Tuesday, June 15, 2021

4. Conversations About the Book "Hong Kong Between 'One Country' and 'Two Systems': Chapter 3: Monday 29 July 2019; Mend-Break (Di Xi 抵巇): The Chinese Position on the Situation in Hong Kong; Statement of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council [国务院港澳办新闻发言人介绍对香港当前局势的立场和看法 ]


“言有尽而意无穷” [Words and meanings are endless]. 

In the run up to the book launch scheduled for 13 July 2021, the folks at Little Sir Press have organized a series of short conversations about my new book, "Hong Kong Between 'One Country' and 'Two Systems'."  

About the Book:
Hong Kong Between “One Country” and “Two Systems” examines the battle of ideas that started with the June 2019 anti-extradition law protests and ended with the enactment of the National Security and National Anthem Laws a year later. At the center of these battles was the “One Country, Two Systems” principle. By June 2020, the meaning of that principle was highly contested, with Chinese authorities taking decisive steps to implement their own understanding of the principle and its normative foundations , and the international community taking countermeasures. All of this occurred well before the 2047 end of the 1985 Sino-British Joint Declaration (中英联合声明) that had been the blueprint for the return of Hong Kong to China. Between these events, global actors battled for control of the narrative and of the meaning of the governing principles that were meant to frame the scope and character of Hong Kong’s autonomy within China. The book critically examines the conflict of words between Hong Kong protesters, the Chinese central and local authorities, and important elements of the international community. This decisive discursive contest paralleled the fighting for control of the streets and that pitted protesters and the international community that supported them against the central authorities of China and Hong Kong local authorities. In the end the Chinese central authorities largely prevailed in the discursive realm as well as on the streets. Their victory was aided, in part by the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020. But their triumph also produced the seeds of a new and potentially stronger international constitutional discourse that may reduce the magnitude and scope of that success. These essays were written as the events unfolded. Together the essays analytically chronicle the discursive battles that were fought, won and lost, between June 2019 and June 2020. Without an underlying political or polemical agenda, the essays retain the freshness of the moment, reflecting the uncertainties of the time as events unfolded. What was won on the streets of Hong Kong from June to December 2019, the public and physical manifestation of a principled internationalist and liberal democratic narrative of self-determination, and of civil and political rights, was lost by June 2020 within a cage of authoritative legality legitimated through the resurgence of the normative authority of the state and the application of a strong and coherent expression of the principled narrative of its Marxist-Leninist constitutional order. Ironically enough, both political ideologies emerged stronger and more coherent from the conflict, each now better prepared for the next.
I am delighted, then, to make available the next in the series of video recordings of conversations about the book with my former research assistant Matthew McQuilla (Penn State International Affairs MIA 2021). Today we discuss Chapter 3: Monday 29 July 2019;Mend-Break (Di Xi 抵巇): The Chinese Position on the Situation in Hong Kong; Statement of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council [国务院港澳办新闻发言人介绍对香港当前局势的立场和看法 ]. This gives a flavor of the chapter and our discussion:

In addition to the larger points, there are a number of interesting positions that the HKMAO sought to underline: (1) the misunderstanding cultivated by some people in Hong Kong; (2) the possible pernicious effects of outside influences provoking an unjustified panic; (3) the framing of the issues as just touching on the extradition law; (4) the concern over alarmism and the rupture of appropriate engagement through official channels as potentially threatening; (5) the warnings about the consequences of continued violence by what were characterized as radical and fringe elements themselves lawbreakers (extremist protestors (激进示威)); (6) the willingness of China to protect its constitutional order by all appropriate means when and as it chooses, in accordance with its interpretation of its rights and obligations under the one state two systems framework; (7) the different conceptual starting points for rule of law discourse between the Hong Kong protagonists and its conception and deployment within the political discourse of China; and (8) the willingness for the moment to continue to work through the local government, though with the warning that in China's view, the violence "has also seriously touched (触碰) the bottom line of the principle of “One Country, Two Systems.”

The video of the conversation about Chapter 3 may be accessed HERE.

All conversations are posted to the Coalition for Peace & Ethics YouTube page and may be found on its Playlist: Talking About the Book: "Hong Kong Between 'One Country' and 'Two Systems'."All conversation videos are hosted by Little Sir Press. I hope you find the conversation of some use.
A pre-publication version of some of the book chapters may be accessed (free) on the Book's webpage (here). All videos may also be accessed through the Little Sir Press Book Website HERE.




No comments: