Chinese Civilizational Identity Takes Primacy in Beijing's Stance on Hong Kong and Taiwan, Challenging Western Sovereignty Norms

A recent social media post by user Yishan has highlighted a fundamental divergence in understanding the political status of Hong Kong and Taiwan, suggesting that traditional Western concepts of nation-states often fail to capture the underlying dynamics. The tweet posits that Chinese civilizational identity profoundly influences group identity feelings, outweighing modern Westphalian nation-state boundaries. This perspective offers a crucial lens through which to interpret Beijing's long-standing policies towards these territories.

Hong Kong, a Special Administrative Region of China, has seen its autonomy significantly eroded in recent years, despite the "one country, two systems" framework. Beijing's imposition of the National Security Law in 2020 and subsequent electoral reforms have led to a crackdown on dissent and a reduction in democratic freedoms. International observers and many Hong Kong residents view these actions as a direct challenge to the city's promised high degree of autonomy.

Similarly, Taiwan, officially the Republic of China, maintains a democratically elected government and operates independently, yet Beijing considers it a breakaway province that must eventually be "unified" with the mainland, by force if necessary. China's "One China" principle asserts that there is only one China, with Taiwan as an integral part. Taiwan's government and populace largely reject Beijing's proposed "one country, two systems" model, particularly in light of developments in Hong Kong.

The tweet elaborates on this cultural perspective, stating, "> The real answer...is that the long-term civilizational identity of Chinese ethnicity carries far more weight when it comes to determining group identity feelings than modern Westphalian nation-state boundaries." This "civilizational statism" emphasizes a shared cultural and historical heritage as the primary determinant of national belonging, often superseding strict territorial or governmental definitions. This contrasts sharply with the Westphalian system, which underpins much of international law and prioritizes exclusive territorial sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of recognized states.

This clash of geopolitical frameworks, where China often advocates for an "Eastphalian" sovereignty emphasizing state control and cultural unity, continues to shape the complex relations in the Indo-Pacific. While Western nations typically adhere to principles of self-determination and clearly defined national borders, China's approach prioritizes a historical and ethnic continuity. This fundamental difference in understanding sovereignty remains a core driver of regional tensions and international diplomatic challenges.