On June 9, Hong Kong residents first demonstrated against a bill that would allow extradition to China. Since then, Hong Kongers have organized marches weekly, with attendance numbering from the hundreds of thousands to as many as 2 million. The scale of the marches, as well as the rough tactics of the police, has shocked the world.
The tactics of protesters and police have changed. Protesters have switched from large-scale marches to smaller protests in multiple locations.
Last month in Yuen Long District, a white-shirted mob savagely attacked protesters at several locations as they returned from a march, with video footage showing them dishing out indiscriminate violence, including upon pregnant women and journalists. Not only were the police slow to respond to calls for help, even ambulances took a long time to arrive.
A “traffic jam protest,” which urged drivers to operate vehicles at slower “safe speeds” in seven areas, was held on Tuesday.
Protest activities have thus far been confined to a show of civic power, but, in a worrying development, civil servants on Friday held a territory-wide rally.
Hong Kong’s civil servants are a restrained and conservative group. They might protest over pay or benefit issues, but rarely over legal or political ones.
However, they took to the streets because internal channels for registering dissatisfaction have been suspended with Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥) a lame duck. Although China has strongly backed Lam, it has hinted that this is only for the short term.
Beijing keeps referring to the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Garrisoning the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, which says that the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People’s Congress is authorized to dispatch the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to Hong Kong to defend it, resist invasion, provide disaster assistance or restore public order in one of three scenarios: following a declaration of a state of war (Article 6); if turmoil endangers national unity or security, and is beyond the control of the Hong Kong government (Article 6); if the chief executive asks the central government for assistance from the Hong Kong Garrison to maintain public order or provide disaster relief (Article 14).
At a July 29 news conference convened by the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, a Chinese official said that the situation in Hong Kong had tested a red line of the territory’s “one country, two systems” model, apparently paving the way for military involvement in accordance with the second scenario.
There is precedent for this: On Aug. 25, 2017, the Chinese government authorized the Macau Garrison to provide emergency relief in the aftermath of Typhoon Hato.
Deploying troops from the Hong Kong Garrison based on Article 14 would effectively implement military rule. As Article 29 says that “the Hong Kong Garrison shall perform its duties in accordance with the provisions of the national laws that the Central People’s Government decides to apply in the region,” the “one country, two systems” model would be abolished.
What would happen in the territory would be decided by the Standing Committee, not the Hong Kong Legislative Council.
If this were to happen, Hong Kong would be changed forever. Beijing should think carefully before opening this can of worms.
HoonTing is a freelance writer.
Translated by Edward Jones
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under