Is it “Today’s Hong Kong, tomorrow’s Taiwan,” as Grace Choi indicated in Foreign Policy magazine on Aug. 19?
Two major developments that have given rise to increased concern in Hong Kong are the June 10 white paper issued by Beijing’s State Council Information Office, and the Aug. 31 announcement by the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People’s Congress that in 2017 the candidates for the territory’s chief executive must be approved by a nominating committee. There seems no doubt that Beijing will have the final say on who the nominating committee chooses.
The white paper basically said that in all matters related to Hong Kong, Beijing is in charge, negating the promises made in the 1984 Joint Declaration and the Basic Law, adopted by the congress in 1990 and which went into effect at the time of the transfer from the UK to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1997.
The essence of the agreement was that Beijing would adhere to “one country, two systems,” allowing Hong Kongers to run their own affairs for 50 years.
The two recent developments seem to undermine this, and the hope that democracy in the territory would gradually influence China has disappeared. The harsh reality is that Beijing is gradually imposing its own repressive system on Hong Kong.
This shows that Beijing will use economic influence and leverage to achieve political gains. The territory is already dependent on China for more that 50 percent of its external trade. Beijing is using this very effectively to extract political concessions, in particular from the business community.
Taiwan is also highly dependent on China for its external trade. About 40 percent of its total trade is with the PRC. If the proposed service trade and trade in goods agreements go through, this will only increase.
Interestingly, recent moves by Beijing have galvanized opposition in Hong Kong and Taiwan to work closer together. In Hong Kong, the Occupy Central movement is pushing back against China’s increasing influence in the territory, while in Taiwan, the Sunflower movement has voiced opposition over the service trade agreement bringing closer economic ties with China.
There are signs that the two movements are increasingly reaching out to each other, as Choi said in Foreign Policy.
It is difficult to see how anyone in Taiwan or foreign observers can watch current developments in Hong Kong and not have some notion that the territory is a mirror for Taiwan and the outcomes there an indication of its future.
If Taiwan allows itself to be pulled closer to China economically, Beijing will use this leverage to restrict Taiwan’s international space and influence its political scene.
In a sense, China is doing that already, as its leadership indicated preferences for results ahead of the 2012 elections.
The situation in Hong Kong should cause Taiwanese to reflect on rapprochement with China.
Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 to 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS