1 August 1995

¡§International Connections¡¨ Saga pour cold water over
 H K people¡¦s confidence towards Basic Law

(Keywords:- international connection, Basic Law, Taiwan, exchange, standard)

          THE recent  press reports of the proposal by the Preliminary Working Committee (PWC) for Hong Kong¡¦s non-governmental organisations to withdraw from international organisations in which Taiwan insists on maintaining a national status after 1997 has caused quite a stir.

          Worse, the reported saying of the PWC members  that  the future Special Administration Region (SAR) government may have to enact laws to impose sanction on non-governmental organisations for their association with international organisations not approved by the China government poses serious doubts about the value of the Basic Law.

          Such suggestion is  obviously based on political ground, which   academic, scientific and technological organisations do not tread. Yet, international connections to these non-governmental organisations are so vital that wanting of such,   international exchanges, advances and standards  might be hampered.

          Article 149 of the Basic Law stated with no uncertainty that non-governmental organisations ¡§may maintain and develop relations with their counterparts in foreign countries and regions and with relevant international organisations¡¨, and can use the name ¡§Hong Kong, China¡¨ in such activities.

          How much confidence can Hong Kong people entrust on our future mini-constitution when on one hand they are given the green light by this document, yet  are restricted by the enactment of another law, all at the pleasure and convenience of the powers that be!

          The blow is further compounded in the health care sector when it was reported that the Hong Kong Medical Association would be abiding by such recommendation and might be withdrawing from the World Medical Association.

          Let there be no misunderstanding that the high level of medical standard, the global acceptable status of the Hong Kong medical profession is not indigenous to this territory. Indeed these are the culminating efforts of the ingenuity of the profession; the unceasing quest for international connections; the insatiable imbibition of global medical advances and the unrelenting promotion of Hong Kong¡¦s medical programmes around the world. These we have our forefather to be grateful to!

          Hong Kong has always been very much of an international city -- international as geographically it is the cross road between the east and the west; international as Hong Kong produces the forum for the intermingle of culture of the east and the west; international as Hong Kong has been the looking glass for China to look out and the world to look into China. In short, Hong Kong thrives because of its international status,  its international connections.

          It will therefore be doomsday for the many non-governmental organisations, let alone medical bodies, when the goodwill, the association, the technological exchange and the participation in meeting will have to come to a grinding halt and vanish into the air -- sans hope, sans faith, sans everything. All these sacrifices -- not because of our standards, but because of political bickering between mainland China and Taiwan over a name.

          What actually is the problem, one might ask?

          Many regional and international organisations have for some time accepted Taiwan as a member under the national status of Republic of China. In many, Taiwan stands side by side with Hong Kong as founder members. Left unchanged, this relationship will, come 1997, be facing certain problems.

          As a start, it would probably lead to  the sensitive issue of a ¡§Two China Syndrome¡¨. Concurrently, many international and regional bodies are constitutional bound to a  one membership per country basis. If Taiwan remains, Hong Kong will be forced to exit.

           Furthermore, Hong Kong will come under the axe in any case should China insist on joining those organisations that are constrained by their constitutions to allow only one member for each country.

          The core of the matter, therefore, depends on how much Hong Kong is needed in these international bodies. How much these global or regional bodies treasure our participation depends on the quality of our contribution in our respective fields, be it scientific, academic or otherwise. There is nothing to stop any global organisation from amending their constitutions, if it so desires, to accommodate Hong Kong, either to allow more than one member from each country or to allow representation on a regional basis. It is for Hong Kong and Hong Kong¡¦s people to prove our worth! On the other hand, to ask Taiwan to leave, or insist that Taiwan be expelled borders on naivety.

          There is however yet another barrier. Hong Kong now has no current laws, and the current government makes no attempt to block non-governmental organisations in the participation in regional and international organisations. The suggestion of the Hong Kong convener of the PWC cultural subgroup on the contrary is thus most alarming.

          PWC members, or at least the Hong Kong members, are people who, I have no doubt,  understand Hong Kong¡¦s needs. They are, to many, the communication channel between the Hong Kong public and the hierarchy in Beijing. They must know Hong Kong people¡¦s sentiment in international connections. The least they could do is to maintain Hong Kong people¡¦s confidence by trying  to untangle this mess in which Hong Kong is a passive victim, instead of letting Hong Kong down by suggesting that we should put our tail between our hind legs and vamoose from the international scene.

(South China Morning Post)