Chapter 9 | Contents | Chapter 11
10.
Hong Kong Faces 1997: Recolonization or Deconolonization
The Kairos for Decolonization
On December 19, 1984, Margaret Thatcher and Zhao Ziyang signed the
Sino-British Joint Declaration regarding the future of Hong Kong on behalf of their
respective governments. This signalled the end of the colonial rule and the beginning of a
new era in Hong Kong. According to the Joint Declaration, Hong Kong will become a Special
Administrative Region of the Peoples' Republic of China on July 1, 1997. Also in this
agreement, China stated that it will not impose its socialist system and way of life on
Hong Kong. Hong Kong will be given a highly autonomous status. With the exception of
defence and foreign affairs, the central government in Beijing will not interfere.
Furthermore, Beijing will not send a government official (or officials)
to govern Hong Kong. Instead, Hong Kong people will be given an opportunity for self-rule.
Both the British Parliament and the Chinese People's Congress ratified the Joint
Declaration in early May 1985. The transition period thus officially began. In theory, it
marked the beginning of the decolonization process. Both sovereign governments as well as
the Hong Kong government should spare no efforts to prepare Hong Kong people for this
radical change.
The Dominant Negative Force
One of the first steps in colonization is to progressively introduce a
fully representative government in Hong Kong. "The earlier, the better," as
argued so eloquently in his letter to this author in early 1987 by the former British
Prime Minister Edward Heath.
Almost seven years have gone by, the legislature, not to mention
the executive branch of the Hong Kong government, is still firmly controlled by the
governor and his handful of senior civil servants. True, Hong Kong finally held the
first-ever Legislative Council Direct Election on September 15, 1991. Sixteen of the
eighteen contested seats were won by people like Martin Lee and Szeto Wah, with impeccable
records of fighting for democracy in Hong Kong for years. But in the subsequent
appointments of the other eighteen seats by the governor, no other similar personalities
were appointed. This means the whole legislature for 1991-1995 (18 elected by universal
franchise, 21 elected by professional groups and trade unions, 18 appointed plus 3 most
senior civil servants) is still tipped heavily towards supporting the government. In order
to counter the United Democrats who hold 14 seats in the Legislative Council, 21
pro-establishment councillors have formed the Cooperative Resource Center (a government
party in substance, though not in name).
In other words, Hong Kong has less than six years before it becomes a
Special Administrative Region of China. There are signs that the government itself is
still in a standstill. It is still a very elitist government - ruled by a few and for a
few.
One of the general marks of the colonial rule is that its government
lacks social commitment. The provision of social services is placed in low priority. In
recent years, we witnessed the privatization of important services such as housing and
hospitals and cut back in welfare expenses. It has been decided also that citizens who use
these services, social welfare included, will have to pay a percentage of their costs.
This is a radical departure from the last century and a half. This implies tremendous
financial burdens on the low income. For example, now you only need to pay HK$34 for a day
of hospitalization. It's widely reported that the New Hospital Authority will require you
to pay HK$100 next year. This will go up to HK$500 by 1995 the latest!
The existing government is less than committed to improve the
livelihood of the masses of people. Inflation has been in double digit for a while. It
reached an all time high of 13.9% this April. Instead of asking the wealthy to shoulder a
fairer share of the problem, the government puts the blame on the rapid increase of wages.
So, its major strategy to combat inflation - the No.1 enemy in Hong Kong nowadays - is to
import a lot of laborers. To meet its ever growing expenditures, instead of a slight
increase of corporate tax or profits tax (at maximum of 16% and 15% respectively), the
government resorts to the increase of indirect taxes year after year. The quality of life
for the low income families in Hong Kong has not shown any marked improvement, especially
when they are compared to their counterparts in Taiwan, Korea or Singapore.
Regarding the safeguarding of human rights, yes, a Bill of Rights was
enacted on June 5, 1991. But the government is implementing it half-heartedly. The
government in effect took the lead to violate it in mid-July when it refused entry to 15
Chinese students holding valid visas who wanted to come for a conference in China at the
invitation of the Federation of Hong Kong Students. Up to this date, the government has
not set up a committee which it promised to promote the bill. Without a Human Rights
Committee, the already watered-down bill will only be a well-decorated piece of
legislation safely tucked away.
Instead of mustering the resources available to build up the people and
the community in Hong Kong, in the remaining six years, the government decided to spend
HK$127 billion (1989 figures) for the Port and Airport Development Strategy (PADS).
In the final analysis, the Hong Kong government in its sundown days
remains quite colonial and archaic, greatly influenced by the wealthy industrialists and
business tycoons who in turn monopolize the important facets of the common people:
housing, transportation, telecommunications, etc. It is this government cum business force
which prevents the process of decolonization in Hong kong.
The Threat of Recolonization
In 1984, China promised to give Hong Kong a great deal. Even in foreign
affairs, which will be the responsibility of the central government, trade matters are
excempted. Hong Kong will be given an independent trade negotiation status. This indeed
was evidenced just a month ago when the Chinese foreign secretary, Qian Qichen and Hong
Kong's Trade & Industry Secretary, Brain Chau, sat side by side in the Asia Pacific
Economic Cooperation Forum held in Seoul. At that time, Chinese top leadership was most
concerned about the territorial integrity of China and Hong Kong's usefulness to China as
a service center. Throughout the 1980s, China earned between 31% to 37% of its foreign
exchange from Hong Kong. Hong Kong was a main provider for China's ambitious modernization
programs. So, China intuited that besides the British flag and garrison, Hong Kong can
continue to remain as it is. At that time too, China had adopted unprecedented open
policies since 1979.
As time moved on, China was to discover the meaning and implications of
having Hong Kong to remain as a "free enterprise region". The eight elder
statesmen were very afraid to lose control on Hong Kong, and eventually on China as well.
(Hong Kong style and way of life are always very contagious to China!) As we witnessed in
subsequent years, China wanted to tighten its control on Hong Kong. This explained why
there was no direct election in the Hong Kong legislature in 1988. (British Foreign
Secretary Geoffrey Howe had promised such in his press conference held in Hong Kong in
April 1984; and so was Hong Kong government's "Policy Paper on the Further
Development of a Representative Government" published in November 1984.) This
explained why the Basic Law promulgated in April 1990 was so undemocratic. It actually
deviated in letter and spirit in many important places from the Joint Declaration. China
wanted to interfere on Hong Kong's internal affairs became even more obvious when it
wanted a say in the building of a new airport. The Airport Agreement signed by John Major
and Li Peng in early September 1991 set a precedent on future mode of operation in Hong
Kong. China's insistence on the constitution of a panel of judges in the Court of Final
Appeal to be set up in 1993 (in place of the function of the Privy Council in London) also
renders the independence of Hong Kong's judiciary after 1997 a hopeless case. All in all,
these are the traces showing that the British rule is on its way out; and, the Beijing
rule is on its way in. It means that British "decolonization" in Hong Kong is on
the halt and "recolonization" by Beijing has already started.
We cannot put all the blame on the Chinese leaders. The British
government is also at fault. Invariably, it kowtowed to the Chinese on its demands
regarding arrangements for Hong Kong's future. It is an open secret that the British
highly treasures the market in China. An amiable relationship with China is thus of
paramount importance.
It has been said that all governments are dishonorable. In a way so are
most of the traders. The British policy on China has been shaped by the influential
business community in both Hong Kong and Britain. Though deep down in their hearts, these
business people do not like and do not trust the communists, yet and at least
superficially, they want to accommodate the wishes of the communist regime in China. In
return, the supreme leader in China, Deng XiaoPing, had this to say, "Investors, put
your hearts at rest," meaning China will take care of their interests if they behave.
The Dilemma of the Hong Kong People
When the Joint Declaration was initialled in September 1984, 81% of
Hong Kong people said they could accept it. (Both governments had told them there was no
other alternative.) 98% of Hong Kong people are Chinese. On the whole, they are patriotic
(as evidenced by the two billion dollars they raised to help the flood victims in Eastern
China in July). They welcome the idea of having Hong Kong to be reuniting with their
motherland.
Conceptually, few people want to be "colonial subjects". The
British government always treated Hong Kong people as second class citizens. Of the 8
million people now living in British colonies, only the 3.25 million born in Hong Kong are
denied full British citizenship. Britain has ruled Hong Kong for 150 years. It has not
undertaken any significant political reforms until this year. When it negotiated a future
for Hong Kong with China, Hong Kong people were not consulted. As a signatory to the
International Covenant on Civic & Political Rights, Britain's policies on Hong Kong
are both morally and constitutionally indefensible.
Hong Kong people were led to believe that the Joint Declaration gave
Hong Kong an "independent government" within China. But soon after the fall of
1985, Hong Kong people became very disillusioned. They came to know China has a very
different interpretation and understanding of the Joint Declaration. China has no
intention to leave Hong Kong alone. It would interfere with Hong Kong affairs at its whim.
The never-ending signals it sent to Hong Kong, in terms of warning and
threats, reminded Hong Kong people once again of the fearful tactics of a totalitarian
state. After all, 45% of Hong Kong people had fled China since 1949. Of course, the
violent crackdown on the democratic movement in June 1989 dealt the most severe blow to
Hong Kong.
For those who have the money and skills, they emigrated - 60,000 in
1989 and 62,000 in 1990. The Hong Kong government predicted that about half-a-million
would be gone by 1996. For the five million who cannot leave, they have been suffering
from a morale failure. The "everybody for himself or herself" attitude is
predominant. Hong Kong is run just like a big corporation. It requires many more
experienced managers and professionals it can produce by its institutions of higher
learning. The brain drain is hurting Hong Kong immensely.
Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore had given the Hong Kong people a bit of
advice, "Do not confront China." Since then, the Chinese authorities, several
most senior British officials, countless business tycoons, and lately even the Hong Kong
governor have all picked up this tone. In a recent survey, half of the journalists said
they would give due consideration on China's feelings in their reporting. This kind of
self-censorship is extremely harmful to Hong Kong as a free international city.
But the fact is, it is certainly legitimate for Hong Kong citizens to
speak up on what they think is best for them - for Hong Kong is their home. The results of
the first-ever direct election in the legislature indicated the Hong Kong people are not
neutral. All Beijing or Hong Kong business community supported candidates lost. The
pro-democracy candidates enjoyed a landslide victory.
Increasingly, more and more community workers and young professionals
have expressed their commitment to Hong Kong and their willingness to fight for a better
Hong Kong. They deserve all the encouragement and support we can muster.
The Emerging Catalytic Forces
In theory, the church, being an uninterested party, could have played a
vital role in the people's struggle to be free. But this has not been the case with the
church in Hong Kong.
Ever since its beginning, because of the historical church-state
relationship in England, the church in Hong Kong (especially the Anglican and the Roman
Catholic church) always enjoys immense privileges and influence. Traditional churches are
a part of the establishment. The score of the most famous church high schools produce
elitists in their thousands who in turn help to uphold the colonial set-up.
Because of the acute need for relief, welfare and later, school places
in the 1950s and 1960s, the mainline churches have seized the opportunity to build up a
hugh service empire. The evangelical churches meanwhile concentrated their efforts in
church growth especially planting new congregations in new towns. In both counts, the
church in Hong Kong rely heavily on financial contributions, earlier on dozens of overseas
missionary societies and later, the local government and wealthy business people. This
dependency syndrome has literally crippled the "prophetic role" of the church in
Hong Kong. Since the late 1980s, there were plenty of cases showing the institutional
church leaders tried to suppress individual critics within the church.
The main enabling force of "decolonization" or
"democratization" came from the social activities in the 1970s. They have
contributed much in promoting Hong Kong as a more open society. Now, the leading figures
have been elected to the Legislative Council. Fourteen of them are members of the United
Democrats of Hong Kong (UDHK) - the first political party in Hong Kong. With their
presence in the Legislative Council, the government will be forced to be more accountable
to the people of Hong Kong especially in the areas of the improvement of the livelihood of
the masses and the safeguarding of their basic human rights. The UDHK will continue to
fight for a fully democratic and representative legislature, and a more responsible
executive.
The UDHK and the many other small political groups will remain an
important force for Hong Kong's political, social as well as economic development. But
with very limited resources, they will confine their work in "advocacy".
Research and education are the two crucial tasks other concerned groups need to take up.
Realizing these urgent and unmet needs, 120 leading Christians in Hong Kong founded Hong
Kong Christian Institute in September 1988. With a high calibre staff of six and a
dedicated string of volunteer theologians, pastors and professionals. HKCI engages in
research, education and publication. We concentrate on the following four areas:
To forge a practical social vision in Hong Kong. "Where there is
no vision, the people perish." Hong Kong lacks overall direction. Most people live by
an utmost self-centered quasi- like philosophy. Education (expanding rapidly, by 1995 Hong
Kong will have 11 years of compulsory education; and the degree students take doubled)
serves no purpose other than to help our youngsters to climb the social ladder. A
sociologist predicted because of the added 1997 impact, Hong Kong society may be
disintegrated before the end of this century.
A democratic culture is essential. This should include at least a
fully democratic and representative government; an open and free social atmosphere as well
as a sense of belonging and responsibility among all citizens. Democratic conscientization
is absolutely essential.
The church should once again act as a social conscience. But first it
needs to refocus its directions and assumes a servanthood as well as prophetic roles
towards the entire society. Its life, like worship and evangelism, needs to be completely
overhauled.
Radical reeducation needs to take place in all congregations.
Christians need to be encouraged especially to think and to put their faith into practice.
The International Support
Strictly in economic terms, Hong Kong is vital to China. China depends
heavily on Hong Kong's technological transfer and capital input. Increasingly, Hong kong
has also become a key player in the economic growth in the Pacific-Rim which in turn is
crucial to Asia.
Many purport that Hong Kong people have pulled off an economic miracle
in just forty years. Now, it is one of the world's most important trading centers. The per
capital income of Hong Kong is one of the highest in Asia, only lower than Japan and
Brunei. Certainly Hong Kong is far from a capitalist paradise, yet in many ways, it can
serve as a model of development for Asia.
Furthermore, there are many countries in Asia which are multi-
cultural, multi-racial and even with groups of people who had traversed in different
paths: economically, politically and socially. But they have to find a way to coexist
preferably on just terms, so that at least the rights and freedom of the minority group or
groups will be safeguarded. Can the China-Hong Kong experiment, "One Country, Two
Systems", be such a model of coexistence?
In sum, the continuing development of Hong Kong is an important
stimulus to China, to Asia and indeed the rest of the world. It therefore deserves all the
support the international community can give.
There are countries like the U.S.A. which are attempting to legislate a
Hong Kong policy in relationship to democracy and human rights. The former French Premier
Jacques Chirac has proposed that the United Nations should monitor on Hong Kong's
development. After all, the Sino-British Joint Declaration was registered at the United
Nations in December 1984. This international treaty will last for fifty years until 2047.
The United Nations, certainly, has a responsibility to oversee the implementation of the
treaty in full. All these suggestions are very helpful.
But in the final analysis, the quest for freedom and democracy lies in
the struggle of the people. This is evidently so with the radical changes in Russia and in
East Europe. Hong Kong people need to be empowered. As Asians, you are emphatic on this
Hong Kong struggle. You can support the Hong Kong people by explicitly expressing your
solidarity with them.
[Note: Presented at the CCA-WSCF joint program on "Youth and
Students, Walk the Path of Obedience" on December 2, 1991 and at the CCA-IA
consultation on "Religious Movements and the State in the New World Order" on
December 4, 1991, both held in Hong Kong.]
Chapter 9 | Contents |
Chapter 11
Home | DAGA Press |