Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Hong Cong Umbrella Revolution of 2014

News Color revolutions Recommended Links Compradors Neocolonialism as Financial Imperialism
Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war NGOs as braintrust of color revolutions EuroMaidan Russian Color Revolution Ukrainian orange revolution
The Technique of Nonviolent Action by Gene Sharp The Politics of Nonviolent Action by Gene Sharp Gene Sharp Recipies and Russian Experience Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair The art of manufacturing of prisoners of consciousness
Sect of fraudulent election witnesses Human right activists or globalism fifth column Exploiting Revolutionary Romantics as polit-technology Delegitimization of Ruling Party Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair
Predator state Two Party System as polyarchy Super Imperialism Foreign Agents Registration Act Russian compradors
Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few The Real War on Reality Frustrated underachievers IntelliXencia: Corruption of Intelligentsia and it usage in fifth column in Russia Net Hamsters as a part of fifth column
The Guardian Slips Beyond the Reach of Embarrassment British hypocrisy The Iron Law of Oligarchy Russian Fifth column Humor Etc

Introduction

You can view color revolutions from two positions - idealistic and realistic.

Here is a small dialog between two Guardian commenters, which reflects those two points of view (The Guardian, Oct 10, 2016):

GeorgeSherban, 10 October 2014 11:41am

To some extent, you could say that the motives of the US government are altruistic. Of course there will also be strategic reasons for intervening.

Whether it is advisable or not is another matter.

Chanelle47 -> GeorgeSherban , 10 October 2014 12:00pm

Altruistic is the last thing they are. Why did the US launch an Iraq War 2.0 in the early 2000? At various points it was because Saddam cause 9/11, because of the Taliban, because of Al Qaida, because Saddam had weapons of mass destruction (tee hee). Then, a couple of years in, it wasn't any of those things. It became about "sowing the seeds of democracy" in Iraq.

It was all bullshit. One thing you can be sure of: if a politician's lips are moving in regard to Iraq, Isis or terror then what is coming out is never the truth. Their buddies in The Press merely amplify, obfuscate and confuse as required and to order.

We can observe similar two modes of coverage of Hong Cong color revolution. Idealists in Western MSM see the spread of freedom and democracy like was in the case of EuroMaidan, Libya and before that in Serbia, Georgia, Turkmenistan and Moldovia. While realists consider this as a geopolitical clash of powers in the struggle for influence, an attempt to show Chinese elite its place, by hitting China in its soft belly.

While to understand dynamic of Hong Cong revolution without knowledge of the language and living on the island is really difficult, so far, judging from MSM and alternative press reporting, it looks like yet another color revolution. Someone really should probably compile the "Regime Change Dictionary" and "Regime Change Blueprint" to simplify analysis of such events despite the smoke screen of Western MSM propaganda, which always promote idealists position.

In reality, color revolutions usually has nothing to do with the democracy and often bring topower brutal dictators or far right nationalists, disguised as democrats. Typically they are dirty wars of imperial expansion of neoliberal capitalism fought with dupes and fifth column hands with full support of World Bank, IMF and other controlled by neoliberals international institutions. And they far less costly then conventional wars. For example February coup in Ukraine cost a tiny fraction of the cost of Iraq war and did not resulted in any US troops casualties. But the goal of subduing the country as essentially achieved. They are also the only type of wars possible against major nuclear powers such as China or Russia.

From the point of view of the level of inequality Hong Cong is by definition is a power keg. in 2007 it has had the highest Gini coefficient in the world:

Gini score: 43.4
GDP 2007 (US$ billions): 207.2
Share of income or expenditure (%)

Ratio of income or expenditure, share of top 10% to lowest 10%: 17.8

Renowned for its high concentration of Rolls-Royces, expensive real estate, and posh shops, the Chinese special administrative region has plenty of rich who enjoy showing off their wealth. However, Hong Kong also has one of the largest public housing sectors in the world, with about half the population living in government-supported or -subsidized housing estates. The city has no minimum wage — except for domestic helpers from the Philippines, Indonesia, and other countries.

There is also a deep and troubling analogy between EuroMaidan. Here is something that you need to be aware of:

  1. The EU (of which GB is a part) and the US were treacherous entities which positioned themselves outside the law. Their explicit goal was the "regime change" via color revolution. They willfully and blatantly discarded the agreement between Yanukovich government and opposition dated February 21, 2014.
  2. The EU and the United States immediately recognized the coup d'état leaders as a legitimate government. And this is in a country with working general election mechanism and elections schedules in less then two years.
  3. Later in similar circumstances the EU and the US do not recognize the people's will in the Donbass.
  4. Actually three points above is all the you need to know to put in proper context Hong Cong events and "leading Western democracies".

 Discreditation of any genuine social protest by USA color revolution technology

In any case using color revolutions for regime change by the USA discredited ingenious protests movements in countries like China and Russia, to the extent that now the first natural reaction is crying "color revolution, watch out the USA machinations!" even at movements that are chiefly based on real grievances.

Any modern "pro-democracy movement" now is embedded in a complex matrix of money, subterfuge, foreign influence, oligarchic clans war, propaganda, and manipulation by foreign actors. It can be easily hijacked and misused by color revolution strategists at NED and similar organizations (who are actually very good at their craft).

Here are a couple of pretty telling comments:

Guest77 | Oct 5, 2014 6:52:31 PM | 84

I don't see what any personal sympathies with the protestors even matters. Sure, we all want people to be able to fight for their rights and have the government they want, but right now there is a larger priority, and that is making sure that the world maintains a multipolar political structure. The importance of a multipolar world outweighs even our desire to see vocal minorities to take to the streets, I think. (And these are vocal minorites, no doubt).

I think, as "westerners" we have to support the group that will insure the independence of the state in question. We cannot support any group that looks to the US as a model or a hope, because we here know better than anyone that this is a sham. And any group that panders to the US and it's citizens via social media has to immediately be suspect.

Sloppy always comes to crow about how much b hates America. I don't think b "hates" the USA, but he is certainly right to make the USAs aggressive moves toward hegemony the key focus of all of his posts, and right to make a stand against this issue over all others because it is truly the gravest threat the world faces today.

- if the emergence of liberal freedom in every corner of the world means it's sure evaporation from all parts very soon after (which will surely occur if the USA achieves total global domination) we cannot support this. We will only see real opportunities for peace, political expression, and true democracy only after the US is prevented from perverting these good things into instruments of its domination. But until then, the independence of foreign governments is far more important for world peace, stability, and prosperity than the rights of a few minorities to threaten their governments in Russia, China, or Iran.

guest77 | Oct 5, 2014 7:23:42 PM | 86

@84 And of course for inside "the west" the exact opposite holds true. We should support any protests, any movement that attempts to degrade the aggressive capabilities of the US Empire, because this will allow real democracy and prosperity to flourish in more places around the world.

No one can claim that countries like Russia, China, Brazil, India and Iran - where standards of living are rising and the governments have the broad support of the people - are "dictatorships".

Just like no one of any honesty should call the banker dominated oligarchy like the United States, where cash determines every election down to the lowest rungs on the political ladder - a "democracy".

Demian | Oct 6, 2014 3:14:41 AM | 100

@brian #95:

Gee, you seem to follow Project pretty closely. I have no such inclination.

As I said before, all one needs to do is watch the Maidan girl video and then the Occupy central video, both of which you directed us to, to see that what is going on in Hong Kong is just another attempted color revolution.

Another link, obtained from the link guest77 gave at #89:

US State Dept Funding and Occupy Central, the Ties that Bind

This is the most through demonstration of how Occupy Central is just the US State Department being up to its usual tricks that I have seen so far. The post the Saker put up today, in which a Hong Konger explains why he does not support Occupy Central, is also worth reading.

Analogy of Hong cong event with Ukrainian EuroMaidan events run so deep that sometimes it looks like the same blueprint was used in Hong Cong as in Kiev.

Is Hong Cong a cleft region?

Cleft regions or countries are areas that contain large groups of people identifying with different civilizations, for examples India (with Hindu majority and large Muslim minority), and Ukraine (with Catholic-dominated, nationalistic and pro-Western Western section and its pro-Russian Orthodox-dominated East).

The question is: can we consider Hong Cong to be a cleft county with people identifying themselves both with Anglo-Saxon and traditional Chinese civilization? I think students are more exposed to Anglo-Saxon civilization and its values that the rest of population. It would be interesting to have statistics of cosmetic "europeization" surgeries for Hong Cong young woman, especially students and especially the percentage of Catholics who took part in the protest.

Many members of "old" Hong cong elite feel threatened by influx of mainlanders ( The Leaf Chronicle )

Joseph Cheng, 64, a political science professor at City University of Hong Kong who was arrested at Sunday's protest and held for 12 hours, said,

"We want to uphold our core values, our lifestyle and our dignity. We don't want to be reduced to an ordinary big city in mainland China."

Huntington’s contention that civilization clashes are inevitable within cleft countries, and that such countries are inherently instable and fragile. The augments he uses are somewhat similar to Amartya Sen’s discussion in ‘Identity & Violence' and they are interesting although not totally convincing.

Huntington suggests that people’s cultural (which include religious as a part) identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-cold war world. He argues that civilizations forms highest rank of cultural identity. Due to increased contacts between each other and modern communications, people have become civilization conscious. As a result, post dissolution of the USSR politics (post Cold War politics) are dominated by these civilization oriented conflicts.

Huntington’s civilization categories are

  1. Western;
  2. Latin American;
  3. Orthodox (Russia and parts of the xUUSR);
  4. Buddhist,
  5. Chinese,
  6. Hindu,
  7. Japonica civilization;
  8. Islam;
  9. African civilization except Ethiopia and Haiti (who he think are no-civilization countries);
  10. Israel.

Critics have pointed to superciliousness of the civilization classification. This aspect was well catched in The wider concerns of Hong Kong's protesters ( bbc.com, Oct 3,  2014 )

"For middle class residents, many with passports to other countries, that's a choice they can make. But, as Mr Xie points out, many young Hong Kongers educated after 1997 find themselves trapped. "

For the Hong Kong students thronging the streets of the Central business district this week the issue at stake has been wider democracy.

But for the thousands more young professionals living and working in the city's nearby office blocks, the protests have re-ignited some worrying memories.

It was in the late 1980s or early 90s that many Hong Kong families took out citizenship of another country. They were prompted by fears of what might happen after the 1997 handover of Hong Kong from the UK back to China.

Quotes

"That's a sizeable number of people, even though we are still talking about less than 5% of the population.
Deep down most people are concerned about bread and butter issues” -- Andy Xie, Independent economist

"You have this sector of society who identify with Western values.

"This idea comes into play when you have a situation when people are dissatisfied with Hong Kong - they have this other cultural identity too, and that leads them to think that they can land in another country."

"People are desperate and they are looking for a quick solution - I don't see that coming - so this thing is going to go on” - Andy Xie, Independent economist

In the case of Joyce Man's family it was Canada that provided a temporary refuge; as an insurance policy in case things turned nasty in Hong Kong.

Ms Man, 30, was a teenager at the time of the handover. She moved with her parents and sister to Canada in 1989, and after obtaining Canadian citizenship, they later moved back to Hong Kong.

But now, like many of her contemporaries, Ms Man is thinking about moving again - and this time it could be for good.

"I think like a certain section of the Hong Kong population I grew up with the idea that you can leave," says Ms Man, who is now a writer of a popular blog: Criss Cross Culture.

"Hong Kongers are also outward looking. Before '97 many people left to go to England, Australia , Canada, or the USA.

... ... ...

Veteran Hong Kong and China expert, Jonathan Fenby, was editor of the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong during the handover in 1997.

He says there are many different currents flowing under the surface of the current unhappiness with life in Hong Kong. One of the key issues is the identity of the citizens - how they see themselves.

Mr Fenby points out that surveys of the population by Hong Kong's universities going back over the past 20 years have frequently found that Hong Kong people do not identify themselves as being purely Chinese - most say instead that they are "Hong Kongers" or "Hong Kong Chinese".

And that makes the leadership in Beijing uneasy, he believes.

"A very large proportion of the people living in Hong Kong at the moment are the children or grandchildren of refugees from mainland China," says Mr Fenby.

"This is a more fluid population, and that is not something the authorities in Beijing like very much.

"Because they like the idea of Chinese national unity, Chinese stability and the Han race sticking together - and the Hong Kongers are different."

And it's the feeling that they want to maintain the differences between Hong Kong and China that appears to be driving many Hong Kongers onto the streets. But it could also drive many away from Hong Kong altogether if events take a wrong turn.

For middle class residents, many with passports to other countries, that's a choice they can make. But, as Mr Xie points out, many young Hong Kongers educated after 1997 find themselves trapped.

"It's difficult for the people here to leave now," he says. "Hong Kong introduced mother tongue education in '98 - in Cantonese.

People are less likely to speak either English or Mandarin than before the handover. So it is very difficult for people to emigrate."

"People are desperate and they are looking for a quick solution - I don't see that coming - so this thing is going to go on. ''

Loyalty of elite, especially comprador elite,
in any neoliberal state in not automatic ;-)

The main beneficiaries of corrupt privatization is states such as Russia and Ukraine, commanded significant resources and began to place their own interests above those of the state. This pehnominen is exemplified by the “oligarchs” of Russia and Ukraine. They used their resources and political connections to defend against encroachment. Some parlayed their fortunes into political careers, most often to win a seat in parliament that came with immunity from prosecution. Among them are those who are more connected to global market and those who are less connected to global market. The former created natural based on color revolution support and financing within the country.

Putin's "purge' of Yeltsin "family" somewhat suppressed this phenomena in Russia, but in Ukraine it played in full force.

The second part of non-loyal to the state "cosmopolitan" elite are university professors and administration, especially in typical neoliberalism dominated fields, such as economic, advertizing, public relations, etc.

Hong cong is a classic neoliberal "state within state" and as such it has substantial share of this "comprador" type of elite.

Comprador class is an important concept in the neo-colonial dependence model. It reflects a specific way to force the country to fulfill the demands of capital (aka transnational corporations) of rich countries. They are dependent on the unequal relationship between the centre (the developed countries) and the periphery. Policies of the USA and EU countries are based on support of a small, but powerful elite or comprador class.

The comprador class is consisted of people with strong ties to the West such as export industry owners, financial traders, military and civil top bureaucrats, university professors and administators, professionals with better employment prospects in foreign corporations, such as programmers. Such people often keep their financial assets in Western banks, there families live in Western capitals and their children typically get an education in prestigious Western universities. There is a convergence of the interests of comprador elite with the interests of financial and industrial elite of developed nations. The comprador group serve to inhibit any genuine reform efforts that might benefit the wider population of underdeveloped countries and, due to this service, the group is highly rewarded by the international interest groups including MNC, aid agencies, World Bank and IMF, which are tied allegiance or funding to wealthy capitalist countries.

I think that comprador elite was the central element of the current Hong Cong protests.

Role of students and "rector revolt" ; University administration and "grant-eating" professors as a Trojan horse of color revolutions.

Importance of "guiding" students into protest movement was recognized by Marxists long ago. For example in 1903 Lenin wrote ( The Tasks of the Revolutionary Youth):

“revolutionary sentiment alone cannot bring about ideological unity among the students”, that “this requires a socialist ideal based upon one or another socialist world outlook” and, moreover, “a definite and integral” outlook

This revolutionary (read "regime change" ;-) sentiments are nothing new. The Petrashevsky circle was a group of "anti-regime" intellectuals formed in St. Petersburg in the mid-forties of the eighteen century around M. V. Butashevich-Petrashevsky, a follower of the French utopian socialist Fourier. Among the members were writers, teachers, students, minor government officials, army officers, and so on. While not uniform in their political views, most of them were opponents of the tsarist autocracy and the serf system. Among those connected with the Petrashevsky circle were the writers Dostoyevsky and Saltykov-Shchedrin and the poets Maikov, and Taras Shevchenko.

Like Marxists who long ago recognized the importance of importance of revolutionizing the students and pushing them into social action, neoliberals too work with students to push them to the protests during color revolutions, making them the vanguard of fighters for neoliberal globalization. That was very vividly demonstrated at the beginning stages of Maidan, when the core of protesters were students of Kiev, Lvov and Ivano-Frankovsk universities.

But the most interesting innovation introduced by color revolution technologists here was cooptation of university administration and professors via grant system and expensive foreign trips. This process can be called "rectors revolt" similar to practicing in color revolutions "revolt of diplomats". This allowed students freely attend protests without the danger to the excluded from the university for non-attendance.

Importance of financing and co-opting using money based incentives of the university bureaucracy and "grant-eating" professors, and creating within the universities self-sustained "resistance-centers" and "pro-democracy groups" with its own press outlets is such that it can be viewed as the mother’s milk of such a regime change. In a way the color of any "color revolution" is always green.

That including special training which is often outsourced to members of similar movements from countries with successful color revolution attempts (COLOR REVOLUTIONS AND GEOPOLITICS Template Revolutions Marketing U.S. Regime Change in Eastern Europe (2008))

Youth movements and NGOs were also employed as couriers for regime change. Following the Serbian ‘bulldozer revolution’, several former foreign-trained members of the local Otpor student movement became traveling consultants on non-violent political tactics. The Serbians' trips to those countries were paid, respectively, by NED grantee Freedom House and Soros's Open Society Institute (MacKinnon 2007, 60, 67, 109, 110). Sensing another ‘colour revolution’ opportunity, Otpor advisors began working with Ukraine's opposition as early as 2002 (Bransten 2004).

... ... ...

Anika Binnendijk and Ivan Marovic cite an internal memo written in April 2003 by Yushchenko's Our Ukraine in which his party discusses the importance of preparing a propaganda response to expected vote fraud:

[The elections will] be a game without rules, unprecedented competition of informational, organizational, financial and administrative resources for the regime…we need allies and at least 500,000 active supporters (Binnendijik and Marovic 2006)

... ... ...

In Ukraine, the U.S. spent in 2004 alone about $34 million on regime change initiatives (U.S. Department of State 2004), while Soros pitched in about $1.6 million in support of a local ‘Freedom of Choice’ NGO coalition and Ukraine's ‘New Choice 2004’ (Wilson 2005, 184). The German Marshall Fund of the United States, Freedom House, and the Canadian International Development Agency together provided $130,000 for activist training (Kaskiv, Chupryna and Zolotariov, 2007, 134). Foreign assistance also staked various get-out-the-vote programs, including ‘leaflet campaigns, street theatre, rock concerts, door-to-door campaigns, and karaoke shows’ (Freedom House 2005). The Center for Political and Legal Reforms, financed by various U.S. foundations, linked its website directly to Yushchenko’s home page ‘under the heading “partners”’, USAID brought the group to Washington, D.C. for three weeks of training in ‘political advocacy’ (Kelley 2004)..

...pro-Yushchenko Pora (‘yellow’ faction) student movement was one recipient of USAID and other foreign groups’ support (Kaskiv, Chupryna, Bezverkha, and Zolotariov 2005);

... ... ...

A U.S. plan of transporting activists from one nation to another to teach “revolutionary” electoral tactics may have started in 1997 when the NED arranged a Vienna meeting between Slovakia's oppositionist leader Pavol Demeš and veterans of Bulgaria's recent pro- Western elections. Demes returned home and designed “OK'98,” the Slovakian campaign which brought down Vladimir Mečiar. Demes next went on to train GONG, a Croatian NGO aimed overthrowing Franjo Tudjman (MacKinnon 2007, 31, 34).

... ... ...

Other grants on the NED website include a 2000 grant to the Student Union of Serbia to encourage "greater student involvement…for democratic reform" and a grant to the NDI to help the Alliance for Change publish a newspaper called "Changes."

Students are the social group the most susceptible to "revolution marketing" efforts. The first who realized that were actually Bolsheviks. Now this idea were appropriated by neoliberals (especially neocons, aka neo-Trotskyites) and they became the fodder of color revolutions. 

The deployment of ‘revolutionary’ symbols and slogans, selected for their agitating and mobilising effects, financial support to local media outlets to stir up antagonism, and the foreign training of dissenters and professional organization of dissent are some of the stratagems in regime change initiatives. As local organizers readily admitted, marketing tactics were key to winning over their supporters.

The use of Western-funded exit polls served as a catalyst for protest. On a broader front, the steady flow of anti-government reporting from the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the BBC World Service, and other Western broadcasting media incited activists to take to the streets.

One could add to the template the efforts of U.S. government and private foundation visitor programs for Eastern European politicians, journalists, students, academics, cultural and athletic performers, and others, which tend to animate their support for Western-oriented political, economic, and cultural institutional practices (Roelofs 2003).

Analogies with EuroMaidan and steps of color revolution that were already replicated

The first to realize this deep, step-by-step analogy of the blueprint of this color revolution and EuroMaidan were social sites that were active in analyzing EuroMaidan. Here are some interesting early comments from marknesop.wordpress.com

Fern, September 30, 2014 at 5:17 am
...There’s a never-ending, never-satiated appetite in the West for articles like the one by Lilia Shevtsova you deconstruct so well. It’s a real cottage industry and one that probably pays quite well. These screeds are always fact-free zones but are received as though handed down on tablets of stone from the mountain and quoted and re-quoted as unimpeachable sources. A comment on the appalling intellectual vacuousness of the West as much as anything else – it’s just supply and demand.

Today’s going to be interesting. The mandarins of the EU are meeting to ‘review’ the ceasefire in Ukraine – if they’re happy with it, they may lift some sanctions on Russia.

And, in other news, right on cue, HRW issues a statement calling on the Hong Kong authorities not to use force against the protestors there – a sure sign the latest colour revolution is up and running. Since CR@2 seem to involve far more violence than CR@1, so HK could be in for rocky times.

This has appeared on ‘Moon of Alabama’ but is worth repeating here – the National Endowment of Democracy’s 2012 funding of the very subject that’s now in the news.

National Democratic Institute for International Affairs - $460,000

To foster awareness regarding Hong Kong’s political institutions and constitutional reform process and to develop the capacity of citizens – particularly university students – to more effectively participate in the public debate on political reform, NDI will work with civil society organizations on parliamentary monitoring, a survey, and development of an Internet portal, allowing students and citizens to explore possible reforms leading to universal suffrage.

(Extract from NED’s 2102 Annual Report)

All a happy coincidence, no doubt.

marknesop , October 1, 2014 at 9:08 pm

Ummmm….who is the democratic freedomizer waiting in Hong Kong’s wings? To the best of my knowledge there is no Chinese Navalny. Who have the “peaceful protesters” got in mind if Leung resigns (which I very much doubt he will)?

China better not dick around with this, because you know what’s next if the street mobs don’t get it done. Cue the rooftop snipers.

Moscow Exile, October 1, 2014 at 10:32 pm

So it’s started!

Kerry has called on HK police to show restraint over the “pro-democracy” movement.

So I suppose they can start lobbing Molotov cocktails at them now, knowing that “the Americans are with us”, as they liked to chant in the Ukraine.

China is not pleased.

The Grauniad reports a report by a press agency, and a French one to boot:

Hong Kong protests: China warns US not to meddle in ‘internal affairs’

Moscow Exile, October 1, 2014 at 10:45 pm

And accusations in the comments of Putinbots metamorphosing into Chinabots are now already appearing.

Langleybots at work?

astabada , October 2, 2014 at 1:50 am

I think we’ll see two key differences vis-a-vis the Ukraine:

  1. The difference between a country thoroughly infiltrated by Western agents and one which is not
  2. The difference between a true leadership and an oligarchy of crooks.
yalensis, October 2, 2014 at 2:33 am

Expect to see mysterious “snipers” show up at some point, to stir the pot.

Moscow Exile, October 2, 2014 at 2:44 am

Nay, before that happens that old fart McCain has to fly in and say to them “America is with you!”

yalensis, October 2, 2014 at 3:29 am

A cia-bot named “jecoz” posts this inane comment:

Here we go another home-grown rebellion against a dictatorship and the leftist faithful blame America instead of supporting those who dare to defy an unelected tyrant. Message to china and her guardianista lackeys: the US has nothing to do with this. Just try to resist the temptation to bring in the tanks and run over people please.

Which is responded to by “JiminNH” (2 OCT 3:51 AM), with supporting links, regarding the ties of the Chinese dissidents with U.S. State Dept.

Are you so sure about your assertions? Did you actually inquire into the facts before making that definitive statement?

If so, you missed the following articles from April 2014 regarding two of the foremost protest leaders (Anson Chan and Marin Lee) meeting with US VP Joe Biden:

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1466666/beijing-upset-after-martin-lee-and-anson-chan-meet-joe-biden-white

http://www.worldtribune.com/2014/04/14/china-gets-vulgar-white-house-meeting-hong-kong-pro-democracy-leaders/

You also missed this about Occupy Central leader Prof. Benny Tai and his several year relationship with the US State Dept’s National Endowment for Democracy and the National Democratic Institute: http://journal-neo.org/2014/10/01/hong-kong-s-occupy-central-is-us-backed-sedition/

(…)

In other words, this is CRC (“Colour Revolution Classic”) at its best, Gene Sharp style.

With Jen Psaki mewing about the lovely winsome students seeking democracy, etc.

The 18-year-old Chinese freshmen are admittedly a tad more winsome than grizzled old Ukrainian Nazis like Tahnybok; however, in the latter case, Psaki had to improvise and just toss in whatever debris she had in her scrap heap; whereas, the storyboard arc for the Chinese revolution seems to have been better plotted out over a longer period of time.

Jen, October 2, 2014 at 5:30 am

That bespectacled geeky student leader Joshua Wong and his Scholarism group are said to be receiving money from the US Consulate in HK and secret American donors. I’ve heard also that another of those Occupy Central leaders, Jimmy Lai, has met with Paul Wolfowitz in the past.

Analogy with EuroMaidan was also early on noted by commenters to Moon of Alabama first post on the subject -- The (NED Financed) Hong Kong Riots (Sep 29. 2014):

The alleged issue in question is the election of new Hong Kong chief executive in 2017. According to Hong Kong's basic law, which was implemented when Britain gave up its dictatorship over the colony, there will be universal suffrage - everyone will be allowed to vote - but the candidates for the position will have to go through some pre-screening by a commission. This is what China had promised and this is what the students, falsely claiming that China is backtracking from its promises, want to change.

brian | Oct 2, 2014 6:51:54 AM | 170

Andrew Korybko
1 hr ·

Gene Sharp's protégé, Jamila Raqib, coauthored an op-ed in Huffington Post advertising the fact that the 'Albert Einstein Institute's' destabilization tactics are being used in Hong Kong.

I've read every one of Sharp's major works and they are designed, even in his own words, to topple governments. He has written strategic guiding manuals on how to achieve this.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shank/why-hong-kongs-occupycent_b_5906184.html

Hong Kong is not a protest, it is a Color Revolution. Well-intentioned individuals are being duped to join a movement aimed at overthrowing the authorities through a soft coup (for now), in a move that has never happened before in modern China. Legitimate grievances are being exploited by a revolutionary core and their cohorts to bring as many peaceful civilians into the fracas for use as human shields, in the hope that this will guarantee their own security amids the crackdown that some of them are trying to provoke.

My full analysis on this event will be forthcoming in the next couple of days on Oriental Review
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10104993491934055&id=12462833

brian | Oct 2, 2014 5:44:16 PM | 193

@188

very interesting, as is this comment left by someone

Do you remember the "please help us" video clip from Ukraine?

Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgpELf-0X8E

And here you have another "please help us" video. This time from Hong-Kong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vvxlGUki7U

Did you notice any similarities? :)

also its 'open' societies that are more prone to penetration/infiltration by foreign powers

Demian | Oct 2, 2014 6:30:51 PM | 196

@brian #193:

Brilliant catch! The juxtaposition of those two videos tells you everything you need to know about the Hong Kong riots. That comment deserves to be front paged. (I still don't think that snipers will be used in Hong Kong, though.)

As is the case with ISIS, MoA is turning out to be my most useful source of information.

For the Euromaidan video, I used the Youtube comment translation feature for the first time: very nice. Since the vast majority of commenters are Polish, it comes as no surprise that most comments are very stupid.

... ... ...

Chronology

From 2014 Hong Kong protests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

26 September[edit]

Aerial view of protesters on Lung Wui Road on the evening of 27 September

Having received a Notice of No Objection approving the assembly that day between 00:01 to 23:59, protesters proceeded to gather in Tim Mei Road in the forecourt at the eastern entrance of the Central Government Offices.[29] At around 22:30 on 26 September, up to 100 protesters led by Joshua Wong, the Convenor of Scholarism, went to "reclaim" the privatised Civic Square for the public by clambering over the fence of the square; they tried to tear down the metal barriers around the central flag podium.[30] The police force mobilised on Civic Square and started to physically carry away the protesters two hours afterwards.[31][32]

27 September[edit]

At 00:45 on 27 September, a large police force surrounded protesters at the centre of the Civic Square. At first, the police allowed protesters to leave voluntarily if they showed their personal identification documents. For those who refused to leave, each was carried away by at least four police officers. Protesters in the Square included secondary students and their parents, as well as representatives from student organisations. At 1:20am, the police applied pepper spray to the crowd near the Legislative Council, with some secondary students injured. From the evening of September until the following midnight, 13 people were arrested including Joshua Wong, who was detained for over 40 hours.[33] He was released after the High Court unconditionally approved his lawyers' writ of habeas corpus.[34][35]

At 1:30 pm, the police force carried out the second round of clearance during which 48 men and 13 women, aged between 17 and 58, were taken into custody for forcible entry into government premises and unlawful assembly.[36] A 27-year-old man was also arrested for possession of an offensive weapon. All the arrested were detained at the Police College in Wong Chuk Hang. The police spokesman declared the assembly outside the Central Government Complex at Tim Mei Avenue illegal, and advised citizens against participating in the assembly, passing by or getting close to that area. The arrested demonstrators, including Legislative Councillor Leung Kwok-hung and some HKFS members, were released around 9 pm. However, HKFS representatives Alex Chow Yong-kang and Lester Shum were detained for 30 hours.[37] The police later cleared the assembly, arresting a total of 78 people who ranged from 16 to 58 years of age.[38][39]

28 September[edit]

Protesters occupy Harcourt Road on 29 September

At 1:40am, Benny Tai, one of the initiators of the Occupy Central movement, announced the beginning of Occupy Central at a rally taking place the Central Government Complex at Tim Mei Avenue.[40][41] Occupy Central had been widely expected to start on 1 October, but was accelerated to capitalise on the mass student presence.[40] The Occupy Central movement similarly demanded the immediate withdrawal of the decision on political reform by the National People's Congress Standing Committee, and immediate public consultation on the issue.[42] Later that day it was reported that at least 34 people had been injured in that day's protests.[43]

Tear gas fired on protesters outside Government Headquarters

Later that morning, protests escalated as police blocked roads and bridges entering Tim Mei Avenue. Protest leaders called upon citizens to come to Admiralty to encircle the police force.[44] Tensions at the junction of Tim Mei Avenue and Harcourt Road kept rising after several jostles which ended up with the usage of pepper spray. As night fell, armed riot police advanced gradually from Wanchai toward Admiralty. As the police progressed towards Central and Sheung Wan, a police officer unfurled a black banner that stated "Warning, Tear Smoke". At that point, shots of tear gas were fired, and protesters hastily distributed masks and bottles of water amongst themselves.[45] The first few tear gas canisters were fired by armed riot police which were surrounded at around 6 pm.[46][47] Protesters retreated to Admiralty. The tear gas used against apparently unarmed and peaceful protesters was cited by the media as a trigger for anger and more citizens joining the protests.[48] Tens of thousands of citizens joined in the protest in reaction to the firing of tear gas and built up new strongholds in Causeway Bay and Mong Kok, two major commercial areas of Hong Kong.[49][50]

According to police spokesmen, officers exercised "maximum tolerance," and tear gas was used only after protesters refused to disperse and "violently charged".[51][52] The police confirmed that they had fired tear gas 87 times.[53] The media recalled that last time Hong Kong police had used tear gas was on Korean protesters during the 2005 World Trade Organization conference.[47][51]

29 September[edit]

With the closure of Admiralty Station and the use of tear gas, many citizens joined in the protests and went to other parts of the city, including Wan Chai, Causeway Bay, Mong Kok, and universities.[54] At dawn after the night of tear gas, the number of protesters that remained in the occupation area was more or less the same. Yet police had changed their strategy, easing their defence level; some police negotiation cadres were at the occupation areas to negotiate with protesters to urge them to leave. A police spokesperson announced that 89 protesters had been arrested. There were 41 casualties, including 12 police.[55]

On 29 September, Carrie Lam announced that the second round of public consultations on political reform, originally planned to be completed by the end of the year, would be postponed. Also, the annual National Day fireworks celebration on 1 October was announced to be cancelled.[56]

1 October[edit]

Hundreds of demonstrators gathered outside the Golden Bauhinia Square in Wan Chai

Joshua Wong and several Scholarism members attended the National Day flag raising ceremony at the Golden Bauhinia Square, having undertaken not to shout slogans or make any gestures during the flag raising. Instead, the students faced away from the flag to show their discontent. District councillor Paul Zimmerman opened a yellow umbrella in protest inside the reception after the ceremony.[57][58][59]

2 October[edit]

Volunteer-organized recycling station on Harcourt Road, Admiralty, inside the occupation zone

Activists lay siege to the Central Government Headquarters in Tim Mei Avenue. Over the end of the first week, protesters alleged that the police made use of ambulances and trucks to bring weapons, such as tear gas canisters, into the headquarters buildings.[60] Subsequently, protesters have demanded the right to inspect ambulances and vehicles delivering food and water passing through their barricades. This demand was conceded to by the police, with SCMP reporting there was only food and supplies on the trucks after the trucks were inspected by the protesters.[60]

Shortly before midnight, the Hong Kong Government responded to an ultimatum, to CY Leung, demanding universal suffrage with unfiltered rights of candidate nomination. Chief Secretary Carrie Lam was to hold talks with student leaders about political reform at an unspecified date.[61]

3 October[edit]

Police amidst a confrontation between opposing groups in Mong Kok

In the early morning, violence started to break out in Mong Kok, Kowloon and Causeway Bay, Hong Kong Island. Groups of anti-Occupy Central activists including triad members and locals punched and kicked protesters while tearing down their tents and barricades.[11][12][60][62] and locals whose day-to-day activities had been affected by the Occupy movement.[63] The group in Mong Kok also attacked reporters; and gave a student head injuries.[11][62][64] Occupiers accused the police of giving the attackers free rein by arresting them but releasing them shortly after. Occupiers said anti-Occupy groups were linked to the triads,[65] and one legislator accused the government of orchestrating triads to clear the protest sites.[12] It was also reported that triads, as proprietors of many businesses in Mong Kok, could have their own motivations to disperse the protesters.[50] Amnesty International condemned the police for "[failing] in their duty to protect protesters from attacks" and stating that women were attacked, threatened, and sexually assaulted while police watched and did nothing.[48] Commander Paul Edmiston of the police admitted officers had been working long hours and had received heavy criticism. Responding to accusations that police chose not to protect the protesters, he said: "No matter what we do, we’re criticized for doing too little or too much. We can't win."[51]

In the aftermath of the scuffle, police arrested 20 people. There were 18 people injured, including 6 police officers. Police confirmed that eight of the people they had arrested had triad backgrounds. All eight were released on bail.[12][66] As a response to the clash, student leaders of Hong Kong halted plans to hold talks with the government, citing CY Leung's "insincerity and stealth tactics" as the main reason.[67]

4 October[edit]

On 4 October 2014, counter-protesters wearing blue ribbons marched in support of the police and the tactics they employed, claiming they were not excessive.[60] Patrick Ko of the Voice of Loving Hong Kong group accused the protesters of having double standards, and said that if the police had enforced the law, protesters would have already been evicted.[68] Another anti-Occupy spokesperson Chan Ching-sum complained the continued occupation of roads was "destroy[ing] Hong Kong people's daily lives" and unrelated to democracy.[69] The anti-Occupy group Caring Hong Kong Power staged their own rally, in which they announced their support for the use of fire-arms by police, as well as the deployment of the People's Liberation Army.[70]

In the afternoon, Chief Executive CY Leung insisted that government operations and schools affected by Occupy Central must resume on Monday. Former Democratic Party lawmaker Cheung Man-Kwong claimed the occupy campaign was in a "very dangerous situation," and urged them to "sit down and talk, in order to avoid tragedy".[71] The Federation of Students demanded the government explain the previous night's events before continuing talks and that they would continue to occupy streets in different areas, including Mong Kok and Causeway Bay.[72] The Pan-Democratic camp held a press conference criticising the police response on the previous night, accusing it of being an orchestrated attack involving the triads. They also criticised the police presence as insufficient.[73] Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok denied accusations against the police, and explained the reason for not using tear gas was due to the difference in geographical environment. Police claimed that protesters' barricades had prevented reinforcements from arriving on the scene.[74]

Pan-democracy member of the Legislative Council James To said that "the government has used organised, orchestrated forces and even triad gangs in [an] attempt to disperse citizens."[12] Violent attacks on journalists were strongly condemned by The Foreign Correspondents' Club, the Hong Kong Journalists' Association and local broadcaster RTHK.[75] Three former US consuls general to HK, Richard Williams, Richard Boucher and Stephen M. Young, wrote a letter to the Chief Executive asking to solve the disputes peacefully.[76]

5 October[edit]

A barricade in Mong Kok

Leading establishment figures who had been sympathetic to the liberal cause, including University heads and politicians, appeared to urge in concert for the occupy movement to leave the street for their own safety.[77] The rumours of a planned operation by the police did not occur. Another group of 80 scholars released a statement later in the day urging the government to listen to the protesters' demands. Alex Chow Yong-kang, leader of the Federation of Students, rejected calls by the government for dialogue unless demands and the protesters' safety were met. Later in the night, he announced that the police had met this requirement, and talks continued throughout the night between the Federation and the government.

6 October[edit]

Conflict between Occupy and anti-Occupy groups continued on Sunday but was less than on previous days. Some protester groups disagreed on whether or not to un-occupy Lung Wo Road in Admiralty and the Mong Kok district.[78][79][80] On 6 October, Patrick Ko, politician and leader of Voice of Loving Hong Kong, said that it was "forgivable" for triads to attack protesters in Mongkok, since the occupation was disrupting triad business.[81]

7 October[edit]

Protest numbers dwindled after leaders met with government officials and agreed to meet for talks, beginning on 10 October, which would be limited in scope. Student protest leader Lester Shum said that protests would continue in the meantime until "practical measures [have] been forged between the government and the people."[82]

9 October[edit]

The government cancelled the meeting with student leaders that had been scheduled for 10 October.[83] The government's Chief Secretary for Administration, Carrie Lam, explained at a news conference that "We cannot accept the linking of illegal activities to whether or not to talk."[84]

Alex Chow, head of the Federation of Students, said "I feel like the government is saying that if there are fewer people on the streets, they can cancel the meeting. Students urge people who took part in the civil disobedience to go out on the streets again to occupy."[84] Pro-democracy legislators threatened to veto non-essential funding applications, potentially disrupting government operations, in support of the protesters.[85]

10 October[edit]

In defiance of police warnings, thousands of protesters, many bringing tents with them, returned to the streets.[85] Over a hundred tents were pitched across the eight-lane Harcourt Road thoroughfare in Admiralty, alongside dozens of food and first-aid marquees. The ranks of protesters continued to swell on the 11th.[86]

11 October[edit]

The student leaders issued an open letter to President Xi Jinping saying that CY Leung's report to NPCSC disregarded public opinion and failed to account faithfully for citizens' wishes.[87][88]

12 October[edit]

In an exclusive pre-recorded interview with the Chinese-language TVB show On the Record,[89] CY Leung said the occupy protest is not considered a revolution and declared that his resignation "would not solve anything".[90] Leung said the decision to use tear gas was made by the police, without any political considerations.[91] Several press organisations including the Hong Kong Journalists Association objected to the exclusion of other media, feeling that Leung owed the public full explanations since the start of the protests. They suggested Leung was deliberately avoiding questions about the issues surrounding the electoral framework.[92][93]

13 October[edit]

Police dismantle roadblocks on Queensway

At 5.30 am, police started an operation to remove unmanned barricades in Harcourt Road (Admiralty site) to "reduce the chance of traffic accidents".[87]

Within hours, hundreds of men, many wearing surgical masks and carrying crowbars and cutting tools, began removing barricades at various sites and attacked protesters. Police made attempts to separate the groups. Protesters reinforced some barricades using bamboo and concrete.[94][95][96] Protesters claimed that the attacks were organised and involved triad groups.[97]

Police made three arrests for assault and possession of weapons. Although police cautioned against reinforcing the existing obstacles or setting up new obstacles to enlarge the occupied area, occupiers reinstated the barriers overnight.[94] In the early morning of 14 October, police conducted a dawn raid to dismantle barricades in Yee Wo Street (Causeway Bay site), opening one lane to westbound traffic.[98] Police reclaimed Queensway, dismantled barricades and reopened it to traffic.[99]

14 October[edit]

Also on 13 October, anti-occupy protesters began to besiege the headquarters of Next Media, publisher of Apple Daily, accusing the paper of biased reporting of OC and obstructing its distribution.[100] Masked men among the protesters prevented the loading of copies of Apple Daily as well as The New York Times onto delivery vans. However, the delivery of Hong Kong Economic Journal, which is also printed at the works, was allowed.[101] Apple Daily sought a court injunction and a High Court judge issued a temporary order to prevent any blocking of the entrance saying this was important to the freedom of press.[102] Five press unions made a statement condemning the harassment of journalists by anti-occupy protesters.[103]

15 October[edit]

Protesters occupying Lung Wo Road in front of the Office of the Chief Executive. People's Liberation Army Hong Kong Garrison is just next to it

Before midnight, protesters stopped traffic on Lung Wo Road, the arterial road north of the Central Government Complex at Central, and began erecting barricades. The Hong Kong Police Force was unable to hold their cordon at Lung Wo Road Tunnel and had to retreat for reinforcement and organised redemption. Around 3 am, police began to clear the road using batons and pepper spray. By dawn, traffic on the road resumed and the protesters retreated into Tamar Park, while 45 arrests were made.

Footage from the local television channel TVB shows that during the operation, one protester, later identified as volunteer social worker and Civic Party member Ken Tsang, was carried into a secluded location with his hands tied behind his back, and then punched, kicked and stamped on repeatedly by about six police officers in rotation. The beating lasted for about four minutes.[104][105][106][107] The video clips have been transmitted internationally and provoked outrage; Amnesty International called for the prosecution of the police officers involved. Hong Kong's secretary for security, Lai Tung-kwok, announced that "the officers involved will be temporarily removed from their current duties."[104][105] Reporters at the scene said that journalists were treated no differently to protesters.[108] One reporter alleged that he was grabbed, kicked and punched by police officers, who ignored his protestations that he was a journalist.[109]

17 October[edit]

Police forcing the protesters back southwards on Nathan Road in the evening

At 5am, Police dismantled the barricades and tents at the Mong Kok site, including the main camp at the intersection of Nathan Road and Argyle Street, and opened the northbound side of Nathan Road to traffic for the first time in three weeks. The protesters were allowed to remain on the southbound side of the road. After work and school let out, at least 9000 protesters returned to Nathan Road to try to retake the northbound lanes, leading to clashes between protesters and police armed with riot gear. The police claims to have 15 police injuries and made at least 26 arrests, including veteran war photojournalist Paula Bronstein.[110] Around midnight, the police retreated and the protesters re-erected barricades on Nathan Road.[111][112]

18 October[edit]

Clashes resumed in Mong Kok as protesters donning hard hats and protective gear made of baby mats fought off police officers armed with batons. 20 injuries were reported.[113]

19 October[edit]

Demonstrators packed the streets in Mong Kok where there were repeated clashes. Democrat Martin Lee at the scene said "triad elements" in Mong Kok were trying to stir up violence to undermine the pro-democracy movement.[114] At night, two pro-democracy lawmakers, Fernando Cheung and Claudia Mo, appeared at Mong Kok to mediate between the protesters and the police, leading to a lowering of tensions as the police and protesters each stepped back and widened the buffer zone. No clashes were reported for the night.[115]

21 October[edit]

The government and the HKFS held a first round of talks on 21 October in a televised open debate. HKFS secretary-general Alex Chow Yong-kang, Vice secretary Lester Shum, general secretary Eason Chung (鍾 耀華), and standing members Nathan Law (羅冠聰) and Yvonne Leung (梁麗幗) met with the HK government representatives Chief secretary Carrie Lam, secretary of justice Rimsky Yuen, undersecretary Raymond Tam, office director Edward Yau and undersecretary Lau Kong-wah.

The discussion was moderated by Leonard Cheng (鄭國漢), the president of Lingnan University.[116][117][118][119]

Later version of Wikipedia page

2014 Hong Kong protests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the protests in Hong Kong from 26 September 2014 to 15 December 2014. For the related political movement, see Umbrella Movement.

2014 Hong Kong protests
Umbrella Revolution in Admiralty Night View 20141010.jpg

The Admiralty protest site on the night of 10 October

Date 26 September 2014 – 15 December 2014
Location Hong Kong:
Causes Standing Committee of the National People's Congress decision on electoral reform regarding future Hong Kong Chief Executive and Legislative Council elections
Goals
Methods Occupations, sit-ins, civil disobedience, mobile street protests, internet activism, hunger strikes, Internet hacking
Result
  • No changes to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress decision on 2014 Hong Kong electoral reform
  • Suffragists launched mobile street protests in various areas
Concessions
given
  • The Hong Kong SAR government promises to submit a "New Occupy report" to the Chinese Central government[5]
Parties to the civil conflict
Umbrella Movement
Pro-democracy activists
Hacking groups
Authorities
Anti occupy movement
Triads[6]
Injuries and arrests
Injuries 470+ (as of 29 Nov)[7]
Arrested 955[8]
 

75 turned themselves in

Sites of significant protests
Sites of significant protests

Admiralty

Admiralty

Mong Kok

Mong Kok

Causeway Bay

Causeway Bay

Tsim Sha Tsui

Tsim Sha Tsui

Protests in Hong Kong began in September 2014, after the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) of the People's Republic of China announced its decision on proposed reforms to the Hong Kong electoral system. In its decision, the NPCSC said that civil nominations, whereby a candidate could run for election to the Hong Kong Legislative Council if he or she received signed endorsement of 1% of the registered voters, would be disallowed. The decision stated that a 1200-member nominating committee, the composition of which remains subject to a second round of consultation, would elect two to three electoral candidates with more than half of the votes before the general public could vote on them.[9]

Demonstrations began outside the Hong Kong Government headquarters, and members of what would eventually be called the Umbrella Movement occupied several major city intersections.[10] The Hong Kong Federation of Students and Scholarism began protesting outside the government headquarters on 22 September 2014 against the NPCSC's decision.[11] On the evening of 26 September, several hundred demonstrators led by Joshua Wong breached a security barrier and entered the forecourt of the Central Government Complex (nicknamed "Civic Square"), which was once a public space that has been barred from public entry since July 2014. Officers cordoned off protesters within the courtyard and restricted their movement overnight, eventually removing them by force the next day.[12][13]

On 28 September, the Occupy Central with Love and Peace movement announced that they would begin their civil disobedience campaign immediately.[14] Protesters blocked both east–west arterial routes in northern Hong Kong Island near Admiralty. Police tactics (including the use of tear gas) and attacks on protesters by opponents that included triad members, triggered more citizens to join the protests, occupying Causeway Bay and Mong Kok.[15][16][17] The number of protesters peaked at more than 100,000 at any given time.[18][19] In a poll conducted in December, up to 20% of the 1,011 surveyed responded that they have taken part in the protests.[20] The government called for an end to the protests by setting a 'deadline' of 6 October, but this was ignored by protesters, although they allowed government workers to enter offices that had previously been blocked.[21]

The state-run Chinese media claimed repeatedly that the West had played an "instigating" role in the protests, and that "more people in Hong Kong are supporting the anti-Occupy Central movement," and warned of "deaths and injuries and other grave consequences."[22] In an opinion poll carried out by Chinese University of Hong Kong, only 36.1% of 802 people surveyed between 8–15 October accept NPCSC's decision but 55.6% are willing to accept if HKSAR Government would democratise the nominating committee during the 2nd phase of public consultation period.[23]

On 23 October, the United Nations Human Rights Committee emphasised "the need to ensure universal suffrage, which means both the right to be elected as well as the right to vote."[24] China's Foreign Ministry responded that China's policy on Hong Kong's elections had "unshakable legal status and effect".[25]

 

Contents

Background

Main articles: Democratic development in Hong Kong and 2014 Hong Kong electoral reform

Political background

As a result of the negotiations and the 1984 agreement between China and Britain, the British colony Hong Kong was returned to the People's Republic of China and became its first Special Administrative Region on 1 July 1997, under the principle of "one country, two systems". Hong Kong has a different political system from mainland China. Hong Kong's independent judiciary functions under the common law framework.[26][27] The Hong Kong Basic Law, the constitutional document drafted by the Chinese side before the handover based on the terms enshrined in the Joint Declaration,[28] governs its political system, and stipulates that Hong Kong shall have a high degree of autonomy in all matters except foreign relations and military defence.[29] The declaration stipulates that the region maintain its capitalist economic system and guarantees the rights and freedoms of its people for at least 50 years after the 1997 handover. The guarantees over the territory's autonomy and the individual rights and freedoms are enshrined in the Hong Kong Basic Law, which outlines the system of governance of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, but which is subject to the interpretation of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC).[30][31]

The leader of Hong Kong, the Chief Executive, is currently elected by a 1200-member Election Committee, though Article 45 of the Basic Law states that "the ultimate aim is the selection of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures."[32] A 2007 decision by the Standing Committee opened the possibility of selecting the Chief Executive via universal suffrage in the 2017 Chief Executive election,[33] and the first round of consultations to implement the needed electoral reforms ran for five months in early 2014. Chief Executive CY Leung then, per procedure, submitted a report to the Standing Committee inviting them to deliberate whether it is necessary to amend the method of selection of the Chief Executive.[34]

Standing Committee decision on electoral reform

On 31 August 2014, the tenth session of the Standing Committee in the twelfth National People's Congress set limits for the 2016 Legislative Council election and 2017 Chief Executive election. While notionally allowing for universal suffrage, the decision imposes the standard that "the Chief Executive shall be a person who loves the country and loves Hong Kong," and stipulates "the method for selecting the Chief Executive by universal suffrage must provide corresponding institutional safeguards for this purpose". The decision states that for the 2017 Chief Executive election, a nominating committee, mirroring the present 1200-member Election Committee be formed to nominate two to three candidates, each of whom must receive the support of more than half of the members of the nominating committee. After popular election of one of the nominated candidates, the Chief Executive-elect "will have to be appointed by the Central People's Government." The process of forming the 2016 Legislative Council would be unchanged, but following the new process for the election of the Chief Executive, a new system to elect the Legislative Council via universal suffrage would be developed with the approval of Beijing.[10]

The Standing Committee decision is set to be the basis for electoral reform crafted by the Legislative Council. Hundreds of suffragists gathered on the night of the Beijing announcement near the government offices to protest the decision.[35][36]

Events

At a gathering in Hong Kong on 1 September to explain the NPCSC decision, deputy secretary general Li Fei said that the procedure would protect the broad stability of Hong Kong now and in the future.[35] Pro-democracy advocates viewed the decision as a betrayal of the principle of "one person, one vote," in that candidates deemed unsuitable by the Beijing authorities would have been pre-emptively screened out by the mechanism.[35] About 100 suffragists attended the gathering, and some were ejected for heckling and protesting.[35] Police broke up a group of demonstrators protesting outside the hotel where Li was staying, arresting 19 people for illegal assembly.[37]

In response to the NPCSC decision, the Democratic Party legislators promised to veto the framework for both elections as being inherently undemocratic; Occupy Central with Love and Peace (OCLP) announced that it would organise civil disobedience protests.[35] The Hong Kong Federation of Students (representing tertiary students) and Scholarism mobilised students and staged a coordinated class boycott. They organised public rallies and street assemblies.[38][39] Tertiary students would commence a one-week boycott from 22 September. At the same time, Scholarism organised a demonstration outside of the Central Government Offices barricade on 13 September 2014 where they declared a class-boycott on 26 September.[40]

September 2014

Policemen surround the students protesting at Civic Square (27 September)

Having received a "notice of no objection" to the assembly on 26 September 2014 between 00:01 to 23:59, protesters gathered in Tim Mei Avenue near the eastern entrance of the Central Government Offices.[41] At around 22:30, up to 100 protesters led by Joshua Wong, the Convenor of Scholarism, went to "reclaim" the privatised Civic Square for the public by clambering over the fence of the square.[42] The police mobilised on Civic Square, surrounded protesters at the centre and prepared to physically remove the protesters overnight.[43][44] Protesters who chose to depart were allowed to do so; each of the remaining ones was carried away by four or more police officers. At 1:20am (of 27 September), the police used pepper spray on a crowd that had gathered near the Legislative Council, and some students were injured. By the following midnight, 13 people had been arrested including Joshua Wong, who was released after more than 40 hours upon being granted a writ of habeas corpus.[45]

At 1:30 pm, the police carried out the second round of clearances, and 48 men and 13 women were arrested for forcible entry into government premises and unlawful assembly.[46] A man was also arrested for possession of an offensive weapon. A police spokesman declared the assembly outside the Central Government Complex at Tim Mei Avenue illegal, and advised citizens to avoid the area. The arrested demonstrators, including Legislative Councillor Leung Kwok-hung and some HKFS members, were released around 9 pm. However, HKFS representatives Alex Chow and Lester Shum were detained for 30 hours.[47] The police eventually cleared the assembly, arresting a total of 78 people.[48][49]

File:Hong Kong Umbrella Revolution-HD.webmPlay media

Tear gas fired to disperse protesters outside government headquarters (28 September)

Occupy Central with Love and Peace had been expected to start their occupation on 1 October, but this was accelerated to capitalise on the mass student presence.[50] At 1:40am on 28 September, Benny Tai, one of the founders of OCLP, announced its commencement at a rally near the Central Government Complex.[50][51]

Later that morning, protests escalated as police blocked roads and bridges entering Tim Mei Avenue. Protest leaders urged citizens to come to Admiralty to encircle the police.[52] Tensions rose at the junction of Tim Mei Avenue and Harcourt Road after the police used pepper spray. As night fell, armed riot police advanced from Wan Chai towards Admiralty and unfurled a banner that stated "Warning, Tear Smoke". Seconds later, at around 6 pm, shots of tear gas were fired.[53][54][55] The heavy-handed policing, including the use of tear gas on peaceful protesters, inspired tens of thousands of citizens to join the protests in Admiralty that night.[56][57][58][17][59][60] Containment errors by the police – the closure of Tamar Park and Admiralty Station – caused a spill-over to other parts of the city, including Wan Chai, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok.[58][61][62] 3,000 protesters occupied a road in Mong Kok and 1,000 went to Causeway Bay.[59] The total number of protesters on the streets swelled to 80,000,[62] at times considerably exceeding 100,000.[18][19]

The police confirmed that they fired tear gas 87 times.[63] The media recalled that last time Hong Kong police had used tear gas was on Korean protesters during the 2005 World Trade Organization conference.[55][64] At least 34 people were injured in that day's protests.[65] According to police spokesmen, officers exercised "maximum tolerance," and tear gas was used only after protesters refused to disperse and "violently charged".[64][66] However, the SCMP reported that police were seen to charge the suffragists.[67]

On 29 September, police adopted a less aggressive approach, sometimes employing negotiators to urge protesters to leave. 89 protesters were arrested; there were 41 casualties, including 12 police.[17] Chief Secretary for Administration, Carrie Lam announced that the second round of public consultations on political reform, originally planned to be completed by the end of the year, would be postponed.[68]

October 2014

Joshua Wong and several Scholarism members attended the National Day flag raising ceremony on 1 October at the Golden Bauhinia Square, having undertaken not to shout slogans or make any gestures during the flag raising. Instead, the students faced away from the flag to show their discontent. District councillor Paul Zimmerman opened a yellow umbrella in protest inside the reception after the ceremony.[69][70][71] Protesters set up a short-lived fourth occupation site at a section of Canton Road in Tsim Sha Tsui.[72]

On 2 October, activists lay siege to the Central Government Headquarters.[58][73] Shortly before midnight, the Hong Kong Government responded to an ultimatum demanding universal suffrage with unscreened nominees: Carrie Lam agreed to hold talks with student leaders about political reform at an unspecified date.[74]

On 3 October, violence erupted in Mong Kok and Causeway Bay when groups of anti-Occupy Central activists including triad members and locals attacked suffragists while tearing down their tents and barricades.[15][16][75][76] A student suffered head injuries. Journalists were also attacked.[15][77][78] The Foreign Correspondents' Club accused the police of appearing to arrest alleged attackers but releasing them shortly after.[79] One legislator accused the government of orchestrating triads to clear the protest sites.[16] It was also reported that triads, as proprietors of many businesses in Mong Kok, had their own motivations to attack the protesters.[60] There were 20 arrests, and 18 people injured, including 6 police officers. Eight of the people arrested had triad backgrounds, but were released on bail.[16][80] Student leaders blamed the government for the attacks, and halted plans to hold talks with the government.[81]

On 4 October, counter-protesters wearing blue ribbons marched in support of the police.[82] Patrick Ko of the Voice of Loving Hong Kong group accused the suffragists of having double standards, and said that if the police had enforced the law, protesters would have already been evicted.[83] The anti-Occupy group Caring Hong Kong Power staged their own rally, at which they announced their support for the use of fire-arms by police and the deployment of the People's Liberation Army.[84]

In the afternoon, Chief Executive CY Leung insisted that government operations and schools affected by the occupation must resume on Monday. Former Democratic Party lawmaker Cheung Man-Kwong claimed the occupy campaign was in a "very dangerous situation," and urged them to "sit down and talk, in order to avoid tragedy".[85] The Federation of Students demanded the government explain the previous night's events and said they would continue their occupation of streets.[86] Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok denied accusations against the police, and explained that the reason for not using tear gas was due to the difference in geographical environment. Police claimed that protesters' barricades had prevented reinforcements from arriving on the scene.[87]

Pan-democracy legislator James To said that "the government has used organised, orchestrated forces and even triad gangs in [an] attempt to disperse citizens."[16][88] Violent attacks on journalists were strongly condemned by The Foreign Correspondents' Club, the Hong Kong Journalists' Association and local broadcaster RTHK.[89] Three former US consuls general to HK wrote a letter to the Chief Executive asking him to solve the disputes peacefully.[90]

On 5 October, leading establishment figures sympathetic to the liberal cause, including university heads and politicians, urged the suffragists to leave the streets for their own safety.[91] The rumoured clearance operation by the police did not occur.[21] At lunchtime the government offered to hold talks if the protesters cleared the roads. Later that night, the government agreed to guarantee the protesters' safety, and Alex Chow Yong-kang, leader of the Federation of Students (HKFS), announced that he had agreed to begin preparations for talks with Carrie Lam.[21]

On 9 October, the government cancelled the meeting with student leaders that had been scheduled for 10 October.[92] Carrie Lam, explained at a news conference that "We cannot accept the linking of illegal activities to whether or not to talk."[93] Alex Chow said "I feel like the government is saying that if there are fewer people on the streets, they can cancel the meeting. Students urge people who took part in the civil disobedience to go out on the streets again to occupy."[93] Pan-democrat legislators threatened to veto non-essential funding applications, potentially disrupting government operations, in support of the suffragists.[94]

On 10 October, in defiance of police warnings, thousands of protesters, many with tents, returned to the streets.[94] Over a hundred tents were pitched across the eight-lane Harcourt Road thoroughfare in Admiralty, alongside dozens of food and first-aid marquees. The ranks of protesters continued to swell on the 11th.[95]

On 11 October, the student leaders issued an open letter to Xi Jinping saying that CY Leung's report to NPCSC disregarded public opinion and ignored "Hong Kong people's genuine wishes."[96]

At 5.30 am on 12 October, police started an operation to remove unmanned barricades in Harcourt Road (Admiralty site) to "reduce the chance of traffic accidents".[96] In a pre-recorded TV interview[97] CY Leung declared that his resignation "would not solve anything".[98] He said the decision to use tear gas was made by the police without any political interference.[99] Several press organisations including the Hong Kong Journalists Association objected to the exclusion of other journalists, and said that Leung was deliberately avoiding questions about the issues surrounding the electoral framework.[100][101]

Police dismantle roadblocks on Queensway

On 13 October, hundreds of men, many wearing surgical masks and carrying crowbars and cutting tools, began removing barricades at various sites and attacking suffragists. Police made attempts to separate the groups. Suffragists repaired and reinforced some barricades using bamboo and concrete.[102][103][104] Protesters again claimed that the attacks were organised and involved triad groups.[105] Police made three arrests for assault and possession of weapons. Although police cautioned against reinforcing the existing obstacles or setting up new obstacles to enlarge the occupied area, suffragists later reinstated the barriers overnight.[102] Anti-occupy protesters began to besiege the headquarters of Next Media, publisher of Apple Daily. They accused the paper of biased reporting.[106] Masked men among the protesters prevented the loading of copies of Apple Daily as well as The New York Times onto delivery vans.[107] Apple Daily sought a court injunction and a High Court judge issued a temporary order to prevent any blocking of the entrance.[108] Five press unions made a statement condemning the harassment of journalists by anti-occupy protesters.[109]

In the early morning of 14 October, police conducted a dawn raid to dismantle barricades in Yee Wo Street (Causeway Bay site), opening one lane to westbound traffic.[110] They also dismantled barricades at Queensway, Admiralty, and reopened it to traffic.[111]

Before midnight on 15 October, protesters stopped traffic on Lung Wo Road, the arterial road north of the Central Government Complex at Admiralty, and began erecting barricades. The police was unable to hold their cordon at Lung Wo Road Tunnel and had to retreat for reinforcement and organised redemption. Around 3 am, police began to clear the road using batons and pepper spray. By dawn, traffic on the road resumed and the protesters retreated into Tamar Park, while 45 arrests were made.

Local television channel TVB broadcast footage of Civic Party member Ken Tsang being assaulted by police. He was carried off with his hands tied behind his back; then, while one officer kept watch, a group of about six officers punched, kicked and stamped on him for about four minutes.[112][113][114][115] Journalists complained that they too had been assaulted.[116][117] The video provoked outrage; Amnesty International joined others in calling for the officers to be prosecuted. In response, Secretary for security Lai Tung-kwok said that "the officers involved will be temporarily removed from their current duties."[112][113]

Police forcing the protesters back southwards on Nathan Road in the evening

At 5am on 17 October, police cleared the barricades and tents at the Mong Kok site and opened the northbound side of Nathan Road to traffic for the first time in three weeks. In the early evening, at least 9000 protesters tried to retake the northbound lanes of the road. The police claimed that 15 officers sustained injuries. There were at least 26 arrests, including photojournalist Paula Bronstein.[118] Around midnight, the police retreated and the suffragists re-erected barricades across the road.[119][120]

On Sunday, 19 October, police used pepper spray and riot gear to contain the protesters in Mong Kok. Martin Lee, who was at the scene, said that "triad elements" had initiated scuffles with police "for reasons best known to themselves".[121] The police had arrested 37 protesters that weekend; the government said that nearly 70 people had been injured. At night, two pro-democracy lawmakers, Fernando Cheung and Claudia Mo, appeared at Mong Kok to mediate between the suffragists and the police, leading to a lowering of tensions as the police and suffragists each stepped back and widened the buffer zone. No clashes were reported for the night.[122]

On 20 October, a taxi drivers' union and the owner of CITIC Tower were granted a court injunction against the occupiers of sections of several roads.[123] In his first interview to international journalists since the start of the protests, CY Leung said that Hong Kong had been "lucky" that Beijing had not yet intervened in the protests, and repeated Chinese claims that "foreign forces" were involved.[124] He defended Beijing's stance on screening candidates. He said that open elections would result in pressure on candidates to create a welfare state, arguing that "If it's entirely a numbers game – numeric representation – then obviously you'd be talking to half the people in Hong Kong [that] earn less than US$1,800 a month [the median wage in HK]. You would end up with that kind of politics and policies."[125][126] A SCMP comment by columnist Alex Lo said of this interview: "Leung has set the gold standard on how not to do a media interview for generations of politicians to come."[127]

On 21 October, the government and the HKFS held the first round of talks in a televised open debate. HKFS secretary-general Alex Chow, vice secretary Lester Shum, general secretary Eason Chung, and standing members Nathan Law and Yvonne Leung met with HK government representatives Chief secretary Carrie Lam, secretary of justice Rimsky Yuen, undersecretary Raymond Tam, office director Edward Yau and undersecretary Lau Kong-wah. The discussion was moderated by Leonard Cheng, the president of Lingnan University.[128][129][130][131] During the talks, government representatives suggested the possibility of writing a new report on the students' concerns to supplement the government's last report on political reform to Beijing, but stressed that students' proposal of civil nomination falls outside of the framework imposed by the Basic Law and the NPCSC decision, which cannot be retracted.[132] The government described the talks as "candid and meaningful" in a press release, while the students expressed their disappointment at the lack of concrete results.[133]

On 22 October about 200 demonstrators marched to Government House, the official residence of the Chief Executive, in protest at his statement to journalists on 20 October about the need to deny political rights to the poor in Hong Kong.[134] At Mong Kok, members of the Taxi Drivers and Operators Association and a coalition of truck drivers attempted to enforce the court injunction granted two days earlier to remove barricades and clear the street. They were accompanied by their lawyer, who read out the court order to the demonstrators. Fist fights broke out during the afternoon and evening.[135]

A yellow banner which read "I want true universal suffrage" was hung on Lion Rock.

On 23 October, a massive yellow banner which read "I want true universal suffrage" was hung on the Lion Rock, the iconic hill that overlooks the Kowloon Peninsula.[136] The location was chosen because Lion Rock represents Hong Kong's special identity[136][137] and is in contrast to Victoria Peak, which represents the elite.[138] The banner was removed the following day.[139]

On 25 October, a group of anti-Occupy supporters wearing blue ribbons gathered at Tsim Sha Tsui to show their support of the police. Four journalists from RTHK and TVB tried to interview them and were attacked.[140] The police had to escort the journalists out.[140] A female reporter for RTHK, a male reporter and two photographers for TVB were taken to hospital.[141] A group of about 10 men wearing face masks attacked suffragists in Mong Kok.[142] Six people were arrested for common assault.[142] Alex Chow Yong-kang said that citizens deserved a chance to express their views over the constitutional reform proposal and the National People's Congress Standing Committee's decision of 31 August. He said that the protest would only end if the government offers a detailed timeline or roadmap to allow universal suffrage and withdrawal of the standing committee decision.[143][144]

On 28 October, the HKFS issued an open letter to the Chief Secretary Carrie Lam asking for a second round of talks. HKFS set out a prerequisite for the negotiation, that the government's report to the Chinese government must include a call for the retraction of the NPCSC's decision. The HKFS demanded direct talks with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang should the Hong Kong Government feel it cannot fulfil this and other terms.[145] The 30th day since the police fired tear gas was marked at 5.57 pm exactly, with 87 seconds of silence, one for each tear gas canister that was fired.[146]

On 29 October, after James Tien of the pro-Beijing Liberal Party urged Leung to consider resigning in a public interview on 24 October,[147] the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference Standing Committee convened to discuss Tien's removal from the body as a move to whip the pro-establishment camp into supporting Leung and the country.[148] Tien, a long-time critic of Leung, said that Leung's position was no longer tenable as Hong Kong people no longer trusted his administration, and that his hanging onto office would only exacerbate the divisions in society.[149] Tien stepped down from his position as the leader of the Liberal Party after the removal.[150] Lester Shum refused bail extension based on conditions imposed after his arrest on 26 September, and was released unconditionally by police.[151] That day was also the day of the Umbrella Ultra Marathon event.

November 2014

A police cordon during the clearance of Mong Kok site, with yellow towers from which liquified tear gas was sprayed on protesters.

The anti-Occupy group Alliance for Peace and Democracy had run a petition throughout the end of October to the start of November, and at the end of their campaign claimed to have collected over 1.8 million signatures demanding the return of streets occupied by the protesters and restoration of law and order. The group's previous signature collection has been criticised as "lack of credibility" by its opponents.[152][153]

The High Court extended injunctions on 10 November that had been granted to taxi, mini-bus and bus operators authorising the clearance of protest sites. On the following day, Carrie Lam told reporters that there would be no further dialogue with protesters. She warned that "the police will give full assistance, including making arrests where necessary" in the clearance of the sites, and advised the protesters to leave "voluntarily and peacefully".[154] However, the granting of the court order and the conditions attached to the execution attracted controversy as some lawyers and a top judge questioned why the order was granted based on an ex parte hearing, the urgency of the matter, and the use of the police when the order was for a civil complaint.[155]

On 10 November, around 1,000 pro-democracy demonstrators, many wearing yellow ribbons and carrying yellow umbrellas, marched to the PRC Liaison Office in Sai Wan to protest the arrests of people expressing support for the protest.[156] The marchers included Alex Chow, who announced that the Federation of Students were writing to the 35 local delegates to the National People's Congress to enlist their help in setting up talks with Beijing.[157] On 30 October Chow and other student leaders had announced that they were considering plans to take their protest to the APEC summit to be held in Beijing on 10 and 11 November.[158] As observers had predicted, the student delegation led by Chow was prevented from travelling to China when they attempted to leave on 15 November.[159] Airline officials informed them that mainland authorities had revoked their Home Return Permits, effectively banning them from boarding the flight to speak to government officials in Beijing.[160]

On 12 November, media tycoon Jimmy Lai was the target of an offal attack at the Admiralty site by three men, who were detained by volunteer marshalls for the protest site.[161][162] Both the attackers and the two site marshalls who restrained them were arrested by the police, which led to condemnation by the pan-democracy camp, who organised an unauthorised protest march the next day. The two marshalls from the protest site were later released on bail.[163]

On the morning of 18 November, suffragists pre-emptively moved their tents and other affairs that were blocking access to Citic Tower, which was subject to a court injunction, avoiding confrontation with bailiffs and the police over the removal of barricades.[164]

In the early hours of 19 November, protesters broke into a side-entrance to the Legislative Council Complex, breaking glass panels with concrete tiles and metal barricades.[165] Legislator Fernando Cheung and other suffragists tried to stop the radical activists, but were pushed aside.[165][166] The break-in, which according to The Standard was instigated by Civic Passion,[167] was criticised by the three main activist groups of the protests, and legislators from both the pan-democracy and pro-Beijing camps.[165][166] Three police were injured and six men were arrested for criminal damage and assault.[166]

On 21 November, up to 100 people gathered outside the British consulate accusing the former colonial power of failing to pressure China to grant free elections in the city and protect freedoms guaranteed in the Sino-British Joint Declaration.[168]

Amidst declining support for the occupation, bailiffs and police cleared the tents and barriers in the most volatile of the three Occupy sites, Mong Kok, on 25 and early 26 November. Suffragists poured into Mong Kok after the first day's clearance, and there was a stand-off between protesters and police the next day. Scuffles were reported, and pepper spray was used. Police detained 116 people during the clearance, including student leaders Joshua Wong and Lester Shum.[169] Joshua Wong, Lester Shum and some 30 of those arrested were bailed but subject to an exclusion zone centred around Mong Kok Station.[170][171] Mong Kok remained the centre of focus for several days after the clearance of the occupied area when members of the public angry about heavy-handed policing.[172][173] Fearing re-occupation, in excess of 4,000 police were deployed to the area.[172][173] Large crowds, ostensibly heeding a call from C. Y. Leung to return to the shops affected by the occupation, have appeared nightly in and around Sai Yeung Choi Street South (close to the former occupied site); hundreds of armed riot police charged demonstrators with shields, pepper spraying and wrestling a string of them to the ground. Protesters intent on "shopping" remained until dawn.[172][173]

December 2014

On the morning of 1 December, there were the most vigorous clashes between police and protesters in Admiralty after the Federation of Students and Scholarism called upon the crowd to surround the Central Government Offices. The police used a hose to splash protesters for the first time. The entrance to the Admiralty Centre has also been blocked. Most of the violence occurred near Admiralty MTR station.[174] Also, Joshua Wong and two other Scholarism members started an indefinite hunger strike.[175]

On 3 December, the OCLP trio, along with 62 others including lawmaker Wu Chi-wai and Cardinal Joseph Zen, turned themselves in to the police, bearing the legal consequences of civil disobedience. However, they were set free without being arrested or charged.[176] They also urged occupiers to leave and transform the movement into a community campaign, citing concerns for their satety amidst the police's escalation of force in recent crackdowns.[177] Nonetheless, HKFS and Scholarism both continued the occupation. Nightly shopping tours continued in Mong Kok for over a week after the clearance of the occupation site, tying up some 2500 police officers;[178] the minibus company that took out the Mong Kok injunction was in turn accused of having illegally occupying Tung Choi Street for years.[179]

On the morning of 11 December, many protesters had left the Admiralty site before crews of the bus company that had applied for the Admiralty injunction dismantled roadblocks without resistance. Afterwards, the police set a deadline for protesters to leave the occupied areas and cordoned off the zone.[180] 209 protesters declined to leave and were arrested,[181][182][183] including several pan-democratic legislators and members of HKFS and Scholarism.[184] Meanwhile, the police set the bridge access to Citic Tower and Central Government Office only allowing media to access. The Independent Police Complaints Council was present to monitor the area for any "excessive use of force" along with fifty professors[185]

On 15 December, police cleared protesters and their camps at Causeway Bay with essentially no resistance, bringing the protests to an end.[186][187]

Triad involvement and protester recruitment allegations

Anti-Occupy protesters in Causeway Bay, 12 October

The BBC showed video footage from a Hong Kong TV network which appeared to show 'anti-Occupy protesters' being hired and transported to an Occupy protest site. The 'protesters', many of whom were initially unaware of what they were being paid to do, were secretly filmed on the bus being handed money by the organiser. Anonymous police sources informed the BBC Newsnight investigation that "back-up was strangely unforthcoming" to scenes of violence. The South China Morning Post also reported claims that people from poor districts were being offered up to HK$800 per day, via WhatsApp messaging, to participate in anti-Occupy riots.[57][188]

The HK police has stated that up to 200 gangsters from two major triads may have infiltrated the camps of Occupy Central supporters, although their exact motives are as yet unknown. A police officer explained the police could not arrest the triad gangsters there "if they do nothing more than singing songs for democracy".[189] A 2013 editorial in the Taipei Times of Taiwan described the pro-Beijing "grass-roots" organisations in Hong Kong: "Since Leung has been in office, three organizations – Voice of Loving Hong Kong, Caring Hong Kong Power and the Hong Kong Youth Care Association – have appeared on the scene and have been playing the role of Leung's hired "thugs", using Cultural Revolution-style language and methods to oppose Hong Kong's pan-democratic parties and groups."[190] Both Apple Daily and the Taiwan Central News Agency, as well as some pan-democrat legislators in Hong Kong, have named the Ministry of State Security and Ministry of Public Security as being responsible for the attacks.[191][192][193]

Legislative Council member James To alleged that "The police is happy to let the triad elements to threaten the students, at least for several hours, to see whether they would disperse or not." He added, "Someone, with political motive, is utilising the triad to clear the crowd, so as to help the government to advance their cause."[194] Amnesty International condemned the police for "[failing] in their duty to protect protesters from attacks" and stating that women were attacked, threatened, and sexually assaulted while police watched and did nothing.[57] Commander Paul Edmiston of the police admitted officers had been working long hours and had received heavy criticism. Responding to accusations that police chose not to protect the protesters, he said: "No matter what we do, we're criticized for doing too little or too much. We can't win."[64] An analysis in Harbour Times suggested that businesses that pay protection money to Triads in the neighbourhood stood to be affected by an occupation.[58] The journal criticised police response as being at first disorganised and slow onto the scene, but observed that its handling was within operating norms in triad-heavy neighbourhoods although it was affected by low levels of mutual trust, suspicion.[58]

Impact

Effects on business and transport

Traffic being diverted off Connaught Road in Central on 30 September

Surface traffic between Central and Admiralty, Causeway Bay, as well as in Mong Kok, was seriously affected by the blockades, with traffic jams stretching for miles on Hong Kong Island and across Victoria Harbour.[195][196] Major tailbacks were reported on Queensway, Gloucester Road and Connaught Road, which are feeder roads to the blockaded route in Admiralty.[50] Whilst in excess of 100 bus or tram routes have been suspended or re-routed,[197] queues for underground trains in the Admiralty district stretched out onto the street at times.[195] The MTR, the city's underground transport operator, has been a beneficiary.[198] The number of passenger trips recorded on two of its lines has increased by 20 percent.[199] Others have opted to walk instead of driving.[200] Taxi drivers have reported a fall in income as they have had to advise passengers to use the MTR when faced with jams, diversions or bloackaded roads.[201] Hong Kong Taxi Owners' Association claimed its members' incomes had declined by 30 percent since the protests started.[202] Levels of PM2.5 particulate matter at the three sites descended to within the recommended safety levels of the World Health Organization.[203][204] An editorial in the South China Morning Post noted that, on 29 September, the air quality in all three of the occupied areas had markedly improved. The health risk posed by airborne pollutants was "low" – it is usually "high" – and there was a steep fall in the concentration of NO2. It said: "without a policy shift, after the demonstrations have ended, we will have to rely on our memories of the protest days for what clean vehicles on our roads mean for air quality".[205]

Nursery, primary and secondary schools within the Central and Western catchment areas were suspended from 29 September onwards. Classes for 25,000 primary students and 30,000 secondary students resumed on 7 October.[206][207][208] Kindergartens and nursery schools resumed operations on 9 October, adding to the traffic burden.[198] The Hong Kong Retail Management Association reported that chain stores takings declined between 30 and 45 percent during the period 1–5 October in Admiralty, Central and Causeway Bay.[209] The media reported that some shops and banks in the protest areas were shuttered.[197]

According to the World Bank, the protests were damaging Hong Kong's economy while China remained largely unaffected.[195] Although the Hang Seng Index fell by 2.59% during the "Golden Week", it recovered and trading volume rose considerably.[210] Shanghai Daily published on 4 October estimated that the protests had cost Hong Kong HK$40 billion ($5.2 billion), with tourism and retail reportedly being hardest hit. However, tourist numbers for the "Golden Week" (beginning 1 October) were 4.83% higher than the previous year, according to the Hong Kong Tourism Board. While substantial losses by retailer were predicted, some stores reported a marked increase in sales.[210] Triad gangs, which had reportedly suffered a 40% decline in revenues, were implicated in the attacks in Mong Kok, where some of the worst violence had occurred.[80][94][211][212][213] Economic effects seemed either to be extremely localised or transient, and in any event much less than the dire predictions of business lobbies. One of the hardest hit may have been the Hong Kong Tramways Company, which reported a decline in revenues of US$1 million.[214][215] An economist said that the future stability will depend on political governance, namely if political issues such as income gaps and political reforms will be addressed.[212]

Effects on Hong Kong society

The protests are causing strong differences of opinion in Hong Kong society, with a "yellow (pro-occupy) vs. blue (anti-occupy)" war being fought, and unfriending on social media, such as Facebook.[216] The media have reported conflict within peer groups over values or what positions may be orthodox, and rifts have formed between mentor–mentees over the extent to which the movement should go. Parents have rowed with their children over their attending protests.[217] Hong Kong people who oppose the Occupy protests do so for a number of different reasons. A significant part of the population, refugees from Communist China in the 1950s and 1960s, lived through the turmoil of the Hong Kong 1967 Leftist riots. Others feel that the protesters are too idealistic, and fear upsetting the PRC leadership and the possibility of another repeat of the crackdown that ended the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989.[218] However, the overwhelming reason is that disruption to the lives of ordinary citizens caused by roads blocked, traffic jams, school closures, and financial loss to businesses (including in particular those run by the Triads in Mong Kok).[218] According to some reports, the police actions on the protesters has resulted in a breakdown of citizens' trust in the previously respected police force. The police deny accusations that they failed to act diligently.[57] The media have reported on individuals who have quit their jobs, or students abroad who have rushed home to become a part of history, and one protester saw this as "the best and last opportunity for Hong Kong people's voices to be heard, as Beijing's influence grows increasingly stronger".[60] Police officers have been working 18-hour shifts to the detriment of their family lives.[219] Front line police officers, in addition to working long hours, being attacked and abused on the streets, are under unprecedented stress at home. Psychologists working with police officers in the field report that some feel humiliated as they may have been unfriended on Facebook, and family may blame them for their perceived roles in suppressing the protests.[220][221][222]

In an opinion poll of Hong Kong citizens carried out since 4 October by Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 59% of the 850 people surveyed supported the protesters in their refusal to accept the government plan for the 2017 election. 29% of those questioned, the largest proportion, blamed the violence that had occurred during the demonstrations on the chief executive CY Leung.[219]

Local media coverage

See also: Media of Hong Kong

The media stage at the Admiralty occupy site

Many of Hong Kong's media outlets are owned by local tycoons who have significant business ties in the mainland, so they all adopt self-censorship at some level and have mostly maintained a conservative editorial line in their coverage of the protests.[223] Next Media, being Hong Kong's only openly pro-democracy media conglomerate, has been the target of blockades by anti-Occupy protesters, cyberattacks, and hijacks of their delivery trucks. The uneven spread of viewpoints on traditional media has turned young people to social media for news, which The Guardian has described as making the protests "the best-documented social movement in history, with even its quieter moments generating a maelstrom of status updates, shares and likes."[224] People at protest sites now rely on alternative media whose launches were propelled by the protests, also called "umbrella revolution", or actively covered news from a perspective not found in traditional journals. Even the recently defunct House News resurrected itself, reformatted as The House News Bloggers. Radical viewpoints are catered for at Hong Kong Peanut, and Passion Times – run by Civic Passion.[223]

The prominent local station, TVB, originally broadcast footage of police officers beating a protester on 15 October, but the station experienced internal conflict during the broadcast.[225] The pre-dawn broadcasts soundtrack mentioning "punching and kicking" was re-recorded to say that the officers were "suspected of using excessive force".[226] Secret audio recordings from an internal meeting were uploaded onto YouTube that included the voice of TVB director Keith Yuen Chi-wai asking "On what grounds can we say officers dragged him to a dark corner, and punched and kicked him?"[226] The protester was later named as Civic Party member Ken Tsang, who was also a member of the Election Committee that returned CY Leung as the city's Chief Executive.[225] About 57 journalists expressed their dissatisfaction with the handling of the broadcast. A petition by TVB staff to management protesting the handling of the event was signed by news staff.[225] The list grew to 80+ people including employees from sports, economics and other departments.[227]

Internet security firm CloudFlare said that, like for the attacks on PopVote sponsored by OCLP earlier in the year, the volume of junk traffic aimed at paralysing Apple Daily servers was an unprecedented 500Gbit/s and involved at least five botnets. Servers were bombarded with in excess of 250 million DNS requests per second, equivalent to the average volume of DNS requests for the entire Internet. And where the attacks do not succeed directly, they have caused some internet service providers to pre-emptively block such sites under attack to protect their own servers and lines.[228]

Chinese government and media

Beijing is generally reported as being concerned about similar popular demands for political reform on the mainland that would erode the Communist Party's hold on power.[35] Reuters sources revealed that the decision to offer no concessions was made at a meeting of the National Security Commission of the Communist Party of China chaired by General secretary Xi Jinping in the first week of October. "[We] move back one step and the dam will burst," a source was reported as saying, referring to mainland provinces such as Xinjiang and Tibet making similar demands for democratic elections.[229][230] The New York Times China correspondents say that the strategy for dealing with the crisis in Hong Kong was being planned under supervision from the top-tier national leadership, which was being briefed on a daily basis. According to the report, Hong Kong officials are in meetings behind the scenes with mainland officials in neighbouring Shenzhen, at a resort owned by the central government liaison office.[231] The HKFS, which had been hoping to send a delegation to meet with the leadership in Beijing, was rebuffed by Tung Chee-hwa, vice-chairman of the NPC, whom they asked to help set up the meetings.[232][233]

Xi Jinping stated his support for CY Leung on the 44th day of the occupation, saying the occupation was a "direct challenge not just to the SAR and its governance but also to Beijing". Xi also said that Leung's administration must govern to safeguard the rule of law and maintain social order.[234]

Censorship

On 28 September it emerged that Chinese government authorities had issued the following censorship directive: "All websites must immediately clear away information about Hong Kong students violently assaulting the government and about 'Occupy Central.' Promptly report any issues. Strictly manage interactive channels, and resolutely delete harmful information. This [directive] must be followed precisely."[235][236][237] Censors rapidly deleted messages internet posts with words such as "Hong Kong," "barricades", "Occupy Central" and "umbrella".[238][239] Sections of the CNN reporting from Hong Kong was also disrupted.[238] Most Chinese newspapers have not covered the protests except for editorials critical of the protests and devoid of any context,[238][240] or articles mentioning the negative impact of the occupation.[241] The Chinese website of the BBC was completely blocked after a video showing the violent assault on a protester by police on 15 October hosted on the site went viral.[242] Amnesty International reported that dozens of Chinese people have been arrested for showing support for the protests.[243] Facebook and Twitter are already blocked on the mainland, and now as a result of the sharing of images of the protests, PRC censors have now blocked Instagram.[239][244] However, Reuters noted that searches for "Umbrella Revolution" up to 30 September escaped censors on Sina Weibo but not on Tencent Weibo.[245]

Allegations of foreign interference

Mainland Chinese officials and media have repeatedly alleged that outside forces formented the protests. Li Fei, the first Chinese official to address Hong Kong about the NPCSC decision, accused democracy advocates of being tools for subversion by Western forces who were set at undermining the authority of the Communist Party. Li alleged that they were "sowing confusion" and "misleading society".[35] The People's Daily claimed that organisers of the Hong Kong protests learned their tactics from supporters of the Sunflower Student Movement in Taiwan, having first sought support from the United Kingdom and the United States.[246][247] Scholarism has been labelled as extremists and a pro-Beijing journal in Hong Kong alleged that Joshua Wong had been cultivated by "US forces".[248] In one of numerous editorials condemning the occupation, the People's Daily said "The US may enjoy the sweet taste of interfering in other countries' internal affairs, but on the issue of Hong Kong it stands little chance of overcoming the determination of the Chinese government to maintain stability and prosperity".[249] It alleged that the US National Endowment for Democracy was behind the protests, and that, "according to media reports," a director of the organisation had met with protest leaders.[250] On 15 October, an unnamed Chinese government official stated that "interference certainly exists", citing "the statements and the rhetoric and the behaviour of the outside forces of political figures, of some parliamentarians and individual media".[251] In a televised interview on 19 October, Chief Executive CY Leung repeated Chinese claims about foreign responsibility for the protests, but declined to give details.[249][252]

The US State Department has categorically rejected accusations of interference, calling the charges "an attempt to distract from...the people expressing their desire for universal suffrage."[253] The South China Morning Post characterised claims of foreign interference as "vastly exaggerated",[254] and longtime Hong Kong democracy advocate Martin Lee said such claims were a "'convenient excuse' for Beijing to cover its shame for not granting the territory true democracy as it once promised."[255]

The China Media Project of the University of Hong Kong noted that the phrase "hostile forces" (敌对 势力) – a hardline Stalinist term – has been frequently used in a conspiracy theory alleging foreign sources of instigation.[256] Apart from being used as a straightforward means to avoid blame, analysts said that Chinese claims of foreign involvement, which may be rooted in Marxist ideology, or simply in an authoritarian belief that "spontaneity is impossible", are "a pre-emptive strike making it very difficult for the American and British governments" to support the protests.[22][257]

Law and order

On 1 October, China News Service criticised the protesters for "bringing shame to the rule of law in Hong Kong";[258] the People's Daily said that the Beijing stance on Hong Kong's elections is "unshakeable" and legally valid. Stating that the illegal occupation was hurting Hong Kong, it warned of "unimaginable consequences"[259] Some observers remarked that the editorial was similar to the April 26 Editorial that foreshadowed the suppression of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989.[260][261] A state television editorial urged authorities to "deploy police enforcement decisively" and "restore the social order in Hong Kong as soon as possible," and again warned of "unimaginable consequences",[262] and a front page commentary in People's Daily on 3 October repeated that the protests "could lead to deaths and injuries and other grave consequences."[15][263]

By 6 October, official Chinese media outlets called for "all the people to create an anti-Occupy Central atmosphere in the society". The protesters were described as "going against the principle of democracy". A commentary in the China Review News claimed that "the US is now hesitant in its support for the Occupy Central. If those campaign organisers suddenly soften their approach, it will show that their American masters are giving out a different order."[264][265]

Chinese government officials have routinely affirmed the Chinese government's firm support for the chief executive and for the continued "necessary, reasonable and lawful" actions by the police against the illegal protests.[124][251][258]

Other pronouncements

While the Western press noticed the apparent silence of Hong Kong's richest businessmen since the occupation began,[266][267][268] Xinhua News Agency posted an English-language article in the morning of 25 October criticising the absence of condemnation of the occupation from the city's tycoons in response to the protest, but the article was deleted several hours later.[269][270] A replacement article that appeared that evening, in Chinese, stated how tycoons strongly condemned the protest, and quoted a number of them with pre-occupation soundbites reiterating how the occupation would damage Hong Kong's international reputation, disrupt social disorder and cause other harmful problems to society.[269]

Deputy director of China's National People's Congress Internal and Judicial Affairs Committee, Li Shenming, stated: "In today's China, engaging in an election system of one-man-one-vote is bound to quickly lead to turmoil, unrest and even a situation of civil war."[271] The mainland media also contested the protesters demands for democracy by blaming the colonial rulers, saying Britain "gave our Hong Kong compatriots not one single day of it", notwithstanding the fact that de-classified British diplomatic documents indicate that the lack of democracy since at least late 1950s was largely attributable to the refusal of the PRC to allow it.[272]

The Chinese authorities are rumoured to have blacklisted 47 entertainers from Hong Kong who had openly supported the suffragists, and the list made the rounds on social media.[273] Denise Ho, Chapman To and actor Anthony Wong, who are among the highest profile supporters of the movement, were strongly criticised by the official Xinhua News Agency.[274] In response to the possible ban from the Chinese market, Chow Yun-fat, was quoted as saying "I'll just make less, then". Reporting of Chow's riposte was subject to Mainland Chinese internet censors.[275]

Beijing refused to grant a visa to Richard Graham, British member of parliament who had said in a parliamentary debate on Hong Kong that Britain had a duty to uphold the principles of the Sino-British joint declaration. This resulted in the cancellation of a visit by a cross-party parliament group due to visit China, led by Peter Mandelson. Graham had also asserted that "Stability for nations is not, in our eyes, about maintaining the status quo regardless, but about reaching out for greater involvement with the people – in this case, of Hong Kong – allowing them a greater say in choosing their leaders and, above all, trusting in the people".[276]

Chinese dissent

In urging students to set aside their protest, Bao Tong, the former political secretary of CPC general secretary Zhao Ziyang, said he could not predict what the leadership would do.[277] He believed Zhao meant universal suffrage where everyone had the right to vote freely, and not this "special election with Chinese characteristics".[277][278] Bao said today's PRC leaders should respect the principle that HK citizens rule themselves, or Deng Xiaoping's promises to Hong Kong would have been fake.[277][278] Hu Jia co-authored an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal, in which he wrote "China has the potential to become an even more relentless, aggressive dictatorship than Russia... Only a strong, unambiguous warning from the US will cause either of those countries to carefully consider the costs of new violent acts of repression. Hong Kong and Ukraine are calling for the rebirth of American global leadership for freedom and democracy.[279]

Amnesty International said that at least 37 mainland Chinese have been detained for supporting Hong Kong protesters in different ways: some posted pictures and messages online, others had been planning to travel to Hong Kong to join protesters. A poetry reading planned for 2 October in Beijing's Songzhuang art colony to support Hong Kong protesters was disrupted, and a total of eight people were detained. A further 60 people have been taken in for questioning by police.[280][281]

Domestic reactions

A double-decker bus in Mong Kok is used as a message board

Political

Former Chief Secretary Anson Chan expressed disappointment at Britain's silence on the matter and urged Britain to assert its legal and moral responsibility towards Hong Kong and not just think about trade opportunities. Chan dismissed China's accusation of foreign interference, saying: "Nobody from outside could possibly stir up this sort of depth of anger and frustration."[282] Former Legco president Rita Fan said "to support the movement, some protesters background have resources that are supported by foreign forces using young people for a cause. To pursue democracy that effects other people's livelihood is a form of democratic dictatorship."[283]

Director of Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor, Law Yuk-kai, was dissatisfied with the unnecessary violence by the police. He said students only broke into the Civic Square to sit-in peacefully with no intentions of destroying government premises.[284] He questioned the mobilisation of riot police while protesters staged no conflict. Also, the overuse of batons was underestimated by the police because the weapon could severely harm protesters.[284] Legislative Council Chairman Jasper Tsang Yok-sing has disagreed that the police were excessively violent, saying they would not misuse pepper spray.[285] and contrary to the claims of other pro-establishment members, Tsang sees little evidence of "foreign forces" at play.[286] Member of Legislative Council Albert Ho of Democratic Party said, "[Attack on protesters] was one of the tactics used by the communists in mainland China from time to time. They use triads or pro-government mobs to try to attack you so the government will not have to assume responsibility."[287]

Former Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa when urging the students to end the occupation, praised their "great sacrifice" in the pursuit of democracy, and said that "the rule of law and obeying the law form the cornerstone of democracy."[288]

On 29 October, chairman of the Financial Services Development Council and Executive Councillor, Laura Cha, created controversy for the government and for HSBC, of which she is a board member, when she said: "African-American slaves were liberated in 1861, but did not get voting rights until 107 years later. So why can't Hong Kong wait for a while?" An online petition called for her to apologise and withdraw her remarks. A spokesman for the Executive Council stated in an e-mail on 31 October that "She did not mean any disrespect and regrets that her comment has caused concerns".[18][289][290][291]

Business sector

The Federation of Hong Kong Industries, whose 3,000 manufacturer members are largely unaffected as manufacturing in Hong Kong has been largely de-localised to the mainland, oppose the protests, due to concerns for the effects on investor confidence.[270] While the business groups have expressed concern at the disruption caused to their members,[292][293] the city's wealthiest individuals have kept a relatively low-profile as they faced the dilemma of losing the patronage of CPC leadership while trying to avoid further escalation with overt condemnations of the movement.[270] On the 19th day, Li Ka-Shing recognised that students' voices had been noted by Beijing, and urged them to go home "to avoid any regret".[294] Li was, however, criticised by Xinhua for not being unambiguous in his opposition for the movement and his support for Leung.[270] Lui Che Woo, the second richest man in Asia, appeared to hold a more pro-Beijing stance by stating that "citizens should be thankful to the police".[295] Lui was opposed to "any activity that has a negative impact on the Hong Kong economy".[270]

International reactions

Main article: Reactions to the 2014 Hong Kong protests

United Nations

On 23 October, the UN Human Rights Committee, which monitors compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, urged China to allow free elections in Hong Kong.[296][297] The committee emphasised specifically that 'universal suffrage' includes the right to stand for office as well as the right to vote. Describing China's actions as "not satisfactory", the committee's chairman Konstantine Vardzelashvili announced that "The main concerns of Committee members were focused on the right to stand for elections without unreasonable restrictions."[24]

A spokesman for China's Foreign Ministry confirmed on the following day that the Covenant, signed by China in 1998, did apply to Hong Kong, but said that, nonetheless, "The covenant is not a measure for Hong Kong's political reform", and that China's policy on Hong Kong's elections had "unshakable legal status and effect". Reuters observed that "It was not immediately clear how, if the covenant applied to Hong Kong, it could have no bearing on its political reform."[25]

States

Leaders of countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Taiwan, Vatican City, United Kingdom, and the United States, supported the protesters' right to protest and their cause of universal suffrage and urged restraint on all sides, with the notable exception of Russia, whose state media claimed that the protests were another West-sponsored colour revolution similar to the Euromaidan.[22][298][299] German president Joachim Gauck, celebrating the 24th anniversary of German reunification, praised the spirit of Hong Kong's suffragists to their own of 24 years ago who overcame their fear of their oppressors;[300] Chancellor Angela Merkel said freedom of speech should remain guaranteed by law in Hong Kong.[301]

British Prime Minister David Cameron expressed deep concern about clashes in Hong Kong and said that he felt an obligation to the former colony.[302][303] Cameron said on 15 October that Britain should stand up for the rights set out in the Anglo-Chinese agreement.[304] The Foreign Office called on Hong Kong to uphold residents' rights to demonstrate, and said that the best way to guarantee these rights is through transition to universal suffrage.[305][306] Former Hong Kong Governor and current Chancellor of the University of Oxford Chris Patten expressed support for the protests[307] and denounced the Iranian-style democratic model for the city.[308] Citing China's obligation to Britain to adhere to the terms of Sino-British Joint Declaration,[309] he urged the British government to put greater pressure on the Chinese state, and to help China and Hong Kong find a solution to the impasse.[310] The Chinese Foreign Ministry said Patten should realise that "times have changed",[311] and that no party had the right to interfere in China's domestic affairs.[312]

British member of parliament and chairman of the Commons Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs, Richard Ottaway, denounced China's declaration that the committee would be refused permission to enter Hong Kong on their planned visit in late December as part of their inquiry into progress of the implementation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. Ottaway sought confirmation from the China's deputy ambassador after receiving a letter from the central government that his group's visit "would be perceived to be siding with the protesters involved in Occupy Central and other illegal activities", and was told that the group would be turned back.[313]

In Taiwan, the situation in Hong Kong is closely monitored since China aims to reunify the island with a "one country, two systems" model similar to one that is used in Hong Kong.[314] President Ma Ying-jeou expressed concern for the developments in Hong Kong and its future,[315] and said the realisation of universal suffrage will be a win-win scenario for both Hong Kong and mainland China.[316] On 10 October, Taiwan's National Day, President Ma urged China to introduce constitutional democracy, saying "now that the 1.3 billion people on the mainland have become moderately wealthy, they will of course wish to enjoy greater democracy and rule of law. Such a desire has never been a monopoly of the west, but is the right of all humankind."[317] In response to Ma's comments, China's Taiwan Affairs Office said Beijing was "firmly opposed to remarks on China's political system and Hong Kong's political reforms .... Taiwan should refrain from commenting on the issue."[318]

Foreign media

The protests captured the attention of the world and gained extensive global media coverage.[319] Student leader Joshua Wong featured on the cover of Time magazine during the week of his 18th birthday,[320] and the movement was written about, also as a cover story, the following week.[321] While the local pan-democrats and the majority of the Western press supported the protesters' aspirations for universal suffrage,[319] Martin Jacques, writing for The Guardian, argued that the PRC had "overwhelmingly honoured its commitment to the principle of one country, two systems". He believed that the reason for the unrest is "the growing sense of dislocation among a section of Hong Kong's population" since 1997.[322] Tim Summers, in an op-ed for CNN, said that the protests were fuelled by dissatisfaction with the Hong Kong government, but the catalyst was the decision of the NPCSC. Criticising politicians' and the media's interpretation of the agreements and undertakings of the PRC, Summer said "all the Joint Declaration said is that the chief executive will be 'appointed by the central people's government on the basis of the results of elections or consultations to be held locally [in Hong Kong].' Britain's role as co-signatory of that agreement gives it no legal basis for complaint on this particular point, and the lack of democracy for the executive branch before 1997 leaves it little moral high ground either."[323]

Solidarity rallies worldwide

3,000–4,000 people gathered outside Chinese Embassy London to support the protests in Hong Kong on 1 October 2014

Rallies in support of the protests have occurred in over 64 cities worldwide, principally in front of Hong Kong trade missions or Chinese consulates.[324][325][326] The demonstration in front of the Chinese embassy in London attracted 3000 participants.[324] Petitions in Australia and to the White House urging support for the protests have collected more than 500 and 183,000 signatures respectively.[325] In Taipei, locals organised a solidarity protest, where participants were reported to have scuffled with Taiwanese police after crowding a Hong Kong trade office.[325] On 1 October, a gathering in Taipei's Liberty Square drew over 10,000 people in support of the protests.[327] At the East Asian Cup qualifying match against Hong Kong on 16 November, Taiwanese football fans waved yellow umbrellas in a show of support. While the Chinese national anthem played, spectators sang "Boundless Oceans, Vast Skies".[328] In Singapore, hundreds of people participated in a candlelight vigil at Hong Lim Park on 1 October to show support to the Occupy Central protesters.[329]

Aftermath

Once traffic resumed, roadside PM2.5 readings shot back up to levels in excess of WHO recommended safe levels of 25mcg/m2. According to the Clean Air Network, PM2.5 levels at Admiralty stood at 33mcg/m2, an increase of 83% since during the occupation; Causeway Bay measured 31mcg/m2, an increase of 55%, and Mong Kok's reading of 37mcg/m2 represents an increase of 42%.[203][204]

Chief Executive CY Leung said that protesters need to carefully consider what sort of democracy they are pursuing.[330] He welcomed the end of the occupation, saying: "Other than economic losses, I believe the greatest loss Hong Kong society has suffered is the damage to the rule of law by a small group of people... If we just talk about democracy without talking about the rule of law, it's not real democracy but a state of no government".[331] Leung saw his popularity ratings slump to a new low following the occupation protests, down to 39.7 percent, with a net of minus 37%. This was attributed to public perception of Leung's unwillingness to heal the wounds, and his unwarranted shifting of the blame for the wrongs in society onto opponents. Leung also claimed negative effects on the economy without providing evidence, and his assertions were contradicted by official figures.[332]

Commissioner of the Police Andy Tsang confirmed the unprecedented challenges to the police posed by the occupations, and that as at 15 December a total of 955 individuals had been arrested,[330][333] 221 activists had been hurt, and that 130 police officers had received light injuries.[333] At the same time, Tsang anticipated further arrests, pending a 3-month investigation into the occupation movement.[333] On, 19 December 2014, the eve of the 15th anniversary of Macau's handover, authorities in Macau banned journalists covering the arrival of Chinese president Xi Jinping from holding umbrellas in the rain.[334]

The Economic Journal predicts a rout as a result of growing alienation and disaffection with the system and with traditional politics. It criticised the means the government employed to deal with the problem, and said that: "[the SAR government's] legitimacy to govern has been deeply damaged. Officials may be made scapegoats for the mass protests, and the police may have forfeited much of their hard-earned reputation and sound relationship with citizens following charges of brutality and links with triads. The judiciary has also taken a beating after it issued injunctions against the occupation of roads in Mong Kok and Admiralty. This has left many people with the perception that it has colluded with the government and the checks and balances between the two powers are now gone. The government's ill-conceived plan to crack down hard on the protesters under the guise of assisting bailiffs sets a dangerous precedent."[335]

An editorial in The Wall Street Journal said that despite the establishment attempting to portray the occupy movement as a threat to Hong Kong, "it's clear that the real threat to Hong Kong comes from those who bend to Beijing's whims. China and its local proxies ... have mounted a violent march through the institutions that have sustained Hong Kong's stability and prosperity-independent courts, free press, honest law enforcement and more".[336] An editorial in the Washington Post predicted that "Political unrest is likely to become a chronic condition in a place that until now had mostly accepted the authority of the Communist regime since 1997... China's inflexible response to the democracy movement may yield exactly the results it wishes to avoid: an unmanageable political situation in Hong Kong and the spread of the demand for political freedom".[337]

A Guardian editorial wrote: "What China has done in Hong Kong will preserve control but deepen alienation... outside China, where it is seen as yet another indication that compromise and the Chinese communist party are strangers to each other, whether in dealing with non-Han minorities, in territorial issues with neighbours or in relations with other major states." It said that the one country, two systems formula "has been almost completely discredited by events in Hong Kong". It added that "The Chinese are prisoners of another narrative, in which China's rise is a phenomenon benefiting its neighbours as much as itself, in which opponents are seen as a tiny minority manipulated by hostile powers, and in which democracy is a flawed western concept that has no relevance for China".[338]

On Christmas Eve, 250 protesters marched from Southorn Playground to Civic Square. Around 7:00 p.m., 500 "shopping" (referred to as "gau wu" by participants) protesters with yellow banners and umbrellas, gathered in Shantung Street, then Argyle Street and Nathan Road. 10 men and 2 women were arrested with ages ranging from 13 to 76. In Causeway Bay, people hung a yellow banner on the Times Square clocktower. The banner was removed by the police. No arrests were made as the protesters were on private property. A group of students hung a banner on Lennon Wall.[339][340][341][342][343] About 30 people had been arrested.[344]

Protection orders for youth protesters

Police have applied for protection orders for two youths which were arrested during the protests. In Hong Kong, care and protection orders are typically only used in severe cases of juvenile delinquency.[345] These protection orders could mean that the parent can lose custody rights of the child and the child being sent to a children's home. These protection orders were seen as "white terror" deterrence for young people to be involved in protests or as police retribution by parts of the public.

The first incident of this kind occurred on 17 December when it was announced that the police were applying for a protection order for a 14-year-old male, who was one of those arrested during the clearance of Mong Kok. This protection order could result in termination of the parents' custody rights and the teenager facing a curfew, counselling or even being sent to a boys' home and removed from his parents.[346] On 13 January, the child protection order was cancelled by police after the Department of Justice announced that they had no interest in pressing charges against him for contempt of court.[345]

On 29 December, a 14-year-old female was arrested for drawing a flower onto the Lennon Wall on 23 December. Dubbed "Chalk Girl", the child was arrested on suspicion of criminal damage, but was not charged. Instead, police applied for a Child Protection Order, which a judge granted. The CPO resulted in her being sent to a girls' home after a magistrate "deemed it safer". She was taken away from her hearing-impaired father, and could not go to school. The police action created uproar, and resulted in several sympathy chalk-drawing protests at the children's home and at the government offices.[347][348] After Martin Lee successfully appealed her case to the High Court on 31 December, she was allowed to return home. Bail conditions stipulated that she must live with her father, continue her studies and be subject to a curfew from 10 PM to 6 AM, unless she is accompanied by her father, sister or a social worker. Her case was adjourned to 19 January.[349]


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Mar 14, 2015] The Coming Chinese Crackup

Mar 14, 2015 | Zero Hedge
TheFourthStooge-ing

Giving the boot to US NGOs like USAID, National Endowment for Democracy, Freedom House, Human Rights Watch, et al., would make an ideal pressure relief valve.

YHC-FTSE

Sounds like one of those articles you see as a prelude to a colour revolution being cooked up in a corner office at Langley to get the public to accept that the chaos they create is real and spontaneous. Funny how these things pop up just after the Chinese deals with Russia, announcing to the world the future implementations of CIPS and the BRICS New Development Bank (Alternative to the IMF & World Bank).

I think the chinese already got the memo about Operation Gladio B and the shit the CIA sponsored Turks are pulling with the Uighurs. If they don't have contingency plans for a "spontaneous" colour revolution then they're all idiots. I thought the neo-cons would use Japan to start a pivot in the East, but I guess they are going to try the cheap and cheerful propaganda crap they used on HK first.

These days all you have to do is follow the US State Dept travel itinerary to predict where riots, wars, murders, and terrorists will strike in the next few months.

reader2010

From what I read online it seems the student protest in Hong Kong last year was financed and supported by a major foreign power. The Chinese state-controlled media capped the casualty data of a numerous Islamic suicide attacks on civilians and police in Xijiang region (rumor mill saying about 400 people had died since the beginning of 2015). There are credible sources pointing to a major western power that is financing and training those Chinese Islamic militants in the nearby boarding countries.

Apostate2

Hmm, 'what you read online". Well perhaps you didn't read that the HK Federation of Students who funded the campaign have opened their books to show no foreign donations or influence. The internet is a dangerous and faulty source without due diligence. And the Xinjiang attacks and response have not been verified, though many reports in the Chinese press. If anyone is training those militants it is the Islamists not your so-called 'west'.

YHC-FTSE

You might want to do a bit of due diligence yourself.

Leaders of the HK occupy movement have been busted. GW did a good expose of them here. The student leader Mr.Wong spent some time as a guest in Macau in 2011 at the invitation of the American Chamber of Commerce. Where did this meeting take place? Venetian Macao owned by the Sands Corp - yep the very one owned SHELDON ADELSON, the American oligarch behind Benjamin Netenyahu. Sometimes I seriously cannot believe these zionists popping up at the centre of every disgusting criminal plot to make this world even more unpleasant than it already is.

As for the Uighurs, you might want to google "Sibel Edmonds - Operation Gladio B" to verify beyond any doubt that there is a serious concerted effort to foster terrorism in NW China by the CIA. Although I don't share her views on Edward Snowden, her research is very thorough and verifiable on the subject of Gladio B.

Here's a youtube interview to get you started: Sibel Edmonds interview. It was a shocking revelation for me when I first saw it.

WhyWait

No doubt the Empire is cooking up a color revolution in China. And we have to ask, what on earth were they doing letting a WSJ reporter into their inside conversations?

Yet, the elite moving themselves their money and their children out of China is certainly telling us something, and the story of officials and Party members speaking the party line without conviction is eerily familiar.

Missing from this article is the fact that this all is happening in the context of what is shaping up to be a global economic collapse of historic proportions, which China as a country that has jumped into capitalism with both feet is about to experience full force.

If China were about to experience a collapse like that of the Soviet Union, the elite would be preparing to inherit it, jockying for their place, looking forward to the great plundering of public resources and the remaining state-owned companies begins. But instead they're fleeing en masse. Evidently they're expecting something else.

Deng Jiao Peng proposed that China had to undergo capitalist accumulation first, then build socialism. The coming collapse of the world and Chinese economies is just what Marx predicted - and Marx is part of China's state religion. The hard-pressed over-worked and over-exploited millions in China's privately owned factories, and the Communist Party members among them, have that doctrine as part of their legacy. They are by all acounts already in a state of pre-revolutionary ferment and anger, as witnessed by thousands of strikes and protests per year, and they are about to get thrown into a crisis of survival.

The resulting revolutionary upheaval may make the Cultural Revolution look like a dress rehearsal.

Foreseeably this will open huge opportunities for the US and Japan to engage in mischief, and will put Russia in a very difficult position with its new strategic partner incapacitated.

WhyWait

Elaborating a bit on how I'm framing this:

China and Russia have both already had profound anti-capitalist revolutions followed by a kind of counterrevolution and a partial restoration of capitalism. In Russia this counterrevolution was marked by the collapse of Communist Party rule. In China it involved a takeover of the leadership of the Communist Party by capitalist kleptocrats and oligarchs. Thus the collapse of Communist Party rule in China, while inevitable, will be of an entirely different character. Without the global collapse of the capitalist economic system it might have devolved into a liberal democratic system more like those of Western Europe. In the present context that is not an option and what we will see instead is a counter-counter-revolution, i.e. a revolution.

goldhedge

"The elites getting their kidz out of China" is probably more to do with Chinese Expansionism.

These will be rich and therefore powerful ppl in their new found homes and still have "some" allegiance to their motherland.

Its all by design.

silverlamb

"A more secure and confident government would not institute such a severe crackdown. It is a symptom of the party leadership's deep anxiety and insecurity"...

A government that feels safe should not militarize the police and try to control the Internet ... but USA is doing . There are not good countries, only good people and corrupt or weak governments ...

shovelhead

Norinco. The PLA's corporate face of the Chinese MIC. They own our West Coast port facilities under various shell co. names.

I imagine, like any army, that political factions in Govt. can only purge dissident military leaders after carefully assessing that they have a majority in the clique of power that will remain loyal.

I also imagine that the political /miltary power structure is a fluid balance of interlocking sheres of influence and interests. When it becomes unbalanced in the US, you end up with dead Kennedys.

reader2010

China embraced liberal market ideology right after the collapse of the Soviet Union thanks to the propaganda engineered by Wall Street. However, in the Aftermath of 2008 financial meltdown, China finally realized that was purely a bullshit. And particularly after the Pivotal to Asia led by Washington, China was made to understand that Washington sees it as the "rogue state". So they started to engage the West in a different light completely. Getting rid of the 5th column (many of them came to study in the US in the 70s and early 80s) is what Xi has been doing in the name of anti-corruption. That's what's happening in real time, folks.

Md4

We cannot predict when Chinese communism will collapse, but it is hard not to conclude that we are witnessing its final phase. The CCP is the world's second-longest ruling regime (behind only North Korea), and no party can rule forever."

China is in the mess its in mostly because the west, having outsourced much the its middle class wealth producing jobs to the east, is mostly broke, and suffering a dramatic and on-going decline in income with which to consume. While life has never been easy for the mostly poor peasant class of Chinese, they were led to believe an insatiable appetite in the west for the goods once produced there would endlessly enable them to enjoy a rising (even if very modestly by western standards) standard of living.

When you come from rice paddy, rural and antiquated agrarian poverty for generations, even a shanty town life in the shadow of new and empty high rises and mega factories are a step up. At least you're working, making a steady wage and eating a little meat once in awhile. If this keeps up, you think, you might actually be able to have something for yourself one day...

But then, that's not how it's all turning out.

What the idiots, in a bonsai rush to outsource western manufacturing and middle class wealth-producing industries apparently never considered, is, what do workers in an emptied-out west do for income when the old jobs are gone, and how will western spending-dependent economies inheriting those former American industries survive without western spending?

Eventually, like the west, the east will implode, of course.

And that's what we're seeing. China is the most visible because it's the largest, most talked about of the beneficiaries of western outsourcing. But it is certainly not the only EM in trouble. What's worse are all of the commodity spin offs heavily dependent on supplying the giant manufacturing engine China became. They, too, are beginning to suck air, as China doesn't need production inputs if the outputs aren't selling much.

The outputs are seriously declining in demand because western incomes are in serious decline. We're witnessing a global train wreck, with each car beginning to slam into the one ahead of it. Eventually, and because of the state of affairs that bonsai outsourcing set into motion, these cars will derail.

The world has never been here before. It is clear to me it doesn't know what to do about what is a checkmate. All of the old easy monetary games aren't working because they can't work. If anything, they're making the inevitable collapse just that much tougher to overcome. This cannot be fixed, but it sure as hell can be screwed up more.

My gut tells me the world will likely fracture into smaller and smaller pieces when the calamity finally takes hold. Human nature more often circles wagons into tighter groups under extreme pressures of disintegration. That may ultimately look like the break up of the Warsaw Pact, or it may look more like the north and south of antebellum America. Much depends upon what any people feel is their best shot at some kind of peaceful prosperity while weathering an unprecedented storm.

But...the collapse HAS to happen first.

The world remains checkmated until it does, and there is no way back to before.

m

scatha

What a crap. ZH could do better then re-posting WSJ excretions. Did author ever read anything about China's history or US for that matter? The Chinese Xi guy's just doing what his predecessors were doing for thousands of years namely purging old clique, replacing it with new clique who helped him to power.

This happens everywhere where there is any REAL change of power. Not in US where the same regime continues for almost 240 years without any change. Not one iota. Nothing, the same British imperial aristocrats with support by courtiers and domestic slaves from Britain colonies like Kenya.

China is much further from collapsing then these US where hordes of oligarchs escape US to Asia to find shelter for their money and their families before this whole shit collapses, joined there by tens of thousands of US expatriates looking for better life in Asia or even Russia or Europe.

Thanks to Japanese renewed militarism and fascist leaning government as well as US aggressive behavior vs. Russia average Chinese learn to stick to evil they know. The popularity of so-called communist party but actually nationalist party surged over last 10 years but not due to economics since it raised standard of living for only about 100 millions (8% of population) but because they learned a lesson that they cannot be divided by the West, never again, otherwise they know they'll return to western slavery as it was for several centuries.

This is Chinese philosophy of life. It hard to believe but vast majority of Chinese are ready to put on gray uniform and jump on a bike dropping all those western useless gadgets at a whim. And if WSJ does not know about it, it does not know anything about China.

So we have to judge this piece for what it is, pure propaganda, unleashed to prep brain damaged Americans for dying for.. few rocks in the ocean or nothing.

Free_Spirit

Unlikely, the instant catastrophic collapse vis USSR was caused by the leaders (drunk yeltsin) choosing to write the nation into history, and wasn't caused by the people. Granted a spineless Gorbachev fataly weakened the system, but what really destroyed the soviet system was lack of reliable food and basic consumer goods supply. Teachers couldn't attend school because they had to queue for food all day. Nor factory workers, whose factories closed for lack of attending workers. Food rrotted in railway sidings because there were no reliable drivers and locos to keep the supply chain going. This above all else was the breakdown of the system. So long as China avoids such a breakdown of supply and basic services, and retains focused leadership the CPP will survive. I don't see any senior CCP leader who rivals Gorby for spinelessness or Yeltsin for drunken stupidity. If we ever do, then it'll be time to talk collapse.

[Feb 21, 2015] The art of provocation and Sacral victims of Maidan

Color revolution is a military operation in which protesters are just a tip of the iceberg. the key players are Embassy staff, three letter agencies, NGOs, bought and foreign owned neoliberal press, some orligrached (who might be pressed into submission with the threat of confiscating their assets), compradors and bought players within the government. It was by bought players within the government initial crashes with police were organized. One of the key instruments are huge cash flows in diplomatic mail that feed the protest ("bombing country with dollars"). In a sense in any neoliberal republic color revolution is designed to be a sucess, the fact which EuroMaidan proved quite convincingly. Ukraine actually was a very easy target. Yanukovich was essentially neutralized and paralyzed by threats from Biden. Security services were infiltrated and partially work for Americans. Several bought members of the government (Lyovochkon?) did their dirty job in organizing the necessity clashes with policy to feed the protest.

Former Prime Minister Azarov explained his version of events on the Maidan. The script writers of the Maidan, in his opinion, were Americans.

Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov told the NTV about how coup d'état of February of the last year was organized. According to him, the script of the coup d'état was written at the U.S. Embassy.

"The main puppeteers were not on the Maidan," Azarov said. The protests started because of the decision of Ukrainian authorities to suspend the signing of the Association agreement with the EU.

"There was, of course, the enormous pressure from the leaders of the European Union, from several European countries. The meaning of this pressure was the fact that we must put aside all doubts and to sign this agreement," said the former Prime Minister. "They just needed an excuse, a reason to overthrow our government. Because we were frankly told: "If you do not you sign this agreement, it will sign another government, another President,"

In this regard, according to Azarov, they needed a provocation to start protest and such a provocation became the use of force on Independence square in Kiev, where supporters of European integration were staying for several nights. "The action was slow. The organizers understood that without the sacred victims they will be unable to ignite the crowd. Suddenly around 3 am several TV crews arrive, set lights, camera. What to shoot? This ordinary situation, when people spend the night at the square?" - said Azarov.

Me and the whole Ukrainian people were cynically played. According to Azarov at this moment "prepared by gunmen in masks" arrived to the square. They started beating on duty policemen with metal sticks. When police called reinforcements instigators quickly disappeared. And when riot police began detention, "they detain generally innocent people who spend night at the square as a part of peaceful protest."

Speaking about the negotiations Yanukovich with the opposition, Azarov noted that the current Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk "every day spend most of his time in the American Embassy and following their instructions to the letter."

In the end, an agreement was signed between the President and opposition leaders on the peaceful resolution of the conflict, the guarantor which were several European countries, but no one except the Yanukovich, fulfilled their obligations. "I still do not understand, how foreign Ministers of Poland, Germany, France, which signed an agreement on February 21 feel themselves. In the history of diplomacy this agreement will be included as an example of the utmost degree of cynicism and deceit," said Azarov.

See also

Chinese Authorities and US-Made 'Color Revolution' in Hong Kong

Let's see what methods the China used in response to the orange infection.

1. As we remember the significant contribution to EuroMaidan was transportation by buses of residents of Western regions of Ukraine into Kiev. In Hong Kong this trick failed. China has established a tight cordons on the border of Hong Kong – tourists who looks like potential street fighters and coordinators tourists were turned back. Buses with armed bits and fittings gull of young aggressive young people had no chance to get into the area of unrest.

2. China has carefully worked the Hong Kong professors, who trying to repay the US grants by droving students to the streets. Dismissal, conversations with the Chinese KGB, check about the payment of taxes from money from grants make this method of generating the crowd from university students by-and-large closed. Similar problems were created for all American NGOs.

Yanukovich during his time in power did not managed to close this channel of feeding of Maidan via "pre-paid" university professors, and NGOs has almost diplomatic immunity status in Ukraine. At the end he almost paid with his life for that.

3. A dangerous groups that could take on the role of storm troopers for insurgents – such as radical environmentalists were placed under administrative arrest and could not participate in the riots.

4. Around the Maidan was organized by the cordon of police, who did not give peaceful protesters the ability to smuggle to the place of unrest Molotov cocktails and such. Those who were caught were packed into police car and removed.

5. China found for local Poroshenko, who fanned the Maidan through his media resources, some very convincing words. Jimmy Lai for a couple of days disappeared from the public view, and when he returned, his revolutionary enthusiasm had sharply diminished.

6. Chinese media together were explained to local residents that because of protests big business and big money will move to other cities. which gladly will cease the opportunity to take over Hong Kong financial hub. For residents of Hong Kong this is a very troubling prospect: at least in terms of higher unemployment and lower wages. At this point many will not be able to pay their mortgages and other loans.

Explanations had its effect – CNN reports that the locals became really aggressive toward protesters. Quote:

Talks planned as Hong Kong protest numbers shrink – CNN.com

The news of official talks comes as a dwindling number of pro-democracy demonstrators continue to cling on to their protest sites in key areas of the tightly packed city. As their numbers wane, so does patience of some of their fellow citizens.

"At first, I supported them, but then I started to think they are being selfish because they block the roads - and that's wrong," said Virginia Lai, who has sold newspapers from a stall in the busy district of Mong Kok for 45 years.

Lai says her business is down 30% and getting worse. The student-led demonstrators are camped out at a major intersection in the neighborhood, which witnessed violent clashes between protesters and their opponents over the weekend.

At the moment on the streets of Hong Kong are still about 300 protesters:

http://itar-tass.com/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/1492865

As we know from previous color revolutions experience, hardcore protesters themselves usually do not disperse voluntarily: they sit until the last, waiting for the moment when the police begin to disperse them. How will China to solve the problem is unclear.

However, we can already say that Americans have faced this time with an intelligent and cold-blooded enemy: the enemy, who had carefully studied all of their previous games, and provided a strong response to each standard course of manuals.

Perhaps, in the place of the Americans, I would think not even about Hong Kong, but about Texas and Washington. In the U.S., more than enough smoldering conflicts that an experienced player will be able, with a little luck to inflate to a full-scale protest. and amount of armed people could make it problematic for policy to crash.

By Fritz Morgen

Hong Kong's "Occupy Central" is US-backed Sedition by Tony Cartalucci

October 20, 2014 | journal-neo.org

The goal of the US in Hong Kong is clear – to turn the island into an epicenter of foreign-funded subversion with which to infect China's mainland more directly.

Protesters of the "Occupy Central" movement in Hong Kong shout familiar slogans and adopt familiar tactics seen across the globe as part of the United States' immense political destabilization and regime change enterprise. Identifying the leaders, following the money, and examining Western coverage of these events reveal with certainty that yet again, Washington and Wall Street are busy at work to make China's island of Hong Kong as difficult to govern for Beijing as possible.

Naming Names: Who is Behind "Occupy Central?"

Several names are repeatedly mentioned amid coverage of what is being called "Occupy Central," the latest in a long line of US-engineered color revolutions, and part of America's vast, ambitious global geopolitical reordering which started in earnest in 2011 under the guise of the so-called "Arab Spring."

Benny Tai, a lecturer of law at the University of Hong Kong, is cited by various sources across the Western media as the primary organizer – however there are many "co-organizers" mentioned alongside him. The South China Morning Post in an article titled, "Occupy Central is on: Benny Tai rides wave of student protest to launch movement (1)," mentions most of them (emphasis added):

Political heavyweights including Civic Party chairwoman Audrey Eu Yuet-mee, former head of the Catholic diocese Cardinal Jospeh Zen Zi-kiun and Democratic Party founding chairman Martin Lee Chu-ming addressed the crowd.

The Post also mentions (emphasis added):

Jimmy Lai Chi-Ying, the embattled boss of Next Media who is under investigation by the Independent Commission Against Corruption over donations to pan-democrat politicians, said he arrived immediately after a call from Martin Lee Chu-ming.

Benny Tai regularly attends US State Department, National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and its subsidiary the National Democratic Institute (NDI) funded and/or organized forums.

Just this month, he spoke at a Design Democracy Hong Kong (NDI-funded) conference on political reform. He is also active at the University of Hong Kong's Centre for Comparative and Public Law (CCPL) – also funded by NDI.

CCPL's 2013-2014 annual report lists Benny Tai as attending at least 3 of the center's functions, as well as heading one of the center's projects.

Martin Lee, Jimmy Lai, and Joseph Zen are all confirmed as both leaders of the "Occupy Central" movement and collaborators with the US State Department. Martin Lee, founding chairman of the Democratic Party in Hong Kong, would even travel to the United States this year to conspire directly with NED as well as with politicians in Washington.

Earlier this year, Lee would even take to the stage of NED's event "Why Democracy in Hong Kong Matters." Joining him at the NED-organized event was Anson Chan, another prominent figure currently supporting the ongoing unrest in Hong Kong's streets.

Media mogul Jimmy Lai was reported to have met with Neo-Con and former president of the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz in June 2014.

China Daily would report in an article titled, "Office opposes foreign interference in HK," that:

A special edition of Eastweek showed Lai, owner of Next Media and Apple Daily, meeting Paul Wolfowitz, a former US deputy secretary of defense in George W. Bush's administration. The pair met on Lai's private yacht for five hours in late May.

Wolfowitz, who was also president of the World Bank between 2005 and 2007, is well-known in the US for his neo-conservative views and belief in a unilateral foreign policy. Wolfowitz also held the post of under secretary of defense between 1989 and 1993. He is currently a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Lai would also seek Wolfowitz' help in securing various business deals in Myanmar. The South China Morning Post in their article, "Jimmy Lai paid Paul Wolfowitz US$75,000 for help in Myanmar," reported that:

Leaked documents show Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai Chee-ying paid former US deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz US$75,000 for his help with projects in Myanmar.

According to a July 22, 2013, remittance notice by the Shanghai Commercial and Savings Bank, Wolfowitz received the money from Lai as "compensation for services in regards to Myanmar".

15385666631_ce65467461_zLai's liasons with notorious Neo-Con Wolfowitz should be no surprise – as NED, the principle director of Washington's vast portfolio of political agitators worldwide is rife with Neo-Cons who intermingle both on NED's board of directors, as well as in various other corporate-financier funded think tanks.

NED itself is merely a front, couching geopolitical and corporate-financier interests behind the cover of "promoting freedom" and "democracy" around the world.

There is also "student leader" Joshua Wong, who was arrested amid the protests. Wong has had his career tracked by the NDI's "NDItech" project since as early as 2012. In a post titled, "In Hong Kong, Does "Change Begin with a Single Step"?," NDI reports:

Scholarism founder Joshua Wong Chi-fung, 15, has become an icon of the movement, and his skillful interactions with media have been memorialized and disseminated on Youtube. Through this page, Hong Kong youth have coalesced around common messages and images – for example, equating MNE with "brainwashing" and echoing themes reminiscent of the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy movement.

Wong's work serves to challenge attempts by Beijing to reestablish Chinese institutions on the island, preserving Western-style (and co-opted) institutions including the education system.

The aforementioned Civic Party chairwoman Audrey Eu Yuet-mee is also entwined with the US NED, regularly attending forums sponsored by NED and its subsidiary NDI. In 2009 she was a featured speaker at an NDI sponsored public policy forum hosted by "SynergyNet," also funded by NDI.

In 2012 she was a guest speaker at the NDI-funded Women's Centre "International Women's Day" event. The Hong Kong Council of Women (HKCW) itself is also annually funded by the NDI. Just this year, should would also find herself associated with CCPL, presenting at one of its functions beside "Occupy Central" leader Benny Tai himself.

In addition to SynergyNet, CCPL, and HKCW, there are several other US-funded NGOs supporting, legitimizing, and justifying "Occupy Central," or hosting those leading it. Among them is the US NED-funded "Hong Kong Transition Project" which claims it is "tracking the transition of Hong Kong people from subjects to citizens."

In name and mission statement alone, the goal of the US in Hong Kong is clear – to turn Hong Kong into an epicenter of foreign-funded subversion with which to infect China's mainland with more directly.

The Transition Project was tasked with legitimizing Occupy Central's "pro-democracy referendum" conducted earlier this year – which then served as justification for increasing unrest on Hong Kong's streets. Guardian in a June 2014 article titled, "Hong Kong's unofficial pro-democracy referendum irks Beijing," would report:

About 730,000 Hong Kong residents – equivalent to a fifth of the registered electorate – have voted in an unofficial "referendum" that has infuriated Beijing and prompting a flurry of vitriolic editorials, preparatory police exercises and cyber-attacks.

Occupy Central with Love and Peace (OCLP), the pro-democracy movement that organised the poll, hopes to pressure Beijing into allowing Hong Kong's 7.2 million residents to choose their own leader by 2017. If Beijing refuses, OCLP says, the movement will mobilise at least 10,000 people next month to block the main roads in Central, a forest of skyscrapers housing businesses and government offices on Hong Kong island's northern shore.

The Transition Project links with other US-funded organizations, including the Hong Kong-based "think tank" Civic Exchange. Funded by Exxon, the US State Department's NDI, the British Council, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Morgan Stanley, Citi Group, the British Consulate itself, and many others, its claim of being "Hong Kong's independent public policy think tank" is scandalous.

The Agenda: What Does "Occupy Central" Really Want?

345435US NDI openly states on its own page dedicated to its political meddling in Hong Kong that:

In 2005, NDI initiated a six-month young political leaders program focused on training a group of rising party and political group members in political communications skills. In 2006, NDI launched a District Council campaign school for candidates and campaign managers in the lead-up to the 2007 elections.

NDI has also worked to bring political parties, government leaders and civil society actors together in public forums to discuss political party development, the role of parties in Hong Kong and political reform. In 2012, for example, a conference by Hong Kong think tank SynergyNet supported by NDI featured panelists from parties across the ideological spectrum and explored how adopting a system of coalition government might lead to a more responsive legislative process.

Indeed, the very organizations, forums, and political parties the "Occupy Central" movement is associated with and led by are the creation of foreign interests – specifically the US State Department through NDI. Since "democracy" is "self-rule," and every step of "Occupy Central" has seen involvement by foreign interests, "democracy" is surely not the protest's true agenda.

Instead, it is "soft" recolonization by Washington, Wall Street, and London. If "Occupy Central" is successful and Beijing ever foolishly agrees to allowing the leaders of this foreign-orchestrated charade to run for office, what will be running Hong Kong will not be the people, but rather foreign interests through a collection of overt proxies who shamelessly sustain themselves on US cash, political backing, and support across the West's vast media resources.

The West's Long War With China

"Occupy Central" is just one of many ongoing gambits the US is running against Beijing. A visit to the US NED site reveals not one, but four pages dedicated to meddling in China's internal politics. NED's activities are divided among China in general, Xinjiang – referred to as "East Turkistan" as it is called by violent separatists the US backs – and Hong Kong.

All of NED's funding goes to politically subversive groups aligned to and dependent on the West, while being hostile toward Beijing. They range from "monitoring" and "media" organizations, to political parties as well as fronts for violent extremists.

And as impressive as this network of political subversion is, it itself is still but a single part of a greater geopolitical agenda to encircle, contain, and eventually collapse the political order of Beijing and replace it with one favorable to Wall Street and Washington.

As early as the Vietnam War, with the so-called "Pentagon Papers" released in 1969, it was revealed that the conflict was simply one part of a greater strategy aimed at containing and controlling China. While the US would ultimately lose the Vietnam War and any chance of using the Vietnamese as a proxy force against Beijing, the long war against Beijing would continue elsewhere.

This containment strategy would be updated and detailed in the 2006 Strategic Studies Institute report "String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China's Rising Power across the Asian Littoral" where it outlines China's efforts to secure its oil lifeline from the Middle East to its shores in the South China Sea as well as means by which the US can maintain American hegemony throughout the Indian and Pacific Ocean.

The premise is that, should Western foreign policy fail to entice China into participating in the "international system" as responsible stakeholders, an increasingly confrontational posture must be taken to contain the rising nation.

This includes funding, arming, and backing terrorists and proxy regimes from Africa, across the Middle East, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and even within China's territory itself.

Documented support of these movements not only include Xinjiang separatists, but also militants and separatists in Baluchistan, Pakistan where the West seeks to disrupt a newly christened Chinese port and pipeline, as well as the machete wielding supporters of Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar's Rakhine state – yet another site the Chinese hope to establish a logistical hub.

Meddling in Thailand and stoking confrontation between China and an adversarial front including Vietnam, the Philippines, and Japan are also components of this spanning containment policy.

Whatever grievances those among "Occupy Central's" mobs may have, they have forfeited both their legitimacy and credibility, not to mention any chance of actually achieving progress. Indeed, as the US-engineered "Arab Spring" has illustrated, nothing good will come of serving insidious foreign interests under the guise of "promoting democracy."

The goal of "Occupy Central" is to make Hong Kong ungovernable at any cost, especially at the cost of the people living there – not because that is the goal of the witless though well-intentioned participants being misled by Washington's troupe of seditious proxies, but because that is the goal of those funding and ultimately directing the movement from abroad.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".


First appeared:http://journal-neo.org/2014/10/01/hong-kong-s-occupy-central-is-us-backed-sedition/

How Hong Kong's umbrella movement folded

Benny Tai, the charismatic law professor who cofounded the original Occupy Central movement, zipped himself into a tent at the main protest camp near the Hong Kong government complex and refused to talk even to his allies for days following the cancellation of talks between officials and student leaders in early October, claiming he "could not come up with solutions to some problems". He has since returned to teaching.
Al Jazeera English

... ... ...

The latest opinion poll by the Chinese University of Hong Kong also shows that almost half of all the city's residents do not have any trust whatsoever in their government, which has stonewalled all requests by campaigners for a properly democratic system. The government is widely perceived as having sold out the city's treasured semi-autonomous status to the ever more insistent urgings of the Chinese Communist Party.

Blaming Hong Kong and Beijing officialdom for the current atrophied state of the protest movement is easy. After all, it was the Hong Kong government that refused first to talk to representatives of the democracy movement, and then to convey their desires to the rubber-stamp mainland legislature that drafted the electoral rules they wanted changed - rules under which, come polling day in Hong Kong, only Communist Party loyalists would get a look in.

And it was the government on the mainland that stopped student protest leaders Alex Chow, Nathan Law and Eason Chung from boarding a plane bound for Beijing to take the democracy message to what many Hongkongers regard as a distant imperial capital.

Turning in on itself

What supporters of the Umbrella Revolution will find less easy is looking at the role its leaders have played in its apparent demise. An effective boycott by the relevant interlocutors, in the form of government officials, and for two months the lack of a face-to-face oppressor, in the form of police - who until last week appeared to have learned that gassing protesters was the equivalent of poking a stick into a hornet's nest - left Hong Kong's democracy movement to turn in on itself.

"Even before the renewed police aggression of recent days, the city's three formerly buzzing protest sites had become forlorn reminders of the movement's early promise."

The leadership of the movement, faced with no one to talk to and no one to confront on the streets when they were at the peak of their power, has done precisely that. Even before the renewed police aggression of recent days, the city's three formerly buzzing protest sites had become forlorn reminders of the movement's early promise.

Benny Tai, the charismatic law professor who cofounded the original Occupy Central movement, zipped himself into a tent at the main protest camp near the Hong Kong government complex and refused to talk even to his allies for days following the cancellation of talks between officials and student leaders in early October, claiming he "could not come up with solutions to some problems". He has since returned to teaching.

Others in the front rank of the protests, including university student union leaders Lester Shum and Alex Chow, and Joshua Wong, a teenage firebrand from the vocal school pupils' democracy group Scholarism, have often appeared paralysed by indecision. When in early November, for instance, a pro-Beijing group won widespread media coverage of a petition opposing the occupation movement that claimed the signatures of almost one in every four Hongkongers - allegedly from individuals that included preschool children, tourists and people paid to sign multiple times - it was more than the democracy camp's leaders could do even to challenge its rigour.

Occupation crumbles

Even now, as the occupation crumbles amid a crackdown involving a quarter of the city's entire police force, there has been little indication from protest leaders as to how the movement should develop and how its supporters might continue to work together to achieve their democratic aims.

The remarkable degree of self-organisation by protesters has demonstrated that there is no shortage of support for the democratic cause in Hong Kong. Yet, a lack of direction from the front as police act with an impunity they appeared to have lost in the protest's early days, is failing a movement that arose with minimal leadership but which, in order to progress towards its goals, demands strong leaders.

For the time being, the task of maintaining the momentum of protest may be left to perhaps the most dedicated supporters of the movement, whose scattered acts of civil disobedience have in recent days provoked ever more determination by the police to crush it. But in the longer term, Hong Kong's democracy advocates will realise that dedication is nothing without direction, and when they do, the forces ranged against them may well find themselves facing a more muscular protest leadership with bolder plans to advance their cause.

Padraic Convery is an Asia-based journalist who has spent almost a decade working at news organisations in the region.

[Feb 19, 2015] Catholics Play Key Role in Hong Kong's "Umbrella Revolution" Women of Grace

A large swath of the Christian population of Hong Kong is taking part in the massive "umbrella revolution" underway in that nation as citizens fight for the right to elect their own leader and break away from the control of the mainland communist regime in Beijing.

According to Joe Carter of the Acton Institute, tens of thousands of people have been pouring into the streets of Hong Kong in the last week, led by pro-democracy activists that include Catholic Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, to protest Beijing's interference in their 2017 elections.

Communist Chinese leaders had promised direct elections for a chief executive of Hong Kong, but decided last month that voters will only have a choice between two or three candidates that were hand-picked by a nominating committee comprised of people from Hong Kong's pro-Beijing population.

In other words, Beijing broke their promise and now wants to control the election, something that has infuriated the people of Hong Kong.

As result, students began boycotting classes and holding demonstrations outside Hong Kong's main government compound in Tamar Park. Since then, members of the Occupy Central with Love and Peace - which is the same Occupy movement that staged protests on Wall Street earlier this year – also became involved.

Even though the movement is considered secular, Christians have been in the vanguard of the pro-democracy sentiment that is now raging through the country, mostly because of their desire to put an end to Beijing's virulently anti-religious government.

Catholic leaders such as Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, who served as the sixth bishop of Hong Kong, addressed the crowds on September 24, urging them to ignore the Communist government.

"In a place where education is not sufficient, people will get cheated easily. There will be danger of manipulation. However, the basic conditions in Hong Kong are ready. People are mature enough," he said according to Catholic Online. "Beijing does not allow civil nomination because they fear. They do not trust in us, thinking that we will intentionally choose a leader who will confront them."

Cardinal Zen is among four Catholic leaders that state-run newspapers have dubbed the "four troublesome gangsters of Hong Kong". The others include Jimmy Lai, founder of the pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily; Anson Chan, a well known protester, and; Martin Lee, founder of the Hong Kong Democratic Party.

In addition to these Catholic firebrands, many Occupy Central leaders in Hong Kong are Christian and pastors of all denominations are allowing their churches to be used as sites to provide support to marchers such as the distribution of food, water and a place to rest.

Police have tried to curtail the movement and it was their use of pepper spray and tear gas that prompted people to carry umbrellas to ward off the toxic fumes – thus dubbing the march the "umbrella revolution."

Hong Kong has an unusual history. It was ceded to Britain by China in 1842 after the First Opium War, but it's 99-year lease expired in 1997. It then became a "special administrative region" of China.

"Hong Kong is governed under the principle of 'one country, two systems',under which China has agreed to give the region a high degree of autonomy and to preserve its economic and social systems for 50 years from the date of the handover," explains Carter.

"China controls Hong Kong's foreign and defense policies, but the territory has its own currency and customs status. Hong Kong's constitution, the Basic Law, provides for the development of democratic processes. However, the Chinese government can veto changes to the political system and pro-democracy forces have been frustrated by what they see as the slow pace of political reform."

Even though Catholics comprise just five percent of the population, and Protestants just seven percent, Hong Kong Christians have born the brunt of Beijing's anti-religion sentiment.

"Christians in Hong Kong, they see that economic development has not brought more religious tolerance in China, so despite economic development, despite improvement in living standards and opening to the external world, tolerance of Christianity especially has not been improving, in fact in the recent two years persecution has strengthened," said Joseph Cheng Yu-shek, a professor of politics at the City University of Hong Kong.

It makes perfect sense that those who have been denied the most freedom are now the loudest voices calling for democracy.

[Feb 19, 2015] Hong Kong's Umbrella Revolution Isn't Over Yet

You can justify a color revolution in many different ways, but it remains a color revolution and net result as worsening of the life of common people. One interesting feature is the level of corruption of professors at universities by Western grants. During EuroMaidan National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy was one of the intellectual center of far right nationalism. Here it looks like University of Hong Cong played a similar role with many professors directly involved in protest movement. Quote: "It began as a movement called Occupy Central With Love and Peace, the brainchild of a tidily dressed law professor at the University of Hong Kong named Benny Tai"
Feb 19, 2015 | NYTimes.com

On Dec. 11, the police cleared some of the final protesters off a highway in Hong Kong.

... ... ...

Hong Kong is a city whose self-conception is, above all, as a good place - a polite place - to do business. It scores well in global transparency studies. Taxes are kept low to encourage commerce. Nominally, under the arrangement known as One Country, Two Systems, the city is free to govern itself. But under Hong Kong's strange mix of authoritarianism and corporatism, the general public votes on only half of the seats in the city legislature, with many of the remaining seats decided by corporations. The city leader, known as the chief executive, is selected by an electoral committee, a majority of whose members are not subject to popular vote and are widely believed to be under the control of mainland China.

Despite this, people in Hong Kong have held out hope that Beijing might eventually allow them real democracy. This hope was dashed last August, when China issued an edict that reserved the power to choose the candidates for Hong Kong's highest leadership position. The decision spurred the democracy movement into the streets, where protesters demanded the opportunity to nominate and elect their own chief executive - the chance to do better. The odds of bringing Beijing to the negotiating table were, from the beginning, understood as slim, but the protesters aimed to show China's leaders their displeasure. "It's a war, not just a battle," Joshua Wong, Hong Kong's most famous student activist, told me the day after Occupy ended. "We still have time."

No one planned the Umbrella Revolution, at least not the way it actually unfolded. It began as a movement called Occupy Central With Love and Peace, the brainchild of a tidily dressed law professor at the University of Hong Kong named Benny Tai, who works out of a narrow office where bookcases run from floor to ceiling - even his scholarly clutter is well dusted and clean. He speaks with the slight British accent that is common in Hong Kong and manages to sound enthusiastic about his subject without a single change in his expression. "I see myself more as an idea carrier," Tai told me, when we met at his office. "I contribute an idea, and that's it," he explained. Then he added, "Now I more and more understand that ideas can be very dangerous."

Tai floated his idea two years ago in a column in The Hong Kong Economic Journal. He proposed a new set of tactics for the city's democracy movement, which had grown somewhat predictable and toothless over the years: an annual candlelight vigil on the anniversary of Tiananmen Square and a protest every July 1 to mark the city's handover to China. "The power of civil disobedience lies with using nonviolent methods to break the law," Tai wrote, "thereby appealing to the general public's sense of justice."

As a student in the 1980s, Tai served on a 180-person committee that oversaw the drafting of Hong Kong's Constitution, a document that called for Hong Kong's autonomy but gave sweeping powers to the city's chief executive. It also left Hong Kong with a system of government that puts power directly into the hands of the city's business elite. Half the seats in Hong Kong's legislature are determined by so-called functional constituencies - voting blocs grouped by industry rather than by geographic district. "A lot of the votes in functional constituencies are actually corporate votes; they're not even given to human individuals," Anson Chan, the 75-year-old woman who ran the city's Civil Service before and after the handover, told me over cups of tea at the office of her pro-democracy group, Hong Kong 2020. "So if you are a big business tycoon in Hong Kong, and you have a dozen companies, all of which are eligible to vote, you essentially not just have one vote or two votes, you have a dozen votes." While there are 3.5 million eligible voters for the 35 seats divided by geography, there are only 232,000 people and corporations voting in the functional constituencies.

A result of this system, according to Tai and many protesters, is growing economic inequality - and a hated chief executive: Leung Chun-ying, a former real estate surveyor with a penchant for insensitive comments. Leung was elected to the position in 2012 by the 1,200-member committee that decides the office, most of whom are not subject to popular elections. After a campaign in which he accused his opponent of having an illegal structure in his home, Leung turned out to have illegal structures in his own. He later pushed an education-reform package that emphasized a rosy, more patriotic picture of Beijing (it was ultimately dropped). Leung, who is better known as C.Y. Leung, is so reviled that toilet paper was sold with his face on it; at an appearance at LegCo, a legislator threw a bun at him. In an interview with foreign media during the protests, he warned that democracy would turn Hong Kong over to the poor. "Then you would end up with that kind of politics and policies," he said, ominously.

Leung's administration has also presided over a slide in the standard of living. Hong Kong's businesses are increasingly tied to mainland China and seen as beholden to leaders in Beijing. Over the past 10 years, the median income in the city has increased by 30 percent, even as G.D.P. has grown by 60 percent. Twenty percent of Hong Kong's population is living under the official poverty line, but the city's 50 richest people, according to the annual list compiled by Forbes, are worth a total of $236 billion (Hong Kong's entire G.D.P. in 2013, by comparison, was $274 billion). Tai paid lip service to economic inequality in the name of his movement - Occupy - but his demands were more modest, limited only to the election of the city's chief executive. "It's just getting Hong Kong people to have that right to vote and have a true election," he said. "It's a first step only." By the time I arrived at the camp on Harcourt Road, comparisons with other global protests had started to grate on the leaders; they did not aim to overthrow a government, they pointed out, or to challenge an entire economic system. The movement's name changed to the Umbrella Revolution to reflect not just the literal image of umbrellas as shields but also how participation had expanded.

"Many people interpret this movement as sort of young people dissatisfied with the current economic environment," Christopher Lau, a member of the pro-democracy party People Power, told me. "This is the case, but this is a case that is shared with the rest of the world. So I don't want to overinterpret this. The movement itself is more like a deep-down frustration. We've been told the hard truth that, Sorry, no democracy for Hong Kong as long as the Communist Party is in charge."

... ... ...

For the party, the protests have threatened to become a powerful symbol of liberalization and economic prosperity. In arguing for democracy, Tai was pitting himself not against Leung but against leaders on the mainland ("Leung Chun-ying is widely understood as an underground C.C.P. member and a puppet of Beijing," reads an introduction on the Occupy Central website). The only way to measure Beijing's response has been through crackdowns. In mainland China, those thought to be supporters of the protest - even those who just expressed support online - have been thrown in jail. Late in the protest, when China's president, Xi Jinping, made a trip to Macau on a rainy day, journalists were not allowed to carry umbrellas.

From the first days of Occupy Central With Love and Peace, Tai's most visible collaborators were college students. The Hong Kong Federation of Students, a group that includes representatives from many of Hong Kong's universities, helped organize a series of town-hall meetings with Occupy Central, the first of which had 700 participants. It also attracted the attention of Wong, who has been a celebrity in Hong Kong since 2012, when, at 15, his group Scholarism fought against a program of nationalistic educational reform. With thick glasses and a bowl haircut, Wong, skinny and looking even younger than he was, organized protests and held a hunger strike. He became so famous that when the results of his college entrance exam came out, he had to hold a news conference.

Continue reading the main story

When Wong heard about Occupy, he had already been considering taking Scholarism in a different direction. "Rather than reject the things that we don't want, we want to fight for the things we want," he told me, sitting in a coffee shop not far from the cleared protest camp, texting on his phone as he spoke. The movement, he felt, belonged to the students.

Occupy Central With Love and Peace started with meetings to discuss changes to Hong Kong's electoral system. The city's government would hold five months of public hearings before Beijing announced its finalized plans. Occupy Central held a civil referendum on the form the election could take. Its final move would be to take over a section of Hong Kong's Central district during a national holiday in October. Tai estimated they would occupy the space for five days at most and, because of a national holiday, disrupt only one business day. They would go forward with the plan, he said, only if Beijing did not make any concessions. Tai and the others hoped that just the threat of such a mass movement would be enough to sway the mainland. The group held a series of smaller events last summer, and after the annual July 1 march, 511 students were arrested during a sit-in.

Not surprisingly, it had little effect. On Aug. 31, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, Beijing's leadership, issued its proposal: Hong Kong could vote for chief executive, but it could not nominate the candidates. That would be left to the same committee that selected Leung. Beijing was essentially offering the Hong Kong people a chance to choose between three different Leungs. "After the 31st of August decision, there was no way out," Tai said. "We had to continue our occupation action."

But a series of snap decisions by the students caused the plans to scramble. The students staged a strike in advance of the Occupy protest. On what was to be the strike's final night, Joshua Wong and the leaders of the H.K.F.S. decided to storm Civic Square, next to LegCo, in one final dramatic gesture. Alex Chow, the secretary general of H.K.F.S., told me that to win more popular support, the students knew they needed to make some kind of sacrifice. This would be it. Wong got onstage in front of LegCo and shouted the plan into a microphone. Students started running toward the square; the security fence offered little resistance.

... ... ...

A canister hit the pavement near where Jack was standing. He ran, tripped and fell down. He waited for a first-aid volunteer to come help him - the volunteer, a student named Eugene, was his first new friend in the protest movement.

That day, Hong Kong's police threw 87 canisters of tear gas at the crowd. They aimed pepper spray at people who did their best to protect themselves with umbrellas. In a city with a history of polite protest, where the last tear-gas incident happened nine years ago and on a much smaller scale during W.T.O. protests, the images coming out of Admiralty were shocking. Protesters scattered, but only for a moment. Instead, supporters who saw the images on television showed up on the scene. Eventually the police retreated, and protesters sat down on the streets.

"It's very easy to handle the tear gas," Jack told me. The key, he explained, is not to panic. "It's like if you get dropped in water and you're too scared, you'll die very fast." Students started arming themselves with wet washcloths, masks and goggles. They learned to walk away slowly, breathing shallowly and avoiding the worst of the cloud.

... ... ...

The Hong Kong Federation of Students is headquartered in a small high-rise tucked in between a highway and a market in Hong Kong's Mong Kok district. It shares the building with a handful of small companies. "The carpet company really hates us," Alex Chow said; the owners opposed the protests. Chow is a bookish student of comparative literature and sociology, with a history of becoming emotional in front of crowds. When he was appointed to the H.K.F.S. in the spring of 2014, he was a bit shy and wary of public speaking. His deputy, Lester Shum, was the outspoken one. After the movement began and the pair became famous, signs started popping up turning their silhouettes into protest art and even combining their name: Alexter.

... ... ...

In the meantime, protesters in the camps were doing their best to balance their lives with long-term occupation. A study tent was set up in Admiralty, along with a power station where people could charge their phones. The camps would clear out during the days - tents flapping in the breeze along the overpasses - then fill up again after dark. High-school students rushed home on the last train of the night. It was a euphoric, exhausting schedule, one that students recognized would be difficult to keep up.

In early November, a handful of bus companies and transportation organizations began filing injunctions against the camps for blocking traffic. The protests had been disrupting commutes. For both the government and the students, these lawsuits offered a quiet, nonconfrontational way to dissolve the camps. The cases started working their way through the courts. The police would occasionally make an effort to move barriers, pepper spraying and using their batons as they went.

... ... ...

Chow plans on stepping down as the head of the H.K.F.S. next month; Lester Shum will be stepping down as well. In the meantime, Chow and Shum can't walk down the street in Hong Kong without being recognized. Some people grin and give them thumbs up, though occasionally people will scold them.

"It matters," Lau said, "although the movement is not successful because the government didn't yield to any of our requests." The importance of the movement, he explained, was to show that Hong Kong could do more. "All these protests that you guys find normal in the States or Europe or France, Hong Kong people detested it. They thought, We cannot have this kind of chaos in Hong Kong, we are an economic city."

After two and a half months of protests, workers set about clearing the detritus of tents and yellow umbrellas.

The end of Occupy did not entirely snuff out the Umbrella Revolution. As soon as the camps closed down, other, smaller protests started popping up around the city. A group of activists hung a yellow banner on a cliff face known as Lion Rock, and the police had to use a helicopter to get it down. Nightly crowds gathered in Mong Kok, and as Christmas approached, groups of singers roamed the streets, singing protest songs to the tune of carols, like "O Come All Ye Faithful":

Everyone has head injuries and bloody limbs

Everyone has a long scar from a healing wound on their forehead

Evil police angrily wave their batons, hoping to kill a few pedestrians

The first large-scale protest since the occupation was held on Feb. 1, organized by the Civil Human Rights Front. They marched peacefully, carrying the familiar yellow umbrellas of the movement, but with just an estimated 13,000 people, the crowd was smaller than expected. "Maybe this is a not a negative thing," Chow told me. The diversity of opinions that he had struggled with in the protest zone could be a source of strength in Hong Kong's post-Occupy movement. Members of H.K.F.S. argued that each small act of protest would keep the movement going.

For the students in the First Defensive Line, the movement didn't change their daily lives, but it changed them. I met up with a few of them at a Häagen-Dazs in Mong Kok a few days after the protest. Jodi had a yellow ribbon pinned just beneath her scarf. "We didn't successfully fight for what we wanted," she said. "But more and more teenagers will think more about the government and society, and one day we will have some success. Not this month or next year. I believe it will be a long fight."

... ... ...

Lauren Hilgers is a writer living in New York City. This is her first article for the magazine.

[Feb 02, 2015] Hong Kong pro-democracy protests – in pictures

Again those White Hall stooges from guardian glorify protest when it suits establishment needs and vilify the protest if they run contrary of British ruling hypocrites.

Thousands of protesters demanding free elections took to Hong Kong's streets on Sunday in the first large rally since demonstrators brought the city to a standstill last year

[Feb 02, 2015] Hong Kong democracy protesters march for 'true universal suffrage'

Looks like UK and US want to keep pressure...

Thousands of pro-democracy protesters took to the streets of Hong Kong on Sunday for the first time since mass demonstrations shut down parts of the city for more than two months.

A sea of yellow umbrellas – the symbol of the campaign – moved slowly through central Hong Kong with crowds shouting for "true universal suffrage".

Organisers had said the rally would draw 50,000 people. Onlookers estimated that several thousand had joined the march by mid-afternoon, but no police estimate was available.

Police said that attempts to reoccupy main roads that were cleared of tented protest camps in December are likely. But no protest group has announced it intends to relaunch the occupation and the march began peacefully, with many carrying yellow balloons.

The rally will be a gauge of the public's willingness to keep fighting for free leadership elections. The authorities have made no concessions to activists' demands and tensions remain high in the semi-autonomous Chinese territory.

"We just want to express our frustration with the government in Hong Kong," said Ronnie Chan, a protester in his 40s who works in sales and marketing. "We understand there is very little we can do but if we don't speak out nothing will change."

In December, officials cleared protest camps that had blocked several main roads. Rallies drew around 100,000 at their peak and saw intermittent violent clashes with police.

China promised Hong Kong residents the right to vote for their chief executive for the first time in 2017. But it ruled that nominees must be vetted by a pro-Beijing committee, a proposal that was heavily criticised by activists.

Daisy Chan, a protest organiser, said the rally would show that the Occupy movement, as the protests were known, was a political awakening. "In the past, these citizens were less political than they are right now. The Occupy movement woke people up."

The founders of the movement, including Benny Tai, along with teenage activist Joshua Wong and other student leaders, are also attending the rally. Alex Chow, a student activist, said there was no plan to take back the streets. "We don't have a plan (to reoccupy). If others want to do it, they will have to do it themselves," he said.

"This march demonstrates to the citizens that the pro-democracy momentum is not dead," said a political analyst, Sonny Lo. But he also believes residents are exhausted from protests over political reform. "At this moment members of the public are tired of politics. The democrats have to strategise very carefully," said Lo, head of the social sciences department at the Hong Kong Institute of Education.

Chan said marchers were not planning to reoccupy the streets on Sunday but police were nervous. "It is believed that those supporting the illegal occupation are likely to seize the opportunity to reoccupy roads which have been now reopened to traffic," a police statement said.

Around 2,000 police are being deployed to the rally, according to local media. Hong Kong's government is urging the public to support Beijing's electoral plan, which needs the backing of two-thirds of the city's legislature to be passed.

Lam Woon-kwong, convenor of the executive council or cabinet, warned campaigners to accept Beijing's framework. "You can't threaten the central authorities," he told a radio programme. "If we can have consensus to have universal suffrage in 2017 first and democratise further later, it would be a more pragmatic approach."

Protests in Hong Kong predate Occupy, with hundreds of thousands taking to the streets over issues including an unpopular security bill. Last July hundreds of thousands also demonstrated a month before Beijing ruled on political reform.

Monkeybiz -> SwissArmy1984 2 Feb 2015 02:00

The British East India company killed millions in the Bengal Famine of 1860s grew opium which Jardine Matheson sold to the Chinese so it could drain China of its silver wealth. Genghis Khan probably killed a few as well. I'll match your history with my history and raise you one.


Monkeybiz -> dolly63 2 Feb 2015 01:58

Oh pulease. Students in HK now, as they always have been, are concerned about pretty much only one thing, and that is getting a good job, preferably in an investment bank, or being a private doctor, or a commercial lawyer so they can get lotsadosh.

The democracy thing has only come about because like everywhere else it's getting much harder now that the people in the middle class own all the property and have pulled the ladder up, that the economic situation means jobs that pay lots are harder to come by, and the other issues that are a product of out times and the Bonfire of the Democracies.

If apartments were affordable - like elsewhere - the democracy thing wouldn't be on the radar.

However, people are quite happy to see their quite good NHS-like public health care system shifted from a general taxation funded to a private insurance based system with nary a murmur. Wake up peoples and smell the real roses.

ShanghaiGuy -> canbeanybody 2 Feb 2015 01:43

Election is election because you cast your vote?

Even for your biased delusional BS this sets a new low bar.

The election for HK ceo is to be gerrymandered by a small clique saying who can be voted for, ergo it is not a free and fair (true) election.
You have lived in UK 3 decades and still ignorant.

Monkeybiz -> Aeola2000 2 Feb 2015 01:40

I always wonder why in the UK the choice of Prime Minister isn't up for discussion When there's a general election. We always seem to get stuck with the person who just happened to be buggins of the day, and ffs look what a mess Cameron's made of the UK in the last 5 years. My uncle could stand for election, only trouble is, he'd never get a look in because the money that controls politics in the UK would drown out any one else. That's why we were stuck with the likes of Thatcher, Bliar and now Call me a Liar. Why can't we have true democracy...oh, wait a minute...

canbeanybody -> TheObamaRebooted 2 Feb 2015 01:30

The western democracy is good for the west and cursed for the rest.

But those occupy central fanatics in Hong Kong is not even for western democracy as they dismiss election as false unless their candidate is free from check and inspection.

It has nothing to do with democracy but regime change.

feebristow12 -> TheObamaRebooted 1 Feb 2015 23:30

Actually. Democracy is entitled to us all - including "Muslims". But each country in the world has a very different understanding of what democracy means, and each nation has very different needs.

And where people are "escaping" from are war - zones (Syria) and these people leave their home, their culture and history in seek of safe refuge, regardless if the nation is a "democracy" or not.

Shoken -> anotherforgottenman 1 Feb 2015 23:22

I would say that democracy itself is far from the idea form of political legitimacy. The problem with soceity and people is that everyone is bent on self-interest. Democracy has evolved into a secular religion that wields undue moral power. Will a "democratically elected" leader of HK necessarily lead HK into a bright future? My answer is NO. That the US and the UK is and was the global dominant power in their particular historical times owes nothing to democracy. A whole string of economic, geographic, social, political, technological factors propelled them to their respective historical status, not election or "real" election or wise voting and public participation in politics.

So the importance of how to select a CE for Hong Kong (or any national leader in any country) has been blown out of all proportions. Even if you get a "real" democratically elected CE, he or she may perform much worse than an appointed (or even hereditary) leader.

alfredwong -> SwissArmy1984 1 Feb 2015 23:19

" .....as long as the Beijing gangsters hold the reins."

I think you should reserve this label for Hong Kong's erstwhile colonial masters who had seized and ruled Hong Kong for 156 years without giving it any form of democracy.


Adrasteia789 -> laLouisiane 1 Feb 2015 22:52

Useful summary.
On Hawaii, it sounds like it has more autonomy than Hong Kong, but apart from the "symbolism" that China wants for first vet potential candidates for CEO, the substance between the two may not be that great?
Hong Kong does have a "high degree of autonomy" as was promised. HK is one of the easiest places in the world to start up a business, taxes are low, law courts are independent, the rule of law is respected (although not always by the "democrats")...the character of HK's independent autonomy is clearly very deep.
Perhaps the "complainants" are motivated more by economic opportunism than the political structure. They fret about expensive housing and difficulty of getting jobs outside of the orbit of the "taipan" conglomerates. These people need to take a leaf or two from their parents' get-up-and-go" attitude to life, which made HK into the rich city state it is today.

Adrasteia789 -> SwissArmy1984 1 Feb 2015 22:40

The "democrats" on show are in a minority, this much seems clear. Being a minority how can they claim legitimacy by the definition of democracy?

And they certainly did display a deep hypocrisy last year by ignoring their co-citizens who just wanted them to get the hell out of the way.

By obstructing businesses, the streets, telling everybody to accept their losses as "its for their own good, anyway", they lost the moral highground they initially enjoyed.

This is not ignorance, it is factual observation. I guess you disagree, from your bitter little comment. Fortunately, the numbers are not with you at all.
On your bike!

The Guardian

The Guardian


Adrasteia789 peternh 27 Dec 2014 03:10

You will always skirt the key issues with flannel and digressions.

The main points are:
1. The street squatters are obstructing other peoples' livelihoods and rights to pass. This is why they are not supported by the majority; and why the HK Police will continue to crack down on them. The preachers of democracy practice something directly opposed to the principles of democracy. They are hypocrites.

2. You are unable to quote the clauses which leave China with a contractual obligation to allow universal suffrage without prior screening by China.

You are banging your heads against a brick wall. You will not be successful.

quarrytone -> candeesays 26 Dec 2014 06:17

I've already said I agree with the demands for greater political flexibility, posters keep saying everyone will get arrested or silenced if they post criticism of the state or leaders, I'm just pointing out the latest research into the reality, it can be highly sarcastic and vitriolic just like our threads here.

That doesn't mean those who agitate for a Western system or try to organise an opposition movement won't get persecuted. Facts are facts, not ivory towers. But they are indeed the opposite of exaggerated to the point of disinformation stereotypes. Be reasonable and objective, not biased and prejudiced. I understand your hate and contempt for the CCP, but as Liu Xiaobo said of his colleagues in 89, if we distort the truth or even lie (tanks crushing tens of cowering students hiding in tents) we are no better than they are.

GoddessOFblah -> BeatonTheDonis 25 Dec 2014 20:05

Haha that's what I was thinking. The way some of the posters are commenting with a superior "we live in a de-mock'racy" attitude you'd think our police wave flowers at us when we protest and our government never goes back on promises and lies to us

GoddessOFblah -> candeesays 25 Dec 2014 19:57

The HK police ought to learn the tactics of US police in beating up protestors. The police in the US even get away with killing unarmed people.

Perhaps the US can train the HK police to be more aggressive.

candeesays -> quarrytone 25 Dec 2014 19:34

An empire is an empire.

The idea that HK or Taiwan is lucky to be tolerated before they become overwhelmed is the problem. The principle for freedom of peoples is self-determination. Not being dominated by an imperial party, regardless of whether they are communist or Qing.

Empire is rule of the few, not representative government or participation in your own destiny. Empire is inefficient, so empire encourages corruption at home and colonialism abroad. Empire is unjust and irrational, because it is predicated on the suppression of the people.

[Jan 12, 2015] The Xinjiang-Chechnya correlation

Is this redirection of efforts and money flow from Hong Cong ?

Asia Times

The Xinjiang/Chechnya correlation
By Peter Lee

Long story short, from the Communist Party of China's point of view, Xinjiang needs the best and the brightest to manage its profound contradictions, but the hardship posting tends to attract cadres and citizens who trend toward the "worst and dimmest" end of the spectrum.

The Center is trying to square this circle with money, attention, and smarter policies; but it also realizes its strategy for Xinjiang has a certain chance of failing catastrophically because of growing local dissatisfaction with what is essentially colonial occupation harshly implemented by mediocre cadres.

The PRC has no interest in cultivating capable and sophisticated local Uyghurs - such as Ilham Tohti, recent recipient of an extravagantly draconian sentence - who might serve as an alternative rallying point for improved governance of Xinjiang. Instead, it is muddling through with what it's got, while preparing for the worst-case scenario by beefing up the full suite of effective repressive measures.

The PRC government invokes the threat of terrorism to justify its actions, and its reactions to the occasional spectacularly bloody acts involving aggrieved Uyghurs, Han citizens, and the security apparatus.

Western governments and the press instinctively gag at the idea of endorsing the repressive Chinese regime's insistence on characterizing Uyghur violence as "terrorism" even when - as in the case of ethnic Uyghurs running amok in a train station in southern China and slaughtering 29 people and injuring 143 more - it's hard to call it anything else.

Even the paranoid sometimes have real enemies, if only in the future, and the PRC government has confronted the reality that the nasty political dynamic provoked by its rule over Xinjiang has the potential to generate bona fide, professionalized, international-seal-of-approval candlelight-vigil terrorism, instead of the frantic ad hoc hatcheting that seems to be the rule today.

The explanation for PRC Xinjiang policy, I believe, can boil down to one word: Chechnya.

In the West we tend to pigeonhole Chechnya as Russian President Vladimir Putin's Problem, Bloodsoaked Caucasus Division. In fact, there seems to be a sizable contingent of Putinophobic Western journos who view Chechnya primarily as a Russia versus Freedom cage match and wait with barely disguised impatience for Chechnya to fall to pieces again so that Putin, his tsar-light repressive regime, and his ferocious local client, Ramzan Kadyrov, can be discredited.

But Chechnya has another, less Euro-centric, more Central Asian identity, as a way-station on the global jihad trolley. After the USSR got its ass handed to it in Afghanistan, the trained, motivated, and at that time generously funded (Saudi religious foundation, natch) jihadis went looking for a new battle. After a few stopovers in Bosnia and Tajikistan, they found one in Chechnya.

Chechnya in the 1990s looked pretty much like a reprise of Afghanistan - same terminally dysfunctional Russky military machine savaging another freedom-loving Islamic population with a brutal occupation/security operation.

Arab jihadis, led by Ibn al-Khattab, descended on Chechnya in the mid-1990s. Thanks to their ruthlessness, fighting experience, and attractive, practical ideology (Khattab was a champion of what one might characterize as "jihadism in one country" a la Stalin as opposed to Osama Bin Laden's rather Trotskyite global jihad focused on attacking the US) the Arab militants to a significant degree took over the indigenous Chechen independence movement, and also set up a conveyer belt of Chechen fighters to be trained in Afghanistan (many of whom, unable to go home to a liberated Chechnya, have found employment and distraction in Syria/Iraq, but that's another story).

Khattab was a ferociously effective military leader who bested the Russians in numerous military engagements. He also benefited from external support, as Thomas Hegghammer describes in his book, Jihad in Saudi Arabia: Violence and Pan-Islamism since 1979:

Shortly after his arrival in Chechnya, Khattab began building a training infrastructure which he would run in partnership with the legendary Chechen commander Shamil Basayev. By mid-1995 a logistics chain had been set up to facilitate the arrival of foreign volunteers. The main stations on this chain were Istanbul (Turkey) and Baku (Azerbaijan).

The Baku safe house was run by Arabs operating under the cover of the Islamic Benevolence Committee. Khattab enjoyed a certain amount of logistical and financial report from Saudi Arabia. Saudi sheikhs declared the Chechen resistance a legitimate jihad, and private Saudi donors sent money to Khattab and his Chechen colleagues. As late as 1996, mujahidin wounded in Chechnya were sent to Saudi Arabia for medical treatment, a practice paid for by charities and tolerated by the state.

After the end of the first Chechen war, Khattab expanded his activities in Chechnya, build more camps and set up an institute in which old Saudi friends of Khattab taught religion and military science to Chechen rebel leaders.

Khattab also benefited from the de facto haven of the Pankisi Gorge in neighboring Georgia which, according to whomever you believe, has either been shut down by the pro-US Georgian government in a fit of altruism, or still provides rest and resupply infrastructure for current and new jihadis hoping to stick it to Putin in Chechnya and President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

Khattab's demise has a rather Game of Thrones cum Medici-ish vibe to it, per Wikipedia:

He was killed during the night of March 19–20, 2002, when a Dagestani messenger hired by the Russian FSB [successor to the Soviet-era KGB] gave Khattab a poisoned letter. Chechen sources said that the letter was coated with "a fast-acting nerve agent, possibly sarin or a derivative". The messenger, a Dagestani double agent known as Ibragim Alauri, was turned by the FSB on his routine courier mission.

Khattab would receive letters from his mother in Saudi Arabia, and the FSB found this to be the most opportune moment to kill Khattab, rather than attack his mountain hideout and risk losing soldiers. It was reported that the operation to recruit and turn Ibragim Alauri to work for the FSB and deliver the poisoned letter took some six months of preparation. Ibragim was reportedly tracked down and killed a month later in Baku.

What's this got to do with Xinjiang? Seven areas of high or partial correlation, I would think, as far as PRC strategists are concerned.

First of all, there's the thirst for independence shared by activist Uyghurs and Chechens that decades of immersion in a multi-ethnic communist empire have failed to quench.

Second, there's the powerful "godless foreigners oppressing Muslims" dynamic that worked so well in Afghanistan and carried over to Chechnya.

Third, the religious dynamic in the Xinjiang Uyghur community is similar to that in Chechnya in the 1990s: indigenous, relatively quietist Sufism discredited by its impotence in the independence struggle.

Fourth, the challenge of militant Wahabbism, its philosophy of jihad, its well-heeled charities backed by Saudi sheikhs, and its fifth column of madrassahs, to traditional religious/political practice.

In Chechnya, Wahabbists were able to achieve an at least temporary and partial ascendancy.

In the PRC, as this excellent article by Muhammed al-Sudairi in The Diplomat points out, the PRC has been vigilant in restricting Wahabbist efforts at prostelitization, education (within the PRC and at Arab universities), and pilgrimage sponsorship via Saudi charities.

With this context, for instance, the offensive and intrusive PRC regulations against religious observances within homes, and for growing beards and wearing hijabs, are understandable. It is assumed that, by abandoning traditional Uyghur dress and observance in favor of Wahabbi-tinged practices, these individuals are self-identifying as malcontents and professional troublemakers. And, in particular, by making beards and hijabs a regulatory offense, the PRC has a basis for questioning these people and creating a useful database of worrisome individuals, families, and social networks.

It pretty much runs in parallel with Chechen Republic efforts to re-establish the prestige of indigenous Sufi observance as an alternative to "foreign" and subversive Wahabbism.

Fifth, the availability of havens. At the height of the Chechen war, many parts of the country were no-go zones, there was the Pankisi Gorge, and behind it the incalculable comfort of knowing that medevac to Saudi Arabia was available (just as fighters in Syria and Iraq are granted access to Turkish medical facilities).

The PRC is expending immense resources to ensure that its writ runs the length and breadth of Xinjiang. But outside of Xinjiang, there are the wobbly stans, there's Afghanistan, and there's the security train-wreck that is the Pashtun regions of western Pakistan - and there's the reduction in Afghanistan of the intimidating if strategically ineffectual US/ISAF presence thanks to the Obama drawdown.

Sixth, there is admission to Jihadi University, the international network of experienced, talented and "entrepreneurial" Islamic militants. Only a few hundred can make a difference, as Higghammer states:

In the Islamist historical narrative, the emergence of the Saudi jihadist movement represents a spontaneous "rise of the people" in the face of outside aggression in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya. The reality was far more complex. "The people" never rose to any of these causes, and the mobilisation was far from spontaneous. A few thousand men were mobilised, and only as the result of the systematic and sustained effort of entrepreneurial groups of devoted individuals.
Khattab helped bring jihad to Chechnya.

In Pakistan, as I have attempted to point out frequently, the essential identity of the Pakistan Taliban (not, please, to be confused with the PRC-friendly and open-for-business Afghan Taliban) is to avenge the bloody 2007 assault on the Lal Masjid Mosque in Islamabad - which was undertaken at the insistence of the PRC, partially because it believed that Uyghur militants were being harbored there.

In Central Asia, the PRC has historically benefited from the contacts and resources it developed in its role as the CIA's quartermaster to the anti-Soviet mujahidin, and in its intimate security alliance with Pakistan's military. But those relationships are in danger of fraying, at least with some groups that have dumped al-Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban to declare loyalty to the Islamic Caliphate. And there, militant Uyghurs have reportedly found haven.

PRC's diplomacy and security policy for Central Asia is, I believe, a matter of trying to shore up the anti-terror capability of its more rickety neighbors against the day when a significant chunk of professional Islamic militants decide that fighting the Chinese infidel in Xinjiang on behalf of Islam and the Uyghurs is the cause du jour.

Seventh, there is outside money. Saudi fiddling in Chechnya is a matter of record. And there is the notorious rumor that the then head of Saudi intelligence, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, threatened President Putin with Chechnya problems at the time of the Sochi Olympics if Russia did not abandon its pro-Syria policy.

Thankfully, for the PRC at least, the prospect of Saudi Arabian sheikhs funneling money and support to Uyghur rebels - and thereby terminally offending and alienating China, the 21st century's biggest customer for Middle East hydrocarbons - is relatively remote.

As long as the PRC is left to its own devices and the Uyghur community is fragmented internally and isolated from outside support, the CCP's divide and rule/assimilationist/repressive model for Xinjiang - backed by the world's largest population and second largest economy - has good prospects for success.

But factors 1-6 offer the PRC plenty of food for thought.

This is an edited version of Peter Lee's article on the PRC's handling of its Uyghur minority in Xinjiang, titled "The Stan That Never Was" published in the current edition of CounterPunch Magazine, the subscription-only print/digital monthly. Subscribe here. Republished with permission.

Peter Lee writes on East and South Asian affairs and their intersection with US foreign policy. His articles can be found on his blog site ChinaMatters.

[Jan 09, 2015] How it was organized in Hong Kong... How can it be organized everywhere... by Ruslan Karmanov

December 26 2014 | marina-yudenich.livejournal.com

First of all they announced the "we have no leader, we are self-organizing movement, we are high-tech, dynamic and independent." In reality for everybody a s special messenger was installed in smartphone (FireChat was used in Hong Kong), which allows phones to communicate in the crowd with each other directly and send messages through the chain of participants, even with switched off cellular towers.

In fact all their claimed are blatant lie.

In the Hong Kong crowd of students was coordinated by elderly aunts and uncles with walkie-talkies, normal Kenwood. And via those walkie-talkie orders what to slogan to scream were distributed. First it was screamed by the key participant. On the second repeat it was followed with his assistants (approximately five persons located at the edges of the crowd), then the crowd was mindlessly repeating the slogan for a minute or two.

That means that it is important to suppress not smartphone communication by walkie-talkie. Left to themselves creakles are stupid mass that panic very easily on any occasions. Without a shepherd, they will become bored and demotivated. Typically the quietly dispersed by themselves pretty soon.

Special messenger FireChat is very simple. It just gives all participants a unique identifier and is using all communications protocols of the smartphone (Bluetooth, GSM/3G/4G, WiFi). It tries to identifies neighbors and tries to build a graph using the Protocol just like OSPF.

The specifics of that when crowd moving this problem cannot be solved in such a way because there are hundreds of reconnects per second, and topology fluctuates to the extant of "boiling"; no convergence is achieved. Scheme of work is trying to cram the data packet not via the best route, but suboptimal, to most plausible target in a hope that via few hops at lease one packet will reach the destination, the recipient.

That means that a person with FireChat installed on the mobile phone and with network packet sniffer will show a bunch of different messages from different subscribers all of which are trying to reach their destinations. A couple of such observers in the middle of the crowd will give a coverage of about 100% (Hong Kong the Chinese did on the second day of protest).

Additionally, continuous scan on all channels WiFi, attempts to send data to multiple instances through several different interfaces, always-on Bluetooth is a very heavy load for a mobile phone load, and the battery goes down quickly (it's a stress test with "always on" screen, running an active application active processor, all network interfaces are enabled and all are receiving transmitting something.

Cutting off the possibility of charging the battery turns the crowd (within a couple of hours) in the dust. All promptly run home or to nearby internet cafee to read in comfort and with fast Internet, what happens there and, from experience, most will not return. Psychology of an infantile office loser (aka creakle -- the key participant of such protests) doesn't see the difference between "personal involvement" and "the ability to like and comment on facebook" and it is easier to do from your house when you battery is dead.

To prevent carrying batteries and charging them "in place" is easy to implement. Batteries most of the owners of advanced modern mobile phones are fixed. To the mass to charge in a reasonable time (at 1A to the outlet, and the new iPhones and more) you need generator or a large battery. The generator cannot be present at the protest site as there fuel in it (gasoline), the battery should be inspected for a long time as it can have an explosive device. Allowing to carry only staff that is allowed to the plane is a good policy here. That means only one small battery can be carried with each person..

All those measures are legal and all represent established international practice of dealing with such protests. As for the cellular network you do not need to shut it down. It might be enough like as did humorous Chinese hackers to send personalized SMS. Something like "Student BJ, we learned that You expelled from the University for 5 absences in a row. This is not a problem - our site will help You to find your calling. Jobs for construction workers, waiters, drivers are avaible. Terrible full of desperation cry young creakle produces when he/she is seeing such a message is typical reaction. now he/she remembers that he/she got in the university winning the contest of 280 people in one place just a year ago. And sometimes this cry can be can be heard as far as Madagascar ;-)

Supplies for making barricades and such

People need water and hot drinks. Without the organization of such supplied in walking distance from the demonstrators, long rally will disperse pretty soon. This is how the Chinese put pressure on creakles --- all within the letter of the law. If this is a trade then the license is necessary. Certificate about sanitary condition of the cart. And information who are judicial persons who pay for all this.

Again this is all with the existing law framework. Is vendor an illegal worker? Then the question is whether he/she has working visa? if no, then good by my love -- this person can be deported immediately. and those who financed him/her can be investigated for attempt of tax evasion and the use of illegals. Immediately, i.e., quickly find who the owner immediately came at the place of registration of the firm. If the firm is not located at the given address you have all right to open criminal investigation. You won't believe how fast "voluntary funds for the development of democracy" which paid in Hong Kong the delivery of water to the places of protest burst under such pressure, when to them the same day came officials and checked all who bought, when, why. Amazing things about financing of protest by respectable people from the UK and US were uncovered.

I already mentioned the important of blocking the possibility to recharge the smartphones batteries at the rally talkie but I will repeat it again: contemporary protesters are the terminology of A. Navalny "fucking sheep" which is standing reading and sending messages on their smartphones and phablets, and wait for commands. It looks like "meeting successful young, dynamic effective active people with their own businesses, IQ=160, 3 high educations and 4 spoken languages". HiTech-lumpens, in short. that mean that will disperse is they will not be able to recharge their phones.

The toilets

An important point to supply the biotoilets. Without them too anywhere, especially in the cold protesting is a very tough, even painful job. Modern creakles are able to give advice on how to organize military operations and what sniper rifle is better to buy (he's say in the game some cute American models), but to shit on the road on a cold, he can find very unappealing. Accordingly, for any unauthorized meeting, city should not supply any toilets. And if the meeting is approved makes only as much as needed for the stated number of participants. Standing a long time to visit the cabin usually draw down revolutionary enthusiasm of this canon fodder of color revolutions pretty quickly. If someone decided to relieve himself in a place not designed for this purpose, this is a clear administrative offence, the penalty should be given and the person should be transported to the police department immediately. This is also a good time to check the documents - if it is not the citizen of the Russian Federation, there must be a visa or tickets, if another from another city, then registration. This is all according to the law, because you wouldn't be surprised if those who do it at the bus stop will be approached a policeman and asked for documents? It's just "as in normal countries", in any county citizens do not like such behaviour no matter how lofty political ideals are behind them.

About the food.

This is the item that should be controlled in a way similar to water. Sanitary inspection certificates and like are a must. Proper equipment and correspondence of the products to documents is also very important.

After all, if someone will be poisoned on such an event all blame falls not on organizers but on the government. and municipal authorities.

They are just children

If someone brings a child (we saw such cases two years ago, when a joyful mother explained to the camera that is police starts to beat protesters the child (5 years old) will see the country in which he lives). In such cases n immediately video recording is warranted and all documents about the child should be checked. Documents are required from all parents - it is quite possible that the mother is divorced. In such cases if the father don't know, and id not gave a written permission to drag the child to places of additional danger, then sorry. It is the responsibility of the authorities to protect the child. If there are no documents that proves that child is her own then additional checks should be performed in Police station. It can be that Gypsies gave her " a child for rent" or some shady orphan organization tries to earn money this way). All parents should be iether present or aware where the child is. if not, you should call the absent parents to find out their attitude, to inform that the citizen so-and-so took the child and brought him to an unauthorized rally, highlighting the danger and risks. Relatives usually a on the phone usually find a proper words to explain this "mother" all her behaviour. All of this is within the law, everything you need to record on video. Again, if the citizen who brought the child has stamp of divorce in the passport it can't bring the child without the written permission of the other parent not only on a rally. but also on the plane, for a visit to the steel mill, to ride a homemade airplane, and other similar events. It is just that law enforcement usually do not care. and this is big mistake. Yes, we need to care guys.

Minors at such events also fall under all that usual - i.e. needs to install their identity, contact with parents, check on alcohol and drug intoxication, fixation results. In case of failure - detention to establish, because the child is in danger - it is unclear who and how I came across illegal mass event, it is necessary to protect against possible risks. Sleep on a narrow bench until the morning, the sound of steps of the guard on duty is a great way not to get into serious trouble. Parents of stupid ass will be pleased that he is now on recorded at the police department, and if in his district somebody will rape a senior, then in door of their apartment at night might come square tired people with long questions about their son whereabouts

Artists performances

To support those who have no leader, dynamic and modern structure, one in the center to put the scene with clowns, otherwise modern and independent protesters are bored and leave. Clowns must combine action (goal - keeping the public the maximum amount of time and political propaganda. Clowns need money and electricity, as well as the mounting of the scene, perhaps some kind of hand

Now, here are the things that we need to establish. Who collects the scene whether it has the right and license (remember how at the Swamp when mounting the scene design was broke and killed the worker, who was guilty? a minute after medics removed the corpse some jerk from the scene said that this is not the last victim of Putin's regime). For electricity - what is the wiring diagram, what is consistent, what power, what with fire protection and the wire to the ground. Remember, any force majeure will be announced by the dirty tricks of the Authorities, even if drunk creakle just stick in his ass power cable. All MSM will describe the event in the framework of the struggle against the Terrible Regime of This Country.

If not - sorry guys, but this time you need to enjoy yourself without clowns.

Aggression and militants

Of course, there will be fighters - those that aim to undermine the situation. Serious money were invested in their training; for many it is a full time job. They are easily detectable, especially due to the difference of their behaviour and the behaviour of the office creakles. They associate between themselves differently, communicate differently, and have a clear plan of action with each "order arrived. Now it's time for ... ". Here, of course, the experience of Hong Kong can be taken without any modification -- fighters are immediately packed into police cars. If someone tries to make barricades from local items, this is the vandalism, the damage to the city property, i.e., video this episode should be documented, because there is a crime. In Hong Kong they did barricaded from the police barriers, binding them with plastic binders using in construction and adhesive tape. In Russia people are stronger. I confess - I broke two barricades in Hong Kong purely to try how strong local ties are, and all sitting in tents creakles something between 30 and 40 did is to protest with the words "What are you doing", but did not even move closer then ten meters. Probably in their package there was no a paid item for " a fight with a strong white foreigner who is twice bigger them me".

All onstuction materials can be easily blocked - you need just to conduct the examination on entrance to the rally and not to miss the materials that can be used for such purposes. Let leave then outside, if brought. After meeting you can return them Within the protest zone such building materials are not needed, right?

Some random tips and observations

In winter conditions, you can add several things at the same time remaining within the letter of the law.

For example, to pump water at the aggressive crows at the temperature below freezing is a bad idea. But in advance of the meeting, to fill the area with water is not. it prevents destruction of pavement BTW. This is very cool - in fact, to protest at the ice rink work. But to attack police on ice ring is much less convenient. They will stand laugh at the attackers falling one over the other.

You also need to patrol the retail outlets near the meeting. If people come in there to warm up, EN masse, you have to ask the owner does his license allow such services as temporary stay, whether the visitors paid for these services. Checks should be on the table for each participant, otherwise this is not a honest commercial outlet (i.e., people sit, do something, consume services - cell phones charged, drink-eat, and pay nothing). Such measures are typically applied to homeless. Want to warm up - make an order to buy something, even a bottle of water and pay.

Inspection of documents all participants is another key "cooling" measure. Unauthorized rally gives the law of total freedom for this action - "We received the statement that there are planned riots. Show, please, passport". this is the law.

Maximum recording what is happening is warranted just of have an official version of events which can be contrasted with MSM coverage.

In Hong Kong there is still the active work of checking "who did what' and as a result many respected people who receiving generous grants for the development of "Normal non-Chinese Democracy" (this is when the citizens of the UK control all the financial flows), lost the positions of professors, advisors, etc. Some case about corruption were opened too. There can be a lot of fun here as typically on such realized it is government that is accused of corruption. but getting foreign money for got know what services is a clear corruption too.

And then the same will recall, two years ago, 1.5 million Euros in cash was seized from the citizen Sobchak (despite the fact that she, as an entrepreneur, received exactly the minimum is 8 thousand rubles a month, judging by her tax reports). K. Sobchak began to yell that it was her, honest money, and that she's going to prove that they earned. "Proves" said the investigator. After a week of Sobchak changed his mind and said that that this were s honest money, who were given to her. "And who?" "asked the investigator. "Good man! He himself will say!" cried Sobchak, and then completely deflated. Because people who are able to donate 1.5 million Euros in cash to some woman, do not like to go to the investigator. At this place some skeleton from the closet can abruptly appear. And everybody has history. No one wants to sit in jail for crazy, eccentric girl who is dancing on the tables for rich. This is how business always reacts on such revelations. Smart people do not go to Bolotnaya Square - they explain the fools that they are independent, free, geniuses, admirer of Europe's History. They just send anonymous e-mail with the text of the poster for the protest really, and the coordinates where each participant need to stand, and from what time until what.

Something like that... This overview, I stress, is only based on my presence in Hong Kong and the study of local color revolution experience, No claims for perfection and completeness. Sill I hope this might help.

The key observation is that the workbook of color revolutions is becoming old, and several precedents of breaking color revolution plots are already here. But in Hong Cong they lost the key part of color revolution playbook - the technological superiority. They proved to be outdated and outgunned -- they simply can't match technical sophistication of the opponents. Which in general, is reflecting the situation with the United States on a global scale.

The world is changing.

hrono61

"the crowd of students coordinated old aunts and uncles with walkie-talkies, normal Kenwood radios from which the order when and what to scream were coming. The slogans were fist screamed by the key participant, then repeated by his assistants (approximately five persons located at the edges of the crowd), then the crowd mindlessly repeating the slogan for a minute or two."

Actually, this is exactly how they organized crowd at all EuroMaidan events in the Ruin:

This was how Maidan was organized: using unobtrusive radio and foremen in red jackets. Each foreman controls the core of 10 associates.

30:00 Как был организован майдан: с помощью малозаметных рации и бригадиров в красных куртках. Каждый бригадир удерживает ядро в 10 человек.

The last appearance of the "red jackets" was in Simferopol - the next day "polite" appeared.

Wu-Tang Clan's "A Better Tomorrow" video is a powerful tribute to nationwide protesters

Dewayne-Net Archives

Posted by

Wu-Tang Clan's "A Better Tomorrow" video is a powerful tribute to nationwide protesters
By Ross Miller
Dec 6 2014
<http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/6/7344733/wu-tang-clans-a-better-tomorrow-music-video-is-a-tribute>

"A Better Tomorrow," the title track from Wu-Tang Clan's new album, is a powerful and contemplative song about social injustice, racial violence, and police brutality, anchored by Teddy Pendergrass's haunting vocals from 1975's "Wake Up Everybody." So it's especially fitting that the accompanying video, released just last night, incorporates dramatic footage of the peaceful and ongoing nationwide protests for both Brown and Eric Garner - just two of countless unarmed people of color that have died tragically at the hands of the police.

Audio from the protest footage cuts in throughout the video; large, culturally diverse crowds chanting "I can't breathe" and "Hands up don't shoot." It also incorporates several segments from President Barack Obama's speech from Wednesday's Tribal Nations Conference, ending on this particularly poignant message:

"And it is incumbent upon all of us, as Americans, regardless of race, region, faith, that we recognize this is an American problem, and not just a black problem or a brown problem or a Native American problem. This is an American problem. When anybody in this country is not being treated equally under the law, that's a problem."

Much of the footage used in "A Better Tomorrow" is at most days old. The protests remain ongoing.

[Dec 17, 2014] 2014 Hong Kong protests

December 2014 | Wikipedia

On the morning of 1 December, there were the most vigorous clashes between police and protesters in Admiralty after the Federation of Students and Scholarism called upon the crowd to surround the Central Government Offices. The police used a hose to splash protesters for the first time. The entrance to the Admiralty Centre has also been blocked. Most of the violence occurred near Admiralty MTR station.[172] Also, Joshua Wong and two other Scholarism members started an indefinite hunger strike.[173]

On 3 December, the OCLP trio, along with 62 others including lawmaker Wu Chi-wai and Cardinal Joseph Zen, turned themselves in to the police, bearing the legal consequences of civil disobedience. However, they were set free without being arrested or charged.[174] They also urged occupiers to leave and transform the movement into a community campaign, citing concerns for their satety amidst the police's escalation of force in recent crackdowns.[175] Nonetheless, HKFS and Scholarism both continued the occupation. Nightly shopping tours continued in Mong Kok for over a week after the clearance of the occupation site, tying up some 2500 police officers;[176] the minibus company that took out the Mong Kok injunction was in turn accused of having illegally occupying Tung Choi Street for years.[177]

On the morning of 11 December, many protesters had left the Admiralty site before crews of the bus company that had applied for the Admiralty injunction dismantled roadblocks without resistance. Afterwards, the police set a deadline for protesters to leave the occupied areas and cordoned off the zone.[178] 209 protesters declined to leave and were arrested,[179][180][181] including several pan-democratic legislators and members of HKFS and Scholarism.[182] Meanwhile, the police set the bridge access to Citic Tower and Central Government Office only allowing media to access. The Independent Police Complaints Council was present to monitor the area for any "excessive use of force" for 10 mins.[183]

On 15 December, police cleared away protesters and their camps at Causeway Bay.[184][185]

Hong Kong Protesters Surround City Leader's Office in Renewed Confrontation - NYTimes.com By CHRIS BUCKLEY and AUSTIN RAMZYNOV. 30, 2014

"Many protesters wore masks and goggles, worried that the police would use pepper spray." Something similar with EuroMaidan. "The protesters' actions were "completely in contravention of the organizers' declared principles of nonviolence," the police said in a separate statement." another interesting similarity. "The crowds of retreating protesters blocked any further advance by the police by throwing metal barriers, bags of trash, shopping carts and other boxes onto the escalator leading to the pedestrian bridge, forming a crude barricade." I wonder where are burning tires ?

HONG KONG - Pro-democracy demonstrators in Hong Kong suffered a setback on Monday, when their attempt overnight to besiege government offices collapsed and the police thrust into the protesters' biggest street camp.

The reversal came after a night of seesaw clashes in the political heart of the city, ending weeks of anxious calm at the protesters' main street camp, in the Admiralty neighborhood, and threw into question how much longer the Hong Kong government would tolerate hundreds of tents there, only a stone's throw from the city's administrative and legislative complex.

Fear rippled through the protest camp, with some student leaders defending the decision to escalate the confrontation with the police, and others wondering whether the protest leaders had made the right decision.

Many protesters wore masks and goggles, worried that the police would use pepper spray.


"The police have never gotten so close to the heart of our camp," said Augustine Chung, a 24-year-old employee of a nongovernmental organization who was among the protesters. "I can only hope the student leaders know what to do next."

Sunday night began with rousing speeches from the student leaders in the Admiralty protest camp and calls for peaceful disobedience. But the bravado gave way to chaotic, panicky strife at the nearby government complex, where the police did indeed use pepper spray and batons to drive back protesters.

The tumult erupted soon after student leaders urged protesters to besiege city government offices in an attempt to force concessions to their demands for democratic elections for the city's leader. The protesters have said that election plans for the city offered by the Chinese government will not give voters a real say. Student protest leaders, who have dithered and debated over the direction of their movement, said their patience had expired.

"We feel that the government feels no pressure if this movement simply drags on like this," said Oscar Lai, a leader of Scholarism, a protest group of high school and university students, who urged protesters to peacefully block the Hong Kong leader's office. "This escalation shows that Hong Kong people can't wait anymore."

"Surround the government," Nathan Law, a leading member of the Hong Kong Federation of Students, said from a podium in the Admiralty protest camp where thousands of people had gathered.

Minutes later, thousands of protesters surged toward the government offices, including the headquarters of Hong Kong's chief executive, where the police were ready with barricades and anti-riot equipment. The action ended an armistice that for several weeks had allowed government staff members and the chief executive, Leung Chun-ying, to go to work minutes from the protest camp without any hindrance.

By 3 a.m. Monday, the police had arrested 40 people in Admiralty, the site of the largest remaining protest camp. (Protesters also maintain a much smaller street camp in Causeway Bay, a shopping district.) Radio Television Hong Kong, the city's public broadcaster, reported more arrests were likely, citing the police.

The protesters' actions were "completely in contravention of the organizers' declared principles of nonviolence," the police said in a separate statement.

The clashes came after a week in which the beleaguered pro-democracy movement lost its street camp in the Mong Kok neighborhood, one of three such camps that demonstrators have held since Sept. 28. Back then, a police operation to disperse protesters backfired, and thousands of residents surged onto the streets, irate at the police's use of batons, pepper spray and tear gas.

"The action tonight is to paralyze government operations," Alex Chow, the secretary-general of the Hong Kong Federation of Students, one of the two student groups that initiated the attempted siege, said early Monday. "Our objective is very clear, which is to have the government respond to our demand, and this action will continue until they respond."

But if student protest leaders felt they could no longer wait, they offered little illumination of how they expected to succeed by urging demonstrators to surround the government's headquarters and attempting to choke off access to it before the start of the workweek. Even protesters caught up in the euphoria of defiance feared they could win only a Pyrrhic victory before the police regained the upper hand.

"I don't know if we can hold out for so long," said Murphy Wong, a writer who was among the protesters outside the barricades at the chief executive's office. Like many protesters, he wore goggles and a surgical mask as protection against pepper spray. "I'm not very confident our movement can influence and outlast the government," he said. "But if we didn't make our point, it would be even worse."

Soon after he spoke, the police raised flags warning that people faced arrest if they did not leave, but the crowd remained defiant and poured across a harborside road and blocked the chief executive's office. The police with riot shields and helmets then used pepper spray to force back the crowd, and soon dozens of protesters lay on the grass of an adjacent park while first-aid teams poured water on their eyes.

The police forces regrouped and further drove back the protesters to a nearby park facing Victoria Harbor. A back-and-forth struggle lasted for more than an hour until the police retreated. But at 7 a.m. the police moved against the exhausted protesters, many of whom were sleeping on the road. The police continued their charge, pushing demonstrators out of the park and across a pedestrian bridge over the main protest area, where panicky crowds ran back and forth. It was the police's deepest incursion into the protest camp since the occupation began.

The crowds of retreating protesters blocked any further advance by the police by throwing metal barriers, bags of trash, shopping carts and other boxes onto the escalator leading to the pedestrian bridge, forming a crude barricade.

But many of the thousands of protesters around the Admiralty camp wondered how much longer they could stay.

"This is our final stand," said Leo, an 18-year-old student, wearing a gas mask, goggles and a white towel draped over his neck, who helped build the barricade on the escalator. Like growing numbers of the protesters, he would not give his full name, fearing punishment.

"I think the government will ignore us again but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try."

In mid-October, the government offices and a nearby traffic tunnel and park became a battleground between the police and protesters who blockaded the chief executive's office. Hundreds of police officers used pepper spray to disperse hundreds of demonstrators who had barricaded nearby Lung Wo Road.

The two student groups at the forefront of the protests, the Hong Kong Federation of Students and Scholarism, had urged supporters to congregate in Admiralty and bring the now-familiar paraphernalia of the protest: safety helmets and drinking water, as well as goggles and umbrellas, which have been used to fend off bursts of pepper spray from the police.

"There comes a time when you need to take some risks, and that's what we did," said Boon Ho Sung, a 36-year-old stage actor who was among the protesters milling around Admiralty. "This will trigger another wave of action from the people," he added. "Some people in the movement will be willing to take more radical steps."

Alan Wong and Michael Forsythe contributed reporting from Hong Kong.

[Nov 24, 2014] MPs' trip to China cancelled after row over Hong Kong protests debate

Case study in British hypocrisy...
Nov 24, 2014 | theguardian.com

A visit by a cross-party group of parliamentarians to China, led by Peter Mandelson, has been cancelled at the last minute after Beijing refused to grant a visa to a Conservative MP in retaliation for a Westminster debate on the recent pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.

In a sign of Beijing's sensitivity to international criticism of its response to the protests in Britain's former colony, the Chinese embassy in London demanded that Richard Graham, MP for Gloucester, make a statement clarifying his thinking after he held the debate in Westminster Hall last month.

The MPs, who had been due to leave on Tuesday morning for the three-day visit to Shanghai, issued an ultimatum to the embassy: grant Graham, the chair of parliament's all-party China group, a visa or the whole trip would be cancelled. The embassy failed to agree to their demands by 5pm on Monday, which meant the trip was cancelled.

Hugo Swire, the Foreign Office minister with responsibility for the Asia-Pacific region, was understood to have been involved in talks to try to save the trip and avoid a diplomatic row.

But members of the delegation, who included the former Labour cabinet minister and China expert Liam Byrne, shadow cabinet member Emma Reynolds, Conservative MPs Conor Burns and Alok Sharma, were understood to feel that the Chinese embassy was interfering in a wholly unacceptable way in the internal affairs of the UK. The trip was part of the UK-China Leadership Forum. Their attitude was described as regretful rather than angry.

A Foreign Office spokesman said:

"The UK-China Leadership Forum has an important role in UK/China relations. We have raised this with the Chinese government and sought an explanation of their decision to deny a visa."

Sources made clear that the Great British China Centre, which organised the trip, is independent of the government. The centre makes its own decisions about travel arrangements.

Graham, a former diplomat who served at the British embassy in Beijing and as the British consul in the former Portuguese colony of Macao in the late 1980s, used the debate in Westminster Hall on 22 October to voice support for some of the protesters' demands. The protests were sparked by the decision of Beijing to impose restrictions on the election of Hong Kong's next chief executive.

In a highly nuanced speech, designed to show his deep understanding of Chinese sensitivities while voicing support for the pro-democracy activists, Graham told MPs that Britain had a duty to uphold the principles of the 1984 joint declaration by Britain and China, which led to the return of Hong Kong to China in 1997. In the declaration China agreed to maintain "freedom under the law, an independent judiciary, a free press, free speech and the freedom to demonstrate".

He added: "If we allow any of those freedoms to be curtailed and if we say nothing about any dilution of Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy, whether deliberate or inadvertent, we risk colluding in Hong Kong's gradual – not immediate – decline, helping others in Asia who would swiftly take any opportunity at Hong Kong's expense, and we would not be fulfilling the commitments that John Major, Robin Cook and, most recently, our prime minister have re-emphasised in the clearest terms."

Graham, who was living in Hong Kong at the time of the 1984 declaration and the 1997 handover, tried to reassure Beijing on one of its main concerns: that outside powers were orchestrating the protests. He said:

"It is my belief that most of those in Hong Kong who feel most strongly about the issues around the election of the next chief executive represent a new generation of Hong Kongers. They were mostly born after the joint declaration. They are not, as has sometimes been claimed, ancient colonial sentimentalists or those left by dark foreign forces to create disturbance after the colonialists had gone, but a new generation with a different take on life from their predecessors. They are more sure of their Hong Kong identity, less sure of their future prospects and less trustful of government or leaders in whose appointment they still feel they do not have enough say."

Graham concluded his speech by addressing two of Beijing's long-held concerns: the need for stability and an assurance that Britain was not seeking to extend its influence back into its former colony.

He said:

"Stability for nations is not, in our eyes, about maintaining the status quo regardless, but about reaching out for greater involvement with the people – in this case, of Hong Kong – allowing them a greater say in choosing their leaders and, above all, trusting in the people.

"We have no interest, no advantage or no conceivable selfish purpose in any form of car crash with Hong Kong's sovereign master, China. Rather, it is in all our interests, but particularly those of Britain and China in fulfilling the joint declaration, that Hong Kong continues to thrive and prosper, in a different world from that of 1984 or even 1997."

[Nov 21, 2014] 200PM Water Cooler 11-21-14

naked capitalism

Hong Kong

Senior Triad member "Mr Kong" says Mainland paid triads to infiltrate Occupy, citing Legco storming as an example [South China Morning Post]. Maybe Obama shared the DHS handbook with Xi? Probably not, actually, since the Chinese no doubt has expertise of their own.

Mainland immigration blacklist from Hong Kong [Roydon Ng]. And self-selected unscientific online poll: Does the Umbrella Movement represent the Democracy Movement? 44% yes, 44% no.

Activists protest at British Embassy [Straits Times].

[Nov 21, 2014] Hong Kong pro-democracy leaders condemn parliament clashes

Looks like Stage Ii of events started, if we consider this a replay of EuroMaidan tactic. That's what nationalist also tried do with the Ukrainian Parliament (Rada)... Opposition leaders can condemn radicals openly and support them behind the close doors...
19 November 2014 | bbc.com

Pro-democracy leaders in Hong Kong have condemned violent action by a small group of protesters on Tuesday who tried to break into parliament.

The Occupy Central movement said those behind the clashes had misled the crowd by spreading "false information".

The police also denounced the violence, saying it had "seriously disrupted public order and public safety".

Protesters calling for full democracy have occupied three key sites in Hong Kong for nearly eight weeks.

But hours before Tuesday's incident, bailiffs and police peacefully cleared a section of the main Admiralty protest camp.

Police say they are also preparing to clear the roads at the main camp at Mong Kok on Thursday.

Protesters 'misled'

Police used pepper spray and batons to drive back the group of protesters after they used metal barricades and concrete slabs to smash the glass doors of the legislature, known as Legco.

At least four people were arrested and three police officers injured in the overnight clashes. The situation had returned to normal by Wednesday morning, after the protesters retreated.

Protest leaders have condemned the violence, suggesting it may undermine their ultimate aim for Hong Kong to hold leadership elections without interference from China.

One of the main protest groups, Occupy Central, said "some people... had egged on other protesters to enter the Legco building but left themselves," in a statement condemning the violence.

Democratic lawmaker Fernando Cheung, who was among a group of people trying to stop the protesters, said they had been "misled" into thinking that parliament was about to debate a controversial ruling on freedom of the internet.

... ... ...

While it is not yet clear when the camp will be cleared, the South China Morning Post says thousands of police are on standby to clear the site as early as Thursday. A third protest site remains at Causeway Bay.

The protesters have been on the streets since early October to demonstrate against a decision by China to screen candidates for Hong Kong's 2017 leadership election. Numbers were originally in the tens of thousands but have fallen to a few hundred.

Hong Kong and the Beijing government say the protests are illegal, and there is growing public frustration with the disruption to traffic and business.

Police operations to clear and contain the camps in recent weeks have sometimes led to clashes. An earlier attempt to clear an underpass near Admiralty led to accusations that police had used excessive force, after a video emerged of officers apparently beating a protester.

Support for Hong Kong street protests wanes ahead of expected dispersal poll

November 18, 2014 | InterAksyon.com
The online news portal of TV5

Reuters - More than two-thirds of Hong Kong people think pro-democracy demonstrators who have occupied key parts of the Chinese-controlled city for seven weeks should end their street protests, a Chinese University of Hong Kong survey suggests.

Of those surveyed, 67.4 percent said the protesters should vacate the streets. Public support for the movement was also wavering, with 43.5 percent of people saying they were against it, compared with 33.9 percent who gave their support.

The results came after an eviction notice for the main Admiralty protest site, next to the Central business district, was published in newspapers on Saturday, suggesting police may move in any day to clear all the street blockades in line with court-ordered injunctions.

The former British colony of Hong Kong returned to Chinese rule in 1997 under a "one country, two systems" formula that gives the city more autonomy and freedom than the mainland and a goal of universal suffrage.

The protesters are demanding open nominations in the city's next election for chief executive in 2017. Beijing has said it will allow a vote in 2017, but only between pre-screened candidates.

The protests, which drew well over 100,000 at their peak, have dwindled to hundreds camped out in colorful tents at key intersections on both sides of the harbor.

China and Hong Kong launched the Stock Connect scheme on Monday, giving foreign and Chinese retail investors unprecedented access to the Hong Kong and Shanghai exchanges.

There were no protests at the Hong Kong exchange against the scheme that will bolster financial ties with the mainland.

Even as the university survey showed a lack of support for the protesters' occupation of the streets, it also showed displeasure with the Hong Kong government's handling of the crisis.

About 40 percent of those surveyed felt the government's response had been inadequate and nearly half - 48.5 percent - said the government needed to make concessions.

The survey involved 1,030 Cantonese-speaking residents between Nov. 5 and 11. (Reporting by Clare Baldwin, Farah Master, Clare Jim and Kinling Lo)

[Nov 13, 2014] A Fruitful Visit by Obama Ends With Blunt Words by Xi Jinping by Jane Perlez

Nov 12, 2014 | NYTimes.com

Initially, Mr. Xi appeared to ignore two questions from a reporter for The New York Times: whether China feared that the Obama administration's pivot to Asia represented an effort to contain China, and whether China would ease its refusal to issue visas to some foreign correspondents in light of a broader visa agreement with the United States.

After first taking an unrelated question from a Chinese state-run newspaper - appearing to draw a bemused reaction from Mr. Obama - Mr. Xi circled back, declaring that the visa problems of news organizations, including The Times, were of their own making. He evinced little patience for the foreign news media's concerns that they were being penalized for unfavorable news coverage of Chinese leaders and their families.

Mr. Xi said that China protected the rights of media organizations, but that the organizations needed to abide by the rules of the country. "When a certain issue is raised as a problem, there must be a reason," he said, apparently acknowledging a link between news coverage and the refusal to extend the visas.

Mr. Xi used a Chinese metaphor to describe the travails of The Times and other organizations, saying they were like a faulty car. "When a car breaks down on the road, perhaps we need to step down and see what the problem is," he said.

In a passage that was not translated into English, the president added that "the Chinese say, 'Let he who tied the bell on the tiger take it off'" - a saying that can also be translated as, "The one who created the problem should be the one who solves it."

Mr. Xi also bluntly warned the United States and other foreign countries not to get involved in the pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong, which he dismissed as illegal, responding to a question to Mr. Obama about rumors in the Chinese media that the United States is fomenting the unrest there.

Continue reading the main story Continue reading the main story

Continue reading the main story

"Hong Kong's affairs are exclusively China's internal affairs, and foreign countries should not interfere in Hong Kong's affairs in any fashion," the Chinese leader declared. "It goes without saying that law and order must be protected in any place."

The authorities in Hong Kong have issued increasingly strong warnings for protesters to clear the streets as Mr. Obama's visit and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit meeting in Beijing have neared an end.

Mr. Xi dismissed suggestions that Mr. Obama's pivot to Asia - including a proposed regional trade pact that does not include China - was an effort by the United States to contain his country. And he brushed off a recent wave of anti-American statements in China's state-run media, saying, "I don't think it's worth fussing over."

Taken together, Mr. Xi's statements offered a rare, unvarnished glimpse of the Chinese president, two years into his term and after his swift consolidation of power. He showed no hesitation in departing from his usual script about the importance of a "major power" relationship.

For his part, Mr. Obama tried to keep the emphasis on working with China. He, too, sharply disputed suggestions that the United States's new focus on Asia should be seen as a threat, saying that "our conversation gave us an opportunity to debunk the notion that our pivot to Asia is about containing China."

Mr. Obama said he had assured Mr. Xi that the United States had nothing to do with the protests in Hong Kong. "These are issues ultimately for the people of Hong Kong and China to decide," he said of the protests demanding fully democratic elections, though he voiced support for the right of free expression.

In general, Mr. Obama's references to human rights were carefully calibrated. He noted America's refusal to recognize a separate Taiwan or Tibet. He also praised China for its role in nuclear negotiations with Iran, its response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and its dealings with a nuclear-armed North Korea.

Mr. Obama played down a recent wave of virulently negative coverage of him and the United States in China's state-run media. Tough press coverage, he said, came with being a public official, whether in China or the United States. "I'm a big believer in actions, not words," he added.

White House officials told reporters that the president had called on a reporter for The Times in part because several of its China correspondents had been denied visas by the government.

The state-run Chinese television station CCTV did not broadcast the 48-minute news conference. "That would have been a deliberate decision by the central propaganda department, which everyone knows is even more hard-line than Xi Jinping," said Shi Yinhong, professor of international relations at Renmin University in Beijing.

Propaganda officials did not want the Chinese public to see President Obama talking about human rights and Tibet, Mr. Shi said, even though he said Mr. Obama had been gracious in not saying "hard things to annoy his host."

[Nov 12, 2014] Hong Kong's umbrella protests are here to stay

"The umbrella protesters often cite Hong Kong's high costs of living, inequality, lack of hope for the young etc. as reasons for demanding democracy, but yet are unable to offer any coherent argument as to how democracy would solve these problems."

Nov 12, 2014 | theguardian.com

The movement is cosmopolitan, inclusive, and networked – and Beijing's scope for a Tiananmen-style crackdown is limited.

... Although the protest's goals may not be met before the next major election, in 2017, it has already succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of its originators. None of them expected the occupation to get this big or last this long.

... The government also has its hands tied. Given the high degree of international media attention Hong Kong received after earlier police actions, an immediate, Tiananmen-style crackdown is unlikely. Teargas and pepper spray might just send more people back into the streets.

quarrytone -> Herman Kusuma 14 Nov 2014 07:23

Really Herman, China is nothing like 1984 (which incidentally you can buy in most big book shops as well as online here). You seem to be mistaking it for North Korea or the former Soviet Union.

Yes the just over 1000 political prisoners the US would like to be released are a shame on the country, but that's out of 1.38 billion souls. The proportion in a real 1984 state is astronomically higher.

quarrytone -> Herman Kusuma 14 Nov 2014 07:13

Sorry Herman, I said a lot, so first you didn't say which bit was "wrong", and second I've seen a few vids myself from the BBC and NYT as well as reports of academic research.

Are you saying life expectancy hasn't doubled? That literacy hasn't risen dramatically? That exemption from the one child policy isn't true when well documented? That lower score access to top universities isn't true? That there is enormous wealth generated from a tourism boom in new hotels, shops, restaurants etc.? With respect you need to be specific.

EliasMcLiar -> quarrytone 14 Nov 2014 00:26

You are, of course, right to call me out on vulgar hyperbole. I am an asshole, that's just my style. For context, I also consider the entire southeastern US, most US cities, Liverpool, Marseille, Slovakia, Mexico, and many other places to fit my definition of "shithole" and freely discuss them as such. Beijing is ok, but, frankly, if it and Shanghai are the best China has to offer I'll be staying home. Many of the other cities, however are very far from the Beijing middle class experience of security and safety, and danger comes from the government, the criminals (white and blue collar), and the huge overlap between the two.

Totally with you on Tibet, by the way. Odd that we don't see white people wearing "Restore the Dzungar Khanate!" T-shirts.


ricohflex 13 Nov 2014 13:17

Journalists need to pay the bills and feed their families. When their drafts get rejected repeatedly by the editors, the journalists get the message. They write articles with a particular slant.

Surely you don't think that these softie Hong Kong kiddies are really slugging it out on the streets. Of course they don't. It is only a show. They rotate shifts and go back to their homes from time to time to shower, have a good warm meal, go to the toilet, have fresh change of clothes, recharge their mobile phones and notebook computers, catch some nice TV show --- and then when they are bored, they go back to the nice camping tent on the Hong Kong street. The little kiddies want to bluff the world that they are on the streets 24 hours 7 days a week for 1 month plus? Don't bluff. It is all crap.

quarrytone EliasMcLiar 13 Nov 2014 10:32

On the violent crime, yes, out of 1.38 billion people there are stories of knifings about every 3 weeks because they are rare, they are very newsworthy and go all over the net and press. Still far safer than the States.

To be honest if you talk to ladies in Beijing they feel very safe late at night. We just had that Brit rapist 3 years ago. Thanks to him your 1st work visa now requires a home country criminal record check.

quarrytone EliasMcLiar 13 Nov 2014 10:27

Fair enough Elias. I live in Beijing and have visited Hong Kong 5 times. I prefer both Beijing and Hong Kong to London.

To be fair I know what you mean about Hong Kong being a fantastic city, but do you need to use such unpleasant language about China to make your point? Beijing has smog 1/3rd of the time, but the people are great, and there are some great places to spend your time. We can all rotten cherry pick the worst then claim the whole tree is rotten. I've only had food poisoning once in 4 years, less than India in 6 weeks, and about average for frequent eating out in the UK. I just wouldn't choose to live in a "shithole".


Viewcart jdanforth 13 Nov 2014 03:05

U.S. dollars pay for stockpiles of supplies hidden in three makeshift warehouses in three schools. NED did not pay for Occupy Wall Street and that's why it failed.


JoeSmith25 12 Nov 2014 06:03

This article is typical of many of the articles written by the western press. The article ignores the fact that Hong Kong already practises many elements of democracy, e.g. free speech, elected legislators, right to assembly etc. The Chief Executive is not elected directly by the people of Hong Kong (and this is the issue with the Occupy participants), but no Chief Executive in his/her right mind would do anything that is highly unpopular withe the public. Importantly, the article does not mention that a number of surveys suggest 70% of the people in Hong Kong wants the umbrella protesters to end their occupation immediately. Throughout the entire period of the protests, the protesters have never garnered much more than 40% support from the public. All evidence point to the majority in Hong Kong as being against the protests.

People in Hong Kong understand the ideals of democracy, but can also see that democracy creates its own set of problems, e.g. decisions made based on political calculations rather than what is good for the community, short-termism etc.

The umbrella protesters often cite Hong Kong's high costs of living, inequality, lack of hope for the young etc. as reasons for demanding democracy, but yet are unable to offer any coherent argument as to how democracy would solve these problems. After all, don't UK, US, Australia, Europe not have these problems?


canbeanybody 12 Nov 2014 05:15

"Hong Kong's umbrella protests are here to stay"

No, you are not and occupation by those occupy central fanatics will be cleared.

Yes the western mainstream media appears to scream head off hoping the "success" of regime change but they fail.

All those fanatics group masters are now talking about to "hand themselves in" although it is likely a trick to deceive themselves.

Arrest all those hard core occupy central fanatics, prosecute them, fine them or impose custodial sentences as appropriate.

The wealthy fanatics should also made to pay for the damages to Hong Kong and to Hong Kong businesses who have suffered great financial losses.

Justice must prevail and justice, law and order will prevail.


JovialMerchant 12 Nov 2014 05:09

Guardian's reaction to mass protests in Hong Kong over appointing their own technocrat:
"This is the biggest shakeup in China since Tiananmen Square!!"... "This is a huge victory for democracy and social justice!!"

Guardian's reaction to mass protests in London over austerity and privatisation:
"Russell Brand met with Occupy Westminster today. Probably to promote his new book"... "Are the protests ignoring feminist issues?"

Raymond Ashworth -> Gonebush 12 Nov 2014 05:05

Just because you personally don't know about the CIA's involvement, shouldn't stop you from going away and reading about it before commenting ignorantly.

[Nov 02, 2014] China gets silence from Hong Kong tycoons instead of vocal support By Julie Makinen

Oct 31, 2014 | LA Times

With a $32-billion fortune and business interests as diverse as supermarkets and ports, Asia's richest man, Li Ka-shing, would seem to have little to fret about. But as the Hong Konger told a class of graduating students in the summer at mainland China's Shantou University, he's kept up at night by worries over his city's yawning wealth gap..

The government needs "dynamic and flexible [wealth] redistribution policies" and should invest more in education, the 86-year-old said in an address titled "Sleepless in Hong Kong."

The concerns troubling Li are among those that have echoed through the night in Hong Kong this fall as protesters, many of them students, have taken to the streets to demand change. Although their primary goal has been greater democracy - a sensitive topic that Li studiously avoided in his speech - they also have fretted about their economic prospects and the state of education.

When the demonstrations erupted in late September, many people - particularly leaders in Beijing - expected power brokers like Li to come out firmly and forcefully against the sit-ins and call for a quick return to the status quo. After all, the territory's business elite has enjoyed a cozy and profitable relationship with government officials since the former British colony reverted to Chinese rule 17 years ago, reaping massive windfalls as closer ties with the mainland set the city's property market on fire and supercharged other sectors of the economy.

But that calculation may have underestimated the tycoons' support for Hong Kong's more Westernized traditions, and their distaste for its government leader, Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying.

To protesters in the streets, Leung is Beijing's man, a representative of anti-democratic forces. But a majority of the region's billionaires have long seen him as a populist, an up-from-poverty arriviste who doesn't share their background or values.

Over the weekend, James Tien, a local legislator and head of the pro-business Liberal Party, called on Leung to resign, becoming the first such establishment figure to do so. Beijing's displeasure at this became manifest Wednesday, when Tien was expelled from the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, a prestigious government body.

Tien's call may only reinforce notions in Beijing that the billionaires who were supposed to have the Communist Party's back are instead engaging in an internecine battle, some observers said.

"This is not a Hong Kong-mainland battle; this is a tycoon-tycoon battle."
- Michael DeGolyer, professor of government and international studies at Hong Kong Baptist University

"I think the way the mainland is seeing it is that the real face of the struggle has been revealed," said Michael DeGolyer, a professor of government and international studies at Hong Kong Baptist University. "And this is not a Hong Kong-mainland battle; this is a tycoon-tycoon battle."

"This is probably also why [Beijing] is being fairly noninterventionist; it was supposed to be tycoons running Hong Kong," DeGolyer added. "So clearly I think they're interpreting this as an internal struggle in which the pro-democracy movement is either an unwitting dupe, being manipulated, or actually an arm or branch or acting element being encouraged by one of the tycoon factions."

None of this is to suggest that the tycoons have been out in the streets alongside the protesters. For the most part, they have said nothing publicly about the unrest, and it is impossible to know what they are thinking or saying in private.

A fair number of Hong Kong's 1% may be unsympathetic to the Occupy Central demonstrations and simply don't want to say anything to offend their hometown customers. So far, the sit-ins have hurt the pocketbooks of taxi drivers, restaurateurs and some retailers, but spared the stock exchange and property market.

"The big boys are doing OK; their businesses have not been hurt," said Willy Lam, a Hong Kong-based political analyst. Li and other billionaires "have called on the students to leave, but they have not used excessively heavy or colorful language to scold them. It's obvious that they realize that the students have substantial support among the population. So I think they are playing it both ways."

China's communist leaders appear to be chafing at the silence. Last weekend, the state-run New China News Agency published an article-cum-plea headlined, "Hong Kong tycoons reluctant to take sides amid Occupy turmoil." The story lamented that former Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa was nearly alone among the wealthy in voicing opposition to the protests.

Li had urged protesters to go home "but did not make it clear whether or not he agrees with the appeals of the protesters," it said. "Other Hong Kong tycoons have all remained mute."

There may be intrigue behind their silence.

Two years ago, Li and many of his peers backed Leung's rival, Henry Tang, for the city's top job. Tang, the son of a Shanghai textile baron, was seen by many of Hong Kong's elite as cut from the same cloth. Leung - the son of a police officer, raised in public housing - was regarded as more populist and unpredictable, despite having made millions in the real estate and surveying businesses.

Ultimately, Beijing signaled its preference for Leung after Tang was hit by scandals over an affair and illegal additions to his mansion. Still, Leung managed to get only 689 votes from the 1,200-member committee of movers and shakers that chooses the chief executive.

"C.Y. Leung has never had the support of these tycoons," Lam said. "So it's highly possible they see this as an opportunity to settle old scores."

So far, there's no indication that the wealthiest tycoons have supported the demonstrators financially, though the city was abuzz this week with revelations that Occupy Central With Love and Peace, one of the key protest groups, received $166,000 from one anonymous donor.

But at least one protest leader believes their reticence to speak out may be a sign of tacit support.

"It seems that the Chinese Communist Party is not allowing people to remain silent. This may be the communist way of doing things, but I think [the elites'] acquiescence speaks loads about how they feel about the Occupy movement," said Alan Leong, leader of the pro-democracy Civic Party. "They may think and feel as strongly as we do that the present system does not work. And if it continues, Hong Kong will become ungovernable."

Special correspondents Tiffany Ap and Echo Hui in Hong Kong contributed to this report.

Prominent Hong Kong activist says protesters need to unify, strategize by By Echo Hui

Oct 30, 2014 | LA Times

A variety of groups coalesced behind the democracy sit-ins, including Occupy Central With Peace and Love and two student groups: Scholarism and the Hong Kong Federation of Students.

Leaders of those three main groups have expressed mutual support and have all spoken frequently to the crowds of protesters. But many people who have joined the demonstrations over the last month say they're not allied with any of those organizations and have "spontaneously" joined the protests.

The diffuse nature of the protest leadership may have helped perpetuate the demonstrations – but also has limited protesters' ability to forcefully unite and agree on a strategy to bring more pressure to bear on government authorities.

Leung's remarks came as two founders of Occupy Central, university professors Benny Tai and Chan Kin-man, announced they have resumed their university teaching duties after a month spent mainly at the protest zone in the Admiralty district, near government headquarters.

Tai told reporters this week that the move does not indicate a retreat and said he and Chan would continue spending a lot of time in Admiralty. But one senior member of Occupy Central, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the issue, said differences between the protest leaders contributed to their decision to go back to work.

"They have different views about how to lead the movement forward," said the member, adding that the advice of Occupy Central founders had been repeatedly ignored by the student groups.

... ... ...

Leung -- a well known rabble-rouser partial to Che Guevara T-shirts -- has been active in the sit-ins since day one, becoming one of the first people to sit down in front of the cordoned-off plaza at Hong Kong's Legislative Council last month to voice his displeasure over limits set by mainland Communist authorities on who can run in Hong Kong's 2017 chief executive elections.

"Every day that passes by, we waste another opportunity. Without leadership, the crowds won't stick around long."
- Leung Kwok-hung, chairman of the League of Social Democrats, speaking about Hong Kong protests

Thousands of students joined him, and dozens of students were arrested, including Federation of Students general secretary Alex Chow and Scholarism leader Joshua Wong. As they were detained by police last month, Leung dropped to his knees in front of other protesters, imploring them to stay and keep fighting for "true democracy."

"I have never knelt down to the tyranny of the Communist Party, but today I feel humble, I will bow to true democracy," Leung said in front of a large crowd of protesters in Admiralty.

Last week, a group of five Hong Kong government officials engaged in a two-hour dialogue with five representatives of the Federation of Students over the protesters' demands and 2017 election rules.

But the session yielded little, and no further discussions have been scheduled. Leung said the government's decision to talk only to the Federation of Students was a tactical move to divide the protesters.

"Students are easier to control," he said.

Government authorities don't want to talk to lawmakers and other political actors because they fear ceding any political power to pro-democratic parties of individuals, he added. But he said the protests have grown far beyond a student movement, and students cannot represent all the demonstrators.

Leung said he tried to persuade Tai to form a new group called United Front to unify the protest movement and mobilize more Hong Kongers to support it. But he said Tai rejected the idea, saying the time was not right.

"In terms of forming a 'United Front,' we need to have a common position, and most importantly, discussion on our strategy," said Leung. "But there is no leadership and very little cooperation."

Hui is a special correspondent.

Why China Won't Talk to Hong Kong's Protesters - FPIF Kaja Baum

Beijing's willingness to allow negotiations came in stark contrast to the hard line it has propagated in state media outlets, which have painted Occupy Central as a hostile movement and accused the peaceful protesters of "illegal activity."Heavily censored news reports and editorials have played up the inconvenience the protests have caused the general population and the threat they may pose to Hong Kong's economic stability. Following a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Li reinforced Beijing's refusal to compromise. "I believe for any country, for any society, no one will allow those illegal acts that violate public order," he said.

Michael Forsythe and Alan Wong of the New York Times had postulated that the talks may have been used to "provide a useful delay for the government, helping to sap the energy of the protests without promising a meaningful compromise." It is possible that they were canceled to prevent even that victory from coming to fruition, as the ranks of protestors have slowly dwindled.

Trouble at Home

For China, the outcome of these protests will have consequences that reverberate far beyond the borders of Hong Kong itself. As Vox's Max Fisher observes, the Chinese government views Occupy Central as "a potentially existential threat to the entire Chinese system, which is perceived as so weak and embattled that leaders believe even peaceful protests like this could bring everything crashing down."

Contrary to its reputation in much of the world as a rising power and economic powerhouse, China is facing numerous internal challenges that have greatly diminished its own self confidence.

Following decades of tremendous economic development, China's export-based economy now faces a looming economic stagnation crisis that will require major policy changes to adjust. And the breakneck pace of development in the country has fomented all kinds of social unrest. According to Foreign Policy In Focus columnist Walden Bello, the country has seen a wave of new protests and strikes against inequality, corruption, environmental degradation, labor exploitation, and land grabs.

China fears that granting concessions in Hong King will only look like weakness, encouraging more internal conflict.

China's restive minority groups, as well as nervous countries on its periphery, are watching the events closely for an opportunity to highlight what they see as Beijing's unfair and even brutal policies. According to Foreign Policy magazine, China's handling of Hong Kong is seen as a "template for how it might approach Taiwan," which currently functions as an independent state that China claims as rightfully belonging to the mainland. In western China, Tibetans and Uighurs are also hoping that these events draw more international attention to how China treats its ethnic minorities.

From their point of view, President Xi Jinping and China's leaders are beating back the wolves at every door and in their own den. While the rest of the world may view China as a rising and sometimes intimidating power, the Chinese leadership sees bogeymen around every corner, threatening its legitimacy.

Reclaiming Space

The likelihood that China's negotiations with Hong Kong's citizens would have led to any substantial victories on behalf of the voters was small. Although some form of negotiations may eventually resume, there is simply too much at stake in the eyes of China's leadership to offer major concessions. As Occupy Central's holdouts return to their studies and jobs, tired Hong Kong citizens may be losing their window for reform, with convictions fizzling out even promises are broken.

There is small comfort to be taken, if only feigned, in China's temporary willingness to talk with protestors. It lands far removed from the grisly conclusion of the highly publicized protests in 1989 at Tiananmen Square.

Will Hong Kong's protestors be able to resurrect the promise of negotiations in the future? The longer the issue is drawn out, the less likely it becomes that the movement will have the leverage it needs to push the government-at least not without maintaining a vibrant presence in the streets.

The election for Hong Kong's next chief executive, however, does not take place until 2017. Even if the democratic aspirations of Hong Kong's citizens are not addressed this time around, the opportunity is not entirely lost. "All gates were closed before," said federation spokeswoman Yvonne Leung. "We have now won some space for dialogue, and we've seen a growth in our civil society. The people used to be unaware of their own power, but now they know."

[Oct 30, 2014] Ukraine's authoritarianism Events in Kiev signal the end of the color revolutions By Anne Applebaum

Blast form the past. Well known neocon, the wife of Polish former Forigh minister shared her views. Note similarities with Hong Cong coverage. she might be more gentle with the USA main banker but the message would be the same -- "regime change"
Ukraine

A pro-European protester wears a gas mask during street violence in Kiev on Jan. 23, 2014.

Photo by David Mdzinarishvili/Reuters


WARSAW-The Ukrainian parliament recently passed legislation directly modeled on Russian precedents. The laws curb demonstrations, using language broad enough to apply to almost any gathering. They criminalize "slander," which might mean any criticism of the government. They require the members of any organization with any foreign funding, including the Greek Catholic Church, to register as "foreign agents," which is to say spies. These laws were passed at night, with a show of hands. Deputies did not discuss them, or in some cases even read them. since November.

Priests said Mass before the barricades; buses burned in the snow. Riot police shot people with rubber bullets. Then they shot them with real bullets. Others were hauled away and beaten. Anyone standing near the scene last Tuesday received a text message from the phone company: "Dear subscriber, you are registered as a participant in a mass disturbance." So far, five people are dead.

In fact, corrupt oligarchs, backed by Russian money and Russian political technology, are a lot stronger than anyone ever expected them to be. They have the cash to bribe an entire parliament's worth of elected officials. They have the cynicism to revive the old Soviet technique of selective violence: One or two murders is enough to scare off many thousands of peaceful demonstrators, one or two arrests will suffice to remind businessmen who is boss. They have also learned to manipulate media (as the Russians do), to multiply their money in Western financial institutions (as the Russians do), even to send threatening text messages. They have crafted a well-argued, well-funded alternate narrative about Western economic decline and cultural decadence. A friend jokingly calls this the "all your daughters will become lesbians" line of argument, but it is surprisingly powerful. hand out cookies to demonstrators in Kiev

Now the administration says it might not issue visas to a few Ukrainian leaders. That policy might make a few people in Washington feel better, but it will also send the Ukrainians running directly into the arms of the Russians. In the words of a Canadian diplomat, "It's like watching a hockey game with only one team on the ice."

[Oct 23, 2014] Why is America so obsessed with 'Color Revolution'

It looks like china authorities realized that they overspet the preparation for this color revolution and now have difficulties to control events. Now the protester for several weeks blocked traffic in many strategically important areas in Hong Kong and access to central business districts and government compounds causing mass disruptions. Chenese official now admin that "The central government certainly need to heed legitimate concerns among people in Hong Kong within the framework of "One country, two system" such as widening wealth gap, rising property prices and erosion of distinct identity of Hong Kong due to an influx of mainlanders."

CCTV.com English

Hong Kong's illegal Occupy Central movement has become the focus of public opinion in the US, with some US forces striving to add fuel to Occupy.

According to foreign media, months ago a responsible person of National Endowment for Democracy (NED), met "the soul person" in "Occupy Central" to discuss the relevant affairs. The responsible person, named Louisa Greve, is the deputy Chairman of NED for Asian and West Asian-North African affairs. For many years, there have been frequent reports about her connections with Tibetan separatists, East Turkistan Islamists and Democratic Movement Activists; she has also hosted or participated in activities such as symposiums on Arab Spring and color revolutions in other areas. As always, the US side denies its involvement in and manipulation of Occupy Central, just like it never admit its manipulation of other anti-Chinese forces. Those involved have cloaked themselves in the guise of "democracy, freedom and human rights" to justify their behavior.

NGOs and think-tanks in America pour lots of energy into the Occupy Central campaign and offer suggestions. In her essay How the Hong Kong Protesters Can Win, by Maria J. Stephan, senior research fellow in United States Institute of Peace and distinguished research fellow in Atlantic Council, proposed strategies for Occupy with the so-called research data of "non-violent, non-cooperation movements" for a century, especially lessons drawn from "civil disobedience" in a dozen of countries. This essay doesn't discuss whether Occupy is advocated by the majority of Hong Kong people, nor the negative impact of Occupy on Hong Kong's politics, economy and society. It merely focuses on how to achieve Hong Kong protestors' aim -"democracy".

Mainstream US media displays unusual interest in Occupy Central, with many compliments for Occupy Central in reports and reviews about it. Media organizations all arbitrarily use the word "pro-democracy" when determining the nature of Occupy Central and repeatedly call it "Umbrella Revolution", taking Occupy Central as a copy of Color Revolutions in other areas. AP's report on Occupy Central is titled Umbrella Revolution Spreads in Hong Kong; "Umbrella Revolution" appears on the cover of Time's Asia Edition; on Wall Street Journal, an article says the Hong Kong people "finally see that they can only get democracy by fighting for it".

The US government stays involved, too. Let alone the fact that NGO organizations such as NED directly use the fund for "democracy and human rights" provided by US government, spokesmen and officials in the White House and the State Council, and diplomats in Hong Kong have all declared several times their "moral" support for Occupy Central. In an open letter, three American former counselors in HK described the chief executive nominating committee system in HK as "democracy in retreat", worsening the confusing situation HK government faced.

Although the US has denied it, the treatment of the Occupy Central by the US government, NGOs and public opinion, and their involvement in this issue remind us of the US's role in various Color Revolutions in areas such as the Commonwealth of the Independent States, the Middle East, North Africa. America always enjoys pushing forward "Color Revolution" in some countries. Seemingly, it is practicing the "universal value" of "democracy, freedom and human rights", and a number of Americans and NGOs believe they have the "entitled duty" to "deliver all living creatures from torment". But if we look at the consequences of color revolution, we find that the US, with a focus on its own strategic interests, is using revolutions to destroy the disobedient regimes it dislikes. In US logic, "democratic" countries and regimes accord with its interests.

America's Greater Middle East Plan has failed; the Arab Spring has become the Arab Winter; street politics in Ukraine has led to national separation and bloodshed. What these countries experienced is turmoil, not true democracy. But the US turns a blind eye to these lessons.

With advocates all over the world, including in Hong Kong, the US sometimes benefits from interfering with domestic affairs of other countries. But on the issue of Hong Kong, the US faces not only China's consistent strategy of maintaining Hong Kong's stability and prosperity, but the mainstream opinion in Hong Kong. What the US has done is lift a rock only to drop it on its own feet.

[Oct 23, 2014] Protesters ignore HK court order By TIMOTHY CHUI and LUIS LIU (China Daily)

2014-10-23 | chinadaily.com.cn
Protesters ignore HK court order

Placards support the police and government at a rally opposing the "Occupy Central" movement in Hong Kong's Mong Kok district on Wednesday. One placard reads: "No rule of law, no future. Hong Kong needs rule of law, and residents support police."

Clashes continued in Hong Kong on Wednesday as demonstrators ignored a court order to vacate protest sites.

Protesters manned barricades for a second day after the city's High Court ordered key roads to be cleared.

Notices of the court injunction were placed in newspapers, plastered on walls and read out by bailiffs, but the protesters ignored them and scuffled with opponents.

A standoff lasted into Wednesday evening after a brief confrontation in Mong Kok following the lunch hour.

A group of taxi drivers and people opposing the protests descended on a blockaded intersection in the district and dismantled barriers before police moved in.

A man was detained for suspected arson after he allegedly threw what is believed to be a flammable liquid as protesters subdued an opponent venting his frustration over the blockades.

Dozens of taxi drivers, with their vehicles covered in messages supporting the police, staged a drive-by in the district.

Alliance for Peace and Democracy founder Robert Chow plans to launch a signature campaign to support police clearing the roads.

"People should have the choice of living normal lives. We hope this movement to resume law and order can make our voices heard," Chow said.

Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong chairman Tam Yiu-chung called on protesters to respect the city's rule of law and the court injunction, describing the protest scene in Mong Kok as "virtually a riot".

Three transport companies are also seeking injunctions to open key roads near the central business district, citing HK$3 million ($386,730) in losses caused by the closures.

A separate injunction obtained by the owners of CITIC Tower in Admiralty continued to be ignored by protesters who have blocked routes used by emergency vehicles.

Police Chief Superintendent Stephen Hui urged parents not to take their children to high-risk protest zones, citing safety concerns, and saying that those who do so are irresponsible and behaving in an extremely dangerous way.

Hui said TV footage of clashes among protesters showed that the sit-ins are far from being peaceful and non-violent, adding that radical protesters and "troublemakers" are gathering at protest zones to incite the demonstrators and to challenge police.

He described protesters' actions as "utterly illegal and provocative", citing incidents where demonstrators surrounded police vehicles and police stations to demand the release of those arrested. Others had interfered with arrests and attempted to seize those detained, Hui said.

He said the personal details of officers, who have already received verbal abuse, have been uploaded online by critics targeting their families.

Hui said there are increasing incidents of officers' families being targeted for intimidation and bullying in cyberspace.

Police detained a 23-year-old man for allegedly sending a threatening message to an officer's daughter.

Hui reiterated warnings that "real world" laws also apply in cyberspace and criticized those who incite others online to carry out illegal acts. These included an online call to occupy the city's international airport, he said.

[Oct 22, 2014] Why is America so obsessed with 'Color Revolution' by Zhang Dan

10-22-2014 | CCTV.com English

By Dr. Chen Xulong, Director and Senior Research Fellow of Department for International and Strategic Studies, China Institute of International Studies

The central authorities were able to quick label the "Occupy Central" campaign as "Hong Kong version of color revolution" because they have identified much resemblance it bears to the "color revolutions" in other parts of the world.

Zhang Xiaoming, director of the Liaison Office off the Central People's Government in the Hong Kong S.A.R., noted that the nature of the "Occupy Central" campaign is defined by how it has mimicked the ways "color revolutions" were staged - extreme street protests, blockage of government compounds and roads and demands for Hong Kong SAR officials to resign.

With the development of this event and the exposure of the inside story of the plot, more and more people, realizing the involvement of internal and external opposing forces into the campaign, are convinced that this campaign serves as color revolution with Hong Kong characteristics, which poses threat to stability, solidarity and prosperity in Hong Kong.

The so-called Color Revolution refers to, originally, the revolution confined to the former Soviet Union which aimed to overthrow the regime established after the disintegration of the Soviet Union and led by its influential people, and to establish a non-Russia influence, Western values-oriented and more pro-Western regime. Afterwards, the conception of "Color Revolution" developed into a wider one: the US and European countries support the "regime change" designed to overthrow the traditional regime in some countries and establish, based on the Western values, another pro-America regime, such revolution like the political unrest in Middle East and North Africa (namely the so-called Arab Spring). In the contemporary world politics, "Color Revolution" has become notorious for its odious nature and great damage and has caused a high degree of vigilance and precaution in many countries.

By penetrating the Color Revolution incited by the west in the past decades, we can drew that the west has formed a set of operating system in terms of stirring up "Color Revolution". The consistent tricks to be applied in provoking such kind of revolution has been revealed: generally, it is the strategic decision makers of the US who first designate the countries and areas bounding up with its national security and interests, then, those countries and areas would be sorted based on their degree of threat and importance. Whereafter, the west would pointedly determine a specific country or an area and take the advantage of the its local anti-government forces to launch a serious of political activities which aim to overturn the existing regime under color of democratization and by means of human rights struggles. The CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) takes charge of secrete plots and guidance behind the scenes, and deals with the flow of human resource and funds. The relative non-governmental organizations are responsible for supporting and assisting the local pro-America and anti-government forces. The means used include overseas broadcasting station and network propaganda, founding printed journal in local areas and extending their power in the form of religious organizations, cultural community and forum, they also establish training institutions to train activists while widely issuing the so-called "democracy" guidebooks and leading local people to organize street politics and anti-government activities.

Throughout the history, it is believed that color revolutions in distinct locations have been staged in different versions according to varied periods of their occurrence. Versions that has been recorded in history are as follows: in 1989, the "Velvet Revolution" broke out in Czechoslovakia. In 2000, Milosevic, president of Yugoslav, was ousted by the opposition and ended up being in jails. Georgia's "Rose Revolution", Ukraine's "Orange Revolution" and Kyrgyz's "Tulip Revolution" happened in 2003, 2004, 2005 respectively. In 2007, "Saffron Revolution" was piloted in Burma but failed. Attempted color revolution, so-called "Twitter Revolution", occurred in Moldova and Iran in 2009. In 2011, Tunisia's "Jasmine Revolution" brought out the "Arab Spring". In spring this year, "Secondary Color Revolution" occurred in Ukrainian.

History repeatedly shows that when color revolution approaches, brutal political struggle will be staged while peace and tranquility will be gone, development and prosperity will be fled. Color revolution leads some countries to split up, some regimes collapse, some politicians die, and some countries enmesh in turmoil, conflict, ethnic and religious conflicts. Besides, it also incurs economic slump, social disorder, the rise of extremist violence. Ultimately it is the innocent people that are apt to be suffering.

Color revolution has never been simple, but it has to gain the help and support of pure and passionate youth (especially university students), taking advantage of their patriotic enthusiasm and pursuit of justice. Many good and innocent participants involved in color revolution eventually become pawns or even victims.

We need to draw lessons from these pernicious facts. Due to color revolution, the "Arab Spring" transforms into the "Arab Winter", the war flames and national crisis spread in Ukraine. People should have sufficient knowledge and profound alert on symptoms and hazards of various versions of the color revolutions.

Hong Kong's "Umbrella Revolution", the new version of the color revolution, which has lasted for more than three weeks, is diminishing Hong Kong's democracy in the name of seeking democracy, and has harmed the basic principle of "One Country, Two Systems" and threatened the stability requirement of the "silent majority" of Hong Kong. So, the illegal and unwelcome movement is doomed to be a failure, and which would be a bliss to the ordinary people in Hong Kong, to the social stability and economic prosperity of Hong Kong, and to the continuing implementation of the Basic Law.

More

[Oct 16, 2014] Hong Kong protests a 'colour revolution' backed by the West, says Beijing By Li Xueying Hong Kong Correspondent

Oct 15, 2014 | straitstimes.com

BEIJING has stepped up its rhetoric against the Occupy movement in Hong Kong, characterising it as a "colour revolution" being supported by Western forces to undermine the Chinese government - a charge both the United States and protest leaders have denied.

Vice-Premier Wang Yang, in remarks reported in Hong Kong media yesterday, accused Western countries of "supporting the opposition forces trying to foment a colour revolution in Hong Kong".

"Colour revolution" is used to describe a wave of uprisings that took place to bring about regime change, such as the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine, which was part of the Soviet Union until the latter broke up in 1991.

Following up on Mr Wang's remarks, retired senior official Chen Zuo'er, who negotiated with the British prior to Hong Kong's return to China, told reporters in Beijing of a "major conspiracy" behind the Occupy movement. He quoted Foreign Minister Wang Yi as saying the root of the unrest in Hong Kong lay in the US.

Beijing Claims Hong Kong's Pro-Democracy Protests Are a US-Backed Color Revolution by Oiwan Lam

October 15, 2014 | Global Voices

Occupy Central protesters brought their tents to the sit-in sites to prepare for long-term fight. Photo by PH Yang, non-commercial use.

Days after the debut of a massive sit-in in Hong Kong calling for genuine democratic elections, Beijing began accusing the grassroots movement of being a color revolution backed by the US government.

Since late September, protesters have camped out in central Hong Kong to demand an open nomination process for candidates in the next election of the city's top leader instead of the mainland's plan for a largely pro-Beijing nominating committee. Pro-democracy group Occupy Central With Love and Peace had planned the sit-in as a last resort if the Hong Kong and Beijing governments refused to bend on the nominating committee despite significant popular support for something more democratic.

At its peak, the sit-in has attracted tens of thousands of participants. The Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece, China Daily, has published commentaries since October 4 accusing a small number of instigators of receiving support from the US government and attempting to stage a color revolution in Hong Kong to undermine the central Beijing government's power. The paper further characterized the protests as a "riot" in a front page news feature on October 11.

Color revolution describes a series of peaceful uprisings in countries of the former Soviet Union. The US government has firmly denied the accusation of having a hand in Hong Kong's pro-democracy movement.

Chinese authorities' use of the term fits with their previously stated belief that Hong Kong conforming to the Beijing-approved election system is an issue of national security. It also implies that it is rather unlikely for China's legislature, the National People Congress, to withdraw or amend the nomination framework set for special administrative region Hong Kong.

Pro-Beijing media in Hong Kong have also spread the conspiracy theory about the US government's role in the Occupy Central protests. In addition to the claim that Hong Kong pan-democrats have a connection with the National Endowment for Democracy, a US-funded organization that promotes democracy and freedom worldwide, the most bizarre smear is the accusation that Joshua Wong, the 17-year-old leader of high school activist group Scholarism, is being cultivated as a political superstar and received combat training from US Marines. Scholarism is one of the leading groups of the protests.

While pro-democracy protesters have treated the rumors as jokes, pro-Beijing lawmakers, who hold the majority in the Hong Kong Legislative Council thanks to the current undemocratic "functional constituency" system, built upon the conspiracy theory of foreign intervention and demanded an investigation into the mobilization behind the Occupy Central protests on October 10.

Some of the evidence of foreign intervention that is being pushed is the abundant supply of resources, such as food, drink, stationary, posters and banners at the protest sites. Blogger Sze Ching Cheun laughed at the claim:

As the occupy movement carried on smoothly, the pro-government camp reintroduced the "foreign intervention theory" with the intention of discrediting the protests. […] The abundant supply of resources is now turned into evidence of foreign intervention. […] Are Hong Kong people that poor? Let's check past reports. Whenever there has been a natural disaster, the donations from Hong Kong have always been astonishing. For example, following the Szechuan earthquake [in 2008], donations coming from Hong Kong citizens reached 13 billion Hong Kong dollars [approximately 1.9 billion US dollars] […] Everyone contributes to the protests what they can, so adding that all up means we have an abundant supply of resources. We don't need foreign donations. We can pay for our own resources.

In response to being labeled a color revolution and a riot, the Hong Kong Federation of Students and Scholarism, two key organizations that started a class boycott mid-September, issued an open letter to Chinese President Xi Jingping. In it, they pointed out the antagonism is rooted in the failure of the Hong Kong government to incorporate public opinion in their election reform consultation report:

[…] The consultation report put forward by the Hong Kong government did not genuinely reflect public opinion. It even claimed that Hong Kong people did not want reform the Legislative Council election system, in particular the abolition of functional constituency. The report is disrespectful to the Hong Kong people's political aspirations. The political reform framework set by the Standing Committee of the National Congress of People Representatives was misled by the Hong Kong government's misleading report. If the Hong Kong government is sincere towards its citizens, it has to admit its mistake, correct the report and incorporate the people's aspirations for genuine democracy into the political reform.

The groups further mentioned that citizen nomination is a common practice in the election of local representatives in mainland China, hence the Hong Kong people's demand for citizen nomination is legitimate:

The fact that local governments in mainland China also accept citizen nomination has provided both legal and practical foundation for the incorporation of citizen nomination into Hong Kong's election of the chief executive. […] The occupy protests are not a color revolution. It is a campaign calling for democracy. The student class boycotts and the sit-in are reactions to the actions of chief executive CY Leung, among other government officials, that go against the people's will. […] Genuine universal suffrage is not about seizing power [from the central government]; it is the realization off a high degree of autonomy and administrative power as written in the Basic Law.

Szeto Tzelong, an online current affairs commentator, further elaborated on the constitutional ground of citizen nomination presented by the two student activist groups in the open letter and stressed that the Occupy Central protests do not mean to undermine Beijing's authority:

From day one, Umbrella Movement protesters have demanded democratic political reform. This has nothing to do with overthrowing the government in mainland China. "Citizen nomination" and "abolition of Functional Constituency" will not challenge the central government's authority. Even the call for the "withdrawal of the decision made by the National Congress of People's Representatives" is made in accordance with China's Constitution Article 62 Clause 11, which includes in the authority of the National People Congress to power to "amend and withdraw the decision made by the standing committee of the NPC." […] In mainland China, the local election of people's representatives allows for "voter nomination". Any citizen who obtains 10 legitimate voters' nominations can become a candidate. In addition, in mainland China, the role of an "election committee" is purely administrative and does not enjoy the substantive nomination right. According to the principle of "one country, two systems," the election law in Hong Kong should be more flexible than mainland China. The practice of "citizen nomination" is consistent with the current practice of the elections in the District Council and Legislative Council and by no means violates the law implemented in China. The struggle for "citizen nomination" is just a civil rights movement and has nothing to do with over taking power [from the central government], nor is a [color] revolution.

Teng Biao, a mainland Chinese human right lawyer, however, believes that the fate of Hong Kong and mainland China cannot be detached and the struggle for democracy in Hong Kong will inevitably affect China. He called the dilemma, the unbearable heaviness of revolution:

The nature of dictatorship is to keep everything under control. The authoritarian system will not allow the existence of a free system. It considers genuine universal suffrage in Hong Kong to be a crack in the dam, which will eventually lead to the downfall of dictatorship. […] Hong Kong people are not just struggling for their own democracy. The political context has turned their democratic struggle into a struggle for China's democracy. This is a paradoxical reality for Hong Kong people, who have developed very strong local identification and wanted to keep a distance with mainland China. […] The Hong Kong people have taken up the unbearable heaviness of revolution, struggling for democracy for those who live in a piece of land that they do not identify with. […]

They seem to have forgotten their history

Oct 6, 2014 | moonofalabama.org

brian | Oct 6, 2014 8:06:25 PM | 108

this appeared in the guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/05/hong-kong-protests-betrayed-by-china-abandoned-by-britain

but they seem to have forgotten their history

Karl Marx wrote in "Genesis of the Industrial Capitalist," Volume One of "Capital":

"The English East India Company, as is well known, obtained, besides the political rule in India, the exclusive monopoly of the tea-trade, as well as of the Chinese trade in general, and of the transport of goods to and from Europe. ... The monopolies of salt, opium, betel and other commodities, were inexhaustible mines of wealth."

So while the Chinese government was taking stronger and stronger measures to end the opium trade, the British were doing all they could to increase it.

Britain's East India Company would wage three wars on the people of China in order to secure the right to sell opium there. These wars for imperialist plunder and to open up new markets determined the fate of Hong Kong.

They were the world's first drug wars. Their sole purpose was to secure the importation of an addictive substance that provided a bountiful flow ofdidn't stand a chance against the British warships.

Rowntree wrote that the British were "in a great hurry to make money out of the East, and the gunboats were found to clear the way quickly. All vestiges of compassion for mankind had been swept away by the silver stream of rupees which poured into the Calcutta Exchequer."

The wars waged on the Chinese people caused untold deaths and casualties. The British destroyed, plundered, looted and raped their way along the coast of China.

http://www.serendipity.li/wod/hongkong.html

The Adults Show Up in Hong Kong by Peter Lee

University administrators has to be the key players in the protest movement as without their direct support any large stale student demonstration outside holidays and vacations is simply impossible. The same was true for Kiev, where rectors of major universities were actually on payroll of Maidan organizers and, at least initially, provided foot soldiers for the protest. Quote: "I tend to give the greatest respect to one group of actors - the university administrators - in the midst of what has been a carnival of less-than-honest framing, slippery tactics, and alarmist bullshit."
Oct 07, 2014 | CounterPunch

... ... ...

Possibly, the Hong Kong government has already signaled, if not its capitulation, its willingness to horsetrade.

As I previously wrote, I considered the fizzling out of the student ultimatum on Thursday night (for C.Y. Leung to resign) and the rapid withdrawal of the students on Sunday night despite the violence in Mong Kok as signs of a choreographed deal.

I tend to give the greatest respect to one group of actors-the university administrators-in the midst of what has been a carnival of less-than-honest framing, slippery tactics, and alarmist bullshit.

They apparently have the job of wrangling the student demonstrators and they seem to have a sincere desire to keep them safe, not only from the Hong Kong cops, but also from the machinations of the Occupy movement, which may, as the situation requires, need some student martyrs at the hands of cops, triads, or provocateurs to keep the outrage machine cranking. I, for one, would not consider it beyond possibility that some determined backer of the movement might actually send some anonymous goons to rough up some students if he felt that was necessary to keep the pro-democracy fire burning and realize his investments in political reform.

After he went downtown to ceremoniously call for the cancellation of the Thursday ultimatum against C.Y. Leung, the president of City University of Hong Kong, James Sung, issued this remarkable statement:

"Although they can't grasp the full complexity of the situation, they have innocent hearts…and should be given the utmost toleration and compassion."

The struggle for Hong Kong isn't just students speaking truth to power with umbrellas and Cantopop.

This is a prolonged, sophisticated multi-stage political battle between two resourceful and capable adversaries.

If you want to understand what's going on in Hong Kong, you can't focus solely on the beauty of democracy and the adorableness of the students. The democracy movement is also embedded in a matrix of money, subterfuge, compromise, subornation, propaganda, and manipulation. In other words, it's good old-fashioned politics, Hong Kong-and Beijing-style.

Peter Lee edits China Matters and writes for CounterPunch on Asia.

Hong Kong's war for democracy gets dirtier by Peter Lee

Oct 10, 2014 | atimes.com

[Hong Kong opposition lawmakers have asked the territory's anti-corruption agency to investigate CY Leung, the chief executive, following revelations that he received 4m pounds [US$7 million] in undisclosed payments from an Australian company.

The Democratic party on Thursday asked the Independent Commission Against Corruption to open a probe, while members of the umbrella pan-democrat camp said the opposition would also consider launching impeachment proceedings. - Financial Times, October 9.]

Things have become hotter for Hong Kong Chief Executive CY Leung, with Australian journalist John Garnaut revealing that Leung signed a non-compete agreement when he parted ways with an Australian company, UGL, that also included a multi-million dollar consulting clause that might have exposed him to some conflict of interest ethics problems when he became Hong Kong's chief executive.

Though the sin seems to be of a venial nature as Radio Free Asia reported it:

While there was nothing apparently illegal about the contract itself, Leung didn't disclose it during his election campaign, the paper said.
That's not good enough for the pro-democracy movement:
Pan-democratic lawmakers in Hong Kong said they would impeach Leung over the allegations.
Fair enough. In my opinion, this is a not unpredictable escalation of the crisis, an effort to get the pro-Beijing government on the defensive when dealing with the negotiations with the students, intimidate the government with the pro-democracy movement's clout and capabilities and, perhaps, decapitate the HK gove forcing CY Leung's resignation and putting the accommodation-minded Carrie Lam - Hong Kong's chief secretary, ie the city's top civil servant - in the driver's seat.

So Leung has his work cut out for him. No problem with that. We're clearly in the hardball phase of the struggle.

I predicted there will be a continual escalation of pressure against the Hong Kong government in order to reform and co-opt it and present the pro-democracy case to Beijing, maybe not out of conviction but because of the desire to dodge the intense political pressure that the democracy movement will continue to bring to bear, inside and outside the governments, from elites and key constituencies, and backed up by the ability to put students on the streets to protest.

Educators now in open support of the movement, as I also predicted. A student told RFA that only half the students were in class:

"[The rest] are all in Admiralty and Central," Chin said. "The college still supports us, and the teachers are e-mailing stuff to us, to help the students."
And indeed, Garnaut's audio segment (illustrated with a quite timely Next Media animation), editorialized about the "travesty" of the nine-day delay in the Hong Kong government's beginning talks with the students and opined that revelations about the deal "add to the pressure on CY Leung to be more reasonable in upcoming talks".

... ... ...

If the journalistic community is unable to recognize, as I put it on Twitter, plain vanilla psyops meant to sow FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) between Beijing and Hong Kong at a level befitting an IQ test in a petting zoo, while dodging the fact that the pro-democracy movement is engaged in a calculated and rather inelegant exercise in dirty tricks ?

... ... ...

My general feeling is this. The Western media wants a big story to come out of this. Heck, there's a certain prestige media outlet that's laying off journos by the fistful while maintaining an expensive, top-heavy presence of exiled reporters in Hong Kong; it needs a big story.

And it's hoping that story is democratic revolution in Hong Kong and maybe, just maybe, in mainland China.

Unfortunately, that's just one story. And right now it's not the main story.

The main story is that the pro-democracy movement is coordinated and financed by a group of clever, determined, and ruthless bigwigs who are using the student demonstrations as part of a sophisticated political campaign against the Hong Kong government to achieve some electoral reforms.

Maybe not the story the pro-democracy media wants to tell.

... ... ...

Speaking of facts - actually, facts, leaks, and oppo research dumps from the other side of the fence - pro-Beijing operators unearthed another interesting nugget from the computers of Jimmy Lai, the Next Media tycoon who is bankrolling and overseeing much of the democracy action in Hong Kong.

The Lai camp has not challenged the authenticity of an audio recording purporting to be Lai's own record of his discussions with Taiwan democracy icon Shih Ming-teh in October 2013.

Shih did 25 years - yes, 25 years, including 13 years of solitary and four years of hunger strike - of hard time in Taiwan's prisons during a struggle for reform of the Republic of China's political system (under Chiang Kai-shek, and until his son Chiang Ching-kuo yielded, the ROC operated under a martial law regime inherited from the mainland that gave Taiwaners only a minority voice as one of the two dozen or so Chinese provinces in the parliament). As a result, he is called by some "Taiwan's Mandela".

As befits the factionalized character of Taiwanese politics, Shih broke with the Democratic Progressive Party and is now on the outside looking in. His most relevant experience to Lai apparently was his organization of the "Million Voices against Corruption, President Chen Must Go" "Red Shirts" action in 2006, an orchestrated multi-stage, multi-week street action that contributed to independence-minded Chen Shui-bian's removal from office, much to the delight of Beijing; in fact, Shih was accused of acting as the PRC's cat's paw.

... ... ...

The accompanying news story says Lai made an offering of 200,000 yuan (currency not specified) to arrange the meeting (which was puckishly described as Lai "going to pick up the scriptures" as Tripitika did in Journey to the West) and Lai collected everybody's phones so they couldn't be used as listening devices (Lai apparently knew about the ability of government surveillance authorities to secretly turn on cellphones and turn them into microphones).

Shih supposedly gave Lai advice on putting students, young girls, and mothers with children in the vanguard of the street protests, in order to attract the support of the international community and press, and to sustain the movement with continual activities to keep it dynamic and fresh.

... ... ...

The meeting was apparently meant to be a super secret summit between Lai, some Hong Kongers, and Shih Ming-teh and some other Taiwan figures who had experience in the use of mass street politics. One of the other attendees at the meeting, a local media nawab associated with protest politics named Fan Keqian, revealed on Taiwan TV that he was furious at Lai - who had demanded complete, "silent as the grave" secrecy - for letting the audio get out, calling him "a son of a dog". Neither Fan nor another attendee, Yao Li-ming, a political commentator who also helped put the wood to Chen Shui-bian in the 2006 mass action, can be heard on this excerpt.

The audio is an interesting look at the nuts and bolts of high-stakes activism by two serious players, one well-heeled and determined, the other bringing a lifetime of experience to the table. Shih talks about the importance of a commitment to go to jail for the cause (he says he's willing to go to Hong Kong and get arrested) and the inevitable dangers of provocateurs...

... ... ...

Note:
For the sake of posterity and interested readers and journos, see here for a translation of the transcript of the discussion between Jimmy Lai and Shih Ming-teh.

Peter Lee writes on East and South Asian affairs and their intersection with US foreign policy.

(Copyright 2914 Peter Lee)

[Oct 12, 2014] Unlike Ukraine, The Hong Kong Protests Will Almost Certainly Fail by Paul Roderick Gregory

I like how Paul Roderick Gregory distort EuroMaidan events ;-). And I agree that "Euromaidan succeeded because of special circumstances" -- inclusion by Stalin Galicia into Ukraine.
Oct 10, 2014 | Forbes
Ukraine's Euromaidan protests-taking place in Kiev from November 21, 2013 to February 22, 2014-aimed to break Ukraine out of Vladimir Putin's sphere of influence. They succeeded, although how well depends on the West's response to Putin's ferocious counterattack. Hong Kong's Democracy protests (August 31-?) are being carried out by Hong Kong students protesting for a semblance of freedom from the autocratic control of Communist China under its flawed "one country, two systems" formula. These demonstrations were sparked by China's reneging on its promise to restore the democratic election of the Hong Kong governor by 2017.

Unlike Ukraine, the Hong Kong protests will almost certainly fail. Euromaidan was a rare exception of success carried out under more propitious circumstances. The questions for Hong Kong are: how soon will the demonstrations be put down and at what cost in terms of blood and loss of economic freedom?

The parallels between Euromaidan and Hong Kong's Umbrella Revolution (so called because demonstrators carry umbrellas) have not gone unnoticed in China. Chinese commentators dismiss what they call Maidanocracy as "the rule of the square, from the infamous Maidan in central Kiev where the Ukrainian protests began. If carried out to its full extent, it will not end well for Hong Kong."

The Communist Party of China's (CPC) fear of Maidanocracy is reflected in its complete news blackouts of both Maidan and the Umbrella Revolution. In its official diplomatic pronouncements, China has followed the Russian line that no government established by the mob rule of Maidanocracy is legitimate.

Inherent in this claim is that both Russia and China are ruled by legitimate regimes, whose overthrow would be illegal and contrary to international law.

Euromaidan succeeded because of special circumstances: The Maidan Square protests reflected a general and genuine public revulsion with out-of-control corruption that affected everyone from common citizen to oligarch, by the years of national tragedy under Soviet rule, and by a genuine desire to become a part of Europe rather than of the Eurasian kleptocracy of Russia. Moreover, Maidan took place in the nation's capital and the center of pro-European, anti-Putin sentiment. It had the widespread support of Kievans who kept demonstrators fed and plied them with moral support. The immediate and perverse source of victory was the government's loss of nerve when it authorized sniper fire that killed a considerable number of demonstrators and set in motion intensifying violence.

[Oct 12, 2014] Furious protesters chase police to Mong Kok station in nightly stand-off by Peter So and Emily Tsang

October 12 , 2014 | South China Morning Post

A series of angry stand-offs between police and protesters in Mong Kok the early hours of Sunday marked the end of an otherwise largely peaceful second week of democracy protests in the bustling Kowloon district.

At least three protesters were arrested. A citizen journalist was hit by a baton to collapse temporarily and a reporter working for the Ming Pao newspaper said he sustained a scratch in his leg after being kicked by the police. Police have yet to comment on the night's events.

Tensions rose around 2am on Sunday when plain-clothes police officers requested some protesters on Nathan Road to show their ID cards. The group had been reinforcing barricades at the occupied area south of Nelson Street.

The protesters in return requested the officers to show their proof of identification. Heated arguments between ensued. The stand-off ended with police escorting away one protester and retreating to Sai Yeung Choi Street, a sidestreet.

Protesters followed the police officers to Sai Yeung Choi Street, where another confrontation ended with at least two further arrests.

James Bang, a 28-year-old citizen journalist, was hit by a police baton on his knee and arm. One female protester said she had been hit on the chest by a police officer during the altercation.

[Oct 12, 2014] Carrie Lam 'helpless' over talks deadlock

Oct 12, 2014 | South China Morning Post

Hong Kong government No 2 Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor has expressed "disappointment and helplessness" over the collapse of talks with students, as unprecedented democracy protests which have rocked the city entered their third week.

Lam - who insisted a resumption of dialogue could happen only if the students accepted talks based on the controversial August ruling of the National People's Congress - made the comments as a flurry of late-night activity saw both sides dig their heels in amid growing concern in the business community over the economic impact of the Occupy Central movement.

Student leaders issued an open letter to President Xi Jinping in which they reiterated that their movement was not a "colour revolution" but a genuine call for universal suffrage and a government that is truly accountable for its actions. The letter also called on the president to "not be afraid of your people''.

The letter came just hours after student leader Agnes Chow Ting announced she was stepping down from her position as Scholarism spokeswoman due to exhaustion and stress.

Beijing is showing no signs of bending to pressure. A front-page editorial in yesterday's People's Daily turned up the heat on the Occupy Central movement, describing it as "unrest", the most serious charge laid at the student-led protest since it began three weeks ago.

... ... ...

The 'Umbrella Revolution' and Secessionist Political Contagion in China (II) by Andrew Korybko

Oriental Review

Raining on China's Parade

It is now necessary to look at the 'Umbrella Revolution' in a larger geopolitical perspective to best understand how it fits into the larger picture of US grand strategy for Eurasia. In short, the US is attempting to 'rain on China's parade' of global ascendancy by hijacking and sabotaging it via whichever means possible, including internal subversion and the festering of violent and secessionist tendencies. Finally, important attention must be paid to how the Chinese authorities are dealing with the conundrum between capitulation and escalation

Low-Hanging Fruit

Hong Kong finally became reunited with China in 1997 after over 150 years of British occupation. Seeing as how it socially, politically, and economically developed in a different manner than the rest of China during such important and rapidly changing historical periods, it can be seen as having already formulated its own identity somewhat separate from that of the rest of the country. Hong Kong's semi-autonomy institutionalized this in its citizens' mindset after the reunification, and considering that they are formally an island chain (albeit in extreme close proximity to the mainland), there is also a geographic separation that reinforces their self-identification separateness. Through these means, a sizeable proportion of Hong Kong's population is influenced by the West and its various mechanisms of projecting such influence (including in 'democratic' rhetoric), thus making it the low-hanging fruit of a unified China and subject to extreme outside interference.

The Chaos Contagion

The primary domestic objectives of the 'Umbrella Revolution' is to unleash a contagion of chaos to sweep through coastal China and severely undermine and weaken, if not overthrow, the Communist Party's leadership. The idea is to create a 'battering ram' to break centralized control and initiate a chaotic chain reaction that spreads into all of China's megalopolises via copycat movements (whether activated Color Revolution sleeper cells or not) and divides the rest of society, even if it is only theoretically 10% of a city's population in favor of revolution and 90% against it. This strategic societal splitting leads to domestic chaos and a clash of two Chinas – 'Chinese China' and 'Western China', with the former supporting the Chinese method of democracy and managing affairs while the latter want to brazenly copy the West in all regards (like Russia's 'Westernizer' leadership in the early 1990s, to similar success).

The end result is to create as much domestic chaos as possible to throw the authorities off balance and provoke another Tiananmen Square event. In turn, this can be selectively manipulated by Western media outlets for long-term image advantage and information warfare. CNN has already taken to highlighting the similarities between 1989 and 2014, and the activists themselves seem intent on doing the same, even hoisting the infamous 'goddess of democracy' above their gatherings. This is where the umbrella and plastic wrap innovations come into play. By offering the authorities no other non-lethal way to physically respond besides rubber bullets, the chances of this happening increase. Should the 'Umbrella Revolution' follow the template of Color Revolutions before it, one can expect 'mysterious' snipers to begin shooting indiscriminately at both police and civilians to maximize the chaotic uncertainty and provoke even more panic on the streets. Even if the Color Revolution attempt fails in all of its other objectives, it's last-ditch intended legacy is to supercede the Tiananmen Square events as an even bigger black eye to China's international reputation (whether real or perceived/manipulated).

The Containment and Cutting Apart of China

On an even larger scale, the 'Umbrella Revolution' is intended to both contain and then cut apart China, representing an ominous threat to the country's international ambitions and even territorial integrity. To begin with, by redirecting the country's focus back to the coast and away from the South China Sea maritime frontiers, it seeks to strategically distract Beijing in an already vulnerable geopolitical theater at a time of heightened competition and overlapping claims. In a certain way, it is specific iteration of the 'Reverse Brzezinski' theorem first postulated this summer in that it creates a US-sponsored 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' dilemma for Beijing. Not only that, but the US has a long-term 'defensive' goal of strategic economic diversification away from China and towards the ASEAN countries. To explain, the US understands that the complex and intimate level of economic interdependence is a vulnerability that constraints itself from more aggressive actions against China. It also wants to create a buffer belt of anti-Chinese states in ASEAN. Thus, it seeks to marry these two goals together by finding ways for Western businesses to relocate from China to Vietnam, for example. It remains to be seen, but if the 'Umbrella Revolution' stretches on indefinitely, as EuroMaidan seemed to do, it is only a matter of time before some Western businesses make high-profiled exits from Hong Kong in favor of locales further south. This is but a small development in a very long-term game, but the general idea should be grasped by the reader, and this probable trend is something to monitor going forward.

The hype caused by the 'Umbrella Revolution' is expected to spread not only to coastal China (as explained previously), but further afield and deeper into the country. Specifically, the US would like to see its pro-separatist policies in Tibet and Xinjiang energized by this movement, hoping that its proxy 'activists' take to the streets of Lhasa and Urumqi with umbrellas and plastic wrap themselves. By deflecting the non-lethal crowd control tactics of the Chinese authorities, they too can provoke an escalation that may tragically result in unintended civilian casualties. In fact, looking at it another way, the 'Umbrella Revolution' is the first time that the US' destabilization campaigns have penetrated the Heihe-Tengchong Line. This geographical division divides the country into roughly two geographically equal parts, but with the West having about 6% of the population and the East, the other 94%. Ideally for America, if destabilization can be coordinated on both sides of the Heihi-Tengchong Line between Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang (not only by their American overseers, but by collaborationist and unwitting domestic organizers within China), then this would be a partial fulfilment of America's strategic warfare against China, throw Beijing off balance, and reorient the overall Asian initiative against China's favor. Accordingly, this scenario represents a terrifyingly realistic nightmare for the Communist Party, hence the seriousness with which they are regarding the 'Umbrella Revolution'.

Between Two Chairs

Thus, an analysis of Beijing's response to the 'Umbrella Revolution' takes on even more heightened importance than previously thought, since the movement, as has been argued, could be the spark initiating a larger separatist and anti-government push all throughout the country. With the activists having neutralized all non-lethal methods of crowd control by the authorities through their umbrellas and plastic wrap, the government now stands between two chairs, to quote a Russian saying, where neither capitulation nor escalation is preferable. Thus, as was remarked in Part I, China has opted to wait and see how the movement develops, hoping that the majority of Hong Kong's citizens which oppose the destabilization will demonstrate their opposition to the Color Revolution and fizzle the event out. This, however, is fraught with risk and could drastically backfire, although in the present circumstances, it may be the only reasonable approach of the country's leadership at the moment.

As the New York Times noted in the above-referenced hyperlink, by choosing such a strategy, the government is effectively ceding the momentum to the movement, which could result in its exponential expansion. Nonetheless, if the Chinese authorities use this extra time to arrest the core and cohorts behind the Color Revolution attempt, then it can adeptly eliminate this threat by leaving only a mass of peaceful and confused civilians sitting around without subversive orders. The government does appear to be making moves in this direction, as the newspaper also reports that it is tracking and monitoring the cell phone activity of certain activists, likely in an attempt to locate and arrest the covert ringleaders (not the red-herring and media-iconic strawmen like Joshua Wong).

Beijing's method of dealing with the crisis also carries with it another risk, namely that the pro-government crowds that it expects to gather could in the long run turn out to be dangerous in their own right. For example, although they may be useful in mitigating the 'Umbrella Revolution' and saving Hong Kong's stability, in the future they could gather on their own (using the connections acquired during their previous activity) to act autonomously and without Beijing's blessing. This could take the form of extreme and widely broadcasted nationalist protests pertaining to the South China Sea controversy that could disrupt delicate Chinese diplomacy during a future crisis. Of course, the greater question is the extent that China can monitor and influence its citizens (both those that are pro- and anti-government), but this seemingly far-off threat could become a realistic possibility (or even one that could be directed and instigated by outside forces seeking to undermine China) sometime in the future. Basically, by opening the floodgates of activist civil society, China could also be unintentionally opening up a Pandora's Box.

Concluding Thoughts

Hong Kong's 'Umbrella Revolution' is undeniably a Western-orchestrated Color Revolution that seeks to exploit legitimate grievances to subversive and possibly secessionist effect. It is divided into two main groups, the dupes and the troops, with both of them having been brought together to form an anti-government mass in the middle of Hong Kong. By eliminating the effectiveness of the authorities' non-lethal crowd control methods through cheap and readily available umbrellas and plastic wrap, they have pressed the government to resort to near-lethal force and rubber bullets if the activists follow through on their occupation threats. Although engineered to create a social contagion to rip through coastal China and the ethnic periphery, the 'Umbrella Revolution' succeeds if it can merely create the perception of another Tiananmen Square. Thus, Beijing is faced with a near intractable dilemma in how to proceed, hence its tentative 'wait and see' approach. This is, however, but a temporary breather, and both the anti-government activists and the legitimate authorities are likely bracing for what seems to be an inevitable escalation (protester-provoked) that could very well climax in catastrophe.

Andrew Korybko is the American political correspondent of Voice of Russia who currently lives and studies in Moscow, exclusively for ORIENTAL REVIEW.

[Oct 12, 2014] Hong Kong's Revolt Will Probably End Like Moscow's by Leonid Bershidsky

I think Leonid Bershidsky forgot to mention the level of control over Ukrainian government exercised by the USA in Yanukovich days and existence of militant far right squads trained for street fights and supported by major Western powers, especially Poland, Lithuania, Sweden and Germany. Yanukovich was essentially on a short leash.
Oct 1, 2014 | Bloomberg View
It's hard not to notice the similarities between Hong Kong's "umbrella revolution" and the recent rebellions in Kiev and Moscow. The crucial question is whether the Chinese protesters will topple their leadership like the Ukrainians did, or gradually crumble under government pressure like the Russians. I would bet on the latter outcome.

Like Russian President Vladimir Putin, supporters of Chinese leader Xi Jinping see signs of a U.S. conspiracy in the familiar attributes of the Hong Kong protests: The use of ribbons, the "mobile democracy classroom" in Causeway Bay, the self-organization, the voluntary cleanups, the rallying cries on social networks, the idealism and young faces of the pro-democracy protesters all echo the demonstrations in Moscow and Kiev.

Pro-Beijing newspaper Wen Wei Po recently accused Hong Kong student leader Joshua Wong of being on the U.S. government's payroll. Russian state television has portrayed the Hong Kong protests as U.S. attempts to destabilize China. Yury Tavrovsky, a pro-Kremlin sinologist, urged the Chinese authorities to "squeeze out the boil:" "I don't think it will be possible to somehow persuade the protesters, because the Americans are behind them, I'm sure of that."

The problem with the U.S. conspiracy theory is that it's impossible to buy if, like me, you experienced the Moscow and Kiev demonstrations first hand. The leaders were weak and non-essential. The protests would have gone on without them. If not through the leaders, how could any puppeteer exert influence? People took to the streets because they felt cheated, and in every case the deception was real. In Moscow, Putin's party blatantly stole a parliamentary election. In Kiev, the president reneged on his promise to sign a trade pact that would have put Ukraine on a path toward European integration. In Hong Kong, a plan to vet candidates for the city's chief executive nullified Beijing's promise of universal suffrage.

The U.S. neither perpetrated the deceptions nor opened people's eyes to them. People aren't as dumb as authoritarian leaders think. The creation of symbols, organization against common ills and the desire to keep protest camps clean are instinctive and universal. They require no more conspiracy or outside influence than a swarm of bees does to organize a new hive.

The government reactions have been no less instinctive, following what political scientist Christian Davenport has called the "Law of Coercive Responsiveness." Only the degree of repression has varied.

In Moscow in 2011 and 2012, the authorities tread carefully, detaining and quickly releasing only the most visible activists. The peaceful, mostly middle-class demonstrators freely posted their "revolutionary" photos on Facebook (I did, too). When a rally on May 6, 2012 turned a bit violent, Putin's repressive machine sprang into action, accusing 28 people of resisting police and sentencing them to considerable prison terms (most have since been amnestied). Putin did nothing that could have radicalized the protesters. He waited until the demonstrations turned repetitive and most people stopped coming, then gradually tightened the screws, creating today's smothering regime in a matter of months.

In Kiev, President Viktor Yanukovych started down the same path, but the cruel beating of several hundred students by riot police re-energized the protests and led to an escalation of violence. Two months after the rallies started, angry men on the barricades were wielding shovel handles and Molotov cocktails, not umbrellas.

In Hong Kong, the authorities used tear gas last weekend. Like the beating in Kiev, the move has provoked and re-energized the protesters, who are now threatening to occupy government buildings -- just as the Ukrainians did, with bloody consequences.

Hong Kong chief executive Leung Chun-ying and his bosses in Beijing can still play the Putin game and refrain from the use of force. Chances are that the protesters will disperse. Like the Muscovites, the demonstrators are a well-educated, middle-class group who have little support in the rest of the country and lack the desperation to risk their lives.

Alternatively, the authorities can unleash more tear gas or bring in the Chinese military. That could lead to a violent, Kiev-style scenario, but the ending would be different. Unlike Yanukovych, now hiding in Russia, the Chinese leadership has the resources to put down the Hong Kong protests even if the city's entire 7 million population joins them.

This leaves the protesters with an unpleasant choice: Either go home and watch Beijing tighten control just like Putin did in 2012, or fight like Ukrainians and lose a bloody battle. Something tells me they will choose the first, safer option. To contact the writer of this article: Leonid Bershidsky at lbershidsky@bloomberg.net.

[Oct 12, 2014] Why Hong Kong Is Massively Pissed (A Primer from Big Lychee)

rudepundit.blogspot.com

... ... ...

Hong Kong's 'umbrella revolution' has just made it onto the cover of the Asian edition of Time. This suggests that the pro-democracy protests and the story will now start to fade from view. But the root cause of the unrest will not go away unless the Chinese government authorizes the city's administration to fix what Beijing's leaders coyly call 'contradictions' (i.e., Communist Party fuck-ups).

Hong Kong was founded as a British colony in the 1840s as a base from which merchants could trade with tea- and silk-producing China using opium as a means of payment – the protectionist Qing dynasty having absorbed most of the silver in circulation (an earlier version of China's more recent mercantilist trade policies). From this no-nonsense start, the city was a business-first sort of place.

When the UK handed Hong Kong to China in 1997, Beijing's paranoid Leninist dictatorship embraced the city's tycoons as a support base and to prove it would maintain the city's capitalist system. The Marxist-trained Chinese officials seem to have assumed that the richest businessmen in town created the wealth. In fact, the big conglomerates were masters at skimming it off from the smaller businesses and enterprising citizens who did the hard work of making the city a major economic success.

You may have heard Hong Kong is a 'freewheeling' capitalist paradise. But its economic structure is closer to feudalism. A small group of family-run companies controls the real-estate sector. This has enabled them since the 1970s to amass the fortunes necessary to corner other sectors, like retail and distribution, transport, electric and gas, and construction supplies. Cartels – price-fixing and other anti-competition arrangements – are essentially legal. Hong Kong consumers work like serfs for these guys.

(A quick explanation of the Hong Kong land system is in order. The government owns all the land – a British colonial practice adopted way back following the unforgettable failure of stamp duties as a viable way to raise revenue in the American colonies starting in the 1760s. In today's Hong Kong both bureaucrats and developers have an interest in maintaining an artificial shortage of land to boost government revenues and profits. The government revenues are earmarked for pointless infrastructure projects which empower bureaucrats and further enrich the tycoons.)

Since the 1997 handover, any semblance of balance between tycoon and public interests has gone out the window. Beijing has bought the tycoons' loyalty partly by giving them access to Mainland China markets; the plutocrats' Mainland assets are profitable but at the mercy of an authoritarian system with no due process (the state can grab private assets at any time, thus has the tycoons by the balls). China also seems to have guaranteed that the tycoons will be allowed free rein to gouge whatever they like from the rest of Hong Kong's economy and society. China's leaders' own families are of course up to their ears in Hong Kong-based money laundering and deals with the tycoons.

The result is a huge concentration of wealth in the hands of half a dozen or so families who control the housing market and rented commercial space. Hong Kong's post-1997 administrations have deliberately kept land supply tight. At the same time, immigration controls on Mainlanders have been relaxed, so Chinese property-buyers and shoppers have flooded into Hong Kong. The young 'umbrella revolution' protestors have little hope of buying a decent home in their own city: a tiny apartment (say 400 square feet) will cost the equivalent of maybe 12 years' total average income for a couple. And their chances of starting a business have plummeted as commercial rents have soared: landlords lease space at sky-high rents to luxury-goods chains selling crap to Mainland shoppers (such goods are taxed or faked in the Mainland). Neighborhood stores selling basics to local residents are closing to give way to designer-label brands for outsiders, adding to the feeling that Hongkongers' own city is being taken away from them.

You get some of this in New York, San Fran, Vancouver or London. But the process is on steroids in Hong Kong, thanks to the distortions created by government land policies and the influx of Mainlanders.

... ... ...

Hong Kong's Umbrellas are 'Made in USA' by William Engdahl

October 8, 2014 | boilingfrogspost.com

The Washington Hong Kong "Democracy" Project

The Washington neo-cons and their allies in the US State Department and Obama Administration are clearly furious with China, as they are with Russia's Vladimir Putin. As both Russia and China in recent years have become more assertive about defining their national interests, and as both Eurasian powers draw into a closer cooperation on all strategic levels, Washington has decided to unleash havoc against Beijing, as it has unleashed the Ukraine dis-order against Russia and Russian links to the EU. The flurry of recent deals binding Beijing and Moscow more closely-the $400 billion gas pipeline, the BRICS infrastructure bank, trade in rubles and renminbi by-passing the US dollar-has triggered Washington's response. It's called the Hong Kong 'Umbrella Revolution' in the popular media.

In this era of industrial globalization and out-sourcing of US industry to cheap-labor countries, especially to China, it's worth taking note of one thing the USA-or more precisely Washington DC and Langley, Virginia-are producing and exporting to China's Hong Kong. Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China has been targeted for a color revolution, one that has been dubbed in the media the Umbrella Revolution for the umbrellas that protesters use to block police tear gas.

The "umbrellas" for Hong Kong's ongoing Umbrella Revolution are made in Washington. Proof of that lies not only in the obscenely-rapid White House open support of Occupy Central just hours after it began, following the same model they used in Ukraine.[1] The US State Department and NGOs it finances have been quietly preparing these protests for years. Consider just the tip of the Washington Hong Kong "democracy" project.

Same dirty old cast of characters…

With almost by-now-boring monotony, Washington has unleashed another of its infamous Color Revolutions. US Government-steered NGOs and US-trained operatives are running the entire Hong Kong "Occupy Central" protests, ostensibly in protest of the rules Beijing has announced for Hong Kong's 2017 elections. The Occupy Central Hong Kong protest movement is being nominally led by a 17-year-old student, Joshua Wong, who resembles a Hong Kong version of Harry Potter, a kid who was only just born the year Britain reluctantly ended its 99-year colonial occupation, ceding the city-state back to the Peoples' Republic. Wong is accompanied in Occupy Central by a University of Minnesota-educated hedge fund money man for the protests, Edward Chin; by a Yale University-educated sociologist, Chan Kin-man; by a Baptist minister who is a veteran of the CIAs 1989 Tiananmen Square destabilization, Chu Yiu-ming; and by a Hong Kong University law professor, Benny Tai Yiu-ting, or Benny Tai.

Behind these Hong Kong faces, the US State Department and its favorite NGO, the US Congress-financed National Endowment for Democracy (NED), via its daughter, the National Democratic Institute (NDI), is running the Occupy Central operation. Let's look behind the nice façade of peaceful non-violent protest for democracy and we find a very undemocratic covert Washington agenda.

Start with Chu Yiu-ming, the Baptist minister chosen to head Occupy Central. The most reverend Chu Yiu-ming is a founder and sits on the executive committee of a Hong Kong NGO– Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor (HKHRM). HKHRM as they openly admit on their website, is mainly financed by the US State Department via its neo-conservative Color Revolution NGO called National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

They state their purpose: "HKHRM briefs the press, the United Nations, local and overseas governments and legislative bodies on Hong Kong human rights issues both orally and through written reports." [2] In their 2013 Annual Report, the NED reports giving Rev. Chu Yiu-ming's HK Human Rights Monitor a grant of US$ 145,000. You can buy a boatload of umbrellas for that. [3] Chu's HKHRM also works with another NED-financed creation, the Alliance for Reform and Democracy in Asia (ARDA).[4]

When Occupy Central top honchos decided to (undemocratically) name the very reverend Chu as leader of Occupy Central this past January, 2014, Chu said it was because "I have more connections with different activist groups, and experience in large-scale social campaigns." [5] He could have named NED as activist group and the CIA's 1989 Tiananmen Square as a 'large-scale social campaign,' to be more specific. The Baptist preacher admitted that he was named de facto leader of Occupy Central by two other leading organizers of the civil disobedience movement, Benny Tai Yiu-ting and Dr Chan Kin-man, who wanted him "to take up" the role. [6]

Benny Tai is also familiar with the US State Department. Tai, law professor at the University of Hong Kong and co-founder of Hong Kong Occupy Central, works with the Hong Kong University Centre for Comparative and Public Law which receives grants from the NED subsidiary, National Democratic Institute for projects like Design Democracy Hong Kong. The Centre Annual Report states, "With funding assistance from the National Democratic Institute, the Design Democracy Hong Kong website was built to promote a lawful and constructive bottom-up approach to constitutional and political reform in Hong Kong." [7] On its own website, NDI describes its years-long Hong Kong law project, the legal backdrop to the Occupy demands which essentially would open the door for a US-picked government in Hong Kong just as Victoria Nuland hand-picked a US-loyal coup regime in Ukraine in February 2014. The NDI boasts,

The Centre for Comparative and Public Law (CCPL) at the University of Hong Kong, with support from NDI, is working to amplify citizens' voices in that consultation process by creating Design Democracy Hong Kong (www.designdemocracy.hk), a unique and neutral website that gives citizens a place to discuss the future of Hong Kong's electoral system. [8]

The Hong Kong wunderkind of the Color Revolution Washington destabilization, 17-year-old student, Joshua Wong, founded a Facebook site called Scholarism when he was 15 with support from Washington's neo-conservative National Endowment for Democracy via its left branch, National Democratic Institute and NDI's NDItech project. [9] And another Occupy Central leading figure, Audrey Eu Yuet mee recently met with Vice President Joe Biden.[10] Hmmmm.

Cardinal Zen and cardinal sin…

Less visible in the mainstream media but identified as one of the key organizers of Occupy Central is Hong Kong's Catholic Church Cardinal Bishop Emeritus, Joseph Zen. Cardinal Zen according to the Hong Kong Morning Post, is playing a key role in the US-financed protests against Beijing's authority. [11] Cardinal Zen also happens to be the primary Vatican adviser on China policy. Is the first Jesuit Pope in history, Pope Francis, making a US-financed retry at the mission of Society of Jesus founder (and, incidentally, the Pope's real namesake) Francis Xavier, to subvert and take over the Peoples' Republic of China, using Hong Kong as the Achilles Heel?

Vice President Joe Biden, whose own hands are soaked with the blood of thousands of eastern Ukraine victims of the neo-nazi civil war; Cardinal Zen; Reverend Chu; Joshua Wong; Benny Tai and the neo-conservative NED and its NDI and a bevy of other State Department assets and NGO's too numerous to name here, have ignited a full-blown Color Revolution, the Umbrella Revolution. The timing of the action, a full two years before the Hong Kong 2017 elections, suggests that some people in Washington and elsewhere in the west were getting jumpy.

The growing Eurasian economic space of China in conjunction with Putin's Russia and their guiding role in creating a peaceful and very effective counter-pole to Washington's New World (dis-)Order, acting through organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS, is the real target of their dis-order. That is really quite stupid of them, but then, they are fundamentally stupid people who despise intelligence.

# # # #

F. William Engdahl, BFP contributing Author & Analyst
William Engdahl is author of A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics in the New World Order. He is a contributing author at BFP and may be contacted through his website at www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net where this article was originally published.

Endnotes:


[1] Reuters, White House Shows Support For Aspirations Of Hong Kong People, Reuters, September 29, 2014, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/29/white-house-hong-kong_n_5901782.html.

[2] Wikipedia, Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Human_Rights_Monitor#Officers.2C_founders_and_staff.

[3] NED, 2013 Annual Report, Grants, China (Hong Kong), http://www.ned.org/where-we-work/asia/china-hong-kong

[4] Wikipedia, Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Human_Rights_Monitor#Officers.2C_founders_and_staff

[5] Asia News, Occupy Central chooses Rev Chu Yiu-ming as its new leader, January 3, 2014, http://www.asianews.it/news-en/%27Occupy-Central%27-chooses-Rev-Chu-Yiu-ming-as-its-new-leader-29951.html

[6] Ibid.

[7] Hong Kong University Centre for Comparative and Public Law, Annual Report, 2014, http://www.law.hku.hk/ccpl/Docs/Annual%20Report%202014.pdf.

[8] Tony Cartalucci, US Openly Approves Hong Kong Chaos it Created, September 30, 2014, Land Destroyer Blog, http://landdestroyer.blogspot.de/2014/09/us-openly-approves-hong-kong-chaos-it.html

[9] NDI, In Hong Kong Does Change Begin with a Single Step?, September27, 2012, National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, https://www.demworks.org/blog/2012/09/hong-kong-does-change-begin-single-step

[10] Tony Cartalucci, op. cit.

[11] Timmy Sung, Ernest Kao and Tony Cheung, Occupy Central is on: Benny Tai rides wave of student protest to launch movement, September 27, 2014, Hong Kong Morning Post, http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1601625/hong-kong-students-beat-us-it-benny-tai-declares-start-occupy-central

[Oct 11, 2014] Color Umbrellas over Hong Kong

Oct 10, 2014 | from-ua.com
The wave of "color revolutions", it seems, has come to China...

Most of us knew Hong Kong only as the home of Jackie Chan, endless epidemics of influenza and cheap copies of expensive European brands. But today, it attracts attention as the epicenter of a possible Chinese Maidan. Recent mass protests in this Chinese city has been nicknamed "the revolution of the umbrellas, and the official Beijing demanded that Washington not to interfere in the situation.

A city of contrasts and triads

Each "color revolution" there are two simple explanations that give its supporters and opponents. The first claim that it is a spontaneous uprising of the people, facing the street to protest against the regime, for democracy and civil rights. The second claim that this is the planned operation of the West (primarily the US) aimed at carrying out a bloodless (as it will) coup or the creation of a "controlled chaos".

Events in Hong Kong is no exception: Chinese, together with Russian politicians immediately began talking about "the hand of the West", but in the West events were interpreted strictly positive. However, every revolution, iether color "injected" with money from the West, or spontaneous, always carry the specifics of the region in which it occurs and is based on real problems. And in the end, its net result of any color revolution can be very far from the victory of democracy against tyranny.

For example, the "Arab spring" in Egypt (2011) was in reality a rebellion of radical Islamists. who are very far from ideas of democracy . "Tulip revolution" in Kyrgyzstan (2005) was nothing but the war of tribal clans. And the February revolution in Ukraine is nothing but an oligarchic coup, when one clan displaced another on a wave of opposition of Western-oriented agricultural producers and Donetsk criminal industrialists. Hong Kong "revolution of the umbrellas", also carry on its specific nuances because the city does not fit into the normal scope of our view about China.

Today, many have already forgotten that Hong Kong was the first piece of China, separated from them by the West: it happened in 1842, after the defeat of China in the Opium war with Britain.

Soon Hong Kong and adjacent areas have received the status of "overseas territories". Convenient Harbor became the main base of the British in South-East Asia and the far East, one of the most famous international ports along with Nagasaki and Rio de Janeiro.

But more importantly, Hong Kong became the South gate to China. Besides him there were two more lart ports, but the Russian Harbin lost its importance after 1920, and international Shanghai became a Communist and was nationalized after 1949. Then Taiwan was still agrarian-fisherman island, and Hong Kong had behind the support of the entire British economy, and therefore running from the Communists large and medium-sized companies and banks of Homindan China moved into it. Then he became the only trade gates with red China, maintaining this status up to 80-ies.

The result was an unprecedented economic boom of Hong Kong in the second half of the twentieth century. However, initially, it was the monstrous city of contrasts. Corporations made huge profits on intermediary trade between China and the West and the exploitation of cheap labor for the poor emigrants. Local bigwigs earned billions of dollars in property speculation: using triads, also immigrated to Hong Kong from all over China, they have pressed the poor out of homes and then resold the plots to companies. And triads, after domistication, "invested" in the manufacturing and trading business.

The economy of Hong Kong was named the most free in the world. And although, on the one hand, businessmen were not much bothered the officials, on the other, the level of social protection and working conditions of the employees were fully depended on the good will of employers. Someone squeezed all the juices for a penny, and then kicked out on the street, the sick and pregnant, and someone paid a very high salary, provided medical insurance, and housing. But generally by the time of the reunification of Hong Kong with China (1997) in the city have has had a numerous middle class, shopkeepers, officials and specialists. And the last two "strata" played in the life of Hong Kong's and the recent events an important role.

Students and the "Chinese miracle"

To become a Bank clerk, government bureaucrat in some Bureau, or engineer, the young man ought first to graduate from the University. Each Hong Kong family wants to see their children to be university students, even though not every can afford to pay for their studies.

Hong Kong students knew that in a few years they will get a well-paid job in the office - in contrast to Ukrainian students, 2/3 of which after graduation throw their diplomas under the couch because of thier uselessness in obtaining decent employment. They also feel that in on student bench they are an important social force. And yet, because of young age, they are politically acive, and not against to fool around sometimes. Mass action protests in Hong Kong is not uncommon, they occur almost every year, and in all of them in the first rows were students.

Recently, however, the Hong Kong students were drawn to protest not only the high ideals and the desire to fool around, but real concern about their future.

In 1997 when Hong Kong came under the sovereignty of red China, the future of those students was seen in the most pink colors. Hong Kong for 50 years was granted significant autonomy: the economic, administrative and political. Therefore, future city employees (who namber in the city for over a quarter of a million) confidently looked forward. And then the shortage of specialists in the rapidly growing economy of greater China has opened vast prospects for graduates of economic and technical Colleges. In addition, Hong Kong remained the major Finance and trading and manufacturing center, so that type of local employment was expected to remain plentiful too.

But fifteen years later, the situation has changed. Hong Kong became increasingly difficult to compete with mainland China in the industrial production capabilities, so many companies have moved their factories back to the "mainland". Many financial companies moved their activities in Shanghai, which became the most powerful economic capital of China. Thus, vacancies for young professionals of Hong Kong became smaller both in their native city, and in greater China - at the same time as number of student continue to increase.

Of course, Hong Kong remains the Chinese center for international banking business, and through it will still pass an enormous amount of export-import transactions and investments, however Shanghai has is a viable competitor. The reason is simple: Shanghai is the main economic project of Beijing, fully controlled by the PRC government, while Hong Kong is still more of a "Western" and less controllable.

Beijing put on Hong Kong not only economic pressure. Its autonomy is severely limited by the system of local elections, controlled from the centre. And in 2017 it was planned to replace the more limited self-government in the region. Strictly speaking, this is the limitation of democracy and was a formal pretext of the current protests. However, it's not even about democracy, as much as what can follow its loss.

For example, local authority Hong Kong forms the local bureaucracy and govern the army of civil servants. And if the local authorities will be led by a protégé of Beijing, and Hong Kong officials will depend on his whims. Want to reduce them. Want to replace their people. This means that the current students in Hong Kong hometown can cause problems not only with his career, but in employment too. Yes they will be accepted in government positions on mainland, but as they say, reluctantly and with probation, as potentially unreliable.

That's why Hong Kong students were actively involved in the movement "Occupy Central" acting for holding in city of direct democratic elections without "care" of Beijing. These young people really believe that, saving in your city enclave of democracy, they will be able to save the future. However, we emphasize that students are only actors, performers, and not the organizers and sponsors of this movement.

"I'm shaking your skyscraper"

It is clear that the sponsors of the "revolution of the umbrellas" themselves did not show, so we can only guess who they are. But hasty statements about Washington is trying to undermine there is a traditional Chinese "stability", far from reality. Because there are other, more plausible versions...

... the Hong Kong financial site is controlled by Britain and the United States, while in Shanghai is the UE which is most active participant. One thing is certain, Shanghai and Hong Kong compete for huge money flows. And even just surprising that those concern are expressed in just rather innocent "the revolution of the umbrellas.

However, event proved to be no so innocent as they lowered by 2% the value of shares of companies of Hong Kong and hit the local real estate market. And since both are within in the commercial interests of the triads, it is not surprising that they decided to squash the rallies, acting in the role of the Chinese "strike-breakers". However, on the demonstrators were thrown not tattooed members of clans but armed with sticks semi-legal "guest workers" of Hong Kong workshops...

[Oct 08, 2014] How Chinese authorities try to extinguish color revolution fire in Hong Cong

Unrest in Hong Kong are declining. On Monday, the part of the fence was dismantled, the main government complex resumed its work. Protesters with umbrellas behave peacefully and do not interfere with civil servants getting in/out of work; the number of activists on the streets has decreased dramatically:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/rolling_news/2014/10/141006_hong_kong_protest_monday.shtml

Of course, it's too early to say "Done". As recently as last winter EuroMaidan a few times almost completely faded, but then petrol to sustain fire was injected again and again; in the end all this ended with national socialist revolution and Anti-Russian course for Ukraine as well as the rapid destruction of economy, and civil war at the East. However, the initial success of China authorities is obvious, and if the organizers of "umbrella Maidan" will not be able to inject new resources and money into the protest and/or organize a serious provocation along the class like of sharpshooter from the roof, Hong Kong might soon return to a normal life.

Let's see what methods the China used in response to the orange infection.

1. As we remember the significant contribution to EuroMaidan was transportation by buses of residents of Western regions of Ukraine into Kiev. In Hong Kong this trick failed. China has established a tight cordons on the border of Hong Kong - tourists who looks like potential street fighters and coordinators tourists were turned back. Buses with armed bits and fittings gull of young aggressive young people had no chance to get into the area of unrest.

2. China has carefully worked the Hong Kong professors, who trying to repay the US grants by droving students to the streets. Dismissal, conversations with the Chinese KGB, check about the payment of taxes from money from grants make this method of generating the crowd from university students by-and-large closed. Similar problems were created for all American NGOs.

Yanukovich during his time in power did not managed to close this channel of feeding of Maidan via "pre-paid" university professors, and NGOs has almost diplomatic immunity status in Ukraine. At the end he almost paid with his life for that.

3. A dangerous groups that could take on the role of storm troopers for insurgents - such as radical environmentalists were placed under administrative arrest and could not participate in the riots.

4. Around the Maidan was organized by the cordon of police, who did not give peaceful protesters the ability to smuggle to the place of unrest Molotov cocktails and such. Those who were caught were packed into police car and removed.

5. China found for local Poroshenko, who fanned the Maidan through his media resources, some very convincing words. Jimmy Lai for a couple of days disappeared from the public view, and when he returned, his revolutionary enthusiasm had sharply diminished.

6. Chinese media together were explained to local residents that because of protests big business and big money will move to other cities. which gladly will cease the opportunity to take over Hong Kong financial hub. For residents of Hong Kong this is a very troubling prospect: at least in terms of higher unemployment and lower wages. At this point many will not be able to pay their mortgages and other loans.

Explanations had its effect - CNN reports that the locals became really aggressive toward protesters. Quote:

Talks planned as Hong Kong protest numbers shrink - CNN.com

The news of official talks comes as a dwindling number of pro-democracy demonstrators continue to cling on to their protest sites in key areas of the tightly packed city. As their numbers wane, so does patience of some of their fellow citizens.

"At first, I supported them, but then I started to think they are being selfish because they block the roads -- and that's wrong," said Virginia Lai, who has sold newspapers from a stall in the busy district of Mong Kok for 45 years.

Lai says her business is down 30% and getting worse. The student-led demonstrators are camped out at a major intersection in the neighborhood, which witnessed violent clashes between protesters and their opponents over the weekend.

At the moment on the streets of Hong Kong are still about 300 protesters:

http://itar-tass.com/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/1492865

As we know from previous color revolutions experience, hardcore protesters themselves usually do not disperse voluntarily: they sit until the last, waiting for the moment when the police begin to disperse them. How will China to solve the problem is unclear.

However, we can already say that Americans have faced this time with an intelligent and cold-blooded enemy: the enemy, who had carefully studied all of their previous games, and provided a strong response to each standard course of manuals.

Perhaps, in the place of the Americans, I would think not even about Hong Kong, but about Texas and Washington. In the U.S., more than enough smoldering conflicts that an experienced player will be able, with a little luck to inflate to a full-scale protest. and amount of armed people could make it problematic for policy to crash.

[Oct 04, 2014] Violent clashes break out in Hong Kong after counter-protesters storm sit-in by Tania Branigan in Hong Kong and Jonathan Kaiman in Beijing

From comments: "It will be interesting to see how this paper and the Western media in general will report on the use of violence from the pro democracy supporters in Hong Kong, because it is inevitable.
My guess is that it will be excused and promoted as heroic."
Oct 03, 2014 | The Guardian

newenergyspace, 03 October 2014 12:17pm

Send in the boys disguised as protesters, wait for violence to ensue, then claim the whole thing had descended into a riot and that the police were justified in their intervention in the interests of 'public safety'.

MurkyFogsFutureLogs newenergyspace, 03 October 2014 2:35pm

And whom are the original protesters? Shall we (as in the West) send in the NGO's posing as student unions to protest and undermine the regional government?

Shall we, (as in the West) support our allies (like Saudi-Arabia and Turkey's) efforts in undermining the Syrian government, by sending in the jihadi's to kick off a civil war under the false auspices of a peaceful protest being violently cracked down upon?

Or how about Ukrainian style? Sending in the armed neo-nazi's to fire upon police officers to garner a like for like response to augment an excuse which leads to actions that support a Western global agenda, for example, the installation of a pro-Western government.

Come on, everyone's playing dirty, these tactics are not reserved for communist or sectarian states.

Shinnel88 Daniel Lee, 03 October 2014 2:15pm

I believe those kids were manipulated by their US-influenced school teachers. Very dangerous.

They do not know what they really want and have very misled fantasies about the Western democracy which is non-existing, especially in UK and USA where we are all evilly monitored and controlled by MI5, MI6, FBI, CIA, and NSA.

xiangbalaolao superdonyoungy, 03 October 2014 5:02pm

Are you saying the multitude of tai tais are the Chinese secret granny squad shipped down from Shenzhen? Can you speak Cantonese? Do you know HK beyond Wanchai and Central? Anyone who has lived here long enough knows you dont mess with Mong Kok and Yau Ma Dei residents, especially the triads and old girls and boys who dont take kindly to spotty kids from HKU interfering with business.

RenZantetsuken Jtd979, 03 October 2014 6:33pm

I was waiting for the standard CIA comment! Ha ha

I was waiting for the plain-clothed cops comment too, wasn't disappointed.

Imagine, if they're both correct.

hipstorian, 03 October 2014 12:24pm

It's not all Beijing sending in a mob. There is a very large number of Hong Kong people who aren't involved in the protests - mostly middle aged, who see the action as damaging the intrests of the place. Despite the reporting about it being a sweeping democratic movement, it isn't. There are disperate groups with different agends which have been lumped together.

QueenElizabeth hipstorian, 03 October 2014 1:08pm

Yes, but 'rent-a-mob' is catchier.

As 'CIA-organised demonstrations' is catchier in the Beijing tabloids.

ploughmanlunch, 03 October 2014 12:27pm

It will be interesting to see how this paper and the Western media in general will report on the use of violence from the pro democracy supporters in Hong Kong, because it is inevitable.
My guess is that it will be excused and promoted as heroic.

Marella, 03 October 2014 12:29pm

Presumably the Chinese government can now claim this was a 'spontaneous' uprising of loyal citizens, and avoid international criticism.

marky226, 03 October 2014 12:29pm

The pro- democracy crowd is being helped significantly in funding by guess who America. The CIA involved again, now I would be support them but this.

eveready, 03 October 2014 12:29pm

Just as I predicted. Hongkong is a fast and furious society. Time is money. The demonstrators are depriving the businessmen in the vicinity of their livelihood. These locals have big losses staring into their faces. The Hongkong government doesn't need to lift a finger to make the demonstrators go home. What more the Communist Chinese government.

WinstonTheChair marky226, 03 October 2014 12:48pm

Have you got evidence for this? Sorry but links to the blogs of nutjobs don't count and neither does inferring on the basis that, "It must be, mustn't it?" – I mean real evidence that might stand rational examination.

Krustallos WinstonTheChair, 03 October 2014 1:03pm

Even if the CIA was involved, would that be a reason not to support the protestors? The KGB fairly seriously infiltrated the UK trade union movement but that didn't mean UK trade unions were nothing but a Kremlin plot.

Besides, basing your political decisions on opposing whatever the US supports is likely to lead you into some very strange places. Better to analyse the issues from an independent standpoint. What's likely to benefit the working class in Hong Kong the most? Political freedom and the right to vote for whoever they choose, or a government hand picked by the dictatorship in Beijing?

alfredwong WinstonTheChair, 03 October 2014 1:11pm

The Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi has sternly warned the US to not get involved in Hong Kong's pro-democracy protests. China probably has the evidence that the US is actually pulling the strings from behind the scene.

marky226 Krustallos, 03 October 2014 1:57pm

China is dictatorship, meantime in America you have a country which is much the same when few vote and the rich and big companies run the country.

arhead4u2 LarsPorsena, 04 October 2014 2:42am

The following is a comment I read earlier:

On Thursday, Wen Wei Po published an "expose" into what it described as the U.S. connections of Joshua Wong, the 17 year-old leader of student group Scholarism.

The story asserts that "U.S. forces" identified Mr. Wong's potential three years ago, and have worked since then to cultivate him as a "political superstar."

Evidence for Mr. Wong's close ties to the U.S. that the paper cited included what the report described as frequent meetings with U.S. consulate personnel in Hong Kong and covert donations from Americans to Mr. Wong. As evidence, the paper cited photographs leaked by "netizens." The story also said Mr. Wong's family visited Macau in 2011 at the invitation of the American Chamber of Commerce, where they stayed at the "U.S.-owned" Venetian Macao, which is owned by Las Vegas Sands Corp.

Benny Tai "Occupy Central's" leader, has spent years associated with and benefiting from US State Department cash and support.

"Occupy Central's" self-proclaimed leader, Benny Tai, is a law professor at the aforementioned University of Hong Kong and a regular collaborator with the NDI-funded CCPL. In 2006-2007 (annual report, .pdf) he was named as a board member – a position he has held until at least as recently as last year. In CCPL's 2011-2013 annual report (.pdf), NDI is listed as having provided funding to the organization to "design and implement an online Models of Universal Suffrage portal where the general public can discuss and provide feedback and ideas on which method of universal suffrage is most suitable for Hong Kong.

The U.S. has certainly promoted regime change worldwide, often by using non-governmental organizations as front groups to funnel money to dissidents who will overthrow the government.
For example, USAID has been called the "new CIA", and FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds told Washington's Blog that the U.S. State Department is involved in many "hard power" operations, often coordinating through well-known "Non-Governmental Organizations" (NGOs). Specifically, Edmonds explained that numerous well-known NGOs – which claim to focus on development, birth control, women's rights, fighting oppression and other "magnificent sounding" purposes or seemingly benign issues – act as covers for State Department operations. She said that the State Department directly places operatives inside the NGOs.

Edmonds also told us that – during the late 90s and early 2000s – perhaps 30-40% of the people working for NGOs operated by George Soros were actually working for the U.S. State Department.

If this all sounds too nutty, remember that historians say that declining empires tend to attack their rising rivals … so the risk of world war is rising because the U.S. feels threatened by the rising empire of China.

marky226, 03 October 2014 12:33pm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-openly-approves-hong-kong-chaos-it-created/5405387

Isotropisch marky226, 03 October 2014 1:09pm

You do know that the so-called "Centre for Research on Globalization" is actually one person, Michael Chussodvsky, a rampant conspiracy theorist and holocaust denier, who relates every single event in the world to a CIA/White House plot. He is the definition of an unreliable source.

Reynardus, 03 October 2014 12:35pm

Has the U.S. State Department come up with the color name for this "revolution"?

21794h, 03 October 2014 12:36pm

Unacceptable abuse of human rights and a peaceful protest? Waits for Cameron's statement supporting the Chinese regime...........

guface 21794h, 03 October 2014 3:22pm

abuse of human rights

isnt the disruption of other people's livelihoods and stopping the progress of an entire city a bit of an abuse of human rights too?

kw9751, 03 October 2014 12:51pm

man, this article may have well been written by fox news.

firstly for the clueless pressitutes here, the mong kok area in hong kong has no government buildings. its is a tightly packed area of small businesses and apartments.

it is highly therefore highly likely the mob in question are local residents that have seen their business wreaked for a week and their sleep disturbed for an entire week.

now imagine you have a bunch of hippies outside your door singing kumbaya all day, all night preventing you from working or sleeping for an entire. would you not want to beat them into a pulp too no matter how worthy their cause is?

Prianichek, 03 October 2014 12:53pm

Applause! US State Dept. set another country on fire. Who s gonna be next?

VengefulRevenant, 03 October 2014 12:54pm

The resort to lame abuse and insulting epithets against the opponents of the occupation by the Guardian "journalist" is actually rather pitiable. It's an infantile tantrum.

Their Guardian's atavistic colonialist hopes were so high that the Occupy Central protest would cause severe political damage to China but the turnout for the demonstrations turned out to be rather underwhelming. And now the whole spectacle appears to be fizzling further.

In their disappointment the Guardian petulantly editorialised that Brazil and South Africa and other non-European countries "must" join in the China bashing to provide cover for the attacks so that they didn't all appear to come from the usual suspects, the decrepit white empires. Of course none of the countries to whom the Guardian's liberal Colonel Blimps issued instructions paid them the slightest attention.

Now that the demonstrators have overstayed their welcome with many residents of the occupied areas and have mostly have gone home, the Guardian is shedding bitter tears of rage and lapsing into hate speech. Sad really ... they would have happy with a win or a bloodbath but it looks like they won't get either.


mapleflot VengefulRevenant, 03 October 2014 1:05pm

Or you could just have free elections. Or is it `petulant' to suggest that if the majority are against protests, the majority would vote accordingly?

VengefulRevenant mapleflot, 03 October 2014 1:23pm

Yes, your comment is petulant, because it reflects a combination of arrogance and impotence.

The point is this: what you think and want for Hong Kong and what the Guardian thinks and wants are completely beside the point.

What happens in China will be decided by the people of China and not by liberal editorialists and commentators in Britain, no matter how convinced you are of your moral and political superiority.

Britain isn't the boss in Hong Kong any more, get it? The British military dictatorship over the territory died with a post-imperial whimper. Your ruling class no longer rule there.

The empire's over.

Gang TieRen, 03 October 2014 12:55pm

This is the old tactic of the Communist and now adopted by the Hong Kong government. These thugs are paid by the Communist to intimate freedom loving people just like what they are doing inside of China.

Zakida Gang TieRen, 03 October 2014 12:57pm

"These thugs are paid by the Communist to intimate freedom loving people just like what they are doing inside of China."

canbeanybody Gang TieRen, 03 October 2014 1:03pm

Those "occupy central" extremists are bona fide thugs who behave irrationally and unreasonably.

They do what they did only because their American handlers told them so.

It has nothing to do with "democracy" as it has everything to do with regime change.

And the need for those Americans handlers to mobilize "Occupy central" I because they are not doing that great in terms of containing China with their lousy war machines, ganging up their little fellow "friends" in Far East to trouble China.

nothingtoeat, 03 October 2014 12:57pm

I love the how the author uses picture images propaganized her bias views. The pictures show the young occupier are calm, innocent, heoric, victomized where the contrast you see mid-age mob-looking, angry, vulger and wretched.


StevenJ19, 03 October 2014 1:09pm

We should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the pro-democracy activists, and if the Chinese don't like it, Hong Kong should become a British protectorate until free and fair elections have taken place.

Wiseowl123 StevenJ19, 03 October 2014 1:22pm

A very nice imperialist wet dream you are having there...why not go back to bed.

VengefulRevenant StevenJ19, 03 October 2014 1:41pm

Hong Kong should become a British protectorate until free and fair elections have taken place.

And how long would that take?

The British regime occupied Hong Kong for 144 years after grabbing it as a base for its opium-pushing operation into China. It was governed as a racist military dictatorship with an autocratic governor.


Luke Taco Powell, 03 October 2014 1:10pm

Stay calm Hong Kong, they can't fight you if stay peaceful.

Sarah7591Wilson Luke Taco Powell, 03 October 2014 3:09pm

Don't be naive. Of course they can. Look at what happened to those college students in California in 2011, whom the cops pepper-spayed directly into their faces and eyes as they were participating in a completely peaceful sit-down.

StephenDaedalus, 03 October 2014 1:14pm

Would be helpful to tell us more about the counter-demonstrators and what they have to say. "Thugs" on its own doesn't tell us much.

游天 StephenDaedalus, 03 October 2014 1:29pm

Because they are not thugs. They are mostly people living close by or have a tiny business in the same region. They are being disrupted not only during day time but 24 hours a day. It makes sense that they are fed up because in reality majority of the people in Hong Kong do not support this "protest". If you are interested, go back and check the poll of people who vote against this protest before it started.

Babeouf, 03 October 2014 1:14pm

Yes they have done the same at large demonstrations in the UK for years. You don't send in the riot squads until people start to drift away. And I expect it will be the same here. You don't want to be with the last few hundred demonstrators on which the authorities will leave a violent imprint. The Honk Kong Protesters appear to have commonalities with Occupy Wall Street many of whose members had the most fantastic illusions about what they were actually doing. In Honk Kong you knew they were done when the Western media highlighted their politeness.

There are no polite revolutions. Perhaps they can put it on again next year for the tourists.

VERBALWARRIOR, 03 October 2014 1:16pm

Democracy does not prevent oppression, and in most EU and western states including the UK it is actually oppressive due to the electoral systems in place.

Oppression is common in UK, though the use of English language, its definitions and meanings are used to deceive the reality.

One just needs to watch/listen to Tory conference.

The proposed freezes to public worker wage rises and to those on tax credits or even on benefits are forms of oppression, which reduces and removes peoples ability to maintain their living standards and lives. There can be no clearer reality of definition of oppression. This Tory group seek to afflict oppressive policies upon millions of people.

In UK, our first pass the post electoral system is used to oppress the views and will of a vast number of citizens, very often in UK those elected are elected by a minority of those who actually voted in total, once all opposition votes for all parties are accounted for.

All very well protesting and fighting for democracy, but at the end of the day it is the type of democracy that ultimately counts.

sydsam, 03 October 2014 1:50pm

Dear Guardian, Why pro-democracy activists and not pro-US separatist, as was labelled in Ukraine?

Hong Kong protests: Violence 'organized', Occupy Central leaders say – as it happened

Compare with Slightly Skeptical EuroMaidan Chronicles, December 2013 and Slightly Skeptical EuroMaidan Chronicles, January 2014

marion4

I'm a pro-democracy HK student. Whilst I don't agree with the views of the pro-Beijing groups, I accept that their voices have the right to exist in the city, because of something called freedom of speech. But yet these pro-Beijing groups try to stifle our voices through their fists...

(By the way, there are witness accounts saying that the pro-Beijing groups are targeting female protesters and sexually harassing them...)

canbeanybody marion4

Once the law and order deliberately breaks down by those "occupy central" activists then many Hong Kong Chinese will suffer.

This is why ever so important to maintain stability and law and order.

Those law breakers ignoring the rules and regulation but just indulge in disruption and destruction, by blocking all major roads, blocking business and traffic then the city is paralysed.

Students will miss their lessons and Hong Kong economy will be severely damaged.

That is why Hong Kong authority appeal to all of you to disperse.

Why not just heed the call?

canbeanybody

After Kiev, the Americans now think it is Chinese turn to get their deadly and nasty game.

Although there are many "occupy central" extremists do exactly what those Americans say, yet they will fail.

Arrest those nasty "occupy central" extremists who are now hidden behind. But first isolate them for the arrest. Impose heavy fines on them and impose long sentences on those most violent and notorious die hard extremists.

MikeLundun canbeanybody

Show your evidence.

canbeanybody MikeLundun

what evidence you want? The evidence the CIA met Kiev regime leaders? Or you want evidence the meeting between Americans agencies and "occupy central" extremists? Or you want evidence of meetings between "occupy central" extremists with foreign governmental officials?

They are all in the press.

It would not be that far fetched to say that they have discussed strategy and techniques.

Are you saying otherwise?

credox969

The Guardian or how to turn HK business owners, store keepers and other bread winners into "pro-beijing rule" supporters. I'm getting disgusted reading this Guardian crap

[Oct 04, 2014] Hong Kong The Radicalize Or Fold Alternative

October 04, 2014

The protest in Hong Kong, instigated by U.S. financed groups, were on the verge of ending in a fizzle.

Hong Kong protests dwindle after talks offer

Mass protests in Hong Kong appear to have lost steam after the leader of the Chinese territory refused to step down, instead offering dialogue.
...
The Hong Kong Federation of Students said in a statement early on Friday that they planned to join the talks with the government, focused specifically on political reforms. They reiterated that Leung step down, saying he "had lost his integrity".

A wider pro-democracy group that had joined the demonstrations, Occupy Central, welcomed the talks and also insisted that Leung quit.

The offer for talks, the weather and the end of a two day holiday was the point where the protests largely died down. A few diehards kept blocking streets and buildings but the end was in sight.

Remarked a political editor of a U.S. magazine:

Blake Hounshell
‏@blakehounshell

When protesters don't get at least some of what they want, they have to radicalize or fold. Key moment in Hong Kong right now.

5:36 AM - 2 Oct 2014

It seems that other people had the same thought and some idea of how to radicalize the crowd:

Hundreds of people opposed to Hong Kong's pro-democracy demonstrations converged on one of the movement's main sites Friday, prompting some of the ugliest scenes of violence yet in the past week of protests.

In the early afternoon on Friday, opponents of the demonstrations moved en masse against the occupation site in the neighborhood of Mong Kok, a popular shopping district across the harbor from Hong Kong. They dismantled tents and removed the protesters' supplies. Scuffles broke out, with reports of roving street battles between protesters and their opponents.

The predictable consequence of that attack, certainly not in the interest of the government, was a revival of the protests and a hardening of the protesters position:

Student leaders called off talks with the government – offered the previous night – accusing officials of allowing violence to be used against them. It dashed the hopes of a resolution to a mass movement that has seen tens of thousands of people take to the streets of the city at its height.

So who paid the thugs, the police says some attackers were members of criminal triads, who instigated the radicalization? The government which wants to end the protests, the businesspeople who lose money due to the blockades or some three letter agency of foreign provenience?

The government now announced that it will end the protesters' blockades of public roads and buildings by Monday. As I had warned in an earlier piece:

While earlier Color Revolutions employed mostly peaceful measures the aim now is blood in the streets and lots of infrastructure damage to weaken the forces resisting the regime change attempts. Accordingly the authorities in Hong Kong should prepare for much more than just unruly demonstrations.
Posted by b at 08:38 AM | Comments (128)

Don Bacon | Oct 4, 2014 10:13:12 AM | 3

What might have some chance of working in the West will fail in China, and Western views will fail also. Chinese, and many Asians in general, have a more benign view of centralized authority then Western democrats do. The idea of teenagers in the streets dictating to government, a higher authority, in China is doomed to fail, even given the youngsters' Western views.

P

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 4, 2014 11:33:49 AM | 7

The protesters shot themselves in the collective foot when they adopted, and then uttered, the Obama-ism "Leung must step down" AFTER he had offered to negotiate on their demands for reforms including 'universal suffrage.'

Rejecting Leung before negotiations began, and thus depriving him of the opportunity do demonstrate good faith, was an act of utter and complete dumbfuckery and makes them sound like Chinese sock-puppets of the 1%'s sock-puppet, Obama.

Gene Sharp would be proud. If they don't come to their senses quicksmart they should prepare for a prolonged bout of universal sufferage.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 4, 2014 11:54:49 AM | 8

So who paid the thugs, the police says some attackers were members of criminal triads, who instigated the radicalization?

It bears investigating who exactly these people were, but I wouldn't buy into the idea they are provocateurs necessarily.

In the face of these colour revolutions, a local mobilization of the loyal population is an absolute necessity. A country cannot simply rely on the repression of police forces against the Western-backed groups. As seen in Venezuela - a seemingly forgotten about color revolution that has failed (though the right wingers still murder with impunity) - local involvement of the population against the protestors is vital.

When government have genuine support - as the CCP does have among sectors in Hong Kong, as the Chavista's do have in Venezuela - then the people can and should be used in counter-protests to put down or restrict the scope of the foreign backed protests.

When a government does not have immediate support, like that of Yanoukovich in Ukraine, they have to rely on police for repression and this creates much worse looking scenes for the cameras, much more problems internationally.

This is a battle for the life of the country, we shouldn't reject the participation of loyal people. Calling regular people ready to reassert control of their neighborhoods without the police "thugs" I think is incorrect and unhelpful.

VE link: here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 4, 2014 12:44:48 PM | 12

China Matters has written on an interesting character in this story, "Next Media boss and China pariah Jimmy Lai Chee-ying."

Including:
--According to earlier reports, Lai and Paul Wolfowitz went on a five-day visit to Burma in June last year.
--Wolfowitz, a former Pentagon operative (Iraq war) and World Bank president, is with American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a capitalist-promoting think tank.
--Lai and Wolfowitz boarded a yacht in Sai Kung on May 27 and were not seen again for five hours.
--Lai has donated more than HK$40 million to the pan-democratic camp and legislators in Hong Kong since 2012.

Read about Lai here and here.

@3 Don Bacon:

While the general perception in the west is that Asians are in general more submissive to authorities, this in fact is hogwash. I have lived here in the US for 45 years now, and I have never seen a population more submissive to oligarchs than the sheeples (or as the Goldman Sachs called muppets) here. Since the Ronny years of Contra and Credit Union bailout conspiracies, muppets' been led through the nose on Long Term Management fiasco, Desert Storm I (and No Fly Zone II), Yugoslavia bulldoze, ME wars, color revolutions, ......, you name them. Slaughtering and destruction of humans and their habitats, one after and other. For enriching the Military/Industrial complex? I don't know, but I don't recall any of these undertaking being initiated or demanded by the muppets, or anyone I know around me. They shoved these down our throats and we swallowed--not a wimp. And look at OWS, the anger against TRAP, against ObamaCare, against bombing Syria, on and on. What did we do but rollover? How would these kinds of color revolutions work in the west that you don't think would work in China?

Denk's posts on the Umbrella Revolution in HK has been the most accurate assessments of the situation. I know because I was from HK, and still read its papers online everyday and visit at least once every year to visit family.

Posted by: OleImmigrant | Oct 4, 2014 12:47:38 PM | 13

Flashback to 2011: John McCain promises that the Arab Spring is like a virus that will spread to Moscow and Beijing. Quite a prediction, I'd say.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/11/the-arab-spring-a-virus-that-will-attack-moscow-and-beijing/248762/

Posted by: yellowsnapdragon | Oct 4, 2014 12:54:52 PM | 14

The cultivation of subversion against PRC in HK has long been around, since at least the early 1980's. I think shortly after the signing of the Sino/UK agreement on HK reversion. The large gathering supporting the Tiananman revolution in 1989 was the first sign of their success. Back around 1985,or 6, Wall Street Journal published a long interview of Jimmy Lai when he was nobody! I was surprised then why some unknown such as this bump would drew WSJ to devote a two column long interview? It soon became apparent who Jimmy was working for.

Posted by: OleImmigrant | Oct 4, 2014 1:01:00 PM | 15

Posted by: Chinese american | Oct 4, 2014 1:49:43 PM | 18

The HK media is now lamenting the economic impacts of what is happening. In reality, HK's fate as a world premier financial center had been dashed when China announced the establishment of Chien Hai in Shenzhen as the financial center back in 2012. The Chien Hai district would be a modern financial 'service' center, meaning it would serve not only the financial transaction but also the chain of services needed in making it efficient in the 21st century sense--logistics, technical support, financing and supply of talent needed for major technological undertakings, currency managements, and innovation breeding grounds vsi-a-vis Silicon valley. In my view, HK is finished. It would remain a entertainment and shopping destination for quite a while yet, due to its infra-structures and beauty. But as far as growth in economical importance to China or the world, it is done for.

Posted by: OleImmigrant | Oct 4, 2014 1:59:13 PM | 19

[Oct 04, 2014] Hong Kong protesters beaten and bloodied as thugs attack sit-in

February instructions from Ukrainian template are dusted off and reused. Good work Guardian. Reuse is a path to sustainable future ;-).
theguardian.com

pauloneill, 3 Oct 2014 21:15

message to HK students:

Don't bother - real democracy does not exist today - all you are fighting for is for an ultra-capitalist big business democracy which will leave you with someone like David Cameron.

sbabcock, 4 Oct 2014 00:19

It's incredible how talking heads on American cable news can talk with a straight face about the 'brute tactics' China is using on its people for demonstrating. What convenient lapses of recent memory...

LostInWonder, 3 Oct 2014 23:47

If protestors blocked off all major arteries approaching the West End of London and Westminster, and erected scaffolding and tents to do so so as to stop all commerce, they would be removed by police. It was made illegal to set up tents on the lawns in front of the houses do Parliament.

The students in HK block off access to government buildings and swore to prevent the chief executive getting to work to force their agenda. Attempts to remove them by police is labeled in the West as Communist brutality.

Just think about is.

And how much coverage is there of the opinions of a large part of the HK public who are against the tactics and the demands of the students so as to provide a balanced picture? I know of many friends and relations in HK who are against what the students are doing but ther is no representation of their views in the foreign press. I wonder why?

RudolfSteinerRules, 3 Oct 2014 23:42

The goal of the US in Hong Kong is clear – to turn the island into an epicenter of foreign-funded subversion with which to infect China's mainland more directly.

"Protesters of the "Occupy Central" movement in Hong Kong shout familiar slogans and adopt familiar tactics seen across the globe as part of the United States' immense political destabilization and regime change enterprise. Identifying the leaders, following the money, and examining Western coverage of these events reveal with certainty that yet again, Washington and Wall Street are busy at work to make China's island of Hong Kong as difficult to govern for Beijing as possible."

http://journal-neo.org/2014/10/01/hong-kong-s-occupy-central-is-us-backed-sedition/

spiritof1983, 3 Oct 2014 23:39

If applied the benefit of rational thought and describe truthfully the context of the picture is totally different.

In this case in Mongkok, Kowloon, the crazy fools have 'occupied' a main road junction in the middle of the district which is a very high density working class residential and shopping and restaurant area (non-luxury). Understand that the unlike western 'Occupy Movement' which is actually sit-ins (with a fancy name for re-branding an old form of visible dissention), that sit-in takes up a space but does not obstruct the functionality of the facility. In Hong Kong, the protest have morphed to blockade or near that, of selected main roads or government building complex. Especially to police movement. Kind of ironic that they then accuse the police of not coming to their aid, more so when they have taxed the police over so many areas and 24 hours a day for a week now.

This blockade action is in fact closer to the actions in Thailand past (airport siege 2006 and 2008) which were for holding the economy hostage, through foreign tourist trade, and showing the government to be powerless thereby discrediting it. This is what the 'occupy' actions in Hong Kong have morphed into. An attempt to paralyse government and key commercial area. In Mongkok, the clowns are trying to paralyse a working class shopping and eating area (Mongkok would be frequented by more Asian tourists, especially mainland China, and HK local residents than Westerners). This is pure stupidity. Of course there will be resident backlash. Hell some might be mainland tourists as well, in addition to residents who are first generation mainland migrants or HKers (especially older ones) loyal to the mainland (patriotic, as opposed to loyal to CPC which is another thing and also in play). Definitely the petty traders and taximen who would consist more of poor mainlanders will be feeling the economic pinch and be among the angry lot. Triad/secret society boldness would be more in Kowloon and New Territories than in HK Island.

This type of paralysis strategy is a form of brinkmanship. It worked in Thailand because, while the government was in the other parties hand, the armed forces and police (top echelon) was with the elite and the other party. Here in Hong Kong, the police at best is neutral, at worst more to the side of the status quo. The Army is with the other side. So playing this strategy protracted will bring out the residents against and eventually the law enforcement.

The sit-ins have to be targeted and prolonged visible dissent. Not blockade and indiscriminate and unthought one at that. The right action of leadership, is not just to advise the protestors to abandon the Mongkok occupation for Admiralty for their own safety, but to in fact go further and disavow the Mongkok group's continued occupation as being counter productive and not lead by them. In Admiralty and Causeway Bay, it has to be sit-in, not blockade of movement.

"They [the government] are trying to use the people to fight against the people. The cops are just going to stand here and watch – they are doing nothing about people breaking laws."

Of course they are. In any population there is more than one side of the argument and support. Of course the government will adjust it actions to allow its side to also show their support. Its pointless crying foul about police not upholding the law when your own action of occupation which spurs the reaction, is illegal. There is a legal way of expressing public dissent in Hong Kong. Use it.

As I wrote after the Thursday midnight ultimatum. There has to be better strategy and leadership. The 'occupy' strategy has failed. Moved to negotiations and rallying with sit-ins. The longer they 'occupy'/blockade the more local resentment will build up and more moved to express counter-protest via blue ribbon movement.


spiritof1983 Cedrik Thibert, 3 Oct 2014 23:55

".....when your thug regime...."

You are making the presumption I am Chinese. I am neither a Chinese national nor a Chinese ethnic of the diaspora. I am a Malaysian. Have posted here and regularly stated this. My old account is in fact ReaderMALAYSIA. Interestingly enough after I posted a view and approach dissenting to the common trend in the thread, post MH17 downing (that is a Malaysian carrier and I am Malaysian and I took the side of the Russian Ukrainians right to life, self defense, not our war and we should negotiate directly with the rebels to retrieve the bodies and conduct investigation), I was accused immediately by a contributor of not being a Malaysian. It seems the argument of people like you is to claim the other of being a cyberbot of the other side. Rather than to retort rationally. The key reason in this is the projection of infallibility (of the side of argument you favour) which is impossible and therefore unbelievable even to outside observers unfamiliar with the current event and place.

IXOXOXI, 3 Oct 2014 20:46

A US created Kiev re-run. Trying to force the Chinese to let up on vetting Govt candidates, and thus get a US paid stooge into power.

But the necessary moral high ground isn't forthcoming. The authorities aren't biting. D'oh!

So this 'evidence' is presented to us. The only evidence offered here of 'Thuggery' is one man trying to get home accused of physically taking on several thousand students, and a photo of someone with a bloody face.

Locals and residents now suffering due to lost business, and getting understandably angry and vocal. Even the local organized criminals (triads) are apparently losing business.

BTW, is it coincidental that the areas of unrest - around the Admiralty - centres around the location of the US embassy (consulate)? Google it.

ryinmcd IXOXOXI, 3 Oct 2014 20:49

I 'd shocked if US didn't get involved. You have to ask the citizens in Libya, Egypt, Iraq and others that are you better off today.

TONY C, 3 Oct 2014 20:38

This is mild compared to what protesters are exposed to in the United States of AmeriKKKa. Here in the US, police kill protesters. And then a grand jury is convened, and then the police are found innocent.

jackscht TONY C, 3 Oct 2014 20:41

Well, in China and Russia they don't even get to trial to be found innocent.
So don't complain too much about your lot.

illbthr22 TONY C, 3 Oct 2014 20:53

Care to remind me when the last Tianamen Square level atrocity occurred in the US?

pauloneill illbthr22, 3 Oct 2014 21:06

dude that was 26 years ago. Today's world looks a little different. Western governments have become more violent and intrusive towards their citizens while the Chinese have tried to tone it down a notch.

Amazingly I would say they are not miles apart any more. Just shows that big business ultra-capitalist democracy is relly very similar to a dictatorship.

[Oct 3, 2014] Hong Kong protests: Leaders threaten to call off talks

Fake goal for real frustration of protesters -- much like in EuroMaidan.
Oct 3, 2014 | bbc.com

Leaders of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong have threatened to call off talks with the government after demonstrators were involved in scuffles with pro-Beijing supporters.

Protesters blockading key parts of Hong Kong had earlier accepted an offer of talks from Hong Kong's Chief Executive CY Leung late on Thursday.

Protesters have been occupying parts of the city for several days. They are angry at China's plan to vet candidates for elections in 2017.

[Oct 3, 2014] The wider concerns of Hong Kong's protesters

"For middle class residents, many with passports to other countries, that's a choice they can make. But, as Mr Xie points out, many young Hong Kongers educated after 1997 find themselves trapped. "
Oct 3, 2014 | bbc.com

For the Hong Kong students thronging the streets of the Central business district this week the issue at stake has been wider democracy.

But for the thousands more young professionals living and working in the city's nearby office blocks, the protests have re-ignited some worrying memories.

It was in the late 1980s or early 90s that many Hong Kong families took out citizenship of another country. They were prompted by fears of what might happen after the 1997 handover of Hong Kong from the UK back to China.

Quotes

"That's a sizeable number of people, even though we are still talking about less than 5% of the population.
Deep down most people are concerned about bread and butter issues" -- Andy Xie, Independent economist

"You have this sector of society who identify with Western values.

"This idea comes into play when you have a situation when people are dissatisfied with Hong Kong - they have this other cultural identity too, and that leads them to think that they can land in another country."

"People are desperate and they are looking for a quick solution - I don't see that coming - so this thing is going to go on" - Andy Xie, Independent economist

In the case of Joyce Man's family it was Canada that provided a temporary refuge; as an insurance policy in case things turned nasty in Hong Kong.

Ms Man, 30, was a teenager at the time of the handover. She moved with her parents and sister to Canada in 1989, and after obtaining Canadian citizenship, they later moved back to Hong Kong.

But now, like many of her contemporaries, Ms Man is thinking about moving again - and this time it could be for good.

"I think like a certain section of the Hong Kong population I grew up with the idea that you can leave," says Ms Man, who is now a writer of a popular blog: Criss Cross Culture.

"Hong Kongers are also outward looking. Before '97 many people left to go to England, Australia , Canada, or the USA.

... ... ...

Veteran Hong Kong and China expert, Jonathan Fenby, was editor of the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong during the handover in 1997.

He says there are many different currents flowing under the surface of the current unhappiness with life in Hong Kong. One of the key issues is the identity of the citizens - how they see themselves.

Mr Fenby points out that surveys of the population by Hong Kong's universities going back over the past 20 years have frequently found that Hong Kong people do not identify themselves as being purely Chinese - most say instead that they are "Hong Kongers" or "Hong Kong Chinese".

And that makes the leadership in Beijing uneasy, he believes.

"A very large proportion of the people living in Hong Kong at the moment are the children or grandchildren of refugees from mainland China," says Mr Fenby.

"This is a more fluid population, and that is not something the authorities in Beijing like very much.

"Because they like the idea of Chinese national unity, Chinese stability and the Han race sticking together - and the Hong Kongers are different."

And it's the feeling that they want to maintain the differences between Hong Kong and China that appears to be driving many Hong Kongers onto the streets. But it could also drive many away from Hong Kong altogether if events take a wrong turn.

For middle class residents, many with passports to other countries, that's a choice they can make. But, as Mr Xie points out, many young Hong Kongers educated after 1997 find themselves trapped.

"It's difficult for the people here to leave now," he says. "Hong Kong introduced mother tongue education in '98 - in Cantonese.

People are less likely to speak either English or Mandarin than before the handover. So it is very difficult for people to emigrate."

"People are desperate and they are looking for a quick solution - I don't see that coming - so this thing is going to go on. ''

[Oct 02, 2014] Hong Kong Government's Strategy on Protesters Wait Them Out

From comments: "I would like to congratulate the Chinese government on conferring much more democracy to the Hong Kong people merely 17 years after it took over than the British had done over the previous 150 years of its rule. At least according to the newly proposed law Hong Kong people can cast votes in an election for their top leader. During the 150 year of preceding British rule they had no such luxury but to passive accept whatever Governor London appointed. The Obama administration should criticize and condemn the state of dictatorship imposed on Hong Kong during every single day of the British rule right up to the last day in 1997! "
Oct 02, 2014 | NYTimes.com

HONG KONG - Crowds of pro-democracy protesters thinned noticeably by Thursday morning after the Hong Kong government adopted a more conciliatory stance of trying to wait out the demonstrators.

Downtown streets that had been fairly crowded on previous nights began to empty late Wednesday, as many went home after days outdoors in heat that had been sweltering even by Hong Kong's tropical standards. But many predicted that crowds would build again later on Thursday, as demonstrators returned after showers, sleep and hot meals.

"Compared to yesterday morning, I think there is a smaller crowd," Venus Wong, a 22-year-old office worker, said as she sat in front of the local government headquarters with two friends, eating a McDonald's breakfast at midmorning. "But I think more people will come back later in the day."

A protester with a defaced cutout of Leung Chun-ying, the chief executive of Hong Kong. Analysts say his removal from office may help Beijing placate protesters.

Thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators gathered in Hong Kong on Monday to continue calls for free and open elections for the city's chief executive in 2017.

But on Thursday, The People's Daily, the main newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party, issued the most severe official warning yet from Beijing about the protests, saying that Hong Kong could succumb to "chaos."

What Prompted the Hong Kong Protests?

Hong Kong belongs to China and operates under a policy of "one country, two systems." Hong Kong, a British colony until 1997, when China resumed sovereignty, is governed by a mini-constitution, the Basic Law.

The city maintains an independent judiciary, and residents enjoy greater civil liberties than residents of mainland China. Hong Kong has a robust tradition of free speech.

Democratic groups say Beijing has chipped away at those freedoms, citing an election law proposed last month that would limit voting reforms.

China had promised free elections for Hong Kong's chief executive in 2017. But the government rejected a call for open nominations, instead proposing that candidates would continue to be chosen by a committee dominated by Beijing.

The current city leader, Leung Chun-ying, has clashed with the pro-democracy opposition. After the crackdown on protesters, some called for his resignation.

In a front-page editorial, the newspaper accused the movement Occupy Central With Love and Peace - the group that led the pro-democracy campaigns that preceded the mass protests - of "blaspheming" the rule of law in the city.

"The actions of 'Occupy Central' have flagrantly violated the laws and regulations of Hong Kong, severely obstructed traffic and disrupted social order," the editorial said.

Hong Kong's chief executive and his advisers have decided, with support from China's leaders, that their best strategy is to wait and hope that the disruption of everyday life will turn local public opinion against the demonstrators.

Leung Chun-ying, the chief executive, and his advisers do not plan to use force to disperse the demonstrations, but they also will not hold negotiations with protest leaders for now, said people with a detailed knowledge of the policies of the Hong Kong government and Beijing. Nor has there been any serious discussion of Mr. Leung's resigning, as the protesters, who have numbered in the tens of thousands, are demanding.

Thursday was a traditional Chinese holiday that follows a lunar calendar, and it coincidentally came right after the National Day holiday this year. As a result, many people had expected the rallies to remain just as large on Thursday as on Wednesday.

Demonstrators were making a bigger effort by midmorning Thursday to minimize their disruption to commerce. Ken Lee, a 17-year-old hotel worker, sat on a gray plastic stool next to a row of safety cones - commandeered earlier from the police - that partly blocked the entrance to Queens Road, an important commercial street in Hong Kong. He explained that he was supposed to remove the cones not just for emergency vehicles that might come along, but also for delivery vehicles. Moments later, a newspaper deliveryman on a bicycle and a large bakery truck appeared. Mr. Lee politely moved the cones. The city's leadership has concluded that it would be pointless for Mr. Leung to sit down with protest leaders, although a few informal contacts have been made with democracy advocates and a few of Mr. Leung's friends have recommended negotiations. Beijing has given the Hong Kong government only a little room to negotiate the details of how the next chief executive will be elected in 2017 - the fundamental issue for the demonstrators.

"The government can tolerate the blockade of three or four or five areas and see how the demonstrations go, so the only way the demonstrators can go is to escalate it - spread it to more places, and then they cannot sustain it - or they will become violent," said a person who is involved in the Hong Kong government's decision-making.

An adviser to the government said the officials believed that Mr. Leung should bide his time. "The consensus is to wait and patiently deal with the crisis - it is not easy, but we shall do our best to resolve it peacefully," the adviser said.

The strategy carries risks for the local and national governments because it in effect cedes momentum to the protesters and allows them to drive events. For China, continuing protests could inspire more dissent on the mainland, despite its censors' attempts to block discussion of the events. Chinese Human Rights Defenders, an advocacy group, said Wednesday that China had already detained or intimidated dozens of people for perceived transgressions like expressing support for the protesters on social media.

For the Hong Kong government, the risk is that the city's image as a stable financial center will be harmed and that the government's intransigence, rather than the protesters' actions, will be blamed for the disruption.

"If he believes that if he keeps on dragging on without answering to our demands then people will go away, forget about it," said Mr. Chan, who added that protesters would skip work to remain in the streets. "If they are not afraid of tear gas, I don't think they will be afraid of their supervisors and bosses," he said.

The demonstration leaders have insisted that they will pursue only nonviolent civil disobedience. In terms of public opinion, violence would be risky for either side: When the outnumbered police resorted to tear gas on Sunday night, they provoked widespread anger, and more people came to protest on Monday. Yet after the police largely withdrew from the downtown district for the past three days, that indignation seemed to have attenuated by Thursday.

The lack of a cohesive leadership among the protesters, combined with the ambitious nature of their demands - Mr. Leung's resignation, fully open elections for his successor - have prompted Hong Kong officials to conclude that the protest leaders are unlikely to accept half-measures in any negotiations.

The wait-them-out strategy appears to have the support of the city's influential tycoons, many of whom are out of town during this holiday week. The tycoons derive the bulk of their income from leasing out their many commercial, office and residential properties, which demand Hong Kong's famously high rents even as protesters restrict access to many businesses.

The hope of the Hong Kong government, and of Beijing, is that this economic pressure will turn owners of small businesses and other members of the middle class against the demonstrators. Officials hope that the public will see the protesters as nuisances, not heroes of democracy, as the students occupying Tiananmen Square in Beijing became in 1989 before China's brutal crackdown.

"This is a Cultural Revolution revival, this is not Tiananmen - they think they are doing the right thing, so they can infringe on other people's interests and therefore make the government kowtow to them," said the person heavily involved in the government's decisions.

President Obama and Susan E. Rice, his national security adviser, raised the protests while meeting Wednesday at the White House with Wang Yi, China's foreign minister. In a statement, the White House said Mr. Obama and Ms. Rice had told Mr. Wang they were monitoring the situation and "expressed their hope that differences between Hong Kong authorities and protesters will be addressed peacefully."

steve, Florida 20 days ago

If any fool actually believes a 17 year old will accomplish anything by "standing up" to the Chinese Communists. I'd like to offer a bridge to them in Brooklyn, at a fair price of course.

Are all New Yorkers so gullible as to believe any of this fairy tale?

China will tolerate this for a while -- then crush them. Dictatorships do not like bestowing freedoms to its' subjects, it gets in their way.

American Expat, Vancouver

I would like to congratulate the Chinese government on conferring much more democracy to the Hong Kong people merely 17 years after it took over than the British had done over the previous 150 years of its rule. At least according to the newly proposed law Hong Kong people can cast votes in an election for their top leader. During the 150 year of preceding British rule they had no such luxury but to passive accept whatever Governor London appointed.

The Obama administration should criticize and condemn the state of dictatorship imposed on Hong Kong during every single day of the British rule right up to the last day in 1997!

CM, California 21 days ago

The strategy of the Hong Kong government has high likelihood of working in part because the fight is over an abstract concept of election procedure. The day the protesting public can rally around a popular candidate that Beijing dislike, it would be a different story. When majority of the voting public either refuse to take part in an election or write-in the name of candidate they really want, it would be quite impossible to ignore.

Of course, it is more difficult to develop real leadership than street protest but to achieve real democracy, there must be strong and visionary leaders.

Taichi Yang, Hong Kong 21 days ago

I think that this "Wait them out" strategy is the right decision, yes, only for now.

If you look at those so called organizers (you rightly pointed out that there is no real leaders of the movement), they won't give up and they do want to escalate.

Up front, they bet on the Chinese government to be "more civilized" or "don't have the guts to crackdown" (well, using Xi's comments on the break up of the Soviet Union: men with no balls!).

What I don't understand is: this movement was planned more than a year ago and the government has been "fighting against it or trying to deter it, I can't believe that the Chinese government does not have an "action plan" to deal with it? The "worst case" scenario should have been considered and action plan mapped out... or even prepared/drilled about. The HK police action is an evidence of this planning. Of course, they did not know that the tear gas could not disperse the crowd and it would invite more people to the streets. However, the Chinese government should have prepared for this... if not, how can you expect the White Paper being issued right before the Occupy Central sign up/demonstration?

Or the NPC decision? I would be really surprised if the Chinese government has not considered this outcome and be prepared for it. If this is the case, then the issue of the White Paper and the NPC decision were all dumb decisions.

Niu Chang, Washington 21 days ago

I heard two days ago, President Xi has refused request from field to crackdown and gave the following firm two sentence order -- "No compromise; no bloodshed".

This is the best, smart "move" under the circumstances --completely ignoring the protest, and refusing to meet or even listen to any of the protesters, and carrying out the business as usual. Pretty soon, the protesters will have to find some face-saving ladders to climb down to answer to Hong KOng citizens and business community about the mess and economic loss they have caused.

Chinese leadership simply has nothing to lose but everything to gain -- it will set an unprecedented example for any future protesters - China have the determination, patience and national will to rule Hong Kong according to the the national interests of China, peacefully, but firmly, without any bloodshed and without any compromise.

Quan, Atlanta 21 days ago

Many references to 1989 have been made recently. Well, I was in the Tiananmen square in late May 1989. As a high school student, I participated in the demonstration enthusiastically. Looking back, the biggest mistake made by the student leaders was not to compromise at all, in any shape or form, with the government. In the end, the moment did not advance the goal of a more democratic society. Democracy is the art of compromise and politics is the art of the possible.

The current demand that the central government reverses itself is not realistic. It is better to push for gradual changes in the makeup of the nominating committee. Forcing a showdown now, just like shutdown the US federal government to overturn ObamaCare, is a fool's errand.

Michael, Carlsbad, CA 21 days ago

If the government plans to wait out the protesters then the protesters need a different strategy. I cannot think of any really good ones. The target would ideally be those that gain the most from the current system and are against more democracy.

Would it be possible to flood these entities with requests, such as opening and closing bank accounts, setting up and closing accounts, waiting in line for repeated deposits and withdrawals. Spending a lot of time in their stores. Filing legal paperwork with anti-democratic legal firms that has to be responded to. Instead of sitting around, could the protesters be calling the phone lines and help lines of the governments supporters to request information or to convey information that they are legally entitled to do. Over and over and over again.

When the mechanisms of profit that are used to bribe the rich into compliance with the regime are suddenly at issue then the government might become more willing to compromise. This is a peaceful yet effective form of civil disobedience. On another note, have you noticed the comment effort of government stooges with seemingly English names.

There are thought to be over 100,000 full time censors in China, and some have been assigned to "manage" comments in newspapers. A recent research study indicated that you can say anything in China except you cannot suggest anything that organizes the people. Clever.

chet380, west coast

The leaders of the protesters have all received money from the NED/NDI/CIA -- another US-funded attempt at a "color revolution".

mingsphinx, Singapore

Can the Chinese government yield to the demands of the protesters?

Such protests have happened many times before and they have always come to nothing. When mass demonstrations occur, the Chinese government will put on hold all 'reforms' and simply wait out the storm. Sooner or later the fervor dies out as the needs of everyday life intrudes and people go back to the pressure cooker life they lead.

Hong Kong has become a very Chinese city and soon it will be just another Chinese city. The Chinese have always interpreted 'one country two systems' as a way to merge different polities into one unit with the central government in China calling the shots.

In my opinion, nothing much is happening. All the power, including basic control over Hong Kong's economic well-being, is in the hands of the Chinese government. They will no repeat the mistake of Tiananmen because they do not have to. All the Chinese have to do is nudge Hong Kong's cheese a little and everyone will fall in line.

CAF, Seattle 21 days ago

And, again, where is the American response? The American political "leadership" just backed a coup in Ukraine and downgraded Russia-US relations to the worst they've been since 1985, and sanctioned Russia to the point where Western Europe is seeing a cold winter in front of it.

This was some under the banner of "freedom" from autocracy and corruption. Why is Hong Kong different? China is far worse than Russia

Oh, wait, American corporations haven't spent the last thirty years offshoring jobs and production to Russia because the oppressed people there cost pennies to the dollar compared to Americans. I forgot. That's right, American corporations now rely on the oppressed labor of China, and the government there could really wreck the bottom line for some people.

Xiao, New Haven

I think different voices are good. However as a mainlander, I care more about how mainlanders' voices can be channeled out without suddenly paralyzing cities,...cause people will starve after the resulted economic blow.

I think Hong Kong government/police 's reaction is very appropriate. Many compare it with Occupy Wall street, however, the later only occupied parks and other area allowed by the law. If they tried to block 5th ave. or marched into congress buildings. Would they be stopped?

Of course, Taiwan's government is more tolerant, who did let students occupy their buildings. Their leaders are fully elected with democracy, however also least favored...

SpecialAgentA, New York City

As Occupy found in NYC (and elsewhere), the wait-out strategy is effectively checkmate. Massive corporate propaganda will increasingly vilify the protestors as economic pressure mounts. Besides militarized police and security armies, the institutions also have all the money. Unlike the diverse group of protestors, institutions only allow the most slavishly loyal and vetted to rise to positions of power. (Non-sociopaths need not apply.) To summarize: the machine cannot be shut down.

As an added bonus, those who had enough and thought that real change on behalf of the collective betterment of society was possible have now been clearly identified by those in power as dissenters or a "contagion".

As such, they will find themselves replaced at work by those with less moral sense, empathy or social decency. It is amusing to watch Western corporate media try to spin this all in a way that ignores the links between the Arab Spring, Occupy, Turkey and Occupy Central. As with Occupy, it's hard to watch the ideals and hope of some of our best youth being boiled out of them, all to be tossed away by the madness of state capitalism and the "elite" who rule such a system.

[Oct 02, 2014] The (NED Financed) Hong Kong Riots

As EuroMaidan had shown, genuine, authentic protest against neoliberalism can be easily converted into neoliberal coup d'état. Quotes from comments: "As documented by Tony Carlucci here many of the Hong Kong protest leaders have a long of contacts with NED/NDI." ... "HK looks like a Ukraine rerun: once again 'corruption' is the excuse to wage a color revolution...where the end result will be worse corruption and more oligarchs"
September 29, 2014 | Comments (205)

Some organized "student groups" in Hong Kong tried to occupy government buildings and blocked some streets. The police did what it does everywhere when such things happen. It used anti-riot squads, pepper spray and tear gas to prevent occupations and to clear the streets.

The "western" media are making some issue about this as if "western" governments would behave any differently.

The alleged issue in question is the election of new Hong Kong chief executive in 2017. According to Hong Kong's basic law, which was implemented when Britain gave up its dictatorship over the colony, there will be universal suffrage - everyone will be allowed to vote - but the candidates for the position will have to go through some pre-screening by a commission. This is what China had promised and this is what the students, falsely claiming that China is backtracking from its promises, want to change.

Peter Lee aka Chinahand has an excellent piece on the issue at Asia Times Online. But Lee is making one mistake in that he does not consider outside influence:

Occupy Hong Kong decided to light it, starting with a class boycott and demonstrations organized by the Hong Kong Federation of Students. And, since I'm never afraid to mix a metaphor, the Hong Kong government poured fuel on the fire by pepper-spraying and teargassing it.

Who really "decided to light this"? To me the protests, and the "western" reporting about it, have the distinct smell not of tear gas but of some expensive Color Revolution perfume of "western" origin.

So lets look up the usual source of such exquisite fragrance. The 2012 annual report of the U.S. government financed National Endowment of Democracy, aka the CCA - Central Color-Revolution Agency, includes three grants for Hong Kong one of which is new for 2012 and not mentioned in earlier annual reports:

National Democratic Institute for International Affairs - $460,000

To foster awareness regarding Hong Kong's political institutions and constitutional reform process and to develop the capacity of citizens - particularly university students - to more effectively participate in the public debate on political reform, NDI will work with civil society organizations on parliamentary monitoring, a survey, and development of an Internet portal, allowing students and citizens to explore possible reforms leading to universal suffrage.

So the U.S. government in 2012 (2013 numbers are not yet available) hands over nearly half a million to "develop the capacity" of "university students" related to the issue of "universal suffrage" in the election of Hong Kong's chief executive.

Two years after the money starts to flow from the U.S. government university students in Hong Kong provoke street riots with demands exactly on the issue the U.S. government money wanted to highlight.

That is just some curious coincidence - right?

---

PS (1): There is no reason to believe that a majority of the people in Hong Kong are supporting the U.S. induced demands of the "students". Hong Kong has some 7 million inhabitants. Ten to twenty thousands protesting amounts to some rather marginal 0.2% of the population.

PS (2): We noted earlier that the new Color Revolution scheme 2.0 - see Libya, Syria, Ukraine - now includes lots of violence:

Color revolutions in the old form had become too obvious a scheme to be of further use. The concept was therefore extended to include intensive use of force and mercenaries and to support those forces from the outside with weapons, ammunition, training and other means.

While earlier Color Revolutions employed mostly peaceful measures the aim now is blood in the streets and lots of infrastructure damage to weaken the forces resisting the regime change attempts. Accordingly the authorities in Hong Kong should prepare for much more than just unruly demonstrations.

PS (3): The NDI through which the NED money was funneled is the Democratic Party arm for regime change campaigns. It also does quite a bit of other Hong Kong meddling by financing various other organizations. Such foreign agents need to be restrained.

JohnH | Sep 29, 2014 1:27:21 PM | 2

Let's not forget that John McCain is COB of the National Republican Institute, which receives the majority of NED money doled out by the State Department.

McCain is also a member of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, the Armed Services Committee, and the Homeland Security Committee.

This incestuous relationship between the executive and legislative branches is not something foreseen in the Constitution and should be banned. It raises the question of who is working for whom--McCain for Obama, or Obama for McCain. (Not that it makes any difference in Obama's increasingly public neocon policy positions.)

Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 29, 2014 1:35:29 PM | 3

One certainly doesn't need 3 guesses to suspect whether the people behind HK's 'troubles' are the Usual Suspects. I'm genuinely curious to see how China plays this - aside from the Tienanmen Option. Vlad booted several Yankee NGO's out of Russia a few years ago (for violating WRITTEN agreements to refrain from certain specified activities; would you believe?).

The spooks left on such short notice that they had to leave things behind which would have left with them if their departure was more leisurely. I'm treating this as a test to see whether China & Russia, together, can outsmart the regime changers, or whether they're unbeatable - like the US Military....
LOL.

Where-Wolf | Sep 29, 2014 2:39:59 PM | 11

While the Empire runs simulataneous destabilization ops in Hong Kong and Xinxang, the mind control grid gives lotsa love to Ali Babba and its techno-fascist CEO on 60 Minutes. When you're allowed to raise 25 billion on US markets and your compatriots own trillions in potentially worthless US paper, you are compromised and/or dependent. It seems only Vlad so much as considers the possibility of up turning the NWO apple cart and I'm not even sure about that.

The promise to China goes like this: support Zion and we'll keep paying interest and rent with our worthless paper.

Will China take this 'deal' or will they do exactly as Deng did in Tiananmen? Things worked out pretty good for the PRC leadership after 1989. Does the belligerent faction hold any sway? Someone might be itching to teach 'Democracy' advocates a lesson.

Don Bacon | Sep 29, 2014 3:37:30 PM | 12

The HKFS Declaration for Students' Strike -
(extracts)

And shockingly, the government is insolent enough to simply ignore the people's voices. In other words, the nominating committee, which is to a great extent controlled by the capitalists locally and from the mainland, will continue to turn a deaf ear to all kinds of rights and welfare we legitimately called for!

Beijing has removed the right for Hong Kongers to determine their future, and handed it to a committee of Beijing loyalists and tycoons with vested commercial and political interests. They have ignored our call for the right to a Chief Executive who is representative of Hong Kong's interests at large.

At this rate, Hong Kong is doomed to remain to be one of the cities in the world with the most ridiculously wide wealth gap. Millions of our people would live under the poverty line, and the enactment of universal retirement security or standard working hours policies would be nowhere in sight.

--The Hong Kong Federation of Students, 10 September 2014

Demian | Sep 29, 2014 3:59:10 PM | 14

@ben #8:

It's interestiyng that #universalsuffrage is one of the three main hashtags for the Hong Kong protests, given that it is mentionined in the 2012 NED report that b quotes.

Peter Lee writes in the post b links to:

Clearly, the PRC's envisioned terminus (the "ultimate aim") of the democratic reform line is universal suffrage to vote for candidates put forth by a nominating committee, not universal suffrage in the nomination as well as election process, which is the Occupy Hong Kong movement's demand.
Americans do not have universal suffrage in the latter sense. Because of the corruption caused by TV commercials in election campaigns being legal, the 0.01% get to nominate political candidates for major positions.

jayc | Sep 29, 2014 4:02:28 PM | 15

The Chinese government relies on surveillance and informant networks to identify and block potential challenges to its political equilibrium. The one-party system is prone to corruption and lack of accountability, and is resistant to genuine grassroots reform efforts.

That said, programs like the NED, starting from assumptions which are condescending and arrogant, do indeed meddle in the internal affairs of other nations - and serve a counter-productive role in that they allow the authorities of a target nation to assume and proclaim any political unrest as the direct result of foreign intervention (NED funded or not).

NED mission statements usually overflow with feel-good nostrums about the will of the people and transparency - but as Ukraine shows, those concepts can and will be dropped at convenience.

Comparing the NED Ukraine mission statement with the actions and intent of the coup government reveals that the supposed intent of the NED project couldn't be further away from being realized and in fact was dealt a disastrous setback by the coup - yet the organization has been silent or quietly supportive of the coup regime.

Don Bacon | Sep 29, 2014 4:09:37 PM | 16

Ralph Nader wrote a book, Crashing The Party, about trying to counter the two-party juggernaut in the US. The states have restrictive requirements about getting on the ballot, they wouldn't allow Nader to even sit in the audience at the "presidential debates," etc. "I asked one British reporter what could possibly occupy him hour after hour, and he replied: 'Well, you try and garnish the dullards a bit as best you can.'"

Don Bacon | Sep 29, 2014 4:33:16 PM | 17

One party, two party -- there's little difference because in the US the R's and the D's go after the same voters and similar money, and the "elections" end up being on irrelevant issues (by design) as promoted by establishment media.

Then add in gerrymandering, where most of the Ins stay in, and you get declining participation in elections, 62% in the last presidential, less in off-years.

Seamus Padraig | Sep 29, 2014 6:11:15 PM | 25

@21, Coldy von Moldy:

I don't remember OWS knocking over the US Govt. Do you? That usually requires a little foreign help.

And if that movement were operating in the belly of beast, that would require a LOT of foreign help.

brian | Sep 29, 2014 6:16:56 PM | 26

this appeared on Pravda

US backed colour revolution in Hong Kong:

'The leaders of the protest movement "Occupy Central", which organizes in Hong Kong, various public events with the requirements of the democratization of the management system, pre-workshops held in the "Hong Kong-American Center."

It is noteworthy that they were trained in the spring and summer campaign began. This information is leaked to the media. Officially stated purpose of the nonprofit organization is "to promote mutual understanding between the Chinese and the Americans", ITAR-TASS reported.

Pravda.Ru, that it is a social movement in Hong Kong, which formally aims to reform the electoral system, a special area (not to recall the NGO "Voice").

During the workshops, some international experts taught them the tactics of protest actions, negotiation strategies with the authorities in a large-scale popular uprisings, were isolated from the list of political demands points from which in any case should not be abandoned, says Chinese newspaper "Huanqiu Shibao".

Head of the "Hong Kong-American Center," Morton Holbrook appointed to this position at the end of last year, is "an important spy," about 30 years in the American intelligence agencies, says "Huanqiu Shibao." As noted in the article, Holbrook, as well as Hong Kong media mogul Jimmy Lai, a sponsor opposition, close to the former Minister of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.

"One gets the impression that the United States-based" Hong Kong-American center "is trying to use the experience of Eastern European" color revolutions "in Hong Kong in order to influence the internal situation," - emphasizes the newspaper.

Pravda.Ru recalls that color revolutions are called "non-violent" overthrow the government.
http://www.pravda.ru/news/world/asia/25-09-2014/1228147-Cina-0/

harry law | Sep 29, 2014 6:22:45 PM | 28

"Hong Kong has some 7 million inhabitants. Ten to twenty thousands protesting amounts to some rather marginal 0.2% of the population".

Islamic State has between 15 to 20,000 fighters yet they are just 1 mile from Baghdad entering the suburbs http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2773268/ISIS-militants-fighting-Iraqi-government-forces-just-six-miles-Baghdad-despite-Western-airstrikes-against-terror-group.html Are these people supermen?

the Iraqi army is over 200,000 strong the numerous Shia militias number in the many 10's of thousands, where are they?

rjj | Sep 29, 2014 6:37:04 PM | 29

Meanwhile ....

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/tdsb-trustees-moving-to-end-controversial-partnership-with-confucius-institute/article20821968/

http://www.economist.com/blogs/analects/2014/09/confucius-institutes

Half a million dollars in one year is not much. I should think the US spends that on "democracy" in each and every member of the United Nations. Nothing compared with the $5 billion spent by Nuland in Ukraine, which if averaged out is more than $200 million a year.

Alexno | Sep 29, 2014 7:15:48 PM | 30

Half a million dollars in one year is not much. I should think the US spends that on "democracy" in each and every member of the United Nations. Nothing compared with the $5 billion spent by Nuland in Ukraine, which if averaged out is more than $200 million a year.

Alexno | Sep 29, 2014 7:22:46 PM | 31

re 28. Are these people supermen? the Iraqi army is over 200,000 strong the numerous Shia militias number in the many 10's of thousands, where are they?

ISIS are sitting in Sunni villages outside Baghdad. They don't have a hope of getting into the city, because Baghdad is almost entirely Shi'a these days.

Actually yes, they probably are as near to supermen as you can get. They are feared, like the Mongols were, and the Israelis used to be.

Farflungstar | Sep 29, 2014 7:32:34 PM | 34

@27

Sorely needed! Ironic to have "these" people trying to open up the average US person's eyes, I'll take it from wherever I can get. Can't wait to hear US pols and pundits crying about it.

@28

I had wondered that also. ISIS is like God...or a strange ghost army no once can quite pin down, except for Amrikans on der Homefront looking under their beds because Faux News and their ilk, that's all their mouthpieces can talk about.

Immune they are to the bullets and bombs of the Iraq military and US air strikes, invisible to satellite imagery as convoys pf pickups cross wide open stretches of desert, and apparently, absent completely are any MOSSAD, CIA, Jordanian, Turkish, KSA-backed spooks, spies, infiltrators and informants to disrupt forthcoming plans.

Keep it on a low boil until after the Nov. midterms' then President Redline can go back to doing what he does best - killing people and making shit up as he goes along.

brian | Sep 29, 2014 8:08:29 PM | 35

dh | Sep 29, 2014 4:47:46 PM | 20

oligarches and capitalists? when they are being funded by oligarches and capitalists.

HK looks like a Ukraine rerun: once again 'corruption' is the excuse to wage a colour revolution...where the end result will be worse corruption and more oligarchs

the guy who is @GazaGlobal (tweets on gaza) has been supporting the HK patsies

brian | Sep 29, 2014 8:14:47 PM | 36

ive just tweeted this page to @waiminglo and ask why he is a front for US NED

people should do the same ...put pressure on him

dh | Sep 29, 2014 8:44:34 PM | 37

@35 I'm not sure this is Maidan again. That turned violent quite quickly. You need something like Pravyi Sektor to get a real response from the police. Don't see that in Hong Kong.

If Beijing handles it carefully it could end peacefully.

brian | Sep 29, 2014 9:07:48 PM | 38

dh | Sep 29, 2014 8:44:34 PM | 37

no this is another maidan....which also began peacefully before local and imported snipers took over.

cant wait for the snipers to appear as they did in Egypt, venezuela

http://www.globalresearch.ca/unknown-snipers-and-western-backed-regime-change/27904

Demian | Sep 29, 2014 9:14:53 PM | 39

@dh #37:

I agree. I don't think this is going anywhere, so I don't see the point of stirring up these protests. The US State Department just can't help itself.

There was a pretty big turnout at the demo. I am suprised that so many Hong Kong students let themselves get fooled.

Don Bacon | Sep 29, 2014 10:09:01 PM | 41

We've had huge demos in the US that didn't affect anything. Hundreds of thousands of people.
Aren't these mostly college kids blowin' it off?

denk | Sep 29, 2014 11:15:25 PM | 42

ah, the ubiquitous ned !

but dont forget hk has been the gateway to destabilisation of china since the opium war, its a virtual homeground of mi6/cia cunts.

in 1997 those perfidious albions literally passed a trojan horse back to china, laden with hk born n bred wogs, fukus patsies in all walks of life. a perfect hotbed for color rev.

ex mi6 spy Baroness Park

* MI6 uses traditional spying methods and ''a few new ones'' was ''very good'' at disruptive or covert action* [1] ;-)

snowden giving out limited handout...

*eah. I could be rendered by the CIA, I could have people come after me, or any of their third party partners, you know. They work closely with a number of other nations. Or, you know, they could pay off the Triads, or any, any of their agents or assets. We've got a CIA station just up the road in the consulate here in Hong Kong,* [2]

as if we need a *whistleblower* to tell us hk is clawing with cia, mi6 !

[1]
http://www.scmp.com/article/52872/former-spy-chief-reveals-mi6-targets-china

[2]
http://news.genius.com/Edward-snowden-interview-on-nsa-whistleblowing-full-transcript-annotated#note-1857386

ToivoS | Sep 29, 2014 11:18:41 PM | 43

For some reason I do not think that China will let any color revolution spin out of control. They have been paying attention to what has been happening in eastern Europe. There is also something else going on in China today.

The new government has been vigorously pursuing an anti-corruption campaign. It is very difficult to figure out who is being targeted right now but I suspect that the campaign is being directed toward wealthy capitalist (and their allies in the government) and not just corrupt officials.

The government is working hard to prevent the emergence of any oligarchies that might compete for political power. They must see what happened in Russia not to say the mess Ukraine has become.

Putin spent a decade trying to reverse the political power of the Russian oligarchs and it is still uncertain if he succeeded.

Demian | Sep 30, 2014 12:47:58 AM | 44

Very interesting article about Japan: Japan as an American Client State

let this sink in: Washington managed, without the use of violence, to manipulate the Japanese political system into discarding a reformist cabinet. The party that had intended to begin clearing up dysfunctional political habits that had evolved over half a century of one-party rule lost its balance and bearings, and never recovered. Hatoyama's successor, Kan Naoto, did not want the same thing happening to him, and distantiated himself from the foreign policy reformists, and his successor in turn, Yoshihiko Noda, helped realign Japan's bureaucracy precisely to that of the United States where roughly it had been for half a century. By calling for an unnecessary election, which everyone knew the DPJ would lose, he brought the American-blessed LDP back to power to have Japan slide back into its normal client state condition, essentially answerable, even if only tacitly, to Washington's wishes.

Where earlier a China policy of friendly relations was being forged, there was suddenly nothing.

Almand | Sep 30, 2014 12:53:05 AM | 45

China has a great deal of experience handling internal unrest. The Chinese government spends more on internal security than defense suppressing strikes and riots (180,000 such incidents in 2010). Most of these "incidents" are actions taken by those exploited or left behind by China's great capitalist experiment. A lot of them also take place in the factories of Western interests, so it's in everyone's "interest" to ignore them.

Nobody wants to see rustic, unsophisticated dirty faced miners and workers asking for mundane things like higher wages (although the Xi government may be much more receptive to these demands in the near future) when there are bright, fresh-faced, Westernized Hong Kong students protesting for something glorious like democracy!

nomas | Sep 30, 2014 2:51:48 AM | 46

"The "western" media are making some issue about this as if "western" governments would behave any differently"

Oh the "western" (American) police would come in blazing with live ammo. You kiddin?

Sunny Jim R | Sep 30, 2014 3:37:04 AM | 47

You bet lots of the student protesters are there for the p**** and beer plus something to do on a a day off, a few care about the politics, maybe the US has groomed a few abbie hoffman, jerry rubin, tim leary types for misdirection. where is the smart money on this?

denk | Sep 30, 2014 6:28:25 AM | 49

what did neocon wolfowitz and mark simon the spook talk with jimmy lai, the shady financier of the hk *democratic movement* in lai's pte yacht ? [1]
u bet it aint about the weather !

incidentally, wolfowicz was anwar ibrahim's mentor in that zwo outfit aei [2].
for the uninitiated, anwar is zwo's man in malaysia.
no sooner than he was convicted of sodomy in mar this yr when mh370 got *disappeared.*
those who think that two mal airliners got zapped in less than six months is sheer *coincidence* would do well to take a look into the anwar saga and fukus decades old covert wars against malaysia. -- [3]

[1]
http://www.chinadailyasia.com/hknews/2014-06/20/content_15142785.html

[2]
http://www.aei.org/article/society-and-culture/religion/anwar-ibrahim/

[3]
http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2007/04/22/gores-racist-assault-against-malaysia/
http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/paul-wolfowitz-al-gore-mat-king-leather-and-the-strange-case-of-mister-john-malott-is-he-lonely-and-frustrated-or-just-well-paid/

ChipNikh | Sep 30, 2014 6:47:20 AM | 50

21

OWS was a displacement operation, the magician's 'brilliant object'. When The Seeing Eye of Mordor glimpsed, in the wake of 'Grampa War Bucks - Princess See It From Here' defeat in 2008, amid the concomitant wipeout of US equities and 401ks, a rising phoenix of the Teabag Movement, seeking to sever the cord between NYC and WADC-NOVA, and therefore, as dangerous as the Tango were to the Muj in Afghanistan, The Chosen moved more brilliantly than we give them credit for.

The Blue Team created 'Occupy Wall Street', it's that simple. Directly athwart American Tealiban's march to Wall Street, bent on lynching The Chosen, The Right Stuff laid a psychic moat of radical, rebellious unwashed hoi polloi, a nocuous atheist antitrope to the American Tealiban's gray beards and blue hairs, hoping to pull the Temple pillars down.

And golly gajammit, it worked!

The Chosen laughed in derision at OWS, pissed out the windows on them. Breitbart taunted them in drunken glee. OWS were hosed with tear gas, the cops tended their clown show, the union garbagemen made their rounds. Then . they . all . went . home, leaving the American Tealiban in 'white hot rage', fecklessly slashing at their Twitters into an uncaring void.

After that inglorious defeat, the American Tealiban were coopted by trolls and trollops, led off madly tilting at Muslims, Migras and Microbes, or whatever Rush, Bill and Glenn served up for the day. Education and Ebola. Burkhas and Bimbos. Huddled in their basement bunkers, the MOST POWERFUL GROUP OF HUMANS IN WORLD HISTORY, who collectively control more wealth than lower four age quintiles combined, in fact, the last reserve of unconsolidated distributed private wealth still on Earth, were left helplessly blatherskite.

Think about that! Only 7,000 people showed for their Sovereigntist '10,000,000 Man March'!

The oldest jujitsu in the book. The Three Card Monte switcheroo. He who controls the meme, controls the masses. As Huxley said, or maybe it was McLuhan, 'the medium is the message'.

Now scale 'OWS' up to snuff flicks on You Tube by Brit pop-star wannabes, with a compliant corporate media running ISIS PSYOP front page, until every NATO member was back on board, and you have a small glimpse of the power of meme displacement, as it's being used today.

As Yuval Harari points out, "What is so special about us that allows for such cooperation? Unflatteringly, it is our talent for deluding ourselves. If you examine any large-scale human cooperation (or co-option), you will always find some imaginary story at its base. As long as many people believe in the same stories about gods, nations, money or human rights (memes and antitropes) – they follow the same laws and rules (of conduct)."

You all might as well go pound your keyboards in the bathtub for all the good it will do, and rename MoA, ♫ La Société des Acolytes Jean-Paul Marat ♫. It's one World Mil.Gov Uber Alles, and it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead. That's what it does!!

The Fourth Reich of a Thousand Years, on Prime Time, in plain view. Dig it.

Demian is a dumbshit | Sep 30, 2014 7:12:37 AM | 51

Right, of course:

"The promise to China goes like this: support Zion and we'll keep paying interest and rent with our worthless paper.

Will China take this 'deal' or will they do exactly as Deng did in Tiananmen? Things worked out pretty good for the PRC leadership after 1989. Does the belligerent faction hold any sway? Someone might be itching to teach 'Democracy' advocates a lesson."

Israel has nothing to do with this. And that's also a hilarious misreading of Deng Xiaoping.

c1ue | Sep 30, 2014 8:07:16 AM | 52

@Demain #139

You said: "There was a pretty big turnout at the demo. I am suprised that so many Hong Kong students let themselves get fooled."

I am not surprised at all. Kids in college - besides being in a bubble, are also at an age where then naturally tend to rebel against authority. Throw in a nice line and some funding - which "democracy" and the NED do nicely, and there you have it.

I do think it is amusing that protests in Hong Kong are such big news when far larger and violent student protests in South Korea have been going on for decades.

They were so common at one point, there was a "protest season"

Yastreblyansky | Sep 30, 2014 9:23:02 AM | 53

2013 numbers are available: NED funding for Hong Kong was down by a third from your 2012 figure, at slightly under $300,000, half of it for one human rights monitor. Compared to three times as much for Malaysia, say, or Ecuador, where any US hegemonic aims are certainly not being realized.

You really need to think in terms of what kind of power an empire is capable of projecting (military yes, nonviolent protest no), and what kinds of class interest are involved. I can understand how dirty US interests can be guilty of fomenting an upper-class coup in Venezuela, say, but I cannot understand how they could bring people out into the streets the way people are doing in Hong Kong--especially students: tight as the labor market in HK always is, youth unemployment is 11.6%. That's a real grievance, not a pretext made up by some American.

Farflungstar | Sep 30, 2014 9:49:29 AM | 55

@ 50: "The Fourth Reich of a Thousand Years, on Prime Time, in plain view. Dig it."

AKA, the coming "Global Plantation". Love the prose.

ben | Sep 30, 2014 9:34:12 AM | 54

If this wasn't NED sponsored, this story wouldn't have such legs. In Amrika, radio and TV twats are talking about it, so now people who normally do not give a crap about anything that doesn't directly affect them, are talking about it.

brian | Sep 30, 2014 10:13:37 AM | 56

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/us-openly-approves-hong-kong-chaos-it.html

brian | Sep 30, 2014 10:16:34 AM | 57

Yastreblyansky | Sep 30, 2014 9:23:02 AM | 53

real grievances? amercains have real grievances yet we see no american springs, maidains or HK twats

what we do see in HK is the leaders meeting with 'people' like Joe Biden...just like Ukraine and Vicki(Fuck the EU) Nuland and M

Demian | Sep 29, 2014 9:14:53 PM | 39

There was a pretty big turnout at the demo. I am suprised that so many Hong Kong students let themselves get fooled.

brian | Sep 30, 2014 10:18:45 AM | 58

the ukrainians of euromaidan also let themselves be fooled

what im waiting for now is part 2: the SNIPERS

IhaveLittleToAdd | Sep 30, 2014 10:39:53 AM | 60

The synopsis is that the non-elite US citizenry and their interest groups have no influence on public policy. I sense this is fairly accurate.

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf

Noirette | Sep 30, 2014 10:42:10 AM | 61

This is a typical Color Revolution Move.

Hong Kong is a fantastic place for it.

The young people, school-, students, are all wired (smartphones), close by and near to each other, very into group young 'activities', in a particular social slot as part of an age category and position which is very strictly defined, generally massed together in their daily lives, imho also quite conventional and ready to follow leaders / their popular guys / gals, etc. Partly because they are, in my imagination, never set foot there, pretty a-political.

1. OK a bit of a caricature, to make a point. Which is that such fires can be lit but then may die down, collapse under their own weight, the line between 'doing our thing' and political action dissolves into insignificance. Yet, they may spin off into violence on a reaction-counter-reaction scenario. An instigation of a color buzz in Hong Kong is in a way an admission of down-scaling.

Note the Hong Kong young ppl are occupying, demonstrating, or crowding, on questions that are not burning issues for them/their mates/families. The wider scope is perhaps sympathetic in a way, but not thought out (imho)

Contrast with what happened at the Maidan. What happened there is far more complicated, and many ordinary citizens of all ages / categories supported Maidan. Maidan was not your regular US-NED-type instigated color revolution. Ukraine had a color revolution - Orange - in 2004, which failed.

1. In other places, young ppl (not all of course..) are politised. In CH, for ex, they are Green, Neo-Nazi, libertarian, Goths, Radical-Liberal just like Dad, mainstream social democrats, People's Party supporters, etc. All have other outlets for political action that they would not eschew (except in dire cases of course.) Some defend only the interests of their corporation (watch-maker apprentices! A plan for life!)

Don Bacon | Sep 30, 2014 12:44:35 PM | 62

The NED, often acting with its partner USAID, working for the US State Department and CIA, has been active in Latin America also. Their involvement in the 2009 Honduras coup and the current unrest in Venezuela have been fully described. Bolivia wisely expelled USAID last year.

Demian | Sep 30, 2014 12:50:34 PM | 64

Maybe we've been relying to much on the msm on this.

Counterpunch: Hong Kong's Fight Against Neoliberalism

As protesters flood the streets of Hong Kong demanding free elections in 2017, the international media puts on its usual spin, characterizing the struggle as one between an authoritarian state and citizens who want to be free. ...

But regardless of what the BBC wants the world to believe, Occupy Central isn't so much a fight for democracy as a fight for social justice. ...

The main issue with CY Leung's administration isn't the fact that it wasn't democratically elected, but that it serves two main groups: Beijing on one hand, and local elites on the other – in other words, far from democratic in its representation. It's not hard to see why big business and the oligarchs are terrified of Occupy Central: any movement towards real democracy would see them losing power and losing their grip over the territory.

So according to this Hong Kong student (currently living in London), this protest movement is authentic after all.
b | Sep 30, 2014 12:51:29 PM | 65

As documented by Tony Carlucci here many of the Hong Kong protest leaders have a long of contacts with NED/NDI.

Behind the so-called "Occupy Central" protests, which masquerade as a "pro-democracy" movement seeking "universal suffrage" and "full democracy," is a deep and insidious network of foreign financial, political, and media support. Prominent among them is the US State Department and its National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as well as NED's subsidiary, the National Democratic Institute (NDI). ...

They also seem to have found some additional funding from some local oligarchs (with fonancial interests in the U.S.)

Don Bacon | Sep 30, 2014 1:21:15 PM | 66

@Demian #64
Hong Kong's Fight Against Neoliberalism

Juan Cole wrote about the neoliberal angle here, in regard to Syria but the general case applies.

Demian | Sep 30, 2014 1:28:02 PM | 67
@b #65:

Hm, I guess I should have paid more attention to that Hong Kong student studying at LSE. David Lindorff got fooled, too.

More from that Tony Carlucci piece:

The "Occupy Central" protests in Hong Kong continue on – destabilizing the small southern Chinese island famous as an international hub for corporate-financier interests, and before that, the colonial ambitions of the British Empire. Those interests have been conspiring for years to peel the island away from Beijing after it was begrudgingly returned to China in the late 1990′s, and use it as a springboard to further destabilize mainland China. ...

To push this agenda – which essentially is to prevent Beijing from vetting candidates running for office in Hong Kong, thus opening the door to politicians openly backed, funded, and directed by the US State Department – NDI lists an array of ongoing meddling it is carrying out on the island.

@Noirette #61:
Maidan was not your regular US-NED-type instigated color revolution.
No, it wasn't. NED-type instigated color revolutions don't typically have racist fascists playing a leading role.
dh | Sep 30, 2014 2:17:37 PM | 70

Kinda interesting look at the protest leaders.....

"Wong, 17, the razor-thin leader of the student group Scholarism, has been one of the city's most outspoken pro-democracy activists for three years. Wong founded the group in 2011 to protest a Beijing-backed proposal to implement a "patriotic education" curriculum in the city's public schools; the following autumn, he mobilised 120,000 people to occupy the city government headquarters, leading officials to shelve the plan.

As a testament to his influence, state media has attempted to discredit him by portraying him as an "extremist" with shadowy ties to the US (he firmly denies the charge). Police arrested him on Friday night after a group of students scaled a fence to invade the government complex. By the time they released him on Sunday afternoon, his detention had already catalyzed further demonstrations."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/30/hong-kong-pro-democracy-protest-leaders-occupy

nomas | Sep 30, 2014 5:07:42 PM | 74

In all the pictures I have seen the Hong Kong "students" all look like mercenaries. They are all men, 20-30 YOA, muscular, all dressed in workout clothes, all carrying fanny packs, all wearing boots. If these aren't US trained troops then, bullshit. Because 90% of them are.

guest77 | Sep 30, 2014 9:36:56 PM | 76

"Sticking with the neolib angle"

I don't think it is too far fetched to say that countries like Libya, Egypt and Syria bought into the neo-liberal bill of goods and faced - at least in part - some homegrown agitation because of it. The US is well known for "making economies scream" and the Bush-era was the height of neoliberal encroachmment into the former socialist areas.

Nothing is more sure to create a riot that slashing of food and fuel subsidies. The Americans know this, and push for this.

This is not to say that those who rush out into the streets and chop off the heads of the Shia have legitimate grievances, or are even motivated by the hurt of the average Arab citizen. But it does play a role, I have no doubt.

Gaddafi and Assad as well toyed with neoliberalism when the GWOT threatened them. It was "the offer they couldn't refuse" that lead to chaos in Libya and civil war in Syria.

guest77 | Sep 30, 2014 9:40:31 PM | 77

What a joke to discuss "democracy" at a time like this.

The choice on the world stage is not wether this island city will have "democracy" but wether we will have a world dominated by one power - the worst conception of life that fascism strives for.

None of us know what occurs in HK past the slogans. What we do know is that, if China or Russia falls to the US - no matter how "autocratic" they may be - there will be no independent action anywhere.

Unless you call what is happening in Greece "democracy" or what is happening in Ukraine "democracy" or what is happening in Libya "democracy". In which case - you've said enough.

Demian | Sep 30, 2014 9:51:46 PM | 79

@guest77 #76:

Maidan demonstrators might not have wanted neoliberalism, but that's what they're getting, thanks to their "revolution". It would be the same with Hong Kong, if it citizens got "universal suffrage", a.k.a. officials chosen by the Empire (instead of China).

guest77 | Sep 30, 2014 9:59:54 PM | 81

@Demian - there is no fascist who does not work for the oligarchy, no matter what he or she thinks. The Night of the Long Knives comes - always.

denk | Sep 30, 2014 10:30:29 PM | 82

besids wolfowitz the neocon and mark simon the spook, media tycoon jimmy lai's buddies include the well known ned patsy martin lee, a hk born n bred wog.

his ned connection is beyond doubt, hell, he got standing ovation whenever he went to the *hill* to sermonise on democracy in china.

hehehe

http://tinyurl.com/6xdr54

guest77 | Sep 30, 2014 10:42:21 PM | 83

Andre Vitcheck sums up Western "freedom" succinctly:

The West has finally reached the highest level of 'freedom'. It is a freedom for itself – a terrible freedom to play with the world as if it were a ball, a cheap and insignificant thing.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39796.htm

denk | Sep 30, 2014 11:10:34 PM | 85

http://zcomm.org/znetarticle/the-west-perfecting-its-techniques-to-hurt-china-by-andre-vltchek/

brian | Sep 30, 2014 11:28:25 PM | 90

So according to this Hong Kong student (currently living in London), this protest movement is authentic afteer all. Hong Kong's Fight Against Neoliberalism Posted by: Demian | Sep 30, 2014 12:50:34 PM | 64

think that one thru! euromaidan in ukraine and the reforms rallies in syria may have had valid goals...this didnt stop them from being used by shadowy persons...both groups ended up being attacked by snipers..used to put pressure of the govts


if no snipers appear we can take this is a legit rally for what they claim....but my guess is others are there with other agendas

Demian | Sep 30, 2014 11:47:05 PM | 91

@brian #90:

I think that the role that the NED has played here by itself shows that the demonstrators are being used and duped. I doubt that snipers will be used in Hong Kong.

By the way, from #66, Juan Cole wrote:

Only when the regime dealt with the 2011 protests by drawing up tanks and firing on peaceful protesters, and by stationing snipers on rooftops, did the protesters gradually take up arms.
As far as I can tell, he is just lying there. First, as far as I know, the snipers did not work for the "regime": same as in Kiev. Second, the "protesters" did not "take up arms". The armed fighters are foreign jihadists trained by the US, as Andre Vitchec explains.

Juan Cole is such a pompous, hypocritical whore. Informed Comment my foot.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 30, 2014 11:50:49 PM | 92

Democracy is a Western concept, not an Asian one.

Don Bacon | Sep 30, 2014 11:52:35 PM | 93

@ Demian #91
Get issues into perspective.
Juan Cole may be wrong on snipers (you don't know), but not on neoloberalism.

brian | Sep 30, 2014 11:53:04 PM | 94

@89
Global research has picked up on the students article

http://www.globalresearch.ca/occupy-central-hong-kongs-fight-against-neoliberalism/5405426

so we have two more sides to this issue! where lies the truth?

brian | Sep 30, 2014 11:55:06 PM | 95

Ming Chun Tang has a blog
http://clearingtherubble.wordpress.com/
its often useful to go back thru a persons blog to gain an idea of his/her orientation(....sorry!)

Don Bacon | Sep 30, 2014 11:59:12 PM | 96

Toby Carroll's description of the HK economic situation might be applied almost verbatim to that in the U.S. One in five in poverty? US -- 15%. etc.

Crest | Oct 1, 2014 12:01:40 AM | 97

@95 Brian

I hope that's correct. It would be nice if there was an organic movement for social justice. Color revolutions seem to make everything worse for everyone but oligarchs.

Demian | Oct 1, 2014 12:31:09 AM | 98

@Don Bacon #93:

I never said that Cole is wrong on neoliberalism.

Cole also says that "ISIL surprised [Obama] and his intelligence officials". Cole doesn't mention that the ISIL is a CIA creation, so he is just backing up Obama with his lying.

denk | Oct 1, 2014 2:17:33 AM | 100

brian 94

do hkers have grievances , do mainlanders hve grievances too, do indians have grievances, indonesians have grievances ?

u betcha !

here's the truth....

what u can be damn sure is someone out there have been spending yrs in infiltrating and manipulating these dissidents movements. There's an army of cunts out there whose *day jobs* consist of looking for *sparks* at every corner of the world and ignite it into an inferno.

witness tibet, xinjiang, south china sea, east china sea, ukraine and....hk --

the uber militancy of these protestors is rather revealing, now they demand the hk chief to step down. -- the puppet masters know full well china wouldnt budge, in fact the police has issued an ultimatum to the protestors to back off.

in demanding a regime change, the manipulators are no doubt trying to provoke a clash, hopefully leading to *tam massacre* sequel. u bet they already have the editorials, headlines standing by...
*hk police shot at unarmed protestors, killing hundres....*

wow , i could almost visualise these cunts wanking themselves in front of the screen already !

in every guardian thread abou tibet, xinjiang and now hk, there'd be idiots chanting about the tam *massacre*, where *the brutal ccp used tanks to crush the bones of unarmed protestors* [sic]
some cunts are already salivating that this would turn into tam2. !

p.s.

in every fukus destabilisation caper, there'r always the willing and unwitting patsies, then there'r the useful idiots .....
*********************************************************************
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/09/the-ned-hong-kong-riots.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef01bb078feb09970d

useful idiot
*If it's true - then they must have learned it from Red China *

kid,
ukus [ i cant use fukus over there] wrote the book on ff, any idea whats a false flag ?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-foreign-policy-script-false-flags-humanitarian-crises-and-russias-phantom-tanks/5399836

*However, as usual, you do the people of Hong Kong a great
disservice. Hong Kong people are westernised and are very politically aware.*

u bet -- your idols martin lee, anson chan are typical hk born n bred wogs lol -- mind u,
politically aware isnt the same as politically astute -- a politically aware but obtuse activist is perfect target for brainwashing !

*A bit of tear gas isn't brutal. What's brutal is sending in tanks and armed infantry into a bunch of students in Tianamen Square.*

see what i mean, u've been kept in the dark n fed bs all these yrs !

*Let's also not forget when China was inspiring not just riots in Hong Kong but also planting bombs in numerous places.

You want links? Here you are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_1967_Leftist_riots

The true face of China.*

i dont want *links*
i want evidence, if u think wiki is credible *evidence* that just goes to show how brainwashed you'r. :-(

hmm,
i forgot to tell him, ever heard of gladio ?

xxx
Pro-Beijing Media Accuses Hong Kong Student Leader of U.S. Government Ties
By: WUFYS
Tags: CHINA CURRENT EVENTS PROTESTS/REVOLUTION
The face of Hong Kong's student democracy movement came under furious attack by a pro-Beijing newspaper today, upping the ante in the fight over the former British colony's political future.

WEBMASTER ADDITION: "Evidence for Mr. Wong's close ties to the U.S. that the paper cited included what the report described as frequent meetings with U.S. consulate personnel in Hong Kong and covert donations from Americans to Mr. Wong. As evidence, the paper cited photographs leaked by "netizens." The story also said Mr. Wong's family visited Macau in 2011 at the invitation of the American Chamber of Commerce, where they stayed at the "U.S.-owned" Venetian Macao, which is owned by Las Vegas Sands Corp."

Las Vegas Sands Corp. is owned by Sheldon Adelson, who is facing bribery charges under the current Chinese government and thus has a powerful motive to fund an overthrow.

Posted by: brian | Oct 1, 2014 8:20:30 AM | 103

xxx
speaking of hedge funders

'Argentina is engaged in a debt row with a number of US hedge funds.'
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/10/01/380657/kirchner-says-us-plotting-to-oust-her/

and

'The top Argentine official further insisted that on her recent visit to Argentinian Pope Francis, she was alerted by police of a purported assassination plot against her by ISIL terror elements.'

now why would ISIL attack an argentinian leader? a clue as to who owns them?

Posted by: brian | Oct 1, 2014 9:09:53 AM | 105

xxx
@97:

So these are the idealistic young people fighting for social justice and "against Neo-liberalism" (frankly, I wonder what percentage of them has ever heard of the concept), while simultaneously calling mainland people "locusts"? Hmmm, calling an entire huge group of people by the dehumanizing name of an insect...Does that remind anyone of anything?

What I understand, there is indeed a big wealth gap and social injustice in Hong Kong, stemming from the stranglehold of the financial and real estate oligarchs. But where did these oligarchs come from, and where did the legal system that protects them come from? IMHO, the Beijing government's fault was precisely too many concessions toward "local interests".

By the way, Here is an interesting article from, of all places, the Guardian. It does not see all the sides of the issue, but does make some good points.

Posted by: Chinese american | Oct 1, 2014 10:27:08 AM | 106

xxx
It is truly heart warming to hear people like Chris Patten calling for democracy. Under British rule democracy wasn't even up for discussion.

Posted by: dh | Oct 1, 2014 10:31:48 AM | 107

xxx
#OccupyCentral leader Jimmy Lai Chi-Ying is a business partner of Paul Wolfowitz

http://journal-neo.org/2014/10/01/hong-kong-s-occupy-central-is-us-backed-sedition/

Posted by: brian | Oct 1, 2014 10:32:04 AM | 108

xxx
@107 Thank you, brian, for connecting the dots.

Posted by: madisolation | Oct 1, 2014 10:52:20 AM | 109

xxx
David Cameron is "deeply concerned" about the situation in Hong Kong

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/30/uk-hongkong-china-britain-idUKKCN0HP0JH20140930

Nick Clegg meets the "activists" from Hong Kong.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/15/nick-clegg-hong-kong-china-democracy

Posted by: Willy2 | Oct 1, 2014 10:55:48 AM | 110

xxx
Cameron and Clegg are right to be deeply concerned. The FTSE is crashing.

Posted by: dh | Oct 1, 2014 11:02:42 AM | 111

xxx
@103 My point is that the extreme neoliberal system in Hong Kong ("the world's freest economy") is the cause of Occupy Central, which is a symptom of the problem. I didn't say, nor do I think the movement's leaders are necessarily concerned about neoliberalism or indeed informed about the ideology. I think democracy could be a way for Hong Kongers to take back their own territory, and the vote is just the starting point. Once the vote is won, there'll still be a long way to go. BUT having the vote provides the opportunity and is therefore a condition for any real change to happen.

@105 There is indeed a lot of racism in Hong Kong, especially towards the Chinese nowadays. But that in itself doesn't make people's grievances illegitimate. Also note that the people labelling the Chinese "locusts" are a minority. The fact is that it's becoming increasingly difficult to make a living in Hong Kong, largely thanks to mismanagement by a government in bed with local elites and controlled by Beijing, and that is one of the main reasons why so many Hong Kongers are taking to the streets.

Also note that China has been paying protesters to rally against Occupy Central. One thing that Occupy Central's leaders haven't done is hand out cash to participants.

Posted by: Ming Chun Tang | Oct 1, 2014 11:23:29 AM | 112

xxx
@112 "I think democracy could be a way for Hong Kongers to take back their own territory..." That suggests you envision an independent Hong Kong.

As I understand it Hong Kong has never been independent. Not under the Manchu and certainly not under the British.

Do you think Hong Kong would be economically better off as an independent entity? If that happened it's hard to imagine foreign companies that use HK as a base would be welcome in China.

Posted by: dh | Oct 1, 2014 12:14:58 PM | 115

xxx
@dh #114:

Good point. An independent Hong Kong makes no more sense than an independent Okinawa.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 1, 2014 12:25:49 PM | 116

xxx
@114

I don't know if that is what @112 means exactly; there is the whole "one country, two systems" idea, after all.

Though of course I cannot read anyone's mind. It would not surprise me if @112 identifies more with the British, and does not see himself as "Chinese" (e.g. when it comes to those being called "locusts", he uses the word Chinese when I would have used mainlander.) But maybe I'm wrong.

As for Hong Kong independence, I suppose it is theoretically possible -- if China is utterly destroyed. I don't think Hong Kong will be better off economically better off in that situation, though.

Posted by: Chinese american | Oct 1, 2014 12:46:08 PM | 120

xxx
Ming Chun Tang, do you consider yourself to be on the left? Or even left leaning? In US there is a form of what I, and others on this blog, call fake democracy.

The US now only trails the EU in being neoliberal. In other words, US has brought in fascism by popular vote. The EZ has had their democracy totally destroyed.

So called, free elections, can get any state neck deep in neoliberal orthodoxy.

Posted by: okie farmer | Oct 1, 2014 1:13:37 PM | 122

xxx
So China is by far the most democratic country in the world:

http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-learn-Disinformation-Hurting-Humanity/dp/1493546449/ref=la_B00G3SWQZ0_1_1_title_0_main?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1412183709&sr=1-1

So this is not about democracy but about imperial aggression.

Posted by: Ben | Oct 1, 2014 1:17:30 PM | 123

xxx
Peter Lee has responded to b's post which started this thread at Counterpunch:
Bernhard of Moon of Alabama unearthed a fascinating budgetary item for the NDI in 2012 (and also, I must own, rebuked me for my naïveté in regarding the Hong Kong demos as home grown).
I think we should treat Ming Chun Tang as an imposter and a troll. Someone here said that the real Ming Chun Tang has a blog. If a person with a blog makes a post at MoA, he will give a link to his blog.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 1, 2014 1:18:48 PM | 124

xxx
@123 Troll perhaps. But interesting. He is echoing the protesters line. They avoid using the word 'independence'. Too early for that I think.

Posted by: dh | Oct 1, 2014 1:22:30 PM | 125

xxx
Americans inciting the sheep in Hong Kong against their will.

https://twitter.com/RaviCNN/status/517018598616072192/photo/1

Posted by: ab initio | Oct 1, 2014 2:02:33 PM | 126

xxx
dh, I agree. Independence is a loaded word that, if used, could bring the Beijing authorities down hard on on occupy cnetral.
to take back their own territory
Sounds like the US Tea Party folk, "We have to take back America." WARNING: Ming Chun Tang don't use that word.

Posted by: okie farmer | Oct 1, 2014 2:10:31 PM | 127

xxx
@124 "I think we should treat Ming Chun Tang as an imposter and a troll. Someone here said that the real Ming Chun Tang has a blog. If a person with a blog makes a post at MoA, he will give a link to his blog."

That's pretty funny. Someone would actually impersonate me, a 20-year-old college student with a blog? Here is my piece published on three sources:

CounterPunch http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/30/hong-kongs-fight-against-neoliberalism/
ZNet http://zcomm.org/znetarticle/occupy-central-hong-kongs-fight-against-neoliberalism/

GlobalResearch.ca http://www.globalresearch.ca/occupy-central-hong-kongs-fight-against-neoliberalism/5405426

Now, my blog: http://clearingtherubble.wordpress.com/

On the right, you'll see my Twitter feed, where I acknowledge your suggestion that I may be an imposter. Happy?

Posted by: Ming Chun Tang | Oct 1, 2014 4:26:00 PM | 130

xxx
Amrika needs her own color revolution. The kind that we like to meddle and instigate from the outside of target nations. It's almost a shame how many still respect the term sovereignty and do not habitually meddle in the internal affairs of others. Minding their own business now is clearly endangering the lives of their own citizens and way of life.

How easy it would be for foreign $$ to manipulate desperate and stupid Amrikans into fighting and killing each other on their way to toppling the USG. There are so many of the sheep that are better off dead than breeding...the Amrika Uber Alles crowd who think no matter who or what Amrika is killing overseas, that they somehow deserve it. Amrika Uber Alles. Never Wrong, Always Right Always Killing for the Good Of Mankind. So many who could be on fire and I would not stop to piss on them to put them out.

Posted by: Farflungstar | Oct 1, 2014 4:31:36 PM | 131

xxx
Okay, I figured out how to include a link to my blog. There it is.

@118 Fair enough. Hong Kongers have never had prior ownership - HK has essentially been colonized twice, once by Britain and once by China. Taking ownership would be a better way to put it, and by that I mean the people actually having a say in how Hong Kong is run, rather than it being dictated solely by Beijing and by local elites.

@122 Yes, I do consider myself to be on the left, and I agree with you about the US being a pseudo-democracy. But now, what's the lesser of two evils: having a vote, or having no vote and having policy imposed on you from above? You're suggesting that free elections lead to neoliberal orthodoxy, but that isn't necessarily the case, and nor do a lack of free elections in any way lead to socialist utopia. The purpose of free elections is to provide the OPPORTUNITY for Hong Kongers to rule themselves and thereby change the status quo. Whether we take that opportunity is another question.

@127 Again, I never mentioned independence. I'm also not American, I don't follow the Tea Party, and I wasn't aware that they use that language, but I'll take your advice.

Posted by: Ming Chun Tang | Oct 1, 2014 4:36:49 PM | 132

xxx
@112 Ming Chun Tang

the extreme neoliberal system in Hong Kong ("the world's freest economy")

The extreme neoliberal system in Hong Kong was created by the British. In the 90s, the big talking points in Hong Kong, what people were saying they were afraid of, were the terrifying "communist takeover" and losing their "economic freedom", and the Beijing government promised that it would not happen, that they would keep its hands off Hong Kong. Beijing is content to let the local elites run Hong Kong, but this does not necessarily imply that the local elites are "controlled by Beijing". Hong Kong does not even pay a cent of taxes to the central government, among other things.

I think democracy could be a way for Hong Kongers to take back their own territory, and the vote is just the starting point.

Has that been shown to actually work in places where there is the popular vote? How do you fight neo-liberalism by (NED-funded) neo-liberalism?

I am not denying that people in Hong Kong have real economic grievances. But grievances are enough to destroy and not enough to build. And they are easily turned to use by other forces. As for the "locust" talk, and the contemptuous attitude toward mainlanders (which I'm not sure is only on the part of the minority of protesters)--that does make one pause to consider about the suggestion that legitimate grievances are not the only reasons for the protests. How much of this sense of grievance is the grievance of losing one's superiority and privileged position, compared to the mainland? It is increasingly difficult to make a living in Hong Kong--how much of this is due to the fact that people now need to compete more and more with the rest of the country?

I was where you were 25 years ago. No, actually, you're way ahead of me at age 20: I certainly did not know what neo-liberalism was.

Posted by: Chinese american | Oct 1, 2014 4:38:03 PM | 133

xxx
@124 "I think we should treat Ming Chun Tang as an imposter and a troll. Someone here said that the real Ming Chun Tang has a blog. If a person with a blog makes a post at MoA, he will give a link to his blog."

That's pretty funny. Someone would actually impersonate me, a 20-year-old college student with a blog?

well, Demian has a bit of a habit of making a fool of himself with his unwarranted speculations

he seems to think he can bully others into silence by making false/ridiculous claims such as the one above

Posted by: yeowzaa | Oct 1, 2014 4:40:17 PM | 135

xxx
All I am saying is that, if one want to fight neo-liberalism, then it seems to me that one needs to realize that neo-liberalism is pervasive in this day and age--in the political "science" and economic theories they teach in the universities, and in the articles of faith that they tell you are cherished universal ideals.

That's how deep the rabbit hole goes. Once you've doubted an idea, every idea, then you can decide what it is good for.

Posted by: Chinese american | Oct 1, 2014 4:45:45 PM | 136

xxx
@133 It's true that it was created by the British - I don't deny that. I also don't think (and didn't say, mind you) that the HK elites are controlled by Beijing. What I said was that the HK elites are ALLIED with Beijing against the social movements because they're doing great under the status quo and the last thing they want is democracy.

On your second point, yes, there is. I'm sure I'll be slaughtered for saying this, but Venezuela has seen genuinely positive social change under a genuine democracy (unlike what the right-wing elites claim). But what makes you say Occupy Central is neoliberalism? They haven't got an agenda other than demanding the vote. And the declining standard of living has nothing to do with competition with China, because if that were the case, we would be seeing HK in economic decline. But that hasn't happened. What has happened is that wealth has been redistributed from the middle and working classes to the rich, as naturally tends to happen under capitalism. I think you're confusing two different issues - the issue of racism and the issue of class conflict. Hong Kongers aren't the type to protest over just anything, least of all that kind of resentment that you're talking about. Occupy Central is only happening because the middle and working classes are getting increasingly angry at the elites.

@134 So these American establishment papers are genuinely left-wing? Wow.

Posted by: Ming Chun Tang | Oct 1, 2014 4:54:33 PM | 137

okie farmer | Oct 1, 2014 4:56:51 PM | 138
The purpose of free elections is to provide the OPPORTUNITY for Hong Kongers to rule themselves and thereby change the status quo.
Fair enough. It'll be an uphill battle for sure, the HK plutocracy will pour money into the elections, run stealth candidates, with the aim to get a TRUE neoliberal in office.

For instance, in France, the Socialist Hollande has embraced neoliberal orthodoxy completely. His approval rating are now at 13%, but he doesn't care, he doesn't work for the people. Like Obomber, he's broken every campaign promise he made.

xxx
@138 Let me make it clear. I'm not optimistic about Occupy Central. Not at all. I don't think Hong Kongers are informed enough. But at the same time, I don't agree with your defeatism. When there are no good options, you've got to take the least bad option. Having a vote is, in my opinion, the lesser evil compared to having no vote when you look at who currently runs HK.

@139 Well, I would have signed into this site through my Twitter account, if only the site had allowed it. But good to see you now know I'm real.

Posted by: Ming Chun Tang | Oct 1, 2014 5:03:16 PM | 140

xxx
No, American establishment papers are way right wing, all of them, and supporters of neoliberalism. The only left leaning paper in US was a south San Francisco paper that got bought by some guy from Chicago who turned it into blah.

No, the reason I would like to see your article in NYT etc is because you would, first, get a larger audience, and second, because you would have established a yourself as a journalist.

Still, I'm glad your got your article in those 3 sites.

Posted by: okie farmer | Oct 1, 2014 5:11:30 PM | 141

xxx
Cy Leung seems to be the main hate figure. The next big event will be Friday morning when he tries to get into his office.....which happens to be next door to the PLA barracks. Lots of media will be there for that.

Posted by: dh | Oct 1, 2014 5:31:07 PM | 142

xxx
'Posted by: I take it back, all of you are dumbshits | Oct 1, 2014 3:25:46 PM | 129

but how much is 'democracy' a western concept? the american founding fathers (landed gentry) rejected it, and most states establish political parties who tend to ignore those that vote for them.

'rule by the people' is in no country on earth

Posted by: brian | Oct 1, 2014 6:29:32 PM | 145

xxx
'On your second point, yes, there is. I'm sure I'll be slaughtered for saying this, but Venezuela has seen genuinely positive social change under a genuine democracy (unlike what the right-wing elites claim). '
@137

i presume most people here support the Bolivarian revolution and the late Hugo Chavez!

Posted by: brian | Oct 1, 2014 6:35:25 PM | 147

xxx
Posted by: Ming Chun Tang | Oct 1, 2014 5:03:16 PM | 140

the problem with these movements is they way they get co-opted: witness what happened in Ukraine: grievances by people of euromaidan were used by shadowy forces to topple a legitimate govt, leading to chaos, fascist terror and war.

Posted by: brian | Oct 1, 2014 6:38:07 PM | 148

xxx
I would think that the very best thing for the HK protestors to do at this point is distance themselves as far as possible from the US Empire, and denounce it and its machinations. Otherwise, people will assume they are merely pawns.

Distancing oneself from the US Empire has to be the first priority of any genuine movement for justice. Even if the campaigns of protest are being waged outside of the US. Perhaps especially so, at this point.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 1, 2014 7:12:49 PM | 149

xxx
@denk - thanks for the link to the '67 riots. Very interesting.

Funny to think that it used to be communism which put the fear of god into every government.

Riots, coups, strikes, real revolutions. Now the US has taken all those methods, injected them with millions of dollars and social and psychological research, and redeployed them.

The US is giving revolution a bad name. No doubt, that's part of the plan.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 1, 2014 7:39:32 PM | 150

xxx
Totally OT, but Hong Kong was former home of one of the most amazing human structures ever built.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 1, 2014 7:42:18 PM | 151

xxx
@151 The closest thing to that now is Chungking Mansions on Nathan Road...

http://arzucanaskin.com/2014/06/30/17-floors-five-thousand-people-friends-and-delicious-food/

Posted by: dh | Oct 1, 2014 8:16:16 PM | 152

xxx
@152 Oh wow, that's still pretty amazing. Thanks for that.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 1, 2014 8:23:43 PM | 153

xxx
@153. Spent a couple of nights there some time ago. Didn't run into any university educated Hong Kongers.....:)

Posted by: dh | Oct 1, 2014 8:32:18 PM | 154

xxx
Hong Kong plays a fairly substantial role in McCoy's The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia.

Its worth remembering the decrepit state the British maintained it in during much of their rule. Addiction to opium and heroin was staggering. A big moneymaker for the big boys.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 1, 2014 8:46:47 PM | 155

xxx
Posted by: brian | Oct 1, 2014 6:29:32 PM | 145

Yes, I know. That doesn't justify the CCP's rejection of democracy, even back when it was still actually committed to Communism.

Posted by: I take it back, all of you are dumbshits | Oct 1, 2014 9:01:09 PM | 156

xxx
Hong Kong was built on the opium trade. Shanghai was part of the deal after the First Opium War. Beijing was sacked. A lot of Chinese haven't forgotten.

Posted by: dh | Oct 1, 2014 9:03:19 PM | 157

xxx
@124 demian quote "If a person with a blog makes a post at MoA, he will give a link to his blog." i was going to challenge this as i read down the thread just now, but i see i don't have to.. some folks posts here demian who don't feel the need to share their blog or website.. as a musician, i have a website, but i feel no need to share it.. i think you have to think a bit more out of the box then you imply in the quote of yours above..

@137 MCT quote - "@134 So these American establishment papers are genuinely left-wing? Wow." no.. those publications are propaganda central in the usa and for any bozo who thinks they want to understand the exceptional nation better and are stupid enough to digest these publications without a serious filter.

@147 guest77. ditto the first paragraph..

@150 guest77.. ditto the gist of that post too..

Posted by: james | Oct 1, 2014 9:17:49 PM | 158

xxx
guest 150

the hierachy of a fukus destabilisation op
[1] fukus embassy,aka cia, mi6 nest[a]
[2] the willing patsies doing the bidding of foreign masters
[3] the unwitting patsies who do not realise they'r doing the bidding of the foreign powers,
[4] the agent provocateurs who provoke violence when plan A fails
[5] the grunts who do battle with the police, the cannon fodders who got killed , not necessarily by the police, when the shit hits the fan.

i bet ming chun tang aint no [1] lol but he seem to be your typical wog,
tang is your surname innit ming chun ?

btw, is martin lee one of your mentor, is he your idol ?


[a]
why isnt there a real color rev in washington dc ? coz there aint no murcun ambassy in washington dc lol.

im still dying to know why aint fukus *diplomats* fitted with electronic tagging device to curb their monkey business.

Posted by: denk | Oct 1, 2014 10:59:53 PM | 160

xxx
China is currently overriding the FRB Cabal's funny money scam with real gold-backed RMB currency now - to help liberate the world from their scaly grip.

ANYTIME A COUNTRY tries to create its own gold-backed currency that would render the USD fiat crap obsolete - the US stirs up dissent and invades (Iraq, Libya, Iran, etc).

Soooo...right on cue...color protest in HK...

Posted by: backstrap | Oct 1, 2014 11:17:13 PM | 161

xxx
and you thought ebola was bad!

He [McCain] said, "A year ago, Ben-Ali and Gaddafi were not in power. Assad won't be in power this time next year. This Arab Spring is a virus that will attack Moscow and Beijing." McCain then walked off the stage.

Considering the overt foreign-funded nature of not only the "Arab Spring," but now "Occupy Central," and considering the chaos, death, destabilization, and collapse suffered by victims of previous US subversion, "Occupy Central" can be painted in a new light – a mob of dupes being used to destroy their own home – all while abusing the principles of "democracy" behind which is couched an insidious, diametrically opposed foreign imposed tyranny driven by immense, global spanning corporate-financier interests that fear and actively destroy competition. In particular, this global hegemon seeks to suppress the reemergence of Russia as a global power, and prevent the rise of China itself upon the world's stage.

The regressive agenda of "Occupy Central's" US-backed leadership, and their shameless exploitation of the good intentions of the many young people ensnared by their gimmicks, poses a threat in reality every bit as dangerous as the "threat" they claim Beijing poses to the island of Hong Kong and its people. Hopefully the people of China, and the many people around the world looking on as "Occupy Central" unfolds, will realize this foreign-driven gambit and stop it before it exacts the heavy toll it has on nations that have fallen victim to it before – Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Egypt, and many others.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-now-admits-it-is-funding-occupy-central-in-hong-kong/5405680

John McCain is the Typhoid Mary of the Occupy/arab springs/euromaidans. ..he needs to be quarantined preferably on Mars!

Posted by: brian | Oct 1, 2014 11:30:49 PM | 162

xxx
"why isnt there a real color rev in washington dc ?"

There was one moment in the post-war period when the US faced precisely the phenomenon that have come to define "color revolutions", that being to occupy the central square, bring huge numbers into the seat of government, live in protestors.

This moment was Martin Luther King's planned "Poor People's March" on Washington. DC at the height of the Vietnam War. MLK planned to bring one million people to the National Mall, and to hold a massive, open-ended sit in.

Knowing people's love for him, his charisma, and indeed the violence that erupted in numerous cities following his death, we can certainly assume that he had the "political capital" to bring the country to a standstill and effect a genuine, Second American Revolution. Or we would have witnessed unbelievable bloodshed in our nation's capital to unknown effect.

There is no telling what that event may have grown into. He was, of course, murdered in the planning stages. The violence that followed was extreme but directionless. The "Poor People's March" would not have been.

Since then, consider what the US has witnessed in terms of loss of civil liberties, surveillance, police powers, and media control. There is little chance for such an event now, but if there is one, it will repeat what King intended on the National Mall.

_______________________

I presume the US has modeled its own global warfare on this and similar events it faced at home during the 1960s. The Ukraine and Venezuela - both of which included mystery snipers - has been the nadir of all of this. Gone are the days (mostly) of military coups followed by mass repression. Now we see "the people" driven out of their minds by carefully orchestrated media campaigns, push onto the streets under the guidance of professionals, to overthrow governments and impose repression and austerity, or simply rip the society to shreds as in Syria and Libya.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall...

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 2, 2014 12:24:01 AM | 164

xxx
guess 164

The Times They Are a-Changin

http://12160.info/photo/mlk-i-have-a-dream-obama-i-have-a-drone-05-1?context

Posted by: denk | Oct 2, 2014 12:51:10 AM | 165

xxx
a possible solution is sugggested here:

'In truth, the ball is in Baba Beijing's court. They have the power and the ability to read the riot act to Hong Kong's elite billionaires and their corrupt, toady politicians. All Baba Beijing needs to do is say,

OK boys, it's time for a haircut. Your current inverted pyramid of wealth accumulation doesn't need to be re-inverted, but it sure needs to be flattened out enough to keep the peace. Make that apex angle more obtuse, much more obtuse.'
http://44days.net/the-skinny-on-hong-kongs-occupy-central-movement/

NOTE supposedly Beijing cant act directly till 2047 so HK people cant blame mainland china, only their local billionaire masters

Posted by: brian | Oct 2, 2014 1:14:07 AM | 166

xxx
44days is a serious resistance blog, no doubt. Here's an OT article about the EU which shows a EU flag with a wolfsangel centerpiece.

http://44days.net/europes-inglorious-ignimonious-infamy/

Posted by: okie farmer | Oct 2, 2014 2:58:08 AM | 167

xxx
The American deployment of double standards never ends:

Hong Kong protests: China warns US not to meddle in 'internal affairs'

"We believe human rights and the freedom of expression is [sic] something that's important not just in China but countries around the world," [Jen Psaki] insisted, asked about Wang's assertion that Hong Kong was an internal Chinese matter.

"We're continuing to urge dialogue between the authorities and protestors," she added.

I don't remember Psaki urging Kiev to engage in dialog with the people of eastern Ukraine, who only wanted a federal system of government and the ability to keep their children for being forced to learn a brain damaged form of Russian. Instead, she said that Ukraine had every right to bomb its own people with artillery and air strikes to preserve its "territorial integrity".

When are inside-the-Beltway types going to realize that Obama, with his neocon-infested State Department, has turned the US into a laughingstock as far as everyone but Americans and the English are concerned? America's persistence in this holier that though attitude is just lessening any remaining credibility it might still have as some kind of moral authority.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 2, 2014 5:13:25 AM | 168

brian | Oct 2, 2014 6:51:54 AM | 170
Andrew Korybko
1 hr ·

Gene Sharp's protégé, Jamila Raqib, coauthored an op-ed in Huffington Post advertising the fact that the 'Albert Einstein Institute's' destabilization tactics are being used in Hong Kong.

I've read every one of Sharp's major works and they are designed, even in his own words, to topple governments. He has written strategic guiding manuals on how to achieve this.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shank/why-hong-kongs-occupycent_b_5906184.html

Hong Kong is not a protest, it is a Color Revolution. Well-intentioned individuals are being duped to join a movement aimed at overthrowing the authorities through a soft coup (for now), in a move that has never happened before in modern China. Legitimate grievances are being exploited by a revolutionary core and their cohorts to bring as many peaceful civilians into the fracas for use as human shields, in the hope that this will guarantee their own security amids the crackdown that some of them are trying to provoke.

My full analysis on this event will be forthcoming in the next couple of days on Oriental Review
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10104993491934055&id=12462833

xxx
i wonder why tang ming chun [1]

never appear in guardian, hell he'd get an army of cheerleaders from fukus, kinda like his home ground really.

what has he gotta say about this charge....

brian 103

*WEBMASTER ADDITION: "Evidence for Mr. Wong's close ties to the U.S. that the paper cited included what the report described as frequent meetings with U.S. consulate personnel in Hong Kong and covert donations from Americans to Mr. Wong. As evidence, the paper cited photographs leaked by "netizens." The story also said Mr. Wong's family visited Macau in 2011 at the invitation of the American Chamber of Commerce, where they stayed at the "U.S.-owned" Venetian Macao, which is owned by Las Vegas Sands Corp.*

im still waitin for his view on martin lee, the god father of hk democratic movement, is he your mentor, your idol , ming chun ?

[1]
i'd rather call deng xiao ping instead of the wog way like xiao ping deng.

Posted by: denk | Oct 2, 2014 6:57:58 AM | 171

brian | Oct 2, 2014 7:04:17 AM | 173

wonder who is the dumbshit here:

so:

'Under the revolutionary leadership of Muammar Qaddafi, Libya has attained the highest standard of living in Africa. In 2007, in an article which appeared in the African Executive Magazine, Norah Owaraga noted that Libya, "unlike other oil producing countries such as Nigeria and Saudi Arabia, utilized the revenue from its oil to develop its country. The standard of living of the people of Libya is one of the highest in Africa, falling in the category of countries with a GNP per capita of between USD 2,200 and 6,000."

This is all the more remarkable when we consider that in 1951 Libya was officially the poorest country in the world. According to the World Bank, the per capita income was less than $50 a year - even lower than India. Today, all Libyans own their own homes and cars. Two Fleet Street journalists, David Blundy and Andrew Lycett, who are by no means supporters of the Libyan revolution, had this to say:

"The young people are well dressed, well fed and well educated. Libyans now earn more per capita than the British. The disparity in annual incomes... is smaller than in most countries. Libya's wealth has been fairly spread throughout society. Every Libyan gets free, and often excellent, education, medical and health services. New colleges and hospitals are impressive by any international standard. All Libyans have a house or a flat, a car and most have televisions, video recorders and telephones. Compared with most citizens of the Third World countries, and with many in the First World, Libyans have it very good indeed." (Source: Qaddafi and the Libyan Revolution)

Large scale housing construction has taken place right across the country. Every citizen has been given a decent house or apartment to live in rent-free. In Qaddafi's Green Book it states: "The house is a basic need of both the individual and the family, therefore it should not be owned by others."

This dictum has now become a reality for the Libyan people.

Large scale agricultural projects have been implemented in an effort to "make the desert bloom" and achieve self-sufficiency in food production. Any Libyan who wants to become a farmer is given free use of land, a house, farm equipment, some livestock and seed.

"The standard of living of the people of Libya is one of the highest in Africa."

Today, Libya can boast one of the finest health care systems in the Arab and African World. All people have access to doctors, hospitals, clinics and medicines, completely free of all charges. The fact is that the Libyan revolution has achieved such a high standard of living for its people that they import labor from other parts of the world to do the jobs that the unemployed Libyans refuse to do. Libya has been called by many observers inside and out, "a nation of shop keepers." It is part of the Libyan Arab psyche to own your own small business and this type of small scale private enterprise flourishes in Libya. We can draw on many examples of Libyans with young sons who expressed the idea that it would be shameful for the family if these same young men were to seek menial work and instead preferred for them to remain at home supported by the extended family.'

http://blackagendareport.com/content/libya-getting-it-right-revolutionary-pan-african-perspective

so readers: ask yourself: who is the dumbshit here?

so my conclusion is mr dumbshit is either ignorant, of Gadafi and libya, and now is no longer
OR
he is a troll

xxx
While I've got no doubt that US and englander agents have been stirring up shit in Honkers it is naive and patronising to write off the entire situation as a mob of idiots being told what to do by USuk.

The root cause of the Honkers problem was the englander government's refusal to offer all the residents of Hongkong (remember they had been subjects of the englander queen for 100+ years), english citizenship when Honkers was returned to its legal owners.

If you actually listen to the occupy mob and the mouthpieces who support it, (journos and members of the legislative assembly), one quickly notices the prevalence of petit bourgeois englander accents.

Many of these types didn't require any encouragement from outside to be stirring shit.

It is disingenuous for Bernard to claim that the protests opposed to the Beijing screening then choosing candidates for Provincial Governor/Chief Executive or whatever it is called, are some sort of recent thing which HKers have only just picked up on. This issue was central to the demands of the HKers back when the english were running the joint and the english & chinese governments banded together to ignore the people's wishes at that time.

Since no one seriously imagines there is the slightest chance of HK becoming independant or even largely semi-autonomous it is equally silly to imagine USuk are seriously stirring up a colour revolution. It is in the interests of the globalists that HK stay exactly as it is - but this doesn't mean that USuk mind creating some chaos for the CP regime to have to deal with.

A minor prick into China's ass to remind Beijing that straying too far from the script at the security council will always result in payback.

So setting aside the deliberately provocative wind ups USuk has been engaged in, it is appropriate for normal humans to feel for the average HK shit-kicker. Many MoA habitues will be too young to remember when the englanders ruthlessly suppressed HK workers claims for equal wages with english workers back in the 1960's. At that time the englander government behaved exactly the same way - maybe worse than Beijing is currently alleged to be doing.
The englanders claimed that the workers were all 'Red Chinese' plants fighting for a commie takeover - The Harold Wilson Labour government was in power in england for much of this time, claiming to be fighting for trade unions and the working man, yet they were just another bunch of greedy white supremacists when push came to shove.

Instead of just mindlessly deciding 'my enemy's enemy is my friend', a self defeating and unsupportable cry which has been dragged out on MoA with gay abandon on most ME issues of late, how about recognising that all of these large states and their corporate puppet masters are a bunch of cunts who don't give a fuck about ordinary humans outside of the time us shitkickers' misery can be exploited for the greedheads' own ends.
The only way justice can be got for any of us is by way of a concerted push for decentralisation and the breaking up of these larger than can possibly be fair sovereign entities into much smaller units where there is only 2 or 3 degrees of separation between all citizens.

HK sure isn't the place where that can be advanced at the moment, because as I said earlier, the assholes in USuk plus the rest of the western neoliberals are just as opposed to and independent HK deep down as Beijing is.
Honkers works for them because it is part of China - break that relationship and the island's economic raison d'etre disappears.

amerika, england, france - most of western europe, in fact - including germany, have all got populations too large to be able to deliver the things that humans expect from their society.
These are the states in post industrial decline and the best candidates for the first wave of entropic decline and degeneration that would stir citizens into demanding then forcing decentralised political structures.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Oct 2, 2014 7:38:51 AM | 174

xxx
@137 Ming Chun Tang

Sorry, I am just going by what you write, but to be honest, from your posts, I can't help but get the sense that you don't actually know how the protests/the chief executive resigning/the popular vote will solve the neo-liberalism problem (or how these things are related to the problem at all), and as for most of the protesters, the have even less of an idea than you do, but just a sense of grievance.

So in what sense are you saying this is a fight against neo-liberalism?

Posted by: Chines american | Oct 2, 2014 8:04:56 AM | 175

xxx
So, Kerry is now making statements about US support of the protestors goals.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/10/02/380750/china-warns-us-over-hong-kong-meddling/

"As China knows, we support universal suffrage in Hong Kong, accordant with the Basic Law," Kerry told reporters, standing alongside Wang.

The Chinese official apparently meekly stood there and said something about China's internal affairs. Why? Why not bring up US treatment of the Occupy movement? Why not bring up militarization of US policing as seen in Ferguson? Why do these countries allow these schmucks to just spout off without calling them out?

Crazy.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 2, 2014 8:34:47 AM | 176

xxx
"We believe an open society with the highest possible degree of autonomy and governed by rule of law is essential for Hong Kong's stability and prosperity," Kerry added.

At this point in world history, for the US to bring up a Chinese territories "stability", this is just an open threat.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 2, 2014 8:37:44 AM | 177

xxx
amerika, england, france - most of western europe, in fact - including Germany, have all got populations too large to be able to deliver the things that humans expect from their society.

I don't think so. These countries have never in history been more capable of delivering peace, health, and a decent living standard to their peoples.

There is just an all out refusal to do so. This being on the part of those who own these countries and most everything in them.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 2, 2014 8:42:12 AM | 178

Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 2, 2014 9:14:15 AM | 179
The Chinese official apparently meekly stood there and said something about China's internal affairs. Why? Why not bring up US treatment of the Occupy movement? Why not bring up militarization of US policing as seen in Ferguson? Why do these countries allow these schmucks to just spout off without calling them out?
Crazy.
Posted by: guest77 | Oct 2, 2014 8:34:47 AM | 176

The Chinese coined the term Paper Tiger having seen, first-hand, what the cowardly, incompetent, racist schmucks did in, and to, Korea and 'Vietnam'.

The Chinese, like the Russians, think defensive bluster is a waste of breath.

They prefer the Ugly Truth ...
Those who can, do.
Those who can't, talk.
... incessantly in America's case.

xxx
neocons in Hong Kong

Hongkong Upheaval is Classic Neocon Regime Change "Color Revolution"

Sept. 30, 2014 (EIRNS)-Although there are multiple foreign "Project Democracy" operations involved in the current mass upheaval in Hongkong (such as substantial annual funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, and open support from Chris Patten, the last British colonial Lord of Hongkong), the most instructive input comes directly from the right-wing "neocon" movement in the US, through Hongkong's one and only "pro-democracy" newspaper, the Apple Daily.

Apple Daily was founded and run by Next Media chief Jimmy Lai (Lai Chee-Ying), who launched the media chain after the 1989 Tiananmen mass demonstrations in Beijing. He has funded the "democracy movement" groups in Hongkong for years, a fact that was revealed this past spring when his emails were leaked to the press. Jimmy Lai is now holding interviews from the streets of Hongkong, where tens of thousands of students have shut down major sections of the city since the weekend. Since riot police used pepper spray to clear out the rioters who had occupied a govenment building over the weekend, the riot police have pulled back and the demonstrators have taken over three main squares, sleeping out and refusing to leave.

The key role is that of Lai's bag-man and top assistant, Mark Simon, an American from Falls Church, Virginia, who previously worked for the Pentagon, did an internship with the CIA (where his father worked), and is a sworn defender and collaborator of the neo-con crowd which ran the Bush Administrations. The South China Morning Post revealed on August 11 that Simon, Lai, and Paul Wolfowitz spent five hours on a yacht in Hongkong (on an unspecified date), and Simon brags in interviews that he is a dedicated neocon. He was introduced to Lai by Bill McGurn, a leading neocon and G.W. Bush's chief speech writer. Lai, himself, reports Simon, "was truly friends with Milton Friedman and Gary Becker."

Tomorrow, Oct. 1, is National Day in China, commemorating the founding of the PRC in 1949, but most celebrations have been cancelled. The demonstrations in Hongkong are being covered in the mainland press, although in a low key manner, calling on the protesters to go home, and the local government not to give in. The International press is all rah-rah, warning of another Tiananmen "massacre."

http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2014/140930_hongkong_color_rev.html

Posted by: brian | Oct 2, 2014 10:09:45 AM | 180

xxx
forget hongkong

Ruptly ‏@Ruptly 7m7 minutes ago

Police clash with anti-#ECB protesters in #Napoli http://ow.ly/CcCWK

Posted by: brian | Oct 2, 2014 10:38:29 AM | 181

brian | Oct 2, 2014 10:40:36 AM | 182
a surprisingly decent piece on Putin in WSJ

'Russia has begun portraying the Hong Kong protests, too, as U.S.-inspired. Russian state-controlled television channels this week claimed that Hong Kong protest leaders had received American training.'

... ... ...

"Putin is a bold and decisive leader of a great power, who's good at achieving victory in a dangerous situation," said Maj. Gen. Wang Haiyun, a former military attaché to Moscow, in an interview with the Chinese website of the Global Times newspaper.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/why-russias-president-is-putin-the-great-in-china-1412217002

xxx
Is the BBC having second thoughts? Apparently not all Hong Kongers like the protests...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29460118

Posted by: dh | Oct 2, 2014 11:04:09 AM | 183

xxx
this is a repost about a less well known foreign instigated riot in tibet 1987. i want to highlight the modus operandi of fukus covert ops these days... sacrificing innocent dupes, children, women etc to further their nefarious scheme.

Hypocritical elegies

I learned of the participation of some 50 *foreign tourists* in the recent Lhasa riots with considerable outrage. But not exactly surprise.

I've been a foreign tourist in Tibet myself on three occasions since 1985. Each time, I met tourist after tourist who, in an interval of a few weeks at most, had become infatuated with a kind of vicarious Tibetan nationalism, Sometimes it was because of one or two conversations with inevitably pro- Western English-speaking Tibetans (there are many returnees from India now); [1] sometimes it was a rather thoughtless extension of genuine awe for Tibetan culture. But often enough it was something much more sinister. Many a blond, blue-eyed "Tibetan" nationalist with a backpack [1] was convinced that the Tibetans were nothing but a race of "noble savages," doomed to the same kind of extinction at the hands of the Hans that native Americans have suffered at the hands of the West.

Such hypocritical elegies are premature, to say the least. But there can be no reasoning with these bigoted "saviours" of the Tibetan people. They do not care that there are fewer than 100,000 Hans in Tibet and there were undoubtedly even fewer during the Cultural Revolution (actually, an anti-communist travel guide, the Lonely Planet Tibet Survival Kit, even admits that most of the damage was done by people who were ethnically Tibetan).

They do not care that there is not a single Chinese "multi-national" corporation in Tibet pumping the area of its non-existent wealth. They don't care that Tibet has never paid a fen in taxes and has on the contrary been richly subsidised for everything from education to industry to commerce. They don't care that the people's republic has waged a long, tough fight to modernise Tibet; in fact, they don't care at all about the modernisation of Tibet, as they themselves will tell you. They are beyond such arguments and mundane concerns; somehow they have all become fanatical vicarious Buddhists and are ready to lay down other people's lives to prove it,

What is really behind all this bornagain Buddhism on the part of foreign tourists to Tibet? Why do young Westerners who wouldn't waste 5 minutes on a religious fanatic in their own country and live in horror of Khomeini in Iran suddenly become devoted (if somewhat patronising) followers of the Dalai Lama, a kind of super-Khomeini who longs for the days when every pebble and tree in Tibet is his personal property. It is not simply ignorance, though there is plenty of that. It is, in a word, racism. Not just racist hatred for the Han people (though I have certainly
heard enough tourists describe Hans as "animals," meaning everything from their behaviour on buses to their alleged "occupation" of Tibet).
It is a particularly sickening kind of patronisation of the Tibetan people, who they see as a simple, happy, carefree race of child-like savages, free from the cares of the modern world and most in need of advice on how to remain so. I know this kind of patronisation. It is the sort enjoyed by native Americans when the reservations were set up and by Black people in the US as a way of keeping them out of White schools and successful careers that would only make them unhappy. It is this kind of patronisation which, in this world, is ultimately genocidal. There can be no better proof than the apparent willingness of large numbers of foreign tourists to bravely risk the lives of large numbers of Tibetan women and children in the name of the travellers' new-found convictions.
According to the REVIEW [15 Oct.], the mob used children to seize automatic weapons from policemen and set a car alight at the height of the violence. Of course, that is horrible, callous, cynical manipulation. But there are plenty of foreign tourists who would use the whole of the Tibetan people to take out their petty anti-communism and narrow-mindedness on China. Let Tibet forever remain closed to such cynical travelling "nationalists"! Or, better yet ... let them come, let them leave their money in the autonomous region, and let them take their idiotic notions of an "independent" Tibet (hopelessly dependent on the West) with them when they leave.
Canton David Kellogg

[1]
i wonder how many of these *tourists* had a desk back in langley ?

Posted by: denk | Oct 2, 2014 12:59:23 PM | 186

xxx
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/10/02/hong-o02.html

While a narrow layer of super-wealthy tycoons has prospered, the living standards of the majority of working people have fallen. Jobs in manufacturing have been replaced by low-wage positions in service industries that benefitted from a growing numbers of tourists from the Chinese mainland. Despite declining real wages, the cost of living, especially housing costs, have risen sharply. The waiting time for public housing has blown out to ten years, forcing the low paid into makeshift accommodation and what are known as "cage homes."[...]

These pressing social issues, however, find no expression in the perspective advanced by those parties and organisations dominating the current protests-the pan-Democrats, Occupy Central and various student groups-which are all, despite tactical differences, narrowly focussed on ensuring opposition candidates can stand in the 2017 election. This is a significant factor in the predominantly middle class composition of the protest movement and its failure to attract substantial support from the working class.[...]

The demand for full and open elections reflects the interests of layers of the Hong Kong elite who resent being marginalised by pro-Beijing tycoons and fear that the Beijing's control over Hong Kong's political affairs will undermine its competitiveness as an Asian financial centre. This wealthy stratum is determined to defend what it regards as Hong Kong's competitive advantage, particularly over Chinese financial centres such as Shanghai: the long-established defence of capitalist property that unpins all commercial and financial transactions and is entrenched in the legal system established under British colonial rule.[...]

Even if the opposition parties and organisations achieved their objective in full-an open election in 2017 for chief executive-the result would be a contest, dominated by big money, between candidates representing rival factions of the Hong Kong tycoons.

The pro-Western orientation of much of the official Hong Kong opposition leaves the present protests open to manipulation by the major imperialist powers. At this stage, the US and Britain have expressed concerns, but not called for the resignation of Hong Kong's chief executive or explicitly backed the opposition's demands over the 2017 election.

Posted by: okie farmer | Oct 2, 2014 1:04:04 PM | 187

denk | Oct 2, 2014 1:32:11 PM | 188
to recap what brian has reported so far....

http://www.sott.net/article/286488-Another-US-sponsored-revolution-Hong-Kong-student-leader-accused-of-US-government-ties

*Do you remember the "please help us" video clip from Ukraine?

Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgpELf-0X8E

And here you have another "please help us" video. This time from Hong-Kong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vvxlGUki7U

Did you notice any similarities? :)

xxx
Excellent article from Ambrose Evans Pritchard.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/11134755/Hong-Kong-crisis-exposes-impossible-contradiction-of-Chinas-economic-growth.html

Posted by: Willy2 | Oct 2, 2014 2:46:07 PM | 190

brian | Oct 2, 2014 5:44:16 PM | 193
@188

very interesting, as is this comment left by someone

Do you remember the "please help us" video clip from Ukraine?

Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgpELf-0X8E

And here you have another "please help us" video. This time from Hong-Kong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vvxlGUki7U

Did you notice any similarities? :)

also its 'open' societies that are more prone to penetration/infiltration by foreign powers

xxx
This helps one understand the riots:

Hong Kong and China: One Country, Two Histories

Unlike pupils in most schools around the world, students in secondary school in Hong Kong will see history twice on their timetables. Chinese History to teach them about their national past and History to teach them about their local and global story.

In Chinese History, pupils study the long and glorious history of the Middle Kingdom. From the first people to inhabit the China, through the rise and fall of dynasties, to the first half of the 20th century and the mass movements that period produced. Students are taught the basis for their nation, and the foundation for a pervasive nationalism. The Hong Kong Education Bureau's syllabus makes quite clear that the aim of the subject is in part to "nurture a sense of belonging to the Chinese nation and ethnicity."

Compare this with the aims of History – a subject that teaches local and global history in English – to "prepare students for citizenship," "develop values and attitudes in relation to moral, civic, and environmental education," and crucially "relate the study of the past to contemporary life." It is in the syllabus of this course that we can see how Hong Kong's values, variously defined as a commitment to liberty, equality, rule of law, and democracy, are developed and reinforced.

With a colonial foundation and Western inspiration, the History curriculum frames the history of Hong Kong in the development of universal ideals and liberal modernity. …

In Form 2, students are taught the "Transition to Modern Times." With themes like the rise in living standards due to the Industrial Revolution, and the impact of the Enlightenment and French Revolution on the world, they learn about the origins of modernity. The individual is at the heart of these movements, and the modernity that students are being told of is decidedly Western and not all that Chinese. …

The splitting of Hong Kong and China's histories serves to illustrate how difficult it has been and how difficult it will continue to be to integrate Hong Kong, with a globally informed political view, into a China that is actively seeking an alternative path.

For "global", read Anglophone.

What people are taught about history and politics in high school certainly molds their ideology. That Ukrainians have been taught using a highly nationalistic and Russophobic curriculum for 23 years explains explains why they are willing to make cannon fodder of themselves for the glory of a unified Ukraine. An interesting Russian piece I read pointed out that unlike Americans, Europeans, and Russians, Ukrainians do not appear to care in the least about the death and maiming of their soldiers. The country has become zombified.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 2, 2014 6:02:12 PM | 194

xxx
Posted by: denk | Oct 2, 2014 12:59:23 PM | 186

lets not get carried away! i happen to be a student of Tibetan buddhism..tho not DL, and a quite aware of western infiltration into tibet in order tro surround china wih a ring of american steel

Posted by: brian | Oct 2, 2014 6:04:00 PM | 195

Demian | Oct 2, 2014 6:30:51 PM | 196
@brian #193:

Brilliant catch! The juxtaposition of those two videos tells you everything you need to know about the Hong Kong riots. That comment deserves to be front paged. (I still don't think that snipers will be used in Hong Kong, though.)

As is the case with ISIS, MoA is turning out to be my most useful source of information.

For the Euromaidan video, I used the Youtube comment translation feature for the first time: very nice. Since the vast majority of commenters are Polish, it comes as no surprise that most comments are very stupid.

@Ming Chun Tang:

I'm curious, what do you think of the Euromaidan? Do you know what Occupy Hong Kong people think about it? What the Occupy Hong Kong people are doing – camping out in the center of the city, causing much mischief – seems to be identical to what Euromaidan did. The only difference is that Occupy has not thrown Molotov cocktails at police or shot them yet.

@Chinese american:

I believe you are new here. Welcome!

xxx
I found out from thiis post at the same Web site as in #194 that International Relations actually has a concept of a revisionist power. How diabolically imperialist. When I read the following in a hit piece on Russia, I thought the author's use of the word "revisionist" in this sense was peculiar to him:
Nurturing Chinese distance from a revisionist Russia is especially important, as is fostering the independence of states in Central Asia and the Caucasus.
From Wikipedia:
Organski and Jacek Kugler defined status quo states as those that have participated in designing "the rules of the game" and stand to benefit from these rules. Challengers, or "revisionist states", want "a new place for themselves in the international society" commensurate with their power.
Given that Russia was one of the victors of WW II, and hence participated in setting up the rules of the game embodied in the UN, it is by definition a status quo state. It is the US that is the revisionist, since with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US started aiming for ""a new place for [itself] in the international society": that of unopposed world hegemon. Destroying nations, which the US began to do with Yugoslavia, thus violating the UN Charter, is not the behavior of a status quo power.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 2, 2014 6:57:14 PM | 197

xxx
@197 Demian- "Given that Russia was one of the victors of WW II, and hence participated in setting up the rules of the game embodied in the UN, it is by definition a status quo state. It is the US that is the revisionist, since with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US started aiming for ""a new place for [itself] in the international society": that of unopposed world hegemon. "

Wow. Damn. Dead on.

Thanks Demian. I'll be using that one.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 2, 2014 7:01:34 PM | 198

xxx
@guest77 #198:

I just look at these things from Lavrov's point of view. ;-)

It all depends on what you take the status quo to be. Russia takes the status quo to be the end of WW II; the US takes it to be the period of Yeltsin's Russia.

That Wikipedia article is worth reading, since it helps one understand how US foreign policy types think.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 2, 2014 7:19:14 PM | 199

It would be interesting to see at what stage snipers will enter the picture in this color revolution. Here are some interesting comments from social sites:

Fern, September 30, 2014 at 5:17 am
...There's a never-ending, never-satiated appetite in the West for articles like the one by Lilia Shevtsova you deconstruct so well. It's a real cottage industry and one that probably pays quite well. These screeds are always fact-free zones but are received as though handed down on tablets of stone from the mountain and quoted and re-quoted as unimpeachable sources. A comment on the appalling intellectual vacuousness of the West as much as anything else – it's just supply and demand.

Today's going to be interesting. The mandarins of the EU are meeting to 'review' the ceasefire in Ukraine – if they're happy with it, they may lift some sanctions on Russia.

And, in other news, right on cue, HRW issues a statement calling on the Hong Kong authorities not to use force against the protestors there – a sure sign the latest colour revolution is up and running. Since CR@2 seem to involve far more violence than CR@1, so HK could be in for rocky times.

This has appeared on 'Moon of Alabama' but is worth repeating here – the National Endowment of Democracy's 2012 funding of the very subject that's now in the news.

National Democratic Institute for International Affairs
$460,000
To foster awareness regarding Hong Kong's political institutions and constitutional reform process and to develop the capacity of citizens – particularly university students – to more effectively participate in the public debate on political reform, NDI will work with civil society organizations on parliamentary monitoring, a survey, and development of an Internet portal, allowing students and citizens to explore possible reforms leading to universal suffrage.

(Extract from NED's 2102 Annual Report)

All a happy coincidence, no doubt.

marknesop , October 1, 2014 at 9:08 pm

Ummmm….who is the democratic freedomizer waiting in Hong Kong's wings? To the best of my knowledge there is no Chinese Navalny. Who have the "peaceful protesters" got in mind if Leung resigns (which I very much doubt he will)?

China better not dick around with this, because you know what's next if the street mobs don't get it done. Cue the rooftop snipers.

Moscow Exile, October 1, 2014 at 10:32 pm

So it's started!

Kerry has called on HK police to show restraint over the "pro-democracy" movement.

So I suppose they can start lobbing Molotov cocktails at them now, knowing that "the Americans are with us", as they liked to chant in the Ukraine.

China is not pleased.

The Grauniad reports a report by a press agency, and a French one to boot:

Hong Kong protests: China warns US not to meddle in 'internal affairs'

Moscow Exile, October 1, 2014 at 10:45 pm

And accusations in the comments of Putinbots metamorphosing into Chinabots are now already appearing.

Langleybots at work?

astabada , October 2, 2014 at 1:50 am

I think we'll see two key differences vis-a-vis the Ukraine:
1 – the difference between a country thoroughly infiltrated by Western agents and one which is not
2 – the difference between a true leadership and an oligarchy of crooks.

yalensis, October 2, 2014 at 2:33 am

Expect to see mysterious "snipers" show up at some point, to stir the pot.

Moscow Exile, October 2, 2014 at 2:44 am

Nay, before that happens that old fart McCain has to fly in and say to them "America is with you!"

yalensis, October 2, 2014 at 3:29 am

A cia-bot named "jecoz" posts this inane comment:

Here we go another home-grown rebellion against a dictatorship and the leftist faithful blame America instead of supporting those who dare to defy an unelected tyrant. Message to china and her guardianista lackeys: the US has nothing to do with this. Just try to resist the temptation to bring in the tanks and run over people please.

Which is responded to by "JiminNH" (2 OCT 3:51 AM), with supporting links, regarding the ties of the Chinese dissidents with U.S. State Dept.

Are you so sure about your assertions? Did you actually inquire into the facts before making that definitive statement?

If so, you missed the following articles from April 2014 regarding two of the foremost protest leaders (Anson Chan and Marin Lee) meeting with US VP Joe Biden:

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1466666/beijing-upset-after-martin-lee-and-anson-chan-meet-joe-biden-white

http://www.worldtribune.com/2014/04/14/china-gets-vulgar-white-house-meeting-hong-kong-pro-democracy-leaders/

You also missed this about Occupy Central leader Prof. Benny Tai and his several year relationship with the US State Dept's National Endowment for Democracy and the National Democratic Institute: http://journal-neo.org/2014/10/01/hong-kong-s-occupy-central-is-us-backed-sedition/

(…)

In other words, this is CRC ("Colour Revolution Classic") at its best, Gene Sharp style.
With Jen Psaki mewing about the lovely winsome students seeking democracy, etc.

The18-year-old Chinese freshmen are admittedly a tad more winsome than grizzled old Ukrainian Nazis like Tahnybok; however, in the latter case, Psaki had to improvise and just toss in whatever debris she had in her scrap heap; whereas, the storyboard arc for the Chinese revolution seems to have been better plotted out over a longer period of time.

Jen, October 2, 2014 at 5:30 am

That bespectacled geeky student leader Joshua Wong and his Scholarism group are said to be receiving money from the US Consulate in HK and secret American donors. I've heard also that another of those Occupy Central leaders, Jimmy Lai, has met with Paul Wolfowitz in the past.

US Openly Approves Hong Kong Chaos it Created by Tony Cartalucci

Land Destroyer

Image: The US now openly supports chaos on the streets of Hong Kong, this
after condemning "occupy" protests in Bangkok earlier this year. The
difference being in Thailand, protests sought to oust a US proxy, Hong Kong
protests seek to put one into power.
September 30, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - The "Occupy Central" protests in Hong Kong continue on - destabilizing the small southern Chinese island famous as an international hub for corporate-financier interests, and before that, the colonial ambitions of the British Empire. Those interests have been conspiring for years to peel the island away from Beijing after it was begrudgingly returned to China in the late 1990's, and use it as a springboard to further destabilize mainland China.

Behind the so-called "Occupy Central" protests, which masquerade as a "pro-democracy" movement seeking "universal suffrage" and "full democracy," is a deep and insidious network of foreign financial, political, and media support. Prominent among them is the US State Department and its National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as well as NED's subsidiary, the National Democratic Institute (NDI).

Now, the US has taken a much more overt stance in supporting the chaos their own manipulative networks have prepared and are now orchestrating. The White House has now officially backed "Occupy Central." Reuters in its article, "White House Shows Support For Aspirations Of Hong Kong People," would claim:

The White House is watching democracy protests in Hong Kong closely and supports the "aspirations of the Hong Kong people," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said on Monday. "
The United States supports universal suffrage in Hong Kong in accordance with the Basic Law and we support the aspirations of the Hong Kong people," said Earnest, who also urged restraint on both sides.
US State Department Has Built Up and Directs "Occupy Central"

Image: The US through NED and its subsidiaries have a long history of
promoting subversion and division within China.
Earnest's comments are verbatim the demands of "Occupy Central" protest leaders, but more importantly, verbatim the long-laid designs the US State Department's NDI articulates on its own webpage dedicated to its ongoing meddling in Hong Kong. The term "universal suffrage"and reference to "Basic Law" and its "interpretation" to mean "genuine democracy" is stated clearly on NDI's website which claims:
The Basic Law put in place a framework of governance, whereby special interest groups, or "functional constituencies," maintain half of the seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo). At present, Hong Kong's chief executive is also chosen by an undemocratically selected committee. According to the language of the Basic Law, however, "universal suffrage" is the "ultimate aim." While "universal suffrage" remains undefined in the law, Hong Kong citizens have interpreted it to mean genuine democracy.

To push this agenda - which essentially is to prevent Beijing from vetting candidates running for office in Hong Kong, thus opening the door to politicians openly backed, funded, and directed by the US State Department - NDI lists an array of ongoing meddling it is carrying out on the island. It states:

Since 1997, NDI has conducted a series of missions to Hong Kong to consider the development of Hong Kong's "post-reversion" election framework, the status of autonomy, rule of law and civil liberties under Chinese sovereignty, and the prospects for, and challenges to democratization.
It also claims:
In 2005, NDI initiated a six-month young political leaders program focused on training a group of rising party and political group members in political communications skills.
And:
NDI has also worked to bring political parties, government leaders and civil society actors together in public forums to discuss political party development, the role of parties in Hong Kong and political reform. In 2012, for example, a conference by Hong Kong think tank SynergyNet supported by NDI featured panelists from parties across the ideological spectrum and explored how adopting a system of coalition government might lead to a more responsive legislative process.
NDI also admits it has created, funded, and backed other organizations operating in Hong Kong toward achieving the US State Department's goals of subverting Beijing's control over the island:
In 2007, the Institute launched a women's political participation program that worked with the Women's Political Participation Network (WPPN) and the Hong Kong Federation of Women's Centres (HKFWC) to enhance women's participation in policy-making, encourage increased participation in politics and ensure that women's issues are taken into account in the policy-making process.

And on a separate page, NDI describes programs it is conducting with the University of Hong Kong to achieve its agenda:
The Centre for Comparative and Public Law (CCPL) at the University of Hong Kong, with support from NDI, is working to amplify citizens' voices in that consultation process by creating Design Democracy Hong Kong (www.designdemocracy.hk), a unique and neutral website that gives citizens a place to discuss the future of Hong Kong's electoral system.
It should be no surprise to readers then, to find out each and every "Occupy Central" leader is either directly linked to the US State Department, NED, and NDI, or involved in one of NDI's many schemes.

Image: Benny Tai, "Occupy Central's" leader, has spent years associated with
and benefiting from US State Department cash and support.
"Occupy Central's" self-proclaimed leader, Benny Tai, is a law professor at the aforementioned University of Hong Kong and a regular collaborator with the NDI-funded CCPL. In 2006-2007 (annual report, .pdf) he was named as a board member - a position he has held until at least as recently as last year. In CCPL's 2011-2013 annual report (.pdf), NDI is listed as having provided funding to the organization to "design and implement an online Models of Universal Suffrage portal where the general public can discuss and provide feedback and ideas on which method of universal suffrage is most suitable for Hong Kong."

Curiously, in CCPL's most recent annual report for 2013-2014 (.pdf), Tai is not listed as a board member. However, he is listed as participating in at least 3 conferences organized by CCPL, and as heading at least one of CCPL's projects. At least one conference has him speaking side-by-side another prominent "Occupy Central" figure, Audrey Eu. The 2013-2014 annual report also lists NDI as funding CCPL's "Design Democracy Hong Kong" website.


Civic Party chairwoman Audrey Eu Yuet-mee, in addition to speaking at CCPL-NDI functions side-by-side with Benny Tai, is entwined with the US State Department and its NDI elsewhere. She regularly attends forums sponsored by NED and its subsidiary NDI. In 2009 she was a featured speaker at an NDI sponsored public policy forum hosted by "SynergyNet," also funded by NDI. In 2012 she was a guest speaker at the NDI-funded Women's Centre "International Women's Day" event, hosted by the Hong Kong Council of Women (HKCW) which is also annually funded by the NDI.

Image: Martin Lee and Anson Chan belly up to the table with US Vice President Joseph Biden in Washington DC earlier this year. During their trip, both Lee and Chan would attend a NED-hosted talk about the future of "democracy" in Hong Kong. Undoubtedly, "Occupy Central" and Washington's support of it was a topic reserved for behind closed doors.

There is also Martin Lee, founding chairman of Hong Kong's Democrat Party and another prominent figure who has come out in support of "Occupy Central." Just this year, Lee was in Washington meeting directly with US Vice President Joseph Biden, US Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, and even took part in an NED talk hosted specifically for him and his agenda of "democracy" in Hong Kong. Lee even has a NED page dedicated to him after he was awarded in 1997 NED's "Democracy Award." With him in Washington was Anson Chan, another prominent figure currently supporting the ongoing unrest in Hong Kong's streets.


"Occupy Central's" Very Unpopular Agenda

If democracy is characterized by self-rule, than an "Occupy Central" movement in which every prominent figure is the benefactor of and beholden to foreign cash, support, and a foreign-driven agenda, has nothing at all to do with democracy. It does have, however, everything to do with abusing democracy to undermine Beijing's control over Hong Kong, and open the door to candidates that clearly serve foreign interests, not those of China, or even the people of Hong Kong.

Image: The National Endowment for Democracy and its various subsidiaries including the National Democratic Institute, are backed by immense corporate-financier interests who merely couch their hegemonic agenda behind "promoting democracy" and "freedom" worldwide. Above is a representation of the interests present upon NED's board of directors.

What is more telling is the illegal referendum "Occupy Central" conducted earlier this year in an attempt to justify impending, planned chaos in Hong Kong's streets. The referendum focused on the US State Department's goal of implementing "universal suffrage" - however, only a fifth of Hong Kong's electorate participated in the referendum, and of those that did participate, no alternative was given beyond US-backed organizations and their respective proposals to undermine Beijing.

The BBC would report in its article, "Hong Kong democracy 'referendum' draws nearly 800,000," that:

A total of 792,808 voters took part in an unofficial referendum on universal suffrage in Hong Kong, organisers said.
The 10-day poll was held by protest group Occupy Central.
Campaigners want the public to be able to elect Hong Kong's leader, the chief executive. The Hong Kong government says the vote has no legal standing.
About 42% of voters backed a proposal allowing the public, a nominating committee, and political parties to name candidates for the top job.
For a protest movement that claims it stands for "democracy," implied to mean the will of the people, it has an unpopular agenda clearly rejected by the vast majority of Hong Kong's population - and is now disrupting vital parts of the island, holding the population and stability hostage to push its agenda. All of this is being orchestrated and supported by the United States, its State Department, and its network of global sedition operating under NED and its subsidiary NDI.

While the Western media shows mobs of "thousands" implying that "the people" support ongoing chaos in Hong Kong's streets, "Occupy Central's" own staged, illegal referendum proves it does not have the backing of the people and that its agenda is rejected both by mainland China and the people of Hong Kong.

Exposing the insidious, disingenuous, foreign-driven nature of "Occupy Central" is important. It is also important to objectively examine each and every protest that springs up around the world. Superficiality cannot "link" one movement to another, one group to hidden special interests. Rather, one must adhere to due diligence in identifying and profiling the leaders, following the money, identifying their true motivations, and documenting their links to special interests within or beyond the borders of the nation the protests are taking place in.

By doing this, movements like "Occupy Central" can be exposed, blunted, and rolled over before the destruction and chaos other US-backed destabilization efforts have exacted elsewhere - namely the Middle East and Ukraine - can unfold in Hong Kong.

[Sep 29, 2014] Beijing reaps bitter fruit in Hong Kong By Peter Lee

atimes.com

It's becoming easier to understand why the People's Republic of China landed on Ilham Tohti, the Uyghur "public intellectual", like a ton of bricks.

Judging from the admittedly selective excerpts used at the kangaroo court to damn him to "indefinite detention", reported perhaps not inaccurately in the West as a "life sentence", Ilham had hoped to use his bully pulpit at a Xinjiang university to nurture a cadre of students with a strong sense of Uyghur identity, alienated from the PRC regime and convinced of the right and

need to agitate for greater Xinjiang autonomy in the face of an alien occupying power.

Then, perhaps, Xinjiang politics would have evolved into the politics of perpetual, continually aggravated, and burgeoning grievance and ever-more-entrenched spirit of resistance that one sees in Palestine - or on the streets of Hong Kong today.

The Hong Kong police showed a poor understanding of the street theater of populist politics in response to the provocations of the student vanguard of the Occupy movement, trotting out the tear gas and rubber bullets in a misguided effort to clear roads in the Admiralty district, and they have lost the public relations battle for now, and perhaps forever.

In retrospect, perhaps the strategists in Hong Kong and Beijing might have concluded it would be better for the police to stand by and allow the students to storm their way into various government offices - over the weekend, for goodness sakes! - and let public opinion chew for a few days over the issue of whether it welcomed this kind of confrontational politics. After all, that's how the much-maligned KMT government in Taiwan handled the Sunflower occupation of the Legislative Yuan a few weeks back; as a result, the PR gains of the students appear to have been relatively transitory, and the uneasy balance between "let's give the PRC the middle finger" and "don't rock the boat" factions seems to have been preserved.

Based on dismal results in places like Egypt, Pakistan, and Ukraine, I am not a big fan of the "student activists raise a ruckus in the main square" brand of democracy. If Hong Kong democracy activists had wanted to give voice to the popular mood, instead of driving the opinion process through confrontational street action, they could have organized boycotts of the 2017 polls (which, if the relevant bill passes the local legislature, will involve universal popular suffrage to vote for candidates screened by a committee of presumably PRC-inclined worthies).

However, the alienation of many Hong Kong people, particularly those on the younger side of an increasingly stark generational divide, toward the PRC and the disruptions that PRC citizens have brought to the economic and social life of the city, is profound; and the PRC's disturbing (and perhaps violent) efforts to put a tighter leash on local media indicate that Beijing is attempting to manage and restrain political expression in Hong Kong.

An unofficial civic referendum (actually offering democracy supporters a choice between three different pro-democracy options) attracted almost 800,000 voters, equivalent to about one-fifth of the city's electorate.

So there was a big fat fuse just lying there, and Occupy Hong Kong decided to light it, starting with a class boycott and demonstrations organized by the Hong Kong Federation of Students. And, since I'm never afraid to mix a metaphor, the Hong Kong government poured fuel on the fire by pepper-spraying and tear-gassing it.

Over at Reuters, John Pomfret provided some context for the police response:

Hundreds of pro-democracy activists stormed government headquarters [sic] late on Friday after student leaders demanding greater democracy urged them to charge into the compound.

Police used pepper spray as the protesters smashed barriers and climbed over fences in chaotic scenes in the heart of the Asian financial centre, following Beijing's decision to rule out free elections for the city's leader in 2017.

One student leader, Joshua Wong, a thin 17-year-old with dark-rimmed glasses and bowl-cut hair, was dragged away by police kicking and screaming as protesters chanted and struggled to free him. [1]

Wonder how much of that context will be remembered by the media, much of which has put on its Tiananmen! Today! goggles as well as teargas goggles to report the unrest.

The Tiananmen analogies are, in my opinion, a barrier to understanding what's going on.

Tiananmen 1989 was a remonstrance/petitioning movement that eschewed disobedience beyond passive resistance and had no political endgame beyond hopes that the regime would respond to its moral suasion by implementing democratic reforms. If there were political calculations to utilize the demonstrations to advance a concrete agenda, they came from reformers inside the elite.

Occupy Hong Kong is a carefully planned program of civil disobedience, escalation, and provocation meant to provoke a political crisis that will polarize Hong Kong opinion on behalf of the democracy movement and force the elite to support the demands of the movement in order to maintain their local positions of power and prosperity.

And, to make an observation that will probably not endear me to the democracy movement, the 1989 student movement was a popular response to a marked crisis of governance, economic management, and corruption by the PRC regime. On the other hand, it appears to me that the Occupy Hong Kong movement was sparked by the announcement of a proposed reform for the 2017 election - universal suffrage - and the calculation by democracy activists that the experience of actually voting for some candidate, albeit Beijing vetted, might fatally beguile Hong Kongers with the PRC's implementation of managed democracy and make agitation for full democracy more difficult.

It should also be said that Dr Benny Tai, one of the organizers of the Hong Kong movement, is no Wuerkaixi, the grandiose, self-aggrandizing, and ultimately feckless face of the 1989 movement. He is a law professor at University of Hong Kong, smart and savvy, and I think he has envisioned plausible endgames that don't involve Beijing sending in the army to crush local unrest a la Tiananmen and martyr his student activists - though I'm sure this is one of the critical scenarios he has to game.

For me, a key "tell" as to the fortunes and strategy of the democracy movement as the political crisis evolves will be whether and how it focuses its ire on the business elite that provides the local support and financial muscle for Beijing's control of the territory.

Will some tycoons be tagged as collaborators and find their local reputation and interests threatened? While others are quietly approached to suggest the advisability of hedging their bets between Hong Kong and Beijing? Time, as they say, will tell.

I imagine that the first reaction of President Xi Jinping and the CCP will be frustration with their local cats'-paws in Hong Kong for failing to keep a lid on the situation and, when things got out of hand, inflaming it. So I guess the Hong Kong portfolio will be handed to some clandestine crisis-management team.

As to the options available to Beijing, one is, of course, send in the tanks! - and endure international obloquy and the undying hatred of the citizens of Hong Kong.

Another, which attracts less interest among the Tiananmen-fixated, is to let Hong Kong stew in its own juice, allow the dysfunction to burgeon until a local backlash is triggered or, failing that, at least stew until the local worthies have had enough and publicly petition Beijing to help them out of the mess, perhaps through an ultimatum coupled with some post-2017 legal legerdemain relating to the electoral commission.

Western reporting seems to be all over the map, albeit with a heavy Tiananmen Redux overlay in many occasions.

There is a significant population of journos that Beijing has expelled or otherwise mistreated; some of them are in Hong Kong or itching to get there, and I suspect many of them, while maintaining the strictest standards of reportorial objectivity, will not be unhappy for this opportunity to put the boot in on the regime.

One of the most irritating canards that is presumably an Occupy Hong Kong meme that some journalists have picked up is "Xi Should Be More Like Deng" - ie adopt Deng's flexible, pragmatic ways in dealing with the Hong Kong situation.

As a reminder, Deng was not afraid to play the Hong Kong invasion card in his discussions with Margaret Thatcher:

The Chinese were ready to resort to "requisition by force" if the negotiations had set off unrest in the colony, said Lu Ping, who later headed negotiations with Chris Patten, the last governor.

[Then prime minister and later] Baroness Thatcher said later that Deng Xiaoping, then China's leader, told her directly: "I could walk in and take the whole lot this afternoon." [2]

Deng was also the architect of Hong Kong's managed democracy structure. And, of course, Deng green-lighted the entry of the armed forces into Beijing on June 3-4, 1989.

With Tiananmen on the lips of so many commentators, the assertion that Xi Jinping should take his grievance-management cues from Deng Xiaoping is borderline ludicrous.

Selective memory has also found its way into reporting (or at least headline-writing) Occupy's claims that the current democracy movement was triggered by Beijing "reneging" on its promise of democracy for Hong Kong by scheduling universal suffrage for 2017, but insisting that only candidates vetted by the commission could run for office.

As far as I understand it, the commission set-up was integral to Beijing's foundational plan for Hong Kong. In other words, the PRC would commit to 50 years of free rein for business/society only if the direct democracy genie could be kept in the bottle by controlling the list of candidates eligible for office.

I also suspect that the PRC told the Thatcher government that, if the UK tried to belatedly introduce full direct democracy in Hong Kong prior to 1997 (as Chris Patten championed) and burden the PRC with the unpleasant task of rolling back a democratic status quo when it claimed sovereignty over the territory, that would be a trigger for the real Occupy Hong Kong - by China.

As noted above, Deng Xiaoping was the conceptual architect of the strategy to install a "kill switch" on Hong Kong democracy and balance Hong Kong's economic and social freedoms under the "one country two systems" formula with political control by keeping hostile administrators out of the Hong Kong political mix.

Here's what Deng Xiaoping said about the Hong Kong rule in 1984:

Some requirements or qualifications should be established with regard to the administration of Hong Kong affairs by the people of Hong Kong. It must be required that patriots form the main body of administrators, that is, of the future government of the Hong Kong special region. Of course it should include other Chinese, too, as well as foreigners invited to serve as advisers. What is a patriot? A patriot is one who respects the Chinese nation, sincerely supports the motherland's resumption of sovereignty over Hong Kong and wishes not to impair Hong Kong's prosperity and stability. Those who meet these requirements are patriots, whether they believe in capitalism or feudalism or even slavery. We don't demand that they be in favour of China's socialist system; we only ask them to love the motherland and Hong Kong. [3]
And here's how that intention was implemented in Article 45 of the Hong Kong Basic Law, which became the effective constitution of Hong Kong upon reversion in 1997:
The Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government.

The method for selecting the Chief Executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures. [4]

Clearly, the PRC's envisioned terminus (the "ultimate aim") of the democratic reform line is universal suffrage to vote for candidates put forth by a nominating committee, not universal suffrage in the nomination as well as election process, which is the Occupy Hong Kong movement's demand.

If the PRC government revised, promised to revise, or hinted it would revise this understanding to do away with its most important tool for controlling electoral politics in Hong Kong, the nominating committee, please let me know. Until then, I will regard the "China reneged/broke its democracy promise" line as a canard peddled to provide unnatural enhancement to the legitimacy of the Occupy movement.

"We don't like the Basic Law and want to overturn it after 17 years through street action" is, I suppose, a tougher sell than "China broke its promise" but, in my opinion, it's more honest.

But I have a feeling that legalistic quibbling has been overtaken by the outrage that "the Hong Kong government gassed its own people", which, perhaps, is the place that the democracy movement hoped the debate would end up in the first place.

Notes:
1. Hong Kong students storm government HQ to demand full democracy, Reuters, September 26, 2014.
2. China plotted Hong Kong invasion, The Australian, June 25, 2007.
3. One Country, Two Systems, peopledaily.com, June 23-24, 1984.
4. See here.

Peter Lee writes on East and South Asian affairs and their intersection with US foreign policy.

[Sep 25, 2014] US backed colour revolution in Hong Kong

Sep 25, 2014 | pravda.ru

'The leaders of the protest movement "Occupy Central", which organizes in Hong Kong various public events with the requirements of the democratization of the election system, were trained in workshops held in the "Hong Kong-American Center."

It is noteworthy that they were trained in the spring and in protests started in summer. Officially stated purpose of the nonprofit organization is "to promote mutual understanding between the Chinese and the Americans", ITAR-TASS reported.

Pravda.Ru, noted that it is a social movement in Hong Kong, which formally aims to reform the electoral system. All this reminds effort of Russian, but also financed by Americans, NGO "Voice".

During the workshops, some international experts taught them the tactics of protest actions, negotiation strategies with the authorities in a large-scale popular uprisings, stressed they key point that can't be compromised in the list of political demands points, says Chinese newspaper "Huanqiu Shibao".

Head of the "Hong Kong-American Center," Morton Holbrook appointed to this position at the end of last year, is in the words of the newspaper "an important spy," with about 30 years service in the American intelligence agencies, says "Huanqiu Shibao." As noted in the article, Holbrook, as well as Hong Kong media mogul Jimmy Lai, the key sponsor of the opposition, are close to Paul Wolfowitz.

"One gets the impression that the United States-based "Hong Kong-American center "is trying to reuse the experience of Eastern European "color revolutions" in Hong Kong in order to influence the internal situation," - emphasizes the newspaper.

Pravda.Ru recalls that color revolutions are typically called "non-violent" regime change.


Recommended Links

Softpanorama hot topic of the month

Softpanorama Recommended

Top articles

Sites

Color revolutions

Fifth Column of Neoliberal Globalization

EuroMaidan 101

Neoliberal Compradors and lumpenelite

Previous color revolution and thier analysys



Etc

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit exclusivly for research and educational purposes.   If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. 

ABUSE: IPs or network segments from which we detect a stream of probes might be blocked for no less then 90 days. Multiple types of probes increase this period.  

Society

Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

Quotes

War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotesSomerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose BierceBernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

Bulletin:

Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

History:

Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOSProgramming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC developmentScripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

Classic books:

The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-MonthHow to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

Most popular humor pages:

Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

The Last but not Least


Copyright © 1996-2016 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org was created as a service to the UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License.

The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info

Disclaimer:

The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.

Last modified: October, 02, 2017