Hong Kong's sticky summer is giving way to a new political season that is likely to be just as uncomfortable for Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa. He cannot ignore the pressure to use July's mass protest as his only compass for future policy directions. But a slippery slope lies between using the summer of discontent as a valuable guide, and making all policy decisions subservient to it. In his anxiety to demonstrate he is a changed man, Mr Tung will be tempted to sacrifice leadership to please the people. Critics will snigger that he has no leadership qualities to sacrifice. That may be true, but unless he voluntarily steps down or is removed by the leaders in Beijing - both unlikely prospects - Hong Kong is stuck with him for now. The choice, then, is to help a weak leader do his best to lead or allow him to be pulled in different directions by the competing forces of public opinion. Most now agree the mass summer protest was more a general demonstration of dissatisfaction with the Tung administration than a specific display of anxiety over lost freedoms under proposed national security laws. Acting on that assumption, Mr Tung has retreated from Article 23 legislation to concentrate on repairing the weak economy - an issue he says the people care more about. But Hong Kong's political opposition is reading a different message from the July protest - that the over-riding desire of the masses is immediate full democracy. Conclusive studies are lacking on whether full democracy or a healthy economy is more important. Like other developed societies, people probably want both, and more - steady jobs, good schools, affordable health care, a clean environment and democratic freedoms they can take for granted. That is a tall order, but one that leaders of democracies and near democracies like Hong Kong are expected by the people to deliver. It is clear from the July 1 protest that the people feel Mr Tung has not delivered what is expected of him. The big unknown is: can the political opposition, in its present form, do any better? A single common cause now unites the anti-Tung forces - fully fledged democracy for Hong Kong. That is the only pillar holding up an otherwise blank agenda. But the passion of the summer protest suggests it is possible that the democracy battle cry alone is enough to carry Mr Tung's opponents to victory by winning enough seats in next year's elections to control the Legislative Council. The consequences of such an outcome range from total legislative gridlock to a business-like effort between two adversaries to find common ground. There is no getting away from partisan politics in free societies, but mature democracies are able to withstand such confrontations and still function effectively. That is because political opposition in such societies will compromise or provide alternatives. But here in Hong Kong, other than demanding democracy, the political opposition has not said how it will deal with other issues it has accused the government of mishandling, like the budget deficit, property prices and transport. In most cases, the opposition has seen its role as simply to oppose. If the anti-Tung forces were to stick with that role even after they win a Legco majority, the consequences would be gridlock. No one who believes in a free society would deny that the true measure of democracy is being able to choose one's leaders. And that should be Hong Kong's goal. But those who seek to stymie the Beijing-anointed leadership through the Legco ballot box as a first step towards total democracy need to tell the people in clear language what their vision for Hong Kong is in addition to greater democracy. Democracy alone, with the promise that freedom's eventual fruits include jobs, wealth, good schools and so on, can sell well in oppressed societies. But Hong Kong, with its open economy, free press, rule of law and a vocal population, is not an oppressed society. Advocates of immediate universal suffrage justify their demand with the claim that Hong Kong is politically mature enough to handle it. That is probably true. But if they are mature enough to choose their leaders, people will also expect those leaders to demonstrate they know how to make the trains run on time. Michael Chugani is editor-in-chief of ATV English News mchugani@atv.com.hk
