Abstract
The previous chapters of this book consider structural and political factors relevant to the internal dimension of the autonomy formula. These factors presuppose a political commitment to this formula and look to structural arrangement designed to ensure this commitment. The present chapter considers the external dimension of autonomy and advocates effective use of international support for Hong Kong’s unique status. As with the internal dimension, the focus will be on the successful implementation of the ‘one-country, two systems’ formula under the Joint Declaration. Other avenues that have been suggested, such as some form of UN supervision or even independence are presupposed to be out of our current reach. The present formula includes achieving a high degree of autonomy while maintaining Chinese sovereignty over Hong Kong. Evidence, however, suggests that both concepts, sovereignty and autonomy, lack clear definition and generally permit a high degree of flexibility to conform to the objectives involved. Due to Hong Kong’s status as an international financial centre and the need for outside participation, anything less than an internationally recognized high degree of autonomy would fail to achieve China’s objectives.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Ibid, Annex II. Many of the international obligations currently applicable to Hong Kong arise out of its status as a British dependent territory. Nevertheless it has been pointed out that ‘the commercial and industrial prominence of Hong Kong has given it a considerable measure of independence in international context’, such that it is currently treated as a separate territory for such multilateral agreements as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), and it is a member of such international organizations as the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Asian Productivity Organization (APO) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). See R. Mushkat, ‘The Transition from British to Chinese Rule in Hong Kong: A Discussion of Salient International Legal Issues’ (hereinafter ‘Transition’), 14 Denver Journal of International Law and Policy 171, 172 (1986). It will be the task of the Joint Liaison Group to ensure the extension of these and other international obligations to Hong Kong, independently where possible or otherwise as a dependent territory of China.
Mushkat points out that PRC scholars see sovereignty as the fundamental element of international law and therefore reject any international intrusion on so-called internal affairs. Ibid., p. 176. This view is supported by China’s complete rejection of international humanitarian claims made after its forceful suppression of the democracy movement in 1989. Such claims were viewed as an intrusion on China’s internal affairs. The strong emphasis on sovereignty is evident in the Chinese propensity to include the five principles of peaceful coexistence in most treaties they draft. H. Chiu, ‘Chinese View on the Sources of International Law’, 28 Harvard International Law Journal, 291 (1987). These principles compete with the more intrusive international human rights principle. The more pragmatic design in the Joint Declaration, however, reflects the willingness to compromise theory to sound practice when to do so will advance national policy objectives.
W. M. Reisman, Puerto Rico and the International Process, New Roles in Association, p. 2 (West Publishing Co., 1975) (hereinafter ‘Reisman’).
Ibid., p. 18. The standard dictionary definition of sovereignty suffers likewise: ‘Supremacy of authority or rule … complete independence and self-government’. P. Davis, ed., The American Heritage Dictionary New York: Dell Publishing, 1980).
See generally, H. Hannum and R. B. Lillich, ‘The Concept of Autonomy in International Law’, in Models of Autonomy (Y. V. Dinstein, ed., 1981), p. 125 (hereinafter ‘Hannum and Lillich’).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1990 Michael C. Davis
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Davis, M.C. (1990). The International Status of Hong Kong. In: Constitutional Confrontation in Hong Kong. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20395-6_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20395-6_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-20397-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-20395-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)