The death of Hong Kong?

---

See the Sol Sanders Archive By Sol Sanders SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM

While the media focused on Chicken Little scenarios about Taiwan, its free elections, the Communist authorities have moved in for the kill on Hong KongÕs identity.

What some like to call ChinaÕs parliament, the National PeopleÕs Congress [NPC] ø hangers-on of the Communist Party meeting ceremonially once a year for a week ø has dealt a crippling blow to the concept of ÒOne country, two systemsÓ. It was that slogan Beijing gulled many into thinking the 1997 reversion of the British Crown Colony to China would see a maintenance of its liberties and prosperity, possibly a model for a democratic transformation of the Mainland might make to a regime of law and an unfettered economy at some later date.

Hong KongÕs finest hours in its Colonial period were serendipity brought on by conditions, some intended, some the unintended consequences of events in a very troubled part of the post-World War II period. Not the least was the rule of law the British Empire in its finest hour bestowed on their former captives. It was Hong KongÕs laissez-faire economy [granted propped up by its unique market access to the bungled attempt of the Communists to create an autarky on the Mainland], the sale of government lands into a booming market, and controlled immigration of half-starved refugees from manmade Communist catastrophes. A dedicated civil service, in its latter stages Chinese ethnics, maintained anti-corruption procedures. Hong Kong became not only an island of prosperity but an important model for economic and political progress.

One by one Beijing has been scraping away the guarantees making all this possible. In 1999, the Special Administration RegionÕs lackluster chief executive, Tung Chee-hua, went over Hong Kong courts to get Communist Party approval for his interpretation of immigration regulations, in effect abrogating Article 158 of the Basic Law. It had supposedly set in stone the terms of Hong KongÕs return. It called for arbitration of any contested regulation or decision by the SARÕs own courts.

This constitution also stipulated the governorÕs selection was to be reconsidered by 2007, hinting he should be directly elected ø instead of appointed as he had been under the British. It called for the SARÕs legislature to be elected rather than the majority appointed [as under the British and continuing into the SAR], a question hotly debated in final negotiations. The Thatcher government blinked at the last moment ø and there were ambiguities: Section 7 of the Basic Law Annex says: "If there is a need to amend the method for selecting the Chief Executive for the terms subsequent to the year 2007..." Who is to call the shots if there is a need? Does "subsequent to the year 2007" include 2007, when the chief executiveÕs third term begins? Interpretation of the Basic Law would presumably be up to the Hong Kong courts ø judicial supremacy is increasingly the rule in all the countries, even in Britain where parliamentary supremacy is increasingly abandoned.

But unfortunately the Basic Law grants the Standing Committee of the NPC, ChinaÕs fake legislature, the right to interpret Hong KongÕs constitution. But it says this may not happen until Hong KongÕs Court of Final Appeal has been consulted. Furthermore, Article 158 says that Hong Kong shall decide all issues except foreign affairs, defense, and relations with the central government. Obviously the SARÕs internal elections system is included.

Now Beijing has jumped the gun. In its March week of rubber stamping, the NPC announced direct elections and other problems of relationship between Hong Kong and the national government will be taken under consideration. No one in Hong Kong has much doubt what that means.

ItÕs been PC, of course, to argue seven million Hong Kongers ø most of whom fled ChinaÕs repression or their offspring ø donÕt care about political freedom but are only economic animals. This year, massive repeated demonstrations have disproved that hoary clichŽ. But, of course, with its manufacturing and even services moving to cheaper labor in neighboring Guangdong, the increasing competition of Shanghai [favored by Beijing] as a financial center, and the fallout of the 1997 East Asia Financial Crisis, Hong Kong has had a rough period. Unemployment is at record levels. Government intervention into the shaky stock market as a temporary sop to speculators [many of them BeijingÕs anointed] poses long-term problems for the worldÕs most successful free market experiment. The economy seems a little better these last few months ø in part a reflection of a general revival throughout the region, in no small part brought on by the export boom on the Mainland. With ChinaÕs economy slowing down, that could be temporary.

Hong KongÕs majority Cantonese ø loud, pushy, hardworking, tenacious, entrepreneurial ø and the leavening of sophisticated Shanghai entrepreneurs who fled south with the Communist victory in 1949, are a tough lot. They have defied Chinese imperial oppression in the past. ItÕs far too early to count them out.