Movement, or Revolution? Big Power Wrangling behind Occupy Central

Movement, or Revolution? Big Power Wrangling behind Occupy Central
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 63, 2014

Executive Summary: The Hong Kong Occupy Central movement has been internationalized. It has led to a struggle between Mainland China and Russia on the one side, and the United States and Britain on the other. It will make human rights the chief bone of contention during the APEC Obama/Xi meeting. It is making waves all across the pond. The CCP is particularly wary of interference by 'foreign forces.' To expect it to continue allowing the protesters to occupy the streets of Hong Kong, is wishful thinking.

Full Text Below:

The Occupy Central movement in Hong Kong has been going on for over one week. Public demonstrations have recently turned into factional strife between Occupy Central and Anti-Occupy Central elements. Student demands for "genuine universal suffrage" have morphed into "opposition to China." Fueled by the foreign media, a pro-democracy movement has turned into a political revolution.

The Hong Kong Government's attitude has changed in response to this development. Leung Chun-ying was originally playing a waiting game. This weekend however, he issued an ultimatum. He threatened to clear the protest grounds completely before work resumes on Monday. The CCP has also taken a tougher line. Originally it resolved to safeguard Hong Kong's prosperity and the resolution reached by the NPC. Now it talks of upholding the rule of law and attempts to foment a color revolution on Mainland China. Clearly foreign intervention could become a reason or excuse for the CCP and the Hong Kong Government to take action.

The foreign media has spun the Occupy Central movement as an "Umbrella Revolution." The demonstrators used umbrellas to ward off police tear gas attacks but the umbrella tips are actually pointed at Beijing. The term "revolution" is highly loaded. Hong Kong protesters refer to the campaign as a "take cover/strike out revolution." What they mean, is that the purpose of the protests is not merely to seek cover, but also to strike out. It is not only to overthrow Leung Chun-ying, but also to overthrow the National People's Congress resolution.

Semantic differences have led to political wrangling over the terms "movement" and "revolution." The campaigin was initially merely a demand for "geunine universal suffrage" in the Hong Kong chief executive elections. But the foreign media spun the movement as a "revolution." It made no difference whether it was an "umbrella revolution" or a "take cover/strike out revolution." It was inevitably cast as "anti-China." At the same time, foreign solidarity with the protests provoked suspicions of foreign intervention. This touched a sensitive nerve, and set off alarm bells in Beijing.

In response to accusations of foreign intervention, scholars have launched a signature camaign in Hong Kong, drawing clear lines between themselves and the foreign media. In their view, the Hong Kong student boycott of classes should be referred to as a "movement," and not a "revolution." The students are seeking a democratic society, and have no intention of overthrowing the existing order.

The movement gradually morphed from Occupy Central to Oppose China. Meanwhile, within Hong Kong, Occupy Central and Anti-Occupy Central confrontations began to appear. The Occupy Central movement was dispersed over multiple locations. This seriously impacted traffic and economic activities in Hong Kong. On top of this, the Occupy Central movement was labeled a "revolution." Anti-Occupy Central forces begain to appear. Occupy Central students provoked bloody conflicts, giving the movement a violent image. Fortunately, to avoid Hong Kong being torn by crisis, university and middle school principals have issued a statement. They have appealed to students to disperse as soon as possible. They have stressed dialogue as the best way to resolve the current impasse. Clearly both external and internal forces are at work in Hong Kong.

One thing cannot be denied. When Western countries conflate the "umbrella revolution" with the "color revolutions," they are looking at the demonstrations through rose colored glasses. Let us examine Bejing's attitude under a magnifying glass. The Umbrella Revolution should be regarded as a sign of "peaceful evolution" within China. For example, the United States, avoids lightly taking stands on cross-Strait issues. But it openly took sides on the demonstrations in Hong Kong. It claimed that universal suffrage was a right in accordance with the Hong Kong People's "Basic Law." It hoped that Hong Kong could maintain its open system. It apparently equated support for the high school students with support for the Dalai Lama.

Russia has seldom concerned itself with East Asia. This time however, it issued an unprecedented statement. It openly sided with the Beijing authorities. It named the United States and Britain as behind the scenes conspirators. Moscow's purpose was apparently to use the movement to settle old debts from the Ukraine "orange revolution" and to use the opportunity to repudiate it.

Beijing swiftly drew a line in the sand in response to the Hong Kong demonstrations. It clearly indicated that the Hong Kong issue is an internal affair. Outside forces have no right to interfere. It hopes the United States will exercise caution, and not issue the wrong signals. A pro-democracy movement has apparently become an arena for great power political struggle.

Hong Kong has long maintained a tradition of liberality and openness. This has given the United States an opening by which to inject itself into the Chinese mainland's internal affairs. Academics in the United States are equating the movement with the May Fourth Movement. That is why the U.S. government loudly trumpeted its support for Hong Kong for three straight days. Beijing is convinced that the U.S. government wants to use Hong Kong as a foward base to strengthen democracy and to contain China. This is why the Beijing leaders have taken such a hard line on the demonstrations, and are unwilling to give an inch.

The Hong Kong Occupy Central movement has been internationalized. It has led to a struggle between Mainland China and Russia on the one side, and the United States and Britain on the other. It will make human rights the chief bone of contention during the APEC Obama/Xi meeting. It is making waves all across the pond. The CCP is particularly wary of interference by 'foreign forces.' To expect it to continue allowing the protesters to occupy the streets of Hong Kong, is wishful thinking.

運動vs.革命：香港占中背後的大國角力
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.10.06 02:20 am

香港占中運動已超過一周。近日，民眾示威演變成「占中」與「反占中」兩派的衝突，學生的訴求也從爭取「真普選」轉為「反中」；在外國媒體的推波助瀾下，一場民主運動幾乎被形容成一場政治革命。

隨著這樣的情勢發展，港府的態度也有所不同。梁振英先前持「以拖待變」策略，到周末卻發出強硬的最後通牒，揚言要在星期一上班前完成「清場」。中共的態度更日漸強硬，從稍早聲稱堅決維護香港繁榮、堅定維護全國人大的決議，到近日強調堅持維護香港的法治，並指責有人想在大陸內地製造「顏色革命」是白日作夢。可見，所謂「外國勢力介入」的因素，可能成為中共和港府對群眾採取行動的基調或藉口。

外國媒體把這次占中運動稱為「雨傘革命」，形容示威者以雨傘來遮抵警方催淚彈的攻擊，傘尖其實是直指北京，但「革命」一詞尤顯沉重。香港示威者則把這場運動稱為「遮打革命」，意指抗爭的目的不只在「遮」，還要「打」，不但要打倒梁振英，也要推翻中共「人大」的決議。

也正由於用詞與認知不同，因而形成「運動」和「革命」的政治角力，原本港人旨在爭取特首的「真普選」運動，被國際媒體冠上「革命」的帽子後，不論是「雨傘革命」或「遮打革命」，都難免被抹上「反中」色彩。同時，因為外國人民的聲援，也引發「外國勢力介入」之說，挑動了中國的敏感神經，也引起北京的戒懼。

針對「外國勢力介入」之說，目前許多香港學者已經展開連署，與外國媒體的報導畫清界線。他們認為，這次香港學生罷課占中活動，應稱為「運動」，不該被視為「革命」，因為學生推動的是爭民主的社會運動，沒有推翻現有政權之意。

也就在這場運動逐漸從「占中」轉為「反中」之際，香港內部也開始出現「占中」與「反占中」的對抗。由於占中據點分散多處，讓香港的交通及經濟活動受到相當大的影響，再加上占中運動被貼上「革命」的標籤，香港社會內部一股「反占中」的勢力開始出現，並與占中學生爆發數波肢體流血衝突，讓運動染上暴力色彩。所幸，為避免香港陷入被撕裂的危機，香港各大學及中學校長紛紛發表聲明，呼籲學生儘快撤離現場，並強調「對話」是解決當前僵局的最佳方式。可見，外部的推力及內部的阻力正在香港拉鋸。

不可諱言，當西方國家把「雨傘革命」與「顏色革命」畫上等號，就註定他們會以有色眼鏡來看待這次示威，以放大鏡來檢視北京政權的態度，同時也將雨傘革命視為中國內部進行「和平演變」的前哨站。舉例而言，在兩岸問題上不輕易表態的美國，竟罕見地對香港示威運動選邊站，不但宣稱香港人民根據《基本法》擁有普選的權利，同時希望香港能持續維持開放的體制。這種作法，似把支持占中學生與支持達賴、熱比婭畫上了等號。

在另外一頭，從不關心東亞問題的俄羅斯，這回也破天荒地發表聲明。它不但鮮明地選擇站在中共政權這一邊，還指稱這次占中活動是美英在背後策畫的「陰謀」。莫斯科的目的，似乎想藉這次占中運動，來清算烏克蘭「橙色革命」的舊帳，並趁機否定它。

北京方面，則迅速為這次香港示威活動畫下了紅線。中共直接表明：香港問題是「內政」，外部勢力無權干涉，同時希望美方謹言慎行，不要對外釋放錯誤的訊息。一場爭取民主的活動，儼然已成為大國政治角力的場域。

香港一向具有自由化與開放的傳統，這讓美國找到向中國大陸內部推進的缺口。這次，有美國學者將占中運動與「五四運動」畫上等號，這也是美國政府連續三天高調支持香港占中的主因。此外，北京則認為，美國政府想利用香港作為據點，來強化對中國的民主圍堵，這也是北京領導人對這次示威格外強硬、且寸步不讓的原因。

這次香港占中運動的國際化，不但形成中俄及美英之間的相互角力，也將使人權議題成為ＡＰＥＣ歐習會爭辯的主調，它吹皺了一池春水。在中共格外戒慎「外國勢力」介入的心理下，要期待它放任示威者持續占領香港街頭，恐怕是奢望。