The past two decades have been nightmarish for Hong Kongers, not only because they were deprived of the right to participate in a democratic electoral process, but the Hong Kong authorities also took the initiative to undermine the territory’s limited autonomy.
As China ostracized Hong Kong from its larger national and juridical formation, it quickly re-colonialized the territory, replacing the British liberal-colonial order with Beijing’s dictatorial rule.
The widespread frustration and despair over many years of impasse deepened tension and conflict with Beijing.
Despite these setbacks, Hong Kong can still hold onto its administrative autonomy and judicial independence, enshrined by the Sino-British Joint Declaration (1984) and the Basic Law, the territory’s mini-constitution after 1997.
Under the current legal and statutory framework, the Hong Kong government has the obligation to ensure fundamental rights to anyone in the territory, including the right to a fair trial by jury.
Yet, the Hong Kong Security Bureau is using a homicide case to formalize the fugitive-rendition agreement with China. If passed, Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥) would extradite a Taiwanese suspect to face a murder trial in the mainland.
Worrying about the extension of Chinese jurisdiction over the territory, tens of thousands of Hong Kongers protested on Sunday against the pending rendition agreement, even though it was a rainy day.
The demonstration offered the prodemocracy activists a glimpse of hope that Hong Kongers had not given up the struggle for human rights, freedom and individual dignity.
The self-mobilization of Hong Kongers symbolized the maturity of individual activism, and their understanding of politics was largely shaped by their grandparents’ and parents’ experiences of turmoil in contemporary China and of exposure to relative stability under the British rule.
In the face of a deteriorating political climate, many Hong Kongers found themselves in a terrible dilemma, torn between acting out their convictions in the public domain and fencing themselves against the need to embrace civic engagement.
In this perspective, Sunday’s mass protest was of great symbolic significance.
First, Hong Kongers were determined to emancipate themselves from a culture of apathy and fear so pervasive in local society.
This apathetic culture was both a result of the collective disappointment with the failure of the months-long peaceful occupation protests, known as the Umbrella movement in late 2014, and a transplantation of conservative authoritarianism from China.
Second, dramatic transformations took place sporadically in history.
While pro-Beijing ruling elites ridiculed the demonstrators as being misguided by prodemocracy politicians, they made a terrible mistake of treating progressive activists of all stripes as a homogeneous entity.
Like it or not, each upheaval served as a rehearsal for future mobilization.
The demonstrators embodied and expressed a variety of aspirations ranging from the rejection of the rendition arrangement with China to direct democracy and freedom from Chinese hegemonic control.
Since the battle for democratic governance and progressive localism has been intensely fought in the public sphere, the anti-rendition protest signified a conscientious attempt to enmesh moral principles in contentious politics.
Behind these endeavors is a hope for shifting the old political boundaries and facilitating changes in the future.
Joseph Tse-Hei Lee is professor of history at Pace University in New York City.
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with