Moderate democrats are snubbed

SINCE it came into being, the Alliance forUniversal Suffrage has sought to dialoguewith the central government and demandedthat there should be a roadmap for introducinguniversal suffrage so that Hong Kong people willexercise genuine universal suffrage in the 2017 ChiefExecutive election and the 2020 Legislative Councilelection. Many watch closely whether its dialogue linewill help break the constitutional reform deadlock.However, judging from available information, one canhardly be optimistic.

Whether the "dialogue line" will prove effectivedepends not only on whether the central governmentwill give a pledge that Hong Kong people will enjoygenuine universal suffrage but also on whether it willopen the door to direct dialogue between the Allianceand the central government. So far Director of thecentral government's Liaison Office Peng Qinghua isthe only central government official that has evercommented on moderate democrats' stance. When heanswered press questions on a public occasion inHong Kong towards the end of last February, he said,"I've noticed that these days rational discussions ofmatters concerning constitutional development haveincreased in Hong Kong." That is all. He has neverdirectly commented on the Alliance's request fordialogue, not to mentioned other central governmentofficials.

Moderate democrats (whom the Alliance forUniversal Suffrage represents) have risked beingaccused of strangling the pro pro--democracy movement toseek to dialogue with the central government with aview to breaking the constitutional reform deadlock.However, their efforts have yet to produce results. No"dialogue of real significance" has ever taken placebetween it and the central authorities. That is how thesituation stands. Judging from what has happened,one can hardly be optimistic that it will have anyopportunity to dialogue with the central government.Moderate democrats are as willing as the goddess inthe myth, but the central government, like King Xiangof Chu, does not dream. Central government officialsoften say dialogue is better than confrontation.

Moderate democrats have rejected confrontation infavour of dialogue, but the central government turns adeaf ear to their requests. Is it true that the remark isonly a casual one that must not be taken seriously?Moderate democrats have analysed the situation.

Some suspect the SAR government and the centralgovernment have resorted to delaying tactics and usedambiguous moves to persuade them to continue tosnub the so so--called de facto referendum. When thepressure on the SAR government sharply diminishesas the May 16 by by--elections close, moderate democratswill be of little use to them. Moderate democratssuspect the central government never sincerely wantsto dialogue with them. There is no verifying whetherthat is the SAR government and the centralgovernment's design design. However, they being. cold cold--shouldered, it is totally understandable that theywould think so.

The central government is justified in refusing todialogue with the Civic Party or the League of SocialDemocrats because they have resorted to radicalism.However, it is not justifiable for it not to dialogue withthe Alliance for Universal Suffrage, which is moderateand whose demands are reasonable. We feelcompelled to remind the central government that thereis now a general trend towards radicalism in the SAR.

It will only push moderates towards radicalism if itcontinues to ignore them. Because of the radicalatmosphere, only if the central government adroitlyguides the situation in the light of the circumstancescan conflicts be averted. If it resorts to containment,the radical atmosphere will intensify and spread, andHong Kong's tranquillity and stability will suffer.If moderate democrats achieve little, thegovernment's constitutional reform package for 2012will be thrown out, and radicalism will gain ground.

Now, many of Hong Kong's deep deep--rooted contradictionsare at a critical stage, and the prospect of social unrestalready looms large. It would be very detrimental to thesituation in Hong Kong for radicals to dominate thepan pan--democratic camp. Hong Kong is now at thewatershed between stability and unrest. The centralgovernment cannot be too wary of that.　

明報英語網「雙語社評」english.mingpao.com/critic.htm　

真誠嘗試若徹底失敗對話無門惟被迫對抗

2010.03.31明報社評

終極普選聯盟（簡稱普選聯）成立以來，爭取與中央對話，尋求普選路線圖，使2017 年行政長官和2020 立法會兩個選舉是真普選。許多人密切注視普選聯這條對話路線，能否解開政改困局，不過，迄今所知情况不容樂觀。

對話路線之成效，除了爭取中央確認真普選，還有另一個檢驗標準，就是普選聯能否開啟與中央直接對話之門。迄今為止，中央官員談及溫和民主派取態的，只有中聯辦主任彭清華。22 月下旬，彭清華在港出席公開場合後，答記者提問時說： 「我也注意到，這個時期以來，香港社會在政制發展問題上，理性討論的聲音有所增強」，僅此而已，至於普選聯爭取的對話，連彭清華也未有正面回應，遑論其他中央官員了。

因此，目前情况是：普選聯所代表的溫和民主派，冒着被指為扼殺民主運動的風險，尋求與中央對話，解開政制困局，但是迄今不但未見成果，連一次「有實質意義的對話」也沒有，從可見事態發展估計，日後溫和民主派與中央對話的機會，也難以樂觀。溫和民主派「神女有心」，中央則「襄王無夢」。中央官員經常說「對話比對抗好」，現在溫和民主派不搞對抗，要求對話，中央卻置若罔聞，難道這句話不能當真，只是隨便說說而已？

近日，溫和民主派分析目前情勢，有意見質疑特區政府和中央在採取拖字訣，以模稜兩可手段綁住溫和民主派，爭取他們繼續「冷待」所謂「變相公投」，待55 月16 日立法會補選過後，特區政府壓力大減，屆時溫和民主派就再無利用價值，根本無誠意對話。這個分析是否戳穿了特區政府和中央盤算，無從印證，但是溫和民主派所遭到冷待，有這個想法，完全可以理解。

公社兩黨搞激進行動，中央不與之溝通對話，可說得過去； 「普選聯」取態溫和、訴求合理，中央若仍然拒絕與它對話，就說不過去了。我們要提醒中央，香港社會氛圍取態愈趨激烈，已是總的趨勢；如果中央對於溫和理性力量，仍然不理不睬，則只會把溫和理性力量推向激進。目前香港社會的激進氛圍，首要因勢利導，才可以避免出現衝突，如果採取堵塞政策，則激進氛圍勢必升溫和擴大，最終必定衝擊香港社會的安寧和穩定。

如果溫和民主派這次空手而回，則2012 年選舉辦法被否決，激進路線抬頭，加上香港各方面深層次矛盾也到了臨界點，整體社會已經隱伏躁動與不安，一旦民主派路線由激進主導，將對香港局勢大為不利。香港現正處於安危治亂的轉捩點，中央對此不能不察。

Glossary

turn a deaf ear toignore.

designplan or intention.

adroitly //??''dr ɔɔIItl tlII//in a skilful and clever manner.