Hong Kong: A
CASE OF SELF-DELUSION
Part
1: From
colonialism to confusion
By
Henry C K Liu
First appeared in Asia Times on
Line on May 14, 2003
The current severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) crisis highlights
an obvious fact: that Hong Kong is an inseparable part of China,
regardless of the artificial separation in the "one country, two
systems" (OCTS) arrangement.
On July 1, 1997, China regained sovereignty over Hong Kong after one
and a half centuries of shameful colonial occupation. What should have
been the beginning of an era of renewed national pride and prosperity
for the residents of Hong Kong, more than 90 percent of whom are
Chinese, degenerated instead into half a decade of confused identity
crisis and shocking economic contraction with no end in sight. The
departing British had 15 years to set Hong Kong up as a time bomb for
China, by disguising colonialism, the most evil of political
institutions, into a haven of bogus democracy and sham freedom, and by
presenting a colonial command bubble economy as a faked model of
free-market fundamentalism.
Love is blind and infatuation disguises faults as virtues. As Rudyard
Kipling fell in love with the pageantry of colonialism and saw racial
exploitation as the "White Man's Burden", Milton Friedman, Nobel
economist, fell in love with colonial Hong Kong, seduced by the
wine-and-dine hospitality of its colonial masters and elite
compradores. Friedman mistook Hong Kong's colonial economic system as a
free market, despite Hong Kong's highly orchestrated colonial command
economy.
For 156 years, Britain deftly manipulated the economy of Hong Kong, as
a jewel in the British imperial crown, to opportunistically respond to
changing global geopolitical forces for Britain's benefit. Even during
the best of times, the average local Chinese small and medium
businesses had to operate under the dictates of British colonial policy
and at the mercy of monopolistic British trading firms and banks, not
to mention that the average worker never had it good at all. British
monopolies needed an unregulated supply network of ruthless predatory
competition to keep costs low, by disguising the institutional slavery
they lorded over as a free market. It was a system of survival not of
the fittest, but of the fittest slaves, the ultimate of a
divide-and-rule stratagem.
Friedman even apologized for Hong Kong's discretionary currency board
despite his trademark monetarist advocacy for free-floating exchange
rates set by foreign-exchange market forces. The linked-exchange-rate
mechanism for the Hong Kong dollar was introduced by the British in
1983 as a political expediency in response to the 1982 Sino-British
Joint Declaration on the return of Hong Kong to China by 1997. It was
not based in the slightest on alleged monetary insights that have since
been conjured up to justify the political decision. Popularly known as
the peg, the linked-exchange-rate mechanism was the central factor
behind Hong Kong's bubble economy in the early 1990s and has locked
Hong Kong in a steadily downward spiral since the Asian financial
crises that began in 1997.
From 1935-67, Hong Kong operated a classic colonial currency board
pegged to the pound sterling, as part of the sterling hegemony of the
British Empire, in which private British banks, not the government,
issued the currency, a practice that continues today. Instability in
the value of the pound in the late 1960s pushed Hong Kong to switch to
a gold-backed US dollar peg. In 1946, the Bretton Woods regime came
into existence, thereby forbidding the importation of gold for private
purposes in signatory nations. Britain was a signatory but Portugal was
not. Thus a Macau-to-Hong Kong gold-smuggling operation flourished
until 1974, two years after the United States took the dollar off gold,
in effect abolishing the Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates,
when Hong Kong abolished a law that requires a special license to
import gold. The tiny Portuguese colony of Macau became one of the
world's biggest importers and re-exporters of gold during this period.
After the United States in 1971 suspended the Bretton Woods system of
fixed exchange rates tied to a dollar pegged to gold at US$35 an ounce,
the US dollar too came under periodic attack, resulting in the dollar
sinking in free float. Hong Kong then decided also to let its currency
float, which worked reasonably well until the commencement of
Sino-British negotiations on the return of Hong Kong to China, which
unleashed wild speculation against the Hong Kong dollar, a precarious
colonial currency whose days were numbered. By the end of October 1983,
Hong Kong pegged its currency to the US dollar at a rate of 7.8:1, in
effect devaluing the Hong Kong dollar by 50 percent from its previous
normal market fix of around 5:1.
To the chagrin of Hong Kong's colonial administration, Friedman
publicly suggested that after 1997, "the only choice is for the Hong
Kong dollar to be absorbed by the yuan and for Hong Kong's foreign
reserves and foreign assets to be taken over by China". It was a
rational suggestion, and if the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
(SAR) government had followed it, Hong Kong would be prospering at 9
percent growth now, along with the rest of the Chinese economy, instead
of negative growth from deflation caused by a freely convertible
overvalued currency.
The bogus democracy promoted by the last British governor, Chris
Patten, and the free-market myth created by Friedman's fantasy have
fueled Hong Kong's eager self-delusion. The so-called rule of law, so
frequently touted these post-colonial days in Hong Kong, merely meant
that no local Chinese business ever won a case against any British
trading firm in 150 years of colonial justice. Hong Kong's low-tax myth
is merely a cover-up for the exorbitant land tax disguised by the
government's century-old, unseemly role as chief land speculator.
Throughout its history, Hong Kong's economy has always been driven by
geopolitical conditions rather than by free-market fundamentalism, much
less by democracy or the rule of law.
What most analysts miss is that Hong Kong's future is dependent not on
China's adherence on its OCTS policy of non-interference in Hong Kong's
internal autonomy, or on the continuation of a fantasized free-market
system, or rule by colonial law disguised as rule of law. Rather, it
depends on whether Hong Kong can again recognize changes in the global
geopolitical landscape since the end of the Cold War to reorient a new
useful role in it.
The OCTS policy erroneously accepted Hong Kong's colonial regime as
democratic and free-market, instead of the colonial governance and
command economy that it actually was. The Basic Law, Hong Kong's
mini-constitution drawn on the OCTS principle, contains defining
clauses on the political and economic systems of Hong Kong that are
mere fantasies of Anglo-US propaganda. The Basic Law in essence
condones a continuation of Western neo-imperialism under Chinese
sovereignty for another 50 years. As such, these constitutional clauses
constrain the government of the SAR from any attempt to face reality
and provide solutions to real problems it is facing. The artificial
constitutional segregation of Hong Kong from China is now creating
difficulties in Hong Kong's effort to be integrated with the booming
economy of the Pearl River Delta. China has no need for Hong Kong
compradorism in this era of direct contact. Neither do China's trading
partners in the West.
Moreover, world trade has changed under a decade of US-imposed
globalization, and is changing again with its impending collapse and
restructure. Hong Kong, as an international trading center on Chinese
soil, must change with the new geopolitical landscape to survive. There
are increasingly undeniable indications that British propaganda to
disguise colonial rule as neo-liberalism has trapped Hong Kong under
Chinese sovereignty into a state of policy paralysis and rendered it
impotent in disengaging itself from a downward spiral of dysfunctional
obsolescence. Hong Kong will prosper only if China replaces Britain in
Hong Kong and sets policies for a command economy to serve the
geopolitical interest of China, as the British had done for one and a
half centuries.
At the early part of the 19th century, Hong Kong was little more than a
backwater cove in southern China, with no indication it would one day
be turned into a world trade center by geopolitics. All through the
19th century, China had no interest in overseas trade. Thus a natural
deep harbor on its coast on the South China Sea was of little
significance to the Chinese economy. In the early 1800s, Hong Kong was
home mostly to indigenous farmers and fishermen, pirates and smugglers.
At that time, China's reluctant contact with an increasingly intrusive
West took place up the Pearl River, at Canton, more correctly known as
Guangzhou, some 145 kilometers north of Hong Kong. It was in Canton
that traders from Britain, France, the United States and elsewhere in
the West lived and worked in a small segregated enclave strictly
regulated by Chinese officials. British ocean-going ships found Hong
Kong's deep harbor useful for unloading and loading cargo to be barged
up the Pearl River to Canton. Trade developed only slowly and in
China's favor, because the Chinese economy had more to offer the
Western economies than it needed in return.
The British soon found a remedy for this trade imbalance, which was
draining silver steadily from the Bank of England. They illegally
imported opium grown mostly in British India to China, where opium sale
and use had been banned since 1729 under the reign of Emperor
Yung-zheng (1723-35), and its importation and cultivation were made
illegal under Emperor Jia-qing (1796-1820). It was in Canton that the
illegal opium trade flourished, with great profit for the British. By
1840, the British were importing 40,000 chests of opium to China
annually, selling at a price of $2,075 (Stg160) per chest that cost the
British $25. US traders, such as the Delano family, as in Franklin
Delano Roosevelt, also made great fortunes shipping Turkish opium to
China and returning with Chinese tea and porcelain to Boston in Yankee
Clippers. Much of the wealth in Boston came from this narcotic trade
and provided capital for the westward expansion of the United States.
This illicit massive transfer of wealth from China, one of the world's
richest and largest economies at the time, played a key role in
financing the economic development of Europe and North America in the
1800s.
Opium addiction in China grew to epidemic proportions within a short
time, ravaging all levels of Chinese society. Qing Dynasty authorities
appointed a special commissioner in Canton in 1840, with orders to
stamp out the insidious opium trade. A week after his appointment,
special commissioner Lin Zexu ordered his troops to surround the
international enclave in Canton, and demanded that the British drug
dealers turn over all of their opium contraband. After a six-week
standoff, the British drug dealers surrendered more than 20,000 chests
of the narcotic, which Lin burned in public.
These British opium traders, led by the East India Co and Jardine
Matheson & Co, a leading British firm still operating in Hong Kong
today, provoked a belligerent response from the British military with
the First Opium War of 1840-42. The Opium War was depicted in
British-issued textbooks used in colonial Hong Kong schools as a war to
protect private property rights. On January 26, 1841, a British naval
party landed on the northwestern shore of undefended Hong Kong, raised
the Union Jack, and occupied the island as a navy base to make war
farther north. China's outdated navy and army were no match for British
naval cannons. The First Opium War ended with the Treaty of Nanking in
August 1842, the first of many "unequal treaties" Western imperialist
powers imposed on the decaying Qing dynasty over the next half-century.
That treaty forced China to acknowledge, among other humiliating terms,
British extraterritorial privileges in five Chinese trading ports. It
also ceded the island of Hong Kong to the British.
Less than two decades later, the Second Opium War (1856-60) ended with
another British victory and the Convention of Peking, through which
London claimed perpetual control of Stonecutters Island and the Kowloon
Peninsula on the Chinese mainland across from Hong Kong Island. By the
century's end, other European powers and Japan had demanded and
received countless concessions from a Qing Dynasty in its final stage
of collapse. With the security of Hong Kong as a pretext, the British
demanded a 99-year lease on what came to be known as the New
Territories - land farther into China, beyond the Kowloon Peninsula.
That lease began on July 1, 1898, and expired on July 1, 1997.
To understand this history properly, one needs only imagine that the
United States had lost its "war on drugs" and had to cede New York City
and a good part of New Jersey to Colombia, whose government had come
under the influence of drug lords. The new government of the Republic
of China, upon its establishment after the 1911 revolution that
overthrew the decrepit Qing Dynasty, immediately declared null and void
all unequal treaties imposed on China during this period of national
shame. The People's Republic, established on October 1, 1949, holds the
same position.
Settlement in the new British colony of Hong Kong grew slowly at first;
the population rose from 32,983 in 1851 to 878,947 in 1931. Recurring
social unrest in reaction to British racial oppression gave rise to
Chinese xenophobia that acquired nationalistic overtones in Hong Kong.
Historically, Chinese society had been a multi-ethnic melting pot until
the arrival of European imperialism. Such nationalistic agitation lay
hidden behind a veneer of stability and prosperity propped up by the
ruling British with the help of a subservient local elite who were
rewarded with leftover monopolistic royal charters considered not
lucrative enough by the British trading firms themselves. Hong Kong
began to prosper economically because it served the geopolitical
interests of its colonial master, without any hindrance from
ideological delusion about free market and democracy.
The 1911 revolution led by Sun Yatsen against the Qing Dynasty was
hatched in Chinese communities overseas. Hong Kong was one of its
operating bases due to the fact that British authorities were not
proficient enough in the Chinese language to detect and suppress
Chinese revolutionary activities under their noses. However, any
anti-imperialist expression of disrespect to the British crown or
hostility toward British authority was swiftly and firmly suppressed
with imprisonment and/or deportation. Even after World War II, it was a
criminal offense to remain seated or not to stand at attention when
"God Save the King/Queen" was performed prior to sporting events and at
the end of movies.
During the early decades of the 20th century, Hong Kong served as a
refuge for those fleeing social disorder on the mainland during the
Taiping Uprising that broke out in 1851 and during the Northern
Expedition against warlords after the founding of the Republic in 1912.
The outbreak of three large labor disputes, namely the first general
strike in support of the Manchurian Railway workers' strike (1920), the
Seamen Strike (1922) and Guangdong-Hong Kong General Strike (1925-26)
reflected widespread revolutionary/nationalistic attitudes and the
close linkage between Hong Kong residents and their mainland
compatriots. These strikes were all brutally suppressed by the British
to keep the Hong Kong economy humming, with the approval of the elite
compradore class.
In 1927, the Kuomintang (Nationalists) escalated their campaign against
the Communists. Mao Zedong established a rural guerrilla base in 1928.
The Japanese occupied Manchuria in 1932 and the Chinese Communist
government declared war on Japan, but the Sino-Japanese war did not
formally break out until 1937 after the Xi'an incident, which brought
about a united front against Japanese aggression. As Japanese forces
advanced into China, hundreds of thousands of displaced Chinese sought
refuge in British Hong Kong, bringing the colony's population at the
outbreak of World War II to about 1.6 million. At the height of the
influx, 500,000 homeless people were sleeping in the streets as a
result of British indifference for the welfare of the colonial
subjects.
Life was harsh and undignified for all of colonial Hong Kong's Chinese
residents, not just the new refugees. The densely populated slums where
the Chinese lived were regularly ravaged by disease, fires and typhoons
and by criminal elements condoned by the British colonial
administration as necessary for doing the dirty work for British opium
smuggling. Primitive conditions mixed with unregulated foreign traffic
made the colony without public hygiene vulnerable to recurring
epidemics of new diseases.
Hong Kong society was segregated between privileged, wealthy British
masters and the Chinese they employed and ruled through local
compradores. Hong Kong Chinese were not allowed out after dark by a
policy of race curfew. They were barred from European residential
districts and parks except as servants. Most Westerners in Hong Kong
treated the Chinese as "a degraded race" - in the words of a
missionary. "You cannot be two minutes in a Hong Kong street," wrote
another observer of the time, "without seeing Europeans striking
coolies with their canes or umbrellas." An example of these racial
tensions surfaced in 1857, when a Chinese baker was accused of
attempting to poison his Western clients by lacing their bread with
arsenic. The incident caused no fatalities, and the baker was later
acquitted for lack of evidence, but not for lack of motive.
Hong Kong's fortunes rose in the 1850s and '60s as refugees flooded the
colony, fleeing from the social chaos in China associated with the
economic dislocation from the resultant drain of silver from widespread
opium addiction and periodic foreign invasion and ruinous war
reparations. The new arrivals helped the colony evolve from a
drug-trading outpost into a permanent settlement, providing a
productive base to serve British economic imperialism.
Western apologists stress British contribution to the development of a
market economy in Hong Kong through its laissez-faire policy. What
Britain actually did was to transfer wealth accumulated from
imperialistic exploitation of China to Britain through an offshore
island on the China coast ruled by British colonialism. Thus the
argument that British colonialism built a prosperous world city on a
barren rock by virtue of a superior economic system was as ridiculous
as Kipling's "White Man's Burden" bringing civilization to India.
Professor Hui Po-Keung of Lingnan University, Professor Tak-Wing Ngo of
Leiden University and others have written on Hong Kong's colonial
compradore politics and monopolistic middle-man capitalism and the
propagandistic dissemination of mythical free-market ideology in Hong
Kong, despite total British control of the colonial command economy.
These research findings refute the myth that Hong Kong's economic
success was a result of a laissez-faire policy, or the outcome of
free-enterprise response to free markets. Evidence showed that British
colonial policies dictated Hong Kong's commercial and trade development
to support British interests, while discouraging any local
industrialization before World War II, and also blocking opportunities
for industrial upgrading in the 1960s that would have enabled Hong Kong
to compete independently in world markets.
The British colonial government in Hong Kong handled conflicts between
China and Japan during the 1930s strictly on evolving British global
geopolitical interests. British actions obstructed China's fight to
preserve territorial integrity against Japanese occupation of Manchuria
for fear of antagonizing a rising Japan and on the principle that
foreign occupation of semi-colonial China was the international norm.
The then British-owned South China Morning Post did not depict Japan in
the early 1930s as the aggressor in China, lest such a depiction
reflect on British occupation of Hong Kong itself as aggression.
After the Japanese seizure of Manchuria in 1939, British policy had
been to appease Japanese aggression as a natural effect of geopolitical
Darwinism. From the July 7 Lugouqiao incident of 1937 that formally
launched the Sino-Japanese War to the fall of Hong Kong to Japanese
forces on Christmas Day in 1941, British policy on China, known in the
British Colonial Office as "Passage of Hong Kong", was divided into two
phases. The first phase, before the fall of Guangzhou to Japan in
October 1938, allowed Hong Kong to supply China on a profit basis. The
League of Nations had advised its members, of which Britain was one,
not to interfere with China's defensive war against Japan. The second
phase, after Japanese occupation of Guangzhou, closed Hong Kong off
from legally providing any supply for China.
Britain's neutrality in the Sino-Japanese war enabled British Hong Kong
to trade with both China and Japan at the same time, supplying war
materiel to both warring parties. This compensated for the drop in
trade in Hong Kong resulting from the rapidly deteriorating war economy
in China. The security of the British Empire, of which Hong Kong was a
crown jewel, was conditioned on non-antagonistic British-Japanese
relations. British interests in China would face unwanted threats and
British status in the Far East would face further decline if German
global expansion in alliance with Japan's Greater East Asia
Co-Prosperity Sphere were to strengthen. Demonstrations and protests
from Hong Kong Chinese against British and other Hong Kong companies
trading with Japan were suppressed and calls for a boycott of Japanese
goods were disallowed by the colonial government in the name of free
trade and law and order.
Britain's policy of neutrality, together with Japan's blockade of the
Chinese coast, made Hong Kong's Victoria Harbor and the Kowloon-Canton
Railway critically important. Hong Kong became a vital route for
transporting goods, commodities and munitions by sea from overseas and
by train via Guangzhou to Wuhan, where Chinese forces were staging a
desperate defensive battle. After Japanese destruction of the Chinese
section of the Kowloon-Canton Railway in October 1937, the British
agreed to Chinese proposal of building a Kowloon-Guangzhou highway as a
replacement route in early 1938, as a commercial consideration. It was
also a policy consistent with British geopolitical interest in
preventing total Japanese military success in China, so as to avoid the
possibility of Japanese pressure turning against British interests once
Japanese control of China was total. The plan to import nine
British-made airplanes to China from Hong Kong in November 1937 was
allowed by the British Colonial Office despite strong protests by
Robert Craigie, the British ambassador to Japan.
The geopolitically induced trade helped relieve the Hong Kong economy
from some of the global effects of the Great Depression of the 1930s.
Combining patriotism with financial benefits, Hong Kong Chinese took a
leading role in supporting Chinese war efforts against the Japanese
through the utilization of the Kowloon-Canton Railway and Victoria
Harbor and later the Kowloon-Guangzhou highway. The British announced
that keeping Hong Kong open to the mainland was crucial to China's
future, while the US secretary of state applauded the "Passage of Hong
Kong" as enhancing China's ability to resist Japanese invasion. Both
Britain and the United States hoped that China could tie down Japanese
expansionism enough to spare Hong Kong and US interests in the Pacific,
particularly the Philippines, from Japanese aggression.
Hong Kong's closeness to the approaching war zone, Japan's growing
threat to Hong Kong, and Britain's apprehension on a two-front war in
Europe and Asia caused Britain to discontinue a tilt toward China after
Japanese occupation of Guangzhou in October 1938. The Japanese, having
taken Guangzhou, were more determined to cut off supplies to China from
Hong Kong. When the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact was signed in
August 1939, Britain tried to persuade Japan to withdraw from the Axis
cause by offering de facto recognition of Japanese occupation of China.
British appeasement of Japanese aggression in China continued until the
attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941.
The Chinese government's proposal to establish an aircraft-reassembly
factory in the New Territories in August 1937, as well as a Hong Kong
company's proposal to build two military steamers for Guangzhou in
January 1938, were refused by the British under the second phase of the
Passage of Hong Kong. Immediately after the fall of Guangzhou, British
governor Alexander Northcote stopped all transshipment of munitions and
weapons from Hong Kong to the mainland. In December 1939, the British
government prohibited the reassembly of four US-made passenger planes
in Hong Kong. The planes had been purchased by the Chinese government.
In June 1940, in a desperate last-ditch effort to appease Japan, the
British formally closed the Passage of Hong Kong and terminated British
tolerance for the supply of munitions, weapons, fuel, and gasoline to
China. Hong Kong banks were forbidden to handle aid funds destined for
China from overseas Chinese communities. Nevertheless, massive
smuggling of military materiel to China and underground financial
transactions continued to benefit the Hong Kong economy.
When Japan began bombing Shanghai in November 1937, it unleashed a
massive influx of refugees into Hong Kong, the greatest in its history
since the Taiping Uprising in the 1850s. The population grew by 50
percent, while slum housing expanded by 8 percent only. The 650,000
refugees created problems of crisis proportion on already overburdened,
substandard housing conditions while the British pampered themselves in
their luxurious villas on the Peak lamenting over cocktails on the
uncouth manners of the lesser breed.
During the Japanese occupation of Guangzhou, armed resistance was
mounted by the Dongjiang (East River) guerrillas, originally formed by
patriot Zeng Sheng in Guangdong province in 1939, comprising peasants,
students and seamen. Among its members was the revolutionary sculptor
Zhang Songhe, later a member of the 5th, 6th and 7th People's Political
Consultative Conference, who became the chief editor of the Pictorial
of the Guangdong and Guangxi column of guerrilla forces. His
masterpieces include the sculpture of Anti-Japanese Guerrilla
Warfare on the Monument to the People's Heroes in Tiananmen Square,
sculptures in Shijiazhuang Martyrs' Mausoleum, the design of the
Monument to Martyrs in Shenzhen and sculptures on the Dongjiang
Monument to Martyrs.
When the British surrendered Hong Kong to Japan in December 1941, the
Dongjiang guerrilla force had more than 6,000 fighters. In the wake of
the British retreat, the guerrillas picked up abandoned weapons and
established bases in the Japanese-occupied New Territories and Kowloon.
Applying guerrilla warfare, they targeted traitors and collaborators,
protected patriotic traders in Kowloon and Guangzhou, attacked the
occupation police station at Tai Po, and set off bombs at
Japanese-controlled Kai Tak Airport. In addition, the guerrillas
rescued British prisoners of war, notably Sir Douglas Clague, Professor
Gordon King, and David Bosanquet. One of the guerrilla force's
significant contribution to the Allied cause was their rescue of 20
American pilots who parachuted into Kowloon when their planes ran out
of fuel after the Dolittle raid on Tokyo.
Founded in January 1942, the Guangdong Renmin Kangri (People's
Anti-Japanese) Guerrillas were established to reinforce other
anti-Japanese forces in the Dongjiang (East River) and Zhujiang (Pearl
River) deltas. The third and fifth branches under Cai Guoliang, which
were sent to Hong Kong and Kowloon, became known as Gangjiu Dadui (Hong
Kong-Kowloon Battalion). Led by Wong Kwun-fong and Lau Hak-tsai, the
guerrilla force attacked traitors and enemy forces, while growing farm
produce and protecting civilian lives in Hong Kong. In addition, the
guerrilla force extended its influence in April 1942 over Lantau
Island, enhancing communication with Macau and Guangzhou.
The spread of guerrilla activities into cosmopolitan Hong Kong Island
assisted Chinese intelligence on Japanese strategies and operations.
Furthermore, the force played an important role in saving British and
other foreign figures of the Allied cause, and 89 of them - 20 British,
54 Indians, eight Americans, three Danes, two Norwegians, one Russian
and one Filipino - were saved from enemy hands. However, because of
Japanese control of Guangzhou and British appeasement policy, and the
subsequent British surrender on Christmas Day 1941, Hong Kong was
officially closed to Mainland Free China contact until the end of World
War II.
On December 8, 1941, one day after Pearl Harbor, just hours after Tokyo
ordered attacks on the Philippines and the Malay Peninsula, Japanese
troops swept across the border from occupied China into Hong Kong's New
Territories. Japanese forces quickly destroyed the colony's weak
defenses, manned by fresh British troops recently redeployed from
Singapore and still unfamiliar with Hong Kong geography. British
commanding officers did not take seriously the idea that an "Asiatic"
army could ever defeat the British Army that had been invincible for
more than a century in Asia. The only effective resistance was from the
small Hong Kong Volunteer Force of local Chinese youths. By Christmas
Day, the British had surrendered, which brought nearly four years of
brutal Japanese occupation.
The pending defeat of Japan in 1945 raised a new question of who should
rule Hong Kong after the war. At the beginning of World War II, US
president Franklin D Roosevelt had argued that the British should
return Hong Kong to the China after the war. But at the Yalta summit in
1943, Roosevelt gave in to British prime minister Winston Churchill's
insistence that Britain did not fight the war merely to give away the
empire.
The British moved quickly to regain control of Hong Kong after
hostilities ceased. Tokyo had ordered the Japanese forces in Hong Kong
to surrender to the British. The Nationalist Chinese government held
back its troops at the Hong Kong border. Franklin Gimson, Hong Kong's
colonial secretary, left his prison camp as soon as he received word of
the Japanese surrender, and declared himself the colony's acting
governor. Gimson set up a provisional government, which welcomed a
British naval fleet into Hong Kong harbor several days later. British
Rear Admiral Sir Cecil Harcourt then formally accepted the Japanese
surrender of Hong Kong.
Hong Kong's postwar recovery was swift. Eight months after the Japanese
surrender, the colony's civilian administration was restored.
Traditional colonial discriminatory taboos were relaxed in the postwar
years. Chinese were no longer restricted from public beaches, parks or
European residential districts, or from owning property on Victoria
Peak.
World War II disrupted the socio-economic structure of colonial Hong
Kong. After the Japanese surrender in August 1945, Chinese civilians
returned in force to Hong Kong at the rate of almost 100,000 a month,
most expecting China, as a member of the victorious Allies, to recover
the Japanese-occupied colony from British imperialism, but they were
sadly disappointed by events. The population, which by August 1945 had
been reduced to about 600,000, rose by the end of 1947 to an estimated
1.8 million. The Chinese economy was deteriorating under the
Nationalist policy of elitist capitalism, which was entirely
antithetical to Chinese historical conditions. Soon afterward, as the
Nationalist government began to lose support from the masses, and its
army faced defeat in civil war at the hands of the People's Liberation
Army, Hong Kong received a population influx unparalleled in its
history. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese - mainly from Guangdong
Province, Shanghai, and other commercial centers - entered the colony
during 1948-49 and, by the spring of 1950, the population had swelled
to an estimated 2.2 million. Since then, it has continued to rise from
population inflow from China and now totals 6.5 million.
Modern Hong Kong rose from the ashes of World War II, created partly
out of an urgent necessity to deal with one of the greatest refugee
crises of its time. Hong Kong's economy slowed when the United States
placed an economic embargo on China after the founding of the People's
Republic on October 1, 1949, but the Korean War broke out in 1951 and
brought new economic life to Hong Kong. It was during this period that
the shipping sector of Hong Kong got its start, leasing anything that
floated to the US Navy to fill the sudden rise in demand by
trans-Pacific military transport.
But Hong Kong also played a critical role in supplying China
unofficially. While Chinese soldiers were being killed in Korea by
US-British troops, with the son of Mao Zedong among those killed,
freedom of speech in Hong Kong consisted of open advocacy for the
violent overthrow of the Chinese government. At the same time, any call
for passive resistance to Western imperialism and British colonialism
was censored and punishable with imprisonment in the colony.
Even today, the English-language press in Hong Kong remains
predominantly anti-China under the guise of press freedom. When the
SARS problem first broke out, the Hong Kong English-language press was
full of criticism of alleged Chinese government cover-up as typical of
totalitarianism, despite the fact that the main motivation had been to
avoid market panic. But when Toronto adopted in essence the same
approach to the SARS scare to protect its economy, the Western press
was full of editorials expressing understanding.
The Korean War had a fundamental geopolitical impact on Hong Kong and
its economy. The US embargo and blockade against China, plus the
interference by the US 7th Fleet in the reunification of Taiwan, made
Hong Kong the needed window to the outside world for an isolated China.
China took advantage of a British Hong Kong as a base to run the US
blockade, and for intelligence work in Taiwan and in the United States
and its allies.
Although underground communist cadres came to Hong Kong in 1948 with an
ultimate mission of liberating the territory, the eruption of the
Korean War stabilized the geopolitical position of Hong Kong. Chinese
tolerance for the continuation of British colonial rule was justified
by China's geopolitical need for a window to the West. British official
ignorance of Chinese political literature created a void that became
the target of competition and occupation by the two ideological rivals:
the Nationalists supported by US propaganda and the Communists.
During the Cold War era, global competition between the two superpowers
became the backdrop of the rivalry between the Communists and the
Kuomintang, making Hong Kong a key residual battleground in the
ideological war in the Chinese language. British diplomatic recognition
of the People's Republic and de-recognition of the Nationalist regime
on Taiwan made outright ban of pro-Beijing activities untenable in
British Hong Kong. On the other hand, Chinese non-recognition of
British colonial rule of Hong Kong prevented Chinese diplomatic
presence in the British colony. Until the return of Hong Kong to China
on July 1, 1997, China was represented by the New China News Agency in
Hong Kong, which served as a de facto diplomatic mission.
With its traditional entrepot role cut off by the US embargo against
China in 1951, the colony was forced to develop local industries for
export. Hong Kong took advantage of a continuous supply of cheap labor
in the form of refugees, financed by flight capital from China, and the
colonial government's traditional disinterest in regulating labor
standards as long as land prices kept rising to keep government revenue
flowing. But the main factor of growth of labor-intensive manufacturing
was the special access to the US consumer market, kept open through a
geopolitical understanding between the United States and the United
Kingdom, in recognition of the strategic location of Hong Kong. This
was the early kernel of globalization, with the US providing a market
for goods too cheap to warrant production by high-paid US labor, and
simultaneously giving US neo-liberalism an early experimental station
for real-life "peaceful evolution" on the doorstep of communist China.
But unlike Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, Hong Kong did not get on a
high-end manufacturing path for lack of any industrial policy. British
colonial education, trade and finance policies kept Hong Kong in
low-end manufacturing sweatshops for the narrow benefit of British
trading monopolies and banks, which had never wanted to endow the
colony with industrialization. At the same time, the Hong Kong
government's long-standing land speculation that enabled a tax policy
that attracted foreign investment further contributed to rapid growth
of the low-end export sector. The colony began exporting in
ever-increasing amounts cheap textiles, garments, low-end electronics,
cameras and watches, plastic flowers, toys and many other low-priced
goods made in small sweatshops, stamped "made in Hong Kong" to clear
the US custom embargo on China.
But most of Hong Kong's wealth came from land speculation, with the
colonial government as the chief speculator and beneficiary. This
policy condemned labor in Hong Kong into perpetual under-education, low
subsistence wages and sweatshop working conditions.
The influx of refugees from China continued unabated during the 1960s,
providing ample cheap labor and occasional entrepreneurial human
resources for the manufacturing workforce. The British colonial
government left the refugees to fend for themselves, to live and
struggle for survival under appalling, subhuman conditions.
In 1953, a tragic, spectacular night fire engulfed hillside shanty
slums in the Shek Kip Mei squatter area on Christmas Eve, destroying
tens of thousands of refugee squatter huts unreachable by firefighting
equipment, leaving 53,000 homeless. The tragic event attracted the
attention of the international media, and even became the backdrop of a
best-selling novel about a bar girl: The World of Suzy Wong,
which later was made into a Hollywood film. The British colonial
government was finally spurred into reluctant action by world opinion,
introducing a housing program for refugees with the construction of
vast public-resettlement buildings - standard seven-story walk-up
concrete structures with minimum facilities in a refugee city. With
virtual dictatorial power, the colonial government managed to solve the
housing problem for refugees in short order, although the result was
little better than highrise concentration camps.
By the mid-1960s, escalating US involvement in the Vietnam War made
Hong Kong a major supply point for the US military. Hong Kong's ports,
shipping and logistics sectors grew further to serve the new
geopolitical needs. The colony became a regular stop for US troops
seeking "rest and recreation". It was also the West's main
pre-satellite spy post into a China isolated by hostile US policy. Much
of Hong Kong's prosperity during this period came from an economy that
served the geopolitical aims of the United States in the Cold War. It
had as much to do with free markets and democracy as cheese on the
moon.
Hong Kong's "go-go" pace, while not the same as free-market dynamism,
created typical problems many neutral cities such as Casablanca during
World War II faced: espionage intrigues, organized crime, rampant
prostitution and drug dealing, smuggling, polarization between rich and
poor, ideological cynicism, political opportunism and official
corruption. The colony's low-end manufacturing sector was unregulated,
and the labor force had to work long hours in sweatshops under inhumane
and unsafe conditions for less-than-subsistence pay with no health or
retirement benefits or job security. Small entrepreneurs were forced to
seek financing from predatory lenders. Child labor exploitation was
routinely practiced. Human rights and civil liberties were never issues
about which British colonialism cared much.
The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution unfolded in China in 1966.
While the issues raised in the Cultural Revolution on whether politics
should be the determinant of the correct development path remain
debatable to this day, the excesses associated with internecine
political struggle of the decade-long upheaval left the nation
exhausted and its economy in near-total collapse. The political
cataclysm spilled over into Hong Kong. In 1967, a labor dispute at an
artificial-flower sweatshop in Hong Kong quickly escalated into
widespread violent street demonstrations. For several months,
protesters clashed with police, overturned cars and buses, stoned hotel
lobbies and shop windows, and in a general release of century-old,
pent-up rage and hostility toward colonial capitalism, disrupting life
and business in the colony. Several bombs were set off in a wave of
terrorism. At one point, shots were fired across the border from China
into Hong Kong.
British officials responded with a ruthless crackdown against the
sudden release of pent-up nationalism, suspending what little civil
liberty the colony had traditionally allowed, in the name of
anti-communism, imprisoning thousands without trial and closing down
left-wing Chinese-language newspapers. Official reports acknowledged
that some 50 people were killed during the riots by excessive police
force, with thousands more wounded.
To defuse a recurrence of social unrest, social and government reforms
in Hong Kong followed, including the cleanup of the openly corrupt,
scandal-ridden police force. At the same time, China made clear that it
still considered Hong Kong a part of Chinese territory it would
eventually reclaim.
It was at this point that British imperialism decided to solicit US
assistance by the gradual adoption of bogus democracy and free markets
as a new colonialism with a human face. The colonial government then
began officially referring to Hong Kong as a territory, not a colony.
British banking interests began nurturing a new breed of native
compradores with special preferential bank credit. Their role was to
pose as a national bourgeoisie to front for neocolonialism.
These new compradore tycoons, some speaking no English and unwashed by
British upper-class education and mannerisms, dutifully bailed out
British interests from the political risk of rising nationalism. They
acquired British trading firms at inflated market prices with loans
from British-owned Hong Kong banks, backed by profit they made in
real-estate speculation, light manufacturing, shipping and retail
finance and banking services for poor natives. The huge profit they
squeezed from the colony were invested in British and US enterprises
overseas that suffered huge losses, in a form of cross-border political
transfer of wealth through the market mechanism. These new tycoons
welcomed the new liberal colonialism as they benefited from token
gestures of the end of racial discrimination.
The British finally allowed that rich Chinese should no longer be
treated as subhuman, at least in public, setting them apart from the
masses of the Yellow Herd as Honorable Whites who might even qualify
for a knighthood from the queen. Compradores now could comfort
themselves by claiming they were serving democracy and freedom rather
than imperialism and colonialism. They posed as heroes of capitalism
instead of running dogs of colonialism.
Colonialism, the administrative system of imperialism, like its slavery
kin, is inherently evil. Yet the evil institution of slavery in US
history did not prevent the emergence of great leaders from the South,
such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Similarly, the evil
institution of colonialism in Hong Kong history did not prevent the
emergence of a sensible administrator in the person of Murray
MacLehose.
Fluent in Chinese and a student of Chinese culture and history,
Crawford Murray MacLehose was first posted to Hong Kong in 1963 as a
political advisor to ensure that colonial policy in Hong Kong supported
evolving British policy on China. He held several other political posts
in the British Empire before becoming Hong Kong's 25th British governor
in 1971.
From 1971, when he assumed the post of governor, to 1982 when he left
the post and returned to Britain, MacLehose, of a new breed of
governors more in tune with the progressive British Foreign Office than
the conservative Colonial Office, practiced an "enlightened form" of
colonial administration with an eye on Cold War geopolitics. He
moderated the traditional colonial attitude of aloof, discriminatory
disinterest in Chinese community problems and needs. He also balanced
the traditional policy of open government support for British
monopolistic businesses with a new progressive social awareness.
Reflecting the ideological wind from the British homeland under Labour
control, MacLehose took an active role in social welfare (particularly
public housing, medical care, colonial education, and protection of
workers), and improved the living conditions of Hong Kong residents
within the context of liberal capitalism and benign colonialism. The
MacLehose administration accorded with Hong Kong's economic takeoff,
laid a socio-economic foundation for the colony as a labor-intensive
manufacturing center, and instilled a sense of respectable if not
totally honorable identity for colonial Hong Kong residents.
MacLehose established the Independent Commission against Corruption
(ICAC) to ensure rule by colonial law, even indicting mid-level British
police officers and colonial officials who had run a police force and a
regulatory regime known for widespread corruption. While the ICAC
stopped administrative corruption in the colony, much of the regulatory
regime of structural British preference remained in place and at the
same time exempted US commercial interests from British protectionism.
After a mass demonstration by off-duty policemen on Queensway in
Central in 1976, the governor ordered an amnesty for all crimes of
corruption committed before January 1, 1977, lest the entire police
force had to be imprisoned. The rule of law indeed.
MacLehose initiated moves toward social welfare as effective and timely
responses to mounting social and political turmoil, such as the riot
against the Star Ferry fare increases in 1966 and the leftist
anti-British-imperialism strikes and demonstrations in 1967. He handled
deftly the student movement launched by Hong Kong University students
in 1968-69, the movement to legalize the Cantonese language in 1970,
and demonstrations in Queen Victoria Park in defense of Chinese
sovereignty over the Diaoyutai Archipelago in 1971.
MacLehose's liberal responses and concessions protected British
interests and stabilized British rule in Hong Kong by reducing the most
visibly oppressive aspects of old-time colonialism. In contrast to the
socio-political upheaval then raging in China, many in Hong Kong began
to let the practical benefit of a peaceful life mask the political
issue of national honor. The threat of communism was promoted as an
anesthetic for British imperialism and colonialism with high
effectiveness among the refugees, who were mostly members of the
petty-bourgeois class that fled from communism in China.
The Vietnam War aborted president Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" for
the United States, but it brought economic benefits in the form of
subsidized trade for Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Singapore,
Malaysia, Indonesia, Taiwan and Hong Kong. While the war created a
backlash in US domestic politics against anti-communist mania, it
strengthened a chain of anti-communist frontline bases in East and
Southeast Asia, in which Hong Kong was a crucial link. Thus Hong Kong
basked in the glory of geopolitical trade preference with the US.
MacLehose became governor at the end of Hong Kong's tumultuous
anti-colonial phase, but the economic fringe benefits from the Vietnam
War gave Hong Kong a much needed and timely boost, which stabilized
Hong Kong's economy at the beginning of MacLehose's benign rule.
After the economic takeoff in the 1970s, primary and secondary
education in the colony improved by government policy and quotas for
tertiary educational institutions increased. In 1969, the Chinese
University of Hong Kong, a conglomeration of US missionary educational
institutions expelled from China, moved to Shatin on a new campus as
Hong Kong's second officially recognized public university.
Notwithstanding its institutional roots as an anti-communist propaganda
machine, the Chinese University provided a counter base to Hong Kong
University, the bastion of British colonial elitist education. In 1970,
the government agreed to convert the former Hung Hom Industrial College
into Hong Kong Polytechnic.
The literacy rate and level of education of the population rose, albeit
still way below world-class standards and still infested with colonial
mentality of rote learning and discouragement of independent, let alone
revolutionary, thinking. To this defect was added the anti-communist
propaganda financed from US sources. Doctoral and postgraduate
education was non-existent even for professional schools. There was no
basic research in the sciences and much of the education was focused on
commercial job training for clerical and mechanical maintenance work.
Much of the research in the social sciences produced in this period was
little more than outright hostile intelligence gathering and anti-China
propaganda.
Graduates of Hong Kong universities went predominantly into careers in
the docile, apolitical Civil Service. Offspring of the elite went to
universities overseas and returned to join family businesses that had
nothing to do with their studies. Scions of wealthy families who were
promising nuclear physicists were put to work in the plastic-toy
business. The professions that prospered were law, medicine, accounting
and architecture. Even then, overseas professionals were routinely
called in for significant assignments. This is true even today. While
Hong Kong has yet to adopt a rule-based competitive policy, it has
never felt the need to adopt any affirmative-action program for local
talent.
In addition, in the 1970s, with the spread of television, TVB (begun in
1967) exerted a strong influence with improved public communication,
particularly in the imposition of Anglo-US anti-China propaganda on an
uninformed and unthinking public poisoned by a colonial education. In
the early 1970s, remnants of Qing Dynasty Manchu feudal laws were
officially abolished, putting an official end to one colony, two legal
systems. It may be said that the MacLehose regime signaled the
beginning of Hong Kong's self-delusion in the name of modernization. In
reality, MacLehose repositioned Hong Kong by giving it a central
anti-China role in the Cold War.
During his time in charge, MacLehose oversaw a historic period of
social reform and public investment that formed the foundation for
unprecedented economic growth, including the building of Hong Kong's
underground transit system. Lord MacLehose was knighted in 1983, a year
after his retirement. These social programs formed the foundation of
Hong Kong's subsequent economic success in the command economy, not the
much-touted free-enterprise myth.
In retirement, Lord MacLehose summed up his opposition as governor, to
any introduction of democratic elections in Hong Kong by saying: "If
the communists won, that would be the end of Hong Kong. If the
nationalists won, that would bring in the communists," in an interview
in Britain's Daily Telegraph. Of course even MacLehose was not
delusionary enough to contemplate the possibility of the British
winning. British colonialism had no use for democracy until Britain was
forced to return Hong Kong to China.
MacLehose, on October 10, 1979, reported the government's housing
policy of creating between 40,000 and 45,000 units annually: "The
housing program continues to be of prime importance, and in the review
of public-sector expenditure it was rightly given very high priority
... None of the housing, amenities, schools and landscaped surroundings
would be of any value without employment. And the new towns are not
intended as dormitories. So the progress of industry in the New
Territories is vital." Thus public housing and an industrial policy of
low-end manufacturing for a geopolitically guaranteed US market put
Hong Kong on the road to prosperity.
Eighteen years later, on October 8, 1997, Tung Chee-hwa made his first
address as the first chief executive of the Hong Kong SAR under Chinese
sovereignty. Again, housing was a key theme. The current system, he
said, had "produced erratic price patterns and left potential home
buyers and developers in the lurch". He set as a goal the production of
85,000 new public and private units annually within two years.
Tung's policy speech, which laid out a five-year plan for the SAR, went
far beyond MacLehose's vistas. Hong Kong's new leader unveiled plans to
cut the waiting times for public rental housing from six and a half
years to four years by 2003 and no more than three years by 2005. He
spoke of building major infrastructure links and developing technology
parks to diversify the economy into the next century. And he announced
concrete initiatives to alleviate the livelihood burdens of the SAR's
expanding elderly population. Tung identified improving competitiveness
and education as the key challenges facing the new Hong Kong - and
launched comprehensive initiatives to achieve such goals. He stressed
the rapidly growing ties - notably economic, cultural and technological
- between Hong Kong and China, though he was careful to omit mentioning
political ties. By doing so, he was turning the attention of a new
generation of Hong Kong residents to the vast opportunities that
awaited them in what was officially their motherland once more. But the
arm's-length attitude on political integration with China means that
this vast opportunity remains elusive to the Hong Kong economy.
Most critically, Tung's vision did not include any awareness of the new
geopolitical landscape. The new Hong Kong SAR, by constitution, puts
fundamental obstacles in the way of its needed integration into the new
Chinese economy, while its former colonial role to serve Anglo-US
interests in China is becoming inoperative. Hong Kong has yet to shed
its compradore mentality or its compradore policy. It continues to look
at China from the outside in, representing the geopolitical and
economic interests of the West, by presenting its residual colonial
system as the more superior of the two systems in OCTS, instead of an
obsolete system that must be restructured in time.
When faced with economic collapse from Hong Kong's failure to
restructure its economy to respond to the new geopolitical landscape,
the new SAR government hangs on to obsolete myths of its colonial
predecessor. Hong Kong's top leaders tirelessly mouth meaningless
slogans of focusing on "sound fundamentals", rule of law, free markets,
small government, sound monetary regime based on its dysfunctional
currency peg, in subservient tribune to US neo-liberal globalization,
which has destroyed the colonial command economy. To make matters
worse, it has abandoned its public housing and other social programs
started three decades earlier by MacLehose, in a panic attempt to save
the over-leveraged real-estate tycoons at the expense of the future of
the Hong Kong economy. While the new leaders continue to pin their hope
for Hong Kong on external trade, they excuse lamely their dead-end
policies by lamenting that Hong Kong has no control over external
factors.
Next: Missing the boat to renewal
|