Hong Kong: Something’s gotta give
As the Johnny Mercer song says “When an irresistible force meets an immovable object, something’s got to give.” The quote sums up the current situation in Hong Kong. Whatever the outcome, Hong Kong will change – and probably for the worse.
The agreement in 1984 to return Hong Kong to Chinese rule set off a wave of emigration that transformed both B.C.’s Lower Mainland and suburban Toronto.
This in spite of the agreement there would be one country with two systems – implying the former colony could continue as it had for 50 years in the post-war era.
The government in Beijing would choose the chief executive of Hong Kong, much as the British had prior to 1997, and there would be elections to select members of the ruling council. The judiciary was to be independent, and British common law was to serve as the base of the legal system.
In 1997, Hong Kong was a booming economic engine of more than seven million with a per capita income far in excess of that of the Mainland and a global financial centre providing an important window both into and out of China. It seemed in everyone’s interest to keep everything as it had been under the British.
In 2003, a peaceful protest erupted in response to a proposed law that would have allowed the police to enter private property without a warrant. The proposal was withdrawn and life returned to normal.
However, earlier this year, a move to limit universal suffrage for the election of the chief executive caused students to lead massive protests that essentially shut down the commercial and government sectors for several days. A satisfactory resolution of the ongoing standoff between the Hong Kong students and the government in Beijing is not obvious. The students are not clear in what they want other than free elections. Any attempt at compromise will likely elicit other students accusing them of selling out.
For Beijing, the problem is especially difficult. China’s relatively new president has been conducting a campaign to consolidate his power using the aim of eliminating widespread corruption as the rationale. If he were to yield to the student demands, this could be interpreted as a sign of weakness.
The worldwide reaction to China’s use of force to quell the Tiananmen Square protest of 1989 has made Beijing cautious. Force would only be a last resort in Hong Kong. But using it would create a flight of both capital and people from the city and a substantial economic downturn. It would also probably chill China’s diplomatic relations and lead to a reduction in foreign investment. A subtle hand is required. However, the protest cannot continue for much longer without severe costs on commerce in Hong Kong and lost tourism.
As is often the case in such situations, a round-about solution may be tried. For example, a law or regulation passed by executive order saying that students who have failed to attend classes for a designated number of days would lose the academic year or be deemed to have resigned. Re-admission to an institution would not be certain.
This would put the decision to protest squarely on the individual who might therefore be less responsive to peer pressure.
Such action by the authorities would certainly compromise the independence of educational institutions; but, the public at large, increasingly worried about the adverse effects of the continuing protest, might support the government.
David Bond is an author and retired bank economist.