Agence France-Presse (France)

Hong Kong protests a wake up call for government
Tue Jul 1,10:36 PM ET

HONG KONG (AFP) - Hong Kong's massive street protest against proposed anti-subversion legislation was a wake-up call that neither the government, Beijing nor the democracy movement could afford to overlook, analysts said. 

Up to 500,000 people are estimated to have taken to the streets on Tuesday to vent their anger at the proposed Article 23 law they fear will curb civil freedoms and gag free speech. 

Police confirmed it was Hong Kong's largest street protest since 1989 when more than a million people rallied in the wake of the Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing. 

But while the sheer scale and passion of the march in a city so often ridiculed as apolitical has taken many by surprise, analysts say it should also be seen a serious statement of dissatisfaction that must not be ignored. 

"This is phenomenal -- a much, much bigger demonstration than I have seen here before," said Paul Harris, political scientist at Hong Kong's Lingnan University. "It shows just how the people feel about" the legislation. 

"Hong Kong people can be cynical and sometimes sceptical about how much of an effect of any change they can make. Nevertheless, they have braved the heat and turned out in force to show their opposition" to the bill, he said. 

Harris said the protest also reflected deepening public dissatisfaction with the government of Hong Kong chief executive Tung Chee-hwa. 

"This is a reflection of a much wider issue -- it also attacks the government," Harris said. "The government can't simply ignore such outpouring of animosity. Mr. Tung is clearly out of touch of the reality in the ground." 

It was this broader protest against Tung's administration that should ring the loudest bells among the government in Hong Kong and China, said academic Joseph Cheng. 

"I believe that this type of situation will much erode the legitimacy of the administration of Tung Chee-hwa," said Cheng, a political science professor at Hong Kong City University. 

Tung's popularity has been on the wane since he was appointed to a second term as leader by a selection committee hand-picked by the communist government in Beijing. 

But after Tuesday's massive protests, Cheng believes Beijing will be looking upon Tung -- and the people of Hong Kong -- with different eyes. 

"It's too early to say yet, but it's possible that the Chinese leadership will have to re-evaluate their support for Tung," Cheng warned. 

Even if the protest succeeds only in deposing Tung, Cheng says the pro-democracy campaign in Hong Kong would be entitled to feeling a sense of victory. 

"It means that the Chinese leadership will have to become more receptive to public opinion in Hong Kong," Cheng said. 

"People will feel less impotent and it will encourage them to continue the fight for democratic reform." 

Newspapers in Hong Kong said in editorials Wednesday that the Hong Kong government had to take the protests seriously. 

"The people have spoken. They deserve a response," a leader in the English-language South China Morning Post said, asserting that the Hong Kong government had "lost the trust of so many through its failure to listen." 

The Standard echoed the Post's stance, describing the protests as a "resounding vote of no confidence in Tung." 

"The people of Hong Kong have spoken," the paper said. "The question now is whether the (Tung) and his administration will listen." 

Some democracy advocates howevr are pessimistic the protest will be able to halt the progress of the Article 23 law. 

Even before the last of the protesters had passed the rally's end-point, the central government offices in the downtown Central district, pro-democracy legislator Szeto Wah was predicting Tung would try to sit out the crisis. 

"It will surely create pressures on the government," he said, "but I don't think he (Tung) will listen to our opinions." 

Fellow democrat Law Yu-kai, director of the Human Rights Monitor, warned that the democracy movement had a responsibility to make the most of the momentum created by the march or risk losing more liberties than Article 23 could take. 

"If the community gathers and continues to show opposition to the (Article 23) law and the government, we can still maintain our freedom," Law said. 

"But if after this huge turn-out the people just shut up, then the damage it will do will be far greater than anything Article 23 can inflict."