by Gabriel Chin
Four months ago, not a single soul would have guessed that Hong Kong (HK) would be facing its worst crisis in the history of its existence. Reports are being churned out on a weekly basis highlighting the sheer violence that has erupted between the protestors and police. The 2019 Hong Kong Protests were triggered by the HK Government’s decision to consider an Extradition Bill that would enable suspected criminals to be sent to China for trial. There were immense fears that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) could abuse the bill to rid themselves of political adversaries that would otherwise be protected under HK law. Moreover, pro-democracy advocates fear that the long-standing “one country, two systems” policy will be eroded and strengthen China’s encroachment into HK’s democratic principles. After the first violent clashes between the black-clad protestors and riot police on 12th June and the siege of the Legislative Council Complex on 1st July, Chief Executive Carrie Lam effectively suspended the Bill on 15th July claiming that it was “dead”. However, the protestors have moved on to press for further demands while the police have resorted to increasingly brutal methods to quash the movement.
There are many instances of protestors striking police officers, destroying public property and forcibly pulling others into the ongoing conflict. On the other hand, the HK police have employed harsh methods to subdue suspects, beating them excessively and firing tear gas and rubber bullets without concern for safety. With violence increasing on both sides, the main question on everyone’s mind is: Who is justified in their approach?
THE PROTESTORS: FIGHTING FOR JUSTICE?
On the side of the protestors, they claim that the protests are primarily aimed at attaining five core demands: official withdrawal of the bill, for leader Carrie Lam to step down, a neutral third-party inquiry into police brutality, for arrested protestors to be released, and universal suffrage. The movement is currently leaderless with two main factions, one supporting peaceful demonstration and the other advocating violence against the authority. Thus far, we have seen a mix of both approaches with sanctioned marches throughout the city taking place alongside bricks and petrol bombs being flung at police barricades, government buildings and even the homes of police officers’ families. There has been deep disagreement over the suitability of either approach and it appears that the overall strategy has been counter-intuitive.
The peaceful marches have gained wide support for the movement both within Hong Kong and overseas (Australia, Germany, Netherlands and UK to name a few). These marches are often sanctioned by the HK government and police and can proceed with close supervision. It is heart-warming to see young children, families and the elderly marching alongside the young people to champion their cause and stand in solidarity against the various injustices they have suffered at the hands of the police and government.
However, the radical wing of protesters have caused the disruption of major roads, train services and even the international airport which has earned them widespread condemnation as well. Not to mention the assault of police officers and those suspect of being agents for the HK police and China. The sight of travellers desperately pleading with protestors at the airport and lone policemen being viciously assaulted raises questions if they movement has lost sight of its main objectives. Moreover, the movement has been accused of being influenced by foreign agents to discredit the Hong Kong and Chinese government.
THE POLICE: FIGHTING FOR ORDER?
The police have often been portrayed as brutalist and merciless in their dealings with the protests erupting across the city. Images of bloodied protestors being manhandled by police and videos showing defenceless individuals being bludgeoned and pepper sprayed have done little to strengthen the HK police force’s image in the eyes of Hong Kongers. There are also reports of tear gas grenades being fired into residential areas and train stations which has caused residents to turn on police as the former are often choked out of their own homes by the noxious chemicals. The police are also accused of collusion with Chinese triads as they blatantly ignored the violent actions of pro-government mobs on civilians and protestors alike. There have been several cases of people being slashed, stabbed and assaulted simply for wearing black with few have been arrested and charged. Thus far, public trust in the police is at an all time low with residents openly jeering police officers on patrol and protestors readily meeting anti-riot lines with metal poles and umbrellas. However, condemning entire police force outright would not be a fair judgement without considering their circumstances.
The police force is, to put it bluntly, stuck between a rock and a hard place. Not only are they expected to carry out their official duty to maintain peace and order, they are at the frontlines dealing with an increasingly erratic and irate movement that continues to direct their aggression against the government by taking it out on the often-outnumbered police officers. While they face constant hostilities, they must also deal with knowing that their colleagues are being gravely injured on a regular basis and that their families are rarely safe from the enraged protestors. Accusations of triad collusion may also raise doubts about the integrity of the organisation they have committed to serve. Furthermore, the passive attitudes towards the pro-police/pro-China/pro-government mobs have only deepened the public’s hatred towards the organisation. All these stressors can lead to irrational and violent behaviour especially if they are given a clear opportunity to get revenge by attacking protestors under the guise of maintaining law and order.
Nonetheless, on some occasions, the police have also demonstrated restraint and shown professionalism in engaging protests. Recently, a senior police officer received praise for gently urging protestors to return home with a megaphone while other officers refrained from using force to disperse the crowds. Unfortunately, such instances are far and few in between.
THE VERDICT?
For myself, I will admit that I am more sympathetic towards pro-democracy movements and the goals that the protestors are fighting for. The unique democratic freedoms that Hong Kong enjoys have always been its pride and joy especially since it allows them to gain privileges that they would not have under the Chinese government. It is encouraging to see that the political maturity and intellect of the HK citizens has only grown stronger over time and that they are fully aware that a government should serve its people and not the other way around. However, the rise in violence has increased my doubts as to whether the protestors are still fighting for their ideals. It appears that they are now mainly out to retaliate against all forms of aggression against them. The police may have more documented cases of brutality, but I feel that these so-called mobs are partly to blame in the increased outrage against the police. As long at the police force continues to be passive against these groups, the protestors will always believe that the two factions are one in the same. Pressure is mounting on Carrie Lam and the government to take immediate actions to de-escalate the conflict but at the moment, it appears that the violence is going to continue for the foreseeable future.
For more updates please feel free to check out the following links:
Protestor’s Official Telegram Group:
For instant updates on protests and a pro-protester’s perspective on the incidents that occur during these clashes.
https://t.me/guardiansofhongkong
South China Morning Post:
Primarily reports and analysis on the current conflict from the eyes of academics, government officials and media that are mainly pro-government/pro-police/pro-china
https://www.scmp.com/asia
The Watercooler 
Hello!
It’s very difficult for me to declare my support for either the police or the protestors.
While I am inclined to support the pro-democracy wishes of HK, I feel that it is too idealistic to envision a future for HK where these rights are protected. You must consider that HK is a part of China, which is known for ruling with an iron fist. She is not going to simply let HK get its way. PRC is insistent on HK being a part of China, which can be seen from its influence slowly creeping up on China. (More pro state media in China, loss of universal suffrage etc.)
Like what you said, the Police is simply caught in a difficult position because they are doing their jobs. The protestors are only likely to take out their anger on the police because they’re the first entity, who is related to the government, they come into contact with on the frontline.
The protestors are simply fighting for their country, because they are used to a certain lifestyle which the PRC government would not be able to provide. While it might seem to be a lost cause, they’re simply doing their best to protect their rights and you can’t blame them for doing that.
LikeLike
I personally believe that Hong Kong citizens do possess the right to protest against China’s blatant desire to infringe on Hong Kong’s status as a democracy. Under the 1 country, 2 systems rule, China should respect Hong Kong’s decision to be a democracy, akin to how Hong Kong respects China’s decision to be ruled by communism. It is absurd for China to demand respect from Hong Kong when they have been infringing Hong Kong’s rights. For instance, China only allowed pro-Beijing candidates to be elected as top leader of Hong Kong in 2014, sparking the umbrella movement. The fears of protestors are also not unfounded given China’s harsh stance towards dissenters, as seen by how numerous activists in China have been detained after spreading awareness of the Tiananmen massacre.
However, I despise the methods that have been used by violent protestors. By harming any police officers and bullying their families, they are no different from China as they have infringed the rights of the innocent. They should stick to peaceful protests as no one’s safety should be sacrificed for their political objective. Peaceful protestors should condemn those that have been violent and keep them in check.
Allow me to end with this quote. “Beware of becoming the pot when condemning the kettle.”. While China has no doubt committed injustice, it is imperative for Hong Kong protestors to not commit injustice as well in the pursuit of fairness. Otherwise, what’s the difference between a self-ruled Hong Kong and a China ruled Hong Kong?
References
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/30/-sp-hong-kong-umbrella-revolution-pro-democracy-protestshttps://
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/tiananmen-square-anniversary-protests-china-beijing-june-4-xi-jinping-a8937756.html
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/hong-kong-protests-police-injured-families-intimidated-bullied-11819360
LikeLike
Two things I wanted to say:
-I think it is unhelpful to classify the protestors based on their “peacefulness”, instead it’s best basing it on whether the protests challenge the authority of the state. Protests in HK technically must be approved by the government, so even peaceful protests can be, in the eyes of the police, to be lawbreaking, and would provoke arrests the same way a violent protest would. That’s not even including the numerous pro-democracy activists that were arrested like Joshua Wong and Agnes Chow. https://twitter.com/kixes/status/1167670701664481281?s=20
There’s also a conflation between “radical” and “violent”, which I’m not sure why it’s there.
-Yes, the police are stuck in a rock and a hard place, but they could just quit being police officers. It would be easy, this is the one time that following the orders of the HK state will mean the destruction of the very idea of a HK law (the very thing they supposed to protect) as it is swallowed by Chinese Communist Party rule.
LikeLike
I would argue that violence is justified in situations where peaceful protest would be inefficient in meeting reasonable demands. Suggesting that a reasonable struggle against oppression and control should be palatable in nature to deserve respect only puts boundaries on that struggle. The violence being used in protests is a symptom of a greater dysfunctional relationship – the bill just triggered this. It’s not like the anger which causes violence is coming from nowhere because the demands of the protestors are reasonable. I think it is easy to take the moral high ground when watching events like this from the outside.
In regards to the police, I wonder whether it is correct to think of law enforcement as individuals in this struggle. Michael’s point is interesting… why don’t the police just quit if it is truly conflicting with their morals? I do not think police officers should be considered as individuals but rather as tools of a greater institution. The police choose to represent the state when they join this job – if there is violence and anger against the state, it is violence and anger against them regardless of who they are as people outside of their jobs.
LikeLike
In this situation it is hard to position and side between the protestors and the policemen: the former have the right to demonstrate pacifically, yet this does not seem to be the case. Even if they need to get the demonstration approved by the government, which will obviously slow them down, this would make more obvious the intransigence of the HK government when trying to stop them.
For the police officers, however, you cannot simply expect them to resign from their jobs for thinking differently and not being satisfied by how they must maintain the law. It is expected that if the protestors use violence, the reinforcement will act in consequence as a response. Demonstrations should be pacific at all time. This, however, like the proportionality of the police actions as a response, is extremely difficult to control and to draw a line.
LikeLike
As for the police – sometimes violence is necessary part of the job to restore peace and security although a few would definitely argue and say that there is a thin line here. Protest =/ Riot As far as the citizens are fully aware of how rioting looks like, it is best to make a point without straying to far that they start becoming violent ( which is unfortunately happening)
However, you might want to check out this article and see for yourself what you think – the extradition bill will be withdrawn as Hong Kong leader, Carrie Lam has decided. It seems like these protests, as violent and confrontational as they were did seem to affect Carrie Lam’s decision to be respond directly to the protestors’ main demands. And one of them is the withdrawal of Extradition Bill. I guess the protests,as violent as they were – worked?
Or could it be other factors came in to play that have pressured Carrie Lam to withdraw the bill?
Here is the link
https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3025641/hong-kong-leader-carrie-lam-announce-formal-withdrawal
LikeLike