Tomorrow, Hong Kong is to elect a new chief executive.
Elect? Not really, given that the process is strictly limited to a 1,194-member committee that has always been stacked in favor of pro-China elements, and Beijing has made it clear which candidate it prefers.
Beijing likes the glimmer of democratic process with which it coats its rule of Hong Kong and Macau, just as it likes to pretend that the Chinese National People’s Congress (NPC) provides democratic support for the Chinese Communist Party’s authoritarian rule.
Yet it is just the barest gloss. Scratch the surface, and Zhongnanhai’s iron fist can easily be seen.
However, this was the year that was supposed to be different, the year that the NPC’s Standing Committee in 2007 said that the chief executive’s election “might” be implemented through universal suffrage.
Seven years later, the Standing Committee was much more nervous, and so on Aug. 31, 2014, it declared that this year’s candidates would have to be nominated by a committee stacked along the lines of the Election Committee, and there could only be two or three candidates.
That decision was the kindling that lit the “Umbrella movement” protests that led to Hong Kong’s Legislative Council rejecting the government’s electoral reform proposal on June 18, 2015.
Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying (梁振英), with his tough stance against the pro-democracy movement, had been expected to seek re-election until his surprise announcement in early December last year that he would not. That announcement came just two days before the poll to pick the 733 Election Commission seats that needed to be filled.
The turnout for that Dec. 11 poll was 46 percent of eligible voters, nearly double that of the previous such poll in 2011, reflecting the growing demand for a greater voice from Hong Kongers in government.
Nevertheless, Hong Kong ended up with three candidates for its stage-managed poll, which limits any real chance of change: former chief secretary for administration Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥), former secretary of finance John Tsang (曾俊華) and retired judge Woo Kwok-hing (胡國興), although Woo, a progressive, has so little support that he is hardly worth mentioning.
Yet for all its efforts, Beijing does not have a great track record with its chief executive picks.
Tung Chee-hwa (董建華) won the first election in July 1997 and a second term in 2002, but became so unpopular that he resigned in 2005, citing ill health.
Donald Tsang (曾蔭權) was elected to complete Tung’s second term and then won his own term in 2007, but left office five years later tainted by allegations that he had accepted favors from tycoons.
He was investigated by Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption after stepping down, and in December 2015 became the highest-ranking official in the territory ever to face a corruption trial. Last month he was convicted and sentenced to 20 months in prison.
The current chief executive was not Beijing’s first choice to replace Donald Tsang. Former chief secretary for administration Henry Tang (唐英年) was seen as the likely winner in 2012, but a controversy of an illegal basement in one of his homes — part of a string of scandals — doomed his candidacy.
Lam was a strong proponent of the electoral reform package that was voted down last year and is widely considered Beijing’s choice for the post. She also won the most nominations to be a candidate, although John Tsang is considered more popular among the territory’s residents.
However, since the entire system is designed to deny the average Hong Konger a voice, it would appear that congratulations are in order for Lam, even before the Election Committee members cast their secret ballots tomorrow.
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.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past