For two months, Hong Kong's politics have been dominated by whether, when or how the Admiralty occupation should end. With the camp gone, the city now faces the question at the crux of the debate: how should we reform our electoral system and prevent further confrontation? Lawmakers and academics who spoke to the South China Morning Post were generally pessimistic about the prospect of achieving universal suffrage for the election of the chief executive, as Beijing has made it clear that it will not back down. On August 31, the National People's Congress ruled that Hong Kong could pick its leader by "one man, one vote" in 2017 - but only from a list of one or two candidates who had received the backing of at least half of a 1,200-strong nominating committee. That decision was a trigger for the Occupy Central protests in September. Students, activists and citizens urged Beijing to scrap the ruling, saying it deprived them of a "genuine choice" of candidates. They had hoped they could force authorities to give in, but with the clearance of the Admiralty base camp, some believe there is no more hope of a breakthrough in the 2017 constitutional reforms. And the chance of minor improvements to Beijing's framework could have also vanished, as the central government further toughens its stance. A day before the Admiralty clearance, Chen Zuoer, the former deputy director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, reiterated that he thought Occupy Central was Hong Kong's version of a "colour revolution", a reference to uprisings in post-Soviet states. In an interview with the China News Service, Chen - now the head of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macau Studies - called for a "rethink and planning on how to rule Hong Kong". He stressed the need to understand the "three pairs of concepts that must not be treated as equals". Those three pairs, he said, were the "'one country, two systems', the nation's socialist core and [Hong Kong's] original capitalist systems, and the nation's sovereignty, safety and development interests and maintaining a region's prosperity and stability". "The actual significance of the waves of struggle surrounding the power to rule is no less than that of the 1997 handover. [The former could be] even more complicated," he said. Chen said the association's experts believed "Hong Kong people should be prepared for a possibly long-term struggle with the force that brings calamity to Hong Kong … in aspects such as the law court, Legco, mass media, universities or even secondary schools". The vice-chairman of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macau Studies said Beijing appeared to be toughening its stance towards Hong Kong. Professor Lau Siu-kai said: "Beijing is also kind of shocked to see people [fighting for democracy] through illegal actions … and thus inclined towards [being more] conservative," he said. Joseph Wong Wing-ping, former civil service minister and now a public affairs commentator, believed any chance of even minor improvements to the framework announced on August 31 had gone. Democratic Party lawmaker Wu Chi-wai said that by suggesting that national interest was more important than regional prosperity, Chen was saying that "Beijing is no longer concerned about whether Hong Kong is governable". But Zhang Dinghuai, deputy director of Shenzhen University's Centre for Basic Laws of Hong Kong and Macau, said Chen's remarks did not mean room for political reform was limited. "Hong Kong is a special administrative region under the central government. How can it be possible that the central government does not have a say on Hong Kong's political development?" he asked. Zhang said reforms could only move forward when rational discussion returned. Some local academics also believe it is not too late to restart dialogue. Joseph Chan Cho-wai helped train the students leaders ahead of their televised meeting with Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor in October. The political scientist professor at the University of Hong Kong said that pan-democrats should now start efforts to negotiate for open elections beyond that date. "It has been clear all along that there will be no concession [by Beijing] on constitutional reform … On the other hand, it is also impossible for pan-democrats to endorse the 2017 proposal under the current situation," he said. But Chan believed there was still something that the Hong Kong government and the pan-democratic camp could do - mainly by making use of the "multiparty platform", which Lam has pledged to consider establishing, and inviting the Federation of Students and Scholarism to join. Lau Siu-kai also called for Beijing, the Hong Kong government and the pan-democratic camp to start rebuilding their relationships. "The local administration can try to minimise social confrontation in its rule," Lau said. "It can also adopt a more inclusive style of governance to mend ties, and roll out policies to alleviate social grievances." Lau also urged the pan-democratic camp to "rethink" how they want to handle their relationship with the central government. Additional Reporting by Peter So