Hong Kong democracy activists Joshua Wong (黃之鋒), Alex Chow (周永康) and Nathan Law (羅冠聰), who in 2014 shot to prominence as leaders of the territory’s “Umbrella movement,” were earlier this month nominated by a dozen US lawmakers for a Nobel Peace Prize.
In their nomination, the lawmakers said they wanted to recognize the trio’s “peaceful efforts to bring political reform” and uphold the territory’s rule of law and human rights.
“Hong Kong’s pro-democracy advocates have made significant contributions to peace by actively seeking to safeguard the future of Hong Kong at precisely the time that Beijing has taken steps to undermine Hong Kong’s long-cherished autonomy,” the bipartisan group told the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in a letter.
The competition is tough, as the Norwegian Nobel Committee receives several hundred nominations annually. However, the nomination itself is significant, as it is not only recognition of the trio’s efforts, but an encouragement to the many who continue the fight for democracy in the former British colony.
Hong Kong in 1997 was returned to Chinese rule as a special administrative region of the People’s Republic of China. At the time, Beijing said that the territory would be governed under the “one country, two systems” framework and that it would enjoy wide-ranging autonomy.
However, the model has proven a failure, with growing concerns from critics and democracy advocates that liberties and freedoms are being eroded.
China is a signatory to the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but it still has a long way to go in respecting and implementing the document.
For example, the forced disappearance of five booksellers in 2015 flies in the face of several articles of the declaration, including Article 3, which states: “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person,” as well as Article 9, which says: “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.”
Beijing’s suppression of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movements and the disqualifying of pro-democracy lawmakers from the territory’s Legislative Council also brazenly violate Article 18 of the declaration, which says: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion,” and Article 19, which states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
It is alarming that Beijing and the Hong Kong government have been undermining the territory’s Basic Law by abusing legal interpretations, not to mention manipulating Hong Kong’s judicial system to neutralize pro-democracy campaigners.
In short, Beijing has for half a century broken its pledge to not interfere with Hong Kong’s autonomy.
As Wong said in response to his nomination: “Hong Kong is not left with only three political prisoners — Hong Kong has many political prisoners. It is just that we three are fortunate or incidental to be noticed and be shown concern for by members of the international community.”
Whether or not the trio are awarded the Nobel Prize in December, their nomination will hopefully direct more public and media attention to the dire straits of Hong Kong’s democratic development and, more importantly, let the territory’s pro-democracy activists know that they are not alone in their fight against Beijing’s oppression.
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
The war between Israel and Iran offers far-reaching strategic lessons, not only for the Middle East, but also for East Asia, particularly Taiwan. As tensions rise across both regions, the behavior of global powers, especially the US under the US President Donald Trump, signals how alliances, deterrence and rapid military mobilization could shape the outcomes of future conflicts. For Taiwan, facing increasing pressure and aggression from China, these lessons are both urgent and actionable. One of the most notable features of the Israel-Iran war was the prompt and decisive intervention of the US. Although the Trump administration is often portrayed as
RSS