The UK has declassified records of its negotiations with China 30 years ago regarding Hong Kong’s future. That these papers have been declassified early might have something to do with the emergence of political reform in Hong Kong as an item on the agenda.
Media reports about the published files tell us that although the Britain was keen to leave Hong Kong with a bit more democracy and human rights, it found itself in a passive position in relation to China. Besides the imbalance between a small nation and a large one, the sense of guilt that British “China hands” felt about the Opium Wars and colonialism was another factor. At the time of negotiations, Hong Kong’s pan-democrats were in favor of China taking back Hong Kong, and this view was largely based on anti-colonialist sentiment.
With the passage of time, some young Chinese academics have been re-evaluating the Opium Wars and colonialism. There are those who say that if it had not happened, there would have been no Self-Strengthening Movement, no Hundred Days’ Reform and no Xinhai Revolution, and China would have remained a feudal society in which men had to plait their hair into long queues and girls were crippled by foot-binding. Would that not have been worse? The social setup in China today compares poorly with the way things were in Hong Kong under colonial rule. Even though Hong Kong’s democracy and human rights have been losing ground, Chinese are still flocking there.
Sixteen years after China recovered its sovereignty over Hong Kong, localist tendencies have emerged among the former colony’s pan-democrats, splitting them into so-called “left sticky” (左膠) and “right sticky” (右膠) factions. The right-stickies want to prioritize Hong Kong’s interests, while the left-stickies are also called Greater China-stickies, which is self-explanatory. Why are these factions called stickies? Perhaps it is because they are stuck in a certain way of thinking.
Most of my old friends are Greater China-stickies, but some of them think that they got it wrong in the past and now declare themselves to be localists. Among my newer friends, especially young people and those who align themselves with the localists, many of their parents are people who returned to China from abroad many years ago out of patriotism, and later moved to Hong Kong. These people have seen through patriotism and no longer believe in it.
Some right-stickies do not agree with right-sticky extremists — especially considering that some extremist groups have shady or suspicious backgrounds. There could also be middle stickies, who not want to see clashes between stickies of the left and right. After all, both these factions fall under the umbrella of the pan-democrats, so there is no need for them to regard each other as enemies. Nevertheless, their mindsets need to keep up with the times.
The current state of affairs in Hong Kong is worrying in terms of where Taiwan is headed. The division in Taiwan is between the pro-unification and the pro-independence factions, and both have extremists among them. To be sure, an absolute majority of public opinion in Taiwan is in favor of sovereignty and independence, which is different from Hong Kong. When it comes to standing up for universal values, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is less determined than the British were. If Taiwanese do not put their foot down and stop Ma from selling their country down the river, Taiwan’s future is not likely to be any brighter than what Hong Kong has experienced.
Taiwan is a popular destination for travelers from Hong Kong, whose enthusiasm is epitomized by the title of the travel program Fun Taiwan. However, Taiwan’s “Greater China stickies” are a much bigger problem than in Hong Kong. Ma is more concerned about the Chinese than the Hong Kong government is. This can be seen in the policies his government adopts the release of Chinese crime suspects.
The Ma administration’s negotiations with China lean strongly in favor of the other side and has no concept of avoiding conflicts of interest. Chinese culture’s deep influence on Taiwan gets in the way of a Taiwanese sense of right and wrong and weakens their will to resist. That Taiwan is being swallowed up by China so quickly is the main reason China is moving faster to scrap the “one China, two systems” framework in its rule over Hong Kong.
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US