Neo-colonialism and Hong Kong: Ambassador Liu Xiaoming responds to a couple of ignorant UK politicians

Following my earlier post about ‘Colonial Policy By Other Means‘ (in relation to Hong Kong and Taiwan), I have been enjoying reading the replies by the Chinese Ambassador to the UK, Liu Xiaoming, in response to one or two ignorant politicians in the UK, who have been cheering on the violence in Hong Kong.

In reply to someone called Jeremy Hunt (seems to be important over there):

It seems that he [Jeremy Hunt] is still immersed in the faded glory of colonialism. He is obsessed with condescendingly criticizing other countries. He keeps lying without remorse. Here I will say a few more words.

First, after Hong Kong’s return to China, British rights and obligations as outlined in the Sino-British Joint Declaration were completed. On July 1, 1997, China resumed sovereignty over Hong Kong. The Chinese Government started exercising jurisdiction over Hong Kong in accordance with the Constitution and the Basic Law of Hong Kong SAR.

The UK has no sovereignty or rights to rule and supervise Hong Kong after the handover. There is no room for Britain to claim any so-called responsibility over Hong Kong whatsover. Claiming itself the guardian of Hong Kong is nothing more than self-entertaining.

Second, Mr Hunt says that the UK negotiated freedoms for Hong Kong. How brazen is that! Was there any democracy when the British governors were in Hong Kong? People in Hong Kong didn’t even have the right to take to the streets then. It is only after the return that Hong Kong residents started enjoying unprecedented democratic rights and freedoms. The Chinese Government strictly follows the Constitution and the Basic Law. It earnestly implements the  one country, two systems” policy. It ensures that the people of Hong Kong govern Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy.

Third, the violent storming of the Legislative Council on July 1 is a grave illegal activity. It tramples on the rule of law and undermines social order. In total disregard of facts, Mr. Hunt called the SAR government’s response “repression”. That is entirely misleading. I want to ask Mr. Hunt, if it were the British Parliament that had been stormed and vandalized, what would the British government do? Will it sit by idly and let the protesters have their way? If this is the democracy he believes in, should the police guarding the Parliament withdraw to allow in protesters across the street? Will he call the British police’s handling of the August 2011 riot in London “repression”?

I shall stress that Hong Kong is China’s special administrative region. Its affairs are purely China’s internal affairs. They brook no interference from any country, organization or individual in any form. We hope that the UK side, especially Mr. Hunt, will cease to overreach and interfere. Such attempts are doomed to fail.

And in reply to last colonial governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, who claims that as a former colony, the UK has a ‘right’ to interfere:

As the last governor of Hong Kong, his body is in the 21st century, but his head remains in the old colonial days. This bill won’t make it easier for Hong Kong to extradite people to the mainland. There are many safeguards. You know, first of all, there are 37 clauses as safeguards in this Bill. That means, no people would be extradited to mainland because of their religious or political beliefs. And the crime has to be punishable in both places. That means, to make an extreme case, if murder was not regarded as a crime in Hong Kong, then people who committed murder would not be extradited to the mainland.

As for the bill of extradition itself, what was its origin?

The whole thing was started by Hong Kong SAR government. Just as the Chief Executive said, she received no instruction from Beijing. She received no order from Beijing. It is completely the initiative launched by Hong Kong SAR government, to make Hong Kong system more perfect, to improve the legal system.

You mentioned “One China, Two Systems” for 50 years. We are fully committed to this promise. There is no question about that. So you can see that from day one till now, the central government has not interfered at all. Every step of the way, we let the Hong Kong SAR government handle this. Instead, it is the British government that was trying to interfere, voicing support for the demonstrators … they tried to obstruct the legal process. To answer your question in a simple way, have full confidence in Hong Kong SAR government. And it shows that they are capable of handling the situation.

 

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Neo-colonialism and Hong Kong: Ambassador Liu Xiaoming responds to a couple of ignorant UK politicians

  1. Dear Roland,

    With regards to your reply to my last comment, I thought you could purchase the book (which is the third book in a five-book series. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirates!) online at any major online book seller, such as Amazon or Book Depository – I prefer the later.

    However, it appears that it’s quite difficult to find cheap prices for fresh copies of the complete series.

    If I were you, I would get cheap used ones off Abebooks.

    https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=gideon%20defoe&bsi=0&sortby=17&prevpage=2

    I hope this has been helpful.

    Regards,
    Jackson

    1. Found this description:
      Synopsis:

      London, 1840: Wagner’s latest opera plays to packed houses while disgruntled workers gather in crowded pubs to eat ice cream and plan the downfall of the bourgeoisie. Meanwhile, the Pirate Captain finds himself incarcerated at Scotland Yard, in a case of mistaken identity.

      Discovering that his doppelgänger is none other than Karl Marx, the Captain and his crew are unwittingly caught up in a sinister plot that involves intellectual giants, enormous beards, and a quest to discover whether ham might really be the opium of the people.

      Includes, at no additional charge, The Wit and Wisdom of the Pirate Captain—a Major Philosophical Work.

      On the Matter of Love:
      If you’re off to fight in a battle, snap a ship’s biscuit in half and give your girlfriend the other half. When you meet again, they will match—like two halves of a single soul! Hopefully, this will stop her sleeping with other men.

      On Life in General:
      Life is like a big shanty. Everything will be fine so long as everyone sings in harmony. But if someone plays a duff note on the accordion or tries to break-dance at a sensitive bit, then there will be all sorts of trouble, mark my words.
      About the Author:

      Gideon Defoe was born in 1975 and lives in London. Because of all the usual politics and petty jealousies rife throughout the literary world, neither of his previous books, The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists nor The Pirates! In an Adventure with Ahab, has been nominated for the Pulitzer Prize.

  2. I watched the Chinese ambassador being interviewed on TV. He was the epitome of diplomacy, and completely convincing. It’s a pity that many of our own foreign ambassadors seem to forget that this is no longer ‘The British Empire’.
    Best wishes, Pete.

  3. As an outsider in this (but interested) the basic aim of the CCP is to unite all Chinese people is admirable and transparent. I thin the rest of the world has to watch because China has a plan, while other nations are ruled by money. Once corruption and lawlessness is under control in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan will want to join. My main interest in China is how they manage religion. GROG

    1. It is worth noting that since Xi Jinping became chairman, corruption and the somewhat lawless approach at many levels has been pretty stamped out – apart from keeping a close eye on the potential for new forms (for example, diverting poverty alleviation funds). But I am more intrigued by the positive side of this: socialist rule of law (partly through the social credit system) and core socialist values.
      As for religion: no member of the CPC may hold a religious belief (although I am told this one is little more flexible in minority areas), while any religious activity outside the CPC must abide by the laws of the land and contribute to the common good. In other words, any form of extremism and anti-socialist activity is outside the law. Not sure what you think of this approach.
      To be added: of all the foreign religions to come into China, only Buddhism has fully became part of Chinese culture. All others are still seen as somewhat alien. Why? I put it down (following Chinese scholars) to the difference between ‘inner transcendence, which you find in Buddhism and Daoism and leads to an affirmation of the world in which we live, and ‘outer transcendence’, in which an external (divine) force acts on the world. The latter dominates Western approaches to almost everything, even in secualrised form and has the outcome that an ideal or better world is beyond this one.

    1. Makes you wonder why they keep on trying, sending covert operators and funds to stir up trouble, when they keep failing. Tibet is the best example.
      That said, it remains a minor irriration as the government sticks resolutely to one country-two systems.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.