Hong Kong’s Protestors Have Already Won. They Need to Appreciate That.

Congratulations are in order. Together, through a campaign of mostly peaceful protests, the people of Hong Kong have forced their government (and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which was likely behind the whole thing) to withdraw the controversial extradition bill. They sustained their movement for 13 weeks until the bill was withdrawn, putting to shame Singaporeans, who never come out to protest far worse abuses, and Malaysians, whose occasional protests last no more than a day and end without a single demand being met. Hong Kongers defended their city’s special liberties against this attempted encroachment from the mainland, beating back an opponent many times more powerful, defying Xi Jinping, who has subordinated the rest of the country to his will. They’ve taught the CCP that it messes with Hong Kong at its own risk – and you can bet it’ll think twice before trying anything like this again. Even if they gain nothing else, this is a great achievement.

Many Hong Kongers don’t seem to see it that way. Chief Executive Carrie Lam’s decision to withdraw the bill last week hasn’t ended the protests, with many calling it too little, too late. Demands have grown beyond just the withdrawal of the extradition bill to include an independent probe into police brutality in relation to the protests, and, more ambitiously, amnesty for arrested protestors, genuine universal suffrage, and Lam’s resignation, and many protestors have vowed to continue their civil disobedience until these four other demands have been met.

This is a mistake. In so many ways, till this point, the protestors have been right. They needed to demonstrate strength, because bullies only respond to strength, and the CCP is undoubtedly a bully. The mass protests did this, enabling them to negotiate from a position of strength and force the withdrawal of the extradition bill, which otherwise would have been passed in the legislative council. Yet, an effective strategy requires separating the more realistic demands from the less realistic ones. It’s difficult to ask for amnesty for protestors who broke the law when the very purpose of the protests was to defend Hong Kong’s unique rule of law. Indeed, a major reason why the successful civil disobedience movements led by Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King garnered so much respect was because they and their supporters were willing to accept the legal consequences of their actions. As for genuine universal suffrage, whilst Hong Kongers certainly have the right to it, it’s highly unlikely the CCP will grant them this under the circumstances, if only because it goes so far beyond the scope of the extradition issue. The demand for Lam’s resignation is largely pointless without genuine universal suffrage, since the CCP would just replace her with another puppet.