Mixed messages on Hong Kong reveal a murky China deal

Young protesters in Hong Kong face down the might of China’s authoritarian state, waving the Stars and Stripes as they take to the streets in the defense of democracy. At the same time, the United States eyes a trade deal to rein in Beijing’s rapacious appetite for intellectual property and ease the threat of an all-out trade war.

It is the sort of dilemma that has tested successive presidents. And in tweets and public comments, President Trump has begun to outline a response that suggests he is trying to balance the pressure of advisers urging him to stand with protesters against his desire not to cross Xi Jinping of China, to whom he made a personal promise not to intervene.

“I hope President Xi can do it,” said Trump last week, in one of a series of demands for a humane resolution that mixed praise for the Chinese leader and linked a peaceful settlement with trade.

“He sure has the ability, I can tell you that, from personal knowledge. He certainly has the ability to do it if he wants to,” Trump said. “So, I’d like to see that worked out in a humanitarian fashion. I think it would be very good for the trade deal that we’re talking about.”

What he did not do was offer explicit backing for pro-democracy protesters.

Hong Kong’s demonstrations began in June in response to an extradition bill that would have seen suspects flown to mainland China for trials. It immediately raised fears of a crackdown on dissidents.

The protests have only intensified. The territory’s airport closed for days at a time this month when protesters occupied parts of its arrival and departure halls.

Meanwhile, the paramilitary People’s Armed Police has been conducting exercises in the nearby mainland city of Shenzhen. You don’t need to know much about Beijing’s history of repression to interpret the maneuvers as a warning.

Against that backdrop, Trump faced intense pressure from inside his administration — including John Bolton, his national security adviser, and senior State Department officials — to take a tougher line on China and back the pro-democracy protesters.

While they have been hawkish in public, offering assertive comments in support of the demonstrators, the president initially said the unrest was an issue for Chinese authorities and described the protests as “riots.”

Opponents said the mixed messages were muddled. But supporters saw a good cop, bad cop routine. So while Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has met democracy leaders and told Beijing not to restrict freedoms enjoyed in Hong Kong, the president has offered a more limited commentary.

“The president’s stance on human rights has always been clear and the State Department has taken the lead in issuing very strong statements,” said a former administration official. “The other thing to think about is what it would mean for the protests if they could be painted by the Chinese authorities as being U.S.-linked.”

But sources with knowledge of a June conversation between Trump and Xi say the real reason is the president’s insistence on putting trade ahead of other considerations. Two officials said Trump promised Xi he would not speak out about Beijing’s stance on Hong Kong in order to keep trade talks going.

“He made clear that he wanted to get a trade deal done and didn’t want other issues getting in the way of what he sees as a friendly relationship with Xi,” said one, who was briefed on the exchange. “The worry was that it was unclear what he was getting in return.”

The result has been a withering barrage of criticism at home, as Trump was accused of letting down the sort of pro-democracy movement that the U.S. should be supporting.

Olivia Enos, Asia policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, said the U.S. should be more explicit in standing with the protesters, untangling human rights from trade.

“There’s a strong need to be able to separate those issues from each other,” she said.

“And even though they do overlap, there’s a lot of human rights issues that can be used as an important leverage point, not just in getting what the U.S. would like to achieve now but it can be used in a strategic, thoughtful manner.”

Related Content