From: cw@orion.uucp (C.W. Chung)
Subject: Re: What do you think of Chris Patten
Organization: Objectivity Inc.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 23:11:38 GMT

In article <Bzr50s.F8u@world.std.com> afung@world.std.com (Albert K Fung) writes:
>In article <1992Dec23.194747.9794@objy.com> cw@orion.uucp (C.W. Chung) writes:

>That's the price she paid for the TAM saga - all international contracts 
>became null and void. You just don't do these things and still be a member of
>the international community! What Gov. Patten should have done is to declare
>it invalid and start all over again rather than circling around the fringes.
>After all, some of the assumptions and premises behind the BL were made
>before the 6/4 episode. If she doesn't even realize that, then we've a big
>problem after 1997 .......

I think if British initiates a proposal similar to Patten's (or even strongher)
right after TAM, the whole HK would be very much united behind the proposal.  
Now while the major western powers are busy in 'normalization' their 
relationship with China, the proposal comes just three years too late.
One can only hypothesize: what happen if the British was pushing democracy
in stead of the new airport three years ago?

>Sounds like HK does have a trump card after all. Shall we urge President-elect
>Clinton, President Yeltsin and Prime Minister Miasawa to join the
>fray? .... :)

Don't count on Yeltsin or Miyasawa.  The only one who could change China's
mind is Clinton, but he has to do it very, very carefully and skillfully.

>>Well, I think Chairman Mao would love what you have written :)

>Unless I'm mistaken, I think his English was not too good. I do like his
>poetry though. You can see the Kantian idealism in him. :)

Don't worry about the English part. He'll have his nephew Wang Hai-Yong 
translated for him :).  It is really the content that counts.

>>Now, isn't Martin Lee a lawyer, and Sezto Wah a headmaster, Christine Loh 
>>a businesswoman, all of them are doing quite well in their field?  

>I'm quite sure you're aware that there's a big difference between elected
>representatives and appointed legislators.

You probably have forgotten that Christine Loh is an appointed legislator :)
Another democracy fighter, Anna Wu, is also appointed.

>With due respect, I don't think it should be left to individuals. The sine
>qua non to a functioning democracy is the "Reagan doctrine" - "trust but
>verify". If I've the choice, I would try my best to elect someone who shares
>my views and my aspirations. But I reserve the right to cast a vote of no
>confidence whenever I feel that my representative is no longer representing 
>my interest.

No disagreement here, but I was responding to your assetion about the
rich/successful professionals don't understand the poor.

>>The other side of the coin is that poor people often don't have the 
>>exposure to the problems and complexities facing business, community,

>Try them.

It's been tried in mainland, and you could see the results. Not that I
am saying the poor are not capable of, but it is just that they have
no such exposure yet, and often they were not able to look at the
matter from various angles.  

>>that from, say Don Quixote.   Sure we know what a lion could do,
>>but what happen if the subject is not a lion, but, say a rabbit.  Is it
>>wise for a rabbit to show his courage by taking on a wolf?  

>Not that many wolves would like to take on 6 million odd rabbits, not
>to mention the 1.2 billion eagerly watching on the side line! .... :)

That's why I tend to think the rabbits will pretty much be left alone,
and it is unwise for the rabbits to take on the wolves.

>>I don't disagree, but my point is the assurance wouldn't mean much until
>>you have a truly democratic China which respect personal right, simply 
>>because it is a much bigger neighbor and also it is 'one country, two systems',
>>not 'two countries, two systems'.   (Perhaps I am too much a pessimist, but 
>>recall the process called Finlandization even when Finland and USSR are two
>>separate countries.)

>A rabbit turning a wolf into a lamb? I don't think you're a pessimist at
>all. I think you're a secret admirer of the the rabbit's faith and courage. :)

Actually, I am an open admirer of the rabbit's faith and courage :)  However,
I have to disagree with the strategy and tactics when it is divisive and 
destabilizing.  Also, I have no problem with the motive of locals,
but I am less certain of the motive of the non-locals.

>The best protection for HK is an international presence and a recogonized
>voice in the world community. It's not much, but it is better that pure faith!

>>Indeed so. Most of the export is to USA (mostly through intermediaries 
>>in HK), and that is why normal trade relationship with USA is so important, 
>>and IMHO, one of the reason of China's willingness to accommodate demands 
>>from USA.  IMHO, it is interesting that CG sees economic reform as a means
>>of survival for CG, but many others (myself included) see the
>>success of economic reform will spell the demise of the party (i.e. as the
>>party we know today).

>The "wolf" does have a vulnerable spot after all!

Sure, but one has to play the 'game' right (perhaps at the risk of being
called kowtowed).  Just like Suen Tze said: know yourself, know others,
then you won't lose in a hundred battle.

>Regards,

>Al Fung
>SoftFab International Ltd., Cambridge, MA
>Email: afung@SoftFab.COM

Happy New Year!

-cw-