What is the Umbrella Revolution?

What is Happening in Hong Kong

Right now Hong Kong is shut down by approx. 80,000 protesters who want a more Democratic Hong Kong.

What's the Context?

Hong Kong is different to all other Chinese Cities with the possible exception of Macau. Hong Kong wasn't founded by China. Hong Kong was founded by the British as naval base and trading city during the 1^st Opium war and Hong Kong Island was officially ceded to Britain in 1842.

The British ran Hong Kong pretty much as a benevolent dictatorship until the handover back to China in 1997, but they planted 2 booby traps for the Chinese to Negotiate.

The first was the stipulation that Hong Kong would be run separately as a Special Administrative Region. (This is often shortened to the mantra of “1 Country, 2 Systems”)This would ensure the framework for the second .

In 1994 the final Governor of Hong Kong Chris Patten introduced Democracy to Hong Kong through broad reforms of Local Councils, Municipal Councils and the Legislative Council. These councils were to be elected by universal suffrage.

This horrified the Chinese Government in Beijing who were powerless at the time to stop them. Even now China feels constrained in it's dealing with Hong Kong because Hong Kong is the 8th largest economy in the world, a financial Hub only behind New York and London, which requires freedom to trade and make money, but also because China's biggest foreign policy goal is the return of Taiwan (a western style democracy which broke away in a civil war). China's Government seem to feel that anything too heavy handed done in Hong Kong could scare off the Taiwanese for good.

Who's Upset and Why?

The chief executive of Hong Kong C Y Leung has announced his intention to Vet all candidates before the upcoming 2017 Legislative Council election. This upset the uni students(Yes it's always the uni students) who were already protesting Education reforms. It brought them to the streets. Then the 'Occupy Central' movement (the local Occupy branch) threw their weight behind the protests.

From here the protests seemed to have gained mass appeal tapping into a growing cynicism about the “1 Country 2 Systems” framework Beijing has set up. It seems many businesses are on side as well. Most businesses want free government that will set the rules and then get out of the way.

Do they have a symbol?

This is known as “Umbrella Uprising”. Referencing the fact that umbrellas are used as protection fom the sun (It's hot in Hong Kong right now), from the Tear Gas that the police have thrown, and that the symbol for umbrella in chinese in made up of the people.

What are the Risks for Beijing?

                1. Beijing is secretly terrified that these protests will spread to the rest of China.  No-one in the Government is unaware of the Tiannamen Square crisis and how close that came to bringing down the government.

                2. Taiwan- The Eyes of the world are on this protest. Taiwan is a free western style democracy. If they see Democracy put down brutally public opinion will turn against China and Taiwan may never join.

                3. Trade. Hong Kong is a massive economy and unlike Shanghai remarkably corruption free. Any threat to the Hong Kong Market is a threat to China itself.

Whats Going to Happen Now?

There are 3 options:

1. The protest peters out
2. Beijing and CY Leung back down and allow free and fair elections
3. The protesters are removed by force

What's your Guess?

Option 3 I'm afraid.

What is wrong with Iraq?

Why is Iraq such an Ungovernable Nightmare?

What makes a modern nation state? What forces hold it together and what forces tear it apart? Who are ISIS and why are we bombing them?

Iraq was designed from the very beginning to be ungovernable. Any attempts to hold it together are futile. Iraq will fall. And for Iraqis that's probably a good thing.

Iraq is a 20^th century construct binding people together who have no will or need to be together. It breaks down into 3 major Groups. The Sunnis who are centred around Baghdad, The Shiites in the South and the Kurds in the North. The Sunnis and Shiites are Arabs, The Kurds are not. The Lets look at how all this happened.

This is a map of the Middle East in 1914. You can see the area of Mesopotamia (modern day Iraq) was controlled by the Ottoman Empire before WW1. Note that Iraq is not on this map, because it hasn't been invented yet.

During WW1 Britain targeted the Ottoman Empire and tried to knock it out of the war. The way to do this was 3 Fold.

1. A direct assault on the Turkish homeland. (Australians remember this as the “Gallipoli” campaign),
2. An Invasion of Ottoman holdings in Mesopotamia (Iraq) and the Levant (Israel and Syria)
3. Incite subject peoples under the Ottoman Empire to revolt by promising them self Government after the war. The film “Laurence of Arabia” deals with this.

As you know the British (and the French) succeeded in removing the Ottoman Empire from the pages of History, having it replaced by the modern Secular country we know today as Turkey.

But what to do about all the territory formerly controlled by the Ottomans? The peoples and land were divided up between Britain and France by the forerunner of the United Nations, the League of Nations:

It is important to note that these borders were created arbitrarily by and for the Great Powers of Europe. They had no basis in history, culture or the will of the people in question.

When the borders took effect what happened to the people living there, was in some ways similar to what happened to the people of Berlin when the Berlin Wall was built. Families were torn apart, and many people felt more sympathy for the people on the other side of the border than their own countrymen.

The Kurds were cut off from Kurds over the border in Turkey. This is why until this day, Turkey is lukewarm about the creation of a Kurdish state. They fear it would be destabilising for their nation.

The Sunnis were cut off from their brethren in Jordan and Syria. This is why the civil war in Syria could so easily spill over into Iraq. The border simply no longer exists. Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is a Sunni organisation seeking to install a Sunni Islamic State (Duh) in Iraq and Syria.

The Shiites are an absolute majority in Iraq. They share a religion with the Iranians over the border and have historically been mostly ignored or persecuted. They have the most to gain from a Democratic Iraq, given that they are the majority. By Proxy Iran also has the most to gain by Shiite empowerment.

King Faisal I

In 1920 the British installed a ruler after a short but violent period of direct control. That ruler was Faisal bin Hussein bin Ali al-Hashimi.(King Faisal I). A Sunni from Hejaz. He (following British advice) concentrated power in the Sunnis around Baghdad. This is the key. The British created a ruling class for themselves who needed British arms and money to keep the regime functioning. If the Sunni's turned away from the British then the overwhelming power of the Shiites and to a lessor extent the Kurds would ensure any civil war was lost. It was important for the British also to inhibit any functioning civil society, so that their aid would always be required to govern this unruly kingdom.

King Faisal dutifully played ball. Happy that he and his own were being looked after, he dutifully gave out Oil drilling rights to British Companies until his death in 1933 when he was succeeded by his son. During his reign he also tried to foster Pan Arab identity (alienating the Kurds in the process).

Iraq achieved independence in 1932 and King Ghazi I was no fan of the British. His reign was incredibly turbulent between 1936 and 1941 there were 5 military coups. Even with limited British support the country was extremely difficult to run. Power flowed away from the monarchy to the Prime Minister during this time.

Prime Minister Nuri Pasha al-Said

After WW2 Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri Pasha al-Said pursued a pro western policy. This was deeply unpopular, but Al-Said ruthlessly cracked down on the dissidents. Iraq's Police State was born under this man. It seemed that it took Brutality to Govern Iraq.

Brutality alone wasn't enough and in 1958 public resentment about the direction of the nation and anti western sentiment in particular bubbled over into a military coup leading to a revolution. The royal family were gunned down and killed, as was Prime Minister.

The new military ruling class were Pan Arab in their thinking, (Thanks to Kings Faisal and Ghazi's education reforms) but were overwhelmingly Sunni. They fought amongst themselves until finally an officer named Saddam Hussein came to power in 1978. His rise was somewhat similar to the rise of Joseph Stalin, and he would employ similar tactics to ensure compliance with his agenda. 

 

Saddam Hussein

In September 1980 Saddam attacked Iran starting a bloody 8 year war. It seems that the Iranian revolution was a destabilising influence among the Shiite of Iraq. He invaded Iran to stabilise his regime. As an enemy of Iran he attracted the USA's attention as a useful ally.

Donald Rumsfeld meets Saddam Hussein

At this time Iraq used Poison Gas against the Iranians on the battlefield and the Kurds at home. Dissent was simply not tolerated in Saddam's Iraq. The Country was in the grip of a dystopian nightmare. It seemed that this is what it took to govern Iraq.

Looking for another war to fight to shore up support after the end of the Iran-Iraq war Saddam picked on Kuwait. In 1990 Iraq invaded the small City State. There is considerable speculation that the ultimate goal was an invasion of Saudi Arabia. Whatever the truth of the matter, this was where Saddam crossed the line and earned the ire of the White House, he messed with an oil producing nation.

If Saddam needed a war to solidify his grip on power, he got one when he ignored the ultimatum to leave Kuwait from George Bush Snr.

The Iraqi army was defeated of course by a multi national coalition, but Saddam had gained what he always needed. An implacable foe. With trade embargoes making life difficult for everybody, allied aircraft patrolling the skies over Iraq, Saddam was able to hold onto power with a vice like grip. In vilifying him the West had given him exactly what he needed.

The 1990's were a decade of grinding poverty and hopelessness for everyday Iraqis. Much like the 1980's. Speak out against Saddam even to your own family could bring a knock on the door from the security forces.

The reoccurring theme of the History of Iraq is that it's impossible to govern without violence and brutality.

This continued until the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the “Coalition of the Willing”. After which a Democratic system was put in place. Simply put, everybody voted for there own side, which meant unsurprisingly that the Shiites were able to form government. That government has repeatedly failed to be inclusive of the other 2 factions, leading to a complete loss of trust in the democratic process in Iraq.

The Sunni's feel they have lost much, which they obviously have. So ISIS (a Sunni organisation) is reaping a fertile crop that the Shiites and the Americans have planted.

So the question being asked here in the west is “What should we do now?” Do we bomb ISIS and stir up more trouble. Do we stand by watching ISIS commit atrocities? Can we help at all?

My opinion is that Iraq must be split in 3. This was originally considered in the days after the 2003 invasion but ultimately shelved. Turkey will now(grudgingly) allow an independent Kurdistan. The Shia in the south would happily leave this union, which leaves the Sunni's and by association ISIS.

I suspect that the future will lead to a unification of Syria and the Sunni part of Iraq. (Syria is 74% Sunni). I also believe this is what's best for the people of Iraq, Syria, Kurdistan,Turkey, Iran and the rest of the world.