Tuesday, July 07, 2020

Hong Kong’s Journey to the West


National security law: does Hong Kong’s Journey to the West have a happy ending?

Journey to the West (Literature) - TV Tropes

  • Like the rebellious Monkey King Sun Wukong, Hong Kong must come to terms with the limits set by its master

  • And like Tang Sanzang, Beijing should apply the ‘constrictive headband’ of its new law with caution if it wants Hong Kong to continue to thrive

Wang Xiangwei

Back in July last year when the anti-government and anti-Beijing mass protests in Hong Kong were at their peak and turning increasingly violent, George Yeo,
Singapore’s former foreign minister with a deep knowledge of China’s culture and politics, made an intriguing analogy between Hong Kong and the Monkey King Sun Wukong in the great Chinese classic Journey to the West.

George Yeo - Wikipedia

George Yeo

In the classical novel, the Monkey King is rebellious in nature and possesses magical powers, including the ability to travel tens of thousands of kilometres in one somersault. But in the end, he fails to escape the Buddha’s palm in an encounter.

“Hong Kong cannot leave the Buddha’s palm. If one day, the Buddha decides to put a ring around the forehead of the monkey, then the monkey will have to take note,” Yeo said in a talk, according to Singapore media reports.

Monkey king pp

According to the classic, Sun Wukong wore such a golden headband around his head which he could not take off. His master the Buddhist monk Tang Sanzang could recite a particular spell to constrict the band to cause searing pains to punish the monkey and bring him under control.

Alas, Yeo has proved prescient with his analogy.

The Monkey King, as depicted in the film Journey to the West 2: The Demons Strike Back

File photo

Nearly one year later, the constricting headband for Hong Kong came in the form of the national security law Beijing directly imposed on the city, just hours before July 1, the 23rd anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to Chinese rule.

Sun Wukong (the Monkey King) with Guanyin (the Boddhisatva of ...

Small correction to author's writeup

T'was Kuan Yin (Goddess of Mercy) and NOT Buddha who provided Tang Sanzang (Sam Cheong) with the headband to restrain and discipline Sun Wukong (Monkey)

All sides have agreed that the introduction of the law marks a turning point for Hong Kong as it is nearly halfway through the 50-year contract that allows the city to maintain its capitalist way of life under the “one country, two systems” formula.

For the pro-democracy people in Hong Kong and their supporters in Western countries, the city has taken a turn for the worse and the promulgation of the law means the advent of one country, one system.

Eff, how are we going to have our weekend arson, looting and vandalism?

For others in Hong Kong and officials in Beijing, the introduction of the law is a turn for the better, resulting in smoother implementation of the one country, two systems concept and freeing the city from political chaos and violent protests, which they believe have stunted its development and made it a base for Western countries to subvert the central government on the mainland.

Beijing’s promulgation of the law has certainly come fast and furious, and is much tougher than expected in terms of its scope and reach.

Crimes of secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces are punishable by a maximum penalty of life in prison.

Officials in Hong Kong and Beijing have argued that there is nothing wrong with the legislation, not only because all countries – including Western democracies – have such laws to protect national security, but also because it is a timely and necessary move to restore stability after six months of often-violent protests.

They say that most national security cases will be tried in Hong Kong’s own courts and the law will target only a very small number of people who endanger national security. Most people’s basic rights and freedoms will be safeguarded, they say.

But what has caused most worries are the provisions in the law that give Beijing a direct and strong hand in policing the city and upholding its authority.

The law empowers Beijing to set up its own national security apparatus in Hong Kong staffed by its own law enforcement personnel, none of which would come under the city’s local jurisdiction.

Moreover, the law effectively allows the mainland Chinese authorities to try “serious” or “complex” cases on the mainland.

This is one of the most worrying bits, given fears that Hong Kong people could be extradited to the mainland for trials under the now-withdrawn extradition bill which triggered last year’s mass protests in the first place.

The way the law was enacted and imposed on Hong Kong was regrettable but inevitable.

Ever since the city failed to legislate its own version of a national security law in 2003, as required by the
Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution, missteps and mistrust by both the pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong and officials in Beijing have gradually but surely led to a point of no return.

On the one hand, many people in Hong Kong believe the central government has tried to tighten controls over the city while officials in Beijing think they are losing control of the city.

A ship in Victoria Harbour, Hong Kong, celebrates the 23rd anniversary of Hong Kong's return to Chinese sovereignty

Photo: Xinhua

Finally, the Chinese government hardened its resolve to impose the national security law on Hong Kong after last year’s demonstrations, which were initially against the extradition bill but soon morphed into an anti-Beijing political movement. In particular, the authorities were humiliated and incensed by a small band of rioters who not only went on a rampage for weeks wreaking havoc and destruction but also openly called for the independence of Hong Kong and begged US President Donald Trump to liberate the city.

From Beijing’s perspective, Hong Kong has become the first Chinese territory where Washington could compete with Beijing openly for influence and Beijing was not on the winning side.

There is no doubt that Beijing intends the tough law to instil fear and deter the kind of unrest that happened last year, making it crystal clear that one country takes priority over the two systems.

It has shown an immediate deterrent effect. Political activists, including Anson Chan, the city’s former chief secretary and a target of fierce attacks by the Chinese state media, have announced they are quitting politics, and some have fled overseas, fearing the repercussions of the law.

Still, just hours after the legislation took effect, thousands of people took to the streets on July 1 in open defiance and clashed with the police who arrested about 370 people, including 10 for breaching the new national security law.

Meanwhile, Beijing’s move has drawn condemnation from the United States and its Western allies. The US has already decided to remove its special trading privileges for Hong Kong and sanction Chinese officials responsible for the law while Britain and Australia have indicated they will offer qualified Hong Kong people the chance of settling in their countries. But those announcements will hardly have any impact on Beijing.

Perhaps a more important question for the people of Hong Kong and the international community is how frequently and how far the new law will be applied to the city.

Recent remarks from Chinese officials and legal experts seem to suggest the law will primarily serve as a deterrent and they have repeatedly stressed it will target only a very small group of people.

Zhang Xiaoming, deputy minister of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office.

Photo: Simon Song

Zhang Xiaoming, deputy minister of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, has dismissed worries that the imposition of the law will mean Hong Kong ends up with one country, one system. If that were Beijing’s intention, he said, it would have been much easier for it to impose mainland Chinese laws directly on Hong Kong, instead of going through all the effort of tailor-making the law for the city.

Precisely because of the worries the new law has caused, it makes every sense for Beijing to help Hong Kong to continue to thrive as Asia’s premier financial and commercial centre, a status that is underpinned by the city’s capitalist system.

If that is indeed Beijing’s intention, then it needs to apply the constrictive headband to Hong Kong with extreme caution, just as Tang Sanzang did with Sun Wukong.

At least the Journey to the West has a happy ending, with the Monkey King overcoming trials and tribulations to complete his mission and ascend to Buddhahood.

The Great Way: Journey to the West


  1. right analogy wrong character. obviously hker is the helpless tang shanzang, trump is that courage monkey, xi n ccp is the no ball jade emperor n bunch of useless deity, buddha is everyone that aspire to democracy. of course there is also evildoers like ccp lover, n 1.4b zombie.

    1. "trump is that courage monkey"??? Wakakaka, what a lot of crock - HY, you have just shown yourself to be a US cock sucker, wakakaka again

    2. He is the kind of mfer that keep playing buat tak tau despite open glaring showings of his nonchinese demoNcratic know-nothing-just-fart-first kharacteristics!

      This katak doesn't even know what hypocrisy is. All it knows about r that fart filled well of its.

    3. monkey seem much better than that pig but still a monkey. unlike u, i dun hv any lust or infatuation towards a monkey, albeit a white one from a white country.

    4. U DON'T have any lust or infatuation towards a monkey. But u share all the same traces of that monkey!

      How come?

      Zoonotic transmission of the hiv kind!

    5. u anglo no read xiyouji can only do personal attack, pity.

    6. U read 西游记?

      The bastardised western & cartoon versions that cater to demoNcratic dickheads all-over the world, right?

      Personal attack?

      NO. Remember what I have said - not to enlighten u, a basket case of waste. I'm just pitching a well dwelling katak to the CORRECT contextual meaning its 南魔萬 England can't convey!


      Just for fun to twist yr fart infilled mind.

      The current HK should be role modelled by Ne Zha (哪吒)- a rebellious youth, only thinking the world of himself. China, the benevolent father 托塔天王李靖. US, the evil 大魔头石矶, trying to create his long lasting empire.

      Bet u woyld never know this legend from that 5000yr of continuing history!

      Ooop… mfer, do u know why 三太子 is so popular in yr beloved Taiwan? Search & read, there r some lessons to be learn!

    7. yr nezha version is from fengsheng bang (the investiture of the gods) not xiyouji la, memang pening to debata anything china n chinese with a chinese illiterate.

    8. Wow!!!

      Now u r proving not only yr England comprehension is 南魔萬. Yr understanding of the Chinese legends r also hp6. Understandable, coming from a nonchinese, living under a fart filled well!

      犬养 mfer, reread AGAIN - which part I was talking about 西游记? Which part I was talking about 哪吒, who was an important role of the 封神榜?

      Now, who's the Chinese illiterate?

  2. "the law will target only a very small number of people who endanger national security. Most people’s basic rights and freedoms will be safeguarded, they say."

    This is the same Bullshit that UMNO conmen peddled in Malaysia for 61 years with ISA, OSA, SOSMA etc etc.

    Mahathir once told off the foreign press that Malaysia's security laws had been used on 0.003 % of the population (mathematically correct) , therefore it is wrong to say that he is a dictator or oppressor.

    Dictators like Mahathir and the CCP understand very well that you just need to lock up 0.003% of the population, the movement leaders and the rest will become as frightened rabbits.

    1. "that you just need to lock up 0.003% (??) of the population, the movement leaders and the rest will become as frightened rabbits."

      1st, can u justified that 0.003% of the population?

      Yr f*cked number plugged from the sky!

      2nd, ain't that the same operational procedure of police crime/riot control - controlling the heads to tie the minions down?

      It's the same ALL over the world of ANY political hues.

      What brownie r u trying to gain?

      Maybe just another one of those irrational fart to gain a 2cent exposure!

  3. No one say Bully cannot introduce security law. But wait lah, 50 years means 50 years, what is 27 more to a 5,000 year old civilization?

    If this security law is so important why didn't Bully include it in the 1997 Handover Agreement? Did Bully fool/trick Britain into signing an easy friendly agreement then, so that they will handover peacefully but later Bully can add, subtract and modify?

    Like Toonsie's famous "Manifesto is not a Bible", can add/subtract/modify....ha ha ha...

    We must all hold Bully to the 1997 Agreement, like a Manifesto...

    1. Blurred mfer, seeking 5sec egoistic fart on his diarrhea on a 5,000 year old civilization.

      This security law was included in the 1997 Handover Agreement & had been drafted into the original basic law.

      Due to various demoNcratic farts, it was never been legislated into HK legal court for the past 23yrs!

      China has never altered a single words as drafted into the signed Anglo-Sino agreement.

      Instead, yr auntie pommie has play England wordsmithy tricks to fool the public, especially those blurred f*cks like u.


      Before the agreement was signed, the pommie governor was all power in HK that only his auntie pommie in UK has a control over him.

      The signed agreement supposedly carried over that assumed power to the later chief executive of HK SAR as stated for the role of interchangeability of governorship & chief executive.

      But Chris Patten split the all powerful governorship role into 3 individual legal roles of legislative, executive & legislative, judicial - modelling after the western demoNcracy before leaving the HK as her last governor. By so doing, he limited the power of the later day chief executive of HK SAR. He did that w/o consulting Beijing!

      W/O changing a word in the signed agreement, the power of the later chief executive has been curtailed!

      The used words r the same. But the role & purposes have changedbdue to the last minute administrative changes done by the all powerful governor!

      Ditto with the HK bno passport holders with the current pommieland administrator.

      Mfer, u should shout loudly to yr auntie pommie for her dirty word plays if u truly know the history. Instead u r defending her left, right, front & back¡

      What's that proved of u?

    2. CK's "This security law was included in the 1997 Handover Agreement & had been drafted into the original basic law."

      Absolutely correct!!! What has just been done is 23 years late.

      Chris Patten was a typical manipulating Machiavellian Pommie bastard who wanted to convince (and he succeeded) 6-7 million Hongkies that they need NOT run away to Mother Britain even though they were Pommie citizens because they could have an independent HK oif they followed his Kerbau-Democracy ad Freedom BS - of course how many Hongkies wanted to run away to Britain to start all over again? So they bought Patten's bullshit hook, line and sinker - he was made a Baron out of conning 7 million moronic Hongkies, to stay away from Britain (which was already reeling from Indians, Paki and Punjabs from Africa plus their families from mother India)

    3. whether basic law 23 or nsl make no diff, hker never agree. dun impose evil law onto it people like umno did.

    4. When have u become a hkie to know what the HKers think about the basic law 23 & NSL?

      U have connection with those HK 废青? The 黄粉丝? The Ned?

      Evil laws?

      犬养 mfer, u want evil law?

      Look no further than yr uncle Sam as in BLM.

      Ooop… also yr 蔡妹妹 - sending badly trained school leavers, as young sailors, to their early death in moronic planned 汉光 military exercise!

  4. The enactment of the security law in Hong Kong seems to reveal some people's attitude towards colonization.

    They believe that if China wants to formulate a law concerning its national security, it must obtain the consent of foreign countries. This is clearly against the Charter of the United Nations

    The Charter of the United Nations calls for non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. Obviously, since Hong Kong's return to China, the Hong Kong issue has been China's internal affairs.

    Does the UK need the consent of other countries to enact a law ? Does the US allow China or other countries to castigate it for the Jim Crow law and the policy of racial segregation and call for sanctions against the US ? The US is the ONLY rogue nation that imposes sanctions, trade tariffs and boycotts on countries that do not accede to its demands.

    During the BLM protest, hardly a few days into it, Trump had started calling them thugs and promised to send in "vicious dogs" and "ominous weapons" when the water canon, police beating and rubber bullets failed to tamp down the protests. And within days, the army was called in. Contrast this to Hong Kong.... almost 1 year of protest, with great restrain shown by the police. This protest which then descended into terrorism of hooligan looting, wanton destruction of properties and public facilities and the killing/attacks on civilians and police, all with the blessing of the cowardly Gang of Four hovering in the background claiming that this was a "peaceful" leaderless protest and the CIA/NED agents caught giving training, equipment and money to those rioting boys and girls. For such acts of terrorism, the UK and US politicians and media hailed them brave heroes; Nancy Pelosi could hardly contain herself seeing the rioters burning up the city, waving her country's flags and imploring for Trump to come "invade" Hong Kong ...." Oh, what a beautiful sight to behold !" the witch seemed to exclaim.

    Can one imagine if the black people in the US were to hold protest and rioting lasting for one whole year ! to block up traffic and destroy traffic lights and deface banks, restaurants, retail shops, business centres, government offices and descend en mass to airports to prevent passengers from leaving the airport or embarking on planes, to start harassing and beating up civilians, especially the elderly and the pregnant ladies, and to throw fire bombs at the cops, send threatening notes to the families of police and threaten the children of the police personnel. Would Trump even allow this to go on for one whole year? If he and his cohorts can call the Hong Kong rioters heroes, why was he calling the black people thugs ? Double-standard fork snake-tongue much ? Typical White Supremacist.

    From the looks of it, world sympathy is obviously with China. At the UN Human Rights Council, 23 countries ( the usual suspects, hehe ) criticized China according to the US script. But guess how many countries support China ? 53 countries, with an additional 20 countries in early July...in total 73 countries support China.

    Nathan Rich is brilliant here when he compares the US security law with the one in Hong Kong :


    1. ah jerk, deng sign something in 1984, reread history, nathan is a jerk, however its pretty normal a jerk read another jerk.

    2. In your case Batty, it goes without saying...You just can't simply fix STUPIDITY. Neither can you fix Indoctrinated Stubborn-as-Ox Brain, wa ka ka ka ka.

  5. Hehehehe...the brilliant Nathan Rich is a convicted felon in the US (crime of violence, not political).

    That precludes him from most professional employment in the US...he's making GOOD money in CCP-land, obviously...

    1. Oh yes..ad hominem attack instead of rebutting his arguments. Monstrous brilliancy, hehe.

      If Nathan is making good money in China, he wouldn't have become broke due to YouTube demonetizing his postings although he had millions of subscribers. Freedom of Speech YouTube Hypocrite ? But now, with Nathan's appeal, donations had started flowing in and he had the fund to start work again. People like you like to make accusation without checking the facts. But then most indoctrinated brains just accept only those 'facts' that aligned with their brainwashed thinking. You fall flat on the Tiananmem Square so-called massacre, slinking away like a coward. You fall flat on trying to pin Mao to deliberately killing tens of millions of Chinese citizens. Just merely parroting Western propaganda is just too pathetic and you seemed shameless in this disgusting habit.
      You seem to have good company with your two other partners-blind-as-mice who can't stop parroting in the Western echo chamber, now focusing their sight on so-called Xinjiang 'concentration camps'.

      Just stop barking uselessly. Due time to get out of TrumpAss butthole...must be nauseatingly suffocating and stinky in there, but then there's no accounting for indoctrinated monstrous taste and private agenda.

      To date your idol Trump has publicly told not less than 20,000 lies since his presidency and his lists of criminality is longer than his arm...he will be without presidential immunity once he lose to Biden. You can send your love to him in his prison cell soon, hehe

    2. The only people still trying to deny the facts of the Tiananmen Massacre are CCP-cocksuckers.

      Its a complete waste of time to reply to your batty looney post on Tiananmen.

    3. Is that all you can manage to palm off Wikileaks revelation ? Huhu..pathetic ! Suck harder on TrumpAss and those Angmos whitey cocks, parroting their 'alternative facts' blindly, be it Tiananmem Square "Massacre", Mao deliberately 'killing 30 millions, 45 millions or 78 millions of his own Chinese citizens', Xinjiang so-called 'concentration camps of 3 million or is it 1.5 million Uyghurs", South China Sea or IP so-called theft. You with your 2 others in the blind-mice club here have the same SOP...slinking with tail tucked in when defeated and come back with yet another line of attack...and failed yet again, hehe

      You have absolutely zero, nada, zilch credible countering with facts to the replies which demolish your false accusation which are nothing but just merely parroting the West propaganda shrill demonization of China for decades. All you can do when faced with actual facts and logical reasoning to all your charges and wild accusation is to make personal attacks. Shameful. Disgraceful. Worse than ostrich with head stuck in the sand, wildly kicking its legs in the air blindly, thinking it has defeated its 'enemy' that way. But have to admit you managed to hide your true self all this while on this site...and your final revelation of your ugly self is not a beautiful sight to behold, wa ka ka ka

    4. Same logic!

      The only people still trying to promote the facts of the Tiananmen Massacre are demoNcratic-cocksuckers.

      Its a complete waste of time to reply to your batty looney post on Tiananmen.

      Right to the point, old moneyed mfer?