Hong Kong legislators voted on wednesday against the democracy reform proposals. The result: 34 for and 24 against (40 votes are needed from the chamber of 60 for constitutional reform packages to pass). In reaction to the defeat, chief executive Donald Tsang warns that mutual trust between Hong Kong and Mainland lawmakers will suffer. From the SCMP:
“This is a major issue. You cannot say, `oh it’s game over, let’s do it again’. This is not on.”
Mr Tsang believed the olive branches extended by Beijing in recent months – such as inviting all lawmakers to visit the mainland – would not be forthcoming again in the near future.
“You cannot bully people and not expect them to get angry.”
Wait… who’s bullying who here?
“The outcome cannot be swept aside as if it has never happened. It’s not child’s play”.
I can say for sure that the outcome will not be swept aside – the democrats certainly have no desire to do that. They will, of course, continue to fight for a fair solution to electoral reform. And why Donald would even hint at the suggestion elections are child’s play is beyond me – the problem in Hong Kong is that the government thinks the electorate are children.
Granted, a certain portion of the people do act childish at times – but sometimes I question whether the real toddlers are the electorate or the government.
Agnes Chong writes an article in openDemocracy.net giving her views of the December 4th march and electoral reform process.
Amongst her comments, she notes that:
In Beijing, the Hong Kong demonstration received the usual “media blackout” treatment. This is as much a reflection of the Chinese government’s kneejerk paranoia, as the march ostensibly has no bearing on the ordinary Chinese person’s life today. It would seem a long stretch to regard the Hong Kong demonstration as a precursor to any kind of social unrest in the mainland.
True enough, there was certainly no media coverage at all here in Beijing regarding movements in Hong Kong. But to think that a mention of protests in China would directly lead to unrest in China is somewhat misleading. Indeed, protests are already occuring in China: 20 are alleged to have been killed in Guangdong (廣東) last week in village protests. As China continues to prosper and education improves, such continued unrest is inevitable.
If anything is to be learned from Hong Kong, it is that peaceful protest and freedom of speech are not detrimental to social and economic development. China should learn from this, not shun it.
There was a relatively good turnout today for the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong – unfortunately I was not present (since i’m still in Beijing), but was pleased to hear the march mentioned on the BBC World Service.
According to the SCMP an estimated 70,000 participated in the rally – including ex-chief secretary Anson Chan. This is a higher than expected turnout, and only goes to show that the will for change in Hong Kong is still strong. And though change has been promised, a promise with no accompanying timetable is about as trustworthy as a written a testimony from a gorilla.
Joseph Zen was quoted in the SCMP commenting that “Tsang says his proposal is a big step towards full democracy: this is the biggest lie I have heard” – harsh words from a bishop accusing one of his subjects of sinning. He continues to say “We are going sideways. We will go in circles with no direction and a dead end.” At the current rate, we’ll sooner break down than reach our destination.
What was amusing to hear was Donald Tsang, speaking whilst the rally was taking place, saying that he also aspires for universal sufferage and would like to see it implemented within his lifetime. To me, it sounds like he has to try a bit harder: for sure the mainland authorities are not going to be easy opposition to defeat, but if compromise is the name of the game, Hong Kong is definitely drawing the short straw. Tsang has the option now to press ahead with Beijing for more constructive political reform for the territory; the alternative, easy way out, is to just let Beijing pull the strings.
Sadly, when it comes to elections, Donald Tsang seems to have no more finesse than Tung did.