HK Observer | Glass half full

Robert Carroll

The controversial messages on Saturday from Beijing’s liaison office director, Zhang Xiaoming, citing the central government’s view on ‘one country two systems’ was on the one hand unsurprising: we all know that Beijing has the upper hand in terms of where ultimate authority lies regarding our relationship with the central government. However that was not how Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong – as was promised in the 1990s – is playing out.
Looking at the full text published yesterday there are distinctly positive declarations. First of all the issue of judicial independence is tackled head on with unequivocal assurances that that independence is guaranteed. Secondly the final words are also reassuring: “Although this is a controversial topic and my viewpoints might well spark controversy, I would like to take this opportunity to express my position; there is no need to avoid controversies that arise in promoting the Basic Law.”
Surely that means that the Central government is declaring that dialogue and disagreement is welcome. Hardly the stance of rigid authoritarians who expect yes men only to arrive at meetings between the SAR and the mainland authorities.
In another part of the text, the problems of our executive-led government are admitted. This unique arrangement of ‘one country two systems’, which it is, is still in an early stage of development and that adjustments must be made. That means recognition that the present system is not functioning as it should and must be changed. This surely opens the doors for the next round of negotiations and consultations for the next round of political reform.
Given that there was the surprising reaching out to the Democrat party by the Chinese government resulting in an opportunity to exchange views, doesn’t that mean that there is the intention to follow through with that?
There is again talk of Deng Xiaoping’s intention and declarations on the subject of Hong Kong’s special situation after the return to Chinese sovereignty in terms of separation of powers and checks and balances. Leaving that aside, let’s remember what else he said about the fifty year duration of the territory as a special autonomous region of China. I raise the name of Deng Xiaoping because if we are to be reminded once again, the proponent of the one country two systems declarations’ on the city are guiding principles. We should remember too that he also said that if the system worked there was no reason to change it after 2047 when our fifty years is up.
Hong Kong citizens should also be aware that while the central government reminds us of the limitations of our autonomy we should recognize the great prize, for all its faults, that it is. As Professor Danny Gittings of the University of Hong Kong points out in his comparisons of other autonomous regions around the world, Hong Kong is the most autonomous of all with more liberties that any other.
It comes down to the people of Hong Kong then to take the olive branches to use those invitations for dialogue to work out, together with Beijing, the final steps to democratic reform. It is no good to take the cynical view that there will be no movement on the other side. There has been plenty in arriving at the establishment of the SAR. As we have been promised universal suffrage for both the chief executive and for the legislative assembly, there is still room to cut a deal. The path however is blocked by mutual mistrust. That’s what needs to be worked on.