21 ms·

I feel like the situation at hand is very different. Crimea, unlike Hong Kong, isn't an alpha+ city that is one of the most important financial hubs in the worl

I feel like the situation at hand is very different. Crimea, unlike Hong Kong, isn't an alpha+ city that is one of the most important financial hubs in the world. While capturing Crimea by RF was extremely reprehensible, there was not much at stake there for any side not directly involved in the conflict. All there was in Crimea situation is just a geopolitical projection of power. With Hong Kong, the stakes are way higher, and I don't think that straight up capture of Hong Kong (Crimea-style) will go over nearly as well. P.S. Also, not that it makes the situation any less reprehensible, keep in mind that heavy majority of Crimea population at the time of capture was ethnically Russian and was supportive of RF actions. Hong Kong residents, on the other hand, seem to be way less supportive of PRC.

jedberg 7y ago
The unfortunate truth is that Hong Kong isn't nearly as important to global banking as it once was. China has a done a really great job handicapping them, for this very reason. So that it would be easier to absorb them.
- filoleg 7y ago
  That's the real leverage. Hong Kong's true potential is still there to be uncovered, and people remember how flourishing it was back then. Imagine how it could all blow up to even higher highs if the PRC rule was completely gone from Hong Kong. I feel like if that gate opens in the near future (i know, wishful thinking), HK will have its new golden age, as companies and individuals will not need to worry about PRC influence on HK anymore.
  - bllguo 7y ago
    HK used to flourish because it was the access point between China and the West. If they completely severed ties with China there is no value proposition anymore... what "higher highs" are you anticipating, exactly?
    - filoleg 7y ago
      >If they completely severed ties with China there is no value proposition anymore Becoming independent from China != completely severing ties with China. Also, I think these days a better served purpose of HK is as the access point to the whole Asian/SEA region, rather than the access point to China alone. Also, HK seems to be (from an outsider perspective) one of the most (if not the most) "westernized" cities in the region, with the proliferation of English language and all, so I can totally see it becoming the central hub in the Asian/SEA region for a lot of companies from the west.
      - pishpash 7y ago
        What is it about post-colonial westerners that makes them not able to grok that the world, but especially Asia, no longer exists to serve westerners? Should there be a most "easternized" city in the heart of Europe that should have a prolific Mandarin speaker base?
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        dang 7y ago
        You've been repeatedly crossing into flamewar on these topics. We've asked you many times before not to do that, and even told you we'd ban you if you did it again. Would you please stop doing this on HN? It's abusive, no matter how wrong and ignorant others' comments are or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - bllguo 7y ago
        Hm. I guess I just don't see China allowing that kind of relationship with an independent HK. HK is also so incredibly close to China geographically, economically, and even culturally that it's hard to wrap my mind around the concept of HK independence. HK as an Asia/SEA hub is a reasonable point, but Singapore already serves that role and is much less reliant on China.
- pishpash 7y ago
  China didn't handicap shit. Hong Kong's rise in the first place was entirely due to China's self-inflicted communism and external sanctions in the first decades after the Revolution. (Shanghai was the Paris of the East before that.) Ever since that stopped, Hong Kong was no longer as important by default. Hong Kong's special status was always predicated on somehow China failing, including now (rule of law, etc.). This is why the underlying sentiment of Hong Kong independence is especially offensive to Chinese sensibilities.
- Mikeb85 7y ago
  They didn't handicap them. HK's status was entirely based on the fact that it was the entry to do business with China. Shanghai and China becoming more open (for example, foreign investors being able to invest in Chinese securities) made HK less important, and the Umbrella Revolution made HK less relevant (bankers don't like risk). Edit - And this most recent round of demonstrations is the nail in the coffin. No business would ever do business in HK now with the political uncertainty, easier to simply set up shop in Shanghai or form a JV.
dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago
> While capturing Crimea by RF was extremely reprehensible, there was not much at stake there for any side not directly involved in the conflict. There was something else still: the population of Crimea was mostly Russian. Like, really Russian. Using only Russian language, calling hryvnas rubles, and in general feeling Russian. Many of these people actually liked the idea of Crimea being a part of Russia (at least before the invasion - things changed a bit since then). In HK the situation is completely different: people know what kind of country China is, and will fight for whatever rights they still have.
- filoleg 7y ago
  I had briefly mentioned this in the "P.S." section of my original comment, but I appreciate you adding more concrete and specific examples.
- everybodyknows 7y ago
  The Tatar minority in Crimea, on the other hand, did not like the idea of being Russian subjects much at all. https://newrepublic.com/article/116814/crimean-tatars-primer-why-population-opposes-putin https://newrepublic.com/article/116814/crimean-tatars-primer...
  - Mikeb85 7y ago
    So a minority should dictate international relations? A minority that aren't even indigenous and whose only history of statehood was being a vassal of the Ottomans that captured and sold Slavs as slaves... Why should they dictate what happens between Ukraine or Russia?
    - inlined 7y ago
      The US has a lot of people whose history of statehood traces back to slavery. They still get a right to vote on their future.
      - Mikeb85 7y ago

jedberg 7y ago

The unfortunate truth is that Hong Kong isn't nearly as important to global banking as it once was. China has a done a really great job handicapping them, for this very reason. So that it would be easier to absorb them.

filoleg 7y ago
That's the real leverage. Hong Kong's true potential is still there to be uncovered, and people remember how flourishing it was back then. Imagine how it could all blow up to even higher highs if the PRC rule was completely gone from Hong Kong. I feel like if that gate opens in the near future (i know, wishful thinking), HK will have its new golden age, as companies and individuals will not need to worry about PRC influence on HK anymore.
- bllguo 7y ago
  HK used to flourish because it was the access point between China and the West. If they completely severed ties with China there is no value proposition anymore... what "higher highs" are you anticipating, exactly?
  - filoleg 7y ago
    >If they completely severed ties with China there is no value proposition anymore Becoming independent from China != completely severing ties with China. Also, I think these days a better served purpose of HK is as the access point to the whole Asian/SEA region, rather than the access point to China alone. Also, HK seems to be (from an outsider perspective) one of the most (if not the most) "westernized" cities in the region, with the proliferation of English language and all, so I can totally see it becoming the central hub in the Asian/SEA region for a lot of companies from the west.
    - pishpash 7y ago
      What is it about post-colonial westerners that makes them not able to grok that the world, but especially Asia, no longer exists to serve westerners? Should there be a most "easternized" city in the heart of Europe that should have a prolific Mandarin speaker base?
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - dang 7y ago
        You've been repeatedly crossing into flamewar on these topics. We've asked you many times before not to do that, and even told you we'd ban you if you did it again. Would you please stop doing this on HN? It's abusive, no matter how wrong and ignorant others' comments are or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - bllguo 7y ago
      Hm. I guess I just don't see China allowing that kind of relationship with an independent HK. HK is also so incredibly close to China geographically, economically, and even culturally that it's hard to wrap my mind around the concept of HK independence. HK as an Asia/SEA hub is a reasonable point, but Singapore already serves that role and is much less reliant on China.
pishpash 7y ago
China didn't handicap shit. Hong Kong's rise in the first place was entirely due to China's self-inflicted communism and external sanctions in the first decades after the Revolution. (Shanghai was the Paris of the East before that.) Ever since that stopped, Hong Kong was no longer as important by default. Hong Kong's special status was always predicated on somehow China failing, including now (rule of law, etc.). This is why the underlying sentiment of Hong Kong independence is especially offensive to Chinese sensibilities.
Mikeb85 7y ago
They didn't handicap them. HK's status was entirely based on the fact that it was the entry to do business with China. Shanghai and China becoming more open (for example, foreign investors being able to invest in Chinese securities) made HK less important, and the Umbrella Revolution made HK less relevant (bankers don't like risk). Edit - And this most recent round of demonstrations is the nail in the coffin. No business would ever do business in HK now with the political uncertainty, easier to simply set up shop in Shanghai or form a JV.

dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago

> While capturing Crimea by RF was extremely reprehensible, there was not much at stake there for any side not directly involved in the conflict. There was something else still: the population of Crimea was mostly Russian. Like, really Russian. Using only Russian language, calling hryvnas rubles, and in general feeling Russian. Many of these people actually liked the idea of Crimea being a part of Russia (at least before the invasion - things changed a bit since then). In HK the situation is completely different: people know what kind of country China is, and will fight for whatever rights they still have.

filoleg 7y ago
I had briefly mentioned this in the "P.S." section of my original comment, but I appreciate you adding more concrete and specific examples.
everybodyknows 7y ago
The Tatar minority in Crimea, on the other hand, did not like the idea of being Russian subjects much at all. https://newrepublic.com/article/116814/crimean-tatars-primer-why-population-opposes-putin https://newrepublic.com/article/116814/crimean-tatars-primer...
- Mikeb85 7y ago
  So a minority should dictate international relations? A minority that aren't even indigenous and whose only history of statehood was being a vassal of the Ottomans that captured and sold Slavs as slaves... Why should they dictate what happens between Ukraine or Russia?
  - inlined 7y ago
    The US has a lot of people whose history of statehood traces back to slavery. They still get a right to vote on their future.
    - Mikeb85 7y ago