As the high-stakes poker game between students and the Hong Kong government draws to a thankfully blood-free close, it is not too early to consider what lasting impact the pro-democracy protests will have on the former British colony.
To start with a conclusion, the outcome of the contest was predetermined. The students’ central demand that Hong Kong adopt “genuine” democracy was a non-starter. Beijing had in late-August handed down its judgment, setting strict limits on Hong Kong’s election rules. That made it inconceivable it would bend to the students’ demands. If this was a poker game, it was rigged. Banker always wins.
True, “negotiations” between CY Leung’s Hong Kong administration and pro-democracy advocates will now take place. Yet the city’s authorities have little leeway to negotiate. The best on offer is a system in which at least half the members of a nominating committee – at present just 1,200 people – select two to three candidates from which Hong Kong’s 5m electorate can pick. There is no question of public nomination of candidates. No system will be permitted that could select for public ballot a radical, let alone anti-Beijing, candidate. If talks are to continue, the students will have to ditch some core principles.