This year’s protests in Hong Kong began with the aim to oppose the introduction of a proposed extradition law that would have let authorities detain and extradite suspects wanted in places such as Taiwan and mainland China, with which Hong Kong does not have extradition agreements.
Many were concerned that the bill would subject Hong Kong residents and visitors to Beijing’s jurisdiction, undermining the territory’s autonomy and civil liberties. The protesters laid out five key demands, which included investigation into alleged police misconduct against protesters and resumption of democratic reforms.
China today poses formidable challenges for international businesses. Rising nationalism, growing universality of social media and geopolitical tensions have made it increasingly difficult for multinational companies to stay apolitical in an increasingly sensitive and bullying China.
A recent incident between the National Basketball Association and China shows the difficulty in balancing support for democratic values and not upsetting a hugely profitable market of 1.4 billion consumers.
Hong Kong’s unrest illustrates the failure of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” model. Hong Kong protests echo the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, which is especially ironic as Communist China celebrated its 70th anniversary this month.
The problem of national identity might be more troubling. As feelings toward mainland China harden, some have initiated more radical calls for Hong Kong’s independence, as opposed to the proper implementation of the Basic Law that is supposed to protect the territory’s relative autonomy.
A worrisome pattern has emerged as some protesters have begun to act with greater ferocity. Hardline protesters see themselves as being forced to take justice into their own hands in a system that lacks accountability. Large marches have ended in violent confrontations, vandalism and arson.
Pro-democracy advocates have singled out companies such as Starbucks and Apple that they consider enemies of their movement, and vandalism and calls for boycotts have followed. Tourism numbers and financial markets have plunged, clear indications that months of clashes are decimating the territory’s economy.
The lack of an extradition treaty with Hong Kong and fear of compromising sovereignty have led to an unfathomable reluctance by Taiwan to exercise jurisdiction over Chan Tong-kai (陳同佳), a Hong Kong resident who is a suspect in the murder of his girlfriend in Taiwan.
Chan has recently expressed a willingness to surrender himself and face prosecution in Taiwan. That the administration of President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) immediately conceded to public criticism and is now willing to entertain Chan’s request, despite political considerations, ought to be commended.
As a beacon of Chinese culture and democracy, Taiwan continues to challenge China to abandon authoritarianism and embrace political reform.
The rule of law and human rights are imperative to Hong Kong, just as continued order and prosperity. Clearly, demonstrations are far more powerful when they are peaceful. That some protesters have resorted to violence can only be condemned, as must excessive force used by the police.
Radical violent methods by protesters and police alike do not help resolve the controversy.
Beijing and the Hong Kong government should respond to the legitimate calls for democracy. Peaceful communication and dialogue serve the better course toward reconciliation and stability.
Alfred Tsai is a doctoral candidate at the University of Wisconsin Law School and editor of the Taiwan Weekly e-mail newsletter.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS