Britain must stand up for Hong Kong
In July 1997, as the Union Flag was lowered over Hong Kong for the last time, Chris Patten, the outgoing governor, declared that the people of the former colony would now run the territory themselves. “That is the promise,” he declared in his farewell speech, “and that is the unshakeable destiny.”
Seventeen years on, the hopes inspired by that pledge have dimmed and Hong Kong’s political future is uncertain. Under the terms of the handover agreed by Britain and China in 1984, Beijing guaranteed to grant Hong Kong a high degree of autonomy and to preserve its capitalist system for 50 years. China also committed to allowing the territory to retain many political freedoms, including the independence of its judiciary. China has until now abided by this agreement. But President Xi Jinping has recently appeared to take a tougher line.
Two issues in particular prey on the nerves of the territory’s inhabitants. The first concerns a disagreement over the way Hong Kong’s chief executive – in effect the mayor of its 7m population – is elected. The office holder is chosen by a mostly pro-Beijing committee of 1,200 people. Hong Kong’s Basic Law, enshrining the 1984 declaration, declares that election by universal suffrage is the “ultimate aim” and Beijing has conceded this will happen in 2017. But, to the fury of pro-democracy activists, the Chinese now insist that they alone will decide who runs for election.
Beijing has also adopted an increasingly belligerent tone towards the territory. China recently issued a “white paper” declaring that Hong Kong was not entitled to “full autonomy.” It has stated that judges should be “patriotic” towards China, raising the threat of a politicised judiciary. When these actions prompted a pro-democracy march two weeks ago, a top Chinese official warned that the People’s Liberation Army could be deployed on to the streets to quell protests.
Given Britain’s status as a signatory of the 1984 Joint Declaration, the UK might have been expected to have a view on these matters. But in recent weeks, David Cameron, the prime minister, has gone out of his way to avoid mentioning the Hong Kong issue at all. He said nothing to Li Keqiang when the Chinese premier was in London in June. When the former colony’s leading pro-democracy activists came to London this week, Mr Cameron declined to meet them, as did foreign secretary William Hague. The obvious conclusion is that Mr Cameron, who was frozen out by China after meeting the Dalai Lama, will do nothing to undermine the bilateral trade relationship with Beijing.
The prime minister’s reticence is unsatisfactory. True, Hong Kong’s Basic Law does not oblige China to accept the full democratic nomination of the chief executive. But Britain’s historic relationship with Hong Kong charges the UK government both with a moral obligation to defend the territory’s democratic rights and a duty to protect the freedoms enshrined in the 1984 treaty.
Britain should remind China of the commitment in Hong Kong’s Basic Law that the territory’s judges remain independent. The UK should spell out to China that it is in Beijing’s own economic interest for Hong Kong to remain a thriving global financial centre, something that can only be sustained by political stability and the rule of law.
Mr Cameron should recall that, in its dealings with world leaders, Beijing respects strength not weakness. Intervention on this issue might temporarily threaten some British commercial interests in China. However, the freedom of the people of Hong Kong is a matter on which the British government under Margaret Thatcher has made a firm treaty commitment.
This is not an issue on which Britain should shrug and look the other way.
-------------------------------------------
Letters in response to this editorial:
Hong Kong’s journey to democracy will be led by China / From The Rev Paul Tong
Too late for Britain to do something / From Mr Kin-ming Liu
http://m.ft.com/cms/s/0/7407f83c-0cd0-11e4-bf1e-00144feabdc0.html
