Next week, Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa will visit the United States to spread the gospel that it is 'business as usual' even though Hong Kong is now under Chinese rule. Mr Tung has no shortage of friends in high places in America and they will try to ensure his visit goes smoothly. The Clinton administration backed Mr Tung from day one, so did some members of Congress and many in the business community.
While these people may want to believe that Hong Kong is still a free city, underpinned by the rule of law and a level playing field, they are not stupid and naive. Thus they may not swallow hook, line and sinker the 'business as usual' nonsense. Those who only care about trade will not want to discuss human rights and democracy. But there are those who do and they may ask Mr Tung embarrassing questions.
The American news media, which are generally pro-democracy as are most Americans, may give Mr Tung a grilling, particularly on the fraudulent and undemocratic Legislative Council elections proposed for next year. Trying to defend the indefensible is an unenviable task and may even backfire. How can Mr Tung expect the Americans to endorse election methods which are based on very limited franchise with the sole purpose of entrenching power in the rich and pro-Beijing? How can any self-respecting individual put up a plausible explanation for the convoluted, archaic and elitist functional constituencies, particularly the part involving corporate voting by banks, companies and business associations? Under the Legislative Council Bill, 30 seats, or half of the council, would be returned by functional constituency elections. Such elections are inherently repugnant and insulting because they imply that only those chosen few have meaningful 'functions' and so given an extra vote.
Former Governor Chris Patten tried to democratise functional constituencies by expanding their franchise to 2.7 million voters. Mr Tung slashed it to 180,000. An American official said he expected next year's elections 'to be rigged, just like they were rigged in past by the British'. Do two wrongs really make a right? Last week the Washington Post published an editorial 'Broken Promises in Hong Kong'. The newspaper concluded 'it is clear long before next May's vote that the elections can be neither free nor fair'.
When asked about the undemocratic proposals, Mr Tung will no doubt say that the Hong Kong people have not vented their dissatisfaction by staging big demonstrations. But neither has there been any sense of jubilation. Many people are resigned to the lack of democracy.
Next week, I will visit San Francisco and Los Angeles at the invitation of the New York-based Human Rights Watch. I will tell the American people that there is discontent underneath the serene exterior. There is also mounting concern that Hong Kong will be run exclusively by the rich and the pro-Beijing.