22 ms·

I don't think Beijing anticipated or endorsed this. In context of Lams leaked resignation remarks yesterday, it looks like Lam is going rogue. She's setting her

I don't think Beijing anticipated or endorsed this. In context of Lams leaked resignation remarks yesterday, it looks like Lam is going rogue. She's setting herself up to be replaced via disobedience, because all signs pointed to Emergency Regulations Ordinance being invoked if protest continues. Her legacy is already ruined, but I think she doesn't have the stomach to double down that far. Beijing specifically instructed Lam not to give in to any demands a week ago. Lam capitulating is Beijing capitulating, and Beijing is not going to capitulate with 70th anniversary coming up and activated mainland nationalism. Beijing is all in. For mainlanders, after how events have been portrayed by state media, Lam is basically acquiescing to terrorists. The situation is developing and I think there's a very narrow set of outcomes where this would not backfire spectacularly.

ephemeralism 7y ago
Do you have a source for this claim that Beijing instructed her to not give in to any demands?
- dirtyid 7y ago
  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-protests-china-exclusive/exclusive-amid-crisis-china-rejected-hong-kong-plan-to-appease-protesters-sources-idUSKCN1VK0H6 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-protests-china-e... >The Chinese central government rejected Lam’s proposal to withdraw the extradition bill and ordered her not to yield to any of the protesters’ other demands at that time, three individuals with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
dragonsh 7y ago
> I don't think Beijing anticipated or endorsed this. This is endorsed and approved by Beijing, she already declared the bill dead this is just a matter of wording. Legally it can be brought back as laws are always evolving and Hong Kong needs an extradition treaty with other jurisdiction including another system in its own country. For Mainland Chinese citizen the narrative will be altered, but will still be seen as symbolic defeat and for Hong Kong Chinese citizens it will be a symbolic win. As it is said in order to win larger battle one needs to lose smaller one, extradition bill was already dead, now it's withdrawn until it's introduced by someone else later. In larger picture it will be sacrificing pawn. If the violent protest continue, then it will be seen as challenging one country two system as the Hong Kong CEO proclaimed in her pre-recorded message. She is just saying in an indirect way this is her last ditch effort to salvage the situation. Hope this brings down the tempers and hopefully this put an end to violent protests, which has destroyed city and society. Violence can never be a solution, only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change.
- pinkfoot 7y ago
  > Violence can never be a solution Clearly you missed WWI and WWII. Violence, sadly, is almost always the solution. A tough pill to swallow.
- mrhappyunhappy 7y ago
  Actually, violence is at the heart of every revolution and is absolutely the answer when facing tyrants.
- anvandare 7y ago
  >only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change. Utterly false, but persistently preached by those in power to ensure there's never any real threat to their position. "Just lie down while I stomp your neck. Don't resist. We'll discuss your objections later, at a more convenient time." All political power emanates from the barrel of a gun. All civil power emanates from the people's latent threat to revolt and string up the members of an oppressive regime from lantern poles. The Founding Fathers understood that more than anything else. The First Amendment is worthless without the Second Amendment. Violence should never be the first (or even second) answer, but it is the ultimate answer, and should never be excluded on principle.
  - jplayer01 7y ago
    The non-violent protest thing seems like a myth that needs to be taken out back and shot, violently. We've seen for decades what they accomplish - absolutely nothing. It reminds me of this. https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-violence-that-helped-india-break-free-from-colonial-rule-57904 https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-violence-that-help...
    - devchix 7y ago
      This NPR podcast/article argues different. "...found that major nonviolent campaigns are successful 53% of the time, while violent campaigns are successful only 26% of the time." The Protest Tipping Point (podcast): https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/736007317/the-protest-tipping-point https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/736007317/the-protest-tipping... The Magic Number Behind Protests: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/06/25/735536434/the-magic-number-behind-protests https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/06/25/735536434/the-...
tobtoh 7y ago
I would argue that Beijing didn't anticipate the resolve of the protestors, but they would certainly know about and endorse Lam's backdown. China is happy to play the long game - they apply pressure to HK to bring them inline with China, people protest, they back of a little, but not all the way. They wait ... then apply pressure again. The idea is that by 2047 when the 'one country, two systems' arrangement expires, HK will fully accept the China way of life. Lam backing down is an easy way to defuse the situation for now and they can try again later. I expect to see this cycle of peace, then protest, then peace again continue for years - each time, HK will lose a few more rights they used to have.
- dirtyid 7y ago
  Normally I would attribute cold technocrat calculations to Beijing as well, but circumstance is dramatically different as of 10 days ago. Xi just scored "people's leader" on August 25th, announced they will not appease HK protesters a few days later, domestic nationalism as been endorsed and cultivated (extremely rare for HK / internal matters), 70th anniversary is on October 1st. I don't think Xi is going to start his first month as people's leader capitulating to HK when the mainland is already at a frenzy. There's a reason CPC doesn't usually play the nationalism card, it's extremely hard to walk back.
- poukofiru 7y ago
  That sounds likely. When Britain colonized Hong Kong, it took them more than 70+ years to pacify the people. Especially after the ‘67 protests, that resulted in 51 deaths. China is hoping the next generation will be more friendly. Like how the people of Macau are.
  - ethbro 7y ago
    If it wants the people to be friendly, it should probably start pumping a lot more money into jobs programs, addressing income inequality, and building a helluva lot of housing. Happy people don't protest as frequently. People who feel they have dim future prospects do. (Simply from a realpolitik perspective)
acd10j 7y ago
I think this is best workaround/outcome for both parties. With protesters not backing down, Beijing can now declare Lam has gone rogue and save its face. Cracking down on protesters definitely was not working. With international media presence they cannot crack down on protesters Tiananmen square style.
- drcode 7y ago
  I'm not sure losing control of a subordinate counts as "saving face"
  - acd10j 7y ago
    By declaring former subordinate as "rogue" they can save both average Chinese Mainlander wrath and save Lam from being ousted.
- eloisius 7y ago
  Western media was present for that
  - mensetmanusman 7y ago
    There is a difference in kind. If China does anything, people all over Africa will see it happening in real time, for example. That is scary to the Chinese who have too much investment at stake there to see an additional revolt to their authority.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
dTal 7y ago
Well, it looks like HK is "all-in" as well - and they have a lot more to lose. It may seem like the protests can't possibly accomplish anything, but they have successfully alerted the world to the soft coup in progress and are now forcing Beijing to escalate to a very public hard coup. Forcing the issue this way may appear pointless, but it's the possibly superior option to sliding gently into that good night.
JumpCrisscross 7y ago
> Her legacy is already ruined Lam’s family has British citizenship. That means she may be able to share her side of the story down the road. Her situation might seem reasonable, forgivable, even, once she shares the facts. Activating the ERO, however, would be unforgivable.
- jplayer01 7y ago
  > That means she may be able to share her side of the story down the road. If anybody ever sees her again, sure.
  - tlear 7y ago
    She better be on a plane to US. Probably the only place PRC kidnap squads can’t touch her.
artsyca 7y ago
I'm not sure how this factors in but I want to offer my intuitive sense of the situation and how it differs from earlier political phenomena -- 1989 is 30 years ago it may as well be 300 and 1939 is a millennium away at best The difference between then and now is the drastic shift we have undergone as a human consciousness (recommended reading: Marshall McLuhan: Understanding Media) If the medium is the message as it were, the message is and always has been the audience. The audience is watching from a whole new vantage point and we have greater agency over what we see than ever before But the greatest difference is that nobody is any longer answering the phones and the masters in their bunkers are simply yelling into empty receivers The sea change has already happened, it just hasn't been processed and rationalized yet. We've already won and the triumph comes in seven billion unique flavours that ultimately boil down to one: free your mind Hong Kong is proof of this fact and all rest is details which will begin a chain reaction spreading over the world like a flood -- all the pretence and deception washed away in a torrent of coloured raindrops, one for each human soul alive in the here and now -- I concur with your splendid analysis dirtyid mind you, highly astute; wanted to share my psychedelic spin Edit: this place is brutal for arguments not based on cautious rationalism; hasn't anyone listened to the advice of Seal? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fc67yQsPqQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fc67yQsPqQ What I'm telling you is individualism matters now more than ever and we've finally got a way to amplify the poor fuckin individual to the nth degree. Do you suppose that poor bastard Tank man would've been turned to soup if he had a twitter feed to spread his message?
- arcturus17 7y ago
  > the drastic shift we have undergone as a human consciousness I don't really know what this means, but if you think that the inherent nature of the human soul has changed in the last few decades, think again... If tomorrow there was a catastrophic event such as a worldwide nuclear fallout, humans would be at each other's throats in the blink of an eye. The only thing really keeping us together are institutions and collective constructs such as "human rights", which are far from permanent. It is hardly our evovled 21st century post-modernist souls keeping us prosperous and peaceful - we are fundamentally not different from the Romans, who enslaved people and had them mauled by lions in giant arenas. Or hey, the Nazis, which were a thing like 70 years ago - practically yesterday. Also, tell Beijing about the wonderful droplets of color that are the people of Hong Kong and see what they think. They'll probably laugh heartily while they order their tank commanders to raze the city, if they become persuaded that that's what needs to be done to fulfill their vision of a dominant China.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Jedi72 7y ago
I read this exact same comment on Reddit. Word for word. Very strange. Edit: Its same user id, probably this user just cross-posted.
- crazydoggers 7y ago
  Or it’s a state run actor? I noticed the account only posts and comments on pro China topics.
nindalf 7y ago
It is unclear whether Beijing endorsed this or not. Why they would not have endorsed this - for the CCP maintaining authority is the paramount objective. At no point can the Party "lose face" by giving in to external demands because that would erode the Party's authority. Any erosion of authority (the thinking goes) could eventually lead to a catastrophic collapse of power leading to civil war like in 1911-1949. This was Deng Xiaoping's overriding concern during his time as paramount leader and he made sure his successors learned it as well. For example, even when the students in Tiananmen Square offered to leave in exchange for some paltry concessions he denied it and cleared the Square with the military. In his opinion and the Party's opinion, negotiating with students would have eroded Party authority irreparably, even if no actual concessions were made. For similar reasons, Lam's request to withdraw this bill earlier this summer was denied by the Party. If Beijing endorsed this, then it could mean the Party playbook on unrest is being modified as we speak. If Beijing didn't endorse this, then Lam will now suffer a fate similar to Zhao Ziyang, the Premier during the Tiananmen Square incident. He broke with the other Party leaders and supported the students, leading to his house arrest till his death in 2005.
xxxpupugo 7y ago
Most important thing for CCP right now is have to this settle. Formal withdrawal of this bill will at least meet a huge demand of the general public. As to other demands, the support will be waning. That would be what the central government wants.
ck425 7y ago
If that's the case what happens to her personally? I read that her family has british passports, will she have to flee?
ww520 7y ago
It seems Beijing can go either way but are paralysis in making decision. It seems the people in charge are afraid of taking the responsibility for a decision and its outcome, and prefer no change. Well, sometimes events will make the decision for you if you don't act. Things are increasingly getting out of hand. Carrie Lam was going to take the fall anyway for the whole debacle so might as well she can make the decision now to back down and resign. Hopefully it will lead to a real election to elect a leader that truly represents the citizens rather than special interests.
duxup 7y ago
It's not clear to me if Xi and Co wants this or not at this point. It's possible Lam going rouge would allow Xi and Co to possibly save some face ... while giving them time to subvert the protester's cause in less obvious ways. It is possible they simply want to back away for a bit, and deal with things more quietly.
idlewords 7y ago
This comment makes a lot of assumptions about what people are thinking and saying behind closed doors. Do you have deep sources in Beijing? Are you close friends with Carrie Lam? Or are you just making up what you think happened? This news has been censored in the mainland press, so no one there is reacting to it either way.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
stjohnswarts 7y ago
I think that is their only way to save face is for her to give up. That way they can have someone to blame it on. She's not so stupid as to give in without China's acquiescence. She knows that it means getting disappeared or at best life in prison if she doesn't do what they OK.

ephemeralism 7y ago

Do you have a source for this claim that Beijing instructed her to not give in to any demands?

dirtyid 7y ago
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-protests-china-exclusive/exclusive-amid-crisis-china-rejected-hong-kong-plan-to-appease-protesters-sources-idUSKCN1VK0H6 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-protests-china-e... >The Chinese central government rejected Lam’s proposal to withdraw the extradition bill and ordered her not to yield to any of the protesters’ other demands at that time, three individuals with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

dragonsh 7y ago

> I don't think Beijing anticipated or endorsed this. This is endorsed and approved by Beijing, she already declared the bill dead this is just a matter of wording. Legally it can be brought back as laws are always evolving and Hong Kong needs an extradition treaty with other jurisdiction including another system in its own country. For Mainland Chinese citizen the narrative will be altered, but will still be seen as symbolic defeat and for Hong Kong Chinese citizens it will be a symbolic win. As it is said in order to win larger battle one needs to lose smaller one, extradition bill was already dead, now it's withdrawn until it's introduced by someone else later. In larger picture it will be sacrificing pawn. If the violent protest continue, then it will be seen as challenging one country two system as the Hong Kong CEO proclaimed in her pre-recorded message. She is just saying in an indirect way this is her last ditch effort to salvage the situation. Hope this brings down the tempers and hopefully this put an end to violent protests, which has destroyed city and society. Violence can never be a solution, only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change.

pinkfoot 7y ago
> Violence can never be a solution Clearly you missed WWI and WWII. Violence, sadly, is almost always the solution. A tough pill to swallow.
mrhappyunhappy 7y ago
Actually, violence is at the heart of every revolution and is absolutely the answer when facing tyrants.
anvandare 7y ago
>only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change. Utterly false, but persistently preached by those in power to ensure there's never any real threat to their position. "Just lie down while I stomp your neck. Don't resist. We'll discuss your objections later, at a more convenient time." All political power emanates from the barrel of a gun. All civil power emanates from the people's latent threat to revolt and string up the members of an oppressive regime from lantern poles. The Founding Fathers understood that more than anything else. The First Amendment is worthless without the Second Amendment. Violence should never be the first (or even second) answer, but it is the ultimate answer, and should never be excluded on principle.
- jplayer01 7y ago
  The non-violent protest thing seems like a myth that needs to be taken out back and shot, violently. We've seen for decades what they accomplish - absolutely nothing. It reminds me of this. https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-violence-that-helped-india-break-free-from-colonial-rule-57904 https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-violence-that-help...
  - devchix 7y ago
    This NPR podcast/article argues different. "...found that major nonviolent campaigns are successful 53% of the time, while violent campaigns are successful only 26% of the time." The Protest Tipping Point (podcast): https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/736007317/the-protest-tipping-point https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/736007317/the-protest-tipping... The Magic Number Behind Protests: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/06/25/735536434/the-magic-number-behind-protests https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/06/25/735536434/the-...

tobtoh 7y ago

I would argue that Beijing didn't anticipate the resolve of the protestors, but they would certainly know about and endorse Lam's backdown. China is happy to play the long game - they apply pressure to HK to bring them inline with China, people protest, they back of a little, but not all the way. They wait ... then apply pressure again. The idea is that by 2047 when the 'one country, two systems' arrangement expires, HK will fully accept the China way of life. Lam backing down is an easy way to defuse the situation for now and they can try again later. I expect to see this cycle of peace, then protest, then peace again continue for years - each time, HK will lose a few more rights they used to have.

dirtyid 7y ago
Normally I would attribute cold technocrat calculations to Beijing as well, but circumstance is dramatically different as of 10 days ago. Xi just scored "people's leader" on August 25th, announced they will not appease HK protesters a few days later, domestic nationalism as been endorsed and cultivated (extremely rare for HK / internal matters), 70th anniversary is on October 1st. I don't think Xi is going to start his first month as people's leader capitulating to HK when the mainland is already at a frenzy. There's a reason CPC doesn't usually play the nationalism card, it's extremely hard to walk back.
poukofiru 7y ago
That sounds likely. When Britain colonized Hong Kong, it took them more than 70+ years to pacify the people. Especially after the ‘67 protests, that resulted in 51 deaths. China is hoping the next generation will be more friendly. Like how the people of Macau are.
- ethbro 7y ago
  If it wants the people to be friendly, it should probably start pumping a lot more money into jobs programs, addressing income inequality, and building a helluva lot of housing. Happy people don't protest as frequently. People who feel they have dim future prospects do. (Simply from a realpolitik perspective)

acd10j 7y ago

I think this is best workaround/outcome for both parties. With protesters not backing down, Beijing can now declare Lam has gone rogue and save its face. Cracking down on protesters definitely was not working. With international media presence they cannot crack down on protesters Tiananmen square style.

drcode 7y ago
I'm not sure losing control of a subordinate counts as "saving face"
- acd10j 7y ago
  By declaring former subordinate as "rogue" they can save both average Chinese Mainlander wrath and save Lam from being ousted.
eloisius 7y ago
Western media was present for that
- mensetmanusman 7y ago
  There is a difference in kind. If China does anything, people all over Africa will see it happening in real time, for example. That is scary to the Chinese who have too much investment at stake there to see an additional revolt to their authority.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

dTal 7y ago

Well, it looks like HK is "all-in" as well - and they have a lot more to lose. It may seem like the protests can't possibly accomplish anything, but they have successfully alerted the world to the soft coup in progress and are now forcing Beijing to escalate to a very public hard coup. Forcing the issue this way may appear pointless, but it's the possibly superior option to sliding gently into that good night.

JumpCrisscross 7y ago

> Her legacy is already ruined Lam’s family has British citizenship. That means she may be able to share her side of the story down the road. Her situation might seem reasonable, forgivable, even, once she shares the facts. Activating the ERO, however, would be unforgivable.

jplayer01 7y ago
> That means she may be able to share her side of the story down the road. If anybody ever sees her again, sure.
- tlear 7y ago
  She better be on a plane to US. Probably the only place PRC kidnap squads can’t touch her.

artsyca 7y ago

I'm not sure how this factors in but I want to offer my intuitive sense of the situation and how it differs from earlier political phenomena -- 1989 is 30 years ago it may as well be 300 and 1939 is a millennium away at best The difference between then and now is the drastic shift we have undergone as a human consciousness (recommended reading: Marshall McLuhan: Understanding Media) If the medium is the message as it were, the message is and always has been the audience. The audience is watching from a whole new vantage point and we have greater agency over what we see than ever before But the greatest difference is that nobody is any longer answering the phones and the masters in their bunkers are simply yelling into empty receivers The sea change has already happened, it just hasn't been processed and rationalized yet. We've already won and the triumph comes in seven billion unique flavours that ultimately boil down to one: free your mind Hong Kong is proof of this fact and all rest is details which will begin a chain reaction spreading over the world like a flood -- all the pretence and deception washed away in a torrent of coloured raindrops, one for each human soul alive in the here and now -- I concur with your splendid analysis dirtyid mind you, highly astute; wanted to share my psychedelic spin Edit: this place is brutal for arguments not based on cautious rationalism; hasn't anyone listened to the advice of Seal? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fc67yQsPqQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fc67yQsPqQ What I'm telling you is individualism matters now more than ever and we've finally got a way to amplify the poor fuckin individual to the nth degree. Do you suppose that poor bastard Tank man would've been turned to soup if he had a twitter feed to spread his message?

arcturus17 7y ago
> the drastic shift we have undergone as a human consciousness I don't really know what this means, but if you think that the inherent nature of the human soul has changed in the last few decades, think again... If tomorrow there was a catastrophic event such as a worldwide nuclear fallout, humans would be at each other's throats in the blink of an eye. The only thing really keeping us together are institutions and collective constructs such as "human rights", which are far from permanent. It is hardly our evovled 21st century post-modernist souls keeping us prosperous and peaceful - we are fundamentally not different from the Romans, who enslaved people and had them mauled by lions in giant arenas. Or hey, the Nazis, which were a thing like 70 years ago - practically yesterday. Also, tell Beijing about the wonderful droplets of color that are the people of Hong Kong and see what they think. They'll probably laugh heartily while they order their tank commanders to raze the city, if they become persuaded that that's what needs to be done to fulfill their vision of a dominant China.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Jedi72 7y ago

I read this exact same comment on Reddit. Word for word. Very strange. Edit: Its same user id, probably this user just cross-posted.

crazydoggers 7y ago
Or it’s a state run actor? I noticed the account only posts and comments on pro China topics.

nindalf 7y ago

It is unclear whether Beijing endorsed this or not. Why they would not have endorsed this - for the CCP maintaining authority is the paramount objective. At no point can the Party "lose face" by giving in to external demands because that would erode the Party's authority. Any erosion of authority (the thinking goes) could eventually lead to a catastrophic collapse of power leading to civil war like in 1911-1949. This was Deng Xiaoping's overriding concern during his time as paramount leader and he made sure his successors learned it as well. For example, even when the students in Tiananmen Square offered to leave in exchange for some paltry concessions he denied it and cleared the Square with the military. In his opinion and the Party's opinion, negotiating with students would have eroded Party authority irreparably, even if no actual concessions were made. For similar reasons, Lam's request to withdraw this bill earlier this summer was denied by the Party. If Beijing endorsed this, then it could mean the Party playbook on unrest is being modified as we speak. If Beijing didn't endorse this, then Lam will now suffer a fate similar to Zhao Ziyang, the Premier during the Tiananmen Square incident. He broke with the other Party leaders and supported the students, leading to his house arrest till his death in 2005.

xxxpupugo 7y ago

Most important thing for CCP right now is have to this settle. Formal withdrawal of this bill will at least meet a huge demand of the general public. As to other demands, the support will be waning. That would be what the central government wants.

ck425 7y ago

If that's the case what happens to her personally? I read that her family has british passports, will she have to flee?

ww520 7y ago

It seems Beijing can go either way but are paralysis in making decision. It seems the people in charge are afraid of taking the responsibility for a decision and its outcome, and prefer no change. Well, sometimes events will make the decision for you if you don't act. Things are increasingly getting out of hand. Carrie Lam was going to take the fall anyway for the whole debacle so might as well she can make the decision now to back down and resign. Hopefully it will lead to a real election to elect a leader that truly represents the citizens rather than special interests.

duxup 7y ago

It's not clear to me if Xi and Co wants this or not at this point. It's possible Lam going rouge would allow Xi and Co to possibly save some face ... while giving them time to subvert the protester's cause in less obvious ways. It is possible they simply want to back away for a bit, and deal with things more quietly.

idlewords 7y ago

This comment makes a lot of assumptions about what people are thinking and saying behind closed doors. Do you have deep sources in Beijing? Are you close friends with Carrie Lam? Or are you just making up what you think happened? This news has been censored in the mainland press, so no one there is reacting to it either way.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

stjohnswarts 7y ago

I think that is their only way to save face is for her to give up. That way they can have someone to blame it on. She's not so stupid as to give in without China's acquiescence. She knows that it means getting disappeared or at best life in prison if she doesn't do what they OK.