TNAG-1233-FCO40-1546-Future-of-Hong-Kong-1983 — Page 12

-2-

A clear picture of the situation can be obtained when the events in October 1981 are compared against those in October 1982. On the eve of its National Day, the Peking authorities announced Ye Jianying's-nine-point proposal of unifying Taiwan and in consequence fanned up much discussion from various concerned quarters. However, the proposal was flatly snubbed by Taiwan and thus ended Peking's efforts.

In October 1982, the nine-point proposal was no longer mentioned. Publicity directed towards Taiwan was also in low key. What was heard, was the recovery of sovereignty over Hong Kong. It thus seems that the Peking authorities have decided to reverse the schedule in the "unification of China" by putting HK and Macao before Taiwan, and practise the nine-point proposal in HK as an example to Taiwan.

In the views of the Peking ruling circles, the nine-point proposal is a masterpiece, giving concrete terms like "two systems within one nation", "special administrative regions". They reckoned the proposal as the most compromising and would very likely be accepted by the Taipei authorities. They were disappointed by the response they got.

Yet as the set object of the Peking government is to "unify" China within the 80s (because of Deng Xiaoping's age), the question of HK and Macao thus has been given prior- ity.

This is precisely the reason why Mrs Thatcher's talks in Peking had run against rocks. As it had been so decided, the British Prime Minister was naturally so informed, first by Zhao Ziyang, then by Deng Xiaoping. That is why both parties had to keep the content of their talks secret. If the decision were to let the British maintain the administra- tive power over HK, it would have been announced as this would be the best news to capitalists

This explained why Mrs Thatcher made remarks such as: "15 years is not enough", (this indicated that she had been informed of the intended recovery of sovereignty and admin- istration over HK in 1997); "the three treaties are valid and are internationally recognised", (this amply showed that she had been informed that not only the leased land but also the cated territory would be recovered, which forced her to bring up the validity of the treaties); and "Britain has a moral obligation towards the people of HK" (this showed that she had been informed that the question of HK is an internal affair of China in which Britain has no say,

and so she had to state that Britain has obligation as well).

Such statements of the Prime Minister had evoked a series of counter-attacks from Peking and caused panic among the HK people, plunge of the stock market and crisis in the real estate market. Public opinions were mostly accusing Mrs Thatcher for making imprudent remarks. But on second thought, what are the real causes of such faltering in economy and confidence? Is it that Mrs Thatcher made the wrong remarks or that the reaction from Peking was too strong? But Mrs Thatcher was driven up a solid wall in her talks, what else but those remarks could she make?"

•

...13