UPDATE Oct 4th: WHAT DID I JUST SAY WHEN I MADE THIS POST ON Oct 1st??? This is the FoxNews' report on Infiltrators: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/04/hong-kong-pro-democracy-protesters-face-threat-from-criminal-triads/
This is not an analyst white paper. I don't have time to write one which will shore up my argument. But in the event that I'm proven right, note to those of you in that community: don't call me.
The WSJ wrote a short blogpost on the "Five things you should know about the situation in Hong Kong." It was so far off the mark I'm surprised it saw the light of day, and I'm really disappointed. The WSJ usually has better analysis than that, and the Asian WSJ is often an analytical force to be reckoned with.
It would be humorous if it wasn't about to become tragic that the 20-somethings in Hong Kong think their "protesting" sit in is actually going to change Beijing. Clearly, their grandparents are no longer living, and they're not listening to their parents. I'm not sure if I'm impressed or saddened that the numbers flooding Central and Wan Chai are large and visually impressive.
Here are the two rules which have governed China for seven millenia:
1. People are cannon fodder.
2. Might makes right.
Subset of #2: unless Beijing is looking for an excuse to change: it doesn't.
You forget how the PROC came into existence: by following those two rules. How was the Emperor finally overthrown and the Republic of China born? By following those two rules. Warring dynasties established? Hello. Repeat: following those two rules.
In 1989 I worked at a company staffed by quasi-former military (meaning, they weren't active duty.) In 1989 students "occupied Tiananmen Square" in advance of the first official visit by Mikhail Gorbachev. They were "protesting" for democracy. Beijing ignored them until it became apparent their "sit in" was going to violate rule 3:
3. Don't embarrass Beijing (goes to the age-old save face tradition).
They were warned. I remember the conversations with the "former" military types when the "lone guy" stood in front of a tank and "faced it down and backed it off." Puh-leaze. I said: "really? The PROC Army which kicked our butt in Vietnam and Korea (and by that I mean just kept sending wave after wave of soldiers...with 6 billion people to use as cannon fodder, they can outlast us), you think that Army was scared off by one little student? PUH LEAZE. That was the equivalent of the ROTC, and that was a warning shot across the bow. That square will be cleared and cleaned up before Gorbachev even lifts off."
And then they were surprised when 48 hours later, the real PROC Army moved in and cleared the square.
If you're thinking Beijing wouldn't dare do that in Hong Kong, you're slightly right. They have learned a few things since Tiananmen. You've forgotten however, that Hong Kong is an island. There's no place to run. If Beijing cares enough to act (and right now since rule #3 hasn't been violated, they're choosing to ignore the temper tantrum) it wouldn't take much to simply not allow them to leave.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if Beijing simply built a virtual fence or blockade around Central and Wanchai, or even the whole island if need be, and starved them out. You wanna stay there? Fine. We'll simply keep water, food, sanitation, transportation OUT. See how long you last when the food, water and sanitation runs out (about 3 days, BTW.) And then we'll only let you out under our terms and conditions. Or send in infiltrators, start a riot which will provide an excuse for the Army to move in, and when the smoke clears there will be a lot of bodies.
Uneducated westerners view the world from their perspective, demonstrating their flawed thinking and "analysis" with their commentary. They should remember (or learn):
1. The ineffective "law enforcement" firing tear gas, "retreating" from the protesters? That's local Hong Kong police. They are local folk, and they are similar to the warning shot fired by the tank. They are meant to simply keep the peace, try and persuade people to go home before the PROC Army shows up.
2. Beijing will not acquiesce in order to keep the markets open: western thought is you wouldn't want to kill the goose. Beijing doesn't give a rats' *** about the financial markets. I forget the numbers back in the 1997 takeover, but basically it was: they could shut down EVERY financial institution/practice westerners value, put it under strict communism, lose 40% and the remaining 60% of a gazillion dollars cashflow was still a hell of a lot of goose eggs (I think it was something like 11 trillion US dollars in income a year. AFTER a complete shutdown.)
3. Repeat: Hong Kong itself is an island. Nothing is grown there--food and water have to be brought in, and it's pretty easy to bring the island to its knees--the choke points are few and far between. Shut off the main roadway (that would be the tunnel), shut off access to the MTR, bring in the Navy and Army to keep things from reaching the island by sea or air, cut off power, and the island will be down in days, and people will be dying or surrendering within a week.
4. Beijing does not care about collateral damage to either people or property. Sucks to be you if you're living in Central, Wanchai or the rest of HK island. Your food and water is about to go bye-bye too. Me? I'd go stay with friends in the New Territories while I can still get out. Iconic buildings brought down? Beijing's attitude will be good riddance: they were ugly reminders of British Imperialism anyway.
5. Beijing already bent when it allowed "two systems" to be instituted. You knew they didn't really mean it, right? Wait, you thought they meant it?? Noooooooo! That was just subterfuge to get Britain to hand over the island of Hong Kong and the peninsula without having to go to real war. Unless Beijing wants, and I mean wants to move off the communist-socialism yardstick, like they did when they allowed tourism in which gave them the excuse to move away from hardline extremist Mao-communism, this will not end well for the idealistic, naive students in Central and Wanchai. An example will be made. The tail does NOT wag the dog.
Again I say: unless Beijing is looking for an excuse to change it will not end well. As long as the stupid, naive students don't do anything stupid (like they're threatening to do by storming a Beijing government building) Beijing may just continue to ignore them. But that is the best case. At worst, a lot of people are going to die.
It's unfortunate that the vast majority in Hong Kong do not have food or water stockpiled, many of them have cash in the bank but won't be able to get to it, and now that the airport is way off island (versus at Kai Tek on the Kowloon side) have no way to escape. In short: they are unprepared to ride out calamity.
I could be wrong. But seven thousand years of history says I'm probably right.
No comments:
Post a Comment