This article comes from the Global Desk, a collaboration between On Century Avenue, The Gazelle and WSN. Read more by searching 'global' in either newspaper. SHANGHAI, China — As always, the month of October began with the celebration of China’s National Holiday. Meant to commemorate the founding of the People’s Republic of China, this holiday is normally marked by an increase in travel to popular tourist sites and government-organized festivities such as fireworks and concerts throughout the mainland, Hong Kong and Macau. Although the streets of Hong Kong were packed with tens of thousands of people this past holiday, no one was there to see the annual fireworks display. In fact, it had been cancelled due to another, more critical gathering. Since Sept. 26, student-led pro-democracy protests have occurred throughout Hong Kong in response to a decision recently made by the Chinese government in Beijing regarding the 2017 election of Hong Kong’s Chief Executive. To understand the dynamics and tension surrounding these protests, it is important to first understand the history of Hong Kong and its unique standing from the rest of China. Firstly, Hong Kong has only been under Chinese control for a brief 17 years. The region was previously a British colony until it was handed backed to China in 1997. Since then, it has been under the influence of a peculiar “one country, two systems” policy as described by Deng Xiaoping. Essentially, it was agreed that Hong Kong would be self-governing to a degree and have certain civil liberties not afforded to mainland China while simultaneously protected by the Chinese government. The principles by which this autonomy would be governed is laid out in a document called the Basic Law. In Chapter 4, Article 45 of this document, it is promised that, “The Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government … The ultimate aim is the selection of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures.” The 2017 elections had been declared the year when the aim of universal suffrage would be met. However, the recent announcement of how the candidates for this election will be selected has led some to believe this promise is being broken. On Aug. 31, China's National People's Congress ruled that candidates for Hong Kong's chief executive will need approval votes from at least half of the Standing Committee, which is largely made of the same members that have chosen chief executives in the past.Technically, this is in agreement with the Basic Law, but for those protesting, the sentiment seems to be that if the Beijing government chooses the candidates for the election, there is no real recognition towards the promise of universal suffrage. The realization of democracy would not be legitimate because any government appointed candidate would obviously be a government-controlled puppet. These reasons may make the protesting seem reasonable. However, there is one thing that cannot be overlooked: these aforementioned puppet-candidates are only a worst case scenario; it is not definite that this situation will arise. Assistant Professor of Global China studies at NYU Shanghai, Andrea Jones-Rooy, brought up this point. While Jones-Rooy acknowledges that the three candidates could be politically aligned rubber-stamp politicians, she also appreciates the argument that Beijing could just as easily select these candidates very carefully: “They [the Chinese government] do not take the decision of who would be a candidate leader lightly. Therefore, it is not likely that they would put up this type of “puppet candidate” who is not properly trained or competent for the job. One can think about it in terms of how the president of the United States has the privilege to appoint cabinet members opposed to them being elected. These people are highly esteemed, proper, and successful people who have ample experience in politics. We look up to them, they all have high degrees, they all have experience … The best interpretation of what Beijing is proposing is something that looks kind of like that,” said Jones-Rooy. Jones-Rooy’s sentiment seems to be shared by some people even within Hong Kong. One Hong Kong teenager who wishes to remain anonymous can be quoted on her Facebook saying that she is hesitant to “show solidarity to our fellow protesters” and that “the movement has caused a lot of unnecessary friction between authorities (such as policemen) and citizens … I understand people are moved by unfair conditions (such as wealth disparity), but I’m not sure this is the way to solve any problems.” Her uncertainty is reflected in polls taken last week that indicate there are more residents against the demonstrations than who support it. Nevertheless, the movement is certainly not lacking in supporters. Many Westerners outside of China have been quick to jump on the “democracy-beats-all, democracy-for-all” bandwagon, organizing rallies and hurriedly signing their names on petitions to show their solidarity with the protesters of Hong Kong. In the span of a few days several “Umbrella Movement” protests were even conducted in major cities and colleges in both Europe and the United States. The White House sent out an official email to everyone who signed a petition in support of the Hong Kong protesters indicating their stance: “The United States supports universal suffrage in Hong Kong in accordance with the Basic Law and we support the aspirations of the Hong Kong people. We believe that an open society, with the highest possible degree of autonomy and governed by the rule of law, is essential for Hong Kong’s stability and prosperity -- indeed this is what has made Hong Kong such a successful and truly global city. We have consistently made our position known to Beijing, and we will continue to do so.” Too much interest may just cause more trouble, which is the concern of some young people within China. Two Shanghainese students from NYU Shanghai’s Class of 2018 agreed that the protesters in Hong Kong were right to be upset as their wishes are not being sufficiently acknowledged, but also believe that blocking streets and aggressive protesting was an overreaction, suggesting that the citizens of Hong Kong could have conducted their protests in a more civil way. However, they expressed more frustration over the actions of those outside of China and Hong Kong. When asked what her biggest concern was, one student said she worried that Western powers and media would see this as an opportunity to arouse conflicts between Hong Kong and China, and use their influence to make the situation more complex than the original appeal from the people of Hong Kong. She also expressed concern for the impact these protests may have on the economy in Hong Kong, with many businesses already looking to relocate if things become more unstable. The current situation has the great potential to create anonymity and increase the general tensions between Hong Kong and China. It is almost hard to imagine things coming to an end without breeding some sort of hostility or distrust, especially since this is completely uncharted territory. But nobody wants that. Perhaps rather than acting, all sides should take a moment to consider exactly what is at stake. This article was written by Maya Williams. Send an email to [email protected] to get in touch. Photo Credit: Alfred Yu