This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/26/world/asia/china-hong-kong-protests-election.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
After Electoral Loss in Hong Kong, Beijing Points Finger at U.S. Beijing Was Confident Its Hong Kong Allies Would Win. After the Election, It Went Silent.
(about 5 hours later)
BEIJING — The Chinese government, still coming to terms with a stunning electoral victory for the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong, is directing its ire at a popular foe: the United States. BEIJING — The Chinese government seemed confident that its allies would prevail in the Hong Kong elections on Sunday.
The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the American ambassador to Beijing on Monday, a day after the local elections in Hong Kong that were seen as a rebuke to the authoritarian policies of President Xi Jinping. For a week, commentators wrote brassy pieces saying the Hong Kong public would go to the polls to “end social chaos and violence,” a vote against what they saw as rogues and radicals. Editors at state-run news outlets prepared stories that predicted withering losses for the protest movement.
Chinese officials warned the ambassador, Terry Branstad, that the United States should “stop interfering in China’s internal affairs,” according to the ministry. They also criticized Congress for passing a bill recently to support the protesters. When it became clear early Monday that democracy advocates in the semiautonomous territory had won in a landslide, Beijing turned silent. The news media, for the most part, did not even report the election results. And Chinese officials directed their ire at a familiar foe: the United States.
The state-run news media on Tuesday revived a popular line of attack against the United States, accusing American politicians of harboring “sinister intentions” and encouraging unrest in Hong Kong as a way of containing China’s rise. The sudden pivot reflects the ruling Communist Party’s continuing struggle to understand one of its worst political crises in decades. At various moments in the monthslong protests in Hong Kong, Beijing has been caught off guard, forced to recalibrate its propaganda machine.
By directing their anger at the United States, Chinese officials are reviving a theme that will likely be popular with the masses and allow the government to avoid taking responsibility for the defeat, analysts said. After the election loss, Chinese officials resorted to a favorite tactic by blaming the West, a nationalistic message that plays well to the masses at home. For months, officials have said the protests are the work of foreign “black hands” bent on fomenting an uprising in the former British colony.
“Beijing knows very well that they lost the game in the election,” said Willy Lam, a political analyst who teaches at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. “Beijing had to blame somebody, so in this case it is blaming outside foreign forces, particularly in the United States, for interfering in the elections.”“Beijing knows very well that they lost the game in the election,” said Willy Lam, a political analyst who teaches at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. “Beijing had to blame somebody, so in this case it is blaming outside foreign forces, particularly in the United States, for interfering in the elections.”
The flash of anger from Beijing reflected the central government’s deep anxieties about months of unrest in Hong Kong, one of the most sustained challenges to Communist Party rule in decades. The victory for the pro-democracy candidates appeared to take Beijing by surprise. Since the antigovernment protests erupted in June, Beijing has sought to portray the protesters in Hong Kong as violent thugs colluding with foreign forces to undermine the party. The government, under President Xi Jinping, has repeatedly denounced the protesters as a fringe group that does not enjoy broad public support.
Pro-democracy candidates captured 389 of 452 elected seats, far more than they had ever won. Beijing’s allies held just 58 seats, down from 300. In the days leading up to the election, state-run news outlets echoed that message. Xinhua, the state news agency, reported that most voters were opposed to violence and worried that the election would become a “stage for political performances.”
The elections on Sunday were for district councils, some of the least powerful positions in Hong Kong’s government. But the vote was seen as a barometer of public attitudes toward Beijing and a referendum on the protests, which began in June over an unpopular extradition bill and have since turned into a call for greater freedom in the semiautonomous territory. It didn’t matter that the elections on Sunday were for district councils, some of the least powerful positions in Hong Kong’s government. Like those in the pro-democracy camp, the Chinese media also appeared to position the vote as a referendum on the protests, albeit as a chance for the public to decry the violence and the pro-democracy movement.
Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s embattled leader, on Tuesday disputed the idea that the bruising defeat of pro-Beijing candidates had broader implications. But she acknowledged that there appeared to be dissatisfaction with how the government handled the extradition bill. But the vote on Sunday severely undercut the government’s narrative.
In a rebuke to Beijing, pro-democracy candidates captured 389 of 452 elected seats, far more than they had ever won. Beijing’s allies held just 58 seats, down from 300. It was a strong message from Hong Kong voters, with record turnout of 71 percent.
As the bruising loss for the pro-Beijing camp became clear, the Chinese news media didn’t cover it. A brief news article by Xinhua stated simply that ballots had been counted and blamed social unrest for “disrupting the electoral process.”
Xu Qinduo, a political commentator for China Radio International, a state-owned broadcaster, said the lack of coverage might be at least partly a face-saving measure. His outlet’s website posted the basic report by Xinhua.
“People see it as somehow a failure of the central government,” he said, referring to the victory for pro-democracy candidates. He said he disagreed with that perception.
Mr. Xu added that the silence from the news media suggested the government had not decided yet how to respond. “There’s probably a lack of conclusion, a lack of consensus even, over how to respond to the election and what kind of narrative we are going to have,” he said.
The failure of the political establishment in Beijing to predict the outcome also raised questions about the party’s grasp of the political forces in Hong Kong. There are grumblings that Mr. Xi’s government has misread the grievances of the protesters and underestimated the depth of the anger in Hong Kong.
Chinese state media has simultaneously argued that the frustrations have stemmed from economic issues like sky-high housing costs and depicted demonstrators as paid thugs. And those provocateurs, in Beijing’s view, didn’t have the broad support of the Hong Kong public.
“They believed in their own propaganda,” said Wu Qiang, a political analyst in Beijing who is critical of the government. “They thought the situation would pivot and the public would support them.”
Hong Kong’s leadership has sought to play down the elections results. On Tuesday, Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s embattled chief executive, disputed the idea that the losses for pro-Beijing candidates had broader implications. But she acknowledged that there appeared to be dissatisfaction with how the government handled the extradition bill that originally sparked the protests.
“There are people who want to express the view that they could no longer tolerate this chaotic situation,” Mrs. Lam said at a regular news briefing. “There are of course people who felt that our government has not handled competently the legislative exercise and its aftermath.”“There are people who want to express the view that they could no longer tolerate this chaotic situation,” Mrs. Lam said at a regular news briefing. “There are of course people who felt that our government has not handled competently the legislative exercise and its aftermath.”
At the meeting with Ambassador Branstad on Monday, Zheng Zeguang, a vice foreign minister, criticized the passage of the bill, known as the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act. Since the election, Chinese officials have renewed their attacks on the United States and criticized Congress for recently passing a bill to support the protesters, known as the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.
“Any attempt to destabilize Hong Kong and undermine its stability and prosperity will never succeed,” Mr. Zheng said, according to the ministry The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the American ambassador to Beijing, Terry Branstad, on Monday to complain about the bill.
The House and Senate both passed the bill, which could impose sanctions on Chinese officials for cracking down on the protesters, with a veto-proof majority this month. The White House, which is engaged in delicate trade negotiations with China, has not said whether Mr. Trump will sign it. Zheng Zeguang, a vice foreign minister, told Mr. Branstad that the United States should “stop interfering in China’s internal affairs,” according to the ministry.
At their meeting on Monday, Mr. Branstad told Mr. Zheng that the United States was watching the situation in Hong Kong with “grave concern,” according to a spokesman for the American embassy in Beijing. Mr. Branstad added that “the United States believes that societies are best served when diverse political views can be represented in genuinely free and fair elections,” according to the embassy. “Any attempt to destabilize Hong Kong and undermine its stability and prosperity will never succeed,” Mr. Zheng said, according to the ministry.
Tiffany May contributed reporting from Hong Kong, and Albee Zhang contributed research from Beijing. The bill, which passed both houses of Congress with veto-proof majorities, could impose sanctions on Chinese officials for cracking down on the protesters. The White House, which is engaged in delicate trade negotiations with China, has not said whether President Trump will sign it.
At their meeting on Monday, Mr. Branstad told Mr. Zheng that the United States was watching the situation in Hong Kong with “grave concern,” according to a spokesman for the American Embassy in Beijing. Mr. Branstad added that “the United States believes that societies are best served when diverse political views can be represented in genuinely free and fair elections,” according to the embassy.
The state-run news media has also sharpened its criticism of American politicians.
On Tuesday, People’s Daily, the flagship newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party, published a scathing editorial accusing American officials of harboring “sinister intentions” and encouraging unrest in Hong Kong as a way of containing China’s rise.
CCTV, the state broadcaster, aired a segment on the evening news quoting American, Russian and Singaporean experts who argued that the United States was interfering in China’s affairs.
The tone in the state media is likely to grow more aggressive in the weeks ahead, analysts say, as Beijing tries to rein in a pro-democracy movement that feels vindicated by its electoral victories.
“The stage is set for more confrontation between the radical protesters in Hong Kong and a recalcitrant Beijing,” said Mr. Lam, the political analyst. “Beijing may end up squeezing Hong Kong further and further.”
Tiffany May contributed reporting from Hong Kong. Albee Zhang contributed research from Beijing, and Ailin Tang from Shanghai.