“Hong Kong is in the grip of the biggest political demonstration in a Chinese city in a quarter of a century,” says The Times. The protestors are “demanding real democracy instead of the rigged elections on offer from Beijing”. Sadly, the Chinese president may not agree to this demand.
After all, “he has consolidated power” on the mainland and is “intensely wary of the democratic contagion spreading”. This means that Western governments have to make it clear that “violence against Hong Kong’s protestors is unacceptable”.
Indeed, “as Hong Kong’s former ruler”, Britain “has a special responsibility to go further and explicitly endorse the cause of those who have taken to the streets”.
Indeed, David Cameron may already have waited too long to show support for the protests, says Louisa Lim in The New York Times. “Many feel that Britain, as the former colonial power, has failed in its legal and moral responsibility to speak out.”
However, other world leaders have been little better, with the US stating that “it would not take sides in the discussion of the island’s political development”.
Indeed, “the muted response from Western capitals has dismayed Hong Kong’s protestors. Of course, this inaction on the part of the rest of the world hasn’t stopped Beijing from claiming that foreign forces are manipulating students.”
While “the world’s eyes will be on the streets of Hong Kong… the public’s reaction in mainland China will also be crucial”, says Gideon Rachman in the FT. Indeed, “the development that Beijing must fear most is the spread of pro-democracy demonstrations to the mainland”.
As a result, “Beijing is trying to block news from Hong Kong on the official Chinese media and on the internet”.
There are parallels with “Russia’s reaction to demonstrations in Ukraine”. While citizens in Hong Kong and Ukraine are “embraced as brothers, in Moscow and Beijing, as long as they stay in line”, they are “denounced as tools of Western imperialism” when they protest.
However, it’s worth remembering that the protestors have already “managed to immobilise one of the world’s leading financial centres”, points out Mary Dejevsky in The Independent. Such an achievement was “barely imagined when the protests began last week”.
In contrast to previous generations of pro-democracy activists, “the protestors of today appear to be cut from different cloth”. One sign of this is that “they came equipped for the siege and tear gas that might meet them”. Overall, ”there is a practical determination that did not exist before”.
Granted, Beijing “could send in the army, the PLA, in the name of restoring public order and retaking the city’s streets”, says Professor Ying Chan in The Guardian. Beijing could also win a temporary “reprieve” by removing Hong Kong’s chief executive, Leung Chung-ying, from office.
However, even if the protests fail in the short run, “there’s no going back. The struggle for democracy has restored the city to international consciousness, reminding the world that Hong Kong is not just a city of high finance… it is also a city with dreams, for which its people are willing to take risks and make sacrifices.”