Winter on Fire (4 Stars)

This documentary about the Euromaidan protests in Ukraine is available exclusively on Netflix, but I was lucky to see it at a special screening at the Aston University Students Union in Birmingham. It was organised by a group of Hong Kong students who see parallels between the Euromaidan protests and the current protests in Hong Kong.

The film follows the 94 days of protests from 21st November 2013 to 23rd February 2014. The people of Ukraine were unhappy that their president was about to sign an agreement linking Ukraine's economy to that of Russia and its allies. They thought of themselves as a European state, so they wanted to join the EU. After a series of large peaceful protests, centred around Maidan Nezalezhnosti (Independence Square) in Kiev, the police began to brutally attack the protesters. The more the police brutality increased, the more people joined the protest.

The documentary presents the events in strict chronological order, both the victories and the tragedies. The only criticism that can be made about the film is that it's one-sided, not showing the views of those who opposed the protests.

I remember reading about the Euromaidan protests in the news as they took place, but I wasn't aware how brutally they had been suppressed. The documentary opened to my eyes to the full scope of what happened in that three month period. It was a case of people rebelling against Communism, or rather against the vestiges of Communism left in place after Ukraine became independent in 1991. This is a dilemma for Communist leaders and idealists, who see Communism as the ultimate goal of suppressed peoples. That might be the case in an ideal world with ideal Communist structures, but in practise Communism has become just another form of suppressing the people. Russia's leader Vladimir Putin is a Communist in name only. His policies are those of nationalism and fascism, following the same paths as Adolf Hitler in the pre-war 1930's.

---

Does the Ukraine crisis of 2013 have parallels with the problems in Hong Kong today? Yes, I can see parallels, but I wouldn't go as far as to say they're the same problems. Ukraine was (and still is) in a unique position as a country on the border between Europe and Asia. It wasn't just a question of democracy and Communism, the people were asking themselves whether they wanted to be a western or an eastern state. The Hong Kong protesters have no wish to detach themselves from China, they just want the freedom to express themselves within the parameters of the UK Handover Agreement.

The protesters in Hong Kong have five demands, of which four are clear and the fifth has been repeatedly rephrased over the last few months.

1. There should be no extradition from Hong Kong to mainland China.

That was forbidden in the UK Handover Agreement. The legal systems of mainland China and Hong Kong should remain distinct.

2. There should be an investigation into police brutality.

Until now the Hong Kong government has said it will investigate police brutality, but nothing seems to have been done.

3. The protests should not be classed as riots.

There is a heavy penalty for rioting in Hong Kong. Calling the protests riots makes the prosecution of participants unavoidable.

4. Protesters should not be prosecuted.

This is connected to the fourth demand.

5. The electoral system should be reformed.

This is the bottom line of several different versions of the fifth demand. Sometimes the emphasis of this demand is on the removal of corruption in government. Sometimes this demand asks for the removal of unelected officials in government. The latter is a difficult demand to implement, because the Hong Kong electoral system was laid down in the Handover Agreement.

The current Hong Kong protests are very small, compared to those in Ukraine. The Ukrainian president fled the country as a result of the protests. Nothing like that will happen as a result of the Hong Kong protests. The protests would have to take place simultaneously in Beijing and other large cities to have the slightest chance of overthrowing the government. The best the localised Hong Kong protests can hope to achieve is to maintain the status quo.

The problem is that the Handover Agreement only specifies the "One Country, Two Systems" for a limited length of time, namely 50 years. After 2047 the Chinese government can legally abolish the special status of Hong Kong and fully incorporate it into the People's Republic of China. That might seem a long way off, but it's within the lifetime of the students I met today. To be honest, I didn't expect the Chinese government to honour the agreement as long as it has, 22 years so far. After all, what could the UK do if China declares the deal invalid? The UK can't take Hong Kong back. All the UK can do is complain to the United Nations, a powerless institution which writes pieces of paper that everyone ignores.

---

The meeting in the Student Union today wasn't as big as I had expected. There were only a dozen young Chinese people in attendance, and I was the only non-Chinese visitor. Shortly before the film began, another group of Chinese people arrived, slightly older than the students, dressed in smart clothes. It was obvious that they wanted to disrupt the meeting. They refused to sit, and they tried to ask questions out of turn. They were taking photographs of the attendees, despite being asked to refrain from taking photos.

I hoped to talk to members of the second group after the film, but they evidently grew bored and left before it was time to ask questions. A lively discussion would have made things clearer to an outsider like me. I have an open mind, and I want to hear both sides of the story. If any of those present today have found my blog post, please write your thoughts in the comments box in as much detail as possible. I look forward to hearing from you.