Hong Kong....Occupy Central Demonstrations....

Geographer said:

Let's look at what the protestors can accomplish.


2.) Put pressure on the top business leaders, CK Leung, the ministers, and the pro-Beijing crowd in Hong Kong, who might then put pressure on Beijing. Beijing might ignore the protestors but they might not ignore the pro-Beijing business elite. The business elite do not want instability in Hong Kong, and they don't want a 1989-style suppression of the protestors either because they would hurt Hong Kong's image and business environment far worse than the current protests. These business elites could convince Beijing that giving Hong Kong full democracy would satisfy the protestors and ensure stability in the city.

The cynics would say that Beijing will never grant Hong Kong full democracy for fear than an anti-CCP Chief Executive will win the election. But so what if that happened? Nobody in HK wants independence, and even if they did there is no way they could achieve it. What else does China want from HK other than for HK to be officially part of China? HK already hosts Chinese democracy organizations, Tienanmen Square Massacre memorials, the Falun Gong, pro-democracy newspapers, and open internet. What's wrong with letting Hong Kong citizens choose the person who will run their government, manage their taxes, appoint the heads of government agencies, and help make internal laws?

Click to expand...

I am afraid you got it backward geographer. HK business elites are not going to pressure Beijing. Many of them have significant holdings and investments in mainland. A portion of their business success in Hong Kong is also dependent on the goodwill of Beijing's government especially when it comes to large projects. This protest has already generated latent political instability for Hong Kong regardless the outcome. It's very possible that mainland cities other than Hong Kong will be the recipient of more Chinese economic liberalization experiments. Something HK elites would loath to see.

It's really ironic that HK elites would probably be able to influence Beijing more if China is a westernized democracy with campaign financing.

Bltizo said:

The status quo would be acceptable to Beijing, but would it be acceptable to the protesters? Their demands are pretty clear, they want everything, now.




Because lack of veto power and indirect control means it could be used as a much stronger base to subvert central government power. HK also sets a precedent for other territories -- they can have autonomy, but they must be answerable to beijing on a few important matters.
And the independence question is not something I would so willingly dismiss either. I wouldn't put it past any anti china chief executive to selectively read the Basic Law or ignore it altogether -- or even be influenced by foreign powers to seek independence just to create further consternation for the central government.

If there is a way for a number of "hard limits" to be set for any candidates, then that might be acceptable for beijing, but the protesters won't accept anything less other than full autonomy and independence in all but words. More importantly, any conditions that beijing sets probably won't be enough no matter how reasonable.
If there was a single and credible leader that was willing to make more nuanced negotiations, then sure, maybe something could be worked out. But I think the crowd has been whipped to a point where anything less than everything will be unacceptable.

Click to expand...

Exactly. It's no-brainer that the current plan to be vetoed on day 1, zero hour, barring some impossible miracle like a big meteor strike leaving a huge crater where the entire Government HQ complex (where the LegCo building also located) once stood, preferably wiped out the entire cabinet and all LegCo members too, so a brand-new ball game can really begin.

The demand by the insurgents calls for "everything or nothing" and giving nothing remotely resemble concession to Beijing in return, so no way Beijing would play along or budge. There're 2 possibilities that it could play out in the end:

1. Beijing muscle in militarily, let blood and grey matter spill all over the streets to make a point to all other cities and region that might hold rebellious notion against the Central Government.
2. Put HK to the sidelines and let it rot, putting Shanghai's resurgence on higher gear, syphoning the capitals from HK to Shanghai, among other things. This will be a slow death for HK, and the most possible outcome of the two.

Bltizo said:

they can have autonomy, but they must be answerable to beijing on a few important matters.
And the independence question is not something I would so willingly dismiss either.

Click to expand...

HK already has autonomy, it is part of the one country two system arrangement with Beijing having controlled over foreign affairs and defence. That was the post 1997 arrangement and has been since. When you mentioned independence, what do you actually mean by that? As far as I know and based on common meaning of that term, no one is asking for that. They are fighting for universal suffrage i.e. being able to choose a Chief Executive unfiltered.

Bltizo said:

@ air superiority

"China has promised to not intervene in HK's political affairs, yet somehow the NPC can say how HK can have its democracy?"

Isn't this the crux of the issue? There are differing interpretations of "intervention".
But at the end of the day, HK's leaders will be accountable to the NPC otherwise what you have is de facto independence.

The fact that China is not directly intervening into these political demonstrations (and ones in the past) show that it is willing to tolerate dissent and political movements in HK which differ to its own.

I've repeated similar questions in my last few posts: do any of the protesters expect beijing to allow democracy without a degree of check or accountability to the central government? If so, then they're going to be in for a long, long wait.
They would have been better off making more moderate and specific demands instead of the equivalent of using a sledgehammer to solve a pathology that needed to be dealt with through a scalpel.

Click to expand...

Isn't this the crux of the issue? There are differing interpretations of "intervention".
But at the end of the day, HK's leaders will be accountable to the NPC otherwise what you have is de facto independence.

Click to expand...

I certainly agree with you. There's a lot of complications because I was thinking about the power struggles between HK and Beijing, and I felt there must be certain benefits that Beijing is trying to secure (hence the amount of control it's trying to assert). Anyways, unfortunately the amount of power Beijing wants in terms of influence and zone of control overlaps the amount of control that HK people prefers/desires, so right now we're talking about a nice arm wrestling match. The other thing is that from HK's standpoint, HK don't trust Beijing anymore(especially how Beijing yielded its influence to appoint CY, who now messed HK up completely) because Beijing-appointed representatives don't look out for HK interests and only serve Beijing completely. People's lives are being messed up and HK people has no more room to yield or to give Beijing another chance at it. Furthermore, the direct election was promised by China, not to mention non-interference, and now these continual Beijing's hard stances are angering people further. I can completely understand from CCP's point of view and all, but CCP seemed to not understand that HK is resisting isn't because we're doing this for the sake of doing it, but because we can't yield anymore if we wanna fix our dying city for all the issues that there is.

Furthermore, HK's future leader ain't gonna call for independence or anything, and HK leader can still be accountable to China and secure both sides' interests appropriately the same time. It's just also the matter of what definition of "accountability" would mean in this case. If the accountability means to be like how CY is right now, which is complete puppet who disregards HK's interests, then no, HK can't stand for that again. The amount of mistrust is too much. Beijing can only blame itself for playing with their influences in HK politics and then picking the wrong guy for the job, who screwed everything up to almost FUBAR status.


Honestly, my thought is that Beijing needs to take a chill pill and give HK a chance. HK ain't asking for independence; we're seeking a responsible and accountable government attending to our needs too. The current government doesn't. The currently government is only accountable to Beijing and the interests of the businesspeople and their elites but disregarding everyone else. Plus, I don't think a candidate who creates hell with Beijing can get sufficient vote to get voted by HK people because HK people are very aware of HK's integration with mainland already, and even if a group of people say yes to this anti-Beijing guy, pro-China and businesspeople will still say no. We just want someone who can not only preferrably balances interests of both sides out, but more importantly really be an actual leader of HK by working on HK's issues. The current guy doesn't, and he's picked by Beijing, so naturally we feel Beijing's choices aren't serving HK interests.

Brumby said:

HK already has autonomy, it is part of the one country two system arrangement with Beijing having controlled over foreign affairs and defence. That was the post 1997 arrangement and has been since. When you mentioned independence, what do you actually mean by that? As far as I know and based on common meaning of that term, no one is asking for that. They are fighting for universal suffrage i.e. being able to choose a Chief Executive unfiltered.

Click to expand...

Then if the protesters make it clear that their desire to choose their own CE will prevent the CE from having any powers similar to that of an independent state, seek independence, or seek to subvert the central government on issues in China, then there may be room for compromise.

But right now there's none of that moderation, only push.

airsuperiority said:

I certainly agree with you. There's a lot of complications because I was thinking about the power struggles between HK and Beijing, and I felt there must be certain benefits that Beijing is trying to secure (hence the amount of control it's trying to assert). Anyways, unfortunately the amount of power Beijing wants in terms of influence and zone of control overlaps the amount of control that HK people prefers/desires, so right now we're talking about a nice arm wrestling match. The other thing is that from HK's standpoint, HK don't trust Beijing anymore(especially how Beijing yielded its influence to appoint CY, who now messed HK up completely) because Beijing-appointed representatives don't look out for HK interests and only serve Beijing completely. People's lives are being messed up and HK people has no more room to yield or to give Beijing another chance at it. Furthermore, the direct election was promised by China, not to mention non-interference, and now these continual Beijing's hard stances are angering people further. I can completely understand from CCP's point of view and all, but CCP seemed to not understand that HK is resisting isn't because we're doing this for the sake of doing it, but because we can't yield anymore if we wanna fix our dying city for all the issues that there is.

Furthermore, HK's future leader ain't gonna call for independence or anything, and HK leader can still be accountable to China and secure both sides' interests appropriately the same time. It's just also the matter of what definition of "accountability" would mean in this case. If the accountability means to be like how CY is right now, which is complete puppet who disregards HK's interests, then no, HK can't stand for that again. The amount of mistrust is too much. Beijing can only blame itself for playing with their influences in HK politics and then picking the wrong guy for the job, who screwed everything up to almost FUBAR status.

Click to expand...

Like I said, if the protesters are serious about their goals, then they should start making noises of moderation.

You can bet they've got Beijing's attention, and in a relatively peaceful way which I am impressed by. However there also needs to be a deliverance that they will not move towards independence nor seek to subvert govt power on the mainland.

Like shen said in a previous post, this entire thing may have been far more successful had the HKers also waved PRC flags and made clear that their desire for greater freedoms would not harm beijing's strategic interests or sovereignty over HK.
I'm not sure how much of the movement you are in contact with, but it may be something worth considering if you guys seriously want universal sufferage. Basically, I'm suggesting nuance to achieve objective goals rather than a blind charge fuelled by ideology (whether it be democracy or anti-CCP)

---

The reason movements in China such as in Wukan were resolved, is because the people (despite having greivances) knew that it would be folly to directly challenge the central government, and indeed many were supportive of the central government. In occupy's case, I don't expect them to sing the praises of the CCP or whatever, they need to position themselves as seeking more autonomy and having universal WITHIN China.
And that's the exact problem, from my sense of it.

airsuperiority said:

... Beijing can only blame itself for playing with their influences in HK politics and then picking the wrong guy for the job, who screwed everything up to almost FUBAR status.

Click to expand...

How you doing, airsuperiority? A moment ago that link worked

[video=youtube;w4q8fs8gTIs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=w4q8fs8gTIs[/video]

When watching it on Sunday evening I thought the protesters hold umbrellas because it started raining but since then I noticed:

good luck to you!

For example, these would be just a few "red lines" that would give beijing a right to politically intervene (obviously it would be scaled based on how much discussion or action has been made):
-Foreign affairs and military (basically the same deal as now)
-Movement towards independence (this would have to be more explicitly detailed for the benefit of all sides, for instance what constitutes "movement"?)
-Attempts to subvert central government authority on the mainland (this won't necessariliy restrict freedom of speech anymore than at present, however it would mean that any elected CE won't have any political sway on the mainland)


If the protesters can make these points clear, then the central government might be willing to listen.

Bltizo said:

It's always difficult to trace the lineage of movements, as smaller issues which can cause people to congregate together often get ignored as newer and bigger issues come to the limelight.

Personally I am doubtful to the claim that anti MLer sentiment didn't have a role in this movement, at least at the initial stages. It could be a sample bias of the news and social media posts from preceding years with HKers complaining of MLers (to be fair, much of it I was sympathetic to, especially regarding politeness and public conduct), but I don't think it's a stretch to think it had a preceding role even if right now the angst is explicitly directed at the HK government and beijing

---

Also, lack of organization isn't necessarily a good thing, for either the protesters or the authorities -- it means there is no guaranteed means for de escalation and no regulation of the differing opinions within the masses.

---

What will happen if a week passes and no compromise is reached or if they don't sate the protester's demands? Everyone knows china isn't going to throw HK away to the masses without some kind of veto power.

Click to expand...

I highly doubt people will go violent because it doesnt really resonates with who they are. The people who're in the streets now are folks from all brackets, including high school students, so not necessarily the anger or sentiments that in other places might experience. Another thing is that the protestors know the world is watching us, and that the police and HKSAR are finding reasons to get involved or undermine their efforts, which is why they are being even more aware. Also, believe me, but apparently there had been some voices expressed by some police of how they felt, and overall I'd say both the police and the protestors are sympathetic to one another. Some are saying that as soon as we get what we want, we gotta disperse immediately and peacefully to reduce strains on the police part too. Furthermore, I'd say the bonding as a community had become such that not only there are SO MUCH (even my cousin and my friend told me) donations, but local businesses are sympathetic and donating to people. If you consider the grateful, emotional, sentiments factor, it's doubtful that they will bite the hand that feed them.

There are stories of some thugs trying to cause trouble, but the protestors are doing their best to combat them. There's one incident of a woman who's ripping down ribbons and flyers, so protestors encircled her and not let her get out until she gets the point.

The majority of the public ain't people from OC. They are sympathizers of the students, regular public folks, and OC with Love and Peace at best. People there are very aware of what's happening, so I hope it all goes well, and let's hope it goes down a good path. I honestly don't know what's gonna happen, and even I'm observing and learning from my people. I hope nothing bad goes down, and if it doesn't work, people will disperse peacefully like a civic and let the world see here in HK, we are responsible for our own city and create the one of the few most peaceful protest that the world has ever seen.

Also apparently the people are cleaning after themselves, and again they kept reminding themselves of their causes, so while I don't know how it all is gonna go down, I really hope, and pray, that everything resolves peacefully, preferrably HKer eventually gets what we want, and everything goes well.

Engineer said:

That's an example of the kind of conditioning I mentioned in my previous post.


Go read HK's constitution, NPC does have that right as it is the de jure highest legislative authority of HK SAR. All that China has promised is written within the constitution, and Beijing has been pretty good at following the Constitution to the letter. Anything more is fictional.


You mentioned a reason in your very own paragraph, that people are over running barricades. How can that be no reason? If I were you, my first step would be to stop reading facebook news.

Click to expand...

I watched the live footages for the entire night, and I had friends on the ground who told me what happened. And even then, I'm not sure if pepper-spraying people who had stopped rattling the fences but standing there with their hands up, who are outside the perimeter, is in any way acceptable.