4 ms·

>As impressive as they are, how long can Hong Kong people keep up this level of protests? Beijing can keep the pressure forever and play the long game As long

>As impressive as they are, how long can Hong Kong people keep up this level of protests? Beijing can keep the pressure forever and play the long game As long as they have food, water and the will to fight. They can play the long game too if they are so inclined. Eventually the CCP will get tired of the expensive, resource sucking bridge to nowhere. Sure, China could carpet bomb HK but the more you destroy it the less it's worth and the harder it is to justify involvement.

refurb 7y ago
China has far too much to lose to back down on this one. One could argue the HK protests threaten the survival of the Chinese Communist Party. Far better for them to lose HK and be condemned globally than lose the all of China.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  But the question is how far are both sides willing to go with the violence? The further the CCP goes the more they risk deepening the resolve of your opponent (especially with a highly united population as in the case in HK). So far it appears that all escalations have done just that. The crux of the issue is that the people of HK do not want to be ruled over by the iron fisted CCP that drives tanks on people. Any escalation by the CCP confirms to the people of HK that the CCP is in fact the iron fisted CCP that drives tanks on people, not the new friendly CCP that does not drive tanks on people. So what does the CCP do then? They either back down or try to up the violence hoping it'll be too much for them. By upping the violence the CCP is gambling that they draw throw in the towel before HK does. At some point (only recognizable in hindsight) the line between protests/riot and open revolt will be crossed. Beyond that point it's fundamentally a gamble that a strong majority of people in HK would rather accept subjugation than die. Since this is somewhat an existential issue for them they may very well choose the latter. How does the CCP "win" against that? People who accept that they are probably going to die resisting are un-govern-able. Your soldiers can patrol the streets and they will still take pot-shots at you. Every time you get one another will pop up. There is no way to "win" against that unless your definition of "win" includes complete eradication. The only historical occurrence I can think of where a people who had resigned to death wound up surrendering involved strong central leadership telling them to surrender. Obviously it's a shit situation no matter how you look at it with outcomes ranging from bad to worse in the short and medium term.
  - dirtyid 7y ago
    China relocated millions of urban youth to country side reeducation camps during the cultural revolution. If push comes to shove, it's well within the capability of the CPC to relocate the problem population in HK. The fact is, Beijing has not used any physical levers yet.
    - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
      Nobody is doubting they can. It's whether or not they will. It's not 1960 anymore. Nobody in the west back then was gonna complain if the commies were starving themselves. China is also more connected with the world than before and on some level there's expectations of following certain behavioral norms that come with that. It's a fine line between "solving the problem" and getting slapped with sanctions that materially affect mainlander's lives and make them question why they even care about Hong Kong. There's no good way out at this point. Somebody is gonna lose.
    - ethbro 7y ago
      China's cultural revolution occurred at a very different time geopolitically. Currently, China is attempting to establish itself as the new bipolar alternative to the United States. This cascades into a lot of different things, but ultimately collapses down into trust. Just as the Cold War did. Counterparties and potential allies are less likely to ally themselves with you, if they see you're intractable even with your own people. What does that say about how you would treat an ally or trading partner? Furthermore, China is also attempting to integrate itself into the existing multinational trading and governance frameworks. That depends on votes from non-Chinese-controlled sovereign states. Being an international pariah makes that a lot more difficult. Additionally (although somewhat tangentially), China would really like Taiwan back without having to invade it. It doesn't matter much in the global scheme of things, but it's been a splinter in the CCP's claim to legitimacy and supremacy ever since it was created as an independent government. Oppressing Hong Kong makes peaceful Taiwanese reunification increasingly unlikely. On a decades / generations time-frame.
      - jxramos 7y ago

refurb 7y ago

China has far too much to lose to back down on this one. One could argue the HK protests threaten the survival of the Chinese Communist Party. Far better for them to lose HK and be condemned globally than lose the all of China.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago
But the question is how far are both sides willing to go with the violence? The further the CCP goes the more they risk deepening the resolve of your opponent (especially with a highly united population as in the case in HK). So far it appears that all escalations have done just that. The crux of the issue is that the people of HK do not want to be ruled over by the iron fisted CCP that drives tanks on people. Any escalation by the CCP confirms to the people of HK that the CCP is in fact the iron fisted CCP that drives tanks on people, not the new friendly CCP that does not drive tanks on people. So what does the CCP do then? They either back down or try to up the violence hoping it'll be too much for them. By upping the violence the CCP is gambling that they draw throw in the towel before HK does. At some point (only recognizable in hindsight) the line between protests/riot and open revolt will be crossed. Beyond that point it's fundamentally a gamble that a strong majority of people in HK would rather accept subjugation than die. Since this is somewhat an existential issue for them they may very well choose the latter. How does the CCP "win" against that? People who accept that they are probably going to die resisting are un-govern-able. Your soldiers can patrol the streets and they will still take pot-shots at you. Every time you get one another will pop up. There is no way to "win" against that unless your definition of "win" includes complete eradication. The only historical occurrence I can think of where a people who had resigned to death wound up surrendering involved strong central leadership telling them to surrender. Obviously it's a shit situation no matter how you look at it with outcomes ranging from bad to worse in the short and medium term.
- dirtyid 7y ago
  China relocated millions of urban youth to country side reeducation camps during the cultural revolution. If push comes to shove, it's well within the capability of the CPC to relocate the problem population in HK. The fact is, Beijing has not used any physical levers yet.
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    Nobody is doubting they can. It's whether or not they will. It's not 1960 anymore. Nobody in the west back then was gonna complain if the commies were starving themselves. China is also more connected with the world than before and on some level there's expectations of following certain behavioral norms that come with that. It's a fine line between "solving the problem" and getting slapped with sanctions that materially affect mainlander's lives and make them question why they even care about Hong Kong. There's no good way out at this point. Somebody is gonna lose.
  - ethbro 7y ago
    China's cultural revolution occurred at a very different time geopolitically. Currently, China is attempting to establish itself as the new bipolar alternative to the United States. This cascades into a lot of different things, but ultimately collapses down into trust. Just as the Cold War did. Counterparties and potential allies are less likely to ally themselves with you, if they see you're intractable even with your own people. What does that say about how you would treat an ally or trading partner? Furthermore, China is also attempting to integrate itself into the existing multinational trading and governance frameworks. That depends on votes from non-Chinese-controlled sovereign states. Being an international pariah makes that a lot more difficult. Additionally (although somewhat tangentially), China would really like Taiwan back without having to invade it. It doesn't matter much in the global scheme of things, but it's been a splinter in the CCP's claim to legitimacy and supremacy ever since it was created as an independent government. Oppressing Hong Kong makes peaceful Taiwanese reunification increasingly unlikely. On a decades / generations time-frame.
    - jxramos 7y ago