Kangxi radical 118|Mr. Li

Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying12moon9Following his announcement that he “will not run for the next Chief Executive,” the political situation in Hong Kong has been far more than just a “ripple on a spring river.” Hong Kong’s political landscape was already chaotic—extremely chaotic; the word “chaos” barely does it justice! Leung Chun-ying’s announcement represents a major, even monumental, shift for the “election campaigns” of many parties. This is because, in the eyes of both political insiders and ordinary citizens, Leung Chun-ying was considered the frontrunner for re-election had he run.

Leung Chun-ying’s announcement that he would “withdraw from the race” sent ripples through Hong Kong’s political scene. However, the reaction was entirely positive. Of course, with one strong contender out of the picture, everyone expressed sympathy, understanding, and respect, and their inner delight goes without saying—including Wu Kwok-hing, who has already announced his candidacy; Regina Ip, who has one foot in the race; and John Tsang, who has indicated he is actively considering a run and has formally resigned as Financial Secretary. These moves are clearly in preparation for the election. Following this, Chief Secretary for Administration Carrie Lam, who had previously stated she would “retire at the end of her term,” indicated she would “reconsider.” There are rumors that she, too, will soon submit her resignation to the Chief Executive in accordance with regulations. Another former Legislative Council President, Tsang Yok-sing, has, as of the writing of this article, remained evasive and hesitant, refusing to give the media a clear statement on whether he will run or not. The current landscape of the Chief Executive election is roughly as described above; whether a “dark horse” will emerge in the future remains to be seen—only time will tell.

When it comes to the qualifications for serving as Chief Executive, there are two primary requirements: First, one must be utterly loyal to the nation, the Central Government, and Hong Kong—which is what people often refer to as “loving the country and loving Hong Kong.” “Patriots administering Hong Kong” is a principle put forward by Comrade Deng long before Hong Kong’s return. Indeed, this is only right. If those governing Hong Kong cannot “love the country and love Hong Kong,” would that not be a colossal absurdity? Second, they must be both willing and capable of getting the job done. These two qualities are dialectically unified. Being willing but unable to perform is akin to “having the will but lacking the ability,” and such a person cannot shoulder major responsibilities. Being capable but unwilling to work—from the perspective of “personnel management”—is tantamount to being “useless,” and need not be discussed further.

Judging by Leung Chun-ying’s performance over the past four years—particularly in the areas of land, housing, poverty alleviation, handling the “Occupy Central” movement, and addressing “Hong Kong independence”—he deserves high praise. His “love for the country and Hong Kong” and loyalty to the Central Government are beyond question. Leung Chun-ying’s dedication to his work is evident to all, and his administrative capabilities are exceptional; however, he falls slightly short in terms of fostering unity. However, there is an objective reason for this: since Hong Kong’s return to China, the opposition, with overt or covert—but primarily covert—support from external forces, has engaged in “anti-China and disruptive” activities that have led to political instability in Hong Kong; moreover, the opposition is a faction within a faction and a clique outside a clique, with a chaotic situation where one group takes the stage only for another to follow. In dealing with the chaos created by the opposition, the Leung Chun-ying administration’s performance was not exactly first-rate. Yet, as the saying goes, “It’s inevitable”—with the opposition constantly stirring up trouble backed by external forces, including massive financial support, what could be done? This is certainly due to Leung Chun-ying’s lack of astute and effective countermeasures, but it is also a case of “the tree wants to stand still, but the wind won’t stop”—what can be done? What can be done?

In its assessment of the aforementioned turmoil, Hong Kong’s long-established *Sing Pao* published a lengthy front-page article attributing the source of the chaos to the “New Gang of Four.” This “Gang of Four” was identified as Zhang Dejiang, Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress; Leung Chun-ying, Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; Zhang Xiaoming, Director of the Central Government’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong; and another mysterious figure.

The name and identity of this person have never been disclosed by *The Sing Pao* or the author of the “Big Block” article, and remain a mystery to this day. Perhaps this is just another way for the media to grab the public’s attention? As for the term “Gang of Four,” it is believed to correspond to the earlier “Gang of Four Disrupting Hong Kong”—namely, Apple Daily’s owner Jimmy Lai, “White Dove Party” founding chairman Martin Lee, “Democracy Granny” Anson Chan, and “Political Bishop” Joseph Zen. It is said that these four frequently gathered at Lai’s villa to secretly plot and orchestrate the opposition’s unrest. What is the truth? It has not been made public. Hong Kong’s political landscape—a mix of fact and fiction, as elusive as seeing flowers through a fog—is indeed something best left unshared with outsiders.

Zhang Dejiang, Leung Chun-ying, Zhang Xiaoming, and a mysterious figure have been labeled the “New Gang of Four,” though no substantive evidence has emerged to date. Precisely because he was included in the “New Gang of Four,” Zhang Xiaoming came under fierce criticism when he donated one of his calligraphy works to a charity auction. To be fair, even if the work had fetched a high price at auction, Zhang Xiaoming would not have received a single penny from the proceeds. Such attacks are neither fair nor correct. *The Chengbao*12moon11A headline in the *Rìtou* reported that “Xiao Ming has disappeared,” implying that Zhang Xiaoming had been recalled to Beijing for “severe punishment” and had become a “target of the Xi administration’s purge,” and so on. How much of this rumor is true? How much is false? I’m afraid only the author knows: it’s nothing more than speculation disguised as “information from well-informed sources”!

Hong Kong’s political situation—or rather, its political turmoil—is murky, extremely complex, and constantly shifting. For example, Leung Chun-ying’s decision “not to run” came as a huge surprise to many, and the news that Zhang Xiaoming is to be “severely punished” is even more baffling. What grave crime has Zhang Xiaoming committed? How will he be “severely punished”? And how will this affect his future? Judging by the wide variety of reports, Hong Kong truly is “a book that’s hard to understand”!