[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 141 (Thursday, October 3, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12334-S12335]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    1984 SINO-BRITISH JOINT RESOLUTION ON THE QUESTION OF HONG KONG

 Mr. MACK. Mr. President, only 270 days of freedom remain for 
the people of Hong Kong unless the principles of the 1984 Sino-British 
Joint Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong are upheld and enforced. 
Although Governor Chris Patton proclaimed yesterday his intention not 
to go quietly from his post as last Governor of Hong Kong, his stated 
goals do not go far enough. Martin Lee, Hong Kong's Democratic Party 
leader, correctly identified Patton's shortcomings on behalf of those 
who will remain after Beijing takes control of the colony next July.
  Governor Patton proclaimed yesterday that he intended to accomplish 
many things during his remaining time in Hong Kong, but his proposed 
actions fall short of what is required. We see former Communist states 
all over the world transitioning to free market economies and forms of 
democratic governance. The United States and our friends and allies are 
investing a great deal of effort to aid and assist these transitions. 
We cannot turn our backs on the only instance of a successful and 
shining free market democracy transitioning to the darkness of 
communism. I fear that this will happen on midnight of June 30, 1997.
  The world must insist upon implementation of the Sino-British 
Joint Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong signed in 1984. And then 
the world must ensure Beijing upholds their agreement. Neither Beijing 
nor London should back down from this agreement now.

  I commend Mr. Patton for his good work on freedom, stability, and 
prosperity during his tenure as Governor. He has pursued reforms while 
facing resistance and indeed intimidation from Beijing. But he has been 
forced to compromise in order to maintain his relationship with 
Beijing. The price of this compromise is too great.

[[Page S12335]]

  I must support Hong Kong's Democratic Party leader Martin Lee, who 
yesterday called on Patton to do more. I also call on the Government in 
London to do more. The people of Hong Kong should be asked to accept 
nothing less. The Joint Declaration of 1984 is an international treaty 
registered in the United Nations. A violation of this treaty by either 
party represents a violation of international law. London must hold 
Beijing to the terms of this treaty for the benefit of the people of 
Hong Kong.
  In assessing the situation today, we have Patton's speech and 
Beijing's promises, but we must focus not on words, but actions. I am 
primarily concerned with actions taken by Beijing that undermine the 
promises made in the Joint Declaration. These include: harassing 
journalists by Beijing such as Hong Kong reporter Xi Yang; threatening 
to replace the democratically elected legislative council with an 
appointed provisional legislature; proposing to repeal Hong Kong's Bill 
of Rights; and assigning power of judicial interpretation to the 
national People's Congress rather than Hong Kong's courts.

  The United States must strongly urge Beijing to grant Hong Kong the 
level of autonomy promised in the Joint Declaration. United States 
policy must acknowledge the Joint Declaration as an international 
treaty possessing the force of law. It is a matter of international law 
that the parties to the treaty abide by their solemn obligations 
undertaken in the Joint Declaration.
  The United Kingdom should make a determination as to whether China's 
plans to replace the legislative council are a violation of the Joint 
Declaration. But even if London fails in this responsibility, the 
United States cannot sit idly by when, by anyone's reasonable 
interpretation, China violates its international treaty obligations, 
especially when the stakes are as high as they are with Hong Kong.
  Over the next 9 months, I intend to continue to raise the level of 
attention of the Hong Kong transition. The principles at stake touch 
the core of the minimum standard of freedom upon which we must 
insist.

                          ____________________