Big Lychee, Various Sectors

Another NatSec 47 trial week. A thread of charges against individuals.

WaPo examines the unfortunate juxtaposition between the ‘spiffy’ [sic] Hello Hong Kong relaunch campaign and the city’s transformation in the NatSec era…

Civil society has been decimated. Pro-democracy politicians and activists are mostly in jail, in exile or too fearful to speak out. Press freedom has been eroded. More people are leaving, or planning to, than coming in. Lawyers facing intimidation and threats have fled. The million people who defiantly marched in 2019, and the 600,000 who voted in the democratic camp primary a year later, have been silenced; even peaceful protest has withered.

HK Free Press op-ed on why you won’t get an independent Covid inquiry from the Hong Kong government.

Some links from the weekend…

William Nee in The Diplomat describes China’s ‘GONGOs’ – state-run quasi-NGOs that back Beijing’s human-rights record at the UN. Parts of this sound familiar…

While China – nominally a socialist state – insists to the world that it cares about labor rights, Wang and Huang are facing the charge of “inciting subversion of state power.”

…China’s government has justified its persecution by claiming that the defenders are carrying out their important work only “under the banner” of human rights and instead have ulterior motives. Since the government rejects the concept of an independent judiciary, seeing it as a “Western” plot, the party-state has no problem securing convictions in criminal proceedings.

There are 10 different ‘One China’ policies/principles. Can you name them all today? An explanation of the varieties and their histories from Carnegie Endowment. Quick summary of the Tendentious Ten from the author.

Academic James Lin offers a better-than-average explanation of Taiwan’s (non-)status. 

Over time, much of the world realized that the ROC’s imagined control of all of China was just that, imagined. As a result, Beijing has become less adamant about asserting its claim to be China’s rightful government, a question which seemed to be a relic of the 1950s and 1960s. Instead, it has become more insistent about asserting that Taiwan is a part of China, which has increasingly become the key issue with respect to Taiwan’s status.

…For Beijing, enforcing their vision of “One China” today is no longer about a diplomatic battle against a rival regime, but rather about repressing the popular will of the Taiwanese people. Ironically, present-day PRC interests have aligned with historical KMT interests. Whereas in the past, it was Chiang Kai-shek and the KMT elite that would not stand for any notion of a separate Taiwanese identity under the ROC, today it is Beijing that feels threatened by that same Taiwanese identity.

Noema on Politburo member Wang Huning’s mission to craft a new approach to Taiwan… 

If Wang were to frame the link with Taiwan as shared civilizational kinship instead of unification under Beijing’s political system, it would open up a prospect for resolving the Taiwan dispute through the loose structure of a “commonwealth.” 

…the next generation in China would be far more amenable to this kind of pragmatic accommodation than to being drafted into yet another cycle of exhausting and diverting “patriotic struggle” against the West that would follow any attempt at forceful reunification.

No mention of what the Taiwanese might think, or whether the CCP could envisage a mainly symbolic arrangement that leaves Taiwan outside its control. It certainly couldn’t with Hong Kong.

This is turning out to be NatSec Year. From the last couple of days…

Following opening statements, the pan-dem primary-election trial moves on to witnesses’ testimony next week. The prosecution is presenting vast quantities of evidence – much of it statements in various forms openly made in public during 2020. A random sample…

Accused pan-dems pleading guilty and turning prosecution witnesses will probably just be confirming that the discussion of election plans and rationales behind them did indeed take place – as we all know they did, because they were reported, with little fuss or fanfare (let alone arrests), at the time. Little fuss or fanfare because, whatever else the broader public might have thought, few perceived anything illegal about the primary-election plan.

In the Stand News sedition trial, prosecutors cite and dispute the veracity of articles on police violence in 2019. It seemed true then, but it’s not true now? And seditious?

Two members of Returning Valiant are sentenced to five years for ‘conspiracy to incite subversion’ through street booths, media interviews and…

…two Instagram accounts and one Facebook page, which [Judge] Kwok said could spread their beliefs to “an unlimited amount of people.”.

More here…

Chan’s individual case was also found to be “serious” because … he provided English interpretation for the group’s press conference. Kwok said “it’s rather clear that he was trying to promote their ideas to international members”.

Despite all this, compulsory school field trips to the Mainland, with a heavy dose of NatSec, will not be as extensive as pro-Beijing people would like…

A day tour to the Dongjiang Column Memorial Hall will focus on the anti-Japanese resistance and the importance of national security, including a visit to the Museum of Cantonese Opera Art.

Students will learn that maintaining “cultural security” is a key foundation for maintaining “national and ethnic unity.”

…Most parents are reluctant to send their children as they said “the trip is too short and meaningless.”

Maybe long and meaningless trips would be better – it’s not easy to get high-schoolers enthused by ‘cultural security’.

A little reading for the weekend: Adam Tooze on China’s real-estate bubble…

…Rogoff and Yang estimate that 43 percent of all homes in China had been built since 2010, 68 percent since 2000 and 88 percent since 1990. If you put this in relation to total population it implies that in a single generation, China has built enough homes to house a billion people. 

…So, simply to stabilize the Chinese real estate market, not to unleash a new boom but to clean up the most serious overhang from the last few years of excess, will require a commitment of in the order of 5 percent of GDP even if the resources are perfectly targeted. That is a measure of the challenge ahead.

I was wondering when this would come up. A British parliamentary committee accuses HSBC of aiding the suppression of Hong Kong migrants’ human rights by barring BNO passport holders below retirement age from accessing MPF funds (in line with a petty and vindictive Hong Kong government directive)…

The inquiry concluded that HSBC’s decision to follow the directive has not only left Hong Kong residents unable to create new and safe lives for themselves in the UK, but also means the bank is complicit in human rights abuses.

…The APPG is also urging the UK government to demand that banks including HSBC unfreeze the accounts of political dissidents, condemn their support for the national security law, and find a solution that would allow BNO residents to withdraw their pension funds.

For more on HSBC’s dilemma, see Matthew 6:24.

HK Police retention/recruitment problems leave force numbers 2,900 down. We hear a lot about teachers quitting, but far less about cops. (Do ex-cops get their retirement funds if they move to the UK?)

And the government takes issue with a US lawmaker’s criticism of the NatSec 47 trial, insisting that the defendants will get a fair trial. The world will see for itself, depending on whether the judges in the jury-less court swallow the prosecution’s contention that trying to win an election is a threat to national security.

The Hong Kong government’s hypersensitive reaction to criticism reminds me of this comment by independent Russian journalist Alexei Venediktov: ‘people scream when they’re in pain’…

The latest on the NatSec 47 trial. The pan-dems devised an elaborate (maybe overwrought, maybe fanciful – but 100% constitutional) plan to use an election to peacefully gain some real political power for the popular opposition. Or, in the plain terms used in a normal democratic system, win. It’s clear the authorities want to portray this as sinister and evil by accentuating the concept of ‘conspiracy’ and the prospect of mayhem if pan-dems had gained enough Legislative Council seats to reject a Budget. What the prosecution can’t do is establish that the attempt was illegal. Because it wasn’t.

Thoughts on the trial from Nathan Law.

The Hong Kong government won’t allow an independent public inquiry into its handling of Covid. But here’s one anyway from Dr Owens – and admirably pithy it is, too… 

Government policies have consistently been at odds with evolving scientific evidence. Why?

It is important to release the minutes of these meetings

…The Hong Kong response focused on top down control rather than education

It was characterised by silo thought with unquestioning fealty to the prevailing political narrative 

Politicians and the Health minister criticised those who advocated for evidence based policies

After a two-year wait, the NatSec trial of pan-democrats starts. The alleged crime is ‘conspiracy to commit subversion’ – trying to gain constitutional political power peacefully through an election. 

Paid court-goers line up to get (if not use) public-gallery passes so there are fewer seats for regular members of the public (and defendants’ family members). At least the press can get in.

In The Guardian…

…prosecutors told the West Kowloon magistrates court that the accused had conspired to seriously interfere, disrupt or undermine the duties and functions of the Hong Kong government, “with a view to subverting the state power”.

…Most have been in jail for almost two years, having been denied bail. Legal observers have criticised the national security law for reversing the presumption of bail for defendants.

From CNN…

John Burns, emeritus professor at the University of Hong Kong, said the trial of the democrats is a “test of will” of Beijing’s capacity to completely wipe out organized opposition in Hong Kong.

Burns said arresting the democrats and pressing charges against them was meant to both intimidate and eliminate the opposition, either by chasing them out of Hong Kong into exile or by jailing them.

“It is a process of removing them. By shutting down political parties, shutting down trade unions, they are shutting down the basis of the support for organized opposition,” Burns said.

The NY Times…

“It’s hard to overestimate the enormity of this case, because it’s basically meant to be a knockout blow to Hong Kong’s peaceful political mainstream opposition,” said Thomas Kellogg, the executive director of the Center for Asian Law.

“This is a real choice by the Hong Kong government and Beijing,” he continued. “They could have focused on people who were talking about independence, for example, or people who had been more harshly critical of Hong Kong government policy and Beijing’s policy toward Hong Kong. Instead, they have gone after every sector of civic life.”

More from Tom Kellogg…

…the defendants are guilty of nothing more than organizing a primary election, as is their right under internat’l human rights law. They should be found not guilty, and prosecutors trying the case should be shamed by the court. That won’t happen, of course. 

Jemimah Steinfeld at Index on Censorship loses patience with the cautious phrasing of the big news outlets and gives it both barrels…

The 47 are walking into court with their guilt presumed.

…This is a show trial masquerading as justice. 

 From ChinaFile, an updated full list of NatSec arrests and convictions.

In short, the trial is likely to reflect badly on a city trying to convince the world it is free and open. To Hongkongers, the dissonance or contradiction between the political prosecutions and jailings and the Hello Hong Kong tourism campaign is both absurd and tragic. But not too puzzling if you can grasp the new-look ‘One Country, Two Systems’ model: Beijing is in charge of this stuff, leaving Hong Kong officials to flail helplessly doing that stuff.

Starting today: the NatSec ‘subversion’ trial of pan-democrats for trying to win Legislative Council elections (that never even took place). Background here…

The defendants say they have been targeted for normal opposition politics…

Al Jazeera’s report. More from Reuters…

Prosecutors have described the primary election – held to select the strongest candidates to contest an upcoming legislative election – as a “vicious plot” to subvert the government and to wreak “mutual destruction” on the city by taking control of the city’s parliament.

Eric Lai comments in The Diplomat… 

Some may argue that Hong Kong is still different from the autocratic regimes named above, because it does not have a kangaroo court. Yet, the old narrative of Hong Kong’s judicial independence and the rule of law is no longer persuasive in light of this political trial. 

The people lining up to fill limited seats in the public gallery seem to have little idea what’s going on.

Whether you call the courts ‘kangaroo’ or not, with unseemly legal actions in progress (Jimmy Lai in due course), it’s not a great time to launch a tourism campaign. The SCMP on PR gurus’ reactions to the ‘cheap and tacky’ ‘Hello Hong Kong’ exercise…

Another veteran brand strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, described the campaign as “terrible, vapid and empty” compared with the efforts of other cities.

…He said in a worse scenario the concept could get twisted, as it could simply be put next to “a bad story” and create terrible imagery.

And on cue…

Some links to start the week…

Very watchable Singaporean 2022 film Ren Yin on a diverse selection of people who have – so far – chosen to stay in Hong Kong.

The Guardian on public anger following the wave of Covid deaths in China…

Across China, hundreds of thousands of families are in mourning. Many are now questioning their faith in the government. The episode has seemingly not affected Xi’s power but it has dented his reputation. A 32-year-old man in Guangzhou says he was once a patriot but is now disillusioned. “Maybe I should thank Covid for making me clearly see through the whole political and economic system.”

Optimized is the new harmonized: Beijing’s image-creators rewrite the sudden end of zero-Covid…

How does an image-obsessed political system deal with the fallout after so many months of insisting that the costs of strict lockdown must be borne by all with a sense of sacrifice? Deny and reframe.

…State media have actively pushed the narrative that the sudden dismantling of rigid Covid control measures was simply a skillful re-tooling of existing policies. And one of the most important tools in this reframing process has been the phrase “optimize and adjust epidemic prevention and control measures”.

…The CCP invests so much of its credibility and legitimacy in the idea that it governs effectively and “scientifically,” always for the benefit of the people, that the story of success is always written before the outcome.

Slate asks everyone to stop calling Xi Jinping ‘President’…

Why is this mistranslation pernicious and problematic? Because it allows Beijing to tell two radically different stories. In China, General Secretary Xi Jinping rules over a tightly controlled, illiberal system. But internationally, President Xi Jinping can advocate globalization, openness, and free trade.

Strictly for military/maritime/Southeast Asia geeks, a long US Naval War Studies paper on Malaysian and Indonesian responses to China’s growing presence in the SCS…

What might at first seem to be among China’s greatest strengths—its employment of an immense, integrated maritime capability to coerce Southeast Asian claimants into acquiescing to its expansive claims—rapidly is becoming its greatest weakness. China’s efforts to expand its control into the southern South China Sea has become a significant strategic vulnerability in terms of its relations with Indonesia and Malaysia.

SOAS paper on trying to analyze China’s Ukraine policy.

For fellow steampunk fans – this thing is real.

The Hello Hong Kong tourism hub-zone rehab-cum-kickstart scheme is launched by a row of men in suits. Trying to be charitable here, but: the dancers, the muzak, the graphics, the emcee saying everything in three languages, the all-masked men-in-suits audience, the desperation behind an offer of 500,000 free air tickets. 

In fairness, my mind sort of drifted after the Chief Executive intoned ‘…Hong Kong, the premier mice destination of Asia’. (Those aren’t mice, John – they’re rats. And not as in ‘tests’.) Maybe it gets better. But it looks like a box-ticking exercise by HK Tourism Board floozies out of their minds on CBD gummies and civil servants impatient to retire. No flair, no surprises, nothing remotely adventurous. Depressing. (Though on the bright side, it might fail to attract zillions of visitors. Actually, there’s a good question: who exactly was the target audience for this?)

The CE’s personal warm welcome. And the official Hello Hong Kong promo vid . (What, no rickshaws?)

The 500,000 tickets were, it says here, bought by the Airport Authority, whose boss said…

…each visitor with a free ticket is expected to bring two or three companions with them, meaning the giveaway could attract some 1.5 million travellers in total, accounting for some 10 percent of the arrivals expected in the coming half a year.

By ‘two or three’, we mean ‘one’ – let’s hope. 

It gets weirder, or at least more complicated. The government will distribute 80,000 free tickets to Hong Kong residents so they can ‘share the joy’ – by going somewhere else. And another 80,000 will go to ‘Greater Bay Area’ folk, so they can come to Hong Kong and then go somewhere else, or something.

Some out-of-area links…

Spot the brain cell: Jordan Klepper of The Late Show interviewing Trump fans in South Carolina.

A thread on the Wagner Group’s human (as in released convicts) wave tactics in Ukraine.

It seems the truly hip and groovy among us have the most ancient rice cookers. This guy’s model (on the left below) is 25 years old, but to me it looks more like the space-age touch-screen Internet-linked ones of today. That’s because mine is on the right. It has two buttons: one to open the lid, and one that toggles between ‘cooking’ and ‘keeping warm’ – for actual ‘off’ you unplug the whole thing. No microchips. No beeping noises. No LED or indeed any screen. Virtually no moving parts. Still working fine after all these decades. 

A mixed, something-for-everyone, bag…

The Intercept on Apple/Tencent’s Internet censorship (blocking of GitLab on Safari browser) in Hong Kong…

While Tencent provides some public explanation of its criteria for blocking a website, its decision-making process is completely opaque, and the published censorship standards are extremely vague, including offenses like “endangering national security” and “undermining national unity.”

Everyone agrees that Impossible City by Karen Cheung and Indelible City by Louisa Lim are superb books. Except that someone begs to differ.

A ‘pragmatic dreamer’ launches a new overseas-based Hong Kong news outlet.

US-China Perception Monitor on how CGTN’s global public opinion ‘think tank’ produces biased survey results.

…respondents to these surveys are likely recruited solely through CGTN websites and social media … they report high levels of support for abstract concepts related to Xi’s speech, such as ‘resolutely opposing all forms of hegemonism and power politics’.

Howard French in Foreign Policy on China’s demographic-economic challenges…

…the sooner China comes to terms with the truth that old-fashioned, head-to-head great-power competition of the type that involves big, continual increases in expenditures on weaponry and hard power—as the country has undertaken in recent years—will condemn large swaths of its population to something well short of developed-world living standards, then the better it will be for its people.

…Failure to come up with new national objectives to replace the goal of the last several decades, building the world’s largest economy, will mean that China will look in other, less peaceful directions for validation of the party and nation, with an armed attempt to take over Taiwan as the most obvious answer.

Foreign Affairs on the backfiring of Beijing’s ‘tendency to prioritize territorial interests over strategic objectives’ – how to lose friends and alienate people. A frequent pro-Beijing op-ed contributor in the SCMP makes a similar point…

…China has played its diplomatic hand poorly. It got arrogant and impatient, and overreached, playing right into the US campaign to isolate and demonise it. Now it is reaping the whirlwind of its foreign policies and actions in Asia.

…countries from Australia to Japan and from India to Indonesia are rapidly coalescing into an anti-China security camp.

Which brings us to the Czech Republic’s new President calling his Taiwan counterpart – and Beijing erupting in an explosion of mouth-frothing and hurt-the-feelings. A supposed Wang Huning re-think of policy notwithstanding, the trend seems to be for more countries to nudge closer to normalized relations with Taiwan…

Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee sees no need for the idea of an independent inquiry into the government’s handling of the Covid pandemic. His reasons – as summarized here – are not exactly convincing… 

1) the virus was new; 2) US and UK had more deaths; 3) the pandemic changed fast; 4) the gov has learned lessons and found new ways.

We had an expert committee report (and health minister’s resignation) following SARS in 2003. But Hong Kong now has a ‘patriots-only’ form of governance with a more top-down and authoritarian style and an opposition-free legislature – not to mention a less critical press. Remember, this new system was implemented to disabuse Hong Kong people of the idea that the government should be accountable to them (and thus might have a duty to acknowledge faults). It is even more unthinkable that it would accommodate implicit criticism of local policies that reflected Beijing’s ideological zero-Covid approach.

But the main reason we will not get an independent inquiry is that the new-look Hong Kong system of administration is not going to do independent anything. The city is being brought into line with the CCP’s Leninist principles that specifically reject ‘separation of powers’ and ‘checks and balances’, or anything that challenges the ruling party’s monopoly of power. Behind the new laws, structures and slogans, that is the new order.

In his press conference, the CE was also asked a question with (no, not on face masks) a less predictable answer: what will the government do with the sprawling community isolation facilities at Penny’s Bay and elsewhere?

It will be interesting to see if officials have the imagination or even desire to put these huge and pricey complexes to good use. They could, for example, lease them out cheaply to whatever individuals or small businesses wanted them, with as few rules as possible – for any use as housing, offices, workshops, street food, retail or whatever people wanted. A golden opportunity for some good old fashioned laissez-faire, and maybe an exciting way to divert public attention from more depressing matters. But don’t hold your breath.

Hong Kong Customs will fearlessly pursue cannabidiol products after they become illegal – officially classified as a dangerous drug – on February 1…

Penalties include up to life in prison and HK$5 million (US$638,000) in fines for importing, exporting or producing CBD. Possession of the substance can result in a sentence of up to seven years and HK$1 million (US$128,000) in fines.

Which suddenly reminds me that I bought a pack of CBD gummies out of curiosity a few months ago at a discount food place in Central. So, in the interests of science and/or not being arrested tomorrow, I try them out. 

As I suspected: there is no noticeable effect at all. (Some people say the stuff ‘helps them relax’ – but since I am never not relaxed, that’s irrelevant.) This is homeopathic cannabis. You get more of a buzz eating spinach. It belongs in the same category as tree tea oil, aloe vera, coconut water and all the other fads.

In other countries, it might conceivably be considered a legal high; in Hong Kong, it’s an illegal gummy. (Quite nice gummies, by the way.)  In a place where you can get arrested for cartoons of sheep or playing a specific tune – and now having jelly candies – who needs drugs to distort your perception of reality?