Learn a lesson from Hong Kong

A few weeks ago, around the time of the sixth anniversary of Hong Kong's handover to China, more than 500,000 individuals hit the street there to protest the enactment of the anti-subversion law based on Article 23 of the Basic Law.

The high-profile protests were the equivalent of a vote of non-confidence cast by the people of Hong Kong against the slogans exalted by Beijing, including "one country, two systems," Hong Kong autonomy and no changing people's lives in Hong Kong for 50 years.

What will happen to the real mainstream popular will of Hong Kong and to its future development has become the center of international attention.

At the same time, Taiwan is about to have another presidential election -- an election vividly characterized as a duel between "one country on each side of Taiwan Strait" and "one China" -- which will obviously have a determinative impact on the future of Taiwan.

The experience of Hong Kong over the past six years will serve as a most important reference for Taiwanese people as they decide on their future.

Last week, the Taiwan Advocates -- a think tank for which former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) serves as chairman, held an international seminar in Taipei on Hong Kong's experiences under ``one country, two systems.'' Scholars and experts from Taiwan, Hong Kong and other countries were invited to take part in the discussions for the two-days seminar. More than 700 people attended the seminar, demonstrating the high level of public attention received by the issue.

The seminar gave insights into what Taiwan can learn from the example set by the implementation of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong and the future reference this example serves for Taiwan, so as to help Taiwan avoid repeating the fate of Hong Kong and taking a path of its own.

This is indeed important at a time when Taiwan society has gradually lost its immunity to the magnetism of China in a backdrop of intensive cross-strait economic and cultural exchanges as well as contacts between the private sectors of the two sides.

The speeches given at the seminar by Lee and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) were the most meaningful. Lee's criticisms of the "one country, two systems" focused on the issues of autonomy and self-identity from the political and economic aspects.

He pointed out that the real key to the economic downturn in Hong Kong was the loss of the Special Administrative Region's (SAR) autonomy and identity. He also indicated that the economic and political development of Hong Kong after the handover revealed the restrictions and the structural issues of the "one country, two systems."

On the economic front, the illusion about maintaining Hong Kong's economic prosperity through the help of the Chinese market is gradually fading. On the political front, China's promise to maintain the status quo for 50 years faces serious skepticism as a result of the SAR government's move to enact the anti-subversion law, Article 23.

Lee said that Taiwan has been able to undergo such large-scale reforms and restructuring on the political and economic fronts and to demonstrate its vitality because Taiwan abandoned unrealistic expectations about China. It began to see itself as the primary subject of policy implementation and learned to draft policies based on the welfare and will of the 23 million people living here.

However, Lee said, the development of Taiwan's self-identity, which remains fragile and awaits further nurturing, is not without risks. Besides facing up to the political and economic gravitational forces from China, Taiwan has to deal with the internal voices echoing in unison with China, as well as the decline in the determination of the Taiwanese to be masters in their own house.

Lee warned about the potential comeback of the conservative forces and the ancien regime. They will, Lee said, seek to take Taiwan back into the shadow of "one China." This is the biggest risk that the people of Taiwan will face in the next seven months.

Chen pointed out during his speech that the expected economic prosperity for Hong Kong after its handover to China did not take place. Instead, the handover accelerated the hollowing out of industries and the large-scale increase in unemployment. In addition, the efforts to enact the anti-subversion law in Hong Kong could be deemed a democratic regression.

All this has created a high degree of skepticism in the international community about China's sincerity when it made promises about "one country, two systems."

Hong Kong legislative councilors Emily Lau (劉慧卿) testified that the drafting of the Basic Law was not done through any democratic process and that the popular will of the people in Hong Kong was not at all respected. The people did not even have the opportunity to cast their votes to confirm their acceptance of the Basic Law as the "mini constitution" of the SAR.

As for the elections in Hong Kong, they are essentially means through which those in power use to protect their own interests. These are even less meaningful than the elections during Hong Kong's colonial days. Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (董建華) was not only indecisive, but is also guilty of favoritism and ignoring the popular will, Lau said.

As a result, the wealth gap in the SAR has widened. Politics has become a game for the privileged class. The rule of law is no longer respected.

Even more importantly, large numbers of people have become unemployed, and the middle-class has become bogged down by debts. As the quality of life declines, society at large has become filled with discontent.

Now that the people of Taiwan have seen the predicament of Hong Kong six years after the handover, how can they have any illusions and expectations about "one country, two systems."

Before 1997, although Hong Kong enjoyed freedom and the rule of law, it lacked democracy. People were not empowered. As a result, "one country, two systems" and China's promise to maintain the status quo didn't really give the people there anything substantive. The "two systems" is gradually being overshadowed by "one country."

In a nutshell, the implementation of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong has disillusioned Taiwan.