Actually they do. The pro-dem controls additional 117 votes in the Chief Executive election now. They already controlled 325 votes last time so now they have around 430 votes. The CE is elected by a committee of 1200 people and you need 601 votes to win the election. If some business sectors secretly defect in the committee election and vote pro-dem politicians into the committee, 601 votes for the pro-dem is not entirely out of the question. And if they can sustain this voter turnout rate, the pro-dem has a realistic shot of winning the majority of the legislative council next year.
I don't doubt that China spies on other countries and does shady stuff but this dude seems suspect claiming to be a high-ranking spy but only being 26-27 years old. Also, I would imagine high-ranking spies who defect would want to keep their defection on the DL instead of plastering their face all over the TV. It also seems unlikely that China would send a high-ranking spy to Australia WITH his wife and kid instead of keeping his family back in China to reduce the probability of defection.
I'm glad Trump signed the HK Democracy Act. I was thinking he wouldn't sign it and let his veto get overriden. Then he could tell Xi that he wasn't for it during trade negotiations while telling everyone else it still got passed. He might've felt that getting a Veto overwhelmingly overriden might've been worse politically.
The relative calm that has returned to HK the past week is another reason why democracy is important. If a populace isn't given an official outlet to make their will heard the only alternatives are civil disobedience and violence. For a country like the PRC that prides stability so much this is an important lesson.
Sounds more and more likely that Chinese Australian James Bond is a fraud and the Aussie govt and media ate it up. But hey, whatever helps your political and entertainment objectives. https://www.canberratimes.com.au/st...ery-nature-arent-often-who-they-say-they-are/
Sadly it looks like the lull in violence is going to be short-lived. This poor fellow is just trying to clear barricade debris from the road and he gets his head bashed in by a protester. While he is barely conscious and bleeding from his head, the protesters continue to curse at him. WARNING: Graphic content!
So am I supposed to feel sorry for him for being a moron? Dude wanted the optics or is stupid. Or both.
Just to clarify, are you saying that people whom you perceive to be stupid should be beaten and possibly murdered?
should China/US relations deteriorate to the point that all Chinese co listed on American stock exchanges must leave; it'd bodes well for the HK's Hang Seng Exchange. no one knows this better than the strident HKers$ talks, BS walks. the strident HKers will leverage / flex this shot of steroid to its economic / access to capital market muscles in dealings / negotiations w the PRC
Chinese internet pioneer "Baidu" considers de-listing from the NASDAQ exchange, to be closer to home. my guess is that "100 Degree" will most probably be listed w the Hang Seng Exchange in HK https://www.marketwatch.com/story/b...nsions-between-us-and-china-report-2020-05-21
Protests are returning as the PRC proposes a new law that is targeting HK. https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/22/asia/hong-kong-china-national-security-law-intl-hnk/index.html China's proposed national security law could end Hong Kong as we know it Analysis by James Griffiths, CNN Updated 5:45 AM ET, Fri May 22, 2020 Hong Kong (CNN)Hong Kong is known for being a "city of protest," with people taking to the streets by the hundreds of thousands to hold their government to account. Long before the Umbrella Movement or last year's sustained political unrest, this reputation was cemented in 2003, when mass marches against a proposed anti-sedition law known as Article 23 succeeded in forcing the government to shelve the legislation. In the 17 years since, despite promises to do so and much prodding from Beijing, no Hong Kong administration has dared restart this process. This week, Beijing's patience ran out. On the back of more than six months of often violent pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong last year, the National People's Congress (NPC), China's rubber-stamp parliament, put forward plans to introduce a national security and anti-sedition law on the city's behalf, bypassing Hong Kong's legislature via a rarely used constitutional backdoor. The details of the proposed law go far beyond what was put forward in 2003. As well as criminalizing "treason, secession, sedition (and) subversion" against the central government, it will also enable Chinese national security organs to operate in the city "to fulfill relevant duties to safeguard national security in accordance with the law." Expected to be passed by the NPC later this month and promulgated in Hong Kong soon after, the law will have drastic effects on whole swaths of Hong Kong society, from the city's garrulous and defiant political sphere to media, education and international business. Broad application Hong Kong has always prided itself on following the rule of law, with an independent judiciary and civil liberties far beyond what is allowed across the border in mainland China. The type of arbitrary punishment, secret detention and nakedly political prosecution common in the mainland is almost unheard of in the city. These rights are enshrined within the Basic Law -- the city's de facto constitution -- and guaranteed (in theory) by an agreement between China and the United Kingdom when Hong Kong was handed over to Chinese rule in 1997. Hong Kong, unlike China, is also party to international treaties guaranteeing various civil liberties. The new law challenges all of this. By criminalizing such a broad swath of ill-defined acts, it could give the authorities leeway to go after the city's opposition as they see fit. In China, sweeping national security laws have been used to target human rights activists, lawyers, journalists and pro-democracy campaigners. Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo, who died in 2017 after more than a decade behind bars, was convicted of "inciting subversion of state power." Permitting China's security apparatus to operate in the city also raises the specter of extralegal persecution. Dissidents and activists in China are often disappeared by the authorities or threatened with arrest around sensitive events, and many journalists and lawyers are dragged in to "take tea" with the security services, during which they receive thinly-veiled threats about the potential consequences of their work. Speaking at a news conference called by opposition lawmakers on Friday, Democratic Party legislator Helena Wong said that even the local government "will not be able to regulate what the agents do in Hong Kong." Her colleague Claudia Mo told CNN that the news was proof that Beijing "will do anything to rein in Hong Kong at any cost." "It's clear Beijing couldn't care less anymore what people think," she added. Implementation of the law in Hong Kong could also prove to be a nightmare for the city's courts -- which operate separately to the Chinese legal system and free of the political pressures put on mainland judges. This does not mean the law is at much risk of being overturned, however. The NPC is the court of final appeal in Hong Kong and can issue an "interpretation" of any constitutional issue, essentially rewriting the Basic Law on the fly. But the confusion and uncertainty the new rules may create, and a potential prolonged fight in the courts, could pose a major blow to the city's reputation for upholding the rule of law, which has long been seen as vital for Hong Kong's position as an international finance and business hub. Chilling effect Unlike the proposed extradition bill that kicked off last year's unrest, the scope and effects of the anti-sedition law could be broad and society-wide. A major chilling effect can be expected on the city's media and political spheres -- journalist groups have long warned of increasing self-censorship as pressure from Beijing has increased and newspapers and television stations came under the control of Chinese owners. The fate of the city's large international press corps is unclear. At present, foreign journalists are free to work in Hong Kong unimpeded by the type of visa and other restrictions imposed on colleagues in China, but ahead of the new law there were already indications that this was coming to a close. New controls on reporting in Hong Kong could see many media organizations relocate from the city, traditionally a base for reporting on the wider Asia region. A crackdown on the city's legislature, where pro-democracy lawmakers hold around a third of seats, could also be a result. In recent years, lawmakers have been expelled from the body and some candidates have been barred from standing on political grounds. The new law could give Hong Kong authorities a broader remit to remove obstructive lawmakers from their positions or even prosecute them for blocking key legislation, particularly on national security grounds. The effects of the proposed change will likely be felt outside the city too. US Senators are due to issue an assessment under the Hong Kong Democracy and Human Rights Act (HKDA) on whether the city remains sufficiently autonomous from China to justify its special trading status. It's difficult to see how Beijing bypassing Hong Kong's parliament and legislating on its behalf won't shape this decision. Late Thursday, several US lawmakers promised to impose sanctions against Chinese and Hong Kong officials responsible for imposing the law, which they described as a "gross violation" of China's agreement with the UK to preserve the city's freedoms when it assumed sovereignty in 1997. Beijing may be counting on the fact that the coronavirus pandemic has weakened the ability and determination of the international community to pressure it over Hong Kong -- the UK in particular, newly outside of the European Union, is dependent on increased trade with China to boost its flagging economy. With the new rules being imposed from on high, leap-frogging Hong Kong's legislature, it is unclear what protesters or opposition lawmakers can do to prevent them becoming law. Legislators succeeded in filibustering a proposed law criminalizing any insult of China's national anthem for years, while protesters physically blocked the parliament last year and prevented further discussion of the loathed extradition bill. Neither tactic would work against the new national security law. The timing, coming as coronavirus restrictions are still in place in Hong Kong, which is only just getting its domestic epidemic fully under control, could mean that people are less willing to join mass protests than they were last year. Nevertheless, amid widespread despair late Thursday night, Nathan Law, a former lawmaker and leader of the 2014 protests, called on people not to give up entirely: "At this time last year, didn't we all think the extradition law would definitely be passed? Hong Kong people can always create miracles."
The Brits never had to give up HK over to the ChiCom in 97. They did not have have to return Kowloon and HK when The Iron Lady singed that Joint Declaration in 1984, grave mistake by Thatcher. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hong_Kong
That was never going to be sustainable. The New Territories contains most of the shipping ports, power generation facilities, etc... Also all of the basic infrastructure like roads, trains, etc.. were all linked across all of Hong Kong It would've taken a massive investment to separate Kowloon and HK Island from the New Territories and it would have also left British HK at the mercy of being cut off by China (by sea and on the land border). The UK was in no position to even consider going down that road. That's the only place they can list in China with any hope to gain real investors. The mainland Chinese stock markets attract zero legitimate investment. No one has any faith in those (both local Chinese investors and foreign investors) as they're rife with insider trading and insufficient reporting requirements. HK's exchange is still considered to be a safe way to invest in Chinese businesses so it remains the only Chinese market that can attract real investment. I think Hong Kong's stock market is its most valuable asset. But HK as a whole doesn't mean much to China anymore. In the 90s, Hong Kong was 20+% of Chinese GDP. Now its less than 2%. The only thing HK provides is a valuable stock market that is properly regulated and a decent banking sector (but the CCP likes being able to control banking so maybe that's not a benefit). HK just doesn't have a reason to have special status anymore (given the constant challenges to the CCP that it presents). Macau has the same status but China is able to blatantly rig Macanese elections and the locals don't seem to care. Macau implemented the National Security law over 10 years ago with little fanfare. Hong Kong will either give in and go the way of Macau or the economy will eventually just fall apart as unlike Macau, Hong Kong's economy is greatly tied to its ability to operate independently from China. And I suspect, the CCP are ready to watch Hong Kong's economy collapse if it means putting an end to Hong Kong's constant challenges to the CCP.
