Hong Kong NGO defends ecotourism research after ‘soft resistance' accusation from Beijing-backed paper
The paper ran a full-page report on Tuesday, accusing the NGO of using 'pseudo-science' to challenge the bottom line of national security.
The report also named Greenpeace Hong Kong, which co-hosted a seminar event on ecotourism with Liber and other environmental groups online last month after a local university cancelled their venue booking.
According to the Wen Wei Po report, Liber 'has been using pseudo-science as 'camouflage' to spread untruthful comments to vilify the government.'
Brian Wong, a researcher at Liber, said he was confident that the think tank's research was well-founded.
'Our last report was solid, with methodologies, data, and case studies,' Wong told HKFP on Tuesday, adding that the NGO would continue its work.
'If they think what we're putting out is pseudoscience, more information is needed to substantiate their claim,' he said.
Addressing the 'soft resistance' accusation, Wong said: 'We are just conducting research and making suggestions for the benefit of Hong Kong's people and environment.'
'Done well'
According to Wen Wei Po, Liber's research is based on the 'false premise' that development will always have environmental impacts.
But Wong maintained that Liber was not opposed to the government's ecotourism initiatives.
'We just want it to be done well. There are always details from which we can derive insights by conducting research,' he said. 'The government has itself said that recommendations are welcomed as long as they are based on fact.'
Last month, Liber and Greenpeace published a joint report urging the authorities to set a clear framework for eco-tourism development after discovering that existing arrangements may grant developers more flexibility to build private housing on ecologically sensitive land.
In early July, 10 green groups, including Greenpeace, separately called on the authorities to align ecotourism policies with international standards. They warned that such eco-projects would otherwise endanger local communities and ecosystems if they skewed in favour of property developers' interests.
On both occasions, the NGOs did not state that they opposed the plan or called for it to be shelved.
Wong also said that the Wen Wei Po report contained inaccuracies.
Contrary to the report's claims, he said Liber did not attend the press conference held by the Society for Protection of the Harbour, an environmental NGO, which the Development Bureau accused of making 'misleading remarks' about a legislative amendment streamlining approval for harbour reclamation works.
Liber also did not draft a template for representation letters regarding the San Tin Technopole, a planned tech park development in the New Territories that has been green-lit despite a 90 per cent opposition rate in a consultation exercise.
The Wen Wei Po report also said that one of Liber's events, which one of the paper's reporters attended without revealing their identity, had the makings of an 'underground assembly,' quoting a host's remark that 'what's said here, stays here.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
an hour ago
- South China Morning Post
Labubu's soft power, Trump eyes autumn China trip: 7 US-China relations reads
We have selected seven of the most interesting and important news stories covering US-China relations from the past few weeks. If you would like to see more of our reporting, please consider subscribing 1. Trump eyes autumn China trip, but September visit off the table: sources Photo: AFP US President Donald Trump is keen to visit China but a September visit is not happening, according to sources, who said Beijing and Washington were working to secure a trip in October or November. Hurdles remain, but high-level officials 'share a consensus', sources familiar with the matter told the South China Morning Post. Read the full story here 2. Trump says Beijing making 'big steps' in controlling fentanyl Photo: AP US President Donald Trump said in July that Beijing is 'making big steps' in efforts to control the flow of fentanyl, an issue that the American leader has used to justify tariffs that he has slapped on imports from China. 'I think China has been helping out,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. Read the full story here 3. Has Apple been trapped by China? Not so fast, analysts say Photo: Shutterstock A new book contending that Apple went too far in consolidating its operations in China is prompting debate among analysts of the country – some of whom say the company may have had no realistic alternatives. 'If they were to have it to do over again, would they have done anything differently?' asked Meg Rithmire, a Harvard Business School professor.
HKFP
2 hours ago
- HKFP
Hong Kong man arrested for allegedly threatening media outlets to publish ‘seditious' report
Hong Kong's national security police have arrested a man for allegedly threatening multiple media outlets to publish a report promoting a fundraising website for wanted activists. A 43-year-old man surnamed Tse was arrested in Fanling on Thursday in connection with intimidating letters sent in June to several local media organisations, police said at a press conference on Friday. According to Superintendent Chow Hok-yin, the letters demanded that media outlets publish a report about a website claiming to sell products to raise money for overseas activists wanted by Hong Kong authorities. The website also claimed that proceeds would be used to support activities calling for foreign sanctions on Hong Kong officials and judges. The letters warned that failure to publish the report could result in arson attacks on the media outlets' offices. As the letters and the report allegedly contained elements endangering national security, the case was taken over by the police's national security department, Chow said. Police said the website was hosted on an overseas server, and Tse is suspected to be its creator. Officers found image and text files used to create the website on Tse's computer, along with a document listing the names and office addresses of various local media outlets. Tse was arrested under the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance – commonly known as Article 23 – for alleged 'seditious intention.' He also faces charges of suspected criminal intimidation. Chow declined to name the media organisations involved. Sedition is not covered by the Beijing-imposed national security law, which targets secession, subversion, collusion with foreign forces, and terrorism and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. It was previously criminalised under the colonial-era Crimes Ordinance, with a maximum penalty of two years in prison. That law was repealed in March 2024, when Hong Kong enacted its homegrown security legislation, which raised the penalty for sedition to up to seven years in prison. Separate from the 2020 Beijing-enacted security law, the homegrown Safeguarding National Security Ordinance targets treason, insurrection, sabotage, external interference, sedition, theft of state secrets and espionage. It allows for pre-charge detention of up to 16 days, and suspects' access to lawyers may be restricted, with penalties involving up to life in prison. Article 23 was shelved in 2003 amid mass protests, remaining taboo for years. But, on March 23, 2024, it was enacted having been fast-tracked and unanimously approved at the city's opposition-free legislature. The law has been criticised by rights NGOs, Western states and the UN as vague, broad and 'regressive.' Authorities, however, cited perceived foreign interference and a constitutional duty to 'close loopholes' after the 2019 protests and unrest.
AllAfrica
6 hours ago
- AllAfrica
Why Trump can't stop the Ukraine and Gaza wars
In yet another twist in his unpredictable decision-making, US President Donald Trump has dramatically shortened his original 50-day ultimatum to Vladimir Putin to call a ceasefire in Ukraine to a mere ten days. It's an unmistakable sign of Trump's frustration with the Russian leader, whom he now appears to view as the main obstacle to ending the war. Progress has been similarly limited on another of Trump's flagship foreign policy projects: ending the war in Gaza. As a humanitarian catastrophe engulfs the territory, Trump and some of his MAGA base are finally challenging Israel's denials that, after almost two years of war, many Gazans now face a real risk of starvation. In neither case have his efforts to mediate and bring an end to the violence borne any fruit. But not all of Trump's efforts to stop violence in conflicts elsewhere in the world have been similarly futile. The administration brokered a ceasefire between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which the two countries' foreign ministers signed in Washington on June 27. The US president has also claimed to be behind the ceasefire between India and Pakistan in May after the two sides had engaged in several days of fierce combat following a terror attack in Indian-administered Kashmir by a Pakistan-backed rebel group. And, drawing a clear parallel between this conflict and the border clashes between Cambodia and Thailand in July, Trump announced he had pushed both countries' leaders to negotiate a ceasefire. All of these ceasefires, so far, have held. By contrast, the ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, to which Trump contributed in January, even before he was inaugurated for his second term, broke down in March and fighting has escalated ever since. A short-lived ceasefire in Ukraine in April was barely worth its name given the countless violations. Three factors can explain Trump's mixed record of peacemaking to date. First, the US president is more likely to succeed in stopping the fighting where he has leverage and is willing to use it to force foreign leaders to bend to his will. For example, Trump was very clear that there would be no trade negotiations with Thailand or Cambodia 'until such time as the fighting STOPS.' The crucial difference, so far, with the situation in the war against Ukraine is that Trump has, and has used, similar leverage only with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky. This led to a US-Ukraine agreement on a 30-day ceasefire proposal just two weeks after the now-notorious row between Trump and Zelensky in the Oval Office. The mere threat of sanctions against Russia, by contrast, has done little to persuade Putin to accept whatever deal might Trump offer him. Trump's threats – which he has never followed through on – did not work in January or May. The Kremlin's initial reactions to the latest ultimatum from the White House do not indicate a change in Putin's attitude. A second factor that may explain why Trump has had peacemaking success in some cases but not others is the level of complexity of US interests involved. When it comes to US relations with Russia and Israel, there is a lot more at stake for Trump. The US president still appears keen to strike a grand bargain with Russia and China under which Washington, Beijing and Moscow would agree to recognize, and not interfere in, their respective spheres of influence. This could explain his hesitation so far to follow through on his threats to Putin. Similarly, US interests in the Middle East – whether it's over Iran's nuclear program or relations with America's Gulf allies – have put strains on the alliance with Israel. Trump also needs to weigh carefully the impact of any move against, or in support of, Israel on his domestic support base. In the deal Trump brokered between Rwanda and the DRC, the issues at stake were much simpler: access for US investors to the mineral riches of the eastern DRC. Just days into his second term, Trump acknowledged that the conflict was a 'very serious problem.' Congo's president, Felix Tshisekedi, responded by offering the US access to minerals in exchange for pushing Rwanda to a deal to end the invasion and stop supporting proxy forces in the DRC. This leads to the third factor that has enabled Trump's peace-making success so far: simpler solutions are easier to achieve. Thailand and Cambodia and India and Pakistan can go back to the situation before their recent fighting. That does not resolve any of the underlying issues in their conflicts, but returns their relations to some form of non-violent stability. It is ultimately also in the interests of the conflict parties. They have had a chance to make their violent statements and reinforce what they will and won't tolerate from the other side. The required investment by an external mediator to end battles that have achieved what the warring sides want anyway – to avoid further escalation – is consequently quite limited. Getting to any kind of stability in Ukraine or the Middle East, by contrast, requires prolonged engagement and attention to detail. These conflicts are at a stage in which a return to how things were before is not in the interests of the parties or their external backers. Nudging warring parties along on the path to agreement under such conditions requires a well-designed process, which is absent in Ukraine and failing in Gaza. Thanks to funding and personnel cuts, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is now required to perform multiple roles. Trump relies on personal envoys with at best limited foreign policy expertise, while insisting he makes all the decisions. This ultimately suggests that the White House simply may not have the bandwidth for the level of engagement that would be necessary to get to a deal in Ukraine and the Middle East. This is a self-inflicted opportunity lost, not only for the United States but also for the long-suffering people of Ukraine and the Middle East. Stefan Wolff is professor of international security, University of Birmingham This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
