Carrie Lam’s blunder embarrasses Beijing

Sources suggest the authorities in mainland China did not consider the extradition bill a priority.

Hong Kong's chief executive Carrie Lam underestimated how deep-rooted distrust was of Beijing among ordinary people, and even the businesspeople she usually counted on as allies. Picture: Getty Images

An attempt by Hong Kong’s leader to push a Beijing-backed extradition bill galvanised unprecedented resistance to tighter mainland control, presenting Chinese President Xi Jinping with the most high-profile challenge yet to his authority.

Massive crowds of up to two million protesters flooded central Hong Kong for a week of demonstrations and at times violent confrontations between protesters and police.

Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam indefinitely suspended the bill last weekend and apologised for mishandling it. The bill would have allowed extraditions to mainland China for trial in its more opaque justice system.

Lam’s “willingness to step backwards suggests that Beijing never wanted this problem, that it hurts their bigger issues” such as US trade negotiations and relations with Taiwan, says David Zweig, director of Transnational China Consulting.

Upheaval in Hong Kong could set back its goal of fully incorporating the city and risk inspiring similar actions in China. Xi’s goal of reintegrating Taiwan into the mainland also has suffered.

Lam, 62, says she initiated the bill after receiving letters from a woman whose daughter was murdered in Taiwan. The suspect fled to Hong Kong, which has no extradition treaty with Taiwan.

Lam also was trying to fulfil a wish from her bosses in Beijing, who for years had wanted an extradition arrangement with Hong Kong. The city’s Western-style justice system is firewalled from China’s.

In combining the two issues, Lam underestimated how deep-rooted distrust was of Beijing among ordinary people, and even the businesspeople she usually counted on as allies.

Facing the most widespread public backlash in 22 years of Chinese rule, Lam travelled across the border to Shenzhen to meet mainland Chinese officials. She returned with a plan to try to restore order, while saving face.

Suspending the bill, rather than withdrawing it, allows China’s government to characterise the protests in Hong Kong as a result of miscommunication and foreign incitement rather than misguided policymaking.

“This case shows that Hong Kong society has developed strong defences against direct attacks on its existing freedoms by Beijing, and Beijing has not found a way to take existing rights away without risking large-scale turmoil and bloodshed,” says Ho-fung Hung, a professor of political economy at Johns Hopkins University in the US.

George Magnus, author of Red Flags: Why Xi’s China is in Jeopardy and a research associate at Oxford University’s China Centre, says perhaps Beijing didn’t want to go to this month’s G20 summit with upheaval in Hong Kong.

“They have handed temporary propaganda and political kudos to the dissenters,” he adds.

Still, “you’d have to be naively optimistic to think this is the endgame”.

Lam’s administration made a series of decisions that further inflamed people: she skipped the usual public consultation, fast-tracked the legislation bypassing a scrutiny committee of legislators, and repeatedly brushed aside criticism of the bill.

People in Beijing briefed on the matter say that while Chinese officials embraced the idea of closer extradition co-operation, judicial and law-enforcement authorities hadn’t regarded it as a priority.

In the past Chinese authorities have circumvented Hong Kong’s judicial processes in detaining booksellers and a businessman from the territory — moves indicating that officials in the People’s Republic felt they could act in Beijing’s interests without serious impediment, the people say.

In February, after the amendments to the bill were introduced, the public was given 20 days to respond, much less than is typical. By early March, the government had received 4500 responses.

Pro-democracy legislators seized on the law, which they saw as China breaking its promise to give Hong Kong legal autonomy until 2047. By the end of April, a march against the bill attracted 130,000 peoples. According to one source, Lam interpreted the modest turnout as a sign she could press ahead.

“Hong Kong people are not stupid, they know when the axe is falling down,” pro-democracy legislator Alvin Yeung says.

An umbrella opposition group called a mass march for June 9. Thousands of others used social media to mobilise.

Lam was undaunted. The mostly pro-Beijing legislature had set the bill on a fast track to start debate last Wednesday, aiming to wrap up a vote by this Thursday.

With protesters swarming government offices on Wednesday, legislators postponed the debate and police later moved in.

Lam issued a video statement calling for calm. Privately, she was in touch with her advisers through the night, associates say. She had lost control of the city.

By Friday, almost all pro-government voices all had the same message: there was a need to calm things down. By Saturday afternoon, Lam had announced she’d suspend the bill indefinitely.

Still, she didn’t back down completely, insisting the extradition bill was needed to stop the city becoming a haven for fugitives. She blamed public outrage on the government failing to explain it to them.

“Hong Kong people have such a high tolerance for adversity, but when you cross their bottom line their explosion is high,” says activist Nathan Law.

Lam ended the week with none of her goals achieved, her relations with Hong Kong’s people shattered and an anxious Beijing looking over her shoulder.

Colleagues say the bill won’t return until at least later next year, possibly never.

The Wall Street Journal