Hong Kong's residents used to be branded as "apolitical." But that description hardly seems appropriate nowadays. Since turning out to rally in record numbers on the anniversary of the handover to China in 2003, hundreds of thousands of Hong Kong citizens have taken peacefully to the streets on various occasions to protest government decisions and demand political reform.
But China's government continues to claim that Hong Kong's people are not ready for democracy. In April, China's legislators ruled out universal suffrage in Hong Kong's 2007 election of its chief executive, as well as for its 2008 Legislative Council election. They acknowledged that under the city's special constitution, the Basic Law, these elections could be the first opportunities for the territory to choose its representatives according to the principle of "one person, one vote." But they expressed concern that major reform could undermine political stability and economic development.
Currently, all eyes in China are on Hong Kong's upcoming legislative election on September 12, which will indicate to Hong Kong's government and to China's leaders what people think about the pace and direction of reform. A high turnout in favor of pro-democracy candidates is expected, although this won't guarantee them a majority in the legislature because of Hong Kong's unusual political structure. For this month's election, Hong Kong's 3.2 million registered voters can elect only 30 of the 60 seats.
The pro-democracy camp is likely to win 22 seats of those 30 seats, which are based on five large geographical constituencies. The other 30 seats, however, are chosen through functional constituencies, which represent specific interests, such as banks, insurance companies, stockbrokers, chambers of commerce and transport operators. Only 199,000 voters, some of them representatives from corporations, elect the legislators who fill these seats.
Some of these constituencies have only a few hundred voters and are easily controlled by a small number of vested interests. Indeed, at the close of nominations on August 4, eleven functional candidates were chosen without opposition, including those representing banks and the Chinese chamber of commerce.
The British and Chinese governments in the 1980s designed Hong Kong's awkward political system during their negotiations over the eventual transfer of sovereignty. Its purpose was to ensure that the will of the public could not be fully expressed through the ballot box.
After 1997, Hong Kong's government made doubly sure that legislators' already limited powers to initiate debates, legislation and amendments to laws were further restricted. It imposed rules requiring majority support from members of functional constituencies as well as geographic constituencies to take such steps.
So resistance to change is built into the system. If the government can influence 16 of the 30 functional votes, it can thwart proposals from the directly elected legislators. This has happened with controversial issues concerning political reform and government accountability in recent years.
Yet no one should forget that on July 1 last year, over 500,000 people protested because the government refused to allow more time to discuss proposed national security legislation. Hong Kong's government felt it could ignore public opinion and push the bill through with a large majority of the functional members, plus a handful of directly elected pro-government legislators. It only backed down when the pro-government Liberal Party, which held a number of functional seats, broke ranks as a result of the intense public pressure.
The Civic Exchange-Hong Kong Transition Project's survey results from early August recorded a sharp upturn in public protests over the past year. It noted that people increasingly adopted informal means of showing unhappiness with Hong Kong's government because they didn't think formal channels were sufficient. People began taking matters into their own hands by attending rallies, signing petitions and donating to political parties and activist groups in unprecedented numbers.
The survey also showed that although China's government ruled out universal suffrage in the 2007 and 2008 elections, over 40 percent of respondents still wanted democracy by then, with nearly 20 percent more wanting it by the next round of elections in 2011 and 2012. Furthermore, the majority did not think democratization would hurt the economy, although there were clear concerns that political instability could arise from China's intervention in Hong Kong affairs.
China's government may well adopt a new Hong Kong policy after the election. The best case would be if China agreed to universal suffrage no later than the 2011 and 2012 elections, gaining legitimacy in Hong Kong by backing reform of the political system. While China's rulers may fear losing control, they also need to recognize that the current system is causing intense discontent.
The worst case would be if China disregarded a decisive pro-democracy win in 2007 and 2008 and continued to insist that Hong Kong's people were unready for democracy or to allege foreign manipulation of the pro-democracy camp. Hong Kong's people may well conclude that they have no alternative but to use every occasion to protest chief executive Tung Chee-hwa's unpopular government, making it even harder for him to govern.
Christine Loh was a member of Hong Kong's Legislative Council. copyright: project syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs