Three days ago, the Prime Minister made a statement announcing that if China was to impose its national security law in Hong Kong, the British government would create a route for Hongkongers to eventually gain British citizenship. Currently, there are 350,00 people there that hold British Overseas passports, these plans propose to make an additional 2.5 million eligible. Whilst the current rules mean that holders of this passport can access the United Kingdom for up to 6 months without a visa, the changes will allow those from Hong Kong that hold this passport to, as Boris Johnson puts it, ‘come to the UK for a renewable period of 12 months and be given further immigration rights, including the right to work, which could place them on a route to citizenship.’ Whilst no targets were set, the Conservative Party sought to lower immigration through a points system. So the question stands, why is an exception being made for millions from Hong Kong?
Hong Kong had been under British rule for 156 years. Britain had secured a 99-year lease for the territory in 1989, in those 99 years in flourished and became a global financial centre. However, the territories future became uncertain as the end of the lease period approached. In 1984, the Sino-British Joint Declaration was reached. This agreement meant that the UK would transfer Hong Kong to China in 1997, around the time of the expiration of the lease, however Hong Kong’s democratic political systems would remain for the next 50 years. Under the deal, Hong Kong would fully merge with China in 2047, until then the residents could continue to exercise liberties such as free speech and an elected government that others in China do not enjoy. Despite the deal, over half a million residents fled during the period leading to the transfer, in fear of the Chinese not upholding the agreement and ensuring their liberties. The system in Hong Kong is referred to as ‘one country, two systems’, expressing that Hong Kong is Chinese, despite current differences in governance.
In 2014, protests were triggered by the proposal of a new law from the Chinese Government which would mean candidates in elections would be screened to ensure that they ‘love the country and love Hong Kong’. Protesters claimed that this law would infringe on their right to free and fair elections, essentially allowing China to remove candidates. In 2019 there were large scale protests, and riots, over a proposed amendment which could allow China to extradite fugitives from Hong Kong, some estimates claim over a million attended the demonstrations. Now, in direct response to the protests, a new national security law would allow Chinese national security agencies to operate in the city, and enforce a ban on any act which threatens China’s national security. This could potentially mean that Chinese security forces could stop protests, putting the liberty of Hong Kong in danger.
The 50 year period was ensured in a deal reached with the UK, therefore the people of Hong Kong have often looked to the British government to ensure the deal is respected by China. Some protesters were waiving the Union Flag and singing ‘God Save The Queen’, putting responsibility on the British government to respond and help protect Hong Kong. Whilst the government obviously puts this responsibility ahead of its immigration ambitions, is this response strong enough? The people of Hong Kong may not want to leave their jobs and homes to live in the UK, they may desire the government ensure that the deal is respected rather than provide a means to flee. Perhaps, the government hopes the economic threat of lowering Hong Kong’s population so significant will force China to reconsider its laws and its tightening grip on Hong Kong. Either way, many will be pleased to see a response from the UK, in defence of its former territory.
Written by Jovan Sindhar - Instagram @jovan.20.5_
Comments