Stephen Vines
Let freedom be the word
The Standard, Friday, September 23, 2005
Sensible governments are good at contingency planning but is it sensible for a government to make plans that stimulate an atmosphere of crisis? This question arises over Hong Kong's preparations for hosting the Sixth World Trade Organization conference in December.
Fearing the outbreak of violent demonstrations the government is planning to close most Hong Kong Island schools on the conference's opening day. Companies have been warned not to schedule important business meetings in the Wan Chai area during the conference. Banks have been instructed to formulate plans for a disruption of business.
In addition there is the usual host of police mobilization measures, traffic control schemes and, so we now learn, a plan to prevent the hijacking of RTHK, the event's host broadcaster.
Meanwhile, there are reports that hotel rooms have been denied to would- be WTO protesters and the existence of an official immigration watchlist has been made public which strongly suggests that entry will be denied to some of those who want to take part in the demonstrations.
What message is Hong Kong sending the world with all this talk of riot and disruption? One reading of the situation is that the government is panicking, so unsure of coping that it is lashing out in all directions.
Hong Kong wanted to host this event to showcase itself. This is a laudable aim well within the reach of a society with a superb infrastructure and experience in hosting international conferences. It wants to show the world that even though Hong Kong is now part of China, a one-party state with a dubious record on free speech, the SAR remains a place apart.
To achieve this, Hong Kong needs to demonstrate that it is an open society that acknowledges the right of assembly and is unafraid of demonstrations even when they cause some inconvenience.
Instead the government is deliberately creating an atmosphere in which all WTO protests are being viewed as violent and therefore illegitimate. A siege mentality is developing which justifies keeping protests not only out of sight but also out of bounds.
Yet Hong Kong has a long tradition of peaceful protest and despite curbs on the right of assembly emanating from new public order legislation, the SAR marks itself out from the rest of China by permitting public assemblies of all kinds. In this way Hong Kong is able to convey a message of freedom that is essential to its reputation.
The WTO meeting presents a fantastic opportunity to reinforce this and demonstrate that even under pressure Hong Kong is able to cope.
However there are dangers in openness as seen when violent protests broke out at other WTO meetings, most memorably in Seattle but not in Doha, which, like Hong Kong, is not readily accessible to the kind of people who staged the violent protests in the United States. They are faced with a barrier to entry in terms of the cost of accommodation and other costs that the usual rent-a-crowd people find hard to meet.
Searching for evidence that the WTO protests will inevitably carry the threat of violence, the government has come up with very little but has latched onto the idea that angry Korean farmers will provide the backbone of violent protest. Few would question the tradition of violent protest in Korea but not only is there no real evidence of plans for a mass of agrarian Korean protesters to visit Hong Kong, there are assurances from the local protest organizers that Korean participants will adhere to their peaceful plans. These assurances might turn out to be worthless but in making contingency plans the government should at least listen to what the protest organizers have to say.
The SAR has a very large police force and is well equipped to deal with rioting should it occur. A high level of police preparedness is to be expected.
But the success of this event will not be judged by how successfully Hong Kong manages to create the impression that it is a police state, intolerant of democratic protest, but by its ability to accommodate legitimate protest and run a smoothly organized conference.
Fulfilling a promise made in this column to keep readers abreast of developments in the government's pledge not to spend taxpayers' money on the hosting of the Olympic equestrian games, I draw your attention to an official plan to spend HK$9 million over three years to hire a commissioner to prepare for this event. That sum represents the commissioner's salary. No doubt we will soon learn that this official requires staff and other facilities.
Watch this space for the latest developments in the nonfulfillment of the government's solemn pledge. Stephen Vines is a journalist and entrepreneur