Author
Listed:
- A. I. Salitskii
- A. V. Vinogradov
Abstract
In February 2019, Administration of Hong Kong initiated Extradition Bill, which sparked mass protests in June. The scale of the protests was unprecedented in the history of the SAR and resulted in violent clashes between police force and young radicals organized by ‘localist’ groups. The authors present a short history of interaction between pro-Beijing and pan-democratic camps in the territory concentrated on the reform of the election system of the SAR. They conclude that exacerbation of the political stand-off in Hong Kong started in 2007 when the authorities promised a possible transit to universal suffrage in 2017. The demands for this transit were not satisfied in 2014 leading to ‘Umbrella revolution’ – the first manifestation of radical youth movements. Detecting the causes of the conflict the authors look into the concept of ‘Hong Kong identity’ as opposed to ‘Chinese identity’ popular in sociological studies of the public opinion in the SAR. They try to investigate other reasons for the growing distress and protests of young generation of Hongkongers, both indigenous and exogenous. The latter correlate strongly with a general trend towards deterioration in Sino-American relations. A wide picture showing interference of the US in Hong Kong’s political life and instigation of protests in 2019-2020 is presented. In the stormy 2020, however, political situation in Hong Kong became more stable following adoption of the Law on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong by the China’s parliament in late June. Closing some loopholes in the SAR legislation the Law facilitates the fight with radical groups. Still, a major healing in interaction of pan-democrats and loyalists is ahead to address gloomy economic and social situation in the territory.
Suggested Citation
A. I. Salitskii & A. V. Vinogradov, 2021.
"Hong Kong’s Stand-off: Indigenous Dynamics and International Perspective,"
Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law, Center for Crisis Society Studies, vol. 14(1).
Handle:
RePEc:ccs:journl:y:2021:id:722
DOI: 10.23932/2542-0240-2021-14-1-7
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ccs:journl:y:2021:id:722. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Кривопалов Ð Ð»ÐµÐºÑ ÐµÐ¹ Ð Ð»ÐµÐºÑ ÐµÐµÐ²Ð¸Ñ‡ (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.