Was it “too little, too late”? Hong Kong’s city’s chief executive Carrie Lam has withdrawn the controversial extradition bill which provoked three months of street protest. But the drama is far from over.
The move by the embattled Lam has clearly been backed by Beijing and seen by observers as a concerted effort to cut the head off the protests. Bill Bishop, in his closely followed Sinocism newsletter, described it as “some sort of 离间计 [deviation]” strategem.
It follows last week’s round-up of leading democracy advocates — including Demosisto secretary-general Joshua Wong, and protest figureheads Andy Chan and Agnes Chow.
But in ignoring four other key demands which have emerged from the protests, Lam and Beijing have ensured that the protests will continue; their calculus being that the central concession would take sufficient heat off the demonstrations.
Tellingly, the move comes only three weeks out from major celebrations planned for the October 1 National Day — the 70th anniversary of the victory of the Communist Party and the establishment of People’s Republic of China. The stage is now set for security forces to stage a more emphatic crackdown at a later stage.
The initial protest laid bare the stark reality of the Mephistophelian contract between the United Kingdom and China for a 50-year “hand over” of the city at the end of Britain’s lease in 1997. It quickly morphed into a broader democracy movement challenging Beijing’s authority over the semi-autonomous Chinese territory.
This was met with a violent reaction by police and proxies — some of whom have been reported as members of criminal triad gangs. There have been concerns of undercover police — and perhaps police surrogates — dressing as protesters to help incite police retaliation. Tear gas has used in underground metro stations — a rare step by police anywhere — and there has been serial use of water cannons and rubber bullets.
People who have been arrested have also complained about being mistreated at police stations. The events have left the reputation of the police force, which it has rebuilt since violence during the Cultural Revolution of the 1960, in tatters. Observers have suggested that an inquiry into the police behaviour combined with a withdrawal of the bill would have been far more effective.
So, what happens next? Pro-Beijing lawmakers who met with Lam ahead of the decision have voiced concern that the move could have the opposite of its intended effect of calming the city down. Protests could escalate as the people of Hong Kong demand the further demands are met. Some at the meeting called for emergency powers.
There are plenty of options left for Lam and Beijing still on the table. Lam can still declare an emergency ordnance order under Hong Kong’s Basic Law, which would give her sweeping powers. They could opt for a bloody Tiananmen-like crackdown and/or a declaration of martial law.
Now, for the world and for the people of Hong Kong, we must wait and see what the weekend will bring.
Give it a few days, give it a few weeks, then roll the tanks in at 3am… What could anyone do? The UN cracks the poohs, the US and UK have a cry, China rolls the tanks back out but leaves behind their military bureaucracy – job done.
It’s depressing, but it’s likely that we’re heading for a redux of Tienanmen Square. It’s the problem with strong man politics in authoritarian regimes, there’s no where else to go but a crackdown.
I don’t think it’s that straightforward or comparable. Tiannenmen was thirty years ago now. China was a much poorer less developed country, there was no internet and Beijing is the Chinese capital and political and cultural heartland. Tiannenmen is also a large open flat area of which there is no vague equivalent in HK. It will be impossible to control the news flow in an escalation. This is something the PRC govt have less experience of and good reason to fear. They also have no pressing reason to invade or whatever you want to call it. The mainland is onside compliments of information control and their own peoples’ antipathy to the uppity disloyal Hongkies.
There’s no doubt a lot of quiet local HK opposition and unease about the situation but the one thing they have in common is their disdain for the mainland and communist system. Hongkies don’t regard themselves as nationally Chinese regardless of ethnic history and affiliation. An invasion would be expensive with a probable high death and property toll.
HK has form and those with an eye to history are wise enough to suggest caution.
Yes, two factors make it more difficult for PRC authorities than Tiananmen:
1. The huge number of protesters.
2. The ubiquity of smartphones etc, making it impossible to gloss over what happens.
At least this time Sainsbury refrained from calling for “our support”, as he did in his piece on 23 August. I replied then and repeat now that what is happening in Hong Kong is an internal Chinese matter. We may observe but should otherwise butt out. Whatever the grievances of the protesters, whether sincere or just plain naive (do they really expect the US Cavalry or Royal Marines to come to their rescue?), the fact remains that large crowds are a matrix easily penetrated by professional provocateurs. Sainsbury mentions “a violent reaction by police and proxies”. This was covered in a piece in MoA on 2 September (I won’t post a link as it may be locked in moderation) which described how violent, black-dressed provocateurs traveled in groups on the subway, harassing passengers, and vandalising infrastructure until the subway had to be temporarily shut down. It is described as a well planned and coordinated campaign against the city’s indispensable mass transport system. I don’t believe there will be a “Tiananmen”, but it’s a no-brainer that the disorders will have to be brought to an end somehow.
For now standard police riot control methods are being used, but with provocateurs in the mix who knows if/when the scales might be tipped, whether deliberately or by accident.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/09/hong-kong-rioters-wage-sabotage-campaign-to-press-congress-into-punishing-china.html#more
Exactly , it’s becoming increasing difficult to differentiate between protesters & agents of Beijing.
Or agents of some hostile foreign power with a deep interest in destabilising China. But of course there’s nobody like that on this earth, is there?
The SILENCE IS DEAFENING;
You would have thought that the attack on the people of Hong Kong by an egregious self serving totalitarian dictatorship would have created outrage by the champions of capitalism and democracy of the free world. There would be animated discussion about haw we could help them stand up to this Socialist Juggernaut . There would be talk of sanctions, (Iran, Russia and Iraq), a coalition of the willing, guaranteed asylum, etc etc etc. Gun boats would be dispatched.
But what have we got. Well Morrison the Moron thinks we need to wait to see what will happen on the basis that it’s either too early to take a stand, or that it’s not clear what stand we should take (or even if stand for something) and if we wait long enough it will be too late to do anything anyway.
Trump reckons Xi “will fix it.” And he urges Xi to do it in a humanitarian way. Interesting concept. How to impose an inhuman repressive policy in a humanitarian way.
What have the rest of them said? What if anything have they proposed should be done?
Well I’m buggered if I know? I have’t heard.
Remember how the Soviets used to get blamed for every US atrocity in South America.
Look at how the US pillories Putin.
But a far more repressive Leader For Life, Xi Jinping and his egregious regime gets a vote of confidence by the Trump. And have you heard from the Democrats on this issue?
I haven’t.
Tanks or 3am door knocks, this can only end in defeat & disappearings.
It would be cruel irony indeed if the Drumpfster’s trade war were to so banjax the Chinese economy that its shuddering to a halt saved HK but I think there is a deal of inertia before that occurs.