EDITORIAL: Hong Kong leader’s belated move will not end public’s distrust

Many people in Hong Kong continue protesting vigorously against the government.

However, making formal concessions is not what the governments in Beijing and Hong Kong have to do now.

Instead, they need to get down to the heart of the problems that have led to the wave of unrest in the former British colony in recent months and carry out reforms to respect people’s freedom and autonomy.

Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam said Sept. 4 the extradition bill that set off a flurry of fierce civil protests in the semiautonomous Chinese territory will be formally withdrawn in the legislative council.

The move came far too late after three months of massive and angry street demonstrations that have pushed the situation into increasingly deeper chaos.

During the period, many dark scenes of clashes between protesting citizens and police have unfolded in the usually vibrant metropolis.

The unrest in the city has not just hurt its society and economy but also augmented people’s distrust of the local authority.

If the Hong Kong government had paid serious attention to what the protesters were saying from the beginning and sought dialogue with them, the situation would not have become so convoluted.

Much of the blame for the chaos should be placed on the local government.

In a televised speech to announce her decision to withdraw the bill, Lam said, “Let’s replace conflicts with conversations.”

It is, however, unclear whether this step alone will really calm the turmoil.

The demonstrators are now demanding five steps from the government, including the establishment of an independent fact-finding committee to look into acts of violence committed by police and the introduction of a democratic election system.

Withdrawing the bill only represents the least difficult step to take for the Chinese and Hong Kong governments.

At the root of the full-blown civil protest movement is people’s fear that Hong Kong society may be completely incorporated into the system for the Communist Party’s monopoly on power.

The ethos of freedom took root in Hong Kong when the city was under British rule. Its economy has been growing under a judicial system that places great importance on equality among citizens.

When Hong Kong was handed over to China in 1997, Beijing promised a “one country, two systems” approach to administration of the city as a gesture of respect for its history.

Over time, however, the Chinese government has taken a series of actions that unmistakably reflect Beijing’s intention to focus only on the “one country” part of the promise while gradually eroding the “two systems” part of the principle.

These actions have been intended as either tangible or intangible pressure on freedom of speech and economic activities in Hong Kong.

How the Hong Kong government has responded to the civil disturbance has also made abundantly clear that the local administration is under the Chinese government’s unchallengeable control. Many people in Hong Kong fear and reject the prospect of Hong Kong morphing into a society where the Communist Party has the final say on everything.

It has been reported that Beijing wants to calm the situation by Oct. 1, when it will celebrate the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China.

Top Chinese government officials have not ruled out the possibility of using armed force or other means for direct intervention in the crisis. But Beijing should immediately stop such high-handed attempts to intimidate Hong Kong protesters.

In her speech, Lam also pledged to create a new framework for dialogue with “people from all walks of life.”

She should immediately start leading the Hong Kong government’s efforts to have constructive talks with citizens on how it should respond to people’s views and opinions and how it should incorporate them into its policy initiatives, including the proposal to introduce a democratic election system.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Sept. 6