AP Photo
Police officers react as rioters set fires on a street in Mong Kok district of Hong Kong Feb. 9. Hong Kong’s Lunar New Year celebration descended into chaotic scenes as protesters and police clashed over a street market selling fish balls and other local holiday delicacies.

Hong Kong’s lessons in coping with China

A Feb. 8 riot and police crackdown in Hong Kong reveals the harsher hand of China but also a dilemma for the territory on how to deal with Beijing’s fear of dissent. The world must watch how Hong Kong decides.

Under “core” leader Xi Jinping, says scholar Minxin Pei, China is now “gripped by fear in a way it has not been since the era of Mao Zedong.” Dr. Pei cites the government’s heavy crackdown since 2012 on human rights activists, corrupt officials, intellectuals, and even investors. While it is easy for the world to bemoan the fears of the Chinese Communist Party for its very survival, the question is how to react. Should China’s rulers be punished or persuaded to change course?

The dilemma is acutely felt in Hong Kong, the former British colony whose autonomy and freedoms were guaranteed for 50 years after it was handed over to China in 1997. Its 7 million people are in an intense debate on how to deal with the Communist Party’s fear-based repression. They are part of China yet still free to talk with freedom. They could be a model for how to better engage Beijing.

As the party’s crackdown has escalated on the mainland, Hong Kong has experienced more heavy-handedness from China or by the territory’s Beijing-approved officials. The older pro-democracy advocates have been at a loss, which has frustrated young people who feel little cultural affinity with the mainland and resent a flood of mainlanders into Hong Kong. In 2014, mass demonstrations by a nonviolent youth movement to win full democracy were suppressed with force. Then a more radical group, called Hong Kong Indigenous, began to gain strength.

Resentments finally boiled over on Feb. 8, the start of the Lunar New Year. Hong Kong officials tried to close down illegal street vendors selling fish balls and other local food, sparking protests. The official action was seen as suppression of Hong Kong’s culture. Food stalls are an expression of the city’s free-market and egalitarian traditions. Police fired warning shots, and the Indigenous group joined the vendors.

In the end, more than 90 police officers were injured and 54 people were arrested. The incident has made the debate in Hong Kong even more urgent.

In a recent forum, Margaret Ng, a barrister and former legislator in Hong Kong, explained that the people of Hong Kong must know when to compromise and when to stand on principle. She says rule of law is one of those principles that cannot be compromised, especially as the Communist Party puts itself above law. “Because if you compromise on the rule of law, you compromise the future of the Chinese people, and not just the future of the people of Hong Kong,” she said.

“We need to exercise a lot of patience and understanding. But the future does not lie in compromising our principles. Because this is really the future, not only of Hong Kong, not only with China, but the whole world – we believe in the rule of law not because it’s a Western value, but because it is universal.”

These are wise words for a small place dealing with a fearful giant next door. Instead of resorting to violence, China and Hong Kong need more level-headed listening. And as China flexes its muscles in front of  the world, more eyes should be on how Hong Kongers find the best path to keep their freedoms.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Hong Kong’s lessons in coping with China
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today