A far-off, irrelevant place
Having been on holiday in England, I have had the opportunity to observe British reactions to last week's democracy rally in Hong Kong. One might, for obvious reasons, expect more interest from Britain than from anywhere else in Europe, if not the entire west.
After all, the British government itself is formally on record as expressing a 'hope to see early progress towards the Basic Law's ultimate aims of the selection of the chief executive and election of all members of the Legislative Council by universal suffrage, at a pace in step with the wishes of the people'. And in April, one of the British Foreign Office ministers expressed disappointment 'that the NPC has set limits to constitutional development ... that are not required by the Basic Law'.
Generally, however, London, unless forced into a statement, clearly prefers to remain silent on the issue, to keep sweet with Beijing. So I needed to look elsewhere to gauge the British mood. Accordingly, I scoured the British media for any signs of reaction.
The BBC provided reports on radio and, with some film footage, on television, in both its domestic and world services. All five 'quality' daily London newspapers carried significant reports, each with an eye-catching photo of the march, on their news pages. In addition to details about the rally, reporters for the Financial Times, which covered the event two days running, ventured the opinion that 'the march is a victory for the democratic movement', and that '[Beijing's] attempts to contain [Hong Kong's] democratic aspirations are not working'.
The Times considered that the 'demonstration marks a serious setback to [Beijing's] plans to reintegrate Hong Kong into the Chinese heartland', and also remarked on the steps taken by the mainland authorities to keep mainland visitors away from Hong Kong on July 1. The Daily Telegraph noted a 'nervous presence of spectators from the mainland', and referred to the publicity given by Xinhua to the opening of the PLA barracks to visitors on the same day.
The Guardian contrasted the huge numbers in the rally with the modest attendance at the official flag ceremony at Bauhinia Square, while The Independent adopted a more tongue-in-cheek line, focusing as much on banners calling for the Yuen Long crocodile to be freed and on a Union flag carried by an evidently confused England football supporter, as on the political circumstances.
Despite all that coverage, the rally provoked no commentary on the editorial or opinion pages in the following days. What was covered? Well, on July 2 each paper, not surprisingly, carried a leading article relating to Saddam Hussein's first appearance in court in Baghdad on the previous day.
Other topics varied, ranging from the ousting of the chairman of the underperforming British supermarket group, Sainsbury's, to the spread of infections in British hospitals, the oil price, defence spending, the arrival of the space probe in the vicinity of Saturn, and the resignation of the UK finance minister's chief economic adviser to stand for election to parliament. None of these may strike one as especially riveting subjects, but they were presumably all deemed to be of more appeal or relevance to British readers than the political evolution of an erstwhile colony.
Or maybe there is some sort of subconscious embarrassment within the British establishment at never having led Hong Kong very far towards democracy under British rule, which disposes the British, collectively, to instinctively shy away from addressing the issue. Too eager expressions of support for Hong Kong democracy may too often be met by critical reminders of that past neglect.
It is not easy to appreciate the true mood of Hong Kong from afar. Anyway, to British eyes, sad to say, Hong Kong is probably appearing more and more remote.
Tony Latter is a visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong
