Hong Kong is now facing the biggest disaster since Tung Chee-hwa (董建華) took office. A chief executive who blindly worships the authorities in Beijing and takes his cues from them is now finally in deep trouble after following the orders of the Beijing government and aggressively pushing for the anti-subversion bill mandated by Article 23 of the Basic Law. The Hong Kong government, which was initially scheduled to push the bill through a second reading at the legislature today, all of a sudden saw one of its allies -- the Liberal Party -- turn against it on Sunday evening. Tung immediately lost his control over a majority in the Legislative Council. He had no choice but to delay the legislature's reading for the anti-subversion bill.
Bryan Weng (翁松燃), a former professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, pointed out that maintaining China's stability, not Hong Kong's, is the rationale behind the Hong Kong government's neglect of the public's anger and its insistence on passing a law that poses a massive threat to freedom and human rights in Hong Kong. Weng's point should be considered by all Taiwanese. Since the June 4 Tiananmen square massacre of 1989, Hong Kong has become a major sanctuary and stronghold for exiled Chinese democrats. The Hong Kong media have also frequently run reports and commentaries inimical to the Communist Party of China. Such discourse has decreased significantly since Hong Kong's handover to Chinese rule in 1997, but the CPC still doesn't want to ease its grip.
Communist cadres, who are used to hearing eulogies from their subordinates and the general public, find such dissent very annoying and naturally want to get rid of it. Looking at the political history of the 20th century, the CPC's first and foremost mission after gaining power has been to annihilate freedom of the press and to seek control over public discourse. The CPC people are also very much into building personality cults that turn the party and its leaders into great benevolent gods, so as to maintain their grip on power by making the public stupid. Therefore, they find any criticism of the CPC's myths or suspicion of its policies extremely infuriating and intolerable.
From the viewpoint of Beijing, "political poisonous grass" is growing in Hong Kong under "one country, two systems" and the people of Hong Kong must sacrifice their interests for the sake of the motherland's political interests. Despite Beijing's promise to the British that Hong Kong would remain unchanged for 50 years after the handover, the promise has certainly been forgotten under realpolitik considerations.
The future political development of Hong Kong under "one country, two systems" is already very clear. A society that has long enjoyed a high degree of freedom will have to toe the line of a society that does not have that kind of freedom. Under the supreme principle of safeguarding CPC rule, the party's will override everything else, including freedom and human rights. Hence the free society will inevitably move toward an authoritarian one.
Through its agent, Tung, Beijing has been attempting to fight against democracy. Such attempts have finally triggered public anger which exploded in the form of a 500,000-strong protest. We would like to praise the people of Hong Kong for the brave step they have taken to express their will and safeguard their political interests. They have caused Tung to relent and given Beijing a taste of the power of public opinion. However, the event has also helped Taiwanese people concerned about politics to clearly see exactly what kind of drug is contained inside the "one country, two systems" bottle.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with