Ian Buruma points out the difficulty of taking to the streets under dictatorial rule, saying the only means to stage a mass protest in Hong Kong effectively is to remain peaceful and avoid a violent response from Beijing. Public opinion will not remove the communist regime. But with China becoming the world’s second largest economy, it also aspires to be a respected member of the international community. To this end Beijing has been investing billions in enhancing its soft power overseas.

The author says, “most people in China, even those who are not especially fond of the current regime, are terrified of violence and disorder, of which the Chinese have seen too much in the last hundred years.” If the mass protest in Hong Kong turns violent, there would be “little sympathy” in China for the protesters. This would allow the leadership and the Communist Party (CPC) to opt for a “crack down with maximum force” to restore law and order.

Last week Beijing condemned the demonstrators who stormed and vandalised the parliament building, calling the act “totally intolerable”. So far Chinese leaders have refrained from sending tanks to crush the protests, as it “would make China look very bad.” But they might not rule out this option, if they “saw no other way” out. They would find an excuse to intervenue – even brutally – if protesters resort to violence.

The author highlights the similarity between the demonstrators in Hong Kong and those who took part in the 1989 Tiananmen protests. In both cases there was a faction of frustrated protesters that ignored pleas from their more mature comrades and crossed the government red-line, being prepared to face whatever consequences.

On July 1, as government officials in Hong Kong celebrated the 22nd anniversary of Britain’s handover to China, dozens of protesters made their way to the Legislative Council, despite friendly warning from pro-democracy lawmakers that they could face serious charges. They besieged the parliament building, before eventually smashing their way through the glass facade. The leadership in Beijing asked Hong Kong to investigate the criminal responsibility of violent offenders for serious illegal actions. Protesters could face up to 10 years in prison if prosecuted and convicted for rioting.

In June 1989, students in the heart of Beijing were frustrated with their government’s tough stance. Some believed they shoud remain defiant and carry on their mass protest “to the bitter end”. Some elder activists feared a violent crackdown and greater repression. They persuaded the students to go home and “live to fight another day.” But the activists were determined to remain, saying any police brutality would only “expose the murderous basis of an illegitimate regime.” That ominous night went down in history as the Tiananmen massacre.

The author points out that in a democracy, public opinion does matter. Peaceful mass protests do not always change politics right away, and it takes time for politicians to listen to the people and acknowledge their grievances, especially when they want to get elected or win re-elections. Protests against the Vietnam war did not immediately bring the end of the conflict. The Occupy War Street movement in 2011 has so far not narrowed the wealth and income gaps.

Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violent resistance to colonial rule had some effect, because the British Empire relied on elected prime ministers to govern. But he was “so convinced that his non-violent methods were the only way to combat oppressive authority that he urged Europeans to engage in similar peaceful resistance against Hitler.”

It was not a pragmatical advice. It remains to be seen whether China would go down the same path as Nazi Germany. But there is hope that Chinese leaders do care about their country’s reputation and respectability abroad.