So can norwegians save 4,25 billion in interest expenses
In an interview in Dagbladet today (23. may) comes Paul Midford with a representation of the situation in hong Kong in the best case, can be said to be of very mixed quality. Something is certainly relevant, as the reference to the æresløse british kolonialismen in the 1800s.
But when it comes to the current situation, there are several errors and inaccuracies in manufacture. Here I am taking for me some examples (quotes in italics) that are not randomly selected, but chosen because they highlight the Midfords distortions.
“hong Kong [is] a rebellious city that is about to drive away. China will not accept such a division.”
CRITICAL: Arne Melsom. Photo: Private Show more
hong Kong has a minigrunnlov (“basisloven”) that says that the city will be developed towards a board where the city’s leader and its legislature are to be elected by general suffrage (article 45 and 68). This is not so in hong Kong today.
This development can perhaps be characterized as “to drive away”. But it follows the meaning of the law as Beijing co-written and approved 30 years ago. If this is a rift, as is the long accepted by China.
If China now chooses to walk away from this, it is Beijing which accounts for the fracture, not hong kong residents.
“hong Kong is [a] ‘hostage’ in the relationship between China and the West, especially the united STATES.”
This is an echo of today’s propaganda from Beijing about foreign powers ‘ “black hand” in hong Kong. The error in this representation is again that the situation follows that of China’s commitments. The arrangement of “one country, two systems” was selected in the joint statement between the united Kingdom and China from 1984, registered jointly by the parties as an international agreement in the UN system the year after.
Turn On the LydErrorAllerede plus customer? Log into herError ATTACK: This throws the police tear gas against demonstrators in Hong Kong under a demostrasjon in the last year. Video: AP View more
This gave hong Kong the opportunity to negotiate international trade agreements as an independent party, separate from China and chinese law. About the arrangement of “one country, two systems” is being eroded or removed by Beijing, it is, of course, that handelsavtalene need to be reassessed, the foundation will fall away. It is Beijing that is gisseltakeren here.
“Massedemonstrasjonene […] is not so much about democracy; they are a nationalist movement, which partly want independence.”
Massedemonstrasjonene are not nationalist, they are in a desperate fight to protect the “one country, two systems”. Requirement of independence does not have great support in the population. When the police disfigured a mosque with spraying the blue kleberlig liquid at the entrance, there were activists who were first on the place to clean the area.
– This is the end of hong Kong
In China has unfortunately he-nationalism, on the other hand, good circumstances, from the cultural genocide of the muslim peoples to the acceptance of racism in advertising. It is among hong kong protesters, we find support for a multicultural society. Nationalism in China is disturbing, and it is the elite in Beijing who stands behind.
In the basisloven we recognize a significant number of elements that are characteristic of democracies, as an independent judiciary, press, ytrings and the freedom of assembly, freedom of association and streikerett, and democratic elections.
In addition to the struggle for these rights is the demonstrations themselves for a rebellion against persistent law-enforcement abuse beyond the use of necessary and limited power.
Massedemonstrasjonene in the hong Kong cuisine itself against abuse by a superpower which, through its increasing global influence seeking to undermine democracies around the world. Hong kong demokratibevegelse is the most important thing we have in the world today in the fight for human rights and democracy.
Want to discuss?
Visit Dagbladet debate!