They smashed glass windows, sprayed rude graffiti and defaced Hong Kong’s official emblem with black paint, but of all the dramatic photographs showing hundreds of young protesters storming the Hong Kong Legislative Council building last week, one image makes for particularly uncomfortable viewing in Beijing: The British colonial flag draped aloft a podium in the council chamber.
That is not all. On a day supposed to celebrate the 22nd anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to the “motherland,” other protesters were pictured defiantly flying giant Union Flags in the Legislative Council.
Why are some protesters — many of them millennials — harking back to a bygone colonial era, two decades after Britain handed the territory over to China as a semi-autonomous territory?
“Does it really mean that people seriously want colonial rule again? No, but I don’t think there’s any dispute among protesters that British rule was better than what we’ve got after the handover, especially in recent years,” Hong Kong journalist Lam Yin Pong (林彥邦) said.
“There might be some element of a rose-tinted lens. Perhaps some people are fantasizing about the ‘good old days,’ but what’s clear is that under colonial rule there was never a clear feeling of freedoms being gradually eroded, of a series of government actions completely against our interests,” he said.
Hong Kong has been rocked by massive street protests and its most serious political crisis after its government tried to push through legislation that would allow suspects in crimes to be extradited to mainland China for trial.
The proposed bills have triggered broader fears that China is chipping away at the freedoms and rights that Hong Kong was guaranteed for 50 years after its July 1, 1997, handover to Beijing under a “one country, two systems” deal.
Its constitution, the Basic Law, promised that Hong Kong voters should ultimately achieve universal suffrage, a goal that Beijing has pushed back indefinitely. That has long caused widespread resentment, especially among the territory’s increasingly disenfranchised young people, but Hong Kong never enjoyed democracy under 155 years of British rule, either.
Governors at the time were appointed in London and legislators were not directly elected to the Legislative Council until 1991. Most of the council’s seats were either appointed or chosen by powerful professional groups.
The territory’s last British governor, Chris Patten, managed to push through democratic reforms only in the final years before his 1997 departure.
Even so, Britain was — and still is — widely seen in Hong Kong as a beacon of Western-style civil liberties and the rule of law, leaving a legacy of independent courts, a well-oiled civil service and institutions such as an anti-corruption watchdog. The colonial years saw steady economic growth and its free-market policies meant the territory flourished as one of the world’s leading business hubs.
“I miss the British-Hong Kong government before 1997. The British helped us build a lot of things: separation of powers, our rule of law, our entire social system,” said Alexandra Wong (王鳳瑤 ), 63, a protester who has often been seen raising the Union Flag at demonstrations and carried one into the Legislative Council building on Monday last week.
“What I can do is to hopefully encourage young people to continue to persist” in fighting for their rights, she said.
It helped that Patten and his administration showed a gift for connecting with the populace and are remembered fondly by many to this day.
“He projected complete commitment to the people. People could feel he wanted to be on their side,” said Leo Goodstadt, a British economics professor and chief policy adviser to the colonial government from 1989 to 1997.
By contrast, Patten’s Chinese successors all suffered dismal popularity ratings — none more so than current Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥).
Recent polls show that under her leadership, trust in Beijing and feelings of identification with China have plunged.
Lam’s administration is widely seen as inept and arrogantly out of touch with public sentiment, bulldozing through unpopular policies with no regard for widespread opposition.
Many in the territory see police violence against protesters in recent weeks as marking a new low for a government seen to be oblivious to residents’ rights.
“At least 1 million people have taken to the streets, but they keep refusing to listen,” Lam Yin Pong said. “Never mind the British — any rational, civilized government would have backed off.”
Some say the protesters’ raising of the colonial-era and Union Flags was a deliberate message for the world — especially Britain — to do more to uphold the democratic values they symbolize. Patten recently called for Britain to fulfill its “duty to help Hong Kong out of this dark moment.”
Both of Britain’s two leading prime ministerial candidates have made a point of stressing solidarity with Hong Kong’s protesters and British media have featured the news prominently.
Benedict Rogers, a human rights activist who heads the group Hong Kong Watch, said he has been encouraged that the Hong Kong question is receiving much more attention in the British parliament.
“We need to sustain this,” Rogers said. “Britain must take a lead in the international community and mobilize other countries to send a strong united message to allow Hong Kong’s freedoms to be preserved.”
However, it is not clear if Britain has the appetite to take steps beyond offering words of concern and condemnation — or if the flags have had the opposite effect of hardening Beijing’s stance against the territory.
In an escalating war of words, British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Jeremy Hunt, in the running to be Britain’s next leader, has warned China not to use the Hong Kong protests as a “pretext for repression.”
He threatened “serious consequences” if China failed to honor the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration upholding Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy — although he stopped short of spelling out any measures.
The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs shot back, dismissing Hunt’s comments as “shameless” posturing and meddling, and mocked him for “basking in the faded glory of British colonialism.”
Kerry Brown, director of the Lau China Institute at King’s College London, said the question now is what the US and Europe would do.
“Right now it’s mostly just rhetoric and it’s not likely to get to the situation where the UK can unilaterally do anything beyond the symbolic,” Brown said.
Certainly not everyone in Hong Kong sees things as better in the colonial days — although some believe that the more widespread political apathy back then is no bad thing compared with the turmoil today.
“Back in the day, there was no one involved in political issues, everyone was politically apathetic... I don’t understand the reason why there are so many political demands after the handover,” said a Chinese medicine shop owner, who gave only his surname, Chan. “Everyone can say anything now. I don’t see there is no freedom. The time when our government was British, I think we didn’t have that much autonomy.”
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
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
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