Hong Kongers are leading the way in the first major ideological confrontation of the new cold war that the People’s Republic of China has launched against the West.
They are conducting their struggle astutely, recognizing two operating imperatives:
First, the ultimate source of the growing constriction on their “guaranteed” freedoms is not the Hong Kong administration, but the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Second, the audience for the protesters’ message is the Chinese population itself, and ultimately, the wider international community.
The Chinese government refrained from overt interference as long as the protests were confined to downtown government and police buildings, where they could derogate them as the work of local troublemakers and vandals.
At the same time, Beijing used its finely honed instruments of information suppression to keep news of the demonstrations away from Chinese, just as it does with the thousands of local protests throughout China.
Its greatest fear is the coalescing of myriad demonstrations into a national movement against the CCP government.
At first, the demonstrators had no way to reach the Chinese, but they soon recognized that they had a ready-made audience in the thousands of Chinese tourists who come to Hong Kong every day.
Once infected with the unofficial version, they would carry the message of the uprising back to the Chinese populace in ways the ultimate nemesis in Beijing could not control.
They shifted the locus of the protests from the city center to the high-speed train station connecting Hong Kong to China.
“We want to show tourists, including mainland Chinese tourists, what is happening in Hong Kong and we hope they can take this concept back to China,” one student said.
The Chinese authorities saw the danger and, to send a message to all train passengers, unleashed “triad” thugs, armed with sticks and metal rods, to attack the demonstrators in the Mass Transit Railway station in Yuen Long, seriously injuring many.
In a coordinated response that escalated the strategic communications campaign, the demonstrations on Friday last week leap-frogged from rail transit facilities to Hong Kong International Airport, where protesters could influence a broader audience of global visitors.
Flight attendants and airport staff launched an 11-hour protest against the Hong Kong government for tolerating, if not instigating, the violent transit attacks at the subway station.
They were joined by the original downtown protesters who staged a sit-down in the airport terminal greeting travelers from around the world with their chants of “free Hong Kong.”
Some students held signs in English, Japanese and Korean appealing to “international friends for help standing up to the Hong Kong government.”
Others held signs reading: “Tourist warning: Do not trust the police or the government.”
The protesters have accomplished their initial purpose of bringing Hong Kong’s plight to the world’s attention. They hope to gain international support for restoring and maintaining their political freedoms.
They are also relying on global public opinion to dissuade Beijing from using military force in Hong Kong and replicating its 1989 massacre of students and workers in Tiananmen Square and other cities.
There are disquieting signs that Chinese leaders are considering precisely those extreme measures.
The Chinese Ministry of National Defense warned that the protests were challenging China’s sovereignty over Hong Kong and said: “That absolutely cannot be tolerated.”
That hint of military intervention was reinforced by reports of troop mobilization in Shenzhen, a potential launching point for an assault on Hong Kong.
A ministry spokesman said that US officials and a “black hand” were stoking violence and chaos in Hong Kong.
“We can see that US officials are even behind such incidents,” he said.
The US Department of State had already expressed the US’ “grave concern” over the proposed extradition legislation at the root of the protests, and as the confrontations escalated, US President Donald Trump and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued veiled warnings to Beijing.
“The president, I think, captured it right when he said that we need China to do the right thing. We hope that they’ll do that, we hope that the protests will remain peaceful,” Pompeo said in an interview.
Hong Kong’s protesters have adroitly pulled off a minor strategic communications coup and exposed the CCP’s vulnerability to truthful messages directed at Chinese and the international community.
The US and other Western governments, with far more sophisticated communications instruments at their disposal, should follow the protesters’ lead and prepare an unapologetic name-and-shame campaign against Chinese leaders.
Beijing should be under no illusion that if it uses force, the administration would be able to return to “business as usual” as its predecessors did after Tiananmen.
In addition, former statesmen and other pro-engagement figures should refrain from giving China cover for any outrage it might commit against Hong Kong.
Joseph Bosco served as China country director in the office of the US secretary of defense. He is a fellow at the Institute for Taiwan-American Studies and a member of the advisory committee of the Global Taiwan Institute.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS