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.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS