BEIJING - The challenge of Hong Kong, where some 500,000 people on July 1 took to the streets against their local government, is only the latest of a series of serious tests for Beijing. But it could have long-term consequences for the stability of Greater China.
The people of Taiwan, who go to the polls next March to choose their next president, are following the developments in Hong Kong closely. The leaders in Beijing have said time and again that their handling of the territory would prove their liberal attitude in the future handling of the Taiwan, once it decides to reunite with the mainland. Suspicion and mistrust in Taiwan over developments in Hong Kong could trigger a drift from the mainland that in turn could make Beijing nervous and heighten tensions with Taipei, which could chill markets throughout the region.
The question then is: How can this chain reaction be stopped before it is too late? Unfortunately, there is no easy answer.
When Beijing chose wealthy businessman Tung Chee-hwa as Hong Kong's top man, it did so partly to reach out to Taiwan's rich constituency. Big entrepreneurs both in Hong Kong and Taiwan were promised plenty of room and opportunities to grow in the mainland in return for their support for reunification. With its choice of Tung, Beijing was declaring that it was keen to work for the development of sympathetic private enterprises. Private capital was no longer the enemy of China but was to become its staunchest ally in its effort to reunify with Hong Kong and Taiwan.
In the past years this strategy has paid off. The tens of billions dollars' worth of Taiwanese and Hong Kong investment in the mainland and the hundreds of thousands of Taiwanese and Hong Kong people living on the mainland prove that the rich people are convinced: Beijing will cater for Hong Kong and Taiwan investments. In Taiwan especially, many large groups have become a kind of pro-Beijing fifth column, with the bosses openly grumbling about the new inefficiencies of Taiwan's young democracy while lauding the latest business-minded technocrats from the mainland. And, as money talks, the fact that big capital is switching its sympathies from Taipei to Beijing is having a large impact in Taiwan, where the independence-minded government of President Chen Shui-bian can't work against the wishes of this powerful constituency.
But this can have a true large social effect only if the well-being of the companies translates into the well-being of the common people and the middle class. If that doesn't occur, the well-being of a few companies will become a target of envy and social protest from those who feel, and are, deprived. In Hong Kong this is not happening - yet. Since Hong Kong's return to the motherland, its tycoons have become richer with a windfall of deals in the mainland, but the regular salary man in the territory has seen only shrinking income. First there was the 1997 financial crisis, then common people felt Tung was not really caring for people's difficulties, then severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) thrashed all hopes for recovery this year. And then, to top it all, when people's complaints grew louder, Tung tried to slap them down with Article 23, a new "national security" law that in effect would restrict freedom of opinion.
Tung's message was: You people of Hong Kong have suffered and are giving me trouble because of that, but I won't do anything for you, conversely I will shut your mouth because worse times are ahead for you, while I'll take care of my own business. The message was delivered without even the smiles and handshakes any politician learns are the stock of his trade. Tung put on a peevish air, as if he were the wronged one and the Hong Kong people were just ungrateful.
Beijing had in fact long been aware of the truth about Tung's Hong Kong. They knew Tung was not the right man to handle the territory before the 2004 elections, which are scheduled to choose in a democratic fashion some 50 percent of the representatives in the consultative council, starting to do away with the cumbersome and undemocratic system that currently functions in Hong Kong. Tung had fulfilled his duties in the first term, ie, he had reassured entrepreneurs in Hong Kong and Taiwan of Beijing's support. But he was more than superfluous for the second term - he was a hindrance, as he could not reach out to people and had no initiatives to spur the Hong Kong economy.
But although this had long been clear in Beijing, it could not spare the time to find his replacement. Until last March Beijing had been engrossed for years in the quest for a smooth political transition from Jiang Zemin to Hu Jintao, and the choice of Tung's replacement would have taken up scores of meetings and long-drawn conclaves where a consensus had to be reached. In other words, the lack of internal Communist Party democracy that stalled a fast reaction on SARS (see SARS spurs structural reform (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/ED26Ad06.html), April 26) also mired a decision on Tung, and in the end it was easier to confirm the man than to replace him.
This internal systemic problem is still there, and Beijing can hope in the short term only for stopgap measures, such as postponing the ill-conceived and controversial law on freedom of opinion in Hong Kong, and waggle along without greater ruckus until the Hong Kong elections and, more important, the Taiwan elections, hoping for a more sympathetic president on the island. But for this Beijing has to try, as it is doing now, to distance itself from Tung, without taking him away before the elections.
A possible choice could well be to put Tung down after the elections, select a vigorous successor who could send a message of democracy and sensitivity across the Strait, in time for Taiwan's presidential elections. He should be a dependable man with good democratic credentials, and possibly with some history of controversy with Beijing, proving his independence. A choice of this kind would reinforce Beijing's stature in Hong Kong, Taiwan and, indeed, the whole world. Beijing has about six months to come up with this name. That would be plenty of time for this kind of decision in any system but this one, while it is still dominated by its cumbersome features.
Meanwhile, SARS could strike back in the autumn, possibly with vengeance, and Beijing might have its hands tied with that emergency and no time to think about Hong Kong. (2003-07-15 Asia Times)
