Asian small states in the age of Trump

Hong Kong is a hybrid in two senses: (1) between democracy and authoritarianism and (2) between being an independent state and an integral part of China. Hans Mouritzen’s week-long stay there – invited by the Hong Kong government – illustrated both characteristics. Ms. Carrie Lam, a long-time top civil servant, was elected on 26 March as Hong Kong’s political leader (‘chief executive’) – not by the people of Hong Kong, but by about 1200 electors representing different professions, businesses, religious groups, the Electoral Council and other vested interests (including, not least, Beijing). The process is of course more democratic than the selection of governor under British rule (pre-1997), appointed from London. But one wonders, how the intricacies and legitimacy of this complicated system are explained to Hong Kong school children?

Several Asian small states are accommodating mainland China in a Finlandized way: Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia and – with president Duterte – even the Philippines (a US ally); believe it or not, Finlandization vis à vis China is discussed also in South Korea and Taiwan (this was the main topic of Hans Mouritzen’s presentation for a Hong Kong academic audience). A neutralist position between the China and the US can be found regarding Indonesia and Singapore. However, Hong Kong is not Finlandized for the simple reason that it is not an independent state; foreign and defence policy is the prerogative of Beijing. The ‘People’s Liberation Army’ has a garrison in Hong Kong and the Chinese navy its own harbour. This being said, however, the dilemmas of Finlandization are obviously present, in the form: ‘how can we accommodate Beijing so we preserve as much autonomy and peculiarity as possible?’ (using the formula ‘one country, two systems’). One instrument in this regard is the stressing of the British past, especially the rule of law (in the Supreme Court there are currently, believe it or not, one English and one Australian judge).

According to the oppositional ‘umbrella movement’, nonetheless, far too much is being decided between the Chief Executive and the Beijing Liaison Office in Hong Kong (with a role not dissimilar to the Soviet embassy in Helsinki during the Cold War, one could add). The movement – culminating in paralyzing street protests in 2014 – wishes universal suffrage and, some of it, even Hong Kong independence (a ‘no go’, of course). Among students in the movement, there are obvious anti-mainland feelings. At Mouritzen’s seminar a discussion theme raised by the audience was in fact: ‘how can we have a cohesive posture vis à vis the China, when public opinion is so divided?’ As it now stands, the China can freely divide and rule.

Alongside this divisive polity, Hong Kong is – compared to Europe – still a ‘tiger economy’. With almost 8 million people (in an area like Stevns), the Hong Kong trade volume is no. 7 in the world. Trade is 4 times GDP (the latter growing about 3% annually), consisting mostly of post-modern services (and, by the way, Hong Kong is Denmark’s 9^th largest trading partner outside the EU). The Hong Kong harbour is the 5^th largest in the world. On this background, emerging protectionism and de-globalisation is an obvious danger. But people comfort themselves, of the form: ‘Trump is after all just a business man’ – a very positive label in Hong Kong.

Inequality is huge. As foreign highly qualified and salaried labour force is being recruited, housing prices are sky-rocketing. Young academics with a job cannot buy an apartment and must live with their parents, often. They threaten to emigrate and/or tend to join the Occupy movement, thus reinforcing political divisiveness. And the poor live in so-called ‘coffin boxes’. It’s a race to the bottom – or to the sky, as houses with 50+ floors continue to be built.