www射-国产免费一级-欧美福利-亚洲成人福利-成人一区在线观看-亚州成人

Hong Kong faces a major economic and social threat from the illegal "Occupy Central" campaign. It is interesting to note that this campaign borrowed its name from the 2011 "Occupy Wall Street" (OWS) protests in the United States. But it is not the same as OWS. The OWS participants joined the movement spontaneously in protest at fund managers - whose greed contributed to the global financial crisis of 2008 and plunged the US economy into its worst recession since the 1930s. There were no organizers behind OWS; its participants had their own reasons for joining. The US movement was above all a manifestation of youthful energy. At least that is how the international community saw it.

The "Occupy Central" campaign here will target the city's financial business district, in much the same way as OWS targeted that of NYC three years ago. However the Hong Kong campaign differs from OWS in that it is premeditated political protest. It is not only illegal, but has an unconstitutional goal. That is why it shares nothing in common with OWS except the word "occupy".

But another important issue is whether the rogue financial speculators targeted by OWS in 2011 will also exploit "Occupy Central" to make illegal profits during the chaos it may cause. Sadly many local investors stand to suffer financially because of the campaign.

The initiators of "Occupy Central" have long said their goal is to gain "genuine universal suffrage" from the central government. They argue that "genuine universal suffrage" must include "public nomination". They have now added further demands, such as compliance with "international standards" and "universal suffrage without screening". However they have still not defined these standards. They seem to agree that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is the obvious benchmark for democracy. But the international convention does not allow for the domestic laws of any signatory country or region to be overridden. Nor does it support the occupiers' assertions from a statutory point of view.

The protest leaders have always said "Occupy Central" would take place if the central government refused to meet their demands. Now this is clearly a form of blackmail. So it is not hard to imagine what will result when "Occupy Central" is launched. Normal business activities will be interrupted. The streets of Central will be blocked. This will cause serious problems for those who live and work there. Social and economic disruption will follow. The organizers have denied their campaign will be destructive. But they have not explained how they will achieve their objectives. How can their protests force the central government to accept their demands?

And if "Occupy Central" is as peaceful as they claim it will be, then it will only be like the small protests on public holidays. This makes it sound more like a party than a political campaign. But then what will a peaceful "occupation" be able to achieve?

The campaign's organizers need to think logically and behave rationally.

Hong Kong is an international financial center. Market fluctuations are all "part of the game" in this city. Ever since China and Britain began negotiations over the future of Hong Kong in the 1980s, the city has been repeatedly shaken by political upheaval. These caused considerable financial volatility. Such market fluctuations also cause Hong Kong enormous financial losses and undermined its economic development.

People may still remember how badly the Hong Kong stock market suffered as a result of the constitutional reforms introduced by the last governor, Chris Patten, in October 1992. These reforms violated earlier understandings between the British and Chinese governments. The stock market plummeted by 20 percent in less than a month only to rise again later. These dramatic market fluctuations reoccurred on a number of occasions. There was an "invisible hand" manipulating the stock market at the time, which allowed certain players to profit from the financial volatility.

Today both political camps are trying to win over the public. It is baffling how vast their political differences have become. Instead of building consensus, this is making a very costly showdown inevitable. We have good reason to believe "an invisible hand" is at work again. Although there is no solid proof yet, people should realize that unscrupulous financial operators and speculators will try to exploit the market turmoil caused by "Occupy Central". Hong Kong people have to protect their investments and wealth. This is why the city should take decisive action to prevent unwanted financial speculation and manipulation.

The US government shut down Wall Street for three days after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. It later introduced the "Patriot Act". Among other things, this extended the powers of the financial secretary to regulate financial activities involving foreign subjects or political entities. The "Patriot Act" was meant to intercept cash for terrorist groups. But many people believe it is also aimed at international and domestic speculators.

I believe Hong Kong can learn from US experience in combating illegal financial activities. The city should start now by strengthening current regulation in order to protect its financial markets.

The author is a veteran journalist based in Hong Kong.

(HK Edition 08/06/2014 page9)