20
89
HKB
020123
FE/0620 A3/2
OTHER REPORT ON KOREA
North Korea accuses Japan of "hostile policy" at Peking meeting (Text) North Korea's party officials have severely criticised what they say is the Japanese government hostile policy towards their country in a meeting here [Peking] with a ranking member of the JSP [on] Saturday [18th November]. Former JSP secretary-general Makoto Tanabe told reporters after the meeting held at the North Korean embassy that key KWP officials strongly resented throughout the three-hour meeting Japanese policy towards North Korea and current attacks in Japan on their country and the pro- Pyongyang General Association of Korean Residents in Japan (Chongnyon). Tanabe said he wanted to discuss how Japan- North Korea relations can be improved but was unable to do so. He also said he could not discuss the question of the release and return of two Japanese crewmen of the "No 18 Fujisan Maru" who have been detained in North Korea since 1983 on spying charges. According to Tanabe, North Korea requested that the names and positions of Korean officials who attended the meeting and details of the talks be kept confidential. (Kyodo in English 0407 gmt 19 Nov 89)
(Excerpt)... The two sides agreed that apologies by then Prime Minister Noboru Takeshita earlier this year for the 1910-1945 Japanese annexation of Korea provide a basis for an improvement in Japan-North Korea relations, and agreed to continue talks in the future, Tanabe said. North Korea will make a proposal for the next meeting with JSP representatives. The North Korean officials said they would urge authorities in Pyongyang to agree to an extension of the North Korea-Japan fishing accords which expire this year, Tanabe said. (Kyodo in English 0303 gmt 21 Nov 89)
‘RENMIN RIBAO' CRITICISES UK'S “ABSURD ATTEMPT” AT “INTERNATIONALISATION” OF
HONGKONG
Peking 'Renmin Ribao' overseas edition in Chinese 21 Nov 89
Excerpts from report
Some leading officials of the British government have recently taken advantage of China's quelling of the counter- revolutionary rebellion in Peking to make an issue of the Hongkong question. They raised Hongkong's so-called confidence problem and the internationalisation of the Hongkong question...
To realise their absurd attempt, the officials spread their viewpoint that "the Sino-British Joint Declaration on the question of Hongkong only solved the sovereignty question of Hongkong, but failed to arrange the future of Hongkong in full". They even advocated "turning Hongkong into an international economic entity because it is a metropolitan city with inhabitants with citizenship of many countries and because Hongkong is "cut off from" mainland China. Some of them even proposed exploring the possibility of turning Hongkong into a "member" or "associate member" of the British Commonwealth after 1997, putting forward the so-
<< this of next rage
"Internat
SWB
called international supervision proposals of every description for the implementation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. Similar examples are numerous.
The British side has spared no efforts to urge other countries and international organisations to interfere in Hongkong affairs in an attempt to use international forces to exert pressure on China and hinder China from exercising sovereignty over Hongkong. This trend merits attention.
Of course, Hongkong is an international financial and trade centre with people from various countries and it has close economic ties with other countries. If “internationalisation" is necessary in this case, should not London and other international metropolises also be further "internationalised"? Everyone knows that being an international city does not mean the internationalisation of the city. The two cannot be lumped together. Hongkong has been China's territory ever since ancient times and the overwhelming majority of Hongkong residents are Chinese... The viewpoint that "Hongkong's economic internationalisation will necessarily lead to its political internationalisation" is ridiculous. The statement that Britain has the "right" to discuss the Hongkong issue at an international conference is also not worth refuting. It is known to all that in 1984 the Chinese and British governments reached a bilateral agreement on Hongkong following long negotiations. It is entirely a matter between the government of China and the government of the UK to implement the Sino-British Joint Declaration on the Question of Hongkong in the transition period. After 1997, Hongkong will be a special administrative region of the PRC and all Hongkong affairs will be China's internal ones. No other countries or international organisations will have the right to meddle in them.
It should be noted that certain figures in British political circles have been active in the international arena, openly seeking foreign political participation in Hongkong affairs. Personages from the Western powers are also eager to have a try. There are people from the USA who said undisguisedly that they "will no longer play a passive role" and "will participate in the development of Hongkong affairs". The British authorities have never allowed other foreign forces to be involved politically in the affairs of Hongkong which they have controlled tightly. However, they have recently departed from their normal behaviour, trying to draw other countries to meddle in Hongkong affairs. As pointed out by some Hongkong media, their purpose is to "link closely Hongkong with foreign interests so as to restrict Peking's influence over Hongkong" before the transfer of government in 1997.
Since the question of restoring Hongkong to China was raised, the Chinese and British governments reached an agreement following long, painstaking negotiations. To maintain a British presence and influence in Hongkong, the British side made all kinds of unreasonable demands during the negotiations and at the same time sounded out "international" reaction. In this regard, the Chinese government adhered to principles, rejected their demands, and safeguarded China's interests in Hongkong. Following the quelling of the counter-revolutionary rebellion in Peking some people in Britain thought it was a good opportunity for them. Once again, they played the "confidence card”, “public
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.