GEOFF RABY. The end of Hong Kong as we know it (AFR 6 Sep 2019)

Tragically, the turmoil in Hong Kong can only end badly.  No good outcomes are available to the participants.  Whatever happens, Hong Kong will never be the same again.  2046, the last year of the 50-year transition, will begin once the streets are cleared, however that is achieved.  Hong Kong could well become a “black swan” event that changes the region and the world beyond.

Three months into continual rioting, mass demonstrations, escalating violence, Beijing remains intransigent.   At the beginning, Beijing could have taken the steam out of the protests had it allowed Carrie Lam, the CEO, to scrap unambiguously the Extradition Bill, which was spark that lit the bonfire, establish a genuinely independent commission of enquiry to examine police behaviour, and then sacked her for incompetence and replaced her with a more politically attuned CEO who had a degree of support across various groups.

That Beijing has refused to do so and has dug in as protests grow is extraordinarily obdurate and ultimately self-defeating.  Most worryingly, the list of demands of the protesters has widened, to the point where the One Country, Two Systems formula, that has underpinned the relationship between Hong Kong and the mainland since 1997, is now being rejected in the streets.  This also has profound implications for Taiwan and regional peace and stability.

Beijing’s official position for not despatching Lam and making some meaningful but, in the scheme of things, relatively minor concessions can only be understood in the context of internal elite politics.  By and large, one of the strengths of China’s political leadership is its sensible pragmatism.  This time, however, the official line is that any concessions, even the most obvious one of getting rid of the CEO, would just bring forth more demands from the streets.

After three months of Beijing’s stubbornness, the situation has only become worse.  The violence has increased massively, the protestors legitimate grievances have increased, especially against the inept and increasingly violent police, and the rejection of Beijing’s rule is becoming widespread and entrenched.  Someone needs to advise Beijing that when you are in a hole, and want to get out of it, stop digging.

As in 1989, before the denouement of the PLA’s killing of innocent residents of Beijing, the reason for the failure to act and find accommodation for the grievances of the students occupying the Square and in the many cities around the country, was to be found in the political struggle at the centre of Chinese politics.

So it is most likely the same today with Hong Kong.  A pragmatic sensible course of action, which would seek to find a way of defusing the situation through compromise, accommodation and dialogue, is not possible because of elite politics in Beijing.  President Xi has many enemies who have been waiting years for him to slip and then attack him.  This is their moment.

Compromise would be seen as weakness and a vulnerability.  This is one of the consequences of strong-man political leadership.  It closes off sensible options.  The problem for Xi, and his opponents know it, is that he has no other option.  While a military intervention, either through the People’s Liberation Army or the People’s Armed Police is a possibility it is still most unlikely.

The international consequences would be disastrous.  Foreign capital and global companies would flee Hong Kong as if the bubonic plague had broken out.  In any event, the military will resist being drawn in.  All militaries want to know what the exit strategy is.  None exists for Hong Kong.  The prospect of being mired into trying to control a labyrinth of steeply narrow streets and laneways is a military’s worst nightmare.

Following Tiananmen Square, the PLA adopted a strategy of maximum intimidation of the population which lasted for three to four days.  We witnessed truckloads of troops arriving at the hutongs across the road from the diplomatic compounds and listening to gun fire for hours and being warned not to appear on the balconies of our apartments.  We feared the worse, but the gunfire wasn’t directed at the residents but rather into the air to intimidate them.

The PLA also shot up the foreign buildings along the main avenue, aptly named the Avenue of Heavenly Peace.  No foreigner was injured which can be seen as a tribute to the Government’s intelligence about the location of each and every foreigner at the time of the shootings.

The layout of Beijing is nothing like Hong Kong.  It has wide flat boulevards and, in those days, tightly packed courtyards, or hutongs, in which residents could be easily trapped, not steeply rising alleyways and lanes with high rise buildings which could be vantage points to trap and attack troops.

The military could still be used if Xi’s political imperative requires that, but the costs would be enormous. It is clear from the courageous, if foolhardy behaviour, of many of Hong Kong’s youth that the bloodshed would be horrific.    At a time when many in the West are wanting to push back against China, this would provide an ideal opportunity to impose severe sanctions on Beijing.  Not only Hong Kong’s but Chinese economic growth would tank.

For all these reasons, it is most unlikely the military will be used.  In view of the incompetence and brutality shown so far by Hong Kong’s police which has only made the protestors more resolute, the only path that exists to resolution is compromise.  Lam has just indicated she may now understand this by offering to withdraw, not simply suspend, the Extradition Bill.  This was a key demand by the protestors at the very beginning of this drama three months ago.  But this now is likely to be too little too late.

Xi Jinping will want the demonstrators off the streets well before the 1 October celebrations of the 70th Anniversary of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China.  This was to be his grand moment and the loss of face to have Hong Kong burning would be intolerable.  The resilience of the people on the streets in Hong Kong may finally have convinced Beijing that compromise would be a better outcome than tanks on major intersections of Hong Kong during the 70th Anniversary.

However all of this is resolved, following this summer of discontent, Hong Kong will never be the same again;  2046 has collapsed into the present.  Beijing will do whatever is necessary through political interference, media and digital control, and undermining Hong Kong’s independent judiciary and academia to ensure this never happens again.

Geoff Raby is a former Australian Ambassador to China


This entry was posted in Asia, International Affairs. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to GEOFF RABY. The end of Hong Kong as we know it (AFR 6 Sep 2019)

  1. A lease on Hong Kong was forcefully extracted by a Britain determined, in the “unequal” treaties of 1842, to open China to international trade. It is now back to being Chinese territory, as is Taiwan, and the contemporary government of China is “Communist” of a peculiarly Confucian dynastic complexion. It is also a regime that has done laudably well for its vast population over time.
    All of the hand wringing about closed societies compared to the virtues of bourgeois “democracy” seem fanciful in the light of the reality that, possibly, 15% of the population, even of Hong Kong, have any interest whatsoever in politics. This lot of young Hong Kongers remind me of their predecessors in the French revolution, when “useful idiots”, inspired momentarily by slogans, had no conception that they were siding with a bourgeois changing of the guard and that liberty had, for the most part, an economic connotation. (I’m not intending to make a case for the Ancien regime here, just sayin’ is all).
    Clearly, it is the HK middle class who are being used by Uncle Sam to wedge China as part of the current trade impasse and I’m slightly amazed that some readers on this site particularly speak in such fatuous terms about “closed societies” and freedom etc. Marx rejected democracy because of its vulnerability to wealth so what do readers, who seem to think that a Communist regime is somehow illegitimate, see as preferable, a “democracy” such as we in Australia have – rule by News Corp?

  2. Anthony Pun says:

    (1) There will be no PLA tanks or soldiers in the city of HK to restore law and order. (2) The impasse between Carrie Lam & Protesters will remain, One Country Two Systems vs Western Democracy. (3) HK Police looks like like angels in uniform compared to French Police. (4) Carrie Lam can be replaced but her replacement could be tougher person. (5) China can sustain a better propaganda war compared to 1989 with her global TV network CGTN in English and Wechat. China is also to convince most of her Chinese people (Mainland and overseas) through national pride to be resilience and patience. (6) Sanctions – double standards. (7) Dreaded weapon – China controls water & food supplies to HK. (8) If westerners want to show humanity on this issue, allow refugee status for HKers. (9)HKers must resolve their difference themselves and quickly before the point of no return and the theme song becomes Red Sails in the Hong Kong Sunset.

  3. That is brilliant, Geoff, and beautifully written. The crazy-brave Hong Kong protesters amaze me. I hope they live to tell the tale and understand their importance in 21st Century history.

    What is the end game for China? I think Xi and the Politburo will have to face their worst nightmare and do a Gorbachev. They must liberalise, thereby doing themselves out of a job.

    China has opened its talents and ambitions to the world. It is too late to pull down the bamboo curtain, even with electronic assistance.

    The first and last law of philosophy rules. You can’t have your cake and eat it. A closed society can’t compete in an open world. China will have to relax but I assume the Chinese will be more prudent than the Russians and will keep Milton Friedman’s Chicago economists off the premises.

Comments are closed.