SNA (London) — As politicians in Beijing gathered for the annual meeting of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, the skies outside darkened, providing grim foreshadowing of events that could alter the fate of Hong Kong forever. Hours later, international news outlets were announcing “the end of Hong Kong.”

Beijing had introduced a draft bill of a national security law which aimed to ban treason, secession, sedition, subversion, foreign interference and terrorism in Hong Kong. In real terms, it would mean that the right to free speech, the ability to protest on the streets, to act in self-defense, to wave foreign flags at demonstrations, or for demonstrators to collaborate with foreign political organizations, would all become illegal.

Hong Kong barrister Wilson Leung stated, “it means activists will be arrested, rounded up, perhaps even by mainland security agents and detained according to mainland norms.”

The idea of a national security law is not new. Indeed, it is required in Hong Kong’s Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution, but efforts to implement it in 2003 were met with hundreds of thousands of Hongkongers heading onto the streets, an international backlash, and the eventual shelving of the law.

But Beijing has clearly become tired of having to deal with its proxy Carrie Lam and her weak Hong Kong government, and will likely attempt to force it upon Hong Kong unilaterally.

Even though Article 18 of the Basic Law says that the mainland can only directly apply laws relating to defense and foreign affairs, Article 158 notes that the “power of interpretation of this Law shall be vested in the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress.” Hence Beijing will likely be able to force it through.

A Beijing source told the South China Morning Post that it will be “introduced in Hong Kong through promulgation, without the need for local legislation.” Not unexpectedly, Carrie Lam told news reporters that she and her government will “fully cooperate” with Beijing. Realistically, Lam doesn’t have much of a choice. But her claims that it will not have any bearing on the “legitimate rights and freedoms” of Hongkongers is almost certainly a smokescreen.

The predominant reaction of the pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong was one of sadness, and for some, resignation. Beijing has long been eroding the “One Country, Two Systems” principle; most notably by attempting to chill the political climate by threatening activists with extradition, which sparked last year’s protest movement, and also by relentlessly promoting Mandarin as an official language instead of Hongkongers’ native Cantonese. Beijing has spirited away several Hongkongers for criticizing the Chinese Communist Party, and has conspired to strip pro-independence lawmakers of their seats.

Tanya Chan, a prominent democrat in Hong Kong politics recent said she is “heartbroken.” Wilfred Chan (no relation to Tanya) wrote in The Nation that “Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement has been defined by one heartbreak after another.”

Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index fell by more than 5% last Friday, and terrified Hong Kong netizens installed VPNs at record rates, deleting social media accounts and scrubbing them of anti-Communist Party content in attempts of self-preservation.

During the coronavirus pandemic, Beijing has slowly been chipping away at the heart and soul of Hong Kong, waiting until the grand reveal of their plan to destroy “One Country, Two Systems” altogether. Earlier in May, pro-democracy lawmakers were forced out of the Legislative Council over a national anthem bill. Hundreds of riot police descended upon the area, hours before the reading, undertaking stop-and-searches of bystanders.

Even with “One Country, Two Systems” still intact, albeit barely, Hongkongers noted online that it already feels like a police state. In April, Beijing arrested many pro-democracy figures on charges connected to protests. Hong Kong police have reverted to their previous levels of violence.

While the world is largely focused on tackling the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, it doesn’t appear that they’ve given up on Hong Kong quite yet. US House of Representatives Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi called it “deeply alarming.” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the national security law would be a “death knell” for Hong Kong. A joint statement from the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada expressed deep concern, and a cross-party international coalition of 284 parliamentarians, led by former Hong Kong Governor Chris Patten, issued a statement expressing “grave concerns,” saying Beijing’s behavior could not “be tolerated.”

Many Hongkongers vow that they will continue to resist have felt over the past few days has now manifested in a hard resolve to resist as much as they possibly can. Activist Nathan Law wrote in a Facebook post, “Hongkongers are never warlike… but if you want war, here comes the war.” Glacier Kwong, the Hong Kong political activist who played an important role in the 2014 Umbrella Movement and previously campaigned alongside Joshua Wong, told the Shingetsu News Agency that “there is in no way we ought to willingly give up our freedom. It is the difference between being dragged into the arena to face a battle to the death and walking into the arena with your head held high.”

Many have already headed out into the arena of protest, the streets of Hong Kong, to make their defiance heard. This included small-scale protests in immediate reaction to the announcement, to a demonstration involving thousands which turned violent on both sides, with police firing tear gas and turning water cannons on journalists, and a minority of demonstrators smashing the windows of buildings belonging to pro-Beijing businesses.

Wilfred Chan admitted in his editorial that despite the “infinite heartbreak” he feels for loving Hong Kong, his home, and while “something profound has been lost,” Hong Kong demonstrators will continue to resist until the very end.

For breaking news, follow on Twitter @ShingetsuNews