Hong Kong people will inevitably look at Biden's statement with deep cynicism. As the U.S. police fire tear gas to disperse pro-Palestinian protesters on university campuses and smash their way into occupied buildings, the hypocrisy and double standards are evident. 

After all, we suffered months of U.S. support and encouragement for violent protests here that wrecked our city's infrastructure and the university campuses. 

It's worth reviewing the damage done in 2019 and 2020. The Hong Kong rioters smashed 740 traffic lights, ripped up 22,000 square metres of paving blocks, took down 60 km of railings, 2,700 traffic bollards and 300 traffic signs to use as weapons against citizens and the police.

Besides, they damaged some 700 highway structures, 1,500 lamp posts, bus stops, and facilities at public transport interchanges. The cost of these repairs was HK$65 million. 

Attacks on MTR stations with firebombs and the smashing of ticket machines cost us HK$500 million in repairs, while the damage done at the Polytechnic University alone amounted to HK$700 million.  

Yet, even now, the U.S. continues to decry Hong Kong for bringing back order and peace to our streets and campuses with laws that are less draconian than similar provisions in the U.S. and elsewhere. 

Hence, folks here watched with interest as protests at 50 campuses in the U.S. last week saw over 2,000 people arrested. 

Like the protesters in Hong Kong, some of the students in the U.S. display a level of naivety that belies their position at leading universities. For example,  LGBTQ types could at least acknowledge that Hamas and their cohort wouldn't welcome them with open arms. Indeed, they'd not last long in Gaza, and it wouldn't be the Israelis killing them. 

These U.S. protests are opening Pandora's box of competing ideologies, played out by protesters with little or no comprehension of the Middle East's history, circumstances and complexities. Please name that river you are chanting about in anti-Semitic slogans that threaten Jewish students and staff.  

With the approach of graduation ceremonies and the increasing anti-Semitic threats, university authorities felt compelled to act. Each university has a degree of autonomy, except that influential donors are watching and making it clear they won't be so keen to open their wallets if the violent anti-Semitic protests continue. 

And while super-rich Jews are big donors, so are Saudi Arabia, Oman and Qatar. Hence, as students demand that universities divest from Israel and its associated entities, they appear willing to accept cash from places that wouldn't exactly welcome them. 

This ability to hold wholly contradictory and nonsensical views together is laughable.  In the fullness of time, words come to mean the opposites: “liberals” are authoritarian.

These protests have been building for months as college authorities indulged the students and imported professional agitators. The extent of harassment suffered by Jews on campuses eventually reached the public eye with a hearing in Congress in late 2023. 

Harvard University President Claudine Gay, the University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology President Sally Kornbluth testified to give mealy-mouthed responses when questioned about threats to Jewish students. Gay and Magill resigned following an outcry at their limp answer and fence-sitting attitude to the anti-Semitic action happening under their noses. 

Anyway, this week, volleys of tear gas soon had the protesters retreating on the UCLA campus and elsewhere. Then, in scenes reminiscent of Hong Kong, police dismantled the tents and makeshift barricaded encampments.

In 2019, the Hong Kong Police received unjustified criticism for their use of tear gas to disperse violent mobs. Nonetheless, the use of tear gas is an appropriate option. Its deployment avoids direct contact between violent protesters and police with the potential for injuries.

From what I've seen of events on U.S. campuses, the protesters were loud and threatening violence but less aggressive than the mob seen in Hong Kong. Yet, dispersal by tear gas still appears to be the proper option and within the operational rules around the use of minimum force. 

In 2019, that point was lost on feckless British politicians, who became overnight experts in public order and anti-riot tactics. These people are now silent about events in the U.S.

In a striking move, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who welcomed the protests in Hong Kong as a "beautiful sight," shared her observation that the U.S. campus events have "a Russian tinge." 

She offered no evidence for her assertions. Still, if the Russians had a role, would it not likely be similar to the actions of the U.S. in Hong Kong and elsewhere? 

Of course, the U.S. protesters, like their counterparts here, will seek to portray the police as using excessive force or bias. A torrent of false social media narratives and twisted accounts is already circulating. The aim is to undermine police credibility and spark public outrage. In the ultimate irony, the usual Nazi tropes are out there, used against officers who are protecting Jews.

Such a process of demonisation is a dangerous road to travel. Almost invariably, this litany of false stories triggers the self-activation of extremists and nascent terrorist groups. We saw that in Hong Kong. Fortunately, the police could stop them before planned attacks came to fruition. However, individual "lone wolves" did manage to stab officers.

A similar dynamic could play out across U.S. campuses. Moreover, given the easy access to firearms in the U.S., the possibility of a severe escalation is there. 

Is it too churlish to suggest that what goes around comes around as events in the U.S. mirror those here? After all, life can be so arbitrary. And yet, Marcus Aurelius ( 121 – 180AD) reminds us, "Don't join in the mourning or the ecstasy."  

Let's leave it there for now.

​May 2024