[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 5]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 7458-7459]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  WILL THE HONG KONG MODEL SURVIVE (AN ASSESSMENT 20 YEARS AFTER THE 
                               HANDOVER)

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, May 3, 2017

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I made the 
following remarks at the hearing held by the Congressional-Executive 
Commission on China which I co-chair with Senator Marco Rubio regarding 
human rights in Hong Kong:
  Two and half years ago, tens of thousands of Hong Kong's residents 
peacefully gathered in the streets, yellow umbrellas in hand, seeking 
electoral reform and greater democracy.
  Joshua Wong was at the forefront of that movement--along with Nathan 
Law and Alex Chow and so many young student leaders. The Umbrella 
Movement was not only composed of students, but included veterans of 
the democracy movement in Hong Kong, including Martin Lee.
  It is good to see Joshua and Martin here today, bringing together the 
generations of advocates committed to Hong Kong's freedom and autonomy.
  Joshua Wong and all those associated with the Umbrella Movement have 
become important symbols of Hong Kong's vitality and its freedoms. They 
are now part of Hong Kong's unique brand and any effort to detain, 
censor, or intimidate them damages that brand.
  Over the past two years, Senator Rubio and I, along with other 
members of the China Commission, have introduced the Hong Kong Human 
Rights and Democracy Act and we have worked in Congress to maintain the 
State Department's annual report on Hong Kong.
  We have issued statements of concern about the political prosecutions 
of Joshua and other Umbrella Movement leaders; the unprecedented 
interventions by the Chinese government in Hong Kong's courts and 
political affairs, and the abductions Hong Kong booksellers and other 
citizens.
  We have also discussed the erosion of Hong Kong's autonomy and 
freedoms with both U.S. and Chinese officials.
  I want to commend Senator Rubio for his leadership on human rights 
issues and on Hong Kong. We have worked together closely and I am 
honored to work with him on the China Commission. Senator Rubio is a 
true champion of the globe's oppressed and persecuted.
  As long as I have the privilege of serving as a Chair of the China 
Commission, I promise to continue shining a light on Hong Kong. 
Maintaining Hong Kong's autonomy is a critical U.S. interest. The U.S. 
also has a clear interest in Beijing abiding by its international 
agreements--in Hong Kong and elsewhere.
  The democratic aspirations of the people of Hong Kong cannot be 
indefinitely suppressed. I promise to stand with Hong Kong and call 
attention to violations of basic human rights as long as I serve in 
Congress.
  Though Beijing's increasingly rough oversight of Hong Kong may not be 
as brutal as that pursued on the Mainland, it is no less pernicious. 
The ultimate goal is eroding Hong Kong's guaranteed freedoms and the 
rule law and intimidating those who try to defend them.
  This year will be the 20th anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong. 
Unfortunately it seems the territory's autonomy looks increasingly 
fragile.
  We are coming up on another anniversary as well, the 25th anniversary 
of the Hong Kong Policy Act.
  At this juncture we should be examining both the health of the ``one 
country, two systems'' model and examining the very assumptions that 
underlie U.S.-Hong Kong relations. What can be done differently, what 
new priorities should be set?
  The Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 was based on the assumption that 
freedom, the rule of law, and autonomy promised to Hong Kong would be 
protected and respected.
  It was also based on the assumption that time was on the side of 
freedom--that trade and investment would eventually bring political 
liberalization and human rights to Mainland China.
  As Chairman Rubio and I have been saying for some time, one can no 
longer base U.S. policy on the ``fantasy'' that China's future will be 
more democratic and more open.
  Mainland China has become more repressive, not less. Prosperity has 
turned a poor authoritarian country into a rich authoritarian country 
with predictable results for China's rights defenders, ethnic and 
religious groups, labor and democracy advocates, foreign businesses and 
Hong Kong's autonomy.
  Some will argue that the best course of action would be to retreat 
into a hard realism, recognize China's interests and spheres of 
influence and protect U.S. interests. We could ignore what is happening 
in Hong Kong and shift responsibility to the British or some undefined 
international body.
  I disagree.
  We don't need a new realism to govern our China policy. Instead, we 
need a new idealism--a renewed commitment to democratic ideals, to 
human rights, and the rule of law in ways that compete directly with 
the Chinese model in Asia and Africa and elsewhere.
  Chinese leaders need to know that the United States stands for 
freedom of expression, the freedom of religion, Internet freedom, the 
rule of law, universal suffrage, and an end to torture as critical 
interests, necessary for bilateral relations, and linked to the 
expansion of mutual prosperity and integrated security.
  The U.S. should also push back hard against the erosion of freedom 
and autonomy in Hong Kong.
  It is in everyone's interest that Hong Kong remain a free and 
prosperous bridge between China and the West, but the city's unique 
vitality and prosperity are rooted in its guaranteed freedoms. If Hong 
Kong is to become just another Mainland Chinese city, we will have to 
reassess whether Hong Kong warrants special status under U.S. law.
  The arc of history does not bend toward justice without concerted 
action from all freedom-loving peoples. If the U.S. and the 
international community does not defend the rights and freedoms of Hong 
Kong's citizens now, there is little hope that freedom can take root in 
China's future.

[[Page 7459]]



                          ____________________