立即捐款

FORUM | The Umbrella Movement: Hong Kong and the future of China (Alex Chow) (Transcript)

FORUM | The Umbrella Movement: Hong Kong and the future of China (Alex Chow) (Transcript)

【FORUM | The Umbrella Movement: Hong Kong and the future of China】
6 June 2015
Host: Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, China Democracy Forum (Sydney), Sydney Democracy Network
Speaker: Alex Chow

Host: Hope among young people, we now turn to Alex Chow Yong-kang, who is one of those unspoiled generations in Hong Kong. I am not sure if you are 25 or 24, 24. Wikipedia almost got it right. You know that Alex Chow is former Secretary-General of the Hong Kong Federation of Students, he was one of the early drivers of the radicalization of the "Occupy Central" in early July 2014, he was one of the organizers of a sit-in on Charter Road in Central Hong Kong, there are 500 hundred people arrested, and he was quite at the time saying "it's not enough to repeat the march and the assembly every year, we have to upgrade it to a civil disobedience movement", and we have heard from Chan Kin-man those details.

I would say, looking at Alex Chow, knowing him through media, he knows a lot about the rough-and-tumble of politics in the richest sense. He is a brilliant tactician, that's clear, but he's also someone who has the capacity to reflect on the historic significance on what is going on in Hong Kong. It's interesting to see, he said at one point, how history is made on spontaneous events; that would be a great question for all students here to discuss.

And he also knows the push and pull within the movement. He told media in a number of places some think you are too mild, but others say you are too radical. And if you want to sense what that means, have a look at the YouTube video, where a woman at a bus stop speaks to Alex rather in very heated words for about two minutes, and (he) remained calm throughout, (we) obviously learn something form that exchange. Alex, thank you very much for coming to Australia, and we look forward to hearing what you have to say.

Alex: I have a student of HKU, graduating this December, there is still half a year to go. Professor Chan has mentioned quite a lot of part of the Umbrella Movement and the constitutional reform in the past two years. These photos are what the people recall the scenes of the Umbrella Movement. Why did it occur? I think it's the question most of you would be interested in.

I would like to show this to you. I don't know whether you know who this guy is, but if you have heard the Umbrella Movement, most likely you would know him. He is Benny Tai. This is a picture taken 30 years ago, in the 80s. This was Benny Tai when he was young, when he was still a law school student, speaking about the constitutional reform. By this time, Benny Tai was already a member helping to draft the Basic Law, to give opinion to the authority and the government. He was born in 1964 and is now a Law Professor at HKU.

When Benny Tai was still young, he already needed to stand in front of thousands of people. Why 30 years later, he still needed to launch the "Occupy Central", the civil disobedience action? This is a question I guess most of the people in the world who are asking. When we shared our experience to different people in different countries, they usually wondered why Hong Kong people acted in this way, it was surprising, because when they travel to Hong Kong, it's mainly about shopping, dining, seeing what fun they could gain in Hong Kong. So what happened to this city?

This short clip might make us better understand the current situation in Hong Kong, what's happened in Hong Kong. This is a very interesting clip depicting how Hong Kong people live. I am not sure if you have seen this clip before. After looking at this clip, you may have a fundamental idea of what is going on in Hong Kong, what's happening to Hong Kong people, how they live, how they spend their lives at night. (Broadcasting clip) I guess now you may have a good understanding of how Hong Kong people are right now. That's what Hong Kong people deal with. This is not an (unusual) case, this is a very common phenomenon in Hong Kong, most of the people live in apartments like this, this little, tiny (apartment). This is the living condition of Hong Kong people.

Usually when people (think about) Hong Kong, they could hardly think about Hong Kong in this way. You may think that Hong Kong is a very brilliant city, international trade centre, financial centre, but it will be quite thought-provoking to ask how Hong Kong people could live like this. It is very horrible actually. But if we trace the origin of the story, then we have to go back to the 80s.

The 80s was actually the starting point of the democratic movement in Hong Kong. Everything started in the 80s, because in early 80s, the Chinese government and the British government dealt with how Hong Kong would be going after 1997. The Chinese government and the British government started the negotiation in 1982. Only a year and a half, they made a deal, they signed the Sino-British Joint Declaration in 1984. The whole process only took two years, less than two years. If we tried very hard to recall what happened to Hong Kong, it was quite weird to take less than two years to get everything settled, and signed the Joint Declaration.

Obviously there was no role for Hong Kong people. Most of the people in Hong Kong were excluded from the negotiation, so how Hong Kong would be looking after 1997, it was simply a deal between the British government and the (Chinese) government. When people demanded the government to launch the democratic reform, most people would trace back to one article in the Declaration: the chief executive will be appointed by the Central People's Government on the basis of the results of elections or consultations to be held locally.

In the 80s, some Hong Kong people still had hope on the Chinese government, by that time, most of the Chinese officials showed positive attitude on reforming China, its economic and political aspects. So in the 80s, some students and intellectuals in Hong Kong also agreed that we should sort a way out that we could have a tactic cooperation with the Chinese government, there were lots of reasons for people to accept the deal made between the British government and the Chinese government.

As you all know, in 1989, the Tiananmen Massacre happened, when it happened, There was a large amount of people in Hong Kong going in the street. This picture was taken in Hong Kong, not in Beijing. More than a million Hong Kong people went in the streets to protest, to support the students in Beijing.

The 1989 Tiananmen Massacre was another turning point for the situation in Hong Kong. People were kind of uncertain what would happen after 1997, would the Communist Party or the Chinese government collapse? Before 1997 it might be possible. After 1989, even the government or the authority, or the British government, they had consultation in Hong Kong, the number participating in this kind of consultation was actually decreasing. By the time there were lots of saying coming out, worrying how Hong Kong would be after 1997, e.g. the Fortune Magazine titled "The Death of Hong Kong". This kind of the description by the time depicted that the advantage of Hong Kong would disappear after 1997.

Some scholars were very cooperative with the Beijing government. This guy is called Lau Siu-kai, I am not sure if he is still a colleague of Professor Chan. This guy is a very pro-establishment scholar, he invented lots of ideas on describing Hong Kong, e.g. "managerialism", or "utilitarian families" when depicting Hong Kong. What does it mean? It means that families in Hong Kong are actually very self-interested, they only focus on self-interest, it is a particular characteristic of Hong Kong people, so if Beijing government wants to rule Hong Kong in a good way, you have to adopt the governance from the colonial ruling. It means that Beijing has to forbid the democratic reform in Hong Kong. This is part of the reasons why Beijing is reluctant in performing (democratic) reform in Hong Kong. Some scholars in Hong Kong also support this theme.

When the chief executive of the HKSAR government was elected by a small-circle (election), when the governance was simply the colonial one, the authority could not gain trust from the citizens. No matter it was the first chief executive Tung Chi-wah, the second, Donald Tsang, or CY Leung, they cannot gain trust from the citizens. Their policies could not maintain a balance in Hong Kong. This is why there are lots of unsettling issues in Hong Kong.

This was a graph describing how the chief executive was elected. There is an election committee electing the chief executive, but the basis of the committee only consists of 200,000 people, while Hong Kong has 7 million people.

One thing we have to bear in mind is that when the government, after 1997, adopted the colonial ruling, the implication on Hong Kong was that the government would deny tax reform, the rate of tax is averagely 15% (standard rate of tax) for everyone, no matter you are tycoon or not, you have to pay this amount of tax. After 1997, when the government talked about continuing the colonial governance, it means that policy is rolling forward, in terms of neoliberal rationality, everything could be marketed, we could marketize or economize everything, no matter it's school, social security network, macro service, everything, it is marketized or economized, this was what happening in Hong Kong in the past 18 years after 1997.

One particular thing is that water, electricity, or petrol, they are all bought from mainland China. Although Hong Kong has its own factory in facilitating electricity, the government in recent years also signed a contract with the Mainland government so as to seek how the Mainland government can supply electricity to Hong Kong. The point is that Hong Kong can supply its own electricity. Hong Kong people (would ask) what's the point of doing this, what's the purpose for the Hong Kong government doing this?

2003 was a turning point for Hong Kong. Only few years after 1997, the so-called chief executive already triggered a lot of discontent. In 2003, there were more than 500,000 people in street joining a protest, on one way, about the economic issue, on the other way, about the national security law the Beijing government would like to impose in Hong Kong. The law was that when the authority thinks that you are implicating some affairs that may harm the state, it could simply go to your home, without warrant, to get you into prison.

After 1997, Hong Kong faced poverty. This is a guy in Hong Kong, you could see what's happening to Hong Kong people, how come in this city, so-called financial centre, some people still live like this? Homelessness, another problem. Housing problem. The housing price of Hong Kong is the most expensive one in the world. When a teenager graduates from university, he would like to get an apartment, it takes him more than 10 years to save the money so that he could enter the market. Once he enters the market, it takes him another 30 to 40 years to really get all the payment done. Most of the people in Hong Kong are forced to play this game, to get into the property market and spend their lives to gain money so as to get the payment done. This is a very ridiculous situation in Hong Kong.

Why this happened is that after 1997, the Hong Kong government followed the colonial way of ruling, it was mainly about how you cooperate with the tycoons so as to generate interest. After 1997, there was a bunch of tycoons in Hong Kong cooperating with the Hong Kong government so as to monopolize everything in Hong Kong, no matter housing, electricity, supermarket, public transportation, they are owned by the tycoons or people related to those tycoons.

In recent years, the situation got weird that some tycoons were expelled by the Mainland government, meaning that they might have fewer corporations in Mainland China on different projects. Those corporations with state funding come to Hong Kong to invest, no matter on the property market or other scopes. One intriguing example is that the North-east New Territories new development plan, it is a site located in the north-east part of Hong Kong. You could see the skyrocketing buildings, it is not Hong Kong, it is Shenzhen. The implication is that the New Territories is also built into those skyrocketing buildings, meaning that the boundary between Hong Kong and Shenzhen disappears. It is a worrying part for Hong Kong people. What would Hong Kong turn into? This is really a problem. In the 30 years, Hong Kong people had no involvement in how we could develop the city, in what way we should develop the city. It was based on the government and the tycoons.

On top of this, Hong Kong is also facing different problems, the fading freedom and the rolling-forward inequity. Press (freedom) is one of the critical problems in Hong Kong, lots of press are owned by pro-Beijing people. It is not a single case (happening) in Hong Kong. When I went to USA and Canada, they face the same problem. In Canada, the Beijing government bought certain amount of media, and established certain amount of NGOs, so as to acquire the air time to voice out their opinion and stance, so as to counter the policies in Canada, especially those regarding the human rights issues and democratic issues. When they talk about or touch upon these kinds of issues, the topic usually falls into binary opposition, either you want economic interest or human rights.

In Hong Kong, if you are a reporter, you may also risk being threatened, it may cost your life if you are a reporter. This guy was former editor-in-chief of one renowned local newspaper in Hong Kong, Ming Pao. There was a claim that he was involved in an issue about tracing the assets of officials in Beijing, in particular Wen Jia-bao, so he was implicated in this kind of situation.

If we recall what happened in 2012, there was also a movement called the anti national education movement. The Hong Kong government wanted to implement a new curriculum about national education, the content was that civil rights was inferior than being a national citizen, the first priority for you to abide was to love your country. Some textbooks even asked the teachers to judge the students' standard by observing if this student would cry or be very touched when he listened to what's happening in Mainland China, e.g. Olympics game or national anthem.

This was another thing mentioned by Professor Chan, last year, Beijing formally issued a white paper to update the version of one country two systems. (Showing PPT) The students, last year, made a lot of effort in promoting their proposal.

The things I have just mentioned are the most important issues in Hong Kong right now. That's why Hong Kong people are very angry about the current situation; no matter on political aspect or economic aspect, Hong Kong people have no say in it. The rules in Hong Kong are set up by the authority and the tycoons; you want to reject the rule forcing you to go into the property market, but actually you (are not able to) do so. The Hong Kong youngsters are forced to play with them. Hong Kong people are more termed "slave" now, there is no difference (for Hong Kong people) from being a modern slave.

Because of this bunch of problem, there is a call for democratic reform from the 80s. Some students, scholars, or NGO workers foresaw that Hong Kong could not be governed in this way, a democratic reform is needed so as to counter this kind of governance. As we may know, over the past 30 years, Hong Kong has faced a lot of difficulties and set-backs. When the situation of Hong Kong is getting more deteriorating, different aspects are facing deteriorating situation, the citizens have lots of angry on the current situation, and that's why the Umbrella Movement or the call for democratic reform would spark last year.

When the government threw out tear gas, it triggered the anger of Hong Kong people, because there is a lot of discontent in Hong Kong already, when Hong Kong people expect the government to be lenient or rational to them, what they get in return was furious attack or encounter, that triggered the Umbrella Movement. These are some pictures of the Umbrella Movement. As Professor Chan mentioned, people occupied important sites in Hong Kong, one was Admiralty next to the government building, one is Mongkok, people usually go shopping there, the other is Causeway Bay, another shopping spot.

In the Umbrella Movement, people have tried different tactics, for sure I would say, people gained a lot of experience in the Movement. If you judge it in terms of the concrete achievement, whether you gain a democratic reform or not, then you could take it as a failure. But if you take another perspective, observing it from if it could enlighten more people or it could have an impact or paradigm shift on how people struggle, then you would discover that Hong Kong people changed a lot. Right now in Hong Kong, there are more and more people who organize protests or do community works themselves.

What's next? What should Hong Kong people head for in the next few years? What are Hong Kong people expecting now? There are several issues in my mind, one is to reject the proposal, it is expected that in mid-June, the government will (submit) the proposal to the Legislative Council on 17th of June. Another thing is how people re-consolidate the civil society. Right now Hong Kong is quite in a split, no matter it's "blue ribbon" or "yellow ribbon", or there is issue for people in the democratic camp to face, there are a lot of debates on how Hong Kong people should head toward, whether there should be independence or more consolidated civil society, whether it's about renewing the one country two systems, whether it's about amending the Basic Law, there are lots of discussion on this issue and there is no consensus yet.

If you ask me what Hong Kong people should pay attention to, I would say that an important aspect is our regional perspective. What's happening now is that Hong Kong, Macau, Mainland China, Taiwan, the civil societies in these places are actually facing the same opponent: the Chinese factors. When I talked to Taiwan people, they are very concerned about China, what's going on in China, what the foreign policy of China is. In recent months, we could see that the Chinese government is drafting its national security law which is renewing how the Chinese government can strengthen their monitor on the overseas NGOs. Even you are a NGO in Australia, when you send your delegates to China, the Chinese government will review it and scrutinize it to consider they will give permission or not. This case does not only apply to Australia, Taiwan, Macau, but also to Hong Kong. No matter it's NGO inside or outside China, the Chinese government is actually strengthening their supervision on them. But we can notice that there is a way out, whether people in different societies can consolidate themselves and to bridge one another so as to gain information, so as to learn tactics from one another, so that they can use such tactics in their home towns to continue their struggles.

Another important issue is the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. China is now setting up her new rules in negotiating with other countries and states. So some officials in USA are worried about what would be going on in China, because they discover that nowadays China can also set up their own rules, it's not simply about USA, it's also about China, some are very concerned about what would be going on in Asia, what the next step of China would be.

When China can set up her own rules in playing the internal game, it also means that it could re-define the meaning of "democracy", "equality", "freedom". Hong Kong is actually an experiment on (re-defining) the concept or definition of "democracy". This is also why it is important for Hong Kong people to reject the unqualified proposal.

My final remark is that Hong Kong is actually in a very difficult position and situation, it is not (only) about political reform, of course the political reform is important, but the governing rationality now is simply the neoliberal rationality. There is a book called "Undoing Demos" by Wendy Brown, a UCLA professor, she described what's going on in the world, the governance or mentality of common people fall into a mentality called "neoliberal mentality", it's about we turn ourselves as i-bankers, we turn ourselves as entrepreneurs so as to invest and to accumulate wealth. This is one of the problems in Hong Kong too. When the government and authority takes it as an important part, of course they do not have to negotiate with the local citizens about what Hong Kong could turn to; it is only about how to accumulate wealth for the tycoons. When Mainland China is expanding and having more influence, Hong Kong is facing a doubly difficult situation because on one hand, it is about how to counter all the difficulties so as to achieve a democratic reform, on the other hand, how you could counter this kind of mentality, the way of development. This is what Hong Kong people are facing right now. This is a summary of my sharing.

(Q&A)

Thank you for the questions. Why there are more and more Hong Kong youngsters going into the street and actively involved in political aspects or social affairs, I think about two main (reasons), one is education, another is the actual situation or living condition they are facing. When youngsters or students go into the streets, it's about how we could relate them to the development of the society. They have such discontent because they see injustice in Hong Kong. Hong Kong students are a symbol of the progressive ones in the society, to voice out the problem. Most of the people in Hong Kong are angry and Hong Kong youngsters also share the same opinion, when there are lots of people challenging the government of being unjust, youngsters also observe this in Hong Kong and I would say this triggers that youngsters to take the position of going to the streets and playing a major role in the Movement.

In regard to the split of the society, it is actually an important question for Hong Kong people. When we talk about democratic movement, it is clear that whether you support the government or not, or whether you support the Movement or not. During the Umbrella Movement, there were lots of people "unfriending" each other in Facebook. You are once friends, but in the Umbrella Movement, if you are "yellow ribbon" or "blue ribbon", I would "unfriend" you.

To me, the question I will ask is when lots of people observe injustice in the society, why are they still indifferent to these issues? I would say, democratic reform or political issues are kind of de-politicized in Hong Kong's context. Hong Kong people think that economic issue is important, when they talk about democratic reform or political issues, it's always in terms of economic aspect or benefit. The issue is how you could relate daily lives to political issues so that you could share your perspectives on what's going on.

In regard to the Sunflower Movement, over the past two years, Professor Chan, Lester and I have connection with some Taiwanese in exchanging ideas on the Movement, no matter about the tactics or the circumstances. We discussed that the context of Hong Kong and that of Taiwan was very different. The authority we are facing or the circumstances are very different. In Taiwan there is a split in the authorities, the government is elected in a so-called democratic way, so it still have to consider the votes, and you could utilize or deepen the split so as to gain something for the Movement. In Hong Kong, the difference is that you could hardly see a split in the ruling class, no matter the Beijing government or the Hong Kong government, the officials are very obedient to Beijing, so it's about the view of Beijing, there is hardly a split.

Another point is in Hong Kong, you don't really have to be concerned about the votes. People in the pro-establishment camp will for sure support (themselves), the only people who would need to be concerned about the votes are pan-democrats, because they have to worry if voters would change their mind in voting the more radical ones. In Hong Kong's context, the dominating parties in pan-democratic parties are more the moderate one, not the radical one, so they have to take this into their consideration. You could observe that in Taiwan, the support for the whole Movement was quite high while in Hong Kong it was quite fluctuating. I would say that it's (related to) the mentality of Hong Kong people, there are lots of people who are pro-establishment, pro-government, pro-Beijing, they think that what the Beijing or Hong Kong government officials do, they are not doing it in a wrong way, they are simply carrying on their duties, that's what they should do.

Audio and photo here.