Is it “Today’s Hong Kong, tomorrow’s Taiwan,” as Grace Choi indicated in Foreign Policy magazine on Aug. 19?
Two major developments that have given rise to increased concern in Hong Kong are the June 10 white paper issued by Beijing’s State Council Information Office, and the Aug. 31 announcement by the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People’s Congress that in 2017 the candidates for the territory’s chief executive must be approved by a nominating committee. There seems no doubt that Beijing will have the final say on who the nominating committee chooses.
The white paper basically said that in all matters related to Hong Kong, Beijing is in charge, negating the promises made in the 1984 Joint Declaration and the Basic Law, adopted by the congress in 1990 and which went into effect at the time of the transfer from the UK to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1997.
The essence of the agreement was that Beijing would adhere to “one country, two systems,” allowing Hong Kongers to run their own affairs for 50 years.
The two recent developments seem to undermine this, and the hope that democracy in the territory would gradually influence China has disappeared. The harsh reality is that Beijing is gradually imposing its own repressive system on Hong Kong.
This shows that Beijing will use economic influence and leverage to achieve political gains. The territory is already dependent on China for more that 50 percent of its external trade. Beijing is using this very effectively to extract political concessions, in particular from the business community.
Taiwan is also highly dependent on China for its external trade. About 40 percent of its total trade is with the PRC. If the proposed service trade and trade in goods agreements go through, this will only increase.
Interestingly, recent moves by Beijing have galvanized opposition in Hong Kong and Taiwan to work closer together. In Hong Kong, the Occupy Central movement is pushing back against China’s increasing influence in the territory, while in Taiwan, the Sunflower movement has voiced opposition over the service trade agreement bringing closer economic ties with China.
There are signs that the two movements are increasingly reaching out to each other, as Choi said in Foreign Policy.
It is difficult to see how anyone in Taiwan or foreign observers can watch current developments in Hong Kong and not have some notion that the territory is a mirror for Taiwan and the outcomes there an indication of its future.
If Taiwan allows itself to be pulled closer to China economically, Beijing will use this leverage to restrict Taiwan’s international space and influence its political scene.
In a sense, China is doing that already, as its leadership indicated preferences for results ahead of the 2012 elections.
The situation in Hong Kong should cause Taiwanese to reflect on rapprochement with China.
Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 to 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS