Today residents of Hong Kong will go to the polls to participate in what remains of its fragmented and suppressed democratic system. At best, democrats can achieve some form of stalemate, although in the final analysis Beijing calls the shots. That is the bottom line in Chinese politics. There are not"two systems" in the "one country, two systems" lie. It is merely window dressing.
Still, making the system work is important, because every single vote against Beijing is an embarrassment to the great dictators sitting in their communist aeries spinning their webs of deceit, oppression and tyranny. Unlike in Cuba, or Iraq under Saddam Hussein, Beijing cannot engineer a 99.9 percent vote for communist dictators under world scrutiny. The communists are damned if they do, and surely damned if they don't. Every vote in Hong Kong gives succor to the millions oppressed and silenced in Tibet, and brings hope to the 23 million Taiwanese, who wait with bated breath for the communist behemoth to falter.
It is true that in Hong Kong, Beijing can effect whatever policy it wants. Still, in Hong Kong the world is watching. In Tibet, Beijing has managed to cover up its policy of eugenics by sheer brutal force (not that the UN would do anything about it anyway). But in Hong Kong, the communists must dance to a democratic tune (even if it's a charade), and they simply don't know the steps.
For this reason, no matter how the election turns out, Beijing will look foolish. Communist dictatorship will look foolish. Brutal suppression of free speech and tyranny will look foolish. No matter how many radio and television hosts are threatened, how many democratic legislators are threatened, how many democrats are framed with phony charges or accused of "sedition," no matter how many old communist dirty tricks are unveiled and no matter how many phone calls threatening death or worse are made in the middle of the night by communist henchmen to squelch democracy, Beijing will look boorish, weak and foolish.
The election outcome will not alter the rule of law in Hong Kong. But even holding an election is a triumph if the residents of Hong Kong realize there is so much power in their participation, and so much hope if they send the right message to the world.
Beijing cannot stop that from getting out. Beijing cannot plug this hole in the wall that otherwise blocks contact with the outside world. It cannot neutralize the effect and it cannot hide the event. Beijing cannot arrest or kill everyone who mentions it, and cannot arrest all who vote against Beijing.
And so, in the ocean of despair created by a hopeless mid-term legislative election, a tiny ripple of hope could gain force, and one day turn into a mighty wave washing away the single most tyrannical regime in the history of the world -- a regime that has oppressed more people in 50 years than all of the previous dictatorships in the last 2,000 years combined.
A single vote for democracy in Hong Kong, like a feather buoyed by the winds of change, can help do that. How remarkable, to slay a rapacious beast with a feather.
Lee Long-hwa
United States
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS