But President Xi surely had an important message for Hong Kong, including the four expectations he put forward to Macau, all applicable to our Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor as well: to keep abreast of the times to elevate governance; to be innovative for sustainable economic development; to improve people’s well-being; and to be inclusive and to promote social harmony and stability.
And it was Xi’s emphasis on Beijing’s determination to stick to the special governing formula for the two special administrative regions that touched on the crux of the issue in Hong Kong.
Hong Kong can never be like Macau
Xi’s reiteration dismissed earlier doubts and suggestions that Beijing might consider giving up the one country, two systems policy if the situation in Hong Kong kept deteriorating – if not soon, then at least by 2047 when its 50 years’ duration guaranteed by the Basic Law expires.
With Xi’s firm “no” in answer to that line of thinking, it is more a matter of how to narrow the widening gap between Beijing and Hong Kong on what exactly “one country” is and what “two systems” should be.
By default, this unique formula is bound to cause conflict. Also, understandably, when Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiaoping came up with this innovative idea decades ago, neither he nor Beijing could foresee all the future complexities.
The current inconvenient reality speaks volumes: Hong Kong seems to have moved further away from, rather than drawn closer to, mainland China because of different interpretations of the relation between “one country” and “two systems”.
The unprecedented political divide stemming from more than six months of protests further amplifies the deep-rooted problem: protesters and their supporters believe they are fighting for democracy, a “revolution of our times” as they put it, but the pro-establishment camp and Beijing in particular see the social unrest as a threat to national security and challenge to “one country”.
One country, two protests – two consequences?
The US factor in this saga has further complicated the situation. This well explains why Xi warned in Macau that there was “no need for any foreign force to dictate things to us” regarding how to handle the two special administrative regions’ internal affairs.
The next day Xi expressed to President Donald Trump China’s deep concerns over Washington’s attitude towards Hong Kong, Taiwan, Xinjiang and Tibet when the two leaders discussed trade and other issues over the phone.
Here’s the irony: when one country, two systems is hailed by all as the best for Hong Kong, and for the country, the chance of forging a wider consensus on a mutually agreeable definition of this concept is getting slimmer under the political confrontation currently intensifying in this city.
To borrow from a well-cited poem: “The furthest distance in the world is not between life and death, but that between fish and bird, one is in the sky, another is in the sea.” But “one country” and “two systems” are not and should not be like fish and bird, unable to meet.
A meeting point between the two sides must be identified through rebuilding mutual trust between Hong Kong and Beijing. Can Lam and her government take up this tough task to get the city back on the right track as we enter a new year fraught with tension and uncertainty?
This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: Can Lam bridge the gap between ‘one country’ and ‘two systems’?
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7tK%2FMqWWcp51ku6bD0mifqKaXYriwusZop6ikmam2pL%2BOmqmtoZOhsnB%2Fj21qamxjZLO2vtOhnKysXZm2tMDAp5qeZZKawbixxKdkqKaVYrCwwc2tqbJlkaOxbsDWqGSssaOpsq6%2F