My Take | China’s sovereignty over Hong Kong is non-negotiable

Freedom of speech is not an absolute. It is subject to limits in practically all human societies. Sometimes such limits are justified; other times, not.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, in rendering free speech almost an absolute right, is an outlier. Many people admire it from afar. Then again, it’s much easier to deal in absolutes than having to acknowledge nuances and conditions.

It seems to me a far greater achievement for societies that have managed to balance free speech with the need for public order and social consensus. Hong Kong is trying to do just that – a free society, yet with clear obligations towards a much greater and bigger authoritarian state of which it is a part. For both moral and material reasons, those obligations must weigh more heavily on us than any other obligations.

Outsiders may try to help or hinder, but we must address, on our own terms, the city’s unique positions and challenges. One clear obligation of ours to the mainland is to maintain, without conditions, that Hong Kong is an integral part of China. It is codified in the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution. Both foundational documents also guarantee freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and other such rights protected in most liberal-democratic countries.

But each society, however free, has its own limits and challenges. Beijing’s red line for Hong Kong is not shifting all the time, as has been claimed by critics. It’s simply this: Hong Kong is an inalienable part of China.