Although the rapid escalation of violence in Hong Kong seems terrifying enough, things might be about to get much worse.
The communique of the recently concluded fourth plenum of the 19th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) indicates that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is planning to tighten his grip on the former British colony at any cost. He should prepare to rack up a formidable bill.
The communique includes two ominous pledges: First, China’s central government would “control and rule” Hong Kong (and Macau) using “all the powers vested in [it] under the constitution and the Basic Law,” the mini-constitution that defines Hong Kong’s status.
Second, it would “build and improve a legal system and enforcement mechanism to defend national security” in both special administrative regions.
A few days after the plenum, the CCP’s plan to assert its control over Hong Kong became clearer when it released the full text of the resolution endorsed by its central committee. China’s central government intends to change the process for appointing Hong Kong’s chief executive and key officials, and reform the system governing how the Chinese National People’s Congress Standing Committee interprets the Basic Law.
Moreover, China would support the strengthening of Hong Kong’s law enforcement capabilities and ensure that the city government enacts legislation to enhance national security. It would also deepen Hong Kong’s economic integration with the mainland and expand “education” programs to cultivate a “national consciousness and patriotic spirit,” especially among civil servants and young people.
Although the details of the plan have yet to be worked out, it seems evident that China’s leaders intend to gut the Basic Law, exercise more direct control over the appointment of key officials, weaken or eliminate Hong Kong’s judicial independence, curtail civil liberties and suppress political dissent, including through ideological indoctrination.
In other words, they have effectively decided to abandon the “one country, two systems” model that then-Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) promised to uphold for 50 years after Hong Kong’s return to Chinese rule in 1997.
China’s leaders must know that they are to run into powerful resistance. While some initial steps would be taken in Beijing, the plan’s most substantive measures require action on the ground in Hong Kong. If the ongoing protests have shown anything, it is that Hong Kongers are not going down without a fight.
In fact, China has tried to get Hong Kong’s Legislative Council to pass national security legislation before, in 2003, but about half a million residents took to the streets to protest, forcing the city government to withdraw the bill.
Likewise, China’s attempt in 2012 to institute “patriotic education” in Hong Kong by changing its history textbooks ignited a rebellion among parents and students, forcing the government to back down.
As the CCP attempts to exert total control over Hong Kong, even larger demonstrations, marked by even more violence, are likely. The city would descend further into chaos and become ungovernable.
However, that might well be what China’s leaders want: an excuse to deploy security forces and impose direct control over the city. In that sense, the fourth plenum might mark the beginning of the end of Hong Kong as we know it.
What Xi and the CCP seem not to understand is how much this approach would hurt them. After all, China is likely to lose much of its access to the global financial system as countries revise their relationships with the new Hong Kong.
Already, the US House of Representatives has adopted a bill that, if also passed by the Senate, would mandate an annual review by the US Department of State to determine whether Hong Kong remains sufficiently autonomous to justify its special trading status under US law.
As China’s central government tramples on Hong Kong’s rights, more Western democracies — including those that have hesitated to support US President Donald Trump’s efforts to contain China — are likely to support comprehensive economic sanctions.
It should be obvious that this would be a devastating development for Xi and the CCP, whose legitimacy depends on continued economic growth and improvements in living standards. However, in a country whose top leadership brooks no dissent, there are few safeguards against bad policymaking.
Two years ago, Xi declared that by the time the People’s Republic of China celebrates its centenary in 2049, it should be a “great modern socialist country” with an advanced economy. The fourth plenum communique reiterated this objective. However, if China’s central government reneges on its obligations to Hong Kong, that goal is likely to become little more than a distant dream.
Pei Minxin is a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College and a nonresident senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the US.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS