Nationality: Democrat

In December, a Hong Kong sociologist by the name of Robert Chung found himself at the center of a political storm. A study commissioned by Chung, director of opinion research at a leading university in the territory, discovered that the number of people who identify themselves primarily as citizens of Hong Kong was higher than it's been for the past 10 years. The survey showed that the number of those who viewed themselves as Chinese had fallen to 16.6 percent. That's a 12-year low and less than half of what it was three years ago.

Since then the territory's communist press has launched a vicious attack on the pollster. "Political fraudster" and "a slave of dirty political money" are just two of the Cultural Revolution style epithets trotted out against Professor Chung. Hao Tiechuan, a Beijing official stationed in Hong Kong, called in local reporters to denounce Professor Chung's work as "unscientific" and "illogical."

Beijing, always wary of Hong Kong's loyalty because of its colonial heritage, ratchets up the rhetoric even higher during "election" season. In March, 1200 mostly pro-Beijing loyalists will choose the next chief executive, and in September, Hong Kong citizens will go to the polls to choose 35 of 70 seats in the partially-democratic legislature. Last fall, pro-Beijing candidates won local district-level polls overwhelmingly, although an investigation has been opened into possible vote-rigging. Beijing's attacks on Professor Chung-- as well as on a so-called "Gang of Four" of prominent democracy advocates -- may be calculated to keep the minions who choose the chief executive in line and dampen turnout by the solid majority of Hong Kong voters who favor progress toward full democracy.

But Beijing's fury reflects a much deeper problem for the Party: any list of factors contributing to the development of a distinct identity among Hong Kong people would have to include civil liberties, independent courts, press freedom, and political parties. When Beijing concluded negotiations on Hong Kong's return with the British, it promised a "high degree of autonomy" and agreed that democracy was the "ultimate aim." Beijing, however, gave itself the right to interpret these terms, and since reassuming control of the territory it has repeatedly pushed back the date when Hong Kong people might choose their leader and legislature.

Hong Kong's people have energetically defended their civil and political liberties. To Beijing's chagrin, that includes holding demonstrations held each year on July 1, the anniversary of Hong Kong's return to Chinese rule. In 2003, a massive march, estimated at 500,000, defeated plans to enact legislation outlawing subversion according to Article 23 of the Beijing-drafted Basic Law -- "a people's victory over their Hong Kong puppet government and the dictatorial Chinese Communist Party," Liu Xiaobo wrote in a 2007 essay, recently republished in a collection of his essays and poems. An uptick in the number of protestors at last summer's July 1 demonstration has been attributed at least in part to opposition to the government's proposal to do away with by-elections. The proposal, which would allow the runner-up to take over a vacated seat, was a transparent attempt to punish several pro-democracy legislators who resigned their seats in order to run again in a self-styled "referendum on democracy." They won. Now that Liu Xiaobo, the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner, is himself imprisoned on subversion charges, his face appears on posters at the annual commemoration of the 1989 massacre of democracy protesters.

Hong Kong isn't the only place where the Party faces a burgeoning identity linked to democratic values and institutions. For decades, Taiwan was a higher priority for the Party than Hong Kong, much of which was automatically supposed to revert to mainland rule under leases that expired in 1997. In fact, the "the one country, two systems" model that has been applied to Hong Kong was originally designed with Taiwan in mind. When President Carter broke relations with Taipei and withdrew U.S. troops, Beijing hoped that Taiwan could be enticed, or coerced, into unification with the mainland.

12NEXT

Save big when you subscribe to FP.

LLOYDDCOLBERT

4:36 PM ET

February 17, 2012

We can never dictate anyone

Actually, this is an issue where we can never ask people to let two things work mutually when they know it couldn't. No one can ever dictate Chinese people, especially in the Communist Party Genomma Lab about these things. It is just fair that China would doubt HK's loyalty - but if HK doesn't want this to happen, they should work something out to delete the suspicion. Well my only hope is - China gets peace, and so does its constituents.

XTIANGODLOKI

10:43 PM ET

If the author wants to talk about democracy

Why not mention the recent HK election, where the pan-democrats (the ones who are against Mainland China) saw their biggest lose in history, while the pro-Mainland factions won theirs? If anything, the most recent election in HK reflects an increasing confidence of the HK citizens in Beijing.

The thing is that regional politics dominate. If you conduct a poll which ask people whether people in texas identifies themselves as Texans first (god bless texas) or Americans first, I would not be surprised if a large amount of the population would identify themselves as former. Besides regional divisive politics though I don't see how the poll could accomplish anything. For one, the poll makes being HK citizen and Chinese citizen and mutually exclusive one, which presumes that HK is separate from China to begin with. This makes about as much logic as concluding that Texas and rest of America are two countries and asking people whether they are Texans or Americans.

QUEME

9:07 PM ET

February 18, 2012

Umm... Yeah, about that

Not to be critical or anything but there are a couple points you make here without answering the writer's argument.
1) You note that the most recent elections in Hong Kong returned results overwhelmingly favorable to Beijing. The article, however, makes mention of these elections - and their results - but adds that "an investigation has been opened into possible vote-rigging." Now maybe there is and maybe there is not but that is a very important point - and one you completely fail to address. Besides, I think we can both safely assume you are not in a position to conduct your own scientific survey of Hong Kong residents that could call into question Professor Chung's results.
2) You say that "the poll makes being HK citizen and Chinese citizen and mutually exclusive one, which presumes that HK is separate from China to begin with. This makes about as much logic as concluding that Texas and rest of America are two countries and asking people whether they are Texans or Americans" and I would have to disagree. First off, asking people whether they identify more with their locality or their country is a perfectly legitimate, and not at all illogical, question. After all, if you were to ask an ethnic Tibetan whether he/she identifies more China or Tibet - regardless of Tibet's situation as part of China - I am 110% positive they would opt for Tibet. Secondly, merely asking the question does not imply that one supports one side or the other. It merely illustrates a desire to determine the relative strength of regional vs. national identity. Thirdly, it is fairly clear that China takes the results seriously (to judge by their reaction).

PS The article makes it quite clear that Hong Kong democracy is extremely inadequate - such so that "election" "results" likely don't reflect the actual support/opposition to certain policies. Once again, it may be false but if so, and you have evidence to back that claim up, you should tell us what that is and where you got it. Otherwise... no dice.

1:52 AM ET

February 19, 2012

Jsut about every election flies with accusations of vote rigging

"and their results - but adds that "an investigation has been opened into possible vote-rigging.""

Speaking of evidence, how much evidence does the author, or Queme, have of voting rigging? Just about every election has accusations of vote rigging. Many consider Gerrymandering to be a legal form of vote rigging. But accusations are just that, accusations. The HK government is going through the vote rigging accusations right now. However given the fact that HK is far less corrupt than most nations in the world, and that the Pan-democrats lost by an overwhelming large margin, the most likely outcome is that the government probe won't find anything significant or anything at all. Rather than playing off innuendos, why not accept the facts?

"First off, asking people whether they identify more with their locality or their country is a perfectly legitimate, and not at all illogical"

What part of my explanation doesn't Queme understand? The poll question is structured in a way to make being HKer and Chinese mutually exclusive when in reality these are not. I don't think there would be any problems if there is a third option in the poll to ask people whether they identify themselves as both HKer and Chinese.

BTW last year I toured regions of Sichuan where there were more ethnic Tibetans than other groups. No I didn't actively seek out Tibetan independence groups and spend time with them exclusively like many who reports on Tibet. Rather, I spend a good amount of time chatting with the locals, although most of my conservations were with our Tibetan tour guide and the bus driver. While I am not sure most of them would happily identify themselves as Chinese, I am sure many of them will identify themselves as both Tibetans and Chinese.

"PS The article makes it quite clear that Hong Kong democracy is extremely inadequate - such so that "election" "results" likely don't reflect the actual support/opposition to certain policies. "

Just because Queme hopes that this is the truth doesn't make it so. So far there is very little proof that the HK election didn't reflect the majority's will. Until the extent of the accusations are proven to be true, I think it's a bit silly if not wishful thinking to assume otherwise.

MANDREWSF

12:59 AM ET

I owe the author 500 bucks...

... If she can prove that
1.She'd stayed in China for an extended period of time and
2. She can fluently read Chinese.

Until she can make me half a grand poorer, she's probably not qualified to write as if she know what she is talking about.

BFJKGHF8D9A

9:10 PM ET

February 20, 2012

very good web: ===

very good web: === http://www.plzzshop.com

The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike, jordan, prada, also including the jeans, shirts, bags, hat and the decorations.

All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment., After the payment, can ship within short time.

We will give you a discount

WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT

YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

=== http://www.plzzshop.com

thank you!!!

Believe you will love it.

We have good reputation, fashion products,

come here quickly== http://www.plzzshop.com

Opportunity knocks but once

MYMYMY

9:26 PM ET

February 24, 2012

BTW last year I toured

BTW last year I toured regions of Sichuan where there were more ethnic Tibetans than other groups. No I didn't actively seek out Tibetan independence groups and spend time with them exclusively like many who reports on Tibet. Rather, I spend a good amount of time chatting with the locals, kizlik bozma although most of my conservations were with our Tibetan tour guide and the bus driver. While I am not sure most of them would happily identify themselves as Chinese, I am sure many of them will identify themselves as both Tibetans and Chinese.

Foreign Policy Magazine

Democracy and identity politics aren't mutually exclusive. But don't try telling that to the Chinese Communist Party.

BY ELLEN BORK | FEBRUARY 17, 2012

(7)

Slate Highlights