Today's Hong Kong Will Not Be Tomorrow's Taiwan

Today's Hong Kong Will Not Be Tomorrow's Taiwan
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 30, 2014

Summary: Hong Kong was ceded and loaned out as a colony. Its sovereignty was determined by international negotiations. The British retroceded it to the Chinese mainland. Taiwan's sovereignty, by contrast, cannot be transferred to anyone else. . Those who have been wringing their hands about "Taiwan becoming Hong Kong-ized" over the past decade, have never given a damn about Hong Kong. They have never studied Hong Kong's political system. Yet they prattle on about how "Taiwan is becoming Hong Kong-ized." This is nothing more than unwarranted blue vs. green political infighting. It is non-conducive to Taiwan's well-being, and to the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations, The less we have of such rhetoric, the better.

Full Text Below:

When the Mainland's Taiwan Affairs Office Director Zhang Zhijun visited Taiwan, he brought with him an olive branch. Some special interest groups however, stalked him. This led to several unfortunate clashes, and even forced Zhang to cancel part of his trip. Cross-Strait peaceful development is becoming mainstream. Its benefits are being felt. Some segments of society however, remain dogged in their opposition. They have become a wild card in cross-Strait relations.

Hong Kongers are holding a "622 Referendum." They are also expected to stage an "Occupy Central" demonstration. Hong Kong was politically unstable to begin with. Now it is being buffeted by new turbulence. Some have linked relations between Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Mainland. They are attempting to join two anti-Mainland forces into one. In terms of values and lifestyles, Taiwan and Hong Kong are indeed related. But at the constitutional level, Taiwan and Hong Kong are totally different. This is a point we must make crystal clear.

Hong Kong has its own history. Hong Kong's political system has its own characteristics. Hong Kong has long been a victim of colonialism and imperialism. It lacks deep democratic roots. But the people long to be their own masters. Hong Kong is a financial center and a free port with a thriving business community. The people are highly pragmatic, realistic, and conservative. But that does not mean they lack ideals. At key moments in history, its people will flock to the streets and make themselves heard. Hong Kong is an immigrant society. Generation after generation of immigrants have shaped this society. The interests of old and new immigrants may not always coincide. But Hong Kong has its own consciousness and its own form of cohesion.

Hong Kong's cuisine combines Chinese cuisine and Western cuisine. It also boasts a local flavor of its own. Hong Konger political consciousness is the same way. It is neither totally Westernized, nor totally Chinese. Hong Kongers are taking their own political path, and choosing their own political system. They have gone from a colony to "one country, two systems." Hong Kong's political system, however, has long been "rule by the executive." The Chief Executive's ability to govern, and democracy's ability to provide oversight are critical. So are the Legislative Council's ability to function and provide representation. Should universal suffrage be implemented? If so, how? These and other issues are extremely important.

Since Hong Kong's retrocession to the Mainland, the "one country, two systems" concept has proved far-sighted. Over the past ten years, Hong Kong has remained a free port. Hong Kong and the Mainland have very different political, legal, monetary, and social welfare systems. The "one country" premise has been ensured. The "two systems" premise has been ensured as well. This is why democratic movements can thrive in Hong Kong. This is why they can fight for democracy and engage in "sensitive" activities. This is why "sensitive" groups can organize freely and survive. In recent years however, "deep-seated contradictions" have surfaced. The Hong Kong government's ability to govern has been questioned. Ethnic and class conflicts have worsened. Environmental, educational, employment, and community problems all require solution. They are problems intertwined with democracy and public welfare. Hong Kongers are increasingly dissatisfied with the status quo. The ruling administration's credibility has diminished. Demands for universal suffrage reflect this dissatisfaction and constitute an attempt to resolve these "deep-seated contradictions."

We on Taiwan have already made the transition to democracy. Naturally were are concerned about political progress and the development of democracy in Hong Kong. We affirm Hong Kong's efforts to implement universal suffrage. We do more than affirm it. We support it. But we must be clear. Hong Kong has its own problems. We respect the people of Hong Kong's freedom to choose. Hong Kong's situation is different from Taiwan's. Comparing Taiwan and Hong Kong may lead to confusion and error. It may blur one's vision. It may blind one to the unique issues facing Taiwan.

Hong Kong is a city in Mainland China. It is a "Special Administrative Region." It clearly belongs to Mainland China. Theoretically "Hong Kong people rule Hong Kong." Dual Universal Suffrage is intended to ensure that "Hong Kong people truly rule Hong Kong."

Taiwan belongs to the Republic of China. The civil war separated the two sides. Since then we have claimed that Taiwan belongs to the Republic of China. The Mainland has a different view. Before the two sides of China reached an agreement, they refused to recognize each other. Jurisdiction over Taiwan belonged to Taiwan's 23 million people. After democratization, legal and political activities such as regular elections and ruling party changes, legitimized this jurisdiction. Taiwan belongs to the Republic of China, No power can transfer sovereignty over Taiwan without the consent of Taiwan's 23 million people.

In recent years, the two sides have agreed to engage in peaceful development. But this has no impact on Taiwan's sovereignty, which is rooted in the ROC Constitution, or its jurisdiction, which is rooted in regular elections and changes in ruling parties. The issue now is how to consolidate that jurisdiction. The green camp likes to carry on about how "Taiwan is becoming Hong Kong-ized." This obscures the difference between Taiwan and Hong Kong. It departs from cross-Strait reality. It is unfounded alarmism.

Hong Kong was ceded and loaned out as a colony. Its sovereignty was determined by international negotiations. The British retroceded it to the Chinese mainland. Taiwan's sovereignty, by contrast, cannot be transferred to anyone else. . Those who have been wringing their hands about "Taiwan becoming Hong Kong-ized" over the past decade, have never given a damn about Hong Kong. They have never studied Hong Kong's political system. Yet they prattle on about how "Taiwan is becoming Hong Kong-ized." This is nothing more than unwarranted blue vs. green political infighting. It is non-conducive to Taiwan's well-being, and to the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations, The less we have of such rhetoric, the better.

社論－今日香港不會是明天的台灣
2014年06月30日 04:10
本報訊

大陸國台辦主任張志軍銜著橄欖枝來訪，部分若干公民團體如影相隨，造成一些令人遺憾的零星衝突，來客甚至被迫取消部分行程。兩岸和平發展在主流層面進展順利，而且成效豐碩，但在社會某些層面，卻累積了若干反對的能量，成為兩岸關係的不確定因素。

隨著香港民間「622公投」開展，以及預期中可能進行的「佔中」運動，原本就已不穩定的香港政治進入了震盪期。一些人把台灣、香港與大陸的關係相提並論，有意讓兩岸反中力量合流，固然台港的未來，從維護價值觀與生活方式層面而言，確實脣齒相依，但就憲政層面而言，台港地位卻完全不同，我們必須分辨清楚。

香港的歷史發展，有自己的軌跡，香港的政治體制，有自己的特點。香港曾是長期被帝國主義統治的殖民地，民主根基不深，人民當家作主的意志卻也不弱。香港是金融中心，是自由港，是繁榮的商業社會，人們的心態，重功利，重現實，重安定，但這不代表民眾沒有理想性，在關鍵的、重要的、歷史性的時刻，民眾還是會蜂擁上街，表達自己的聲音。香港是道地的移民社會，幾代幾波的移民潮形塑了香港社會，新老移民的利益未必相同，但港人的本土意識正以其特有的方式凝聚、昂揚著。

香港的飲食，中西合璧，又有在地特色，港人的意識，也是如此，既非全盤西化也不是全盤內地化，港人要摸索自己的道路、自己的政制。從殖民地到「一國兩制」，香港的政制始終是「行政主導」，行政長官的管治能力與民主監督，立法會的功能與民意代表性，都是非常核心的課題，「普選」與否，怎麼「普選」，當然就變得極其重要。

香港回歸大陸以來，「一國兩制」的設想，證明是極有遠見，十多年來，香港自由港的「自由」沒有被剝奪，香港與內地在政制、法律、貨幣、社福、教育等制度上有相當差異與區隔，「一國」前提得到確保，「兩制」更有認真實踐，也因為如此，確保了香港社會能夠存在民主運動、爭取民主的空間，「敏感」的活動、「敏感」的團體都能夠自在地舉辦、生存。另一方面，近幾年，香港存在的「深層次矛盾」有複雜化的趨勢，政府的管治能力受到質疑，族群、階級的矛盾深化，生態、教育、就業、社區等各領域累積待解決的問題層出不窮，民主與民生議題的相互纏繞，讓港人對現況的不滿有所提升，當局的威信有所下降，這都讓普選運動成了反映、承接這「深層次矛盾」的突破口。

我們在台灣，以「民主轉型過來人」身分，自然對香港民主的發展、政治的進步，抱持高度的關注，對於港人爭取普選的努力，不但肯定，也願意支持。只不過，我們要清醒的看到，香港有香港自己的難題，我們尊重港人的自由意志與自由選擇，另一方面，香港有香港特殊的局勢，把台灣和香港類比，容易產生落差與偏差，也會模糊了自己的視線，看不清台灣面臨的獨特課題。

香港是中國的一個城市，一個「特別行政區」，他的主權明確屬於中國大陸，香港的治權，理論上是要「港人治港」的，「雙普選」的問題就是要完善「港人治港」，是真正、全面落實「港人治港」的核心課題。

台灣主權屬於「中華民國」，由於內戰造成的兩岸分隔，我們宣稱台灣主權屬於中華民國，大陸卻有不同的主張。在兩岸中國達成政治談判協議前，處於「互不承認」狀態。治權則屬於台灣2300萬人民，歷經民主化浪潮，已在法理上與政治運作（定期選舉、政黨輪替）上，完成「治權」的合法性。台灣的主權屬於中華民國，沒有任何強權能將台灣的主權讓渡出去，除非經過台灣2300萬人的同意。

近年兩岸已建立和平發展的共識，但無論如何都不影響台灣的主權（中華民國憲法）與治權（定期選舉、政黨輪替）的存在，現在的課題，其實是「治權」如何不斷鞏固的問題。綠營人士喜歡談台灣「香港化」，這就大大混淆了台灣和香港的巨大差別，也背離了海峽兩岸的現實局勢，更是缺乏事實佐證的危言聳聽。

香港原是割讓、租借出去的殖民地，主權是透過國際談判，由英國移交給中國大陸，台灣的主權沒有任何強權能夠讓渡出去。那些高談「台灣香港化」的人士，其實在好幾十年的時間內，從來沒有真正關心過香港、研究過香港的政制與歷史，如今卻杜撰出了「台灣香港化」這個渲染性過強詞彙，說穿了，只是為了進行內部鬥爭、藍綠對抗。這是不足取的，更無助於台灣確保自己的福祉，和繼續促進兩岸關係的和平發展，這樣的言論，實在寧肯少些！