'Politics is the art of the possible," said Germany's "Iron Chancellor" Otto von Bismarck, commenting on the intricacies of contemporary European politics in August 1867. Bismarck was the architect of the German Empire of the late 19th century and shaped modern Europe. Not only was he a military strategist and diplomat, he also won the support of the new working class at home in Germany by providing welfare support.

The complexities of the Kingdom of Prussia and the competing separatist and imperial ambitions of the various European players resemble and even, arguably, greatly exceed the convoluted politics of the present-day world. When competing interests and ideologies threaten to tear our world apart, the statesmen and stateswomen of 2015 would do well to remember Bismarck's practical advice.

Last week has seen politics and debates in Hong Kong reach new and intense heights. Deep divisions in the community and the Legislative Council (LegCo) have been revealed and there seem to be few means of reconciliation. As all readers know, the decision on the means of electing the next Chief Executive in 2017 will shape the future of the city and its relations with the mainland. This is not a new debate but has been building over months and years and I have followed it with great interest.

I have read that some LegCo members have said that the government proposal should be accepted because it reflects the will of the central government in Beijing. Others have said that the proposal is not "real" democracy and therefore should be rejected. That view in turn has been met by counter comments that no further democratic development would take place if this opportunity were to be passed by. This leads me to wonder hypothetically where then would this leave the opposition since there are no obvious future rallying points?

Hong Kong has been blessed with the inheritance of rich cultural traditions from both the East and West. These include administrative and governmental systems carried over from 150 years of colonial rule and established by the Basic Law. The British parliamentary system differs significantly from that pertaining to Hong Kong but it has also undoubtedly influenced events and popular thinking there. Speaking as someone who values that system highly, I also admit it has faults. Too often it encourages self-defeating oppositional politics. Leaders of opposition parties sometimes turn parliamentary democracy into a sport, indulging in digs and quips at the other party, knowing that they do not have to bear the responsibility of putting policies into practice. It is only when and if they win elections, and when they have to form a government, that they find Bismarck to have spoken truly. Then they find that they have to satisfy the demands of the electorate and win their trust, while still putting into effect those reforms that are needed for future prosperity.

Now I see some "pan-democrats" in Hong Kong taking on the aspect of such Western opposition parties and espousing an idealism that might hardly be translated into reality even if they were able to form a Western-type government.

Around the English-speaking world, last week marked the 800th anniversary of the signing of the great charter known as the Magna Carta, when a group of English barons won concessions from King John that paved the way to modern democracy. The well-known lawyer and judge, Baron Tom Denning, described the Magna Carta of 1215 as "the greatest constitutional document of all times - the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot".

I am sorry to say, however, that the band of feudal lords who forced the King to sign was motivated not by altruism but by self-interest. They simply masked their partiality by formulating their demands in high-sounding terms that implied they were speaking on behalf of all citizens. And this did work. So, by putting aside their own immediate benefits, they secured the long-term rights of all.

In the event, the LegCo rejected the reform package as expected. All bets are off now as to when and if the SAR government will revisit this issue.

But the legislators should now subordinate their narrow party interests and strive for the betterment of Hong Kong in dealing with the many social and economic issues. These were relegated to the back burner in the two sides' tedious struggle over universal suffrage. There are many pressing issues awaiting compromises to carry the somewhat stagnating Hong Kong community forward.

As Bismarck noted, "A statesman cannot create anything himself. He must wait and listen until he hears the steps of God sounding through events; then leap up and grasp the hem of his garment." It is my hope that the statesmen and stateswomen of Hong Kong will be so responsive.

The author is a visiting professor at the School of Languages and Cultures, University of Sydney. She was previously a senior officer in the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Her last posting was as consul-general in Hong Kong and Macao.

(HK Edition 06/22/2015 page8)