THE TTALK QUOTES 

On Global Trade & Investment

 

Published Three Times a Week By

The Global Business Dialogue, Inc.

Washington, DC   Tel: 202-463-5074

Email: [email protected]

 

No. 68 of 2014 

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2014     

 

   

Filed from Portland, Oregon  

     

Click here for yesterday's TPP quote from a Congressional letter.

 FROM THE CONSCIENCE OF HONG KONG

"First, the governments in Hong Kong and Beijing must acknowledge that Hong Kong people have a right to be angry."

"The treasured policy of 'one country, two systems,' mandated by the Sino-British Joint Declaration and our constitution - the Basic Law - is being progressively undermined."

 Anson Chan

Sember 30 and October 1, 2014  
Publication Dates
CONTEXT (With Some Comment)
Anson Chan is usually and correctly identified as a former Chief Secretary - head of the civil service - of Hong Kong.  But she is more than that.  As the world prepared for the 1997 change of Hong Kong's sovereignty from the United Kingdom to China, Mrs. Chan was the linchpin of trust that made the handover work smoothly.  As long as she was there, the world knew Hong Kong would continue with its own rule-of-law system, one that both the people of Hong Kong and the global business community could trust.  

Anson Chan stands between the Chinese and British Flags at the sovereignty handover ceremony in Hong Kong, June 30 - July 1, 1997

Mrs. Chan has been out of government for some time, but she has never ceased to be a voice for what she believes Hong Kong should be. 

Today Hong Kong is facing a crisis.  The outward manifestation is the Occupy Central movement, which is succinctly defined in a paragraph from the South China Morning Post:

"Occupy Central is a civil disobedience movement which began in Hong Kong on September 28, 2014.  It calls on thousands of protestors to block roads and paralyze Hong Kong's financial district if the Beijing and Hong Kong governments do not agree to implement universal suffrage for the chief executive election in 2017 and the Legislative Council election in 2020 according to 'international standards.'"

Today's quotes are from two separate articles by Anson Chan, both of which have appeared recently in major U.S. outlets.  The first - on the people's right to be angry - was in an article for Time, published on September 30.  The second is from her opinion piece on Wednesday, October 1, in the Boston Globe

Her Time article began with a lament.  "For me," she wrote, "the most heart-breaking aspect of the current unrest in Hong Kong has been to see our police force kitted out in full riot gear like Star Wars Stormtroopers..."  Hong Kong demonstrators - kids doing homework - have always been peaceful, she said, and the police have traditionally kept their part of an unwritten bargain with civilized restraint.  Now that is changing. 

In her Boston Globe article, she injected some rational optimism:

"I don't believe rumors that the Hong Kong garrison of the People's Liberation Army is being readied to clear the streets.  That would precipitate a collapse in confidence and a flight of capital from Asia's foremost banking and financial services center that even the diehards in Beijing will stay away from - not least because of the huge sums of mainland Chinese money that have found their way into the city's banks and stock market."

But she added: "It is nevertheless crucial that Western governments make clear to China that the world is watching."

In both pieces, Mrs. Chan discussed Beijing's interference in Hong Kong's promised democracy.  In her Boston Globe article she wrote:

"The decision of China's 'parliament,' the National People's Congress, to palm us off with sham democracy for the 2017 election of the next chief executive is the straw that broke camel's back.  Despite having promised this election will be by universal suffrage, only two or three candidates selected by a nominating committee stacked with Beijing loyalists will be allowed to stand.  In short, the election will be rigged from the outset, with the outcome a farce."

COMMENT
Some governments are paying attention.  The British are.  In advance of calling in China's ambassador, Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, explained the basis for his "dismay and alarm" this way:

"Universal suffrage means what it says on the tin.  It means everybody can vote, and everybody can vote for the candidates they want.  Not for candidates that have been screened and preselected by the authorities in Beijing."

Obviously, Beijing sees things a little differently.  The South China Morning Post recently shared with its readers this excerpt from the People's Daily:

"The real goal of some Hong Kong people who use illegal means such as damaging Hong Kong's rule of law and order is not so-called universal suffrage.  [T]hey are challenging the highest order of the nation. ... [T]hey are doomed to fail."

***

The events unfolding in Hong Kong are inspiring and disheartening, all at once.  We would like to think that, at the very least, Mrs. Chan is correct in her guess that the streets will not be cleared by the People's Liberation Army.  On the other hand, some reports suggest that Beijing may be taking a leaf out of Putin's book: you do it with goons, not uniformed troops.

We don't doubt Beijing's ability to work its will in Hong Kong, past promises notwithstanding.   It will tarnish somewhat, though, China's image as the country that has a three-thousand year history and takes the long view.  Of Hong Kong's promised 50 years, there are 33 left to run.  Would 33 years of democracy really be that harmful? 

Finally, our world view is sufficiently saturated with realpolitik that we don't really expect states to keep their word.  The example of the 1973 peace accords come to mind.  That was the Paris agreement that ended America's war in Vietnam.  Two years later, North Vietnam ignored that agreement and took the South Vietnam by force.  Surely, no one was surprised at that.  It was what they had been always been fighting for. 

But Hong Kong was different.  In 1997, a China rising - and rising largely on the strength of its commerce with the world - made a deal with the world.   It wasn't really just a deal with Hong Kong and the UK.  It was a deal with the world.  And, so long as the rest of the world continued to take that deal seriously, it was reasonable to expect China to keep it.  The question today is, does the world care? 
SOURCES & LINKS
From Time is a link to Anson Chan's September 30 article in Time.

From the Globe is a link to Anson Chan's October 1 article in the Boston Globe.

Ambassador Called In takes you to the Bloomberg story from the UK that includes the quote above from Nick Clegg.

Occupy Central is the South China Morning Post piece with the definition of this protest.

A Beijing View is a link to the South China Morning Post article with the above quote from the People's Daily.
 
   
SUBSCRIBE
If you want to receive these TTALK Quotes, we're happy to send them to you.  That's the deal.  If you want to help and ensure that they keep coming, please


SUBSCRIBE NOW
It's just $50 a year.  Click here and you' re done.

Buy Now
Thank you.

Note: GBD Members are already subscribers and we thank them for their membership and support.

 

 

 

 

TO GET THE TTALK DAILY QUOTE IN YOUR INBOX

 

Or Other GBD Notices, Click below. 

Join Our Mailing List

 

� 2014 The Global Business Dialogue, Inc.

1140 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 950

Washington, DC   20036

Tel: (202) 463-5074

R. K. Morris, Editor

www.gbdinc.org