Hong Kong has become a place whose present is unresolved and whose future is unimaginable. After the unexpected violence of the past week, no one can predict how the events of this afternoon, tomorrow, this week will play out. The only certainty is that Hong Kong’s way of life is under immediate threat and its people are coming out in force to defend it.
However, the curse of living in the eternal immediate present is that the stakes for this “last fight” could not be higher, especially since young Hong Kongers fear that if they are defeated in this battle, there will be nothing left to lose.
The failure of the “Umbrella movement” five years ago, when Hong Kongers occupied important thoroughfares for 79 days, seeking greater democratic participation, to win any concrete gains has raised the stakes further still this time round.
Illustration: Yusha
“HK is not China! Not yet!” These few words hastily scrawled on to a piece of A4 paper and tacked on to the concrete strut of a walkway aptly encapsulate the political crisis roiling Hong Kong.
The territory has been plunged into instability after police fired rubber bullets and 150 rounds of tear gas to break up a huge rally on Wednesday, just days after 1 million people peacefully took to the streets to protest against extradition legislation.
“Not yet” is a reference to the terms of the joint declaration governing Hong Kong’s return to Chinese rule in 1997, which promised that the territory’s way of life would remain unchanged for 50 years, until 2047.
When it was signed, in 1984, the year 2047 seemed impossibly far off, but the proposed extradition law brings 2047 much, much closer.
By permitting the rendition of anyone on Hong Kong soil to face trial in China, it would effectively remove the firewall between Hong Kong’s common law system and China’ party-dominated legal system.
Though the Hong Kong government has suspended the bill, the process has unleashed a firestorm of fear and anger.
Since the “Umbrella movement,” Hong Kongers have already seen irrevocable changes to their way of life: popularly elected lawmakers have been disqualified by the courts for saying their oaths too slowly or with the wrong intonation; politicians have been forbidden to stand for election; a political party has been banned; advocates have been sent to prison on public order offenses; now the police have used violence against their own people.
The unseemly rush to pass the unpopular extradition law has also weakened each of the territory’s institutions.
The legislature descended into unseemly brawls, with fist fights breaking out as committees dueled.
The civil service and judiciary are no longer seen as politically neutral.
The police force, once seen as Asia’s finest, is an object of popular hatred and its relationship with the public is irretrievably damaged.
Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥) is so unpopular that protesters carried pictures of her face stamped with the word “Liar” and 6,000 mothers turned out to accuse her of not being fit for office.
Even though the bill has been put on hold, the process has already permanently devalued the institutions that Hong Kong people hold dear.
Hong Kong’s status as a territory of protest is also under threat. The ability to demonstrate has become an important expression of local identity that distinguishes Hong Kong from China, and over the years Hong Kongers have enthusiastically marched with performative flair, mounting shopping actions, carol singing rallies and artistic protests against censorship with blank placards.
Yet the designation of Wednesday’s protest as a riot, combined with court verdicts finding advocates guilty on public nuisance charges, strike at the very heart of the ability to stage a protest.
Today, any call to public action, even the act of giving speeches to a rally, requires a greater degree of caution. The young advocates involved in recent protests have switched tactics to form leaderless, anonymous collectives, hiding their identities with masks and using messaging apps to organize.
The government has begun to act against these, arresting one Telegram group administrator on suspicion of conspiracy to commit public nuisance.
Many advocates no longer welcome their photographs being taken or doing interviews with foreign media. Within the course of a week, they are becoming as cautious as Chinese dissidents.
By shutting young people out of the political process, the government might well have created an underground resistance that sees that radical action can have results.
However, the core values that Hong Kongers cherish include universal values, press freedom, judicial independence and civil rights. These are seen by Beijing as among the “seven unmentionables,” putting Hong Kongers on the front line of the clash between Western “universal” values and the Chinese Communist Party’s need for total control.
Faced with these existential threats, Hong Kong’s default position has in the past few years been a defensive crouch.
“We don’t have a grand strategy,” political scientist Ray Yep from City University told me before this round of protests had broken out.
“In every situation, you just defend what you can the most. This is how you defend Hong Kong values. We defend what we have. It’s defensive, but it can be offensive as well,” Yep said.
When one in seven of the population turns out to protest against the extradition legislation, defense becomes attack, particularly in the eyes of Beijing.
The protest messages on the pieces of paper flapping on the overhead walkway underline the confusion, shock and anger reverberating through the territory in the wake of last week’s violence.
“Stop shooting students.” “Is protesting a crime?” “Is speaking a crime?”
However, equally, there is a flinty determination that underpins the realization that, even if this struggle over the extradition law is won, there will be the next fight, then the next. Because Hong Kong is not China yet.
Not yet, but 2047 moves ever closer at an accelerating pace. One message simply said: “Keep going till the end.”
Louisa Lim, a veteran China reporter-turned-academic, is a senior lecturer at the Centre for Advancing Journalism at the University of Melbourne and the author of The People’s Republic of Amnesia: Tiananmen Revisited.
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