TOW #5 (NonFiction) "Hong Kong – betrayed by China. And abandoned by the British" by Anson Chan

        Hong Kong is currently going through a turning point in its history. Back in 1984, the UK and China made a treaty to give Hong Kong back to the Chinese in 1997 after 150 years of British rule, creating a capitalist state within a communist nation, both side making promises to maintain Hong Kong's way of life and freedom. However, ever since Hong Kong was in Chinese control, China has had control on the choice of leader, or chief executive, in Hong Kong without any say by the Hong Kong public. China pre-screens every candidate and only those that the Chinese government approves are allowed to run fort the position. With a new generation of worldly, connected people, the idea of democracy is spreading like fire, and this past week, many pro-democracy demonstrators have been, so far, peacefully rallying against this "fake" democracy. However, neither China nor Britain has stepped in to face the problem. In her opinion article, "Hong Kong – betrayed by China. And abandoned by the British", Anson Chan uses a compelling ethos and an effective counter-argument to argue that China and Britain need to take action in Hong Kong's situation and follow through with the promises they made to Hong Kong.

     The most prominent appeal in the article is the appeal to ethos. Anson Chan was the chief secretary in both the British colonial government before from 1993 to 1997 and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government under the Chinese rule from 1997 to 2001. An advocate for democracy in Hong Kong even after her civil service she is a public activist in the road to democracy. Since Chan has served in the Hong Kong before and after Chinese rule, she has the knowledge and experience of both sides. She knows the pros and cons of Chinese rule and British rule and has incredible credibility when speaking of this topic. Knowing who Anson Chan is and her accomplishments allow readers of the article to seriously consider her argument.

    Connected to her past as the chief secretary of the British colonial government and the Chinese government, Chan also has the ability to consider the other side and their motives, yet effectively counter it with a more powerful argument. "If people are fearful of their future, they are more likely to protest. And of course the Chinese leadership worries about protests spreading. In this light, they might view Hong Kong as an agent of change. So I understand mainland Chinese fears" (Chan). Here, Chan considers what the Chinese are doing and why their actions are justified. They see Hong Kong as the catalyst to a revolution that they don't want to happen. Chan understands this. However, "if they are allowed to walk away from their commitments under an international treaty, then it doesn't say very much for China's commitment to the rest of the world" (Chan). The Chinese promised to protect Hong Kong way of life, yet they haven't followed through with these fixed elections. For Chan, an international promise and commitment that you made to yourself and the rest of the world is of much more importance than the fear of a non-existant revolution. Chan further proves her point that China must follow the promise to Hong Kong instead of worrying about its own problems with the effective counter argument.

   Both her great credibility and her wide perspective allow Chan to argue her point that the promise between China and Britain must be kept and both must follow it.  Sometimes in opinion papers, we don't get to see the whole picture, both sides of the story, just one biased argument that leaves the reader stunned but somewhat persuaded. But Chan has the ability to overview the entire situation, analyzing the actions and motives of the entirety, and then come to a sound conclusion that makes sense, both to herself and the reader.