With election dust settled, eyes turn towards Beijing

The election is over and the results are in. But who really won, the pan-democrats or the pro-establishment camp? The answer is not clear.

The performance of the leading party in each block illustrates the puzzle.

The Beijing-loyalist Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong saw all of its nine slates in the five geographical constituencies win, thanks to the skilful allocation of votes. But the strategy did not work in the city-wide "super seats" poll, where DAB chairman Lau Kong-wah was defeated.

It was quite the opposite for the Democratic Party, which lost three of its directly elected seats, forcing chairman Albert Ho Chun-yan to resign. But Ho was elected to a "super seat".

Ho dismissed suggestions his party's failure was down to its talks with the central government's liaison office about constitutional reform two years ago. Some pan-democrats saw the talks as a "betrayal", but Ho said the party would continue to seek dialogue with Beijing, albeit taking more care to speak to the right officials and choose the right venue.

It's not unusual for pan-democrats to attack pro-establishment candidates or independents, about "red" connections, but this time the accusation spread to their own camp. Some were attacked for joining organised trips to the mainland. Others, including staunch anti-communists, were reported to have business arrangements with Beijing.

Those being attacked, of course, said contact with the mainland did not mean they were being brainwashed and had nothing to do with politics.