A brutal public dressing-down by the Chinese president in December may have signaled the beginning of the end of Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa's (董建華) turbulent seven years as the territory's leader.
With TV cameras recording each uncomfortable second, the 67-year-old Tung looked every inch an errant schoolboy as President Hu Jintao (胡
"Identify your inadequacies," Hu barked at Tung as the stony-faced Hong Kong leader stood rigidly to attention. "Raise the standard of your administration and improve your governance."
ILLUSTRATION: YUSHA
Tung had gone expecting a friendly encounter. His office even trumpeted details of the meeting when it was confirmed. Instead he was ambushed and confronted with his failings in the cruelest manner imaginable.
China had clearly lost patience with the man they hand-picked to lead Hong Kong after the 1997 return of the territory to Chinese rule by Britain. For Tung, the loss of face on Dec. 20 may have been the last straw.
Before, there had been only private expressions of concern and public messages of support for the former shipping magnate who was due to serve as chief executive until 2007.
But Hu -- with no personal loyalty to the man appointed by his predecessor, Jiang Zemin (江
Shortly afterwards, Tung is understood to have made up his mind up to resign. Significantly, it was not the first time he had reached the decision that it was time to go.
The first occasion was as he watched more than 500,000 protesters take to the streets in a massive anti-government demonstration on July 1, 2003, underlining the depth of his personal unpopularity.
Widely seen as autocratic, remote and too willing to do Beijing's bidding while ignoring the wishes and democratic aspirations of Hong Kong people, Tung knew he was disliked.
But the sheer numbers on the July 1 march and the sight of dummies in Tung masks being held aloft by jeering members of the crowd persuaded him to offer Beijing his resignation.
He was told to stay on but from that moment onwards, China -- alarmed at the prospect of protests spilling over from Hong Kong -- decided to take a more active role.
China began to openly meddle in Hong Kong politics. Officials started last year by launching a series of attacks on pro-democracy legislators, labeling them unfit to run Hong Kong.
Beijing intervened again last April to announce that there could be no free elections in Hong Kong until after 2008 at the earliest, a move criticized by Washington in a human-rights report this week.
Now, it is sources in Beijing -- not Hong Kong -- who are leaking news of Tung's expected departure and officials there will decide how any change of leadership is handled.
Tung is expected to be elevated to the position of vice-chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference -- an honorary position usually given to retired officials.
It is believed that he will cite ill health and possibly stress as the reasons for his early retirement, and there is little doubt that his health has deteriorated over the past two years.
Tung has suffered from hypertension and other illnesses and has given up the tai chi exercises that used to start his long working day.
He has cut down significantly on public appearances and last month canceled appearances at Lunar New Year parties because of ill health.
Superficially, Tung's resignation could be viewed as a delayed triumph for "people power" after the 2003 demonstration -- but pro-democracy champion Martin Lee (李柱銘) warns it is more a signal of China's tightening grip on Hong Kong.
"This is the end of Hong Kong people running Hong Kong," Lee told one newspaper.
Christine Loh (陸
"You could argue that on that day his government fell," she said. "If it was the British parliamentary system, he would have had to call an election to be reconfirmed as the government of the day.
"Between then and now the economy has improved but Mr. Tung's government has lost credibility with the people and he hasn't been able to get it back," she said.
Tung had a "troubled relationship" with Beijing, Loh said, and if news of his resignation was confirmed, it would seem that the vital decisions have again been taken in Beijing.
"If my line of logic is correct, then the [Communist Party] politburo has effectively said it is better for Mr. Tung to go now rather than later," she said.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS