The COVID-19 pandemic continues to wreak havoc worldwide. Despite countries being under pressure economically and from the novel coronavirus, China’s National People’s Congress last month passed national security legislation for Hong Kong, a decision that has shocked the world.
Let there be no doubt: This move is the beginning of the end of China’s plans for “one country, two systems” in Hong Kong and Taiwan.
Proposed amendments to extradition laws last year ignited massive protests in Hong Kong, with millions of participants, shocking the world and making confrontation between government forces and those who opposed the change a permanent part of Hong Kong society.
This year’s legislation might breathe new life into the unrest in the territory.
Hong Kongers’ fury last year moved from the proposed extradition rules to China’s “one country, two systems” governance model.
At first glance, former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping’s (鄧小平) promise that “horse racing and dancing would continue” seemed to guarantee Hong Kong’s freedom, but in practice, the “one country, two systems” model has removed any chance of it beating its own path.
“One country, two systems” means no universal suffrage and huge income disparity, which limit the territory’s future.
Last year, Hong Kong’s democracy camp won landslide victories in district council elections, gaining almost 90 percent of the 452 district council seats in a display by voters of their dissatisfaction with “one country, two systems” and the absence of universal suffrage, as well as their hatred of China.
All the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) had to do to relieve Hong Kongers’ thirst for democracy and remove the source of the turmoil was to provide a real possibility for political development. Unfortunately, the CCP has all along turned against the public, failed to recognize their demands and diminished their protests by calling them a plot to overturn the government in collusion with foreign forces.
The CCP passed the national security legislation to allow it to control Hong Kongers without negotiating with them. Beijing has clearly given up on the idea of a Hong Kong run by Hong Kongers, and is taking a tighter grip by pushing it toward “one country, one system.”
The protests have bolstered anti-Chinese sentiment in Taiwan. In addition to giving President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) the ammunition she needed to win re-election in January, they have also resulted in a surge in the number of people identifying as Taiwanese and reinvigorated the independence movement. The Democratic Progressive Party’s continued hold on government power is a reflection of the public’s unwillingness to accept “one country, two systems” and their preference for the “status quo.”
Beijing rushed through the national security legislation in its pursuit of stability in Hong Kong, which completely disregards the feelings of Taiwanese, who are used to democratic procedure, and value communication and interaction. It precludes any possibility that “one country, two systems” would ever be implemented here.
With the pandemic and US action against it, China faces internal and external trouble.
However, passing controversial legislation without considering public sentiment in Hong Kong will only result in an even stronger backlash.
If the authorities in Beijing do not think long and hard about the consequences of their decisions, there could be a repeat of the June 4, 1989, massacre in Hong Kong.
Hsiao Hsu-hsing is a political commentator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
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
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS