Beijing reaffirmed its
promises after June
1989
A Chinese government
on the brink...
desperately feared
Hong Kong subversion
SUBVERSION
After Tiananmen Square there was much talk of Hong Kong's crisis of confidence and of the risk that China would abrogate its promises and subvert Hong Kong's economic and political freedom. However, the real issue that arose after Tiananmen Square was the opposite. While Hong Kong did indeed have a crisis of confidence, it was not because Beijing tried to subvert it. As noted above, Beijing initially reaffirmed the freedom of Hong Kong people to demonstrate against Chinese policies without fear of retribution.
Hong Kong political groups did not stop, however, at demonstrating against Beijing's brutality and denouncing it in the press. Some also sent large sums of money to support dissident groups in Beijing and in Paris. Some initiated fax campaigns to send political materials into China. Some helped smuggle leading dissidents out of China. A group led by two strong supporters of democracy called for the overthrow of the Beijing leadership and, according to Beijing, asked the army to turn against the leadership.14
China at this point had an even greater crisis of confidence than Hong Kong. A million dissidents assembled in the capital city. The prospect of such a huge dissident movement allied to large amounts of money from Hong Kong appeared to the Beijing leadership as a very serious threat indeed. Hong Kong has a history as a base from which to subvert the central government of China. Moreover, Beijing had lost control of its own apparatus in Hong Kong: the newspapers owned by Beijing were all denouncing their masters, and the New China News Agency (NCNA), which serves not just as China's propaganda arm but also as its shadow government in Hong Kong, appeared to be completely in the hands of dissidents. It was as if Washington D.C. had been swamped by a million Vietnam dissidents, who temporarily had immobilized the army, while Manhattan, with all its media and financial power, was threatening to
secede and throw its resources behind the rebellion.
China responded to this by disciplining its own people (a tough guy took over NCNA in Hong Kong and Beijing fired its newspaper editors) and by waming that Hong Kong would not be allowed to subvert China. It followed up by writing an anti-subversion clause into the Basic Law. It specifically warned liberals Martin Lee and Szeto Wah to stop organizing for the overthrow of the Beijing leadership.
These developments sharply polarized Hong Kong opinion. The liberal press denounced China for having the temerity to fire newspaper editors for their political opinions. Liberal politicians denounced the anti-subversion clause as an attempt to undermine Hong Kong's autonomy. Much of the British and British-oriented population took the view that it was their