THE article by Tse Ying (Sunday Morning Post, February 14) propounds a seemingly plausible argument that has been used ad nauseam by the pro-Beijing media to discredit any view about democratisation in Hongkong which deviates from that prescribed by Chinain the Basic Law. The argument is the British Government denied Hongkong people democratic rights for 150 years and only deigned to grant them after Beijing (in 1983) insisted the British surrender sovereignty to China in 1997. The reader is thus invited to infer only by the grace of a benevolent motherland have the Hongkong Chinese had democratic rights conferred on them. It is then suggested this last-minute rush by the British to make the government more representative must be part of a foreign conspiracy to impede China's economic progress and destabilise its government. The flaw in this argument is not that it criticises the British unreasonably for procrastinating over reform in Hongkong. Indeed, British foot-dragging was deliberate, unimaginative and irresponsible. The flaw is in the implication that China is going to be more progressive about democratic reform in Hongkong after 1997 than the British were before 1997 and that the proof is to be found in the Basic Law. Although it was obvious by the late 1970s that Hongkong society was ready for greater participation in government, and the government needed to make itself more open and accountable, little was done to effect either reform. Britain's golden opportunity to make up for past neglect came with the Sino-British Joint Declaration. This legitimised the right of Hongkong to have representative institutions and imposed a duty on the British to develop them in the transitional period. China was also obligated to give its support, but while it openly acknowledged the need for reform it impeded its implementation secretly at meetings of the Joint Liaison Group and by means of the Basic Law Drafting Committee. Governor Mr Chris Patten's difficult task is to try to salvage what little is left of Hongkong's political rights after years of British concessions to China in the interests of ''convergence'' and a ''through train''. Those who believe Beijing will give Hongkong more autonomy and democracy after 1997 than Mr Patten is fighting to get now are deluding themselves. China's track record leaves no room whatsoever for such false optimism. JOHN WALDEN University of Hongkong Centre of Asian Studies
