The huge turnout of over 80,000 people at the June 4 candlelight vigil in Victoria Park last week was the Hong Kong people's response to the central government's decision to tighten control over the Special Administrative Region. Many people attended the vigil because they could not forget or forgive the Tiananmen massacre, but many more took part because they defiantly regarded it as a sign of protest against diminishing freedom in the territory.
Just hours before the vigil, I attended a forum in Victoria Park to discuss Tiananmen and constitutional reforms in Hong Kong. One member of the audience said the next time people march to the Central Government's Liaison Office in the Western district to protest, instead of urging the crowd to disperse right away, the organizers should direct demonstrators to stage a two-hour sit-in. He said the objective would be to strengthen the protesters' demands.
Since Beijing decided in April to rule out direct elections in Hong Kong in 2007 and 2008, the political atmosphere has become very tense. Apart from banning democratic elections, the central authorities also want Hong Kong people not to march on July 1 and not to vote for pro-democracy politicians in the Legislative Council election on Sept. 12.
Beijing's high-handed decision has filled many Hong Kong people with revulsion and despair; hence some people are pressing for a more radical form of protest. I do agree that Hong Kong should send a strong message to Beijing about the people's determination to preserve freedom and to fight for democracy. However, we should not resort to measures that would paralyze traffic or create huge inconveniences. Last July the people showed that they were prepared to stand up for their rights, and hundreds of thousands of people are expected to march again on July 1 this year.
However, some people may stay away if there are signs of violence or disturbance. Last year when more than half a million people marched in scorching heat, there was not a single incident. Such responsibility and self-restraint were much admired by the international community. A strong signal about the community's unity and sense of purpose was also sent. Thus the best way forward is to insist on protesting peacefully with dignity, determination and self-restraint.
Looking to the Legislative Council election in September, Hong Kong people should be psychologically prepared for a long, hot summer filled with political struggle, scandals, smear tactics and possibly even violence. This is because the Chinese authorities are worried that pro-democracy candidates may be able to secure a majority in the Council, and think that would make the territory ungovernable. Thus they are intervening to prevent that outcome.
Most people in my generation are not used to communist-style politics, and "one country, two systems" is intended to prevent the Chinese political system from spreading to Hong Kong. Now that the central authorities have decided to intervene, that shield has been removed and the local people have no choice but to deal with Chinese politics directly. In so doing, Hong Kong's people are like babes in the wood. Faced with the communist regime and its arbitrary and ruthless way of doing things, many Hong Kong people are very frightened. This is a big challenge and the people's wisdom will be severely tested.
The candlelight vigil last week was for the first time attended by people from China. It is not surprising that some Chinese people want to find out what happened 15 years ago. They must have found it refreshing and stunning to be able to have access to such information. When they return home, they will share the information with their friends and relatives.
Apart from Chinese visitors and tourists, it has been said that the Chinese authorities, both from Beijing and other provinces, have sent officials and security agents to the territory to monitor the situation. Some political activists are concerned that some people may try to cause trouble and create disturbances, and this will give the police an excuse to intervene or even compel the organizers to abandon the march on July 1.
Such a tense atmosphere is bad for Hong Kong and is weighing very heavily on the minds of people, be they rich or poor. This negative development, though not unexpected, has seriously undermined "one country, two systems." Instead of taking the people's concerns seriously, the territory's government simply dismissed them by arguing that the people's rights are protected by the Basic Law and saying that the central government will not do anything to undermine "one country, systems." Such a lame response does little to enhance public confidence and re-enforces the conviction that Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
Emily Lau is a legislative councilor in Hong Kong and convener of the Frontier Party.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS