13 ms·

Military response is not being considered. Original Article: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3019007/chinese-officials-scramble-deliver-new-ho

• IIAOPSW 7y ago
  Take it with a grain of salt. SCMP is owned by Jack Ma. Jack Ma isn't going to die on this hill even if he agrees with HK. He's going to do what the PRC asks of him. SCMP have maintained reasonable independence from the mainland so far. But if ever there was a time for the PRC to pull strings and use SCMP for disinformation, now would be it.
  • analyst74 7y ago
    Wouldn't claiming non-military involvement embolden the protesters?
    • duxup 7y ago
      Not sure the protesters would do much differently until they saw military action, or lack of it. I don't think a news story changes much.
      • loyukfai 7y ago
        Many of the front-line protesters seem to be willing to give up their lives to confront the HK government. They broke into the LegCo building on 1/July, if the police force hasn't withdrawn, probably lots of blood would have been shed. Whether one agrees or not, many of the youth do not see much, if any, hope in Hong Kong under the current leadership. These people would rather go "scorched earth" (well, probably not Syrian-style scorched earth, yet) than to be appeased with empty promises, again.
    • flukus 7y ago
      Which would then give them an excuse to send in the military.
    • my_username_is_ 7y ago
      Protesters are already facing threats of physical violence, so saying that there won't be overt military action isn't likely to change many minds. Dozens have been injured in altercations with the Hong Kong police department since protests started last month. There have been several accusations of police brutality, coming from both protesters and journalists. There are also accusations that the police are already using the PLA or other forces from the mainland to bolster their ranks, but it's hard for me to tell how likely that is too be true. The primary pieces of evidence that I hear are officers covering or wearing incorrect identification numbers, and officers speaking little/no Cantonese & speaking Mandarin instead.
  • bllguo 7y ago
    could we address the implication here more critically? what logical reason is there for violence and bloodshed? it feels like us westerners are so prone to caricature the Chinese government as some kind of cartoonish villain. to me the CCP is coldly rational, and I don't see the reasoning here for them escalating the conflict.
    • komali2 7y ago
      They're at least as cartoonishly villainesque as early Nazi Germany given that they have reeducation camps for minorities they don't like.
      • logicchains 7y ago
        There's a key difference in that the camps are actually about reeducation/brainwashing (or at least forced conversion away from Islam), as opposed to systematic slaughter of said minorities.
        • PavlovsCat 7y ago
          > as opposed to systematic slaughter of said minorities. By "early Nazis"? No. And the purpose isn't restricted to the people in them, it goes way beyond murder. > While the separation of inmates into categories was merely a tactical-organisatory measure for the the purpose of administration of the camps, the arbitrariness of committal demonstrates the essential principle of the institution as such. The existance of a political opposition is just a pretext for the concentration camp system, and its purpose is not achieved when the population more or less voluntarily conforms as consequence of the most monstrous deterrence, that is, to give up its political rights. The arbitrariness has the purpose to deprive those under the totalitarian regime of all their rights as citizens, which finally become as outlawed [vogelfrei] in their own country as otherwise only the stateless and homeless. The deprivation of humans of their rights, the killing of the juridical person in them is just a precondition of their being totally controlled, for which even voluntary agreement is a hindrance. -- Hannah Arendt That was true in China even before those camps, and that people with a cartoon understanding of history, concentration camps, Nazism, just about anything related to this, roll their eyes at "making" someone a "villain" is as predictable as it's their own fault.
  • ksec 7y ago
    It may also be worth pointing out, Jack Ma is also a member of CCP.
  • calyth2018 7y ago
    LOL. You wouldn't need military intervention to make Hong Kong buckle. You'd just fake some water and food situation, and cut it off. In this heat, they'll start rationing water within days. I'm old enough to remember the water rationing under the British colonial rule, and even then, that was the tail end of it.
• jillesvangurp 7y ago
  I think they are smart enough to realize that military intervention would blow the lid of this thing domestically and create a huge outrage internationally. The Tienanmen protests was the closest they got to revolution since Mao created the modern China state. The only reason military intervention worked at the time was because they had a local population with an active memory of Mao's oppression and total control of media. Lots of communist regimes collapsed at the time and the Chinese got pretty close as well. They don't want a repeat of that and they have plenty of places across China where they've been working hard on keeping a lid on local unrest. Hong Kong was in British hands throughout last century and has an active memory of how things used to be before the handover. Also, they remember Tienanmen. There are numerous ties to the outside world in Hong Kong as well as to the rest of China because of family ties, trade, local freedom of press, etc. A military intervention would be impossible to hide domestically. Spin off protests in e.g. Bejing and other Chinese cities are at this point unlikely but not unimaginable if they don't contain this. Even if this doesn't happen, the mere possibility of this might be enough to weaken the current leadership and the fear of that is very much informing current actions. Tienanmen remains a taboo topic in China out of fear of something like this happening again. The last thing they want is this spreading. They don't fear revolution as much as political leadership change. Xi Ling Ping's grip on leadership is being weakened by this. He and the people he put in positions of power need this to go away. The sooner the better. So, what I expect is the Chinese finding a creative way to de-escalate this such that Hong Kong goes back to business as usual. It will probably involve a way of sacrificing Carrie Lam, who at this point is the very definition of a lame duck and the focal point of the protests. Speculation of her stepping down has been rampant for weeks. Probably they are slowly coming to the conclusion that keeping her around is not helping the situation. Removing her would allow the protests to calm down and allow business as usual to resume. I imagine business as usual sounds pretty good in Bejing at this point. I'm guessing that as this drags on, they are warming to getting rid of her sooner rather than later. I'd be very surprised if she's still around a month from now.
  • deehouie 7y ago
    Let me gently suggest you read up on Hong Kong a little bit more. No need to go back 40 yrs. Just last 5. The Umbrella movement in 2014 had greater participation, attracted much more international media attention, subsequently wreaked much greater havoc in the territory, and lasted much longer than the current protest. Yet, the Chief Executive at the time, Mr. C. Y. Leung, did not resign. Go figure.