UK is walking away from its responsibility to Hong Kong

The ongoing saga of the five booksellers who disappeared from Hong Kong in suspicious circumstances is a plot worthy of a cold-war spy novel. Recent revelations – notably the confirmation that Lee Po is on the mainland, and the bizarre appearance of the hitherto missing Gui Minhai on state television – continue to intrigue and alarm.

As relations between Hong Kong and the mainland grow more fractious, many Hong Kong lawmakers and the media have concluded that blame for the damage to “one country, two systems” lies squarely at Beijing’s door. Meanwhile, the other signatory of the Sino-British Joint Declaration, the United Kingdom, is silently getting away with evading its legal and moral obligations to Hong Kong.

READ MORE: Hong Kong is no longer important – Missing booksellers case proves we have become insignificant in Beijing’s eyes

Britain’s retreat from its responsibilities is a familiar pattern. In the past 18 months alone, London has refused to challenge Beijing’s announcement that it only intended to permit prescreened candidates to run in the 2017 chief executive election. In December 2014, China denied a delegation of British parliamentarians entry into Hong Kong, a provocative snub that was met with minimal condemnation from the prime minister. And, during the umbrella movement protests, Britain was conspicuously silent.

The hullabaloo surrounding bookshop owner Lee Po’s disappearance and his subsequent reappearance on the mainland appears to violate the “one country, two systems” principle. As the scandal unfolded, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond “urgently inquired” to Beijing about Lee’s whereabouts, and stressed the importance of Hong Kong’s independent judiciary. But no diplomatic action, or public demand for more answers from China, has since been taken.

A cursory look at the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office website lists 22 current policy concerns. Incredibly, Hong Kong, and more specifically Britain’s signature of the joint declaration, is not one of them. By contrast, piracy in Somalia, climate change and the Falkland Islanders’ right to self-determination – to name just three – are all listed as current British foreign policy concerns.

The serial abdication of responsibilities to the people of Hong Kong by the British government prompts an uncomfortable question: if neither signatory of the joint declaration is prepared to enforce or follow the law, is it still worth the paper it’s written on?