| bibo:abstract |
Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. The Legal Basis for Hong Kong’s National Security Law and its Key Provisions
Ⅲ. Why Does the Passage of the Law Provoke Hong Kong’s Outcry?: Hong Kong’s Identity and the Principles of “One Country, Two Systems(一國兩制)”
Ⅳ. Hong Kong’s National Security Law of 2020: Assessment and Outlook
Ⅰ. Introduction
On May 28, 2020, the National People’s Congress (NPC) of the People’s Republic of China decided to enact the Hong Kong national security law (hereinafter referred to as the National Security Law). The bill was approved unanimously by the 20th Standing Committee of the NPC with 162 votes on June 30.
Hong Kong’s civil society and the international community worry that the passage of the National Security Law, which bans anti-government protests to safeguard national security, could stifle Hong Kong’s autonomy and undermine universal values such as freedom, democracy, and human rights.
With an aim to evaluate the impact of the National Security Law on various future developments and explore its implications for Korea, this article outlines the background and content of Hong Kong’s national security law, and analyzes the perspectives of Hong Kong, the international community, and China, respectively.
Ⅱ. The Legal Basis for Hong Kong’s National Security Law and its Key Provisions
The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Basic Law) was adopted with the Sino-British Joint Declaration (1984) as its legal basis. And the legal basis for the National Security Law is set out in Article 23 and 18 of the Basic Law.
The passage of the National Security Law by the NPC has been a source of considerable controversy because the Basic Law stipulates that Hong Kong’s judicial independence must be guaranteed in “enacting laws on its own”for its national security. The legal basis for such interventions can be drawn from Article 1 and 31 of the Constitution as well as Article 18 of the Basic Law.
The National Security Law consists of six chapters and 66 articles, including a total ban on anti-government protests and restrictions on activities that involve foreign forces in Hong Kong’s internal affairs that cause domestic division. The key provisions of the law say that Beijing will establish a new security office in Hong Kong, and Hong Kong’s chief executive will have the power to appoint judges to hear national security cases. The stance of pro-democracy activists, the Hong Kong Bar Association, and academia differs greatly from that of the Chinese government.
Ⅲ. Why Does the Passage of the Law Provoke Hong Kong’s Outcry?: Hong Kong’s Identity and the Principles of “One Country, Two Systems(一國兩制)”
Due to 150 years of British rule based on the principles of non-politicization and maintaining the neutrality of colonies, the idea of national identity is somewhat ambiguous for Hong Kong and its people. And this is why they deeply disapprove the Chinese government’s nationalistic approach to steering state affairs. As many in Hong Kong do not perceive British rule as suppression or invasion, the widespread perception of mainland China in Hong Kong is just another administrator replacing London. In contrast, those in the pro-Beijing camp in Hong Kong - Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam and 43 pro-Beijing legislators, numerous entrepreneurs with close ties to mainland China, mainlanders who moved to Hong Kong in search of economic opportunities, senior citizens who support ethnic nationalism and patriotism, view British rule as unpleasant memories.
Traditionally, the people of Hong Kong put a top priority on practical values. Since the handover in 1997, however, more and more people have been calling for safeguarding freedom and democratic values with the spread of localization propelled by the sense of superiority many Hong Kong people have over mainlanders, and anti-Chinese sentiment triggered by the 1989 Tiananmen Square Incident.
From Beijing’s perspective, Hong Kong has symbolic significance in terms of the integrity of national sovereignty, enhancing border security, and as a conduit between China and the world.
From the 1980s, China had demanded the handover of Hong Kong (Hong Kong Island, Kowloon Peninsula, and Singye District) from Britain. In particular, Beijing promised to guarantee Hong Kong’s autonomy and political status within the frameworks of “one country, two systems(一國兩制)”·“Hong Kong People administering Hong Kong(港人治港)”·“high degree of autonomy(高度自治).”Beijing’s promises seemed to be well fulfilled within an overarching framework. However, since President Xi Jinping took office, the conflict erupted between Beijing’s emphasis on “one country”principle and Hong Kong’s emphasis on “two systems.”
Ⅳ. Hong Kong’s National Security Law of 2020: Assessment and Outlook
The strategic rivalry between the U.S. and China over the passage of the National Security Law is spiraling into a confrontation between the “pro-Western”and “pro-China”camps. The U.S., member states of the British Commonwealth of Nations, the EU countries, and Japan, view Beijing’s action as reneging on its commitments to the international community and the spirit of the Sino-British Joint Declaration as well as the “one country, two systems”principle. And such views are also popular in Hong Kong’s civil society. In contrast, Russia, Cuba, and North Korea, and many of underdeveloped countries, issued a joint statement supporting the passage of the National Security Law by the Chinese government, and urged critics to stop using the issue for the purpose of interfering with China’s internal affairs.
Since the 2014 Umbrella Revolution, China has always suspected that the West is backing anti-China forces in Hong Kong. And Beijing has been maintaining its position that outsiders should not interfere with the Hong Kong issue as it is just one of China’s internal affairs. In terms of international relations, Beijing has been at odds with Washington over the passage of the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act (2019), the Tibet Policy and Support Act (2020), and The Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act (2020). It appears that Beijing pushed ahead with the passage of Hong Kong’s national security law to show its determination not to make any concessions in tackling important political issues such as the Hong Kong issue. In addressing domestic issues, it is anticipated that Beijing will take a tough stance and target anti-China activists with harsh penalties in an attempt to prevent domestic and foreign critics, including Tibetans and Uyghurs calling for autonomy for their peoples, from forging an anti-China alliance with Hong Kong’s pro-democracy camp. It also seems that the election of Tsai Ing-wen in Taiwan, who decries the “one country, two system”principle, affected Beijing’s calculations.
Of course, Hong Kong’s symbolic significance may change over time. However, given the ambiguity of provisions in the National Security Law, it is difficult to accurately predict the scope and aspect of the change. In the short run, political instability will likely continue in Hong Kong with its civil society pitted against the Hong Kong government or the Chinese government. And it is also anticipated that pro-democracy activities will likely be impeded with Beijing tightening its grip in Hong Kong. What’s unfolding in Hong Kong could stimulate necessary structural change and reform in the long run. But it should be noted that a majority of Hong Kong people are forming collective identity as “We, as Hong Kong people”in relation with mainland China. Therefore, it seems inevitable that some political demands will be continued by the Hong Kong people to advance their collective interests.
Ⅴ. Implications for Korea
With the U.S.-China rivalry intensifying in recent years, the Hong Kong issue is anticipated to add urgency to the Korean government’s need for formulating an effective balancing strategy between Washington and Beijing in the coming years. It is advised that the Korean government should carefully phrase and send out its messages on the issue by keeping a watchful eye on how Hong Kong’s political landscape changes and the international community’s responses.
Along the way, it is also important to create its own guiding principles without falling into the trap of the rivalry between China and the Western world, and set up various scenarios to navigate through changing situations. Moreover, it is necessary to have a detailed understanding of the values Hong Kong’s pro-democracy camp upholds, and observe whether a majority of Hong Kong people support those values and causes. It is also recommended that the Korean government understand why the pro-democracy movement is gaining ground in Hong Kong now, and forecast how Hong Kong-China relations will be shaped in the future.
The Korean government also needs to brace itself for the impact of the situations in Hong Kong on the Korean economy and businesses. Some industries including the service sector, excluded from the Korea-China free trade agreement (FTA), are expected to face challenges as they have taken a detour to Hong Kong. However, as the destination of Korea’s major exports is mainland China, it seems that there will be no major impact other than short-term spikes in costs. This is because Hong Kong has mostly served as a detour for the convenience of trading dollars, benefiting from tax cuts, and avoiding regulatory risks.
Recently unfolding situations in Hong Kong show that running a country by employing separate institutional frameworks or dividing sovereignty and administrative power is unsustainable in the long run. sThe Korean Ministry of Unification devised a three-stage unification plan called the National Community Unification Plan. The key of the plan is to acknowledge one national community and two separate state systems at the same time in the interim stage of the unification process. It seems that the Hong Kong case, in which two systems co-exist in one state, could be good historical references for the entire process of unification of the Korean peninsula in the future.
It is also imperative that the Korean government should come up with responses to a possible confrontation between Hong Kong people and mainland Chinese residing in Korea.
|
