Nathan Law is a young Hong Kong democracy activist, currently in exile in London.

A key figure in the Umbrella Movement in 2014, Nathan and other student leaders founded the pro-democracy Demosistō party in 2016. Nathan then became the youngest Legislative Councillor in history, but his election was overturned on spurious grounds by the Chinese Communist Party. He was later jailed for his participation in the Umbrella Movement as part of a government crackdown. After the recent introduction of the ‘National Security Laws’ by the CCP, Nathan left Hong Kong due to fears for his safety. He continues to speak up for Hong Kong people at international events and forums and is a global leader of their movement. A nominee for the Nobel Peace Price, in 2020 Nathan was named as one of the 100 most influential people in the world by TIME Magazine.

Misha Zelinsky caught up with Nathan for a chinwag about his path to activism, taking on the might of the CCP in elections and civil demonstrations, how the democracy movement has been crushed by the CCP under the cover of COVID-19, why democracy matters to everyone everywhere, what the democratic world must do to help Hong Kong, the battle for freedom in Taiwan and how he hopes to return home one day.

It’s a truly inspiring chat and we loved having Nathan on the show. Nathan is an absolute hero, an incredibly brave young man who is not yet 30 and yet has already achieved so much. Nathan is someone we should all look up to in the global struggle for democratic freedom.

Please rate and review us, to spread the word it really helps!

 

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT:

Misha Zelinsky:

Nathan Law, welcome to Diplomates. How are you mate?

Nathan Law:

Yeah. Doing really good.

Misha Zelinsky:

And for the purposes of the recording, you are in the UK right now? In London, is that right?

Nathan Law:

Yes. I’m in London.

Misha Zelinsky:

Very good. It’s a great city, I spent a lot of time there when I was studying in the London School of Economics. And I’m of course in Wollongong in Australia. So, thanks for coming on. Now I’m really keen to talk about, I suppose your career to date and how it is that you’ve ended up in the situation you’re in and in London. But I thought we might start of with a little bit of a primer for people, just about Hong Kong right now. No doubt you’re chatting to people back there with COVID and the way things have changed politically. How are things in Hong Kong right this minute?

Nathan Law:

Well, the political situation in Hong Kong is quite dire. After the implementation of the national security law of last June, there have been a series of crackdowns on people’s individual rights, mass arrests on political activist campaigners and union leaders and also a lot of civil organizations are forced to disband because the government is just controlling the whole society and not allowing any force in civil society to grow that can possibly challenge them. So I think for now, we’ll be seeing a lot more people getting in jail, people are more worried about expressing political opinion and basically political opposition is really difficult to continue to be very vocal and continue to criticize the government publicly.

Misha Zelinsky:

Yeah, so let’s just unpack that a little bit. So, when Hong Kong was sort of given back from the British to the control of the Chinese Communist Party in ’97, there was this promise of one country, two systems. You just talked about a national security law, maybe if you can just explain one country, two systems and then how the national security law has interacted with that basic principle?

Nathan Law:

Yeah. In 1997, Hong Kong was handed back from the British government, after more than 150 years of colonial ruling, to Chinese government. And back then, there were several promises made, because Hong Kong was already a cosmopolitan international financial hub by then. But China, it was ruled and still ruled by the Chinese Communist Party and it was just after the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre, which was this huge crackdown on democratic protesting mainland China. So there was a trust issue and a crisis which Hong Kong people did not trust the Chinese Communist Party that they would maintain the way of life and that international financial hub status and the relevant values that are needed to build that to Hong Kong people. So by then, the Chinese government promised Hong Kong people that they would do one country, two system after 1997, which there are two separate system governing mainland China and Hong Kong. And for the Hong Kong people in this system, we will enjoy democracy, freedom and rule of law and these are cornerstones of our one country, two system.

Nathan Law:

But when we fast forward to 2020, when the government implemented the national security law, it’s easy to see that freedoms are all gone because in the law, it says that when the government can see that you have breached international security, which is really effectively defined and from all the cases that we have is a speech crime. You don’t really need to do anything, as long as you chanted a slogan, you display a leaflet, then it can lock you in jail. So we’ve got that kind of draconian law and also democracy are basically deprived. For now the government is doing a election reform, which makes our directly elected seat in the Parliament from half of them into just around quarter of them. And then most of the seats are being appointed by the government. So these, really cornerstones of our one country, two system, are basically being destroyed. And commentators and people just feel like we’re not in one country, two system, we’re in one country, 1.5 system or even to a degree that we’re in one country, one system. Because no one sees the role of Hong Kong government now as they are already a puppet of the Chinese Communist Party. So you can really tell how dire the political situation in Hong Kong just by observing how people describe the system and how they feel the heat.

Misha Zelinsky:

And so you mentioned people are being arrested, maybe just give a bit of a summary of the types of people being arrested. Because obviously Apple News which is one of the major free press there that was essentially broken up, Jimmy Lai was arrested a few months or a little while ago now, but what sort of arrests are we seeing and what sort of sentences are we seeing? Obviously as a trade unionist in Australia, we’re extremely concerned about arrests of trade union officials in Hong Kong as well. Maybe just unpack a little bit about the types of arrests and why those people are being targeted?

Nathan Law:

In the crackdowns in Hong Kong are all rounded. Not only democratic activists, not only ordinary protesters, but media tycoon and even union’s leader, they also suffer from political persecution. Under the national security law, there has already been more than a hundred arrests and one of the landmark case is the primary election case which the government arrested 47 democratic campaigners who was involved or organized a primary election for a legislative council election that was deemed to be held last years, but was postponed now. And the government says that, when you organize or participate in the primary election and the main purpose of the primary election is to win a majority and you are vowed to say that you could block government’s bill in order to express people’s opinion, so that by the fact that you are trying to get a majority and you will block government’s bill, you are committing a subversive action. So basically they’re just saying that if you are an opposition camp in the Parliament, you are constituting in subversive actions by exercising your constitutional rights, which is to reject proposals, reject government’s resolution, things like that.

Nathan Law:

So more than 40 democratic campaigners are already locked in jail without granted a bail and if you look at the list, a lot of unionist leaders like Carol Ng and many others and also Lee Cheuk-yan, from many other cases, that they are all in jail. And the reason is simple, when China Communist Party claimed themselves as socialists but actually they are not. There are no independent union, there are protection on labors rights, the government relies heavily on a extremely uneven capitalist system in order to maintain their absolute dominance. In Hong Kong, it’s easy to see that the union movement is one of the prime suppression targets of the government, that after the implementation of the national security law we have countless unions disbanded because they worry that they’re being hunted by the government and many union’s leaders are in jail because of that.

Misha Zelinsky:

Yeah, and it’s shocking stuff what we’re seeing. But when you’ve sort of being following this issue and this crisis has been building for a number of years now in Hong Kong and sort of combinative with the national security law and it was being opposed and they’ll protest, but then of course we had COVID-19 hit. Would it be fair to say that the Chinese Communist Party has ramped up its activities perhaps while the world was distracted because there was enormous amount of attention on Hong Kong and the struggle there and of course now the world has been hugely distracted and upended by COVID. Do you think they’ve used that as a convenient way to crush the freedom movement in Hong Kong?

Nathan Law:

Well yes, definitely. The Hong Kong Chinese Government, they brought down their suppression while the COVID-19 was getting started and so it really distract the world because a lot of democratic countries, they have had a difficult time dealing with COVID-19. But also in Hong Kong, it’s a really convenient excuse for them to ban a crowd from gathering, to expand their power. I think these emergency states are golden times for the authoritarian regimes because they have a legitimate reason to expand their power. But after the crisis, they won’t relinquish it. They will still retain that extra power gained and to make their suppression more effective. For example, after the COVID-19, is actually a couple weeks before that, that they had already been no protest allowed in Hong Kong and all the proposals are submitted by civil organizations saying that, “Well, I’ll obey all sorts of social distance and all the public health concerns and mechanisms are in place to protect all the participants.” But the government already rejected them under the name of public health, but in reality we understand that these are really political decisions.

Nathan Law:

Massive gatherings like 4th of June candle vigil light and also 1st of July rallies, annual rallies, they’re all banned. And the government when they publicized the bans on crowd gathering, it’s easy for them to use it as a convenient tool to put pressure on protestors or people just standing on the street and try to protest. They were occasions where people, they were only standing there alone, but they were trying to chant certain slogan or express certain political messages, the police just fined them, just charged them with a gathering ban, which in fact they were not violating that. But the government says that you and other strangers that you didn’t know, they were gathering, so that you are being fined or you’re being charged with the bans on public gathering, things like that. So you could see the scope of power that they expanded. A lot of them can be used to suppress democratic campaigners and protestors.

Misha Zelinsky:

Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yeah, you can’t see this, obviously this is a podcast, but those who know, you’re an exceptionally young man still, but you’ve been doing this for a very, very long time, so I’m curious. How did you come to be involved in, I suppose a democracy movement in Hong Kong? It’s a big fight to pick, essentially fighting several million people in a small city state, taking on the might of the Chinese Communist Party, which is right next door and essentially has part of the control over that society. How did you end up in this struggle?

Nathan Law:

Yeah, I had not been growing up thinking myself as an activist, as a politician or as someone who have certain influence. I grew up in a blue-collar family. My father was a builder, my mother was a cleaner. I grew up in a situation that sometimes we had to rely on government subsidies and I had been living in public housing provided by the government for my whole life. So I would describe my family as having certain refugee mentality, which in they only care about stability, they only care about providing for their families even though they know that there are problems in politics. The Chinese Communist Party is very bad that’s why they left China to Hong Kong, they try to avoid the influence of the Chinese Communist Party, but they don’t agree that the children have to be part of a struggle, they have to get involved in political works because those will bring instability. So I didn’t grow up in a very political family, it was a apolitical family and I was not really paying attention to any official affairs or political struggles when I was in childhood or growing up period. And the very first time that I had any intention and curiosity to look into these things, were actually in my high school when Liu Xiaobo, a Chinese person got the Nobel Peace Prize. And the next day of that, our school principal because we were a every pro-Beijing school actually, so-

Misha Zelinsky:

So the school was funded by Beijing or?

Nathan Law:

Yeah, funded by an organizations that is controlled by Beijing. So yeah, when the school principal was holding a morning assembly and she publicly criticized Liu Xiaobo, saying that he was like a enemy of the country, there were a lot of problems of him, he was criticizing a lot of things, things like that. And back then I was puzzled because all I knew is, when you got the Nobel Prize, it’s an honor, it’s a recognition for your excellent work in that field, so how come such a Chinese person being criticized while he got the prize and it really triggered my curiosity and that was the moment that I started to look into the concepts of freedoms and human rights and the works Liu Xiaobo had been doing and it sort of opening up a gate for me to understand the world and the society and the relationship between me and the society in another perspective. So that was the start of it and then when I got into university, when I was involved in the student body, the student union, when I was elected as the head of it, I represented the student union to be involved in social movement and that was the time that I was put under the spotlight.

Misha Zelinsky:

Yeah, so let’s talk about that. Politically you have an awakening as you going to high school. You come at university, you get elected to the peak of the student political movement there which is, a lot of people come into politics through university. That kind coincides with a bit of the Umbrella Movement and this movement that’s rising in Hong Kong. So tell us about that movement and then how you got involved in it?

Nathan Law:

Yeah, the Umbrella Movement is the very first mask on civil disobedience movement in Hong Kong’s history. It took place in 2014 where a round of political reform was ongoing and Hong Kong people were just fed up of basically appointing system of our chief executive, the top leader of our city and because it was already 17 years after the handover in 1997 and we should enjoy democracy by then. So people were very impatient, very angry and they were chanting demands on democracy and hoping that that rounds of political reform could grant Hong Kong people and to anyone a democratic election on both our Parliament and also our executive branch. So there were pressure developing, there were actions developing and at the end of the day in late September, Hong Kong people marched down to the major runway of the city center and they just sat down and they had been in 79 days long democratic protest and occupation in the heart of Hong Kong in order to put pressure to the government and to express their political pursuit. And that sit-in, the Umbrella Movement, was led by student organizations, was led by scholars and Hong Kong Federation of Students, which I was in the Hong Kong Federation of Students as a student leader and I participated the only one dialogue and negotiation between the government and the protesters.

Misha Zelinsky:

And so why was it called the Umbrella Movement because I think a lot of people probably don’t quite understand the background to that symbol?

Nathan Law:

Yeah, it was not named by organizers or by protesters. It was actually named by-

Misha Zelinsky:

Or it’s probably not the most catchy title.

Nathan Law:

Yeah. Yeah, it was actually named by the press because it was a completely peaceful civil disobedience movement and when the government was deploying riot police using batons and using pepper spray, Hong Kong people all used umbrellas to resist that. And when you look into the protest scene, you could see there were hundreds of umbrellas and they were patching up together and it created a very colorful scene and that is a very moving and powerful scene to symbolize the peaceful protesters. They were going against a very draconian regime and a police force that had much more violence than them. So that was actually from the press and people thought that wow, it really represented a movement and we adopted that and continue to call it Umbrella Movement.

Misha Zelinsky:

That’s right. So just to skip ahead a little bit, we’ll come back but, in the most recent sort of umbrella marches, they were close to two million people all carrying umbrellas, which is an incredible sort of visual side to that, right, and everyone marching peacefully. Did you imagine that you’d get to that point where that many people would all be carrying an umbrella in solidarity? I mean, that must have been a pretty incredible feeling at the time.

Nathan Law:

Yeah, the 2019 protest, it was five years after the 2014 Umbrella Movement. It was actually a blow. People didn’t expect that we could mobilize so many people coming into the streets and protest. So yeah, definitely it surprised many democratic campaigners and after the Umbrella Movement because we failed to achieve a political reform that can grant Hong Kong people democracy. So that had been appealed over in the activist groups and in the civil society and that bounce in 2019 was really surprising.

Misha Zelinsky:

So let’s go back. So you’re a student of activism, you’re involved in these protests in the occupation of Central, Hong Kong. I want to just step a little bit to just your family story. Because you talked about your background, your parents were not super political and that mindset, which my family are similar with two migrants into Australia, so I understand that don’t rock the boat mindset from my grandparents. So I’m curious, what were your parents saying about your involvement in this and how did they find out that you were involved?

Nathan Law:

Yeah, well my mother when she was in a wedding boutique in late September 2014 and when she looked up to a television because she was enjoying with her friends, she was happy because some of her friends were getting married and when she looked up to the television and she saw her son being arrested in front of a camera by a dozen of undercover police and she was shocked and-

Misha Zelinsky:

Not the best way to reveal, huh? Not the best way to reveal to everybody [crosstalk 00:22:22].

Nathan Law:

Yeah, yeah. It was rather dramatic. It’s rather dramatic, it’s like an opening of a movie. But yeah, she was shocked and that was the first time that she realized her youngest son was involved in political movement. It had always been a troubling signal for her. She had always been trying to convince me not to be involved, to stay away, to try to focus on your personal life, focus on building of the family and provide for your family. And to be honest, that had always been my thought. I wanted to become a person who can make more money and to treat my family a good life because they had been struggling for the rest of their life and they deserve to have a better life when their sons are grown up and they could provide back to them. But at the end of the day, I felt like it’s my duty, it’s my city and if we don’t come out, who will? And that was a driving momentum for me to defy the gravity from my mother and from my family and continue to devote myself into a larger struggle in the society.

Misha Zelinsky:

Well, I think it’s almost a bigger call defying your mum and defying the CCP, mate. So I understand that some of these things upset your mum.

Nathan Law:

Yeah.

Misha Zelinsky:

But you get arrested, but you got jailed as well, right? And so talk to us about, you’re a young guy, you at university, you go on part of these protests, you get arrested by undercover cops who are being directed by the Chinese Communist Party. What’s going through your head at this point, once you’re behind bars? Talk to us about that because that should have been an extraordinarily scary experience.

Nathan Law:

Yeah, I had been arrested for many times. There were several charges pressed on me. The time when I was in jail was in 2017 and it was quite a long story because in 2016 I found a youth-led political organization with Joshua Wong and many other student leaders. The organization is now disbanded and is Demosisto and we ran for election. So I won the election by a large margin and I became the youngest ever parliamentarian in Hong Kong at the age of 23. So by then, the government really doubled down all the pressure and political suppression on me and nine months after I served the people, I was unseated because the government issues our interpretation into our constitutions. And in the fact, it has changed to the requirement of our oath taking ceremony which each of the parliamentarians have to take it and change it and applied it retrospectively, so making parliamentarians who had made certain statement before and after the whole length of oath, considering these additions were illegal, so that we were deprived from our seats. So I was unseated because of these kinds of draconian-

Misha Zelinsky:

Technicalities.

Nathan Law:

Technicality.

Misha Zelinsky:

But you got unseated for quoting Gandhi, is that right? On the basis-

Nathan Law:

Yes, yes, yes.

Misha Zelinsky:

Yeah.

Nathan Law:

Yeah, it was part of the plots that they designed, saying that you quoted Gandhi, it shows that you are not solemn, you are not sincere to the Chinese Communist Party, to the country and then because of that, you are basically elected illegally and well, more than 50,000 people voted for me and all their ballots are being tarnished, being tossed into a rubbish bin. And that took place nine months after I served the people and a month after, I was convicted inciting illegal assembly and was in jail, was sentenced to jail for eight months because of my peaceful participation in the Umbrella Movement. And luckily, I spent around two and a half months in jail before I filed an appeal and I appealed successfully at the Court of Final Appeal. Yeah, it was just quite a roller coaster ride when you are degraded from a honorable parliamentarian to an inmate in just a month and that was definitely quite a difficult time for me.

Misha Zelinsky:

So I want to talk about running for Parliament at 23 because that’s a extremely gutsy thing to do in any parliamentary system, but you’re doing it essentially to challenge the regime under which oversees your society. That would have been a big call to make, so what was going through your head when you decided, “Look, we’re going to create our own party, we’re going to run for election and we’re going to change the system from the inside”? At that point, I think is probably your thinking, right?

Nathan Law:

Yeah, well I was always feeling, in 2016, there was still room to work inside the system and also outside the system and we had to really collaborate these two forms of resistance so that we can maximize our impact. And by then there were no individuals that had the heritage of Umbrella Movement that can carry the flag of it, that can remind people that, that movement existed and the influence of it lingers and so that, along with other student leaders in the Umbrella Movement, we found our youth-led party. The party was so young. The average age was even younger than I, so you could really identify the youth managed to do that in an election. And we ran for just one seat which I was the candidate and at first, it was quite difficult.

Nathan Law:

I remember that one month before the election, I was at the bottom of the race. We were having a proportional election system, so there were 15 lists fighting for six seat in my constituency and that was the wealthiest, most educated and most aged constituency. So it has a natural rejection to young people like me and all the previous elected candidates were lawyers, were professionals, were ex-government officials, were proper intellectuals, so it didn’t fit my profile. So a month before the election, I was at the bottom of the race basically and people thought that wow, you were just a protesters, an activist, a university student, you knew nothing. The only thing that you knew was protesting and chanting anti-political slogans. That could possibly be a perception for people, but after several aired debates in public television, and the ability to talk about policies, to talk about politics, taught the understanding on real politic and also the ability for you to demonstrate that the lack of experience may be a benefit, may mean that you are getting rid of the constraints and the chains and the shackles, that all those experiences applied to another candidate, to the other candidates, that you are there to do something, that you can really rock the boat when the boat is so corrupted and when the boat is doing bad things to people.

Nathan Law:

And I think all these elements combined the perception to a young activist changed and people had certain confidence in him that he could talk about politics, he could talk about policy, he understand was is going on in the society and he had that new face, new energy that they had not been seeing and could possibly change the political landscape. So in having that expectation, the support really reversed and a lot more people are willing to vote to a young person like me, that they hoped for a change.

Misha Zelinsky:

I mean, obviously you’ve connected with the public in a great way because you’ve been elected, but clearly the regime has detected that as well, with the Chinese Communist Party has detected that as well and they’ve gone to great lengths to disqualify you are a Parliament, arrest you, et cetera, crush you. We’ve mapped that a bit as we’ve gone, not in a linear way, but we’ve sort of… Now we’re getting 2020 with the introduction of the national security law. At that point, you decided with your mates to disband your party, Demosisto and then you leave Hong Kong, so talk to me about that. So you’ve put this party together with hope, trying to do the right thing I suppose and go through the system and see if you can’t stand up for people in the way that we all would in any democracy and I certainly congratulate you for that, but at that point, what’s going through your mind when you’re like, “This national security law is now in. We’re disbanding the party. I have to leave Hong Kong”?

Nathan Law:

Well in 2019, the massive, the most impactful protest in Hong Kong had began. The anti-extradition protest started in June 2019 and we had been through a few million people rally, the largest one was two million people rally, which was more than a quarter of the city’s population. So you can imagine, if in any other major city in Australia or the whole Australia, if there were more than a quarter of the population coming out, politics will long changed and the government will definitely disband and the people will regain the power. But that’s not the case in Hong Kong. Even though we had been through so many massive peaceful demonstrations, other governments still refused to listen to us and there had been an escalation of force from the government and also an escalation of force from the protesters as a response to that. It really lasted a couple of months, with really intense protestings and conflicts and when the COVID started in 2019, in early 2019, the protest slowed down because of that.

Nathan Law:

And the government was trying to impose much more restrictions on people and I remember in May 2020, there was suddenly a news about the Chinese government trying to impose a law in Hong Kong, impose national security law and we were puzzled because in Hong Kong we’ve got our legislation system. We need to go through the Parliament in Hong Kong so that we can enact the law, but the national security law was intended to bypass all the local legislation and consultation process and it was intended to complete that in two months. So such a very controversial law and law that obviously violates human rights, that the government intended to pass it in two months and we didn’t know much before the full draft of it, after it was passed, was released. So at that point, we didn’t know how draconian it was, how close it would close down the civil society and what impact it will give to the society as a whole because we did not see the full tax of it when it was made. But after a couple of weeks, after there were more news released by the media and around two to three weeks before it was officially passed and implemented, we were getting a sense it would be a extremely draconian version of it and it were definitely targeting “at our national enemies” like me, like Joshua, like Jimmy Lai.

Nathan Law:

So we were caught in a very difficult choice. Either we stay and try to find rooms to resist, but we also need someone who can speak up for Hong Kong because it’s obvious that under the law, we cannot speak freely because any appeal for sanctionings of officials on China or having a tough stance on China, holding them accountable, will be seen as subversive speech and you will be locked in jail for years because of that. So by then I decided that we need a person with an international profile and with ability to speak for Hong Kong people on the international stage. So then I fled. I left Hong Kong a couple days before the implementation of the national Security law and arrived in London in order to preserve a voice, free from the threat of the national security law.

Misha Zelinsky:

So what was it like to leave home?

Nathan Law:

Well, it was difficult. I spent past seven years defending Hong Kong’s freedom. Well basically before then, all of my life into the city’s fight. And I love the culture, I love the people, I love the connection, I love the city landscape, cultural-scape, everything. So it was definitely a difficult decision to make, but I realized that it was more than myself, it was more than my personal preference because I carry a responsibility, a duty for collective wits which is making sure that Hong Kong is seen and is being listened to. And so, even though I did say a lot of goodbyes, but for now I feel like I made a right decision to do it.

Misha Zelinsky:

And so, you in the UK now. Obviously it’s a free democratic country, but the Chinese Communist Party makes it very clear that it considers two things, that Chinese diaspora that live abroad are part of the Chinese Communist Party’s interest. So they’ve taken a big interest in Chinese people living abroad and then secondly, they also aren’t afraid to be active in that space, to try to intimidate people, et cetera. Do you feel safe in the UK? Or do you still feel that there’s that reach, they can reach into even our societies that are democracies and free and open?

Nathan Law:

Well, we all understand how extensive China’s reach could be. That extraterritorial, extralegal persecution on democratic activist, freedom activist. Well, you can see it in a lot of places including in Australia, in the UK, so I can never say that I feel entirely secure or safe, even though for now I’m being very cautious and very vigilant so that I haven’t encounter any physical attacks. But that is for me, I can never lose my guard down. I just have to be very careful and to be aware of any following, any spies, any people approaching me, things like that.

Misha Zelinsky:

And so, how is the movement surviving through this moment? I mean, I understand people are very afraid to speak up and there’s being dissembling of the party and a breaking apart of media apparatus like Jimmy Lai, who you said stayed behind and was arrested obviously and so many other people that are still being smashed up in a way that you would expect if you were trying to crush a movement. How is it surviving? And second, you think Xi Jinping will break the will of the people in Hong Kong?

Nathan Law:

Well, I think it is obvious that a lot of possibilities for protesters, for opposition are basically gone. So people, they have to invent new mechanisms to try to express their opinion more and in a more simple way. Take an example in 4th of June this year, when the 4th of June vigil nights was canceled second time in a row, people were just so angry because in Hong Kong it had been the only place on Chinese soil that could publicly commemorate the 4th of June massacre the democratic movement in 1989 and it had always been seen as one of the important events in Hong Kong and it really shows the consciousness and the pursuit for freedoms of Hong Kong people. So people were really furious and especially that was the first 4th of June after the implementation of the national security law. So when people can not gather in Victoria Park, which is where the vigil is normally held, they were wandering around the park, holding up cell phones with a flashlight, making it seemingly as a candle when there were thousands of police outside the park and arbitrarily detaining people who were holding a candle and saying that it was an illegal action to hold a candle in the city center.

Nathan Law:

So they had to use the flashlight of their cellphone to substitute that, but they was still trying something to tell the world, to tell Hong Kong people, to tell the press, to tell foreign media that they were people trying to express certain signal and they were trying to protest. So the day become a day that many people, thousands of them, wandering in the city center outside the Victoria Park in Causeway Bay and they were in black. They were holding flashlights and sometimes the police told them to shut the flashlights, but they were still wandering. They just appeared and that had become a way for them to protest. So after the national security law, a lot of things which has had some incredible adjustment for that but still, I do believe that there is still a strong pursuit of Hong Kong people. They just can’t express that and when they find the right way to do so, they would definitely do it.

Misha Zelinsky:

And so, what can the world do, right? I think the democratic world has watched this whole situation unfold, certainly since ’97, but particularly really since the middle of the last decade with horror and aghast and total solidarity to the people of Hong Kong, offering asylum to people such as yourself and others who want to leave. But what more can we do and what can it do? What should it do? What would you like to see?

Nathan Law:

I feel like there have been a complacency in democratic countries, in the global community for the past two decades. And they were growing that kind of authoritarianism from China and from Russia and from around the world. For now, we’ve been seeing the democratic recessions for almost two decades and I think the erosion of freedoms in Hong Kong is just falling into the big picture, one piece of the puzzles. And I think if we are indeed going to try to help the people in Hong Kong, we just have to stand much more firmer in terms of defending our democracy globally and seeing it as a crisis. Authoritarian regimes are too easy to excuse themselves from taking responsibility by claiming all the things are internal problems, are sovereignty problems and denying all the human rights claims. And in the democratic countries seems difficult to form a more collaborated and sophisticated reaction towards these human rights violations and all those economic coercion and blackmailings to countries like Australia and others and I think that should be changed. We should form a much more coordinated alliance and with an aim of promoting global democracy and addressing global human rights violation and to try to promote that values and use all of our policies to work with it.

Nathan Law:

It’s just a crisis too big to be neglected, but we have not been seeing it really properly. We see climate change, we see poverty as global crisis, but not the decline of democracy and I think if we need some changes on the international level, if we need more accountability for regimes like the Chinese Communist Party, we need to start with a change of perception. We need to see the rise of authoritarianism and the decline of democracy as a global crisis, so that we could formulate global goals, global agenda and actions around it. So I do hope that we can have that in the short-term future, so that we can really change the fight, we can really fight democracy back before it’s too late.

Misha Zelinsky:

Mate, that’s perfectly put. I mean, just on that right, so curious of your take on this. I mean, I think I know your answer, but I think it’s worth talking about which is, some commentators in the West and just generally foreign policies say, “Well, Southeast Asia, there’s not been a great history of democracy and the democratic institution, so maybe they don’t want it or their societies aren’t overly compatible.” I mean, what’s your take on that? I mean, I obviously disagree with that when you look at places like Japan, Indonesia, et cetera, but I’m curious about your take about, do you see democratic being universal or do you see it being a cultural practice?

Nathan Law:

Well, this is definitely not a cultural practice. Is definitely universal. Hong Kong people have always been ready for getting in democratic system. The core essence of democracy system is to make sure that the government is held accountable. No matter is being held accountable by the people on its policies or by the international community to comply with the certain standards that could protect the livelihood and the happiness of people. So democratic accountability is one certain thing that should be implemented over the world because that could avoid people falling into the hands of tyrannies and falling into the hands dictators, who take no responsibility but only for holding wealth for themselves. So I think democratic accountability delivered by a democratic system, is definitely universal and is the goal that we should pursue even though we could say that there is a variation in between different democratic systems, but we just have to make sure that people have the capacity to pick a government, to pick a governing body and the ruling incumbent party has to be responsible to them.

Misha Zelinsky:

No, exactly and I completely agree. So I’m kind of curious, I mean we talked about Hong Kong specifically, but the Chinese Communist Party is not just targeting Hong Kong within its territories. It’s also extremely hostile to Taiwan. Now we don’t have time to talk about all the issues related to Taiwan, but I’m quite curious about how you see a sense of solidarity with Taiwan and do you think that Taiwan is important in their struggle because a lot of people say, democracy in China looks a lot at Taiwan, right, and so it’s a massive threat to the Chinese Communist Party by existing, but do you see solidarity and parallels in that struggle?

Nathan Law:

A lot of Taiwanese activists are my friends who have been in very close connection. I’ve been engaging in Taiwanese civil society for many years. They are definitely good allies. Taiwan is one of the most powerful democratic entity in Asia and it really demonstrate the capacity, the ability of a democratic system. China has always been, especially under the Xi Jinping’s leadership, trying to do the “reunification” and some say that it’s the annexation on Taiwan and that’s definitely for us to stand shoulder-to-shoulder to them and to say that Chinese government has to stop that military intimidation and the democratic country in the world, the community has to step in and to deter China from doing all sorts of terrible things on Taiwan.

Misha Zelinsky:

And so, I suppose the last thing I want to ask you before I get to the critical barbecue question that I know you just hanging to answer, where you sit right now, you’ve had to leave home, you’ve had to give up you a political party, but you’ve gone to fly the flag and to keep the flame alive for democracy. Do you hold out hope that Hong Kong can stay as it is and that we can prevail in their struggle, for all the things you talked about in terms of global democracy and democracy for people of Hong Kong?

Nathan Law:

Definitely there is hope. As an activist, I’m not entitled to lose hope. We have to believe the innate pursuit of freedom from every individuals and we just have to believe that there is a possibility for change. And the things that I’m doing, the international advocacy work, meeting with policymakers, attending in conferences and many others, are paving my way home. I really do wish that the work of raising awareness and raising attention and support to Hong Kong can build up a larger international pressure and the determination to hold China accountable and to make Hong Kong democratic and free.

Misha Zelinsky:

And would you like to go home one day to a free democratic Hong Kong?

Nathan Law:

Well, definitely. I guess, that is the biggest wish that I can ever have. So yeah, definitely. I would love to step foot in Hong Kong again. It could take decades, but I believe that will come.

Misha Zelinsky:

Well mate, we truly hope so and congratulations for everything you’ve done so far. But I can’t let you go and obviously I’d love to keep talking to you about this for a long time but you’ve got a life to lead and I’ve got to let you go, but I can’t let you go without the famous, lame question of Diplomates which is, you are a foreign guest on my show and so foreign guests have to have Aussies and Aussies have to have foreigners, so three Aussies at a barbecue at Nathan’s, who are they and why?

Nathan Law:

Well, it’s a pity that personally I don’t know many Aussies.

Misha Zelinsky:

That’s probably a good thing.

Nathan Law:

And secondly I don’t know how to barbecue, so I would love to invite you Misha and you bring two of your best mates who are the best in cooking BBQ and we can start from there.

Misha Zelinsky:

Mate, I don’t know if you want my mates there, but you’re going to have plenty of beer. That’s the only thing that I request, but we’ll do the cooking if you supply the drinks.

Nathan Law:

Yeah well, beers!

Misha Zelinsky:

Oh Nathan mate, congratulations on everything you’re doing. Complete solidarity with you and your movement, mate, and we hope to talk to you in the future.

Nathan Law:

Yeah, thank you so much.

Misha Zelinsky:

Thanks mate.