So Beijing has rattled the sabre. Or has it? Is this a genuine attempt to fail the hearts of pro-democrats in the Pearl of the Orient or is it merely on a level of normalcy for a Chinese government that expects to do what it wants wherever it wants?
Surely this pressure was always to be expected. Only the most space-headed fantasist would have thought Beijing would tolerate a 'democracy', unless it was under its management. In recent times, rule from the North has not really been about allowing or forbidding free opinion, but more about consolidating control – it's control. Is it any wonder, then, that Hong Kong's slow path to democracy has just been bulldozed? For how can an unfettered democracy be controlled if not by force?
A country of the size of China has always had problems with control. It has exercised this control brutally in the past, but comparatively less-so in recent decades. In fact, it is a small wonder that it hasn't bared its teeth more often. The minor rebellions in Xinjiang, Tibet and elsewhere have upset the thinking in Beijing that all things in 'communist China' are for the greater good. For how could any dissent be tolerated if it is against the harmony that an ideologically-sound centralised control is seeking to create? At least, that's how it may be seen. Such troublemakers are thus seen as true criminals, the sort that should be eradicated like so much vermin. Within this mental framework, how could Beijing permit the election of anything but a 'yes man' as a Chief Executive of Hong Kong?
The pro-democrats may puff and fume as armoured personnel carriers are driven around the territory, but what is of greater surprise, at least to me, is that the central government is frequently applauded for its actions from within a de facto democratically free Hong Kong. The east truly is red for many in Hong Kong. It is true that people have short memories, but perhaps there is also a blurring of memory and fantasy, of fact with fiction, perception and ideology. Many have conveniently forgotten the plight of refugees – frantic swimmers straggling ashore in 1970s New Territories beaches, braving sharks and deadly currents to escape the Red Guards' bullets. But if taxi drivers in Hong Kong, Shanghai and Xiamen suspend both Mao and Kwan Yin from their rear-view mirrors, it is because these mythic figures have become part of the even greater China myth. China has at last become great – it sends folks into space, builds mega-skyscrapers and runs high-speed Maglev trains between its mega-metropolises. It can now do anything. And that, of course, justifies anything. Just as 'Middle Americans' can justify bombing targets in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq in the name of self-defence and as part and parcel of their incredible projection of power, so their Chinese equivalent, Mr & Mrs Chan, can justify the Chinese state's similar actions against its enemies. And it is up to the media in both instances to inform their public about just who those enemies are. Hong Kong democrats are therefore viewed as a lot of troublemakers that need sorting out!
So will Hong Kong achieve full democracy in 2017? Of course not. Some may argue that it will look like democracy, and that may be enough. Others will continue the debate, probably right up until 2047 when the one-country, two-systems policy will be set aside for full integration with the motherland, whatever that means. Quite whether China and Hong Kong will then be in existence as they are now, no one can know. If I'm still around, then I'll be an 80-year old observer, and a cynical but unabashed democrat at that.
Comments