Earlier this summer, Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥) submitted a report to Beijing that assessed protesters’ five key demands and found that withdrawing a contentious extradition bill could help defuse the mounting political crisis in the territory.
The Chinese central government rejected Lam’s proposal to withdraw the extradition bill and ordered her not to yield to any of the protesters’ other demands at that time, three individuals with direct knowledge of the matter said.
China’s role in directing how Hong Kong handles the protests has been widely assumed, supported by stern statements in state media about the country’s sovereignty and protesters’ “radical” goals.
Beijing’s rebuff of Lam’s proposal for how to resolve the crisis, detailed for the first time by Reuters, represents concrete evidence of the extent to which China is controlling the Hong Kong government’s response to the unrest.
The Chinese central government has condemned the protests and accused foreign powers of fueling unrest.
The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has repeatedly warned other nations against interfering in Hong Kong, reiterating that the situation there is an “internal affair.”
Lam’s report on the tumult was made before an Aug. 7 meeting in Shenzhen about the Hong Kong crisis, led by senior Chinese officials.
The report examined the feasibility of the protesters’ five demands, and analyzed how conceding to some of them might quieten things down, the individuals with direct knowledge said.
In addition to the withdrawal of the extradition bill, the other demands analyzed in the report were: an independent inquiry into the protests; fully democratic elections; dropping of the term “riot” in describing protests; and dropping charges against those arrested so far.
The withdrawal of the bill and an independent inquiry were seen to be the most feasible politically, according to a senior government official in the Hong Kong administration, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
He said the move was envisioned as helping pacify some of the more moderate protesters who have been angered by Lam’s silence.
The extradition bill is one of the key issues that has helped drive the protests, which have drawn millions of people into the streets of Hong Kong.
Lam has said the bill is “dead,” but has refused to say explicitly that it has been “withdrawn.”
Beijing told Lam not to withdraw the bill, or to launch an inquiry into the tumult, including allegations of excessive police force, according to the senior government official.
Another of the three individuals, who has close ties with senior officials in Hong Kong and also declined to be identified, confirmed the Hong Kong government had submitted the report.
“They said no” to all five demands, the source said. “The situation is far more complicated than most people realize.”
The third individual, a senior Chinese official, said that the Hong Kong government had submitted the report to the Central Coordination Group for Hong Kong and Macau Affairs, a high-level group led by Politburo Standing Committee member Han Zheng (韓正), and that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) was aware of it.
The official confirmed that Beijing had rejected giving in to any of the protesters’ demands and wanted Lam’s administration to take more initiative.
In a statement responding to Reuters, Lam’s office said her government had made efforts to address protesters’ concerns, but did not comment directly on whether it had made such a proposal to Beijing, or received instructions.
Written questions to the ministry were referred to the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office (HKMAO) under China’s State Council; it did not respond to a faxed request for comment.
Reuters has not seen the report. The news agency also was unable to establish the precise timing of the rejection.
The two Hong Kong sources said the report was submitted between June 16 — the day after Lam announced the suspension of the extradition bill — and Aug. 7, when the HKMAO and China’s representative Liaison Office in Hong Kong held a forum in nearby Shenzhen attended by nearly 500 pro-establishment figures and businesspeople from Hong Kong.
The question of Beijing’s influence strikes at the heart of Hong Kong’s “one country, two systems” governance, which promised the territory a high degree of autonomy and wide-ranging freedoms that do not exist in mainland China.
More than two months of protests have embroiled Hong Kong in its most severe crisis since the former British colony returned to Chinese rule in 1997.
What began as a movement to oppose the extradition bill, which would have allowed people to be sent to China for trial in Chinese Communist Party controlled courts, has morphed into a broader campaign for greater rights and democracy in a direct challenge to Beijing.
Ip Kwok-him (葉國謙), a senior pro-Beijing politician who sits on Hong Kong’s elite Executive Council, which advises senior officials, including Lam, said that “if the central government won’t allow something, you can’t do it.”
Ip did not know about the proposal to withdraw the bill.
A senior businessman who attended the Shenzhen meeting and has met with Lam recently said “her hands are tied” and Beijing would not let her withdraw the bill.
The businessman spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.
At the Shenzhen meeting, HKMAO Director Zhang Xiaoming (張曉明) said in televised public remarks that if the turmoil persisted, “the central government must intervene.”
Since then, there have been signs of Beijing taking a harder line.
For instance, officials have likened some protests to “terrorism,” Chinese paramilitary police have conducted drills near the border, several Hong Kong companies have been pressured to suspend staff supporting the protests, and security personnel have searched the digital devices of some travelers entering China.
On Friday, several prominent democracy activists, including Joshua Wong (黃之鋒), were arrested.
Additional reporting by Clare Jim, Farah Master and the Beijing newsroom
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