Embracing the power to change
Dubbed 'iron-faced Zhu', former premier Zhu Rongji was fond of telling a joke about coffins. He said he would prepare 10 coffins: nine for the wrongdoers he was after and one for himself. He wanted to show that he was prepared to give everything - even his life - in his battle to root out bad, decadent forces and vested interests.
Seemingly inspired by the Zhu style of proclaiming one's commitment, Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen has moved to reassure doubters of his determination to fulfil his election pledges.
'I will truly give everything till I die,' he said last week. His next term will be his last, as the Basic Law limits a chief executive to two terms.
On Sunday, he said in an interview with TVB that he hoped he would be remembered as a 'loyal and honest chief executive' after his second term ended.
That hope is in line with his trademark pragmatism, espoused since succeeding Tung Chee-hwa and repeated in his re- election campaign.
In his concluding remarks during the second election debate, he paraphrased the prayer for serenity that he said reflects his philosophy of life. 'There are things we can change, and things we can't change. I hope we have the wisdom to recognise what can't be changed and the courage to change what can be changed.'
There is no denying that Mr Tsang has been caught in a difficult position by the constitutional constraints of the 'one country, two systems' framework. As chief executive, he is often trapped by different, at times conflicting, demands from the community - and between Hong Kong and the mainland - over a range of important issues, such as Article 23 national security legislation and democratisation.
On the issue of universal suffrage, Beijing's anxieties about the introduction of a 'one person, one vote' system in the city should never be taken lightly. It would also be counterproductive to simply dismiss, as unfounded, fears about universal suffrage among the business and other sectors. Their opposition to the idea is not necessarily based solely on self-interest.
As genuine as they are, though, the concerns of Beijing, and of opponents of universal suffrage, are by no means things that cannot be changed. After all, neither Beijing nor the Hong Kong community have ever wavered over the ultimate goal of universal suffrage, as set out in the Basic Law.
The crux of the matter is whether all parties concerned believe genuinely and wholeheartedly that giving people the right to vote is the right thing to do - and is in line with the overall, long-term interests of Hong Kong and the nation.
As premier, Mr Zhu was faced with an intricate web of privileged people's interests and entrenched malpractices in the bureaucracies of the party and government.
Perhaps he was under no illusion that he could change such things single-handedly in the foreseeable future. The battle, however, would have been lost before it began if he had resignedly accepted them as 'things we can't change'.
A change of mindset - towards striving to change the unchangeable - is therefore critically important.
Unlike societies in other authoritarian countries, Hong Kong needs no heroes or heroines to sacrifice their lives for democracy.
It does need political leaders with faith in the quality and wisdom of their citizens in choosing the best person to lead society.
Mr Tsang, according to conventional wisdom, is no longer weighed down with the political baggage of having to seek re-election.
Riding a wave of high popularity and votes in Sunday's election, he is clearly in a strong position to go down in Hong Kong history as a leader who played a key part in finding the path to universal suffrage.
Chris Yeung is the Post's editor-at-large
