Simon Parker

It is, on the face of it, a stunning victory for “people’s power”. Hong Kong leader Tung Chee-hwa is stepping down following a chain of events set off by an anti-government protest involving more than half a million people. In reality, things are not what they seem to be.

Tung’s credibility may have been fatally wounded by the massive demonstration on Jul. 1, 2003 and his demise and the appointment of his successor appear to have been engineered almost entirely by Beijing. Five years after its return to Chinese sovereignty, Hong Kong faced the gravest threat to its civil liberties in the form of Article 23. On Sep. 24, 2002 the government released its proposals for the anti-subversion law. Protests against the bill led to Jul. 1 demonstration, where more than 500,000 Hong Kongers took to the streets to demand the withdrawal of the article.

In the aftermath, two cabinet ministers resigned and the bill was finally withdrawn. The last time there was such a huge, disciplined display of “people’s power” on Hong Kong island was when a million or so Hong Kongers took to the streets after June 4, 1989. They were protesting the Beijing Massacre, thereby destroying forever the myth that Hong Kong was inhabited by a politically apathetic citizenry. Analysts believe that the chaotic early departure of the unpopular 67-year-old chief executive is a further blow to Hong Kong’s democratic aspirations and reflects a tightening of China’s grip on the former British colony.

Beijing-appointed Tung, who has run Hong Kong since it was returned to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, is widely expected to announce his resignation within days, two years before the end of his second five-year term. He will cite ill health, sources say, and will be at least temporarily replaced by deputy leader Donald Tsang. But the increasing belief in Hong Kong is that Chinese President Hu Jintao pushed Tung out of his job. China was shaken by the events of July 1, 2003, and has since intervened increasingly in Hong Kong affairs, verbally attacking pro-democracy legislators and then ruling out universal suffrage in the territory until at least 2008.

A key factor was the departure of former president Jiang Zemin, who chose Shanghai compatriot Tung to run Hong Kong and secured his reappointment for a second five-year term in 2002. When Jiang gave up his last top post with China’s military commission in the autumn, President Hu no longer had to consult him over Tung, who Jiang repeatedly defended in the face of criticism of his bumbling performance. Although there was no confirmation of whether Tung jumped or was pushed, Democratic Party legislator Dr Yeung Sum said: “There must have been pressure from the central government, and that worries me.” Now the issue of succession lies ahead and there is a growing belief that the Chinese president will shoo in Tsang — a bow-tied former financial secretary under British colonial rule who has waged a clever low-key campaign to win Beijing’s support. Although the demonstrators of Jul. 1, 2003, may have achieved one of their goals in deposing Tung, their main objective has been thwarted. There is no sign of universal suffrage in Hong Kong and the next chief executive will, as before, be chosen by a pro-Beijing 800-member election committee. — IPS