US President Donald Trump’s administration’s confused response to the Hong Kong crisis risks emboldening Beijing.
In June, Hong Kongers began demonstrating against a proposed extradition bill that threatens the territory’s autonomy.
Opposition to this proposal was so strong that at its peak, 2 million people were on the streets — roughly one-third of the population.
In response, the Hong Kong government suspended the bill, but did not fully withdraw it, a measure that was not good enough for many. This face-saving fudge, alongside the government’s general ineptitude and police brutality perpetrated under its watch, has led to weeks of demonstrations.
As the dispute went on, the list of demands from this leaderless movement grew. Most want an inquiry into the police’s behavior, others amnesty for those arrested.
There were calls for Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥) to step down and the demand for democratic reform was renewed. All of this from a people who have experienced little but disappointment since the “Umbrella movement” in 2014.
Their determination should be applauded, as it has been by members of the US Congress, who have also warned Beijing that the world is watching to see how it responds. The US Department of State, too, has remained reliably resolute. Meanwhile, in recent months, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and US Vice President Mike Pence have warmly welcomed leading pro-democracy figures to Washington.
Yet Trump’s remarks have bordered on the facile, from calling the protests a “very tough situation” to saying “I just hope it gets solved.” Not to mention the praise he has heaped on Chinese Communist Party (CCP) General Secretary Xi Jinping (習近平) via Twitter.
In dangerous times, as armored Chinese paramilitary vehicles move along the Shenzhen-Hong Kong border, the US must show resolve — instead of appearing confused.
Worse still, on Aug. 1, the US president told the press: “Something is probably happening with Hong Kong, because when you look at, you know, what’s going on, they’ve had riots for a long period of time. And I don’t know what China’s attitude is. Somebody said that at some point they’re going to want to stop that, but that’s between Hong Kong and that’s between China, because Hong Kong is a part of China. They’ll have to deal with that themselves. They don’t need advice.”
This is problematic for several reasons: One of the most objectionable being that it buys into the CCP’s line that what happens in Hong Kong is its business alone.
This is not the case. The US has interests in the territory, and not just commercial ones. Safeguarding democracy and human rights has been, when the country is at its best, a core goal of US foreign policy. After all, it was Republican Party darling and former US president Ronald Reagan who said that the US has an obligation “never to let those who would destroy freedom dictate the future course of life on this planet.”
Clearly this lofty 1980s idealism is a far cry from the current “America first” agenda whereby trade trumps most other considerations.
According to Politico, angling to improve his trade deal, Trump promised Xi that he would not condemn the Chinese government over a crackdown during a telephone call in mid-June. If true, this would explain the mixed messages coming from the White House and the rest of the administration in recent months.
Not only is this sort of silence cowardly, but it is also the sort of signal that has historically tempted tyrants. Fortunately, in recent days, Trump’s mercantilist mindset appears somewhat mollified with the president telling Xi that a trade deal will be dependent on a peaceful resolution to the Hong Kong protests.
Whether this change of course will make the US’ position appear more resolute, or just confuse Beijing more, remains to be seen.
Gray Sergeant is a British writer focusing on East Asian politics.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS