From: "Micky Wong" <micky_wong@vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Who Believes in One-Country Two-Systems?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 00:56:57 GMT

Inside the January 1993 edition of the Ming Pao Monthly, there are
some interesting articles about the current relationship between
China and HongKong, and the discussions about HongKong's political
system.

The contributors of these articles include Governor of Hong Kong Chris
Patten ,the #2 boss of Hong Kong's XinHua News Agency and many other
leaders or spokespersons for different segments of HongKong's society.

Chris Patten's article is the only one with it's original English
text, and this made it very easy for me to copy Patten's article here
to provide interested netters, an opportunity to take a look at the
views from the person who is at the center of the recent PRC-HongKong
dispute.

I hope there will be other netters who will be able and willing
(How about those "patiotic" CCP's defenders on the net) to translate
the article written by XinHua's #2 man into English and provide us
the views of the otherside of the argument.

The following is the article published on Ming Pao monthly, copied
without permission.

Who Believes in One-Country Two-Systems?

      by   Christopher Patten

   The relationship between any two sovereign states is not something
which stands in isolation; something which stands apart from the day
to day business of international affairs.  It is quite simply the sum
total of all the contacts and issues which the two states have to manage.
In the case of Britain and China, the relationship is, quite rightly,
dominated by one single issue - Hong Kong.

   The Joint Declaration is a major landmark in this relationship.
More importantly, it is a solemn agreement between Britain and China to
preserve Hong Kong's way of life for 50 years beyond 1997. The two
central concepts are "one-country-two-system" and "Hong Kong people
ruling Hong Kong".  They need to be turned into reality.  Hong Kong's
system is different from China's and that is the way it must remain
until at least 2047.

   I want to make this vital point absolutely clear. I am committed, as
is the British Government, to preserving Hong Kong's separate way of
life beyond 1997 and this means preserving it's separate systems of
government, and, of course, its freedoms.  There is no contradiction
between this and preserving Hong Kong's prosperity and stability.
The two are mutually reinforcing.

   I have been accused of damaging the relationship between Britain --
Hong Kong -- and China.  But it is an accusation which does not gain
in truth or substance simply because it is repeated every day in some
sections of our press. The facts are very simple. My proposals are in
line with both the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law. They would
result in arrangements for the 1995 elections which are fair and open.
And they do seem to command widespread support from the people of
Hong Kong.

  I think it(is) clear beyond a reasonable doubt that given a choice the
people of Hong Kong do want a greater say in deciding their own future.
But it is also clear that a lack of trust in the good sense and sound
judgement of the people of Hong Kong has led some of my critics to
overreact to the modest proposals that have been put forward.

   Chinese officials have demanded that I withdraw my proposals for the
1995 elections. They are modest proposals, but if others disagree with
them I hope they will suggest alternatives. My criteria are that the
arrangements for 1995 should be fair, open and accep'able to the people
of Hong Kong. It is a matter of both fact and principle that LegCo will
decide what the arrangements should be:

     - fact because legislation has to be enacted by LegCo; and
     - principle because the British Government believes that LegCo has
       the duty to decide whether I have correctly judged the point of
       balance in the community.

   I stand ready at any time to discuss these proposals with Chinese
officials, without preconditions.  I will explain that China has nothing
to fear from and everything to gain from a Hong Kong which respects the
mainland's separate system while developing its own to suit its own
conditions, in accordance with the Joint Declaration.  Indeed, the
debate about the 1995 elections is a vital element in turning Deng Xiao
Ping's concept of "one-country-two-systems" into a working reality.
That is what Britain and China have pledged to do and that is what will
determine the quality of our relationship.  We must work together to
achieve our objectives for the benefit of Hong Kong now and for the
future.

   There is one simple question to ask at the end of this debate.  Who
believes in one-country-two-systems?  I do;  but do the critics?
*************************
End of Patten's article.

Reply-To: Micky_Wong@vnet.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Canada Laboratory
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
X-X-From: Micky_Wong@vnet.ibm.com
X-Spool-Tags: Micky_Wong@vnet.ibm.com
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan