9 -
I
oh yeah!
The British financed consortia in Hong Kong were naturally unhappy with the remarks of the Chinese
leader. The South China Morning Post and Far Eastern Economic Review, which speak for British interests, immediately launched an attack against the Chinese side. A certain lady accused the Chinese language newspapers in Hong Kong of not daring to speak up and of exercising "self-discipline" before 1997, implying that the media should oppose Beijing. A feature article in the South China Morning Post of 20 November lashed out at Ji Pengfei's remarks as a "path to an early takeover". The article
said : 11
the British .... believe that unless Hong Kong is allowed to evolve politically at a pace that meets the aspirations of the population
the newly-
recovered faith in the economic viability of Hong Kong as a powerful trading bastion will rapidly diminish once again if it becomes obvious the people are less than happy with a stagnant political structure." China has shackled the British role in Hong Kong's political reforms by "reducing Britain to a caretaker in Hong Kong". At this stage, the outbreak of a quarrel and a "public opinion war" became inevitable.
Xu Jiatun's remark of 22 November that "there is a trend of not working according to the book" made the Chinese attitude more obvious and it is only expected that the remark would draw criticisms from the pro-British and pro-Taiwan media. The great controversy became more acute.
On one side of the great controversy, the views held were: First, Hongkong people must "resist communism through democracy". Second, "return the power of government to the people"; major changes in the political system are justified and are in line with the Joint Declaration. Third, any remark made by the Chinese side on the future political system is an attempt to interfere in Hong Kong's internal affairs.
......