Whether Occupy Central’s “Umbrella movement” achieves its stated goal of true universal suffrage in Hong Kong or not, it has heralded the birth of a new Hong Kong, one that is prepared to stand up and be heard.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has cultivated a strong-man image since taking office. It is difficult to see him compromising. Nevertheless, Hong Kong, having gone through the baptism of the Umbrella movement, will never again be the same commercial, consumerist ex-colonial city where “horses will still race and people will still dance.”
The younger generation has, through the student-led movement, demonstrated true civic grit with their active participation in politics. They are sure to continue cultivating the internal momentum to transform Hong Kongers into an autonomous citizenry and the force behind the struggle for democracy.
Hong Kongers must also seek to re-establish the status of an autonomous citizenry that has been allowed to gradually crumble over a century of colonial rule. In this regard, the Umbrella movement has already achieved a great deal, and the movement is to be commended.
In 1997, Hong Kong came out from under British rule only to be handed over to the totalitarian government of Beijing. It was a fate that Hong Kongers could not escape from at that time. That does not mean that they, especially the younger generation, are willing to accept the hand fate has dealt them, as has been evidenced by the Umbrella movement. Chinese progressives have been wanting to achieve freedom and democracy for the past 100 years; it is just a shame they were never successful in their endeavor.
Xi is employing strong-arm tactics to fight corruption, but he is going about it in the wrong way. The most efficient way would be to introduce democratic reforms and allow congressional oversight, party political checks and balances and a free press acting as the fourth estate. He would be able to achieve so much more for much less effort.
Xi has come to office when the climate is ripe for change. If he does as the public wants and allows Hong Kong to embark on the road to democracy, and from there set in motion the democratization of China, then he will be able to achieve in the realm of political reform what former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) achieved in the realm of economic reform. His historical legacy would be assured.
Once strong-arm politics have been enacted, there is no return. Xi can lure people with power, he can cloak his moves with the pretense of nationalism, but he would be going against the civilized world. He would damage his country, harm his people and, in the end, hurt himself. He would be taking his country down a perilous road, with dangers difficult to predict.
This is not a sustainable way for him to govern or keep people safe. Democracy is the only way forward; it is the only thing that will allow Chinese to express themselves with dignity. He must allow China to have a peaceful transition of power within a system of constitutional government and the rule of law, and for people to express themselves with personal freedoms. This would stimulate social, economic and cultural development.
These are universal values, rooted in the appeal to human dignity found within the Chinese cultural tradition, and democratization would win plaudits within the international community for a major country on the rise. Xi is standing at a fork in the road. It is up to him which one he takes.
The Umbrella movement has already achieved much. This has been a major step for Hong Kong’s democracy. Hong Kongers are to be applauded for braving the storm. The sun is finally breaking through the clouds.
Ho Hsin-chuan is a professor in National Chengchi University’s philosophy department.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing