Governments in the rest of the world might be blaming China for not taking decisive and forceful action earlier on to protect their interests. The plan to enact the national security law is indeed a preemptive measure against such a grim scenario.

Beijing’s draft decision at the National People’s Congress to introduce a national security law in Hong Kong has sparked international concerns about its broader implications for Hong Kong’s status as a global financial hub and the high degree of autonomy the city has enjoyed since 1997. For those who care deeply about the special administrative region’s future, the memories of last year’s social unrest, especially those violent and bloody incidents that happened to average Hongkongers, must still remain fresh. An elder died shortly after being smashed in the head, a passerby was burned by a petrol bomb, a local legislator was stabbed in the stomach, a police officer’s throat was slit, a traveller from the mainland was tied up and intimidated, and an Australian tourist assaulted by mobsters. Those riots had put the lives of local residents and international travellers in great peril. Since then a majority of Hong Kong residents have been expecting the central government to take decisive actions to protect the city and its people. The need for a security law is not only urgent but imperative.

Over the past few years, some local fringe groups have been openly calling for independence, self-government, and referendum. Violent extremists have desecrated the national flag and defaced the national emblem. Last year some rioters even went so far as to besiege Beijing’s Liaison Office and wave US and UK flags and flags of Hong Kong independence, appealing for foreign interference in China’s domestic affairs and undermining the one country, two systems framework.

Last year’s upheaval has cast the current administration’s credibility and competence into question. It seems impossible that local authorities can pass a national security law to enact Article 23 of the city’s Basic Law on its own. The national security legislation is long overdue more than 23 years after Hong Kong was returned to China and 30 years after the promulgation of the Basic Law. Beijing has no choice but to take the matters into its own hands in order to safeguard its sovereignty and ensure Hong Kong’s long-term stability and prosperity.

Amid the intensifying strategic competition between Beijing and Washington, the Trump administration is increasingly use Hong Kong as a diplomatic leverage to contain China’s development. Through domestic legislation, executive orders, and local NGOs, Washington is instigating anti-China and anti-government riots by opposition forces who have been aided and abetted by some US politicians. The central government will never allow Hong Kong to become a safe haven for rioters and terrorists who plot separatist and subversive activities against China.

The social unrest has undermined global investors’ confidence in Hong Kong. Moody’s and S&P have lowered their credit ratings for the city for the first time in the past 20 years. After assessing all the potential risks (for example, international capital flight or Hong Kong’s integrity as a global financial hub) that may accompany the legislative move, Beijing has come to the conclusion that it is worth to make short-term sacrifices for the long-term security and stability of Hong Kong and China. Without long-term stability there will be no prosperity to speak of. In this sense, the national security legislation will ultimately consolidate Hong Kong’s position in the global financial market, strengthen international investors’ confidence, and protect foreigners’ businesses in the city.

Moreover, the national security law will be enacted to criminalise specific acts of separatism, subversion, terrorism, and foreign interference. It will not affect the normal life of Hong Kong residents. The legitimate rights and interests of investors and travellers will continued to be protected by local laws. Hong Kong is the conduit through which international capital has flown into the mainland, which has enabled China to grow into the world’s second-largest economy. The last thing Beijing will do is kill the goose that has laid so many golden eggs.

As a scholar having been studying Hong Kong affairs over the last 15 years and visited the “Pearl of the East” over a hundred times, I have always cherished a deep affection for the city and regarded it as my second hometown. In the heat of the protests over the extradition bill last year, I talked with some of the young people who had been engaged in street violence to know what they really wanted. To my disappointment, none of them ever gave a definitive answer. The bloody anti-government protests and aimless young people have really upset me over their future and the city’s prospects. Unless something is done, neither investors nor travelers are ready to venture into a city of chaos.

It really hurts to see one of the four Asian tigers and a financial center on a par with New York and London descend into a place constantly threatened by street violence and bloody demonstrations. The one country, two system framework benefits not only Hong Kong and China but also the rest of the world. Hundreds of thousands of investors, businessmen, and expatriates from all over the world are now living in the city. No governments around the world would like to see their commercial interests or the lives of their compatriots threatened by acts of violence. Were these life-threatening acts left unchecked, the day may not be far when the whole world looks on as hundreds of thousands of expatriates are being evacuated from a place that once boasted the world’s most free and open economy. By that time, governments in the rest of the world might be blaming China for not taking decisive and forceful action earlier on to protect their interests. The plan to enact the national security law is indeed a preemptive measure against such a grim scenario.

Link

Source of documents：The Peninsula Qatar, 28 May 2020