Just as pan-democratic legislators were looking into this issue, they found in March an article by Cao Erbao (曹二寶), head of the research department at China’s liaison office in Hong Kong, which was published in the Study Times (學習時報), a publication of the CCP’s Central Party School, in which he discussed Hong Kong’s ruling teams.
Cao said he believed that after Hong Kong’s handover, the governing power was divided between two ruling teams. Cao said one team was made up of the “SAR establishment” and enjoyed a high degree of autonomy, while the other team was made up of central government and mainland cadres in charge of Hong Kong-related affairs.
Cao also said that under the “one country, two systems” formula, the team of cadres from the central government and the mainland represent a form of governing power and that the legal, open operation of such a team is a practical necessity for China as a unitary state in its handling of relations between the central government and Hong Kong. In other words, this second governing power must be legalized and allowed to operate openly to change the illegal and closed manner it has been working in.
Is Cao implying that in addition to the CPPCC and the National People’s Congress, the Chinese Communist Party, which has currently also been operating underground in Hong Kong, needs to be made legal and allowed to openly direct affairs in the SAR? Is Cao’s emphasis on China being a unitary state aimed at undermining the “one country, two systems” model?
The Hong Kong government claims that Cao’s article was published as a “theoretical exploration” during his time as a cadet at the Central Party School. Xi happens to be the principal of that school and as Taiwan becomes increasingly Sinicized, “exploration” seems to be synonymous with “implementation.”
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
RSS