Hong Kong residents head to the polls tomorrow for the Legislative Council elections, which have grown more crucial and more contentious over the past year, and Taiwanese would be well-advised to keep a close eye on the results.
Although six would-be candidates were rejected by election officials because they would not sign a pledge to uphold the territory’s Basic Law — or in one case because an official said one man’s pledge could not be believed — there are still many whose election will give those in power in Beijing, as well as the territory’s administration, a headache.
However, the vote for 35 of the council’s 70 seats could also end up giving the pro-democracy camp a headache, because there are questions over whether it will be able to retain enough seats to have veto power over legislation.
The fear is that younger, more radical and localist candidates could split the pro-democracy vote.The pro-democracy camp currently holds 27 seats, a crucial number that has helped quash several questionable proposals. If that number drops, pro-Beijing members could pass controversial laws and regulations that have failed or been withdrawn amid widespread protests, such as an anti-subversion bill, a “patriotic” education measure and an electoral reform package favored by China.
Tomorrow’s vote is also crucial because it could hold the key to next year’s “election” for the territory’s leader.
Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying’s (梁振英) term is up in March and it was Beijing’s refusal to live up to its pledge to allow universal suffrage for that poll and its adding of a screening requirement for potential candidates that triggered the “Umbrella movement” in 2014.
Leung was unpopular even before those protests, but dissatisfaction with him has deepened since then, given an economic downturn, but especially because of Beijing’s blatant encroachment on the territory’s rule of law, its judicial system and its autonomy, as demonstrated by last year’s snatching of five men linked to a Hong Kong publishing house and bookstore famous for unflattering, even salacious, books on Chinese leaders.
If the pro-democracy camp retains its seats, or makes gains, Beijing might be tempted to drop Leung instead of pushing for a second term, although Leung himself has, in a face-saving measure, said that he has not yet decided whether he would run for re-election.
Just as the Umbrella movement took heart from Taiwan’s Sunflower movement in the spring of 2014, the territory’s electorate, parties and administration should consider the results of this nation’s legislative elections in January.
The New Power Party (NPP), which grew out of the Sunflower movement as well as the Dapu demolition protests and several other land-rights cases, ran as an alternative to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), the Democratic Progressive Party and other more established groups — and did well enough to win five seats.
The NPP’s lawmakers pressed several proposals based on their party’s campaign platform during the last legislative session, proving their independence and an uncompromising determination to shake up the traditional political structure.
Tomorrow’s election offers Hong Kongers a small chance of a similar change.
In 1984, Beijing proclaimed that its “one country, two systems” policy for Hong Kong could serve as a template for Taiwan’s unification with China. However, it has completely failed to live up to its guarantee that Hong Kong’s social, economic and legal systems would remain unchanged, as would its way of life.
That failure has led directly to the situation facing Hong Kong’s voters now. Let us hope they cast their ballots wisely.
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
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
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath