Analysis: Occupy Central Not Exactly Hong Kong's Tiananmen
by Al Pessin October 01, 2014
Al Pessin was VOA's Hong Kong correspondent from 1984-1987 and Beijing correspondent from 1987-1989. He was expelled from China for his coverage of the Tiananmen protests and crackdown.
Today is the 65th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China, and the country finds itself facing another identity crisis, although this one is localized in Hong Kong.
Twenty-five years ago, China was a still relatively young country with much turmoil in its short history. When millions of workers from all walks of life joined students protesting for democracy on Tiananmen Square and throughout the country, its arguably insecure leadership violently cracked down, sending troops to clear the square and rounding up activists nationwide.
Western experts say hundreds were killed, possibly more. China says no one died on Tiananmen Square.
That movement was centered in the heart of Beijing, not far from the leadership's walled compound. After weeks of growing protests, the leaders fell back on classic Chinese Communist theory, concluding that the protests were an insidious form of 'chaos' that threatened the ruling position of the Party. They acted decisively and violently to end it.
What is happening in the relatively isolated former British colony of Hong Kong is somewhat different.
"What happens in Hong Kong, at the moment, is not going to threaten the very existence of the Chinese State in the way that Tiananmen did," said former British diplomat Roderic Wye, who was posted at the British embassy in Beijing in the 1980s and 90s, and is now at London's Chatham House.
And so far, China has been more restrained in its criticism of the "Occupy Central" protests, saying only that they are "illegal" and "undermine the rule of law and sabotage social stability," in the words of Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Hua Chunying.
But Wye says Chinese leaders feel some urgency to end the protests.
"They clearly don't want something similar to happen in China," Wye said in a VOA interview, "because if it did start happening then, I think, yes, we could be back in a situation sort of parallel to Tiananmen. And that is something that the Chinese government will do their utmost to avoid."
Wye says although the Tiananmen crackdown has suppressed dissent in China for the past 25 years, Chinese leaders don't want to use the same tactics in Hong Kong.
"If they did have the involvement from the People's Armed Police or the Chinese military, that would effectively be the end of 'One Country, Two Systems,' and I don't think that's what they want at the moment."
"I think it's a very big challenge and quite an uncomfortable situation," said China Studies Professor Francoise Lauwaert at the Free University of Brussels. "All China is watching Hong Kong now, and (China's leaders) could be afraid of a kind of contagious disease for the system."
So far that has not happened. "Maybe [Chinese people] need some more time for understanding what's happening," Lauwaert told VOA. "And also, maybe for them Hong Kong is a little bit special, so they don't feel so deeply concerned about the Hong Kong situation."
And from the other side, Roderic Wye says there is a "sort of growing Hong Kong identity."
"The feeling of somehow 'differentness,' in a way contrary to expectations, has grown rather than diminished since 1997," he said.
And that 'differentness' may help Chinese leaders prevent the Hong Kong democracy movement from spreading, says Francoise Lauwaert. "I think they can say that Hong Kong is a post-colonial society or they have been contaminated by Western people," she said.
But there is the potential for a more subtle impact. "I'm not sure the majority of people in China are interested in free elections," said Lauwaert, "But they are interested in how to struggle for more concrete topics peculiar to their situation."
"The way [Hong Kong] people gather and the way they organize themselves may give them some ideas," she said.
And Roderic Wye says Hong Kong people also have some other topics on their minds, like a more Western-style education system and direct election of their legislature, as well as the chief executive.
"Even if there is a solution, and let's hope that there is a solution, the problem won't go away because that's just one step," he said.
Back story
Hong Kong's status as a Special Administrative Region grew out of more than 100 years of British colonial rule, and the Sino-British Joint Declaration for the return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty, negotiated in 1984 and implemented in 1997.
The breakthrough concept of "One Country, Two Systems" came from then-Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping. The idea was that Hong Kong would continue with its capitalist economic system and Western lifestyle while coming under Chinese communist rule. Deng did not want China's most successful city to decline just as he was seeking to bring the rest of the country up to Hong Kong's level.
The concept also included a separate political system for Hong Kong, with levels of freedom and civil liberties that other Chinese citizens did not have, and still don't.
But the Joint Declaration was vague on the question of democracy, stating that the people of Hong Kong would have a say in choosing their chief executive through "elections or consultations," but that he or she would be appointed by the central government in Beijing. It also specifies that the local legislature would be chosen through elections, but it does not define who can vote or run for office.
In the waning years of colonial rule, British officials began to expand democracy in Hong Kong, and as that process continued after the Joint Declaration was negotiated, Chinese leaders were not happy.
From China's point of view, "the British seemed to be wanting to fundamentally change the deal that the Chinese felt that they had been signed up to," Wye said.
"The British belatedly wanted to introduce some new element of democratic politics into Hong Kong," he said. "The Chinese felt that they had signed up to 'no change for Hong Kong,' but the Hong Kong of 1985."
Initially, China accepted the changes, but after the Tiananmen movement and crackdown in 1989, and protests in Hong Kong supporting the movement, the two sides' views on the city's democratic future diverged.
After 1997, China introduced some reforms to further expand democracy in the territory. But they did not go as far as today's activists want. Specifically, although it has expanded voting rights to allow everyone of age to cast a ballot for the next chief executive, China wants a loyal committee to decide who can run. That is what sparked the latest protests.
Special responsibility
Some in Britain still feel a special responsibility toward Hong Kong, just 17 years after the handover.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said, 'The Chinese authorities in Beijing seem determined to refuse to give to the people of Hong Kong what they are perfectly entitled to expect, which is free, fair, open elections based on universal suffrage.'
"I think Hong Kong's prosperity and future is dependent on some of those basic freedoms around the freedom to protest and the freedom to participate in their government,' added Finance Minister George Osborne.
Similar statements came from the White House.
"The United States supports universal suffrage in Hong Kong and we support the aspirations of the Hong Kong people," said Press Secretary Josh Earnest. He added, 'We believe that an open society with the highest possible degree of autonomy and governed by the rule of law is essential for Hong Kong's stability and prosperity.'
In Brussels, Francoise Lauwaert says the West does not have any special responsibility to Hong Kong because of its former colonial status. Rather, she says, "Western people have a responsibility toward China as a whole."
"China became a very big power and a very big economic power and there is nothing said about Human Rights and democracy in China," Lauwaert said. "For me, it's not because Hong Kong was a colony. It's more we have a responsibility toward Hong Kong and toward Xinjiang and toward China as a whole."
But there is little Britain, the United States or any other country can do, aside from trying to pressure China to protect Human Rights and avoid violence.
And in Beijing, spokeswoman Hua Chunying rejected even that.
"Hong Kong affairs fall entirely within China's internal affairs," she told reporters in Beijing. "We urge relevant countries to be prudent in words and deeds, refrain from interfering in Hong Kong's internal affairs in any way, and do not support the illegal activities such as the 'Occupy Central' nor send any wrong signal.
China's rapid economic growth in recent decades has made Hong Kong less important as an engine of trade and growth, so its special status may be less important to Chinese leaders. But at the same time, they may be more concerned about foreign reaction to how they handle these protests than they were about reaction to the Tiananmen crackdown. China is much more integrated into the global economy than it was 25 years ago, making it potentially more vulnerable to sanctions that might follow a violent crackdown.
But barring any stronger Chinese action and Western response, the protesters in Hong Kong - most of them not yet born 25 years ago - will have to face the authorities on their own, much as their predecessors on Tiananmen Square did. They can only hope that officials in Beijing in 2014 see their demands for their small enclave as manageable, and not as the kind of threat a previous generation of Chinese leaders perceived in 1989.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
