National Guard were outside the U.S. Capitol since the incident in January 6.
On the waning days of his administration, President Donald Trump has scored another, hopefully the last, world-stunning "achievement" under his 「America First」Policy, this time the "success" last Wednesday in mobilising his supporters to lay siege to the Capitol Hill where the US parliament was meeting to ratify the Electoral College vote of the presidential election held in November 2020. The incident happened on the afternoon of January 6 (US time) when an armed mob comprising mostly Trump supporters stormed the Capitol Building to prevent the parliamentarians from certifying the election outcome. The crash into the complex led to a fierce encounter between the protesters and the police, which resulted in five deaths including a policeman on duty there. Flags are flying at half-mast in Capitol Hill in memory of this police officer.
Right before this incident, several thousand Trump's supporters held an assembly in the name of 「Saving the US」to protest against the claimed "stealing" of the November election by President and Vice President-elect Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. During the brawling gathering, Trump delivered an address emphasizing that the Americans could not tolerate such "electoral fraud" and instigating the participants to march to the Capitol Building to deny the election result protestingly. He burned up his supporters' emotions by saying if they do not fight with their lives, they will lose their country. And a fatal clash between the demonstrators and the police force at the scene was the tragic consequence of the uncontrolled procession which took a toll of five human lives.
This shocking incident has aggravated the deepening divides among the political factions in the US, with the House representatives having voted to unseat the incumbent president through impeachment and the Democrats demanding the Vice President Mike Pence to invoke Amendment 25 of the US Constitution to remove Donald Trump from American presidency on grounds of instigating his followers to originate the Capitol Hill chaos and thus create an unpardonable assault on the US government. Upheavals have also sprung up in other arenas, including the suspension or termination by leading social media of Trump's accounts, boycotting of business transactions with Trump by some banks, resignation of some members of the Trump cabinet and the refusal by reputable footballer to accept a highest national honour conferred by Trump.
The tear gas smoke over the Capitol Hill this time has sounded a big note of caution to the government on account of the people in favour of the existing president yet remaining defiant of law and order after the Capitol's besiege. With Trump rejecting to concede defeat in the presidential election, some of them are yelling for a return to Washington to see Biden's inauguration as the new president of the US on January 20. They are even encouraging on social media platforms the participants to bring guns to the ceremony. This is a threatening danger which has prompted the FBI to issue the stark warning of armed protests to state and local law enforcement ahead of Biden's installation as the political head of the US. It has been coupled with authorisation by the Pentagon of up to 20,000 National Guard troops for the ritual that will put Joe Biden and Kamala Harris formally into office. It seems that, by making all these disruptions to happen in the limited residual time of his official term, Trump is looking to hamstring his successor to expend political capital amid polarised social environment in the country. Yet it is obvious that Trump has arrived at a miscalculation of his projected gains in the political manoeuvre to drum up substantial physical countenance of the masses. He now has got himself embroiled in a political whirl which is beyond any hope of retrieval.
US House and Congressional leaders have simultaneously slammed President Trump's most negative and unethical involvement in the Capitol's deadly incident. He is deemed "not fit to serve" in the current presidential position, and being "out of office is not an issue" since it is high "time for him to go". The question only remains with "what will happen to the (then) ten plus days" of his presidency. To these senior politicians, the more worrisome concerns in mind rest with Trump's authority over such vital possibilities of launching, for instance, military and nuclear warfare that could engender ruinous consequences for America and indeed the world at large.
Outside the US, severe blasting have also been heard from even Trump's close allies. Holding the incident as "shocking, disturbing and saddening", Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has linked Trump's behaviour to an "assault on democracy" which "can't get the way" he wants. To the Prime Minister, "violence has no place in our society," and "extremist deeds can't overwhelm the will of the people". British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, another close ally of Trump, also criticised the incident as a "shameful phenomenon", urging the US leaders to have a "peaceful and orderly transfer of power" in the White House. From its officials to online commentators, the Chinese mainland ridiculed Washington of adopting hypocritically "double standards" in its response to the Capitol disturbances by Trump's supporters, after comparing it with the violent anti-government demonstrations in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) since mid-2019.
If the condemnations against the insurrection-inciting acts of President Trump by the key players across the political spectrum in North America and the major parts of West Europe are rooted in their genuine convictions, which can be translated into an indictment against the president, why have they not reacted in accordance with such firm political beliefs in the face of the intense riots plaguing the HKSAR in 2019? In those months, most American politicians and media expressed continuously unilateral endorsement and protection to the handful of Hongkongers advocating the city's independence, burning up its social order and resorting to violence for the so-called "freedom of expression". At that troubled time, they fully supported the wild behaviour of the rioters. In sharp contrast, the approach employed by the US government and social media to handle the Capitol Hill incident has unmistakably demonstrated to the world that in order to put an end to the chaotic situation and to restore law and order, personal freedoms and human rights have to be put under restrictions.
Right after the outbreak of the Capitol disturbances, the American authorities mounted a massive seizure of the intruders into the Capital Hill, while social media like Facebook and Twitter made a downright closure of Trump's accounts, along with those of the radical groups. A curfew was imposed with immediate effect in the capital, barring demonstrations and justifying immediate push for autocracy. On the day of the upsurge in the parliament's commotions, the Washington City major first declared a curfew for twelve hours, which was then followed by a state of emergency for fifteen days, until after the inauguration of Joe Biden as the new president. During this period, a new curfew can be enforced any time which overrides the protesting rights of the citizens there. Washington could use such drastic measures to curb protests, but the American politicians did shout repeatedly at the HKSAR government, which did not introduce curfews to tackle the persistent street violence in 2019/2020, for what they considered the repression of due but limitless freedoms. This is but patent manifestation of "double standards" in the way protests are managed in the US vis-a-vis the HKSAR.
The US law enforcement agents have taken a high-handed stance in capturing the demonstrators, and it was reported that over fifty people have been arrested based on clues searched online. Meanwhile, many American mainstream media platforms have published the images of a large number of protesters, much to the ignorance of their privacy and human rights. This has also led to the dismissal by employers of people who had no definite links with the riots and might just happen to be around at the protest site but were covered by the online media. Where have their occupational rights gone? Have the politicians made any utterance against all these abuses in the same way as they attacked the city here in the past two years?
It will certainly be recalled that every time when the Hong Kong Police made their debut on coming to grips with the mob chaos, there were inevitably individuals claiming to be human rights experts who levelled heavy attacks against the number of police officers deployed to the scenes of violence. The Capitol Hill event involved a turnout of a few thousand people staging strong defying actions, but they were greeted vigorously by over three thousand National Guards troops. Where have these human rights and political activists gone now? Do they have the courage to speak up fairly and justly on such absurd phenomena? Should they declare openly the withdrawal of erroneous comments and statements on the actions taken by the HKSAR government in relation to the riots over the past two years, taking into due consideration what has just happened in Washington's Capitol Hill?
Thanks to the generosity of the American politicians, people on the mainland and here in the city have benefited from one great enlightenment offered through the Capitol Hill incident. It tells us that individuals' rights and freedoms are not unlimited and must be subsumed under the government and society on the vital necessity of tackling riots and restoring law and order. Especially in times of emergency, absolute rights and freedoms will fuel irresponsible behaviour of individuals and further dampen social order and stability. If this view is actually shared by the US government, politicians and opinion leaders, there are no valid grounds for them to criticise the HKSAR government for restricting the rights and freedoms of the protesters under necessary circumstances.
The author is a chairman of the Hong Kong Education Policy Concern Organisation.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of Orange News.
Photo: AFP
