For those who frequently visited Hong Kong in the mid-1990s and were present at the “handover” on July 1, 1997, it is sad to watch the continued deterioration of Hong Kong’s freedoms and China’s false “promise of full democracy.”
When the handover took place, innumerable people attended to experience what on the surface was a festive occasion. History was in the making. Who would have ever expected that then-British negotiator Claude MacDonald’s 99-year lease granting the UK unrestricted China trade would expire?
The Manchu empire, which had granted the original lease, had subsequently been overthrown, a warlord period followed and stability would only come in snatches, as China then erupted in civil war. World War II would see Japan take temporary control of Hong Kong. Then, the People’s Republic of China would be created in 1949. Change after change followed.
For many foreigners in Taiwan, including me, the “pre-handover” Hong Kong was a favorite destination for a quick getaway, a change of pace or even a visa run. It was still British and colonial, but with a free-wheeling international flavor that made it appealing.
This is one reason that so many flocked to Hong Kong for the handover. The British nobility were present, banquets and parties took place. Was there anyone who did not want to attend?
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) had promised Hong Kong full democracy within 20 years of the handover: that is, by the year 2017. And it was to last until 2047. Hong Kong would be a Special Administrative Region under the “one country, two systems” formula, and eventually by 2047 it would become a full-fledged part of China.
As with the previous 99-year lease, few ventured to predict what would happen in the coming 50 years. Most movers and shakers present in 1997 would be long gone by the time 2047 rolled around.
Would the age-old economic competition between Hong Kong and Shanghai return? Would old jealousies resurface?
Regardless, while hopes were high for Hong Kong, one other nagging question remained: “Why would it take some 20 years for China to give Hong Kong full democracy? It was already halfway there. Yet no one wanted to put a fly in that ointment.
Unfortunately, the winds quickly changed, and they have not been blissful. New restrictions did not take long in coming. Hong Kong school curriculums were being regulated by 2012. Universal suffrage was never achieved. The governor of Hong Kong had to be vetted by Beijing. Only a designated number of seats in the legislature would be open to election by the people, and that number continued to be reduced. Everything was moving in the opposite direction.
This gave rise to the Umbrella movement protests in 2014, which was harshly put down. By 2019 there was the anti-extradition protest, and Hong Kong’s new National Security Law seemed to give authorities carte blanche to find someone guilty of being “anti-government.” Most recently, the number of seats in the legislature directly elected by the people dropped to about 80 out of 240.
Those who had previously protested and fled were also being pursued, and a bounty of about US$127,701 was put on each one’s head. Similarly, for some time, it had been legal to commemorate those who died at Tiananmen Square in June 1989. However, even that was restricted.
Using the cover of the COVID-19 pandemic dangers, new gatherings were forbidden, and arrests followed. Those commemorating were branded as “de-stabilizing, anti-China forces.” Finally, the new National Security Law that was passed in 2020 provided additional blanket reasons to suppress protests.
Books are expected to be written detailing this deterioration. In hindsight, the beginning could have been sensed back in 1995, when the South China Morning Post did away with Larry Feign’s long-standing cartoon, “The World of Lily Wong” — a cartoon that often satirically panned the CCP, as the handover drew near.
When it comes to promises, some governments honor them, others do not. After 99 years, the UK did live up to its promise and surrendered sovereignty over Hong Kong by July 1, 1997. In contrast, for Hong Kong, the dreaded dystopian CCP rule that was expected in 2047 has already arrived. The time for wishful thinking is past.
This is the lesson for Taiwan. It is time to learn from it. The CCP never intended to keep its word.
Remember that whenever any candidate brings up the so-called “1992 consensus” and says that Taiwan should talk with China.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS