|
1C2S is China's pledge to prosper Hong Kong
Laugk Updated: 2004-02-25 09:11
Just before 1997, my wife on a trip to Guangdong (Canton) was met in HK by our son-in-law's parents and relatives. It so happened that my eldest daughter's father-in-law's rich elder sister was celebrating her birthday. My wife was invited without knowing it was a birthday dinner, more because our in-laws did not want her to spend money on presents.
At the dinner talks centred on the impending handover of Hong Kong to China.
My wife made a comment: "What is there to worry about China making a mess of Hong Kong? The 1C2S is an undertaking by China to prosper Hong Kong, and China would never want to make the people poor because it is also a showcase to win over Taiwan Chinese. China would never ill-govern Hong Kong to play into the hands of the Taidu (Taiwan independents)."
Whether our changka (qingjia) in-laws appreciated what my wife said was debatable, but the guests around were apprehensive and there were no dearth of Anglophilia that evening.
*** Why should China be criticised if it invokes the sedition laws?
Insofar as the glee and elation about this demonstration from Taiwan and the Falungong it was openly expressed in Taiwan's pro Chen Shui-bian's media and the DPP itself. In the websites of the Falungong they went overboard with their elation over what was done to China by Hong Kong.
A little about Martin Lee and Szeto Wah. Martin Lee is the scion of a KMT official, a general connected to Taiwan if my memory is correct. Szeto Wah in his mid-seventies is a Christian, probably indoctrinated about the evils of communism by the Church, and hence a distaste and dislike for PRC.
Nothing need to be said about the Falungong, as its covert activities has become brazenly overt to defy the Chinese government from a safe distance of Hong Kong, and the US.
My take is that China knew what Martin Lee and Szeto Wah were up to, and if they ever as made it so brazen in their political agitation, then the law on sedition must be invoked against them.
This would be no different from the sedition laws that the British enacted in Singapore and Malaysia, where they imprisoned political agitators without trial.
The remarkable fact was that China did not follow what the British did, and to date I have yet to hear condemnation of what the British did.
I believe China did not want to precipitate the issue with the arrests of Martin Lee and Szeto Wah when they warmed up with the US and the West over their campaign against China. In Singapore, when the Attorney General and former Public Prosecutor Francis Seow was seen talking to a high-ranking US official in the midst of a political tussle with the ruling party, he had to free to the US to avoid imprisonment. Same with student leader Tan Wah Piow, who now resides in Britain.
It is to the credit of the US and Britain that they give sanctuary to these two dissidents from Singapore.
The point I am making is: What is so reprehensible about China putting Martin Lee and Szeto Wah under sedition law or treason? Would it not be that Singapore is anti-communist and China is communist?
I speak with the conviction of my wife's brother being a political prisoner for about four years, and two of my friends in similar fate for 18 - 22 years.
My honest answer to that would be for China to take firm action against Martin Lee and Szeto Wah if there was already a prima facie case. The fact that this was put under lid was not to give cause for China's enemies to discredit 1C2S.
Now my question: If Senator Kerry had been found in clandestine or even overt gestures to China to topple the US government, would you think G. W. Bush would let down the American people by not arresting him in the name of national security under the Patriot Act?
Finally, it was easy to drum up '10%' of the populace to come out if the population was some six million. Out of the '500,000' how many were the curious and unintentional shoppers and people going about their normal daily activities.
But for Hong Kong, I would think the demos might kill the China goose that lays the golden eggs for the Hong Kongers.
Lau Guan Kim
Singapore
| The above content represents the view of the author only. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
