It seems odd that a strong performance for a pro-Beijing party at the expense of Hong Kong democrats could be a positive sign. Yet this is the case.
Sunday's elections saw the opposition Democratic Party brought down to earth after losing more than 25 percent of their district councilors, with the pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) almost doubling its share from the previous election and overwhelming the Democratic Party's haul.
There must be tremendous disappointment in the democratic camp that pro-Beijing parties such as the DAB can prosper in an environment of occasional threats of violence against pro-democracy figures and a ramping up of aggression against democrats in Beijing's mouthpiece media outlets.
But this was a free and fair election -- even if turnout was below 40 percent. The rejection of democratic candidates thus reflected real uninterest or dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party and its activities and will prompt party strategists to rebuild their agenda and methods in line with the needs of local communities.
Democratic Party Chairman Albert Ho (
That is to say, the democrats could learn a thing or two about democratic practice from Beijing's friends in Hong Kong.
Some analysts are now predicting a poor showing for the democrats at the Legislative Council elections next year. But, as with Taiwan, local elections are not always the best place to gauge sentiment on executive performance.
The Democratic Party, like Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party, needs to work harder not only at mobilizing its base but also at making gradual inroads in electorates where it does not enjoy majority support. This is all the more important in polities such as Hong Kong in which economic considerations top the agenda at all times.
The people of Hong Kong have proven themselves pragmatic and uninterested in flights of ideological fancy. Even so, when a critical mass of Hong Kongers get angry and get out on the streets, Beijing notices.
Beijing's equally pragmatic response, in balance, has not been bloody crackdowns but, ironically, investment in the democratic process on the ground, particularly in the DAB's skilled party workers, who delivered handsomely in working class areas this time around.
Hard work, closer communication with voters, innovation and practical policies are the answer. And in time, the cycle will swing back in the Democrats' favor -- no doubt more quickly if the pro-Beijing side treats voters with less than the respect they deserve.
And in one more regard, HK's democrats should find some solace. Taiwan's 2004 presidential election showed that local and national politics can have very different outcomes at the hands of voters who back different parties in different polls.
The cause for gloom in Hong Kong is overstated. If the Democratic Party suffers a tremendous hit over this setback, it will be in large part because of their losing faith in themselves and Hong Kong's voters, and not because of dwindling opportunities.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS