Sat, Mar 05, 2005 page8

• Editorial: Hong Kong still under colonial rule

  • • 
    • 
    • 

  There have been reports that Tung Chee-hwa (董建華), chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, will resign. It is hard to believe that this is his own wish and not a decision by the leadership in Beijing. Beijing orchestrated Tung's initial appointment, the extension to that appointment and now his resignation, leaving the people of Hong Kong no say in the matter. This is the tragedy of "democracy" in Hong Kong.

  Tung's first term lasted five years. His policy implementation was ineffective, giving him little public support, and the Hong Kong economy was in the doldrums. Despite this, he was elected -- if that is what it can be called -- to serve a second term.

  Apart from vigorous support from former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民), there were no persuasive reasons for the public to want a second term for Tung. When Jiang resigned from his party, government and military posts, Tung's platform also crumbled, transforming the situation. At last year's commemoration of the return of Macau to China, Chinese leaders had high praise for Macau's Chief Executive Edmund Ho (何厚鏵), but expressed clear dissatisfaction with Tung, telling him bluntly that problems must be correctly analyzed and properly handled.

  According to Deng Xiaoping's (鄧小平) "one country, two systems" promise, Hong Kong would enjoy a large degree of autonomy, and people would be able to go on gambling on horses, because nothing would change for 50 years. But after Hong Kong's sovereignty shifted to China, the territory's capital, talent and economy have been absorbed, the judicial system and freedom have been distorted and legislation based on Article 23 of the Basic Law brought hundreds of thousands of angry people to the streets in protest. The people of Hong Kong have nominal political power, but no say in who becomes chief executive. The question of whether Tung should stay on reveals how Hong Kong's autonomy is defined by Beijing. The territory's "democracy," directed from the outside, differs little from British colonial rule.

  Although the CCP has gradually understood what a market economy is, its one-party autocracy remains unchanged, and the party makes all decisions for the Chinese people. As China continues with its economic experiment, perhaps the contradictions of such an autocratic system are not serious enough to cause significant conflict in its young and booming market economy. However, in highly capitalist Hong Kong, such totalitarian factors are out of tune with its market economy, which enjoys a great deal of freedom. This is also why, no matter how hard Tung tried, his performance was still unable to satisfy the people of Hong Kong. The territory's people, even though they never enjoyed the sweet taste of democracy during the days of colonial rule, are now discontent with the fake "one country, two systems." So how could the people of Taiwan, who enjoy a high degree of democracy and autonomy, possibly accept this policy?

  The replacement of Tung before the end of his legal term could mean that Beijing has lost faith in the chief executive's ability to govern the territory. Beijing is therefore pushing him out before the situation worsens. Nevertheless, whether Tung's successor is Chief Secretary for Administration Donald Tsang (曾蔭權) or someone else, that person will also be firmly in Beijing's pocket. In the coming "election," whose unfair rules have been set by China, Hong Kongers will be deprived of the right to pick a chief executive according to their own will. Therefore, though the chief executive's skin color may have changed from white to yellow -- and his nationality, from British to Chinese -- Hong Kong is still subject to colonial rule.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    HSR to encircle Taiwan

  • 2

    MOFA welcomes Rubio’s Taiwan remarks

  • 3

    China seeks to divide Okinawa: report

  • 4

    Open letter to Speaker Han Kuo-yu

  • 5

    EDITORIAL: Taiwan’s constitutional moment