Culture
Hong Kong’s Struggle of Decolonization and Democracy: A Conversation with Ching Kwan Lee
In this episode of the China Power Podcast, Dr. Ching Kwan Lee discusses her book 'Forever Hong Kong,' exploring the complex interplay of decolonization and democracy in Hong Kong's rec...
Hong Kong’s Struggle of Decolonization and Democracy: A Conversation with Ching Kwan Lee
Culture •
0:00 / 0:00
Interactive Transcript
spk_0
Welcome to the China Power Podcast. I'm Bonnie Lynn, Director of the China Power
spk_0
Project and Senior Advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In
spk_0
this episode, we'll be discussing the new book, Forever Hong Kong, a global city's decolonization
spk_0
struggle. What does it mean to mute Hong Kong's recent history through a lens of decolonization?
spk_0
What happened in Hong Kong in 2019 and why was it a turning point? What does the city's
spk_0
experience showcase in terms of Beijing's decision-making? To explore these questions and more,
spk_0
we are joined by Dr. Qin Huangli, author of Forever Hong Kong. Dr. Li is a professor in the
spk_0
Department of Sociology at UCLA. She is a sociologist working at the intersection of global and
spk_0
comparative issues, including labor, political sociology, global development, decolonization,
spk_0
and comparative ethnography of Hong Kong, Taiwan, China, and Africa. She has published three multiple
spk_0
award-winning monographs on contemporary China, including gender and the South China miracle,
spk_0
against the law and the specter of global China. The trilogy of Chinese capitalism was written
spk_0
through the lens of labor and working-class experiences. Her most recent publications include a
spk_0
short format book titled Hong Kong Global China's Restifrent Here and two co-edited volumes
spk_0
take back our future and eventful sociology of the Hong Kong umbrella movement
spk_0
and the social question of 21st century, a global view. The book we'll be discussing today,
spk_0
Forever Hong Kong, a global city's struggle for decolonization, is her newest monograph.
spk_0
CK, thank you for joining us. It's great to have you on the podcast.
spk_0
Thank you, Bonnie, for having me. So I'd like to start off with asking you of why you decided to
spk_0
write this book and why did you decide to release the book now. First and foremost, I was born and
spk_0
raised in Hong Kong. I left the city for the US for my PhD and then I stayed to work as an academic.
spk_0
And in 2019, I got an opportunity to teach in Hong Kong while I was lead from UCLA.
spk_0
It was just happened since that my plane landed in the morning of June 16th and in the afternoon,
spk_0
I realized I was marching together with two million people. So as a Hong Kong native, I just
spk_0
felt compelled to write about this very historic watershed event that happened in 2019.
spk_0
It's very important for our city's history. Everything changed because of it and after it and
spk_0
especially when in 2020 Beijing crushed movement by the national security law and mass arrests.
spk_0
I also wrote the book out of a sense of urgency to inscribe history and memory from the perspective
spk_0
of the Hong Kong people before they are butchered and maybe erased by the Chinese Communist regime.
spk_0
As we speak, history textbooks in Hong Kong are already being rewritten and distorted to serve
spk_0
Beijing's interests. So for instance, Beijing now claims in history textbooks of Hong Kong
spk_0
that Hong Kong has never been a British colony. So I'm sure one day they will rewrite what
spk_0
actually happened in 2019 and also about all the social protests that happened after 1997.
spk_0
Then professionally, I am a political sociologist. I study a lot of protests around the world
spk_0
and I realized how extraordinary this episode of popular uprising in Hong Kong in 2019 was
spk_0
just by any measure compared to other social protests in our times. So in terms of duration,
spk_0
scale and the amount of international media attention is just a highly unusual, very significant
spk_0
intriguing subject for scholarly research. In CK, as you did your research, what surprised you the most?
spk_0
Was it as you just mentioned how extraordinary the protests were in duration scale and its impact?
spk_0
Or was there something else that really stood out to you as you were looking back in history
spk_0
entering many of those involved in the protest? What is the most important argument that I try to
spk_0
make in the book? It is that while most academics and journalists would describe this movement as
spk_0
a democracy movement or movement for freedom and democracy and human rights and the Hong Kong people
spk_0
themselves would tell you the same. It is a fight for freedom and democracy. And what I have found
spk_0
is that of course it is, but it is not just that. And I think once you put the 2019 protest in
spk_0
the proper context, that means not as a singular event, but as the peak of a two-decade struggle,
spk_0
you would realize that the totality of the movement, the full range of popular demands, the debates,
spk_0
the issues that 20 years of social protest have provoked, you begin to realize as I argue in the book
spk_0
that it is much more than the political system that was a stake, the struggle was actually about
spk_0
Hong Kong itself, not its political system, but Hong Kong itself as a political project. That means
spk_0
people are trying to redefine its destiny, trying to rethink its economy, its identity,
spk_0
people's mentality, culture, what kind of ideal society people want. And I make the very important
spk_0
point, and fatically that people didn't just want universal suffrage. They wanted that, but I think
spk_0
it was self-determination in a holistic sense that was the real objective of the movement.
spk_0
So if you look at 2019 as part of a 20-year struggle, not as just in singular incident happens in
spk_0
that year, you would see that people are contesting, rethinking and rejecting many of the kind of
spk_0
inherited truths and common sense imparted and perpetuated by the British colonial rulers and
spk_0
the Chinese rulers. So I just want to give you some very simple examples. So these two colonial
spk_0
masters have always told people that prosperity and stability are all that mattered to Hong Kong,
spk_0
and Hong Kong already had prosperity and stability. These are the conditions of a good society,
spk_0
and we already have them. Hong Kong also, we were told, already had a rule of law, and with
spk_0
rule of law there was no need for democracy, and our economy was the best, a textbook case of
spk_0
a capitalist utopia. They say fair, open and fair, and finally China was our destiny because
spk_0
we were all Chinese. So these are the kind of colonial common sense that have been
spk_0
orchestrated by China and Britain together, and the 20 years of social movements and protests.
spk_0
Why did I call it a decolonization movement? It was because people really begin to rethink
spk_0
and question these beliefs, and these beliefs were the fund foundations of consent to colonial
spk_0
rules. So this rejection and rethinking of colonial truths means that this movement,
spk_0
which we call it, a decolonial movement is to get rid of or rethink or reject colonial
spk_0
heritage and redefine history and take history into people's own hands. So I think my major one
spk_0
standard argument that distinguishes my book from many other books that were also right about
spk_0
the 2019 movement is that I define it and analyze it as a two-decade long struggle for decolonization
spk_0
by the people, and not just as a movement for human rights and democracy, which you find many
spk_0
other movements of similar nature around the world, but only in Hong Kong to define a decolonization
spk_0
movement happening in 21st century. It used to be a very common phenomenon back in the 1960s,
spk_0
but in the 21st century, the world has no more colonies except Hong Kong. So I think this would be
spk_0
the major takeaway of this book. There's a lot to unpack there. Maybe we can first start with
spk_0
understanding Hong Kong from the perspective of decolonization, and then we can move on to looking
spk_0
at how exactly we should understand the protests both in terms of what happened as well as
spk_0
Beijing's response. But just following up on your main finding that what happened in 2019 was
spk_0
a result of two decades of decolonization. You point out in the book Hong Kong experienced
spk_0
double colonization under both Britain and China, but what I found really striking was you ask
spk_0
the question, we didn't see a lot of this happen under British colonialism, but now it did happen
spk_0
once Hong Kong was returned to China. What was different or similar between British and Chinese
spk_0
colonialism? And why did Hong Kongers largely accept British colonial rule, but then resist Chinese
spk_0
sovereignty? Let me address the first question, which is what is different or similar between
spk_0
Chinese and Chinese colonialism? I think there are a lot of similarities between these two periods
spk_0
of colonial rule. The first similarity is that both China and Britain had and have shared
spk_0
interest in keeping Hong Kong a colony. That is not to allow Hong Kong citizens to take control
spk_0
of their own destiny, their political, economic and education system to define their own identity.
spk_0
And I'm talking about the entire period from British colonial rule up to the present. So this is
spk_0
a long kind of historical lens. So that's the first. The second is we can look at the structure of
spk_0
colonial rule. If you look at the political system, the distribution of power between Hong Kong
spk_0
under British and Hong Kong under Chinese rule, you'll find striking commonalities. So we find
spk_0
ruling class. Who are they? Well, they have always been in a person currently consisting of
spk_0
political elite, the bureaucrats, colonial bureaucrats or politicians, groomed and supportive of
spk_0
China today and the business elite. We also have always had an executive led autocracy, the top guy
spk_0
who was previously appointed by London. They have now been appointed by Beijing, but simply
spk_0
similarly appointed, not elected. As I said, there has never been universal suffrage. So in terms of
spk_0
the structure of rule, the elite structure, the structure of power, we find very similar
spk_0
distribution. And then if you look at a very important element that people always miss when they
spk_0
look at British and Chinese colonialism and say that you can't talk about Chinese rule as colonial,
spk_0
it's the issue of race. And I make the point in the book that actually British colonialism and
spk_0
Chinese rule are both based on race. And so we can actually talk about Chinese rule as colonial.
spk_0
Well, in what way race under British rule is very clear is the politics of difference.
spk_0
There's a rule of difference. There is a hierarchy based on racial difference. There was clear
spk_0
racial hierarchy in the government employment in the civil service under British period. All the
spk_0
top guys, there is a color bar barring Chinese from rising to the top of the civil service hierarchy.
spk_0
In the police force, it was all white. And English has been the only legal language throughout
spk_0
the British colonial period until the 1970s when they accepted Chinese also as a legal and official
spk_0
so we see race and it is common across the world all colonies. We see a politics of difference based
spk_0
on race. Now in the case of Beijing, under Chinese rule, it is still ruled based on race, but it is
spk_0
not using race as the politics of difference, but race in the logic of coercive sameness. The idea is
spk_0
that China is claiming and try to legitimize its rule based on the idea that Hong Kongers are
spk_0
racially Chinese and because we are off the same race, they claim Hong Kong people as the same
spk_0
race as the Chinese and therefore Hong Kong people have to be subject to Chinese rule. I argue that
spk_0
this is also colonial rule because it is based on race except that this time race operates not
spk_0
according to the logic of difference, but according to the logic of coercive, similarity or coercive
spk_0
in my view, racialized nationalism which is what the Chinese version of nationalism is based on
spk_0
race, the Chinese race is similar to colonialism because both are race based. So if you look at the
spk_0
row of race in terms of justifying political domination, we're basically talking about the same
spk_0
kind of colonial rule because colonial rule is always based on race. So we can find a lot of
spk_0
similarities. Another similarity is that in both British and Chinese colonialism, they actually
spk_0
for both of them, there has been a mix of consent and coercion and this again defies common sense in
spk_0
Hong Kong, especially today's Hong Kong people. They have very nostalgic and romantic memory of
spk_0
British colonialism and they think that British rule was all fine and good and benign and lightened,
spk_0
but if you look at history, going back to the beginning of British rule, there were long periods
spk_0
of coercion and repression by British colonizers. There were lots of political social unrest in the
spk_0
past up to the 1960s that were repressed with police brutality. My book, The First Chapter,
spk_0
recounted many deaths in prison and deportation without due process and that's the kind of
spk_0
British colonial rule that is based on coercion. It was only after many riots in 1960s that British
spk_0
colonial rule pursued social and governance reform and also the economy began to take off and then
spk_0
the last 25 years of colonial rule, that's what people today remember. They forgot the previous
spk_0
130 years of repressive rule. So I think under British rule, there was the use of both coercion and
spk_0
repression and the creation of consent in the later period and I think when you look at Chinese
spk_0
rule since 1997, you find a similar mix of consent and coercion. Remember the beginning
spk_0
after 1997, the first decade, it wasn't that bad. Repression was not probable in Hong Kong by
spk_0
Beijing. They began to interfere into this and that arena of Hong Kong lives, but it wasn't as
spk_0
repressive and interventionist as in the last 10, 15 years. So I think another similarity is that
spk_0
under both British and Chinese rule, there has been a combination of coercion or repression as well
spk_0
as the creation of consent. And so I hope people when they think about Hong Kong as a colony under
spk_0
both British and Chinese colonialism, that's why I call it double colonization, we take this longer
spk_0
historical perspective to assess the two colonial masters, what they have done and try not to romanticize
spk_0
one and demonize the other. Actually, Hong Kongers have been subjected to both and they have very,
spk_0
very similar kind of structure and practice of governance and those have impacted us today and
spk_0
also the movement. Now, your question and I'm sorry I have to be kind of long in this response
spk_0
because it's not an easy question to answer and I can't have a simplified answer to your question.
spk_0
So why did Hong Kongers largely establish colonial rule but resist Chinese sovereignty? This is
spk_0
the question that Chinese officials asked themselves all the time after 1997. They always assumed
spk_0
when they signed the joint declaration with the British agreeing to establish one country
spk_0
to systems and allowing 50 years of Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong, they assumed that Hong Kong
spk_0
people would stay a political colonial subjects like they had been, who care only about making money,
spk_0
the goose that lay the golden egg, that's how Chinese described Hong Kong people and they never
spk_0
imagined that Hong Kong people would become so assertive in resisting Chinese rule. So this is a
spk_0
very important question not just for academics to understand, to unravel but also has tremendous
spk_0
policy and political implication because Chinese officials always ask the same question and
spk_0
they are still asking the question and trying to find solution to that. To answer this complicated
spk_0
question, I think we have to think in terms of historical context. So let me give you three reasons
spk_0
why Hong Kong people acquiesce to British rule. First reason applies to the older generation of
spk_0
Hong Kongers in the post World War II period up to the 1970s. They acquiesce to British colonialism
spk_0
because British colonialism was a lesser evil than Chinese communism. That is both are oppressive,
spk_0
both are not desirable but which one would you rather live under? You have to remember that
spk_0
first few generations of Hong Kong people, they were refugees fleeing the mainland,
spk_0
fleeing the political turmoil there and they actively sought refuge in the colony. So colonialism
spk_0
to them provided relative security in comparison to Chinese communism next door.
spk_0
And the second reason for Hong Kong people direct queues to British colonialism since the 1970s.
spk_0
So we're talking about a little later another historical period since the 1970 was because as I said
spk_0
before that the British carried out reform, social reform, welfare reform, legal reform,
spk_0
and they make Hong Kong a much better place to live and they became more caring, there has been more
spk_0
social welfare. I grew up during that period and I've personally, my family, my friends,
spk_0
personally experienced a more enlightened form of colonialism. And very important also was
spk_0
during the same period the Hong Kong economy grew rapidly and steadily became one of the
spk_0
leading economies in nature and ordinary people were able to have a stake in the
spk_0
growing part, this growing economy. The third reason we're talking about the 1980s up to 1997,
spk_0
that period of transition, it was because simply out of a sense of powerlessness people were not
spk_0
empowered, there was no sense that they could change reality in the face of these two great powers
spk_0
Britain and China. These are military powers and Hong Kong is just a city, seven million
spk_0
world at that time, five million. And when these two big powers decided to exclude Hong Kong people
spk_0
from negotiating tables to determine the future of Hong Kong, there was a very pervasive sense of
spk_0
powerlessness. And so when you felt powerless, you couldn't do anything because nothing seemed
spk_0
possible, people felt like there was no alternative. And so it was so overwhelming the sense of political
spk_0
powerlessness that people actually poured their energy, they sort of find sublimation and agency
spk_0
in the economy in making themselves rich, rather than pursuing politics and fighting for rights,
spk_0
which in those days were really the past time of very, very small minority of people. And so they
spk_0
were feeling powerless and just hope for the best in the later years of British rule. So all three
spk_0
reasons combined, you could see for different reasons of acquiescence, there wasn't that much
spk_0
meaningful resistance to British rule. Okay, coming to Chinese rule, why was there resistance to China?
spk_0
Again, this was a historical process and it was a very ambivalent process by both sides. Hong Kong
spk_0
people were not that set from the beginning to say, oh, because its Chinese rule, because its
spk_0
commoners were rejected it. As I said, people felt powerless, they were willing to subject themselves
spk_0
and give a chance. Now, why? Why didn't they resist from the very beginning? First of all,
spk_0
we all know that Hong Kong people has deep cultural family ties with people in the mainland,
spk_0
not with the regime, but a lot of ties and business affiliation since the 1980s. And so there was
spk_0
never any unmitigated a peory hostility who was China. So at the beginning, it wasn't that bad,
spk_0
and when the sign of British agreement was signed, the 1980s also was a period when China began
spk_0
opening up. And Hong Kong people would just like the rest of the world. By that time you have to
spk_0
understand not just Hong Kong but the rest of the world at that time were genuinely hopeful and
spk_0
sympathetic towards the communist regime's reform effort. I think everybody was rooting for China's
spk_0
success in liberalizing its economy. And economic reform also helped many Hong Kong people,
spk_0
the reform gave Hong Kongers many economic opportunity. What was changed and was very important
spk_0
was 1989. That was really the turning point when people began shifting their mentality and attitude
spk_0
towards China and became very concerned that there was this dark side to a reforming regime that could
spk_0
really affect Hong Kong and the well-being of Hong Kong people. So 1989, the massacre was a turning
spk_0
point. It was a moment of awakening, but that didn't develop into again, you know, unmitigated
spk_0
unidirectional hostility and animosity. After 1997, the first few years, I would say five, six,
spk_0
seven years Beijing left us alone. And so that wasn't that much complaint. The complaint that
spk_0
Hong Kongers have was really mainly a target against the Hong Kong government. And I remember
spk_0
208 Beijing Olympics. Hong Kong people were cheering for Team China and even the young students who
spk_0
later become protest leaders, they told me in my interview for the book, they remembered themselves
spk_0
really proud of being Chinese during the 2008 Beijing Olympics. So it was not a straightforward
spk_0
resistance movement right after 1997. There was this ambivalence on the side of the Hong Kong people.
spk_0
But then Hong Kong people's resistance to China intensify over time as Beijing
spk_0
violated its own promise of autonomy, stalled the electoral reform, denying people consistently
spk_0
universal suffrage. So there were grievances building up later on. But my point is that in reacting to
spk_0
China, there is a lot of ambivalence and even sympathy and support for the Chinese people and the
spk_0
Chinese government at some point in the 1980s. So the grievances developed from 2010 onwards.
spk_0
And I think if you ask why Hong Kong people resist China, it was all mostly because of the
spk_0
abrogation of China's own promise. So that's the grievances. A very important condition for
spk_0
Hong Kong people to resist China is why did China allow Hong Kong people to resist?
spk_0
Why did they allow the movement to grow and strengthen over 20 years? Why didn't they impose the
spk_0
national security law earlier right after 1997 or right after the big protest in 2003? Why did it
spk_0
why Hong Kong could resist China for so long? We have to understand why China allowed us to
spk_0
happen? Why did it allow Hong Kong to become a city of protest? And to answer that, my book talks
spk_0
about China's own ambivalence towards Hong Kong. Or I should say more accurately, China's
spk_0
contradictory policies towards Hong Kong. Contradictually and ambivalent because under one hand,
spk_0
it wanted Hong Kong to be a Chinese city under its authoritarian control like the rest of China.
spk_0
So it intervened into its election, its education, its media, its economy, and creating the grievances.
spk_0
That's the one impulse of China. But then very importantly, China has a contradictory impulse,
spk_0
a contradictory interest. And that is to make Hong Kong different from China. Why? Because China for
spk_0
20 years, since the 80s and 90s, it needed Hong Kong to be different. Because it was in China's
spk_0
interest to have a free liberal Hong Kong open Hong Kong rule of law Hong Kong to attract Western
spk_0
investment and technology. So that China could grow its own economy and can be integrated with
spk_0
the rest of global capitalism. And so it was out of China's own self interest that it has this
spk_0
other impulse towards Hong Kong. And the two impulses, one authoritarian, the other liberal,
spk_0
they are in conflict with each other. And therefore, this contradiction really constrained China's
spk_0
reaction to all those social protests in Hong Kong. Thank you, CK. Your answer just showed how
spk_0
complex the reality was. But also how much ground your book covers in terms of history
spk_0
and the different factors that led to the 2019 protest. There are a couple of things I want to
spk_0
follow up on. You've talked a bit about why Hong Kong citizens resisted. But your book also
spk_0
talked about how the pragmatic majority joined that passionate minority. I know we probably don't
spk_0
have enough time here to unpack all the different reasons for why they did. But I think usually one
spk_0
characteristics of social protests is it's led by this passionate minority and it's very hard to get
spk_0
the majority along. What drove the majority within Hong Kong to join the protest? And was there anything
spk_0
particular that you found striking in your research there? I think in 2019, we saw the majority
spk_0
Hong Kong people, the numbers quite striking. You know, the two million people that went on the
spk_0
street to March on June 16, they continued to participate for six months on the street.
spk_0
And playing different roles on my book, there's a long chapter showing how different segments
spk_0
of the population participated. So these were what I call the permactic majority. The reason for them
spk_0
to participate in the movement has to do with what happened for 20 years before when they stood
spk_0
on the sideline. Now they didn't participate but people living in the same city, they were aware of
spk_0
what was going on. They may not participate but the debates and the issues were in the news every day
spk_0
and then there were the younger generation who grew up after 1997, came of age after 1997.
spk_0
The education system, the very vibrant media news Apple Daily, that's why Apple Daily and
spk_0
you know the boss was in such trouble because it was really influential. And you have lots of young
spk_0
students, which were part of the permactic majority, they didn't participate in the earlier
spk_0
movement, but they were exposed to the ideas and the debates and the demands made by the passionate
spk_0
minority over a 20-year period. And I think that is a very important factor in shaping people's
spk_0
awareness in articulating visions and grievances and how the government basically failed to respond
spk_0
to those demands also showed that it is not enough to rely on Beijing appointed government official
spk_0
to plan our city to improve the economy to sustain our future. And so I think the 20 years of
spk_0
mobilization by a minority of movement activists really have a very important educational
spk_0
and sort of mobilization function. And so by 2019 people were well aware and I would say many of
spk_0
them were sympathetic to the causes of the passionate minority consisting mostly of the post 1997
spk_0
generation. I called them the post-colonial generation and it is this group of young people at the
spk_0
forefront of movements. Since 1997 the movements that demanded social justice, the anti-proibularization
spk_0
movement had come to Hong Kong in 2000s. And if you remember the anti-proibularization movement
spk_0
was basically a social justice movement around the world and they were talking about capitalism
spk_0
would not deliver all the good things that we want, we want social equality and environmental
spk_0
sustainability and so on and so forth. That movement came to Hong Kong and some of the younger
spk_0
generation were inspired by the tactics and also their demands and that has bred the message
spk_0
quite effectively to the majority. And then the younger generation also were at the forefront
spk_0
of fighting back. China's attempt to change the curriculum to impose a patriotic curriculum in
spk_0
Hong Kong schools and that's when Joshua Wong became this iconic figure and he inspired
spk_0
countless numbers of young people as well as the adults who were watching him and listening to him.
spk_0
And then the umbrella movement, the occupation movement that paralyzed Hong Kong for three months,
spk_0
the main financial districts occupied the streets there for three months demanding universal
spk_0
suffrage. Now people walked to these occupation sites, they would not risking anything. They
spk_0
sometimes would oppose these occupiers for disrupting traffic. But the message and the vision
spk_0
of universal suffrage has a tremendous impact on the population at large. And then there were
spk_0
these young charismatic politicians at World Learn who was imprisoned for his role in the 2016
spk_0
riot and then the government used a law to criminalize political dissent and sent him to prison
spk_0
six years prison. These happenings, these mobilizations, these protests and sacrifices for 20 years
spk_0
have really accumulated. And what happened in 2019 was not only where the pragmatic majority
spk_0
already in their minds quite sympathetic and open to these youngsters' message and demands.
spk_0
2019 has the added factor that united the vast majority of people to join the struggle
spk_0
was police violence. Everybody suffered from police violence, disproportionate violence.
spk_0
It was aggravated police violence that we didn't see before in the previous waves of protests.
spk_0
And that police violence sustained for six months, really alienated the vast majority of the Hong
spk_0
Hong Kong people because tear gas went into working class, neighborhoods, those high rises,
spk_0
into homes of people who didn't go to protest. And people were really upset when out of
spk_0
nowhere they had to suffer. And the lungs were filled with tear gas. And so it really made the
spk_0
government and the police, everybody's enemies. And that created a lot of solidarity on top of
spk_0
the 20 years of mobilizations that have created a lot of active protesters to young generation.
spk_0
And middle class have lots of reason to be unhappy about the domination of Chinese businesses
spk_0
that discriminate against Hong Kong professionals. These Chinese businesses prefer
spk_0
mainland Chinese in their upper echelon of power. So there is almost like an ethnic color bar,
spk_0
you could say, mainland versus Hong Kongers for the professionals in their workplaces
spk_0
suffering from discrimination. So you have lost, you know, by 2019, different people have different
spk_0
political, economic, identity issues that they see China as the common source of problem.
spk_0
And that's why what I call the pragmatic majority, not abandoning the pragmatism,
spk_0
but the ant passion into the pragmatism and became this powerful force. It was so powerful
spk_0
that Beijing felt that they had no option but to use the nuclear option, which is the national
spk_0
security law. And just on how people resisted, your book also documents that there was a
spk_0
variety of resistance that folks took and not just protests on the streets. Could you share with
spk_0
our listeners the range of activities that we saw in Hong Kong? Right. So people play different
spk_0
kind of supporting roles. My book really went into detail like in any incidents of protest.
spk_0
Besides those in the front line fighting the police, you need a lot of support
spk_0
staff at the back. So for each protest, a large number of ordinary citizens, they play different
spk_0
roles and they learn how to play different roles over a six month period. On the internet,
spk_0
there were actually menus of 20 what they call occupations in the protest that citizens can pick
spk_0
and choose. A menu would include what you need to play a certain role. So there are roles of the
spk_0
weatherman, which are people marching peacefully, but holding umbrellas. Umbrellas are very useful
spk_0
tools. Weatherman means it has to do with weather. And sometimes it's to block police cameras and
spk_0
cameras from surveillance of the government protecting protesters. And there is scuba's driver.
spk_0
And many ordinary citizens play the role of scuba's drivers. That is you use your own car parked
spk_0
near protest sites. And the idea is that people fleeing the police would need transportation.
spk_0
And you provide that kind of transportation helping people to leave the sites of protest
spk_0
and away from the police. There are also firefighters, people who help put out tear gas.
spk_0
And you can use bottled water to do it. It is a very effective means. And we've seen housewives
spk_0
carrying bottled water. And they use them to extinguish tear gas. And you can do a lot of things
spk_0
online. You can distribute online, announce the security code of your condominium building.
spk_0
If your building is near protest site and you announce the security code so that people fleeing
spk_0
can use that code to enter the building and find refuge. You can play the role of parents. And that
spk_0
is to provide pocket money in a full of food coupons. There are a lot of people who donate food to
spk_0
those youngsters because many of the young people they have very bad relationship with their
spk_0
parents. I'll give it to parents because the parents didn't want them to join the protest
spk_0
and they denied them pocket money. So these guys need money to buy food. And people who are
spk_0
long time residents in a neighborhood would plot escape routes during the times of protest and
spk_0
posted on social media so that people know where to get into small streets and up the mountain
spk_0
or the hills and so on and so forth. So they play very many different roles and people who are
spk_0
actually graphic designers, they design beautiful huge posters, huge posters like 10 feet tall kind
spk_0
of posters. And very moving beautiful depotion graphics of all types of citizens joining to struggle.
spk_0
It is what they call propaganda work, very artistic propaganda work. So basically staying where you are,
spk_0
you play different roles to help the protest. So it's not just physical and violent clashes with police.
spk_0
This is only one form of the struggle in 2019. I want to now go back to what you were discussing
spk_0
earlier about Beijing's role and Beijing's decision making when it comes to Hong Kong. You mentioned
spk_0
that prior to 2019 there was quite a bit of ambivalence in terms of how Beijing thought about Hong Kong
spk_0
and the contradictory goals they had for the region. How would you characterize Beijing's response
spk_0
to 2019 protests? And would you still characterize post-2019 Beijing's priorities or approach
spk_0
towards Hong Kong as one of ambivalence? Or did you see that shift considerably from 2019 onwards?
spk_0
Indeed, I think you're absolutely correct. There has been a shift. Previously, China was constrained by
spk_0
its own ambition to become a global economic power and it wanted economic development through
spk_0
Hong Kong as a bridge with the West. That they did very successfully. And so the result is 20 years,
spk_0
30 years later by 2017, I would say. China has succeeded in realizing its goal of becoming a global
spk_0
power and its economy was booming. And so the ambivalence or the contradiction of having to keep
spk_0
Hong Kong different from China and the same with China has shifted to us is inclination to make Hong Kong
spk_0
more the same because now it can't afford to crack down on Hong Kong because China has become
spk_0
such a powerful economic power. It feels like it has lessen need on Hong Kong and when 20 years
spk_0
of protests have created such a powerful force of resistance against China, China's under-shidding
spk_0
ping felt more obligated or more compelled to tip the balance to exercise control rather than let
spk_0
Hong Kong to continue to become so assertive in its resistance to become so liberal in its civil
spk_0
life. You have to think about the worries of the leadership in Beijing that the demonstration
spk_0
effects of Hong Kong to the rest of China were very probable. You know, during the 20 years before
spk_0
2019 starting around 2003, we have a huge exodus or large number of tourists from China. And guess
spk_0
what's on their itinerary a lot of times is that Chinese tourists, they would always add rallies and
spk_0
protest and demonstration into their itinerary when they visit Hong Kong because they could never
spk_0
do it. It's like something you need to do when you visit a foreign city. And when they come to
spk_0
Hong Kong, they also part of the souvenirs that they took back to China were books that were banned
spk_0
in China. So that's why China needed to arrest and you know, the adoption of the Hong Kong
spk_0
booksellers, people may still remember, very high profile, very kind of a good behavior by China,
spk_0
but still they needed to do it because the booksellers are selling all these books that find their ways
spk_0
through Chinese tourists. So the demonstration effects of Hong Kong to the rest of the Chinese
spk_0
population, I think was always on the mind of the Chinese leadership. So when the economic
spk_0
consideration of keeping Hong Kong different has been reduced by China's own economic achievement,
spk_0
they have to think more about the political necessity of reeling in on Hong Kong. I also have
spk_0
wanted to point out that the National Security Law in Hong Kong in 2020 fits very well in the national
spk_0
trend before 2020. Within China, Xi Jinping has already issued by one count some 20 national security
spk_0
legislations covering almost every aspect of Chinese life. So the idea of using national security
spk_0
legislation to maximize control over the internet, you know, culture, you name it. I mean, you look at
spk_0
the new theory, Xi Jinping's theory of national security, it really covers everything. So the national
spk_0
security law in the minds of the Chinese leadership, it's just one of those legal means that they
spk_0
have already gotten used to imposing on the mainland. And so when this huge protest broke out and
spk_0
apparently receiving a lot of popular support and foreign support, remember the global media were
spk_0
on Hong Kong night and day for six months. That was really disturbing, annoying for the Beijing
spk_0
leadership and they are just using one of the means that they have been using domestically,
spk_0
using national security legislation. And so I think it fits right into China's domestic priorities.
spk_0
At the time, when it feels very confident about its global agenda and the lesser role of Hong Kong
spk_0
and the need for Hong Kong for that global agenda. And so it actually sort of makes sense if you think
spk_0
in the mode of the Beijing leadership to impose and sort of destroy Hong Kong with the national
spk_0
security law. Fascinating to hear you discuss how China's goals for Hong Kong change and how China
spk_0
didn't need to keep Hong Kong different anymore, particularly as China has become more powerful
spk_0
internationally. As you look at Hong Kong's experience, what is this suggest for how Beijing
spk_0
is treating other regions that it claims like Taiwan, as well as other autonomous regions,
spk_0
such as Tibet and Xinjiang? Do you think the Hong Kong experience is relevant for them? And do
spk_0
you think that what was experienced in Hong Kong might be possible in some of these other regions
spk_0
such as Tibet and Xinjiang, in particular? Well, I think a major lesson from Beijing's reaction
spk_0
or recent policy in Hong Kong and towards Hong Kong is that politics is taking command over economics.
spk_0
That is for the Beijing regime, it is political power and control at this moment, being the priority
spk_0
over using Hong Kong as an economic resource for its own economic development.
spk_0
This is a priority issue. I think this is the importance of politics, the paramount consideration
spk_0
of politics in deciding what policy to take towards these border autonomous regions is the main
spk_0
lesson we can learn from what happened to Hong Kong. But I also want to point out that it was
spk_0
actually the historical experience of Tibet and Xinjiang that have been repeated in Hong Kong.
spk_0
So it's not like something happened to Hong Kong, it becomes something that would happen to
spk_0
Tibet and Xinjiang is the other way around. As I thought about these border areas and what has
spk_0
happened to Hong Kong, you see that China is using the same playbook of colonization of these
spk_0
border areas and apply that playbook to Hong Kong. They have used it before in Tibet and Xinjiang
spk_0
before they applied it to Hong Kong in what sense. Well, think about migration. A huge migration of
spk_0
the Han people to these border regions has been happening to Hong Kong in the past 20 years and has
spk_0
picked up speed actually as we speak. There are more schemes to bring in more mainland so-called
spk_0
professionals who turn out to be not very professional, but that's the category of visas for them.
spk_0
Huge migration stream 150 people every day since the 1990s. And so the idea is to change the social
spk_0
composition of the local population. That's a very classic means of colonization by the Chinese,
spk_0
but also by other colonial power. The second thing you can see the parallels between China's
spk_0
policy to Tibet and Xinjiang and to Hong Kong is to create economic dependency on the mainland.
spk_0
And I don't need to give you the details. You look at the number of listed companies, the entire
spk_0
Hong Kong stock exchange basically is dominated. I think 70% of the listed companies are Chinese
spk_0
companies now. And with tourism and all kinds of policies towards Hong Kong and the idea is to
spk_0
make Hong Kong dependent on the mainland for economic activities. The use of language, they're
spk_0
encouraging the use of Chinese, even academic publications, professors are encouraged to publish
spk_0
in Chinese and well not to publish in English anymore to cut off their ties and allegiance to
spk_0
the international academic community. They wanted to control the curriculum at school and that
spk_0
had happened before in other border regions. They also threw training and different incentive
spk_0
systems for civil servants and police force and they groomed the probaging politicians and they
spk_0
create parallel mass organizations. We are talking about unions, women's groups, neighborhood
spk_0
watch groups to replace previously autonomous civil society organizations. So all of these have
spk_0
happened before and they happened before Hong Kong witnessed these developments. So I think it was
spk_0
the other way around is the lessons in Tibet and Xinjiang that have been used to Hong Kong more
spk_0
recently. Now with Taiwan, I think Taiwan has more capacity to keep a distance from the mainland
spk_0
because it basically has de facto independence and autonomy in many many different ways and has very
spk_0
different international position. Some countries actually recognized Taiwan as a country. So I think
spk_0
the effect of Taiwan we see very clearly in 2019 the re-election of Taiwan and the DPP.
spk_0
It was a very clear indication that people in Taiwan after seeing what happened in Hong Kong,
spk_0
they would not accept one country to system, especially among the younger generation. And therefore
spk_0
China is now doing another very important offensive double down on infiltrating the Taiwan
spk_0
political system and the political parties and political leaders there. They are keeping on to
spk_0
influence Taiwan in so many different ways but I think Taiwan is in a very different situation
spk_0
than these other borderlands that were officially under Chinese sovereignty. And I guess in all these
spk_0
places these three or four territories, I think the struggle between Chinese nationalism from China
spk_0
by China and for self-determination will continue. The struggle will continue to be a long and uneven
spk_0
process with ups and downs and sometimes China will have an upper hand and repression with a seat
spk_0
but then other times we will see waves of resistance. Especially if we pay attention to the
spk_0
diasporic movement from Tibet, Xinjiang and Hong Kong. They are expanding their growing
spk_0
influence. They are trying to empower themselves despite the depressing situation inside China.
spk_0
So I think we shouldn't lose sight of this continuing struggle between Chinese nationalism
spk_0
and these movements for self-determination outside of China but in relation to territories within China.
spk_0
Thank you, CK. I'd like to wrap up with one last question for you. What role if any did the United
spk_0
States play in Hong Kong's 2019 protest as well as Hong Kong's overall trajectory? I know as a leading
spk_0
academic you're less focused on providing recommendations for the US government but would be useful
spk_0
to get your thoughts on the role the United States has played in the past. The US indeed I think
spk_0
has played a tremendous role not just in 2019 but as you said historically previously in 1992
spk_0
the US Congress passed the US Hong Kong Policy Act and that was very consequential.
spk_0
In terms of tying China's hand not to crack down on the 20 years of social protests that
spk_0
eventually led to 2019 because that act stipulated that for foreign technology and investment
spk_0
to go to Hong Kong, Hong Kong has to stay different. Hong Kong has to show that it has a different
spk_0
system than the mainland and that's why it is okay for US capital technologies sometimes very
spk_0
sensitive technology and investment to go into Hong Kong because it's separate from China
spk_0
and China needed these resources and know how and capital and a lot of these would come to Hong Kong
spk_0
and then eventually move to China. So the US Hong Kong Policy Act was the kind of international
spk_0
I would say law that created the space of 20 years of civil liberty for the movement to grow
spk_0
and China had to abide by it because it needed all these resources from the US through Hong Kong.
spk_0
US played that role in creating that political space for the movement to grow.
spk_0
In 2019, the US also played an outside role in encouraging and boldening Hong Kong people.
spk_0
The Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act that the Congress passed in 2019 became the rallying cry
spk_0
to go for many protests. Hong Kong protesters had demanded and plead President Trump at that time
spk_0
and also Congress to support them as one of the frontier of fighting Chinese authoritarianism
spk_0
and so because at that time Trump was already very anti-China, Trump just sympathized with
spk_0
Hong Kong. I would argue play a role in giving hope to Hong Kong protesters that their cause
spk_0
and the fight against China had international support of the US but also the US led West
spk_0
and so it was a very important morality boost to the movement protesters and when the act passed
spk_0
they felt like they have this weapon backed by the number one competitor arrival of the Chinese
spk_0
government and so I think it was a very important sign of US support for the movement that allow
spk_0
it to grow and go global and continue to appeal to a global audience and the act is still active today
spk_0
has been renewed it was initially for five years but it has been recently renewed whether it has
spk_0
teeth or not is a folk debate but it did impose sanctions against Chinese officials it sort of a
spk_0
symbolized very important international support for the movement until today and for the diaspora.
spk_0
CK thank you for this very rich and comprehensive discussion of what we've seen in Hong Kong
spk_0
as well as unpacking the different dynamics that led to the protests in 2019. I highly recommend
spk_0
the sinners to pick up her book obviously her book had a lot more details than we could cover in
spk_0
this podcast so thank you again CK for joining me today. Great I hope it's useful for you.