In 1997, Hong Kong experienced “the Handover.” According to the Basic Law, it became a Special Administrative Region of China with a high autonomy degree in every issue except international and military affairs. However, the misunderstanding of the “one country, two systems” principle and Beijing desire to intervene into Hong Kong policies that became especially crucial last years fueled tensions between Hong Kong and China. The aim of this paper is to analyze and evaluate the issue of Hong Kong-China relations through the theoretical framework of pluralism.
For a start, it is necessary to give a brief overview of Hong Kong political system. Hong Kong political system has three branches of power, Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary. The Head of the Government is the Chief Executive. While the Chief Executive does not belong to any of the parties, he or she relies on them in the legislature. Hong Kong has a multi-party system and more than fifteen parties in the Legislative Council, but none of them has exclusive rights to gain power through the Legislative Council. The major document of Hong Kong, the Basic Law, does not have any mentions about political parties, and most of them are registered as societies or limited companies.
It is important to consider the theory of pluralism and the dual administration that coexists in Hong-Kong-China relations. Pluralism is based on the distribution of political power; it is characterized by the absence of dominants and policies aimed to improve social stability and to be fair. However, if Chinese intervention into the work of Hong Kong government has really answered these points, there would be no reasons for social protests and existing talks about Hong Kong independence. Let’s look at this issue in detail.
First of all, it is worth noting that the major Hong Kong document, the Basic Law, proclaims coexistence of Hong Kong and China according to the principle “one country, two systems” till 2047 (McKirdy, 2014). Before the expiration of this time, Hong Kong government should “safeguard the rights and freedoms of the residents" and has a right to establish and develop its own democracy system that is “completely within the sphere of the autonomy of Hong Kong" (McKirdy, 2014). At the same time, Lu Ping stated that the Chinese central government would not intervene into the political structure of Hong Kong and its civil affairs. Beijing, however, reinterpreted the Basic Law, and in 2014, the Chinese government published the White Paper that confirmed its jurisdiction over the administrative district of Hong Kong.
The reasons for the White Paper are rather clear. Living standards in China have always been worse than in Hong Kong, the “Pearl of the Orient.” Furthermore, Hong Kong has also considered being more “civilized” than China as long as it had been the British colony for more than 150 years. Beijing recognizes Hong Kong as a part of the mainland, and its intervention into Hong Kong social, political, and economic affairs will bring China a number of advantages. However, as long as we consider Hong Kong and the question of interference under the theory of pluralism, Chinese intervention is insupportable. It has a number of reasons. For instance, Chinese attempts to implement new reforms that “would allow each Hong Kong person a vote in the election of their next leader in 2017—but only in a field of pre-screened candidates who support Beijing” (Chen et al., 2015) caused the famous Umbrella Movement. Chinese proposal violates democratic rules and universal suffrage. Moreover, social protests show that the proposal does not answer pluralist points regarding social stability and fair.
Now let’s move to the next point and consider the problem from within Hong Kong. Hong Kong political system has two major political ideologies, Pro-Beijing camp, and Pan-democracy camp. Pro-Beijing, or pro-establishment camp supports Chinese policies, and Pan-democracy, or pro-democracy camp holds a “one country, two systems” view. Thus, in Hong Kong, pluralism manifests itself not only through a multi-party system and the concept of separation of powers but also as a dual political ideology that directly relates to the issue of Chinese interference into Hong Kong policies and independence of Hong Kong. Pan-democracy camp includes democratic and liberal parties while Conservators, Nationalists, and Socialists represent Pro-Beijing camp. Currently, Beijing loyalists dominate over pro-Democrats in the Legislative Council and District Councils. At the end of 2015, Pro-Beijing camp held 43 of 70 legislature seats. Current Legislative Council Jasper Tsang Yok-sing is the member of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong, the largest party that also supports pro-establishment views. Thus, according to the political system of Hong Kong and in keeping with the point of the pluralistic theory stating that larger groups have more influence, the pro-Beijing camp is more influential but it does not have exclusive power to make decisions. The internal political conflicts complicate the situation. For instance, the Umbrella Movement started in 2014, but the government still could not solve the issue with Chinese proposal: pro-democrats promise to reject it while pro-Beijing camp is ready to accept.
Nowadays, the Hong Kong movement for independence is especially active, and Chinese interventions are one of the key reasons for this activation. The current situation mothered the formation of the Hong Kong independence movement parties as Hong Kong Independence Party founded in April 2015 and Hong Kong National Party founded at the end of March 2016. However, the independent parties are not officially recognized. The question of Hong Kong independence is too serious. Moreover, it is probably the only issue where pro-Democrats and Beijing loyalists agree with each other. On the recent meeting between the representatives of two major political ideologies and radical students who support localism, the first ones explained that sovereignty of Hong Kong would mean war (Ng, 2016). It is important to say that the most part of Hong Kong population understand they could not live without the mainland. Thus, the protests and the rise of the independent movement and proclivities for democracy is just a way to push back against Chinese intervention.
It is also interesting to look at the issue of Chinese intervention into Hong Kong policies from the point of two pluralist types of groups. According to the pluralist model, these types of groups are insider groups and outsider groups. Insider groups have more power, as they are closer to the government, and outsider groups are less powerful as have less access to the government officials. In our case, Beijing represents an insider group. It has direct access to the Hong Kong government and can put forward various proposals that are usually supported by pro-establishment camp and denied by pro-democracy camp. At the same time, grassroots activism and social protests represent an outsider group, as they have not got direct access to the government but can only express their opinion.
The theory of pluralism has a number of limitations. First, it underestimates the influence of informal power. Hong Kong population has strong demand for participation in political life of Hong Kong. Despite the fact people also have high political tolerance, the one could imagine the increased role of informal power. The bright example is the independent movement and its political parties that are not recognized officially but resonate with the population. Second, it overestimates the impact outside interested groups have on political processes. For instance, if China and Hong Kong come to a consensus about their relations, they would hardly interest in the opinion of Hong Kong population. Last, it is too dependent on competitive power. Beijing supporters and pro-Democrats are two competitive fractions, but they cannot solve the issue of Chinese intervention.
The theory of pluralism is an issue-oriented method. Its major idea is a dispersion of power, competitiveness, a plurality of interests, the absence of domination, and fair policies aimed to provide social stability. This paper considered the pluralist theory with regard to the issue of Chinese intervention into Hong Kong policies and increased social movement for independence. The dual political ideologies of Hong Kong, as well as Hong-Kong-China relations, brightly exemplify the application of pluralism. Chinese intervention violates Hong Kong democracy granted it by the Basic Law and resonates with the population reflecting in mass protests and the idea of independence. Thus, the one could say that Chinese intervention violates the theory of pluralism that results in Hong Kong social unrests. The issue of Hong Kong-China relations is also a bright example of limitations of the theory as the role of informal power, and the influence of outside groups, and the competitiveness.
References
Chen, G., Cheung, A. Y. H., Veg, S., & Hung, H. (2015, June 17). Has China’s ‘One country, two systems’ experiment failed? ChinaFile. Web. Retrieved from https://www.chinafile.com/conversation/has-chinas-one-country-two-systems-experiment-failed
McKirdy, E. (2014, September 30). 'One country, two systems': How Hong Kong remains distinct from China. CNN. Web. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/29/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-backgrounder/
Ng, K. (2016, April 18). "Beijing will send in troops if Hong Kong declares independence.’ South China Morning Post. Web. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/1936969/beijing-will-send-troops-if-hong-kong-declares-independence
