Gaining momentum

"The huge crowds gathered here reflect the willingness of the people of Hong Kong to take action and sacrifice for the sake of democracy," said Joseph Cheng. The political science professor from the City University of Hong Kong is one of many city residents who took part in the this year's July 1 rally to mark the day the territory was returned to China in 1997 after more than a century of British rule.

Passions were running particularly high this time around as tens of thousands marched through the heart of the city demanding more democracy and accusing Beijing of taking their civil liberties away. Some, chanting anti-Beijing slogans and waving colonial-era flags, even called for the city's chief executive to be sacked in a move seen by many as a direct challenge to the rule of the Communist Party of China (CPC).

The mass demonstration came just a day after polls closed in an unofficial referendum on democratic reform which drew an unexpectedly high turnout of nearly 800,000 votes - more than a fifth of the city's electorate - but was slammed by Beijing as an "illegal farce" that was "tinged with mincing ludicrousness."

Exceeding expectations

The 10-day poll - which took place online and at physical polling stations - was intended to urge Chinese authorities to allow opposition democrats to run in a 2017 citywide election for a new chief minister. The vote gave city residents three options on how the poll should be carried out - all of which included the public having some influence on the selection of candidates. Beijing has promised direct elections in 2017, but has ruled out allowing voters to choose who can run for the top job. Both the vote and the rally were organized by the pro-democratic protest group Occupy Central with Love and Peace (OCLP).

In a DW interview, Joseph Cheng, described the poll as "platform for the Hong Kong people to articulate their views on political reform," adding that true universal suffrage was the only way to ensure that the people will have a meaningful choice and that the vote will be genuinely competitive. But Cheng also pointed out that Chinese authorities are extremely sensitive to the idea of allowing such polls as they could be interpreted as a challenge to the CPC's authority. "The authorities are also very worried about similar votes being carried out in Taiwan or regions such as Tibet and Xinjiang," he added.

Beijing's 'white paper'

Shortly before the referendum got underway, China's State Council's Information Office issued a white paper on June 9 reiterating that Beijing had "comprehensive jurisdiction" over the former British colony. The policy document stated that some people were "confused or lopsided in their understanding of one country, two systems and that this has led to "many wrong views" about the city's economy, society and the development of its political system.

Robert Daly, director of the Kissinger Institute on China and the US at the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, says Hong Kong is only as special as Beijing allows it to be. However, it is not in China's interest that the territory functions simply as one more Chinese city. "Beijing benefits from Hong Kong's openness and from its attractiveness to foreign corporations. Cracking down too harshly on Hong Kong would put the lie to overtures the PRC makes to Taiwan under the "One Country, Two Systems' banner."

Most Hong Kong residents are pragmatic and hope for good relations with the People's Republic, Daly added. But they also want the city to remain unique and modern. The want to enjoy freedoms of speech, information, and association, and they want to participate meaningfully in their own governance.

Hong Kong's Basic Law promised those things to the people of Hong Kong and since 1997, Beijing has, in the main, honored its promise. "The recent White Paper issued by Beijing, however, called the promise into question with its implication that Hong Kong administrative personnel, including judges, must now take direction from Beijing."

China scholar Perry Link told DW that the aim of the white paper was to intimidate democrats and make clear that Beijing intends to continue its 'digestion' of Hong Kong. "It appears to be a clear violation of Deng Xiaoping's promise of "one country, two systems" for fifty years. But in fact it is not really new. Deng's promise was never a promise in the conventional sense," Link said.

Link believes that Beijing's increasingly tight control of Hong Kong won't make much of a difference economically as most of the city's tycoons are already allied with Beijing. Politically, however, this will sharpen and deepen the political problems in Hong Kong, he said. "This will enforce a surface appearance of unity with Beijing, but cover a resentful populace who will now have even more reason to feel resentful", the China expert said.

'A polarized society'

Tim Pringle, a Hong Kong permanent resident and senior lecturer at SOAS University of London, has a similar view. He told Hong Kong society had become increasingly polarized since 2003 when the city witnessed the first great pro-democracy march of the post-colonial era.

Pringle explains that while a vibrant students and workers' movement has emerged, what happens in the city does not take place in isolation. "If Beijing fails to exercise considerable influence over the arrangements for the next election of Chief Executive, this would give succor to those demanding democratic reforms in the mainland. Therefore, the chances of an entirely unfettered election in 2017 are slim."

Pringle points to the fact that despite the massive support in favor of direct elections for the chief executive post, there are also significant number of Hong Kong people who support Beijing as an expression of their patriotism or because they agree with the argument that Hong Kong folks are more concerned with 'making money' than engaging in political struggles. "While there is strong evidence to suggest that the majority of Hong Kong people support direct elections, it is not the case that Beijing is on a collision course with Hong Kong residents in general."

According to Daly, the protests will, therefore, have only a limited impact as China will continue to insist that only candidates who "Love China" - i.e. take directions from Beijing when it chooses to provide it - are qualified to run for chief post. "Hong Kong is, irrevocably, part of China and, under the Beijing formula, 'without the Communist Party, there would be no new China.' That's the bottom line; the interests of the Party and Chinese State are one. Hong Kong must operate under that umbrella."

What next?

As for the pro-democracy campaign, analysts argue Beijing will prefer to divide and weaken this movement and perhaps isolate its more "radical" wing rather than collide with it head-on. "A key challenge for the movement will be to maintain unity as some of the more radical actions planned unfold – such as occupying the central financial district – while leaving room for Beijing to compromise," said Pringle.

Daly shares a similar view: "Beijing needs to find a way to acknowledge the Hong Kong demonstrators' concerns - to mollify them without emboldening them. But it's getting harder to square that circle. To date, mollification hasn't been style of Chinese President Xi Jinping."