Beijing says military could intervene in Hong Kong

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-07-24/beijing-strikes-ominous-tone-saying-military-could-intervene-in-hong-kong

by onetimemanytime • 7 years ago

152 181 7 years ago

latimes.com

komali2• 7 years ago

In response, Ho posted a Facebook video making death threats against pro-democratic legislator Eddie Chu, who has spoken up against corruption in rural areas in the past and argued with Ho on a local TV channel on Tuesday.
Ho said Chu had “two paths” before him: “One is a path of being alive, one is a path of not being alive. You must choose which path to take. Decide soon,” he said.

Jesus it's gotten bad.

If ever there was a way to galvanize the populace, it's to do away with the masquerade and just tell them "step in line or die."

mtgx3• 7 years ago

That's when you get when your country is run by a dictator with supreme powers -- everyone is at the behest of his/her mood (and of those who follow their direct orders), including other countries with which they may enter more conflicts because they are personally offended by them. There's no body of representatives to keep that mood in check.

k_sze2• 7 years ago

Native Chinese Hong Konger here.

I don't like Junius Ho myself, but I think the LA Times translation of that quote is incorrect.

生路 and 死路 in Chinese don't literally mean "path of being alive" and "path of being dead". They are figurative, more appropriately translated as "free/open path" and "dead end". So Ho isn't really making threats about Chu's life, but more like abstract "consequences", maybe legal, maybe career-wise, maybe popularity-wise. Frankly, I don't know what Ho can do. I don't think Ho has enough evidence that Chu's supporter(s) vandalized his parents' graves and that Chu knows the exact perpetrator(s). Otherwise Ho would have provided that evidence to the police and the police would have made arrests already.

r00fus2• 7 years ago

Anyone not expecting this? It's fairly clear that the newest bridge to the peninsula was directly intended to enable such intervention.

This is not a judgement against China, but a nation that plans massive infrastructure projects, has a history of single-party rule (and rule by dynastic monarchs) and also is responsible for the Uighur re-education camps, doesn't really sound like a country unwilling to wield it's military might.

While it's citizenry and residents are much more diverse and identify not as Chinese but seperate, HK has historically been part of China, and only really a separate state/entity for a couple of centuries.

pm90• 7 years ago

Using the military on an backwater province is different from deploying troops to a dense city filled with millions of people. Not saying they might not still do it, just pointing out that a PLA invasion of HK would command significant attention and sympathy worldwide.

alasdair_4• 7 years ago

Using the military on an backwater province is different from deploying troops to a dense city filled with millions of people. Not saying they might not still do it, just pointing out that a PLA invasion of HK would command significant attention and sympathy worldwide.

And, sadly, like in Tienanmen Square, little would change.

The "international community" may condemn the violence and human rights abuses but, well, the "international community" still does business in Saudi Arabia, so the chance of the condemnation changing anything seems minimal.

dis-sys• 7 years ago

PLA invasion of HK

Did the 1st Marine Division invade LA in 1992?

peteretep4• 7 years ago

a PLA invasion of HK would command significant attention and sympathy worldwide

Which probably doesn't matter one iota, given Tibet, BUT: it's going to be hard to hide that invasion from mainland Chinese who live in big cities, and may just start asking some difficult questions. If you live in Shanghai -- or I guess more to the point in Shenzen -- you'll have to work quite hard to see why you might not be next

9nGQluzmnq3M2• 7 years ago

Mainland China has 19 miles of land border with Hong Kong, it hardly needs to ship its tanks through the Macau-Zhuhai bridge.

Also, the PLA already has about 6,000 troops stationed in HK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army_Hon...

tombh• 7 years ago

I find it odd that in all the articles and discussions I've seen about this, the Opium Wars are never talked about. Of course violence is never justification for more violence, but seeing as Hong Kong's very existence is based on the worst of human exploitation, it's hard to imagine that it's ever going to have a calm future.

I can't help but think that for us Europeans it touches the nerve where we know at some level that all our chickens will come home to roost like this one day?

shalmanese• 7 years ago

I don't know where this conspiracy theory came from but it's patently absurd. Hong Kong already shares a river border with Shenzhen on which there are at least 7 ~100m long bridges as well as 1 ~3km long bridge that can put Chinese tanks directly onto HK New Territories.

The HK-Zhuhai-Macau bridge is a 55km long bridge connecting a 8x smaller city in China to Lantau Island which then requires another separate two bridge crossing to reach the New Territories (and then another to reach HK Island).

The military strategic value of this bridge is less than nil. The bridge was built for its stated purpose which was to increase integration and economic growth of the Greater Bay Area. The indirect effect of this is to tie HK's economy more deeply into the Mainland's so that HK becomes assimilated but there this was plainly stated from the beginning of the project.

austinheap• 7 years ago

I'm afraid they've lost: there are patently zero countries with the political will to defend Hong Kong.

ryanlol• 7 years ago

Luckily we now live in a world where this could change rather quickly. Information moves much faster than it did decades ago.

Causality1• 7 years ago

Smart approach would be offering blanket asylum status to Honk Kong residents. The US could certainly use seven million educated, hardworking people.

headsoup• 7 years ago

Yeah but they also like democracy and I don't think that's in the current US administration's interests...

remarkEon10• 7 years ago

This would absolutely risk an actual shooting war, so no it is not a "smart approach".

I get it that people are mad that democracy is under attack in Hong Kong, but this drift into considering extreme reactions is getting ridiculous.

idlewords3• 7 years ago

BRING THE DIM SUM

r00fus2• 7 years ago

I would be surprised if US under Trump administration would even consider doing that.

alasdair_4• 7 years ago

The US is currently in the middle of a crackdown on asylum seekers in general.

barry-cotter4• 7 years ago

About 3.4m Hong Kong people have British National (Overseas) status and can immigrate to the U.K. tomorrow should they wish to do so. I imagine a substantial number of those not entitled to BNO are children of those who are and would be able to migrate with their family if their entire family leaves. All the Chinese who moved to Hong Kong after the handover are screwed however.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_(Overseas)

Applicants were required to be British Dependent Territories citizens by a connection with Hong Kong.[30] While about 3.4 million people acquired the status,[41] 2.5 million non-BDTC residents (virtually all Chinese nationals) were ineligible.[42] Those ineligible who wished to register as BN(O)s were required to have been naturalised as Hong Kong-connected BDTCs by 31 March 1996. Acquiring Hong Kong BDTC status other than by birth was no longer possible after that date.[37]

peteretep4• 7 years ago

There are precisely no countries able to intervene militarily here.

Bud• 7 years ago

False. The US is able. Just not willing.

kyconny• 7 years ago

The UK is very unlikely to just sit and watch China be troublesome.

idlewords3• 7 years ago

They are probably already drafting the strongly-worded letter

NeedMoreTea2• 7 years ago

The UK has spent 22 years sitting and watching China be troublesome in HK, uttering barely a word. Chris Patten (the last governor, former chairman of the Tory party and despised by Beijing) has repeatedly criticised government and Tory party for it.

UK has precious little leverage left except trade sanctions, which is a far weaker lever as we leave the EU. Nonetheless HKers have taken out ads targeting UK gov requesting sanctions be imposed:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/24/hong-kong-acti...

steve193• 7 years ago

Unlike France the UK has long since checked out of being a colonial power. And even if they wanted to do so, the great naval power that was Britian seems unable to stop Iranians from hijacking their ships.

jeswin• 7 years ago

Western Europe is the weak link in sustaining democratic movements worldwide. Its economic clout is enormous, but will refuse to use it in any meaningful way because it will incur short-term hardship and possibly loss of support at home. While being a good example of many modern values, Europe has no will to confront when things go wrong.

If the last two big conflicts were due to European actions, the next one will be due their inaction at the appropriate time.

I am not American.

steve193• 7 years ago

That they ignored Ukraine means they will ignore just about anything, even if it happens on their borders.

A loose union like the EU is unlikely to ever even threaten war, which is more or less the point of it I guess.

remarkEon10• 7 years ago

...but will refuse to use it in any meaningful way because it will incur short-term hardship and possibly loss of support at home

It's fascinating to see people advocate that European leaders should ignore the democratically expressed wishes of their own people in order to support "democracy" on the other side of the planet.

pas15• 7 years ago

The problem is that we see how hard it is to see such a liberation/democratization campaign through. (Iraq, Afghanistan)

And in the end what is democracy? Will of the people. Great, what if the people are trigger happy xenophobics? (Just look at how nationalist populism is on the rise in democratic countries.)

bufferoverflow2• 7 years ago

I agree. Their only solution right now is to give out rifles and ammo to every citizen, if they want to remain free from the tyranny.

sametmax11• 7 years ago

China, population 1.3 billions.

Honk Kong, population 7 millions.

Give them all the weapons you want, they will get crushed.

jwilbs2• 7 years ago

A few weeks ago, I never would have expected China to profess/commit violence openly, just because of the comparatively open press in Hong Kong + ubiquity of cell phones.

After the triad attacks, and now this, I’m worried how far China will go to suppress any unrest.

FWIW, any Americans looking to (try to) help may write their Congress representatives to support the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.

devoply4• 7 years ago

Yeah I think US should send troops, build a base, and annex Hong Kong.

Marsymars• 7 years ago

I expect the PRC would treat that similarly as the US attempting to annex Shanghai, or any other major city in China.

PKop6• 7 years ago

I imagine you won't be signing up to fight in this war you envision others fighting? Maybe you should be sent, or perhaps your son?

JumpCrisscross7• 7 years ago

US should send troops, build a base, and annex Hong Kong

No, but we should definitely subsidise defensive weapons sales to Taiwan and our other democratic allies in the region.

dasil003• 7 years ago

Why not Russia? They’re closer and they love annexing stuff.

Rainymood• 7 years ago

I’m worried how far China will go to suppress any unrest.

"Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it."

The mere fact that I had a previous comment in which I directly refer to ... some point in the past and I deleted it because I am scared of the (global) repercussions of my comments on the internet is horrifying...

rolltiide• 7 years ago

Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act

What is up with the delusional nature of Hong Kong proponents? I mean I get that there are no other options but come on we have to watch this slow motion trainwreck for 50 years straight? Just get it over with already!

The US is merely going to re-evaluate Hong Kong’s independence, not this thing on the other end of the spectrum.

Everything I ever hear about Hong Kong residents is oozing with delusion. “We’ll get UK passports!” Remember that meme?

Im going to be on the edge of my seat if she requests the military though

lisper2• 7 years ago

I never would have expected China to profess/commit violence openly

Seriously? I'm surprised they held off this long. Remember Tienanmen Square?

kibwen• 7 years ago

Remember Tienanmen Square?

Worry not, they're busily working on making sure you won't.

jwilbs2• 7 years ago

Conveniently, you ignored everything I wrote after the comma:

“just because of the comparatively open press in Hong Kong + ubiquity of cell phones”

Of course I remember Tienanmen. And I’m also aware of the Uyghur camps. It’s no surprise that a country as authoritarian as China will be violent. What’s surprising is that it’s being violent in an autonomous territory with many Western connections.

k_sze2• 7 years ago

FWIW, any Americans looking to (try to) help may write their Congress representatives to support the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.

Please don't. We don't need more concrete excuses for the central government to claim that there is foreign meddling. If the people of the country cannot awaken to fight together in solidarity against the authoritarian government, then it's just too bad. So be it. I still live in Hong Kong and it's a scary thought, but it's also the only correct way.

In fact, nobody can expect the US or any foreign government to want to "save" Hong Kong in good faith. We don't need your saving.

goblin892• 7 years ago

I keep wishing the West stopped reporting on “successful” protests. What good does that do? Make mainland China more and more insecure about its image?

hker3• 7 years ago

> FWIW, any Americans looking to (try to) help may write their Congress representatives to support the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.
Please don't. We don't need more concrete excuses for the central government to claim that there is foreign meddling. If the people of the country cannot awaken to fight together in solidarity against the authoritarian government, then it's just too bad. So be it. I still live in Hong Kong and it's a scary thought, but it's also the only correct way.
In fact, nobody can expect the US or any foreign government to want to "save" Hong Kong in good faith. We don't need your saving.

Thanks for voicing out your view, but I beg to differ.

I am a Hong Konger and I support the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act 2019, and I welcome Americans to write to their Congress representatives to support the Act—in fact I persuaded my friends to do so.

The central government has been claiming foreign meddling even when there is none: they claim that the protesters went to the street because of direct monetary support by the United States, which—frankly—is insulting to the million protesters. They made similar claims during the 2014 Umbrella protest already, without any evidence of foreign meddling even until now.

Let’s be honest: the Hong Kong protesters would have lost much earlier without foreign support (mostly media attention). The Hong Kong protesters are pretty pragmatic: they don’t expect foreigners (including the US) to “save” Hong Kong in good faith, the protesters only hope that it would be mutually beneficial to align their interests with that of foreign governments, and the protesters would do their part.

Let me use Singapore as an analogy (and to be clear, this example does not imply independence movement or whatsoever): Lee Kuan Yew succeeded with the foreign relations of Singapore largely because he aligned the interests of Singapore with those of foreign powers, such as of Taiwan and of the United States, so that Singapore got their support (including military one). It does not mean foreign meddling or that foreign government want to “save” Singapore in good faith. It means alignment of interests.

traderjane• 7 years ago

Please don't. We don't need more concrete excuses for the central government to claim that there is foreign meddling.

Would that mean China takes a different stance in HK? Like this is an international PR chess game and China must follow the rules? Because surely that is not true.

HK is both valuable and dangerous to China, and the US can't seriously effect any narrative within the Chinese media. China, on the other hand, can create any narrative it wishes to.

remarkEon10• 7 years ago

FWIW, any Americans looking to (try to) help may write their Congress representatives to support the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.

We just spent the last 3+ years, complaining about foreign meddling in our democracy and now we're right back to advocating that we do it ourselves to someone else.

Amazing.

onetimemanytime• 7 years ago

>"A few weeks ago, I never would have expected China to profess/commit violence openly, just because of the comparatively open press in Hong Kong + ubiquity of cell phones.

Oh, no. Not violence, they're merely "maintaining order," something the state is obligated to do. A few criminals are using violent acts and making life miserable for the silent majority...etc etc.

King-Aaron• 7 years ago

Don't worry, nothing happened in 1989 that might give some indication of what the Chinese government is historically prepared to do to protesters.

jedmeyers• 7 years ago

I just did a Google search from China and nothing is coming up. I guess you are right, we should not worry as nothing had happened. information is organized and is universally accessible and useful.

pas15• 7 years ago

Is Google accessible at all from mainland China?

kino123• 7 years ago

I don't get why you referred to the year 1989, absolutely nothing happened in that year. Tiananmen? What's that?

siphon22• 7 years ago

Sounds like a brand of instant ramen.

dawhizkid• 7 years ago

I have to say, these protests in Hong Kong have really surprised me. This is my own prejudice speaking (as an American-born Taiwanese), but my wrong assumption about young East Asians was they'd be too distracted, disaffected, and generally uninterested in politics to have rallied like this.

idlewords3• 7 years ago

Do you see this as a cultural difference between Taiwan and Hong Kong, or a misreading of the younger generation?

mtgx3• 7 years ago

From what I've seen it's the millennials, the ones who are supposed to be disinterested about everything, who employ a high-level of activism.

Millennials seem set to ruin one more thing: government corruption. The progressive revolution you see in the U.S. is also due to them.

tyc85• 7 years ago

Seeing it another way, assuming you did not read the young generation incorrectly: even the uninterested youngsters have a bottomline and cannot stand what the Chinese government is doing anymore.

As a Taiwanese, I am more optimistic than your are regarding the thinking and passion of young east Asians.

tangmonk• 7 years ago

HK belongs to China

alasdair_4• 7 years ago

HK belongs to China

And the USA belongs to Britain.

echaozh• 7 years ago

No, to compare HK with US, you should first give US back to the native Americans. The US belongs to the native Americans. It was a colony of the Brits, and then inherited by other white colonists.

ycombonator• 7 years ago

They have experience with Tianenmen and got away with murdering their own citizens before. https://www.pulitzer.org/article/army-clears-tiananmen-squar...

Animats2• 7 years ago

Coverage in the South China Morning Post is better.[1]

[1] https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3019854/chi...

mtgx3• 7 years ago

Better how? By focusing more on China's point of view?

Animats2• 7 years ago

The SCMP isn't as unbiased as it used to be, but it's closer to the situation. They seem to have talked to all the players and quote them, but avoid drawing any conclusions.

facethrowaway• 7 years ago

You just cited a newspaper owned by one of the richest members of the Communist Party. Not exactly an unbiased news source.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46353767

atr_gz• 7 years ago

Yes, the ownership situation isn't great. But as someone following the Hong Kong situation, I have to agree with Animats. They have the best coverage so far - it's really quickly updated and pretty balanced.

cdmckay3• 7 years ago

You’re right, a newspaper owned by a rich capitalist will be much less biased.

odiroot2• 7 years ago

If you want to link to native media better link to Hong Kong Free Press.

SCMP is not at liberty to tell "the truth" (by western standards).

dredmorbius2• 7 years ago

URL?

majia2• 7 years ago

This is mostly rhetoric and political posturing. Chinese government has so far refrained from taking any action. Beijing is not an benevolent actor, but is smart enough to leave Hong Kong people alone and let Hong Kong people see for themselves what a HK version of Arab Spring/Orange Revolution can deliver. If the protests lead HK to a state of chaos and recession, Beijing will gain more leverage.

JumpCrisscross7• 7 years ago

Beijing is not an benevolent actor, but is smart enough to leave Hong Kong people alone

Nothing Xi has done in the past year with Hong Kong has been smart. It’s short termed decision making, optimised for his political survival over the country’s long-term interests.

When dictators’ economies slow, they tend to pick from one of two handbooks: scapegoating a minority or launching pointless wars.

cdmckay3• 7 years ago

What has Xi done that you feel is in short-term interests?

discordance• 7 years ago

Also Keep in mind what the Chinese gov is capable of, notably that there are up to a million or more Uighers in 're-education' camps at the moment [0].

0: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-45474279

majia2• 7 years ago

If this happens in HK, everything is on the table for Beijing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_2009_Ürümqi_riots

remarkEon10• 7 years ago

A bunch of jawjacking in this thread about how the US should "intervene", whatever that means.

He's a quick rehash of what the American military has been up to for the last 2 decades:

* Fighting a failing (read: failed) counter-insurgency, that has surely atrophied the necessary skills and experience of field-grade and above officers needed to fight great land and sea wars

* Mopping up the mess left from the above

I don't doubt the fighting ability of the line infantryman (I was one), but this idea that we could do anything about Hong Kong without engaging in a full-scale war is ludicrous. It ignores a) the actual military engagements this country has gotten into for the last 20 years, and b) the actual geo-political situation in the region. Perhaps consider what strategic interest to the United States Hong Kong represents before advocating that we get into yet another endless war with nebulous objectives and mystical thinking about how easy it would be.

JumpCrisscross7• 7 years ago

this idea that we could do anything about Hong Kong without engaging in a full-scale war is ludicrous

Fighting a land war against China for Hong Kong is ludicrous. Making a second Tiananmen Square painful for Beijing is not.

From sanctions, to weapons sales to Taiwan et al, to providing protesters and resistance pockets with intelligence, there are options. Whether they’re worth it is the question.

remarkEon10• 7 years ago

I mean, we're already in a trade war with them. I'm struggling to understand why, after 50+ years of trying the same thing over and over again and seeing downright horrible results across 3 continents, people still advocate the tried and true method of "just send in CIA".

sametmax11• 7 years ago

Sanctions didn't work for Russia.

7 millions people in Honk Kong cannot win against 1.3 billions of people from main land, no matter how many weapons you provide.

"Making a second Tiananmen Square painful for Beijing is not" could be a good strat, but something tells me they learned from that one and have a plan for it this time.

underthebus4• 7 years ago

Making a second Tiananmen Square painful for Beijing is not

That would be in no-one's interests.

Immediately after the Tiananmen Square events in 1989 the US sent a high ranking general to Beijing to reassure the Chinese that this changed nothing.

The situation has changed because now China is seen as a real rival but the US and the West still have zero interests in going down that route. Not least because China is not a small country, it's the second economy on Earth.

I think the events in HK are being spinned and that some people are really losing their sense of proportion.

Bluntly speaking: The events in HK are irrelevant globally and are regional news at best. They are not a global issue that deserve international involvement.

At the same time, it is very difficult to understand the message and aim of the protesters, and their violence made them lose a lot of credibility.

cltsang• 7 years ago

To the more fortunate among us who live in the civilized parts of the world: please proactively fight for your democratic system and basic human rights. They are hard-earned, but can be easily eroded.

qbaqbaqba• 7 years ago

Well done UK.

Beijing says military could intervene in Hong Kong

Related Stories