As thousands of legislative delegates and political consultants last week gathered in Beijing for two weeks of meetings of the Chinese National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) faced challenges ranging from an economic slowdown and a ruinous trade war with the US to growing anxieties about the future of Chinese tech giant Huawei and growing domestic discontent.
With respect to Hong Kong, Chinese leaders called for a crackdown on local pro-independence young people, and the territory’s closer integration with the national economy and the one party-state. This reflected Beijing’s heightened concerns over widespread political and socioeconomic grievances among Hong Kongers since 1997.
The latest call for economic integration coincided with the newly announced Greater Bay Area program, an ambitious policy to convert cities and townships in the Pearl River Delta into a high-tech financial zone called the Greater Guangzhou-Hong Kong-Macau Bay Area.
At the center of this development agenda is financialization, a process of expanding the profitability of banking and finance at the expense of the labor-intensive manufacturing. As income is diverted from labor to capital, the regional banking and finance industries are positioned to grow faster, with higher monetary returns, along with numerous opportunities and risks.
While this top-down model of regionalization is designed to create a new transregional platform for international and domestic high-tech, services and financial enterprises to thrive, it might end up handing over profits to the wealthy elites, thereby widening inequality and triggering popular discontent.
So far, the discourse of regional economic integration has led to widespread worries, both real and imagined, about the deteriorating rule of law and freedom in Hong Kong. Rather than act as a force for stability and unity, the program has been leveraged by democracy and independence supporters against the pressure for “Mainlandization.”
On the international stage, where China appears to be unmatched, a sense of assertive identity has shaped how Chinese leaders intervene in Hong Kong’s political and judicial affairs, and how China is perceived as a hegemon by Hong Kongers and expatriate communities.
National cohesion builds on shared understandings among citizens who consider themselves to be part of an imagined community. National identity is not socially given, but has to be institutionally constructed from a broad coalition of different groups and interests held together by consensus.
Today’s Chinese nationalism is characterized by the supremacy of the collective over the celebration of individualism. Hong Kongers are instructed to show absolute loyalty to the mighty communist state and to identify truly with the Chinese motherland. This attachment to the collective polity is perceived as a fundamental element of one’s worth and dignity, and a vital means to keep the Chinese Communist Party in power.
These worrisome trends offer a pessimistic glimpse of what Taiwan’s future might look like under the “one country, two systems” framework, a visionary strategy implemented by then-Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) that aimed to guarantee administrative autonomy and judicial independence for Hong Kong and Macau, and to enable experiments with liberal governance on Chinese soil.
As the territory is quickly absorbed into the Chinese political union, the long-standing universal values, regulations and norms that have contributed to the success of Hong Kong are disintegrating.
Joseph Tse-Hei Lee is professor of history at Pace University in New York City.
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.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US