LEADER: Patriot games

Financial Times; Feb 17, 2004

Who is a patriot and who is not? According to Beijing and some of Hong Kong's tycoons, the answer is simple: patriots support the government; the unpatriotic oppose.

The political temperature in Hong Kong has risen sharply since the Chinese Communist party set out its views on the territory's political future in talks last week with the Hong Kong government. In statements relayed by the state-run Xinhua news agency, China issued some of its most strident views on Hong Kong since the handover by Britain in 1997.

Chinese officials made an egregiously one-sided interpretation of the Basic Law under which the territory was ceded, saying that Beijing should have direct control of Hong Kong's supposedly autonomous government and that "patriots" should be the "main body" in charge of that government.

Beijing's hard line is probably an attempt to damp rising expectations of political reform and to stake out a negotiating position. For all its ambiguity, the Basic Law says the ultimate aim is for the Legislative Council and the chief executive to be chosen by universal suffrage. Hong Kong needs decisions on the next steps before the 2007 and 2008 elections.

Less forgivable is the reaction of some of Hong Kong's businessmen. Tsang Hin-chi, a Beijing supporter, promptly labelled democratic politicians such as Szeto Wah and Martin Lee unpatriotic for opposing unpopular security legislation. Sir Gordon Wu suggested a democratically elected Hong Kong government would hand out "free breakfasts, lunches and dinners" in an irresponsible binge of welfare spending.

Not surprisingly, the "patriotism" debate has reignited the passions vigorously expressed in the Hong Kong pro-democracy marches of January 1 this year and July 1 2003. The democrats have declared themselves more genuinely patriotic than their critics.

Donald Tsang, Hong Kong chief secretary and head of the territory's constitutional taskforce, has now tried to calm the furore sparked by his trip to Beijing, asking people to focus on the important issues rather than becoming "entangled" in the patriotism debate.

Unfortunately, the definition of patriotism is indeed at the heart of the problem. China is a one-party state in which opposition to the status quo can be, and sometimes is, interpreted as treason. Hong Kong - already a partial democracy under the awkward "one country, two systems" relationship with China - is very different. So is democratic Taiwan, which holds an election next month.

If it really wants to win hearts and minds in Taiwan and Hong Kong, the Chinese government should accept that Hong Kongers are intelligent enough to debate their own future. Beijing may not agree with their conclusions but that should not stop it negotiating in good faith on the territory's future. That would do a lot more good than grandstanding about patriotism.