Some in H.K. doubt China’s promises

Press, 23 April 1984, Page 6

Some in H.K. doubt China’s promises

NZPA-AP Hong Kong The statement by the British Foreign Secretary, Sir Geoffrey Howe , that Britain would relinquish sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997 has drawn mixed reaction in the colony. Some said that his statement on Friday had removed some of the secrecy surrounding the ChineseBritish talks that started in Peking 19 months ago. Others expressed doubt about whether China would keep its promise of allowing Hong Kong to maintain its present capitalistic system for 50 years after the Chinese take-over.

Sir Geoffrey, who arrived on Wednesday from the Chinese capital, Peking, after discussing the colony’s future with top Chinese leaders, including Deng Xiaoping, told a news conference that his Government bought an agreement

with China that would allow Hong Kong to have “a high degree of autonomy under Chinese sovereignty that would preserve the way of life in Hong Kong, together with essentials of the present system.”

He also said that both governments realised the importance of Hong Kong’s maintaining its international trade links. “I don’t think Sir Geoffrey made a gloomy statement and it should not come as a shock to Hong Kong people,” said Allen Lee, an unofficial member of the Legislative Coucil. The council, Hong Kong’s law-making body, has been one of the most vocal groups in the colony in demanding that Britain bring the contents of the negotiations into the open. Mr Lee described Sir Geoffrey’s statements “a

confirmation of what Chinese leaders have been saying for a long time.” A councillor, Stephen Cheong, said that the Howe pledge that the present lifestyle would be maintained could be “a start towards reviving confidence in Hong Kong.” Yu Pun-hoi, a spokesman for the Hong Kong observers, a pressure group consisting of intellectuals and professionals, said that Sir Geoffrey had removed “a great deal of uncertainty,” but expressed disappointment that the existing system would be continued for only 50 years after 1997. “Was he implying that after 50 years, Hong Kong would revert to a totalitarian system?” Mr Yu said. “It is all very well to say the present system would be maintained after the Chinese take-over but what kind of guarantee can the

Chinese and British give us? With China’s track record I wouldn’t be surprised if the Communists fail to keep their promise,” said William Soo, a teacher. Hong Kong’s newspapers splashed the Howe statemeg on front pages and carted articles on the his-

tory of the colony. In one editorial the independent, English-language newspaper, “Hong Kong Standard,” said: “The death-knell of direct British colonial rule of Hong Kong has been rung, and the resonance of the words will echo for a long time, for the future is clear. Hong Kong is going the way it has more or less gone for a decade. The faint-hearted may still be jittery, but the stoic majority are resigning to selfgovernment as promised by China M

Commenting on China’s pledge that it would allow Hong Kong to maintain its capitalistic system for 50 years after 1997, the conservative, English-language “South China Morning Post” said: “Many people would surely prefer an agreement lasting longer than 50vears, but even if we can ®hieve one that sticks W that

length of time, we shall be doing well ... any agreement is only as good as the intentions of those signing it. Will China honour it faithfully until 2050 — 63 years hence? First let us ask who will be in power in Peking during that time. That is the reality we have to live with.”

Meanwhile Hong Kong remained calm without any signs of anxiety after the statement since most people had taken it for granted that a Chinese take-over would be inevitable.

“What the Foreign Secretary said is not new to us. we don’t need him to tell what would happen in 1997,” said Fung Lai-yu, wife of an industrialist. Her family had no plans to leave.

“We are all Chinese and we belong here,” she said. • A Chinese leader said yesterday that Nationalist personnel and organisations

from Taiwan stationed in Hong Kong would enjoy the same civil rights as other groups after China took back the colony.

The official Xinhua News Agency also quoted a State councillor, Ji Pengfei, as telling a delegation of Hong Kong community leaders that the colony’s relations with Taiwan would remain unchanged after Britain’s 99-year lease on most of the territory ran out in 1997. “When the Chinese Government resumes the exercise of China’s sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997, Kuomintang (Nationalist) personnel and organisations from Taiwan stationed in Hong Kong will enjoy the same rights as other residents and organisations there.

“Their legitimate rights and interests will be protected by law, provided they observe the local laws,” Mr

Ji said. “Relations between Hong Kong and Taiwan, including sea and air transportation, economic and cultural ties, and personnel exchanges will not be affected,” he said.

Mr Ji heads an office in the Chinese Government dealing with the affairs of Hong Kong and the Portuguese-administered territory of Macao. Foreign analysts said that they thought this was the first time that China had explicitly guaranteed the presence of the Nationalists, who are densely concentrated in some parts of the territory, hold considerable amounts of property, and have influence over various newspapers.

Taiwan has remained in the hands of the Nationalists after they lost a bitter civihjvar on the