Beijing and Hong Kong’s protesters can agree on this much about the unrest now in its ninth week: the turmoil is growing and violence is intensifying. The region is facing its most serious crisis for decades. In the first eight weeks, police fired 160 rubber bullets and 1,000 rounds of teargas. On Monday, they came close to matching those figures in a single day. Meanwhile Beijing issues barely veiled threats, such as the mass drill of 12,000 riot police in Shenzhen, just across the border, or explicit ones: “Those who play with fire will perish by it.”
Hong Kong’s fabric is unravelling. Thirteen of the city’s 18 districts have seen protests. The youngest of those arrested is 13, the oldest 76. Thousands of civil servants, finance workers and lawyers have rallied. On Monday, Hong Kong’s first general strike in half a century brought out teachers and construction workers alike, halted metro lines and cancelled hundreds of flights. Many who were largely apathetic about the original issues are furious at the behaviour of politicians and police, but views are polarising: others are angered by or fearful of the disruption.
A small but growing number in this leaderless movement has turned to force, mostly against property, but also against police. Others are dismayed by those tactics, and fear the reaction to direct if symbolic attacks on Beijing’s authority, but are outraged by the double standards. A student union leader has been arrested for possession of “offensive weapons” – laser pointers – and others have been charged with rioting, carrying a jail sentence of up to 10 years. In contrast, the men arrested after a gang rampaged through a metro station assaulting suspected protesters with metal and bamboo rods – while police were mysteriously absent – face the much lighter charge of unlawful assembly.
Though demands have proliferated, many of those taking part would probably think again if the government formally withdrew the extradition bill which ignited this movement, rather than simply repeating that it is dead, and launched an independent inquiry into the unrest and its policing, as even pro-establishment lawmakers have requested. But officials ruled that out on Wednesday. Protesters are moved more by despair than hope. Some even say they are sticking it out because they could be arrested later: they see it as now or never.
A deployment of the People’s Liberation Army remains a last resort for Beijing. Officials in Hong Kong and Beijing probably hope the return of schools and universities in September, as well as the sheer exhaustion of non-stop activism, will take the steam out of the movement before the Communist party celebrates the 70th anniversary of its taking power in China on 1 October. But they also seem to be relying on harsher policing on the streets and a more punitive pursuit of protesters through the justice system. Everything to date suggests this will pour fuel on the fire. How much more can Hong Kong take?
Since you’re here…
… we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading and supporting The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever before. And unlike many news organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism accessible to all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. But we need your ongoing support to keep working as we do.
The Guardian will engage with the most critical issues of our time – from the escalating climate catastrophe to widespread inequality to the influence of big tech on our lives. At a time when factual information is a necessity, we believe that each of us, around the world, deserves access to accurate reporting with integrity at its heart.
Our editorial independence means we set our own agenda and voice our own opinions. Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias and not influenced by billionaire owners or shareholders. This means we can give a voice to those less heard, explore where others turn away, and rigorously challenge those in power.
We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism, to maintain our openness and to protect our precious independence. Every reader contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you.
View all comments >
comments (331)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
I am so proud of, and afraid for, these protesters. I feel like we all know how this will end, and I feel sick about it, but I am also just in awe of their bravery.
If I were religious I would pray for them.
I can only hope that another Tiananmen Square would result in actual international condemnation - but after the non-reaction to Khashoggi, I have little faith.
While things look difficult for the people of Hong Kong, there is a small bit of good fortune that they do have in the business. Though it is by no means clearly enough to keep them free, they have the leverage of being in a territory which acts as a commercial gateway for the mainland China. So long as the area is a very important jewel in China's crown, Hong Kong may remain a bit free. The need to use the area for its trade and commerce forces…
lets hope future demonstrations are peaceful and keep wide public support, that doesn’t gift state media the chance to portray lawful protest as criminal anarchy, or the army the chance to interfere
In an ideal world the Chinese government would allow free and fair elections in HK and then throughout mainland China.
It isn't going to happen. This could turn very nasty.
Will Trump intervene? No. Is any other country strong enough to intervene? No. The people of HK are on their own. Those encouraging them to continue and widen the protests should realise they are not the ones in the front line.
The pressure has been building for years. The Basic Law stipulated an orderly progression towards democracy. This has not happened in the 22 years since the handover. This means that the government is merely the puppet of the tycoons and cartels on the one hand and the communist party on the other hand. So none of the real issues facing HK society have been addressed, most notably housing and inequality.
Ironic, isn't it that a so-called communist government works with tycoons in the cause of totalitarian capitalism. I lived and worked in HK for 15 years from 1998, thinking, naively that after the handover it would become a more equal society under communism. A silly mistake on my part.
Another silly mistake was my theory, that, given the problems of UK society in 2013, if things went wrong in the UK, I could always return to and live in Hong Kong!
The communist party thing is just a complete misnomer. They're about as communist as the DPRK are democratic.
I couldn't see anything communist about China. They seem to have US style illness-can -bankrupt-you health care. The guy I was talking to did not believe we had free health care. Schools vary, the catchment areas for the best ones are much more expensive. They are planting lots of trees though.
The protestors need a plan and a concrete socialist alternative.They need to spread these to the Chinese mainland and to the working class.Endless marches which do not offer either, will eventuality petre out.
Don't try to join a Marxist group in Guangzhou and fight for workers' rights. And if you do the same in HK you will probably face the same consequences.
It would have to be done secretly then, like in pre revolutionary Russia.
If the ruling class up the stakes,then revolution is the only answer.
Or it could be done from an armchair, in a safe western country.
They are protesting for the sake of protesting. It is unclear what they want while carrying British and American flags. What is going on in France I hear the Yellow Vests are still protesting and are still being brutally suppressed.
They're protesting against Chinese regime they see as removing their freedoms (20+ years before the basic law is supposed to run out).
Yep, lots killed still going on .
Not that you will hear on the BBC, the guardian, ....
As a consequence the conclusion is there is a D-Notice in place.
Unless the nastiness can be be pinned on the USA, the UK or Israel you won't hear much from those sources.
It's a test case balancing act which Western governments will be following with interest between those who benefit and those who don't and how far each will go to defend it.
It’s only a matter of time now before the tanks move in.,and morale outrage erupts in the U.K.Lefties will demand that we do something.
Boris should simply outline that we are in the EU and we await their views.Jean Paul later stands up in the EU Parliament and intimates that the EU is outraged and that in accordance with established practices ,that it.
I agree, not much we can do about it as a middlecranker - which is why we have greater influence as part of a like minded group. I wouldnt say the west has no power though since the Chinese economy and thus stability depends on us buying their exports. But your post suggests that in the event of another massacre we should just ignore and continue as usual.
Feeble attempt to blame the EU. How would Brexit Britain do better on its own? Would trump condemn China in either case? Answers on a postcard please
In an ideal world the Chinese government would allow free and fair elections in HK and then throughout mainland China.
It isn't going to happen. This could turn very nasty.
Will Trump intervene? No. Is any other country strong enough to intervene? No. The people of HK are on their own. Those encouraging them to continue and widen the protests should realise they are not the ones in the front line.
Tragic but true and PLA may use any violence as pretext to end 2 systems and who can prvent that ?
In an ideal world, the UK would have allowed free and fair elections in HK long before 1997.
I lived in HK at the handover time and the locals were very favourable about swapping a British dictatorship for a Chinese one. they reckoned the Chinese would be no worse than the Brits. On handover day the New Territories were awash with Chinese flags and lots of parties were in full flow.....not that the middle classes were not intent on getting overseas nationalities ( UK, Australian, Canadian) before handover day.
In an ideal world, however China had made it quite clear that were the UK to have tried it , then HK would have been invaded immediately . Many many times the UK were warned off it.
I'm waiting for the west's liberal left to condemn China's actions in Hong Kong, given their concern for democracy and human rights.
No, only joking. We all know they'll say nothing.
Big nose may scent wong perfumed harbour
Eh - the "liberal left" (whatever that means) has said a lot.
What has your (based on you indicating that the liberal left is a side you do not belong on) side said about it?
Just like you have said nothing and by the pointless noise of pointing at others suggested the rabid right of which you clearly identify are not saying anything .
Surely the masses yearn for the people's Liberation Army to throw of the thrall of consumerism and to be re eductaed like the Uighers have their children stolen and refrain from mingling with Anglophone influencers.
Yes... patriotic and correct-thinking citizens know this is what is needed.
This will only end when China (and/or Hong Kong’s admin) answers two questions (and all follow-up questions) to the satisfaction of Hong Kong’s citizenry:
1. What is it that makes us inferior? Why do we not deserve democracy like so many other people around the world?
2. What does the Communist Party of China have to offer us that democracy would not be able to deliver, and deliver better?
China cannot answer these questions, let alone acknowledge them, without questioning the Communist party’s entire reason to be. They will keep talking past each other until one steps too far for the liking of the other… and the consequences will not be pretty.
Having lived in China recently, and having seen how much the CCP spends on improving infrastructure, public transport, housing and education while maintaining a very safe, economically stable country, I would say they're already doing brilliantly.
Especially when compared to the shit state of the UK, where in recent years that hip 'n cool democracy with its referendum and elections has resulted in economic stagnation, an increase in crime, homelessness, decline of public services and resulted in division and instability unseen for decades.
The poor white "gweilo" worshippers amongst the HK protesters waving their colonial flags have for long been brainwashed by the British that the illusion of democracy was to be what made them special and set them apart from China, but Britain never gave a shit about granting it to them before the handover,
Fair enough, for now perhaps there is some state-led brilliance on the mainland.
But what happens when the government does something unpopular, or if something happens that citizens think the government has control over, such as a pear-shaped economy?
You will get a replication of what you see in Hong Kong.
Democracy gets messy when education is lacking, and not broad and deep enough. If I had my choice of messes, however, I would still take a democratic mess such as the UK over the kind of thing we are seeing in Hong Kong, any day.
UK folk are learning a lot from this Brexit thing. They will bring that knowledge with them to the ballot box.
Yes let's not bother with democracy then - how inconvenient it is. Those damn peasants should be grateful for what they have and turn a blind eye to the political abuses, cronyism and corruption or the way that the legal system is manipulated. Those students shouldnt have thrown themselves in front of tanks a few years ago. Though I agree that recent history has shown that a stable dictatorship can be safer than anarchy, it seems a bit rich telling other people you dont deserve democratic rights.
I don't know anybody who now supports the violence of the protesters. I would like to support them, but it seems to me they are becoming the very people they despise.
They are self selected and unelected. Yet take it upon themselves to be a true voice of the people. They have demands that must be met in full. No room for negotiation or compromise. They want the application of laws to be flexible based on the political needs of the transgressors, yet profess to be protecting the rule of law. They use violence and intimidation to suppress opposition to them, which is the most alarming of their behaviors. Youtube footage shows a man at the airport harassed and bullied as he tries to leave. Drivers who refuse to stop at illegal road blocks set up by the protesters have been punched and their vehicles damaged. They perceive and act out against many enemies - the MTR, shopping centre owners, police.
They claim their freedom to expression is being curtailed by the government and police, yet when allowed to peacefully demonstrate unhindered by police, they eventually gather at police stations to throw rocks, set fires and vandalize the buildings.
It needs sensible and rational voices from the Democratic parties and affiliated movement to challenge the actions and perceptions of those who have become violent. Unfortunately that does not seem to be coming. The democracy movement was already fragmented and prone to self defeating acts of grandstanding (E.g incorrect oaths at swearing in in the LEGO) which arguably has led to a disillusionment with peaceful means which are seen as ineffective.
But when you act like the people you despise, it is time to think again.
"They are self selected and unelected."
Trouble is, this sounds like the leadership of China. (Which actually bolsters the point you are making, by the way: both sides are alike.)
However difficult it is to for protesters justify their actions, in the eyes of HK citizens, the Chinese government faces a challenge of self-justification that's equally huge, if not bigger.
Especially when China's government only seems to be making moves on the mainland to tighten control and curtail freedoms.
I total agree with you, and that is indeed the point I was making. As I said, they are behaving in exactly the same way as the people they despise. There was an interesting article in the South China Morning Post about a reluctance to discuss matters in Hong Kong because it has become so polarized, and people fear the disapproval/reaction of their peers. Support for the pulling of the extradition bill was never universal, but most people seemed to see the rationality of the fear behind it. But the more violent the actions and more tenuous their justifications become, the more they are going to prove divisive. Trying to get a consensus on what and what isn't acceptable influence for Beijing in an already divided Democracy movement is almost going to do the job of Beijing for it.
The Independent have a article where Boris is considering sending out troops into Yemen. What f**king foreign policy?
Tories literally destroy lives.
Sorry posted to wrong article. But our foreign policy just doesn't exist. Johnson will kiss the arse of any dictator.
China is the most authoritarian, oppressive regime in the world. It is beyond any doubt that China is the real threat to Western values in the world.
And yet, the Western media has been strangely silent on the whole Hong Kong protesters. I've even seen pundits flat out condemn what are protests for all the values that we hold dear. Even this editorial seems strangely reticent on the issue, with a tone at times suggesting the protesters are in the wrong for standing up to a brutal, murderous, amoral regime!
The public need to know why this issue is not receiving the same attention as protests in Iran, Syria and Libya did. Why do human rights in those areas matter more than those in Hong Kong? Why are politicians and the media condoning (correctly) airstrikes on Asssad, sanctioning the Mullahs, and putting Putin out into the cold, while still flattering, appeasing and grovelling before Beijing's Winnie the Pooh? Why are sanctions against the Iran so important, but not against China?
You need to watch the hyperbole or else you look ridiculous.
No, it isn't hyperbole. China likes to present a very sanitized image of itself to the world, which you have clearly fallen for, but it's a brutal regime that stifles all dissent. It curtails all information, monitors everything that citizens do, and engages in horrific torture and violence. They enact this violence against a billion human lives. The scale of it is disgusting. What's more, those regimes you mentioned? They are supported in turn by China. Same for the brutal regimes in Africa that are kept in business by Chinese loans and subsidies.
So yes — China is the most authoritarian, oppressive regime in the world, and is the greatest threat to the values of freedom and democracy. The regime should be sanctioned, castigated and refused admittance into civilization until the people of China are free. Your equivocation on this issue is beloved by the CCP, and it's this equivocation that will be our downfall.
1. China would wipe the floor with us if we dare apply sanctions on them.
2. What do you mean by China being an abhorrent, murderous regime. Is it the death penalty (still used by 57 other countries)? Their internment of Uyghurs? How is that worse than US Middle East foreign policy (who, by the way, still haven't closed Guantanamo)?
3. How many protesters have been killed, if any? The HK police force have been relatively lenient thus far and the right of HK people to demonstrate has still been upheld. How on earth are rubber bullets and tear gas more morally abhorrent than drone strikes to warrant sanctions?
You need to take the previous contributor's advice about watching your hyperbole.
Mrs Thatcher let the Hong Kong people down badly in 1997. Contrary to popular opinion, there was no requirement to hand back Hng Kong or Kowloon, only the New Territories, and the Chinese would have been willing to extend that deal. Reports say the Chinese were flabbergasted when Thatcher wanted a meeting to discuss the handover of the entire colony. And with the current clown as "our leader", we stand no chance of being a nation of substance ever again
Who told you that? I never saw any such reports.
Really ? There were no such reports , if you had ever been to the demarcation line between owned and leased territory you would have known there was never any other option than total handover. The Chinese were very clear that no renewal was permissible and to save the NT citizens from being handed direct to one country one system a deal was done.
I am only surprised its lasted this long .
How is being a colony equals to being a nation of substance? Following your logic, the opium war (when the treaty was originally established) also equals human-rights and democracy?!
I could see this coming the day control was returned to China.
Welcome to Northern Ireland circa 1969-1970
Those were " baton rounds " ... not bullets; remember?
whataboutery..if you like i will ask my Chinese wife to translate that for you
The trite characterization - "whataboutery" - is the reflex response of those called out on their hypocrisy.
Translate that into Chinese for your wife.
Taking liberties away from relatively free people will prove very challenging. If they refuse to be governed then the only way will be to defeat and crush them.
This is true - it's China, don't rule it out , currently they are losing face , never do that in an asian society unless you invite retribution .
The Chinese government can't afford to lose face, it would have severe ramifications on the mainland.
Somehow I don't think this will end well.
They are absolutely caught in a no-win situation.
They can’t dole out freedom for Hong Kong without being forced to justify why the rest of China doesn’t deserve a similar trajectory towards democratic ideals.
They can’t get nasty without drawing lots of unwanted attention on their nasty side.
The only real solution for them is face-losing climb-downs, not just in Hong Kong but across China. It is hard to see that happening.
I'm quite sick of the subtle manipulations disguised in seemingly unbiased reporting:
" Many who were largely apathetic about the original issues are furious at the behaviour of politicians and police, but views are polarising: others are angered by or fearful of the disruption." A seemingly balanced comment, but subtly implying: MORE people are angry at the police. How can you possibly know?!!
"A small but growing number in this leaderless movement has turned to force, mostly against property, but also against police." A seemingly balanced comment, but subtly left out the most important information: they also beat innocent, helpless civilian bystanders including elderlies, damaged their cars! (while trying to stop people filming!) It is awfully easy to just forget this!
"A small but growing number" -- Yes, it is a small number of protesters who are engaging in violence. But, is it not also only 'a small number' of police (possibly) used excessive force? Rubber bullets and teargas are absolutely appropriate measures.
I used to denote to Guardian. No more. Full of self-righteousness but loose on facts. Can't be trusted any more.
Beijing won't send in the troops, because there is no need - why bother? HK has absolutely ZERO possibility to break away, being right next to the mainland. No troops were used in 2014. No troops will be used now. Dramatising the situation for what purpose? Only to set the protesters up, to prolong the conflict. It's just irresponsible and disgusting grand stand of self-righteousness.
Are you paid to write this? How much?
I think about "Wu Mao"...
Well, just tail me and sniff it out!
We must understand that Russia is not really "expansive" in Ukraina (according to themselves). They are just reclaiming.
China is not really expansive either - they are just reclaiming. And China will be polite about it. Offering the Brits to go home. They will probably compensate for it.
The big problem is not HK. The big thing is Taiwan.
There is nation-building involved. It is military strategical control involved. And it is a question to the west involved (what made us drop anchor at all in the first place to define rules)?
HK is easy (it was a leasing-deal). Ukraine is not so easy but practical. But Taiwan is very complicated - because that "deal" includes a lot of power-games of old. Tawan is the inversed Cuba of the east.
HK is just a test-bed. Like Tibet was a more local test-bed before.
The interesting politics of border movements and shit used to belong to Europe with 2 WWs - until the idea of EU made stuff more stable back in the 20th century. Now the interesting politics of borders are all in Asia. Including that India and Pakistan are currently rattling the idea of Kashmir.
I do not think that the west will bother to engage in a WW3 that does not involve us as the source and protagonist. We will let these thing work themselves span out regionally.
Just look at the US back at WW2 - it took them Pearl Harbor to jack it up to feel "personal" about it. It took 9/11 to make the west to feel "personal" about it.
The emotional arument for another Falkland war does not exist any longer.
We are just watching the swan-song of the HK lease-deal running out.
Taiwan is a bigger problem. But saying that - how Trump treats Puerto Rico may actually cause this shuffle of power to defuse. To not care at all about people may prevent wars.
To use the solution of Brexiters - "if you do not like it - just move to another place".
To be fair, its still far safer in Hong Kong then the US, where mass murder is rife.
The debate is about freedom, not crime levels.
Well, to measure safety against USA as the standard is a bit unfair. Over in USA children feel a sense of safety for being trained so well in prepping for mass-shooting events as normal life.
Depends what colour you are.
Why can't Beijing wait till 2017 to extradite people from Hong Kong?
Beijing is clearly provoking this protest so that they have an excuse to invade HK>
I meant 2047
Er, they own HK.
What you even mean by "invade HK"? PLA has been in HK since 1997, do you call that invasion too? So UK navy enters North Ireland is also an invasion by your logic? Please get your facts right before commenting.
And this editorial says nothing to denounce violence. It is ridiculous. You have to obey a police officer. If you don't, you will be arrested, no matter right or wrong - that is to be decided later in court. This is common sense in a society with rule of law. HK protesters obviously do not have this simple knowledge, but are the editors at the Guardian also as ignorant?
Obey obey obey obey obey obey
I thought the Guardian was blocked in China?
If you can't win with peaceful protests, you won't win with violence.
The harsher policing, assuming it doesn't get any worse, is really a minor concern in comparison with the punitive justice HK's judicial system will be required by Beijing to mete out to the hundreds if not thousands of protestors who end up in court. Hong Kong's government will of course take pains to emphasize throughout that the judiciary in Hong Kong are fully independent and that the protestors will receive completely fair hearings, "依法" - "in accordance with the law".
But no-one will be deceived. Justice in Hong Kong is already dead, and the place that in Chinese means "fragrant harbour" will soon be a stinking pit of repression courtesy of the Chinese Communist Party's by now all-too-familiar barbaric methods of governing and control.
The police won't be a real problem once a PLA unit moves into HK. They're getting ready. We'll definitely see dead people, then.
will be required by Beijing to mete out to the hundreds if not thousands of protestors who end up in court
So, a bit like the reprisals after the London riots then, only better targeted and less severe.
Why the hell is this such a big story?
I'm sure in London, the police didn't make up crimes.
Sign in or create your Guardian account to recommend a comment