With Snowden case, Hong Kong must keep faith in its values and freedoms
Stephen Vines says Snowden's case should be decided by law, not politics
Is there anything left to say about Edward Snowden's flight to Hong Kong in the wake of his allegations about US cyberspying? The answer is yes, because some outstanding matters remain to be clarified and other aspects have been unintentionally revealing.
First, we are confounded by the extreme reluctance of the people who run Hong Kong to claim any credit for Snowden's two main stated reasons for coming here; namely freedom of expression and rule of law.
Second, Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, who happened to be in New York when this story broke, provided unintended confirmation of his subservience to the bosses in Beijing because, in the face of repeated questioning, he was rendered speechless in addressing this matter. Either he was waiting for orders or was fearful of deviating from the party line.
Third, we yet again found that the people of Hong Kong were well ahead of their leaders. If opinion polls are to be believed, a majority clearly support sanctuary for Snowden, a whistle-blower they believe performed a public service. Moreover, the public has started asking the right questions about the information he disclosed.
Meanwhile, Snowden has not really given a coherent explanation of why he came here. Hong Kong is hardly unique in having rule of law or freedom of expression, and it is an adjunct to a one-party-ruled state that puts whistle-blowers in prison and has little tolerance for free speech. So what really made Hong Kong so compelling?
Naturally the bosses in Beijing can hardly contain their delight over revelations of massive cybersnooping by the US, at a time when Washington is self-righteously making precisely the same accusations against China.