Article - Tail wags the Dog - Hong Kong's relationship with China
One of Hong Kong’s top finance industry leaders asked me recently “which side are you on: China or Hong Kong?” The intent of the question was to see if he should talk to me. Being a self-declared Pro-China advocate himself, assumed my being Canadian meant I was Pro-Hong Kong and our dialogue would end there. Instead my reply surprised him. “I love China and I love Hong Kong. I don’t side with one or the other, I side with dialogue”. This opened the door to a long conversation which only ended when I had to depart for my next appointment.
I committed to Hong Kong a week before Tienanmen Square but didn’t arrive until October 1989 after witnessing the start of the end of the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc in Prague, Budapest, East and West Berlin. By the time I arrived in Hong Kong residents were emigrating to flee Beijing’s takeover of Hong Kong in 1997. As things evolved the July 1st, 1997 “Handover” as it was called in Hong Kong or “Take Back” as it was called in China, went relatively smoothly. For the next several years the tail (Hong Kong) and the dog (China) coexisted relatively successfully.
Most people in the 1990s looked at China’s liberalisation and felt that Hong Kong’s relationships with China would be like “the tail wagging the dog”. It was felt China would learn from Hong Kong how to govern in a modern, just and socially advanced way. Instead China turned inward and rolled back its liberalisation. Now people in Hong Kong feel the dog is biting its tail.
A recent dialogue sponsored by HKU Faculty of Social Sciences shared early research on the effects of Hong Kong’s 2019 year of discontent. The dialogue featured remarks from professors in Journalism, Psychology and Politics followed by a panel discussion. The event coincided with the passing of Alex Chow, the first student to die as a direct result of the conflict between Hong Kong’s police and pro-democracy protesters.
The research shared by HKUs professors, points towards media mis-information by both sides bent on attacking each other, a considerable uptick in mental illness (suicide is the #2 cause of death for 15-29 year olds in Hong Kong and there are 2-3 suicides per day in HK) and a political outlook leaving “no hope” unless Beijing decides to change its ways. A slight glimmer of optimism exists when reminded China’s Communist Party has shown a consistent ability to learn from its mistakes (e.g. the Cultural Revolution, Agriculture Reforms, Tiananmen Square, etc). Is China learning from the Hong Kong protests? Is the tail finally wagging the dog?
If the tail is wagging the dog, the rapid motion is very disruptive for both HK and PRC. With the protests showing no end in sight and with Hong Kong’s political leadership choosing repression over reform, China’s Communist Party is losing the soft war. Chinese citizens outside China now feel threatened everywhere. China’s international trade has fallen considerably and its R&D and other projects overseas are now being questioned for their links to the Communist Party. Worst of all is the arrogance demonstrated by many Mainland Chinese in the face of justified questioning by Hong Kongers and others around the world.
As the international community connects the dots between Communist repression in Tibet, Xinjiang and Hong Kong together with questionable protections of intellectual property, domestic dissent and the fallacy of one China for the entire Chinese race, we forget the good China has achieved and the beautiful personalities of Chinese people.
I count myself lucky to be in the business of dialogue and negotiation at this pivotal time and place in world history. Together with others in my field we believe the solution is in the dialogue. We toil to replace violence and trade wars with peace and development. We need all sides to suspend their beliefs and create space for presence, respect, expression and listening to blossom. Only then will solutions to the current crisis reveal themselves to us.
The tension and anxiety caused by the repeated images of brutality is hurting the mental health of everyone involved. Many businesses have already closed in Hong Kong and many are planning to depart or close if things don’t improve soon. Conflict avoidance is not the solution. Professionally led dialogue with experienced ways of handling differences is the only alternative to violence and avoidance.
We are in the middle of a crisis which can go on for decades. Many people expect the crisis to get worse before it gets better. Just like taking oxygen on a plane before helping others, we need to take time during this crisis to look after ourselves and each other.
With only reform or repression as a way forward, “the obvious path is not being taken”, shared one of HKU’s panellists. One speaker described Hong Kongers as “political orphans” with no one to turn to for help. The Hong Kong Government doesn’t appear to care, the Beijing Government is leaving it up to Hong Kong, Britain departed in 1997 and other countries say it is a domestic matter. Where do orphans turn in time of need? I suggest we turn to dialogue.
Dialogue is proven to help resolve conflicts, strengthen relationships and change minds. Every day is a chance to destroy or renew relationships. If you would like to host a dialogue session in your organisation please contact me to arrange a date. You will be glad you did. You won’t be politicising your workplace; you will be addressing the needs of your team and business at this critical time.
Peter Nixon, FCPA, has advised and trained leaders from over 600 organisations and 60 countries worldwide. His books are available on Amazon. Visit www.PotentialDialogue.com to learn more. The solution is in the dialogue©.
Sign up here to receive our occasional newsletter alerting you to upcoming events, blogs, discounts, resources and news of our Dialogue Institute, Dialogue Center, and Dialogue System.