The European Parliament last week passed a nonbinding resolution condemning the deterioration of human rights and freedoms in Hong Kong, and called for a review of the territory’s WTO membership. The resolution signals Hong Kong’s diminishing role as a non-sovereign entity.
What is most striking is the dead silence of the territory’s leadership. Anxiety and insecurity best describe the mood of the ruling elite as they contemplate the end of Hong Kong’s glory days as a financial hub.
In the past, senior Hong Kong officials were quick to criticize the West for its hypocrisy and failings to project a nationalistic image. When former US president Donald Trump revoked the territory’s special trade status in June 2020, Hong Kong authorities used patriotic rhetoric to downplay its devastating effects.
The world is questioning Hong Kong’s non-sovereign status because of its deteriorating autonomy and rising frustrations against political injustices.
China’s national security arrangement has rapidly changed Hong Kong’s governing order since 2020. It suspended the “one country, two systems” experiment that was set to expire in 2047. As the scope of the security laws continue to evolve, Hong Kongers have experienced a profound change in daily life.
People see hostile government interventions in shutting down civic organizations and media companies, persecuting democracy advocates and journalists, and censoring academia and dissent. The forced closure of the Apple Daily and other independent media sent a chilling message to the press to self-censor reporting on corruption, abuses of power and police brutality.
Without legal protection for everyone, local businesses, universities and civic sectors are finding it impossible to operate in a free and open environment.
Another layer of change comes from below. Hong Kongers appreciate the benefits of enduring bilateral links with the EU and other nations with respect to consular affairs, visa arrangements and legal services, as well as cultural and educational exchanges.
For years, Hong Kong sought “paradiplomacy” in the international domain, with memberships in the WTO, the WHO, APEC, IMF and the Financial Task Force on Money Laundering. The territory has numerous economic and trade offices worldwide to facilitate free-trade discussion, lobby foreign officials and promote its business interests abroad.
Keeping Hong Kong’s non-sovereign integrity has made the territory what it is today: a vibrant financial hub thanks to its openness, transparent regulatory environment, and commitment to the rule of law and civic liberties.
Yet everything has changed in this new era of securitization. Local officials perceive regular political, economic and social matters through the lens of national security, and employ extrajudicial measures against Hong Kongers who try to exercise their rights. When the national security order overrides the rules-based governance structure, Hong Kong is no different from any Chinese territory.
Because longstanding ties with foreign countries only benefit the privileged few at the expense of everyone, there is widespread support to end Hong Kong’s official participation in international bodies and to sanction those officials responsible for smothering the territory’s freedom.
Europe has taken the lead in debating the merits of treating Hong Kong as a subnational entity in global trade. Taiwan and other allies might follow in the same footsteps.
In light of this international effort to adjust Hong Kong’s special status, only time will tell whether the territory’s leadership can demonstrate significant progress in democratic governance and human rights protection.
Joseph Tse-hei Lee is a professor of history at Pace University in New York City.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS