In reaction to the lack of autonomy and democracy under the so-called "one country, two systems" formula, over half a million people in Hong Kong took to the streets on July 1, a march that coincided with the anniversary of the former British colony's return to China. A clear and unified message was sent to the Chinese leadership -- return power to the people, fight for democracy.
This was not the first time that the people have expressed their strong dissatisfaction with the Beijing government. A year ago, a demonstration by 500,000 residents protested China's attempt to impose "national security" laws that would have curtailed basic freedoms of expression and human rights, and dispelled any illusions about Beijing's "one country, two systems."
The recent gathering displayed the growing demand for the Chinese leadership to reexamine the "one country, two systems" formula in relation to Hong Kong. The model was designed originally as tool to brainwash the world that Hong Kong and Taiwan could be unified under the "one China" principle with sustainable autonomy. Now the truth deconstructs the fantasy that democracy would never be sacrificed under authoritarian rule.
What went wrong with the "one country, two systems" illusion? The talk about preserving government structure of Hong Kong -- or Taiwan -- and not appointing local authorities was just that: talk. Hong Kong's Legislative Council attempted to revise the "Electoral Laws on the Chief of the Special Administration Region" two years ago -- and ended up granting the Beijing government the right to dismiss the chief at its own will.
To what extent have Taiwanese people helped bring about the decline of the "one China" myth? The Taiwanese can elect their own president through a democratic process and choose another political party to replace the one they don't like. In Hong Kong, the chief executive needs an imperial order from the Beijing government to rule and he or she can be sacked by Beijing at any time.
What is the implication of the July 1 demonstration on the future democratization of China? The establishment of a liberal democracy in China is unlikely in the foreseeable future. Even though the world anticipated a growing move toward democracy following China's recent political succession, the new leadership, led by President Hu Jintao (
While some anticipated a new look in China's new generation of leadership, Hu reiterated the importance of abiding the so-call "Three Represents" of former president Jiang Zemin (
Can "political incrementalism" become the path for China's democratization? Political reform based on such gradualism will face a great deal of challenges if it does not come up with more economic openness.
As China becomes more incorporated into the world trade regime, economic interdependence may heighten, rather than defuse, political tensions between Beijing and the outside world.
But dependence also means vulnerability. Since China is a country that has suffered from a "century of national humiliation" and is eager to regain it's national pride, its leaders are naturally inclined to "control what they depend on [from abroad] or to lessen the extent of their dependency." This is the real face of today's China. The "one country, two systems" model is just a dead end. The world must deal with a growing, but potentially unstable, China.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY Lin Ya-ti
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations