Constrained by Beijing, Whither Hong Kong's Democracy?

Constrained by Beijing, Whither Hong Kong's Democracy?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 3, 2014

Summary: The CCP People's Congress has issued a "reform package." It has drawn a line in the sand regarding the Chief Executive elections. It has rejected Hong Kongers' demands for "genuine universal suffrage." This move has undermined trust between Hong Kong and Beijing. It will provoke Hong Kongers to a new wave of unrest. For the people of Hong Kong, this is admittedly a huge setback. How should they go about their fight for democracy in the face of such setbacks? They will need farsightedness and calm. They must not allow themselves to be overwhelmed by momentary anger and anxiety.

Full Text Below:

The CCP People's Congress has issued a "reform package." It has drawn a line in the sand regarding the Chief Executive elections. It has rejected Hong Kongers' demands for "genuine universal suffrage." This move has undermined trust between Hong Kong and Beijing. It will provoke Hong Kongers to a new wave of unrest. For the people of Hong Kong, this is admittedly a huge setback. How should they go about their fight for democracy in the face of such setbacks? They will need farsightedness and calm. They must not allow themselves to be overwhelmed by momentary anger and anxiety.

The resolution passed by the CCP Standing Committee has disappointed even moderate Hong Kongers. The main reason is that Beijing is unwilling to agree to even small compromises. It has dug in its heels and further reduced the size of the birdcage. Hong Kongers now feel that Beijing is deliberately oppressing them and reneging on its promises of "one country, two systems."

Hong Kong's pan-democrats are uncomfortable about several constraints. One. The CCP Peoples Congress stipulated that Chief Executive candidates shall be nominated by a Nomination Committee. Other methods of nomination, such as by political parties, were rejected. Two. The Nomination Committee can nominate only two to three candidates. The candidates must receive majority support from 1200 Nomination Committee members. This provision greatly reduces the chance of pan-democrats being among the finalists. Three. The Peoples Congress declared that if the Legislative Council fails to come up with specific measures based on these principles, the Hong Kong Chief Executive election will continue to use the old Election Committee system. Hong Kongers will not be able to implement universal suffrage.

Hong Kongers in general, and students in particuar, are most angry with the first constraint. The CCP has agreed to universal suffrage. Yet it has refused to adopt a more open approach to the nomination of candidates from all walks of life. Instead, nominees are restricted to "patriots who love Hong Kong." This is the main reason Hong Kongers want to Occupy Central. Actually the second and third constraints are more troubling to the Hong Kong pan-democrats. These constraints leave them in a nominally improved but actually worsened situation. They intensify the conflict between them and the average Hong Konger.

Consider their nominally improved but actually worsened situation. The current approach for the Chief Executive Elections requires the approval of only one-eight of the Election Committee members to nominate a candidate. The pan-democrats may be few in numbers, but they still stand a chance of nominating their own candidates. Now that Beijing has raised the threshold to one-half however, the pan-democrats are likely to lose any chance to take part in the elections. In other words, Hong Kong may now enjoy universal suffrage, but given Hong Kong politics, the pan-democrats may lose the opportunity to participate because of the the raised threshold for eligibility. This is the essence of the political fight.

To this end, 25 pan-democrat lawmakers out of the 70 members of the Legislative Council, have issued a joint statement. They have expressed full support for the Occupy Central movement. They also plan to vote against the Peoples Congress plan in the Legislative Council, rejecting what they consider an unreasonable Chief Executive election process. But if the new approach fails to pass, then Hong Kong's special election will remain a "small circle election." Citizens will not enjoy universal suffrage. As a result, the pan-democrats may be accused of "obstructing universal suffrage." Given their stand on Occupy Central, they may even be accused of "neglecting stability and prosperity of Hong Kong." This could drive a wedge between them and the people of Hong Kong. The pan-democrats must weigh these possibilities and respond wisely. Only then will Hong Kong's hard-won democratic achievements not be lost.

The Chinese Communist Party has displayed its iron fist. One. It is worried about meddling from foreign powers who have infiltrated the Hong Kong democrats. Two. It is concerned about the "Hong Kong model" and the shock effect it has on the Mainland. Three. It wants to show that Beijing will not tolerate threats from the Occupy Central movement. The pan-democrats' reading is that the CCP has no intention of implementing universal suffrage in Hong Kong. That is why it set such a high threshold. It wants to force the democrats to quit. In any event, the current situation poses a dilemma for the pan-democrats. If they charge ahead, they could undermine Hong Kong's stability. If they retreat, they could lose whatever foothold they have. Therefore they must carefully determine where to draw the line.

For the moment, the Occupy Central movement appears ready to pull the trigger. It cannot retreat. This is especially true for the younger generation in Hong Kong. They find it difficult to tolerate a situation in which democracy cannot advance and remains constrained. But politicians, attorneys, and others affected by politics cannot place all their hopes on street demonstrations. They must attempt to advance their goals through the system or parliamentary means.

Many Hong Kongers emulated the March student movement on Taiwan. They held high the banner of "civil disobedience," in defiance of Beijing. In fact, the two movements are not at all comparable. The March student movement faced a relatively soft democratic regime. Its demands were simple. Hong Kong, by contrast, faces a set of far more complex issues pertaining to democracy. Standing on the opposite side is Beijing, a force vastly more powerful than the KMT, even during KMT one-party rule. Also, the Mainland and Hong Kong have no experience with democracy to speak of. These differences in historical context and social perception mean that Hong Kong democrats must allow more time to reverse their fortunes. Expecting otherwise would be wishful thinking.

The CCP People's Congress announced its changes to Hong Kong's political system. On the same day, Macau Chief Executive Fernando Chui Sai was reelected with 96% of the vote, in a small circle election. Separated by water, Hong Kong and Macao find themselves in different situations. Hong Kong insists on its pursuit of democracy. It has shaken the world. But this is a long road it has embarked upon, one that will require time, patience, and dialogue in addition to confrontation. After all, Taiwan's road to democracy took 30 years. Yet this is all it has come to.

面對北京箝制，香港的民主路怎麼走？
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.09.03 02:11 am

中共人大發表的「政改方案」，對特首選舉悍然畫下多道紅線，否決了港人極力爭取的「真普選」；此舉，不僅撕裂了香港和北京的信任關係，也將把香港推向新一波動盪。對香港人而言，這誠然是一大挫折，但要如何在挫折中繼續向爭取民主推進，恐怕須放長眼光、冷靜思考，不要被一時憤怒和憂慮淹沒。

這次中共人大常委會通過的決議，連平日態度溫和的香港人士都感到失望，主要原因是北京不僅寸步不讓，更強硬緊縮了鳥籠政治的尺寸，讓港人覺得北京是刻意打壓，使「一國兩制」的承諾倒退。

香港泛民主派人士感到最不安的，是幾項箝制：第一、中共人大明確規定特首人選須由「提名委員會」產生，排除了政黨提名等其他途徑；第二、規定提名委員會僅能提二至三名人選，且均須獲一千兩百人提名委員的「過半支持」，這項規定使民主派人士入圍的機率大大降低；第三、人大表明，立法會若無法就其宣布之原則制訂出具體辦法，香港特首選舉便繼續沿用舊制由「選舉委員會」推選，而無法實施港人普選。

綜合觀察，一般港人和學生最氣憤的是上述箝制的第一點，即中共雖同意普選，卻拒絕用更開放的方式接受各界提名，提名對象僅限「愛國愛港」人士，這是刺激港人參與「占中」行動的主因。進一步看，實際上更困擾香港泛民派人士的卻是第二及第三點，這不僅使他們陷入一個「名進實退」的處境，更挑撥了他們和一般香港市民間的矛盾。

所謂「名進實退」，現行特首選舉辦法只要獲得推選委員會「八分之一」委員的同意，即可成為候選人；泛民陣營目前雖屬少數，仍有機會推出自己的候選人。然而，北京將門檻一舉提高至「二分之一」，極可能使民主黨派完全失去參選的機會。亦即，名義上，香港市民雖得到了普選的機會；但就香港的政治而言，民主陣營卻可能因門檻抬高而失去競逐的機會，這是實質的政治打擊。

為此，在七十名立法會成員中，已有廿五名泛民派議員發出聯合聲明，稱全力支持「占中」行動，並將在立法會投票否決人大的方案，封殺不合理的特首選舉辦法。然而，如果新的辦法不通過，意味香港的特選仍將維持昔日的「小圈圈選舉」，無法進行公民「普選」。如此一來，泛民派可能被對手扣上「阻撓普選」的罪名，甚至以「占中」指控他們「不顧香港的安定繁榮」，離間香港市民對他們的認同。這點，泛民派必須仔細衡酌、技巧因應，才不致使香港好不容易獲致的民主成果化為烏有。

中共這次的鐵腕，一是對香港的民主派及它所謂境外勢力的介入不放心，二是擔心「香港模式」對內地造成示範與衝擊，三是要顯示北京不受「占中」行動威脅。民主派人士的解讀是，中共其實根本無意讓香港實施普選，才會訂出如此高的門檻，要讓民主派知難而退。但無論如何，目前的情勢，對泛民派確實是一個兩難的局面：硬衝的話，可能損及香港安定；退讓的話，則可能使自己失去立足之地，因此必須謹慎評估拿捏。

目前看來，「占中」行動已經箭在弦上，不能不發。尤其香港年輕的一代，難以容忍這種民主寸進如此艱難的處境，勢必不受節制。但對於政界、法界乃至其他領域的問政者而言，恐不能將全部希望皆寄於街頭路線，而必須維持體制路線或議會路線的平行並進。

這次不少香港人取法台灣「三月學運」的經驗，高舉「公民不服從」之標語向北京示威；事實上，兩者相提並論是一種不對稱的思維。三月學運面對的是一個相對柔軟的民主政權，且只是訴求單一議題；然而，香港面對的民主議題要巨大許多，站在其對立面的北京是比一黨獨大時代的國民黨政權還要強悍，更毫無民主經驗可談。這點時空及主客觀形勢上的差異，香港民主派必須靠著更長時間的經營來扭轉，不可能一廂情願。

在中共人大宣布香港政改方案之日，澳門特首崔世安在小圈圈選舉中以九成六的得票率成功連任；一海之隔，港澳兩樣情。香港對民主鍥而不捨的追求，令世人動容，但這不是一蹴可幾之路，需要日久天長的部署、積累、對話與抗爭；畢竟，台灣走了卅年的民主道路，也不過如此。