The extract from Lee Kuan Yew's book, From Third World to First, which appeared in the Sunday Morning Post on September 17, is misleading. The last governor Chris Patten is made responsible for acrimony in his final years, for derailing the 'through train', for tightening post-handover election rules and for relaxing government control, thus reducing Tung Chee-hwa's ability to resist pressure groups. The extract ignores Tiananmen, the resultant flood of pleas to London for help by local VIPs and that Mr Patten was responding to those pleas. His government truly became ineffective and pressure groups burgeoned; but I recall at that time a torrent of abuse from the north, an alternative government in Shenzhen, frustration of whatever Mr Patten sought to do, the careless attitude of Chinese negotiators for Hong Kong's future (over Container Terminal 9, the new airport, the sewage system), the attempts of businessmen to have Mr Patten recalled, and all the other nastiness. It is not surprising that pressure groups burgeoned, but their growth was hardly caused by Mr Patten. Mr Lee ignores proximate causes. When China destabilised Hong Kong in 1967, the British dismantled colonialism, encouraged investment and created wealth for 30 years. In 1967, Hong Kongers were indistinguishable from mainlanders and could have been readily reabsorbed. Now they have their own ideas. In 1989, the Beijing authorities shot hundreds of residents and students, horrifying the Hong Kong populace, who watched the massacre on TV. This extract suggests the Chinese Government is not responsible for the consequences of its actions. It has been my observation that China's leaders seldom recognise incipient problems - that is their forte. The extract says that to be useful to the mainland, Hong Kong must work with Chinese officials and understand their mindset without allowing it to affect Hong Kong. We should steer a middle course between becoming another Chinese city and democracy/rule of law. I believe Hong Kong officials understand the mindset as well as Mr Lee. To suggest it can be resisted, or that there is some middle course, seems absurd. Hong Kong's Government is not sovereign like Singapore's. All the provinces are represented here, the major Chinese companies are here, think tanks operate, the New China News Agency and its 10,000 sleuths do their work, thousands of selected mainlanders immigrate month after month, the local media is often silent. Mainland interests are furthered by private meetings and lobbies and fronted by local businessmen. Even when a matter can be brought into the open for discussion, as one British negotiator on the Joint Liaison Group noted, 'We say 'two systems' and they say 'one country' '. Now the latest election has revealed electoral support for Beijing. Mr Tung's difficulty is not limited authority transmitted from the previous government; it is that irresistible mindset that will absorb Hong Kong in five years rather than 50. ROGER HOUGHTON Sheung Wan
