June 4th

The crack of AK47s around Beijing in June 1989 still echoes in Hong Kong. These events, however you interpret them, continue to influence Hong Kong politics. If you doubt that, consider the ongoing extradition debate with direct lines drawn to 30 years ago.

People in the West and some in Hong Kong have a superficial understanding of the sequence of events, the causes and the consequences. Images of the ‘Tank Man’ frame their narrative, together with students making bold statements about democracy. Then the army rolls in, and people die. Alas, this vast over-simplification doesn’t even scratch the surface.

I can’t cover all the ground here, except to say the unrest wasn’t confined to Beijing and the causes were many. A weak economy, widespread corruption and an internal party struggle all coalesced.

The catalyst was the death of reformer HU Yaobang. Students took to the streets, then occupied Tiananmen Square demanding reforms. 

It’s known protests flared in several urban centres. Students and workers seized bridges in Wuhan, occupying streets in Shanghai, Xi’an, Nanjing and Chengdu.

These troubles rumbled on for days after June 4, although the authorities gradually gained the upper hand. 

In Shanghai, the protests dispersed peacefully. Not so in Chengdu. Reports suggest as many as 300 people died as the police moved on protesters. But, without the presence of international media, these reports are not verified. 

We know from first-hand accounts that the students in Tiananmen couldn’t coordinate their actions or agree on a strategy. Several factions jockeyed for control.

Misunderstandings and confusion meant the forfeiting of opportunities. In the end, it was probably too late — yet even with the soldiers advancing on the square,  the students continued a frantic debate. 

Also, the Western media reports of killings in the square proved inaccurate. It’s now known that confrontations developed in the West of the city. None of this changes the fact that people died, but it fed a description of the West’s media producing false reports.

The abiding image in the West is of ‘Tank Man’ confronting the PLA armoured column. That took place on June 5. He is later led away by other protestors. We don’t know who he is, and his whereabouts remain a mystery. 

As a response, Hong Kong’s people’s faith in the future under Chinese rule evaporated overnight. Hundreds of thousands took to the streets. The New China News Agency in Happy Valley (now the Metropolitan Hotel) was the focus of their wrath. Along the way, vast sums of money came in to help the students flee. 

Then an exodus of talent started from Hong Kong as people sought to secure a future abroad. The lame response from the British didn’t fill many with confidence. Besides offering a stingy 50,000 passports across a population of five million, the Brits uttered empty words of reassurance.

But times changed, and attitudes evolved. China underwent an accelerated development that saw it challenge the US as the leading economy.

Hong Kong’s people’s zeal for change in China eased as the economic benefits of a close relationship supplanted political considerations. 

Most folks accepted the situation to make an uneasy peace, while keeping their options open. A Canadian passport in the bottom drawer and a house in Vancouver sit ready.

Commemoration of June 4 is ritualistic for our old-guard pro-democracy politicians. Moreover, it’s the time of the year when they can replenish their coffers with donations. The communion of the candle-lit vigil, replaying of the news clips and former student leaders speeches. 

And yet, the draw of the event is weakening for the new batch of activists. They reject Tiananmen as irrelevant to their generation, to focus within Hong Kong. Although, after the collapse of the Occupy movement in late 2014, and the later prosecutions, they’ve somewhat lost direction. Their frustration bubbled over with the 2016 Mongkok riot.

It’s telling that before last year’s vigil, the head of Hong Kong University Student’s Union made public statements. 

“As Hongkongers, do we have a responsibility to build a democratic China? This is a question we must ask.” He went on to infer that Hong Kong people have a different identity from Mainlanders. He implied this creates a responsibility to focus on Hong Kong issues. 

Similar sentiments came from other student bodies, who asserted they didn’t ‘feel’ a connection to the events of 1989. This rejection of a broader role in Chinese affairs is an anathema to the old-guard. Beijing can’t be comfortable either, because the Hong Kong students are defining themselves as outside the domain of greater China. 

China 2019 is very different from the China of 1989. During a recent visit to Shanghai, I’m knocked sideways to see hundreds of teenagers dressed in Hogwarts costumes rushing to a movie. 

The people are wealthier, better travelled and engaged in building a future that is breathtaking to observe. They’ve attained much in a short time. 

The clamour for democracy — in whatever form — was predicted to flow from increased prosperity. For the most part, pundits asserting such theories failed to recognise the complexities on the ground. 

In truth, the ability of the Party to deliver wealth, layered atop tight controls, held things in check. Allied to that is the inherent nationalism with an overwhelming sense that the Chinese are moving forward. 

Meanwhile, the Tiananmen anniversary is weaponised to serve a broader agenda. It’s an easy stick with which to beat China, while countries gainly ignore their history. Without wishing to engage in naked whataboutism or cynically deflect responsibility, is there a contradiction and double-standard in the West’s attitude?

None of this justifies nor condones what happened. On my travels, I’ve had the opportunity to speak with people who were there in Beijing; academics, officials and city residents. Believe me; there are regrets and recriminations aplenty on all sides. 

Tonight I observed the vigil. I went to sense the mood and understand the current sentiment. The turnout was huge. As expected, the crowd was sombre. 

​They sang the songs, eulogised the dead and called for the Party to reverse the verdict on 1989 and recognise the students as patriots. All eyes are now on Sunday, June 9, when a march against the proposed extradition bill will take place. ​