52 The EconomistSeptember 7th 2019
1D
uring thepast nearly three months of
popular unrest in Hong Kong, unprece-
dented in size and intensity, the territory
has become accustomed to surprises. Par-
ticipants themselves have been taken
aback by the scale of some of the protests,
the violence they have spawned by protes-
ters and police, and their persistence in
spite of the economic harm that some resi-
dents fear they are causing and the risk
they may be incurring of intervention by
the mainland’s security forces. Now the
territory’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, ob-
durate for weeks in the face of the protes-
ters’ demands, has changed her tune.
On September 4th, after days of specu-
lation that the government was preparing
to get far tougher, perhaps by invoking
sweeping colonial-era emergency regula-
tions, Mrs Lam made a pre-recorded tele-
vised address that was clearly intended to
sound conciliatory. In it she said she would
formally abandon the proposed legislation
that sparked the unrest in June—a bill that
would have allowed criminal suspects in
Hong Kong to be extradited to CommunistParty-controlled courts on the Chinese
mainland. Mrs Lam shelved the bill a few
days after the protests broke out, but had
hitherto rejected protesters’ demands that
she scrap it entirely. She now says a govern-
ment motion declaring its withdrawal will
be submitted to the legislature when it re-
convenes next month.
This was hardly a dramatic step—she
had already declared the bill “dead”. But it
was striking in the context of recent reports
that she had been refusing to ditch it com-
pletely because the leadership in Beijing
would not let her. On August 30th Reuters
news agency quoted unnamed sources in
Hong Kong as saying that Mrs Lam had pro-
posed doing so in a report submitted to the
central government. This document had
also suggested accepting one of the protes-
ters’ other demands, namely that an inde-pendent inquiry be conducted into the
protests, including the use of excessive
force by the police. Reuters said the re-
sponse from Beijing was that no further
concessions should be made.
Many pro-democracy activists have re-
sponded dismissively to Mrs Lam’s an-
nouncement. They note that Mrs Lam re-
peated her consistent line that complaints
about police violence would be handled by
the Independent Police Complaints Coun-
cil, which protesters say is not indepen-
dent enough. She also made no conces-
sions to their other demands: that arrested
demonstrators be released and no charges
pressed, that the government stop classify-
ing the unrest as a “riot” and that full de-
mocracy be granted. The party has prom-
ised eventual “universal suffrage” in Hong
Kong. But it applies the term only to the
ability to cast a vote. It reserves the right to
decide who can stand.
Few protesters expect the party to grant
more democracy. But a slogan they often
chant is “Five demands, not one less”, im-
plying that they intend to maintain pres-
sure on the government even though they
know their goal is unrealistic. Before Mrs
Lam’s address, the stances of both sides
had appeared to be hardening. Last week,
for the first time, the police refused to give
permission for a proposed big rally in cen-
tral Hong Kong. Organisers called it off, but
thousands turned up anyway on August
31st. This led to some of the worst violence
since the unrest began.Unrest in Hong KongCarrie Lam’s blues
HONG KONG
The territory’s leader has made a concession to protesters. It may not helpChina
53 A belt-and-road film flops
54 Chaguan: Not yet a coming-out partyAlso in this section