Guo Jiping (a pen name) in People’s Daily (December 31, 2019)
Summary by Alan Yang Gregory
The phase-one trade deal reached between China and the US will be beneficial not only for China and the US but also for peace and prosperity around the world.
In December 2019, China and the US reached a phase-one trade deal on the basis of equality and mutual respect. On both sides of the Pacific Ocean, and the world as a whole, markets responded positively. While challenges are inevitable in international relations, only cooperation and mutual promotion, rather than confrontation and containment, can make relations last.
As economics and technology continue to make the world more integrated, China and the US are seeing their interests increasingly intertwined. While disputes are a normal part of cooperation, supremacy cannot overthrow justice and rationality. As such, cooperation is always the best choice. China, facing the US-initiated trade war, will never surrender to any form of pressure, and remains devoted to safeguarding its core national interests. In addition, China is committed to resolving issues through dialogue, properly handling differences while seeking common ground, and overcoming obstacles with practical solutions.
Improvements in relations between the China and the US over the past 40 years help to demonstrate that working to create opportunities and maximizing common interests between China and the US is the right approach. Furthermore, working towards the common good of the world is the most worthwhile cause. The phase-one trade deal illustrates that, if China and the US remain committed to win-win cooperation while respecting each other’s national dignity, sovereignty and core interests, they can overcome any form of difficulty. Only through the strengthening of relations will both countries and their people be able to benefit.
Shih Wing-ching, Chairman of Centaline Holdings and owner of the am730 newspaper, in am730 (23 December 2019)
Summary by Alan Yang Gregory
Anti-government protesters have been using the slogan "Reclaim Hong Kong" as they feel that, since the handover in 1997, the concept of “one country, two systems” has gradually deteriorated into “one country, 1.5 systems”. The “reclaiming” therefore pertains to the missing 0.5.
The protestors feel that, because of China, political rights in Hong Kong are becoming increasingly restricted. For instance, they claim that China is attempting to control the election of the Hong Kong chief executive and the legislature. In addition, the growth of Chinese-funded institutions has also reduced the status of the Hong Kong business community.
Meanwhile, the increase in mainland tourists has allegedly disrupted the daily lives of Hong Kong people. What concerns the protestors the most is that 150 mainlanders move to Hong Kong every day and there is the fear that they will not only compete with the Hong Kong people for resources, but also make Hong Kong become more like the mainland. These are the reasons why they claim that “one country, two systems” has descended into “one country, 1.5 systems”.
While these criticisms are not entirely groundless, they are somewhat exaggerated, and it is somewhat alarmist to claim the system of Hong Kong is only a “0.5 system”. Even if Hong Kong today does not have the original pre-1997 system, it still has at least around 0.85 of the system.
This is because many of the basic elements of Hong Kong's original system have actually been preserved. These include capitalist-style protection of private property rights, British common law-style judicial independence, basic human rights, a simple tax system, and professional and highly self-regulatory organizations. In addition, the government remains efficient, with low social expenditure, is financially stable, and has a large reserve surplus.
These are characteristics unique to Hong Kong. The system, therefore, is completely different to the Mainland’s. In fact, the current system is closer to the West than to China. It is therefore more accurate to refer to the current system as a 0.85 system. Hong Kong people should not consider fighting for the missing 0.15 at the risk of destroying the remaining 0.85.
Derek Yuen Mi-chang, Honorary Lecturer at the University of Hong Kong, in Ming Pao Daily (December 24, 2019)
Summary by Alan Yang Gregory
Beyond the US-China trade war and the Hong Kong anti-extradition amendment bill protests, the US has been applying pressure on China on issues relating to Xinjiang, Tibet and Taiwan. Today, China is at an inflection point. To determine its future direction, look to the country’s rich history.
There are parallels between the Opium Wars of the 19th Century and the protests in Hong Kong. Although 180 years apart, they both involved a clash between China and the West. The Opium Wars had as much to do with Britain’s assertion of “universal values” such as private property ownership and free trade as it did the selling of opium. Today’s tensions in Hong Kong are also about contending claims for “universal values” (such as human rights and democracy) and for principles of sovereignty and non-interference in a country’s internal affairs. Hong Kong is therefore a microcosm of the conflict between democracy and authoritarianism.
Chinese President Xi Jinping’s reaction to the situation in Hong Kong has been to deploy nationalism, thus impeding China from continuing Deng Xiaoping’s reform path. The reason why the US is able to interfere over issues such as Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong is that the Communist Party’s grip over China has weakened and the “One-China” policy is unable fully to assimilate these places.
China’s situation today is not so different from the Opium Wars. The US has identified Hong Kong as a magic button. Once it is pressed, China will inevitably tighten its grip internally and feel compelled to promote nationalism to maintain its system. As a result, China looks inward, and its society regresses backwards to the ways of the past. If China wants to avoid this fate, it must think hard about how to address the Hong Kong issue as soon as possible.
Asma Nadia, writer and publisher, in Republika (December 14, 2019)
Summary by Keith Loveard
A lot of people have been shocked by the plan of new Education and Culture Minister Nadiem Makarim to remove or revise the National Exam (referred to as UN, or Ujian Nasional, in Indonesia. This is just a small part of the major change that is needed in the field of education.
In his statement, the minister is right to say that the potential of children cannot be measured from a test and that they are forced to chase a good result because of the importance attached to it. There are many, many students who succeed at these exams because they are intensively coached. I suspect that 100 percent of students at universities are the products of coaching clinics. That means is that the door is effectively closed to children whose parents cannot afford to pay for coaching.
Ralph Recto, Senate President pro tempore of the Philippines, in Usapang Barako (Bar Talk), Abante (December 10, 2019)
Summary by Alejandro Reyes
December is the busiest time for Filipino workers. There is still a lot of work to be done before the holidays. Employees are likely to claim a lot of overtime. With our hard-working workers in mind, we have filed a bill to eliminate the tax on overtime pay. If this bill becomes law, it will benefit 26.7 people in both the public and private sectors.
While the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) does not support this bill because it would collect fewer taxes. But this money will not disappear. The extra cash goes into the pockets of works who will use it to purchase goods and service. This will stimulate consumption, boost the economy and eventually result in greater revenue for the government.
To be honest, nobody wants to work overtime. The administration is implementing new taxes on alcohol, cigarettes, sugared drinks and more. So, let us ensure that employees fully enjoy the benefits of their overtime pay. This would be an early Christmas present to hard-working Filipino workers.