12 Mar 21 | China, Hong Kong, Opinion, Ruth's blog
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Yang Xiaoguang
It will not surprise you to know that I think words are important. Both in terms of what they tell you and what they don’t. When words come from a diplomat, a person who is trained to be civil and to not give too much away, from someone who is literally paid to give the official line, then their words can be even more insightful.
Which is why I think it is important to read the words of Yang Xiaoguang, chargé d’affaires of the Chinese embassy in the UK (right), from an interview he did yesterday morning on the BBC’s Today programme.
When questioned about the National Security Law in Hong Kong and the ‘patriots governing Hong Kong’ resolution, which was passed unanimously by the National People’s Congress on Thursday, he said:
Different definition about democracy.
In Hong Kong, we have seen too many political frictions.
The aim is to ensure that patriots have the industry power of Hong Kong so that it will be good for the long run of governance. For the benefit of the whole of the Chinese people.
This is an internal affair.
And when challenged on the treatment of the Uighurs in Xinjiang he said:
British Bias Corporation.
Too much fake news.
Genocide doesn’t exist in Xinjiang.
We are bringing economic development and stability in Xinjiang.
Taken at face value this completely counterfactual narrative could be plausible. Until facts get in the way.
You cannot dismiss images of Uighur men in lines at a train station, waiting to go to the ‘re-education’ camps as fake news. You cannot claim that China has a different definition of democracy when they signed up to the original plans for one country, two systems. And you cannot claim that you are acting for the benefit of the people of Hong Kong and China when you implement a new National Security Law and arrest over 100 leading democracy campaigners, including 47 charged with subversion last week for daring to hold election primaries in Hong Kong.
There is a genocide happening today in Xinjiang province as I type. The few witnesses who have managed to escape have told consistent stories. The images of the queues and of the camps have been verified. The US and Canada recognise these actions as acts of genocide.
In Hong Kong, we’ve looked on in horror as the CCP have moved in, asserting their authority with the National Security Law. We’ve watched as social media accounts have disappeared, as activists have been arrested, as journalists have been silenced and as the BBC World Service was banned.
The CCP seemingly no longer cares what the world thinks. It is has made a strategic calculation that it’s economic might protects it from global condemnation. That a propaganda campaign against public broadcasters like the BBC will be successful. That no one is brave enough to challenge them.
But brave the world must be. People are dying. People are being arrested. People are disappearing. On our watch.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”You may also want to read” category_id=”41669″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
26 Feb 21 | Events
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”116310″ img_size=”large”][vc_column_text]Over the past two years, there have been massive citizen-led protests in Hong Kong, Thailand, Russia, and Belarus — as well as major acts of repression by their governments. Join us for a roundtable discussion that will zoom into these four countries, focusing on the similarities and differences between the two pairs of locales: Hong Kong and Thailand, and Russia and Belarus.
Our panel of experts include Natalya Chernyshova, Senior Lecturer in Modern History at the University of Winchester who will discuss Belarus; Nina Khrushcheva, Professor in the Julien J. Studley Graduate Programs of International Affairs at The New School who will discuss Russia; Claudio Sopranzetti, Assistant Professor in Anthropology at Central European University who will discuss Thailand; and Jeffrey Wasserstrom, Chancellor’s Professor of History, UC Irvine, who will discuss Hong Kong. The conversation will be led by Maria Repnikova, Assistant Professor in Global Communication at Georgia State University, and will explore the possibilities of these citizen-led protests, and whether there have been — or will be — any major changes in government leadership, culture, or international relations within the four locations.
This event is programmed in partnership with the UCI Forum for the Academy and the Public, Wende Museum, Central European University Democracy Institute and the Orange County World Affairs Council.
Register for tickets here.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
19 Feb 21 | China, Hong Kong, Media Freedom, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”116283″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship has condemned the removal today of the director of broadcasting of Radio Television Hong Kong from his post and his replacement with a civil servant approved by the Hong Kong Government.
Veteran journalist Leung Ka-wing has been in the post since 2015 and his contract was due to come to an end in August this year, although his tenure had already been extended by three years in 2018.
The Hong Kong government announced today that he would leave his post immediately, with civil servant Patrick Li Pak-chuen taking over on 1 March. Li has served as deputy secretary for home affairs since 2017 and has previously worked in the Security Bureau.
Commenting on the appointment, the Secretary for the Civil Service, Patrick Nip, said, “Li is a seasoned administrative officer with proven leadership and management skills. I believe that he will continue to serve the community with professionalism and dedication in his new capacity, and ably lead the Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK) to meet the challenges ahead.”
In its statement, the Government made a clear point of Li’s role at the broadcaster. “As Director of Broadcasting, Li will ensure that RTHK fully abides by the charter of RTHK,” it said.
Index’ s CEO Ruth Smeeth said, “Hong Kong has been a bastion of media freedom for decades. This chilling statement from the Chinese Government removing the Director of HKTV is another step towards a truly authoritarian regime in Hong Kong. We stand in solidarity with the people of Hong Kong and those journalists are trying to cling on to their media freedom which is so precious.”
The news comes in the wake of a tit-for-tat battle been China and the UK over broadcast rights.
On 4 February, the UK’s broadcasting regulator Ofcom rescinded the licence of China Global Television Network (CGTN), an international English-language satellite news channel, following an investigation into who held editorial control for CGTN’s output.
A spokesperson said, “Our investigation showed that the licence for CGTN is held by an entity which has no editorial control over its programmes. We are unable to approve the application to transfer the licence to China Global Television Network Corporation because it is ultimately controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, which is not permitted under UK broadcasting law.”
A week later, the Chinese government banned the broadcasting of BBC World News in the country. China’s National Radio and Television Administration said the BBC’s broadcasts were not “truthful and fair” and it caused harm to China’s national interests.
RTHK also announced it would stop relaying the BBC’s World Service radio.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”You may also want to read” category_id=”40980″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
07 Jan 21 | China, Hong Kong, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”115971″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Two countries, one system.
That, effectively, is the policy in Hong Kong and China after more than 50 pro-democracy activists were arrested yesterday morning under the National Security Law for their part in the pro-democracy primaries last July.
The primaries were held to identify pro-democracy candidates for Hong Kong’s Legislative Council (LegCo) elections which were due in September 2020.
At the time, HKSAR chief executive Carrie Lam said, “If this so-called primary election’s purpose is to achieve the ultimate goal of delivering what they called ’35+’ [lawmakers], with the objective of objecting or resisting every policy initiative of the HKSAR government, it may fall into the category of subverting the state power – one of the four types of offences under the national security law (NSL).”
Lam subsequently postponed the 2020 LegCo elections, citing a resurgence in Covid-19 and claiming support for the move from Beijing.
Lam’s threat has now materialised, with many of the candidates and organisers of the primaries now arrested for breaking the NSL.
Several of the candidates for the primaries had already fled to exile, including Nathan Law, Ted Hui and Sunny Cheung.
The three issued a joint statement saying, “This has yet again proven how the National Security Legislation tramples upon One Country, Two Systems. The indiscriminate arrest concerns political figures from all sides of the spectrum. The unprecedented scale indicates how the Communist government had decided to purge the democratic camp, silencing all dissent.”
The three said that the ambiguity of the law now threatens all 600,000 Hongkongers who cast their votes in the primaries.
Benedict Rogers, CEO of Hong Kong Watch believes the arrests mean no one in Hong Kong is safe anymore.
“The simple act of organising a primary election for the purposes of selecting candidates for the pro-democracy camp ahead of Hong Kong’s planned Legislative Council elections is now deemed an act of subversion under the draconian national security law, carrying with it the potential for years in prison,” he told Index.
“Potentially any expression of desire for democracy or dissent from the Chinese or Hong Kong governments could be a criminal act. The national security law and its vaguely defined crimes of subversion and collusion with foreign political forces, imposed on Hong Kong last July, already threatened freedom of expression in Hong Kong, and now the arrests we have seen in recent months and especially these mass arrests prove that this draconian law has destroyed freedom of expression in Hong Kong.”
The UN clearly agrees with this view that everyone now needs to be waiting for the knock at the door.
A spokesperson for the UN Human Rights Office said, “These latest arrests indicate that – as had been feared – the offence of subversion under the National Security Law is indeed being used to detain individuals for exercising legitimate rights to participate in political and public life.”
The situation all seems a very long way from what is laid out in the Sino-British Joint Declaration which promised to maintain the status quo until 2047.
Lord Patten, who was governor of Hong Kong at the time of the handover, told Sky News that the arrest of pro-democracy activists was a “further turning of the screw”.
He said, “This is a further attempt to destroy the freedoms of a city that has thrived under the rule of law. The people who have been arrested are not radicals, they have not been guilt of violence, they are lawyers, academics, social workers. [These are the] people who organised a vote to choose the best candidates for the elections which were then postponed, arguably because of Covid.”
UK foreign secretary Dominic Raab said that the mass arrest was “a grievous attack on Hong Kong’s rights and freedoms as protected under the Joint Declaration” and that “the Hong Kong and Chinese authorities deliberately misled the world about the true purpose of the National Security Law”.
Tom Tugendhat MP , chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, called it a “tragedy”, saying, “Eroding free speech and detaining democrats is an act of violence against the people of Hong Kong and the economy they have built.”
Chinese exiled cartoonist Badiucao expressed his sentiments over the arrests with his latest work.
The UN has also urged the authorities to guarantee the right to freedom of expression in the context of ongoing investigations, including by allowing journalists and news organisations to fully and freely exercise their legitimate functions.
The authorities seem unlikely to comply. Various Hong Kong publications were served with a search warrant asking for the contact information of primary election candidates. This led Tom Grundy, co-founder of Hong Kong Free Press who spoke on our podcast just before Christmas, to say, “Hong Kong newsrooms are not phonebooks for the police to call upon as they wish.”
Whether it was coincidence that the arrests took place on a day when the world’s attention was distracted towards the USA or not – which is not beyond the Chinese Communist Party – many have highlighted the irony.
Journalist Tony Lin spoke for many when he tweeted, “So many nuances need to be addressed, but at core what many ppl fought for in Hong Kong was EXACTLY what DC extremists trying to dismantle in the US: the right to vote.”
In their statement, Nathan Law, Ted Hui and Sunny Cheung express what many are now feeling.
“Foreign governments must reconsider whether Hong Kong should be treated differently from China,” they added. “Leaders of the free world must recognise the ambition and the despotic nature of the Chinese Communist Party.”
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”You may also want to read” category_id=”40980″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
