:00:00. > :00:10.Welcome to HARDtalk, I'm Stephen Sackur.
:00:11. > :00:13.Later this month, a new chief executive will be voted into office
:00:14. > :00:26.Elected not by the people, but by 1000 or so members of the
:00:27. > :00:31.territory's economic and political elite, tied closely to the Beijing
:00:32. > :00:36.government. And that is far short of the universal Suffrage demanded by
:00:37. > :00:42.my guest today. Joshua Wong was a teenage student when he became a
:00:43. > :00:43.leader of the so-called Umbrella pro-democracy protests that swept
:00:44. > :00:44.Hong Kong in 2014. Has Beijing managed to neutralise
:00:45. > :01:23.Hong Kong's youthful rebels? Thank you. So Hong Kong is about to
:01:24. > :01:31.get a new chief executive. He will be selected, he will not be elected,
:01:32. > :01:35.by the general population. And that is a sign of the failure of your
:01:36. > :01:39.pro-democracy movement, isn't it? I don't think it is in favour of our
:01:40. > :01:44.movement. Because our movement is just motivated by the undemocratic
:01:45. > :01:49.system, which means, rather than allowing us more social selection,
:01:50. > :01:53.as you mentioned, it would be great for Hong Kong people to deserve
:01:54. > :01:58.democracy, with one person, one vote. Well, that is what you wanted.
:01:59. > :02:02.And you brought tens of thousands of people onto the street in the late
:02:03. > :02:06.summer, the autumn of 2014, you demanded with both the Hong Kong
:02:07. > :02:11.authorities and by extension, frankly, with Beijing as well. And
:02:12. > :02:15.of course, nothing happened. Regime did not give you a single
:02:16. > :02:19.concession. Three years ago we created Hong Kong history, with
:02:20. > :02:23.100,000 people occupying on the street, it resulted in the Umbrella
:02:24. > :02:27.movement. However, it is a long-term battle for us to fight for
:02:28. > :02:31.democracy, against the largest authoritarian regime in the world.
:02:32. > :02:36.So from my point of view, it is a long-term battle. We can win in the
:02:37. > :02:42.battle, what I believe finally we can win in this war -- can't win.
:02:43. > :02:46.That he is, someone said as a battle in which you shot yourself the foot.
:02:47. > :02:50.It was on offer at the time back in 2014 was at least the idea that,
:02:51. > :02:55.after a first round of selection which would be handled by the small
:02:56. > :02:58.coterie of elite people, then finally the two or three nominees
:02:59. > :03:02.that came out of that committee would be put before the people. But
:03:03. > :03:06.because you guys in the pro-democracy movement rejected
:03:07. > :03:10.that, that is not going to happen. So there is no sense of a popular
:03:11. > :03:15.involvement in this decision at all, and that is your fault. From the
:03:16. > :03:20.definition of the Communist Party of China, they would say that the China
:03:21. > :03:24.government will choose... Field candidates for you to elect
:03:25. > :03:29.election. But I would say that, if there is a screening process to deny
:03:30. > :03:35.or reject all of the pro-democracy politicians to be the candidates of
:03:36. > :03:39.the elections, it is not a democratic election at all. So what
:03:40. > :03:45.will your view be of the likely winner of this chief executive race?
:03:46. > :03:52.Because we don't know yet, it looks as though Carrie Lam... Well, let's
:03:53. > :03:55.call it selection. Carrie Lam, it looks as though she is the likely
:03:56. > :03:59.winner of this process. She is deemed to be close to Beijing, she
:04:00. > :04:04.has already had a senior position in the executive of Hong Kong. Would
:04:05. > :04:06.you regard her as completely illegitimate, given the
:04:07. > :04:11.circumstances? Carrie Lam being elected, it would be a nightmare at
:04:12. > :04:14.all. And I would say that he would be the chief executive of Hong Kong
:04:15. > :04:23.after the 26th of March is not dependent on the Hong Kong people or
:04:24. > :04:27.Hong Kong elite. It depends on President Xi. So whether the
:04:28. > :04:32.president of China will elect Carrie Lam, at this stage, no one knows.
:04:33. > :04:36.What we can do is just clearly request and uphold what we believe
:04:37. > :04:40.in, which means democracy, and continuing to fight in the future.
:04:41. > :04:43.But just to be clear, you would regard the winner of that selection
:04:44. > :04:47.process, and that hypothetically say it is likely to be Carrie Lam, you
:04:48. > :04:50.regard her sitting there with no mandate, no legitimacy whatsoever.
:04:51. > :04:55.It is lack of legitimacy from people, because we can't vote in an
:04:56. > :04:59.election. So how come we can say that the executive, which means the
:05:00. > :05:03.leader of Hong Kong, is representing Hong Kong citizens? So will you try
:05:04. > :05:07.to get people out on the street again? Because the issue here is
:05:08. > :05:11.what sort of amount you have, and indeed what sort of achievement is
:05:12. > :05:16.the pro-democracy movement can ever hope to garner -- what sort of
:05:17. > :05:20.momentum. Because we look at the record, and Frankie, as I say, you
:05:21. > :05:24.don't appear to have achieved very much. Yes, I would say that the
:05:25. > :05:27.chief executive election day will be a date when we come out with civil
:05:28. > :05:30.disobedience and confrontation and protest again. But as you have
:05:31. > :05:35.mentioned, according to the track record of experience in the Umbrella
:05:36. > :05:38.movements, even Occupy on the street, it can result with a
:05:39. > :05:45.positive gain. And at this stage, the Hong Kong people are still far
:05:46. > :05:49.away from democracy. But what I have learnt in Umbrella movement is we
:05:50. > :05:54.can't only rely on street activism, but also get into the institution.
:05:55. > :05:57.That is why Nathan Law, one of the student leaders, has run in the
:05:58. > :06:02.election last year had been elected to be the youngest MP in Hong Kong.
:06:03. > :06:06.You are I think were sentenced by a Hong Kong court to was at 80 hours
:06:07. > :06:10.of community service for your activities during the protest
:06:11. > :06:13.movement of 2014? Yes, for participating in an unauthorised
:06:14. > :06:18.assembly. So you are telling the civil disobedience is on the cards
:06:19. > :06:21.for the day of the selection, March 26, the new chief executive. Perhaps
:06:22. > :06:24.you might organise street demonstrations, perhaps you might
:06:25. > :06:29.confront the police, I don't know. But how far are you prepared to push
:06:30. > :06:34.this? I mean you are a young man, you are a student, you are 20 years
:06:35. > :06:37.old. You want to go to prison? I expect to pay the price for
:06:38. > :06:41.democracy. That is why before Umbrella movement, in 2014 until
:06:42. > :06:48.now, I expected to one pushing forward the civil disobedience. One
:06:49. > :06:53.day, I I may need to go into jail, but the fight for democracy, you
:06:54. > :06:57.need to pay the price for it. You are in London, with Nathan Law, you
:06:58. > :07:01.save. We have had him on the programme not too long ago. You two
:07:02. > :07:08.other poster boys, if I can put it that way, for the youthful
:07:09. > :07:12.pro-democracy so-called Umbrella protest movement. I am just
:07:13. > :07:16.wondering, already faced threats. I have heard that you were threatened
:07:17. > :07:20.when you tried to travel to Taiwan, you had a crowd of people who were
:07:21. > :07:26.shouting curses at you. Somebody apparently tried to punch you in the
:07:27. > :07:33.face at one point. Are you scared? Sometimes I am tired, or
:07:34. > :07:39.downhearted, but I know what I've done, and what I commit is valuable.
:07:40. > :07:43.According to a previous experience, being an activist in Hong Kong is
:07:44. > :07:50.not easy. As you have mentioned, while we have visited Taiwan and
:07:51. > :07:54.back to Hong Kong, the pro-China, Maoists and gangsters almost just
:07:55. > :08:00.assault us in the airport, Nathan Law being the elected legislator has
:08:01. > :08:03.even been sent to the hospital. I have been blacklisted by the men in
:08:04. > :08:09.China government, and even last October I visited Bangkok and the
:08:10. > :08:12.Thai government just locked me and sent me to the detention cell,
:08:13. > :08:17.saying that, sorry, you are a troublemaker and we will not allow
:08:18. > :08:21.you to enter Thailand. And after I took the flight back to Hong Kong,
:08:22. > :08:29.after 12 hours detained, the government officials just say that
:08:30. > :08:32.Thailand will blacklist Joshua Wong forever. You know why this is
:08:33. > :08:36.happening, don't you? You are seen by Beijing as a threat not just
:08:37. > :08:40.because you talk about democratic values, basic human freedoms, it is
:08:41. > :08:46.because Beijing sees your political movement as ultimately threatening
:08:47. > :08:51.separatism and independence, and that is something that is a red line
:08:52. > :08:55.which the Beijing government will never accept. In fact, from the
:08:56. > :09:02.point of view of Beijing, independence would have been a red
:09:03. > :09:07.line for them. And for my political party and myself, we do not advocate
:09:08. > :09:12.independence, and what we hope is to fight for general autonomy for Hong
:09:13. > :09:15.Kong. Yes, you see, this is where I don't understand your position. You
:09:16. > :09:19.say we're not talking about independence, we are just took it of
:09:20. > :09:22.determination. What if you are talking about self-determination and
:09:23. > :09:26.of course all options are on the table. You are leaving it to the
:09:27. > :09:30.joys of the Hong Kong people as to how they want to be governed in the
:09:31. > :09:33.future. One of those options has to be separation and independence or
:09:34. > :09:37.are you saying that is definitely off the table? I think we can answer
:09:38. > :09:40.this question in two aspects. The first one is the matter that civil
:09:41. > :09:45.disobedience or just the moderates fighting for democracy just like the
:09:46. > :09:49.former legislature, all of that are also being labelled as pro-
:09:50. > :09:54.independence. So I would say that if Beijing put a label on everyone and
:09:55. > :09:58.labelled them as pro- independence activists, it is meaningless.
:09:59. > :10:04.According to your question, as well, self-determination means that we are
:10:05. > :10:08.also part of the independence movement of Hong Kong. I would say
:10:09. > :10:15.that absolutely not at all. Well, hang on. In April 2016 you said I am
:10:16. > :10:18.not explicitly advocating independence for Hong Kong, art, you
:10:19. > :10:25.went on, we think independents might be one of the options. So come on,
:10:26. > :10:28.which is it? You either are or you are not prepared to countenance
:10:29. > :10:32.independence? I would love to answer this question, and I am not the one
:10:33. > :10:36.who advocate independence, but I would say that Hong Kong, being a
:10:37. > :10:41.former colony of the British government, it will be usual for us
:10:42. > :10:46.to get the right to determine the sovereignty and constitution of Hong
:10:47. > :10:51.Kong in a decolonisation process of Hong Kong in the last century. Hang
:10:52. > :10:55.on, you know that the Basic Law is there. The deal between the former
:10:56. > :11:00.colonial power, Great Britain, and China, or quite clear. The Hong Kong
:11:01. > :11:06.Special Administrative Region was, in terms of sovereignty, an
:11:07. > :11:11.inalienable part of China. The most significant point is the joint
:11:12. > :11:17.declaration will have and expiry date, according to the policy, the
:11:18. > :11:21.joint declaration was signed in 1984, it will be in fermented since
:11:22. > :11:26.1997 until 2047. However, what will be the situation of Hong Kong after
:11:27. > :11:30.2047? With the expiry date of the joint declaration, no one knows. And
:11:31. > :11:33.what we are afraid is, without referendum or without the
:11:34. > :11:40.authorisation of Hong Kong people, it will just result in one country,
:11:41. > :11:44.one system. You see no one knows what will happen after 2047, but I
:11:45. > :11:48.think it is quite clear everyone knows that China and letting Hong
:11:49. > :11:51.Kong go. I mean, that is just inconceivable. In fact, most Hong
:11:52. > :11:55.Kongers themselves, most people who live in the territory, feel that as
:11:56. > :12:00.well. And Reuters did an interesting survey last year in which only one
:12:01. > :12:04.in six people in Hong Kong supported in any way, any sympathy for
:12:05. > :12:08.independence. The clear majority were against the idea, because Hong
:12:09. > :12:13.Kongers are realistic people, even if you're not. I would say that,
:12:14. > :12:17.being an activist, and also being one who leads a political party and
:12:18. > :12:23.organise the election campaign last year, I know the logic behind
:12:24. > :12:26.straight activism and elections are a bit different. Straight activism
:12:27. > :12:33.it is just necessary to get a critical minorities to support joint
:12:34. > :12:37.action. Before an election you need a critical majority to vote for you.
:12:38. > :12:40.But I would say that, according to the survey, as you mentioned, of
:12:41. > :12:44.course, the majority of Hong Kong people disagree on Hong Kong
:12:45. > :12:48.independence. But I will say that, no matter whether people agree or
:12:49. > :12:54.disagree on Hong Kong independence, what we hope is, after 2047 for Hong
:12:55. > :12:59.Kong, the political economy or cultural sector has the future
:13:00. > :13:03.arrangement of Hong Kong, it will be decided by Hong Kong people, rather
:13:04. > :13:06.than just an order from the Beijing government saying it is time to put
:13:07. > :13:09.aside judicial independence, rule of aside judicial independence, rule of
:13:10. > :13:14.law, and if you put aside without any pressure from Hong Kong, all
:13:15. > :13:18.without any reaction from Hong Kong people, it will just be a nightmare
:13:19. > :13:22.for us. Do you worry that you are being used as a puppet by countries
:13:23. > :13:25.hostile to China? I am thinking in particular of the United States. Not
:13:26. > :13:30.long ago you went to Washington. You were received very warmly by
:13:31. > :13:32.senators, including Marco Rubio, former Republican presidential
:13:33. > :13:37.candidate, who is certainly know not to be a great friend of Beijing. And
:13:38. > :13:40.he saluted here, and he sponsored another piece of legislation that he
:13:41. > :13:46.wanted to get through the US Congress, which the Chinese thought
:13:47. > :13:50.was blatantly anti- Chinese. I just wonder, there is a danger you are
:13:51. > :13:55.going to be seen as a tool in the pocket of the United States. I don't
:13:56. > :13:58.think I will be used as a tool in the United States. Of course, for
:13:59. > :14:03.the pro-China propaganda they will say that I am one of the CIA agents,
:14:04. > :14:07.and that I am controlled or funded by the US government. Or even
:14:08. > :14:11.claimed that I am trained by the US Marines, it is ridiculous. But
:14:12. > :14:15.referring to your question, I would say that what we hope is to get the
:14:16. > :14:20.international committee to support Hong Kong democracy movement. It is
:14:21. > :14:25.not because only focusing on the moral reason. It is because the US
:14:26. > :14:29.government or UK government is the ones who signed off, and the joint
:14:30. > :14:32.declaration. So they gain the responsibility to monitor the
:14:33. > :14:34.implementation of one country, two systems.
:14:35. > :14:42.But they're not, Abe, looking at the allies you might want to have in the
:14:43. > :14:46.discussion with how Hong Kong can determine its democratic rights, the
:14:47. > :14:49.UK government isn't doing much, the US and government is now led by
:14:50. > :14:53.Donald Trump, who clearly sees his relationship with China in terms of
:14:54. > :14:57.trade and currency but he really doesn't seem to put it in terms of
:14:58. > :15:03.human rights and democratic values. I still appreciate his phone call
:15:04. > :15:07.with the president of Taiwan. Things are changing because Mr Trump says
:15:08. > :15:11.his administration is committed to the one China policy. That's why
:15:12. > :15:16.there's uncertainty for the Trump administration and that's why I
:15:17. > :15:20.would have more expectation in legislation rather than the
:15:21. > :15:25.administration. You say, I'll have some hope of getting support from
:15:26. > :15:30.legislatures, but you're not getting support. In material terms, since
:15:31. > :15:35.you launch your umbrella protest, and now you have your own new party
:15:36. > :15:39.and a handful of representatives in the Legislative Council, tell me, in
:15:40. > :15:43.material terms, what level of support you're getting from around
:15:44. > :15:48.the world from governments and legislatures. We have to push
:15:49. > :15:52.forward to help the democracy movement in Hong Kong and in the UK
:15:53. > :15:57.we are questing and arranging a hearing in the parliament. In the
:15:58. > :16:00.US, as you mentioned, there is a cross-party bill which is called the
:16:01. > :16:04.Hong Kong human rights and democracy act and what we hope is it will be a
:16:05. > :16:10.starting point for the umbrella movement generation and what we hope
:16:11. > :16:14.is after the end of the Umbrella Movement, we want a positive result.
:16:15. > :16:18.China is now very important economically and globally, one of
:16:19. > :16:21.the two most powerful economies in the entire world, do you really
:16:22. > :16:26.think you will rally international support for democracy in Hong Kong
:16:27. > :16:30.when China is so clearly against it and China is now frankly seen around
:16:31. > :16:36.the world as one of the most vital strategic partners. Supporting
:16:37. > :16:40.democracy and Hong Kong does not... What I mean if Hong Kong has a lack
:16:41. > :16:45.of rule of law and judicial independence, how can it ensure
:16:46. > :16:49.economic freedom and also protect the business interests? What I would
:16:50. > :16:52.like to say, especially for the British audience, if how China is
:16:53. > :16:57.nor the international treaty, ignored a promise in a joint
:16:58. > :17:00.declaration, how can the British government insured China will rely
:17:01. > :17:09.on its miss on the future trade deal? Are you in anyway a China
:17:10. > :17:14.Afobe, a sign of Vogue, there are certain statements that have come
:17:15. > :17:18.out of the localised movement in Hong Kong which smacked of a
:17:19. > :17:25.prejudice Chinese people and China. I would say I am ethnically Chinese
:17:26. > :17:30.and I am against the China Communist Party regime but not against Chinese
:17:31. > :17:34.people. What about your colleague, Nathan Law, who said, and I actually
:17:35. > :17:39.put this quote to him some time ago, a lot of people think we don't know
:17:40. > :17:43.China so we hate them but actually it's different. We know China and
:17:44. > :17:48.that's why we hate them. I would say that we hope to know more about
:17:49. > :17:52.China. Do you hate the Chinese? No, I don't hate the Chinese and I hope
:17:53. > :17:59.to know more about Chinese culture and what's happened inside mainland
:18:00. > :18:03.China, unfortunately after the end of Umbrella Movement I've been
:18:04. > :18:07.blacklisted and I can't enter mainland China. I suppose what I'm
:18:08. > :18:10.getting at is whether you're interested in aligning yourself with
:18:11. > :18:14.some of the more populist elements in Hong Kong who are very angry
:18:15. > :18:17.about certain things they see as problems coming from China. For
:18:18. > :18:22.example, Chinese people coming across the border, spending a lot of
:18:23. > :18:26.money, raising prices in Hong Kong shops. Some have been referred to as
:18:27. > :18:30.locusts by elements inside Hong Kong. There's also concern about
:18:31. > :18:34.jobs, Chinese people with qualifications coming and taking
:18:35. > :18:41.jobs that used to go to Hong Kong people. Are you prepared to ally
:18:42. > :18:44.yourself with these... You could call them nationalists beaming is in
:18:45. > :18:49.Hong Kong. I wouldn't recognise myself as one of the local lists and
:18:50. > :18:53.I'm not one who agrees on Hong Kong nationalism. Would you not
:18:54. > :18:57.acknowledge that people in Hong Kong care more about the housing crisis,
:18:58. > :19:01.the difficulty for young qualified Hong Kong people getting decent jobs
:19:02. > :19:05.with good salaries. These are probably things that engage Hong
:19:06. > :19:09.Kong people more than your theoretical discussion of universal
:19:10. > :19:12.suffrage and changing the way in which the Chief Executive is
:19:13. > :19:16.selected. I think your point is explaining the reason we run in the
:19:17. > :19:21.election, during the Umbrella Movement a lot of residence in Hong
:19:22. > :19:25.Kong said they support democracy and I have quite a good impression on
:19:26. > :19:31.the democracy movement but it is possible for you to have emphasis on
:19:32. > :19:35.more issues like the housing issues, social welfare, liberal rights, not
:19:36. > :19:38.only emphasis on political reform. That's why since last year we found
:19:39. > :19:44.a political party and ran in the election and what we have proved to
:19:45. > :19:48.Hong Kong citizens, we hope to put our thoughts to fight for democracy
:19:49. > :19:55.and urge for a political system reform. But also on the other hand
:19:56. > :19:59.we are one who cares about peoples livelihoods, housing problems
:20:00. > :20:05.transport problems, and in Hong Kong only 20% of high school students can
:20:06. > :20:10.go to university. It's the lowest rate compared to any big country.
:20:11. > :20:13.Let me ask you more about your personal situation, it strikes me as
:20:14. > :20:16.very interesting, we know your place around the world because you
:20:17. > :20:19.identified with the umbrella protests and many were struck by how
:20:20. > :20:24.young you were but you started becoming an activist when you were
:20:25. > :20:30.even younger. 14 years old. 14 years old. You were beginning to think it
:20:31. > :20:33.was worth while it was good to activate with your student peers in
:20:34. > :20:37.high school to make a political noise but it has cost you a lot.
:20:38. > :20:41.Now, as you said, you are blacklisted by Beijing, it's going
:20:42. > :20:45.to affect your future career prospects and life. How do you cope
:20:46. > :20:49.with that? Of course it is hard for me to seek any job inside government
:20:50. > :20:54.or work in the business sector, but I would say if the young generation
:20:55. > :21:00.can't see the future of Hong Kong, how can I see my future? What do
:21:01. > :21:08.your parents say? My parents strongly support me. They are the
:21:09. > :21:12.ones who are not activists, not a guy in politics every day, but they
:21:13. > :21:16.still give me enough flexibility compared to other parents in Hong
:21:17. > :21:20.Kong mostly according to the Chinese culture, where they forced their
:21:21. > :21:25.students to focus on examinations and enter the best university, the
:21:26. > :21:30.professional and get upward mobility into the middle-class. There's
:21:31. > :21:36.enormous pressure in Hong Kong to do well, strive and achieve. You bust
:21:37. > :21:42.all of those stereotypes. It is lucky that my parents are more
:21:43. > :21:46.open-minded. Let me ask you this, you're a young man and I don't in
:21:47. > :21:50.anyway want to sound patronising, but with youth comes a certain
:21:51. > :21:53.amount of idealism, and maybe sometimes a certain amount of
:21:54. > :21:58.naivete. There are people who look at the reality of China's grip upon
:21:59. > :22:03.Hong Kong, the massive dominance that China has when it comes to any
:22:04. > :22:07.discussion of Hong Kong's political future, the economic reliance of
:22:08. > :22:11.Hong Kong on China. Then they listen to you and think, there's a spirited
:22:12. > :22:16.young man who is going to change his views as he gets older. There's no
:22:17. > :22:19.way that China is ever going to relinquish its political and
:22:20. > :22:24.economic control and grip on Hong Kong. Do you recognise that many
:22:25. > :22:27.people feel that way? I knew especially through the umbrella
:22:28. > :22:31.movement the number of people agree or disagree on the movement, it
:22:32. > :22:36.would come down to the occupied zone and have discussions with me and I
:22:37. > :22:40.know more about their ideas. I would say there's always discussion and
:22:41. > :22:44.debate is about whether China relies more on Hong Kong or Hong Kong
:22:45. > :22:49.relies more on China, especially with the capital... Even in 1997
:22:50. > :22:56.when you first experienced sovereignty, Chinese rule, I think
:22:57. > :23:00.Hong Kong was worth almost 15% of China's GDP, it's now down to
:23:01. > :23:04.something like 3%. The leverage in the relationship is changing every
:23:05. > :23:07.year and always going in the direction of Beijing. I would say
:23:08. > :23:11.fight for democracy or protecting the rule of law and judicial
:23:12. > :23:16.independence, in fact we are facing the largest authoritarian regime or
:23:17. > :23:26.the second largest economic power in the world. If you asked whether we
:23:27. > :23:30.would achieve the mocha see in the next two or three years, I would say
:23:31. > :23:33.it is hard for us to achieve immediately in the short-term, but
:23:34. > :23:38.that's why at the start of the interview I said it's a long-term
:23:39. > :23:42.battle -- democracy. Some people said why is the young generation
:23:43. > :23:48.focused on self-determination, why don't you focus on one country, two
:23:49. > :23:54.systems. The fact is, one country, two systems, after the end of 50
:23:55. > :23:58.years unchanged policy, in 2047 I am 51 years old and I hope that no
:23:59. > :24:04.matter what will be the sovereignty of Hong Kong at this point, we still
:24:05. > :24:08.ensure human rights, rule of law, judicial independence and we won't
:24:09. > :24:14.let Hong Kong exist as Hong Kong and not just exist in name only. You are
:24:15. > :24:18.not leaving this battlefield? Yeah, I will not leave it. Joshua Wong,
:24:19. > :24:22.thank you for being on HARDtalk. Thank you very much indeed. Thank
:24:23. > :24:23.you very much, appreciate it.