China Research Monographs, no. 75. Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 2017. ix, 292 pp. (B&W photos.) US$25.00, paper. ISBN 978-155729176-9.
This is an important contribution to the study of Hong Kong. It tackles the pertinent question concerning Hong Kong’s reunification with China: Is Hong Kong becoming a PRC/CCP colony? With Beijing intervening with growing regularity into the affairs of the Special Administrative Region and Hong Kong’s rapid socioeconomic assimilation into the Mainland, one can easily understand the common use of the term “colonization” among scholars of Hong Kong. Contributors to this volume, nonetheless, contend that most of these accounts “largely remain assertions with thin or even no theoretical and empirical support” (3) and urge for conceptual clarity in assessing the usefulness of such notions for understanding post-1997 Hong Kong. This collective effort embraces the challenge by comparing British colonialism in pre-1997 Hong Kong with the Mainland presence in Hong Kong after the reunification.
The book is organized into three sections. The three chapters in section 1 offer detailed accounts on several key aspects of British colonialism: Kaori Abe talks about the comprador system in nineteenth-century Hong Kong, Sonia Lam-Knott traces the pattern of the changing English-language policy of the colonial administration, whereas Carol Jones analyzes the consolidation of the tradition of the rule of law in the territory. Together, they uncover the evolutionary nature of the colonial rule and the multifaceted nature of the colonial practices. The British colonizers had moved from the early stances of detachment and segregation to a more proactive and engaging approach in the postwar period. Section 2 highlights the autonomy enjoyed by the colony despite the hierarchical structure of imperialism. Zardas Lee’s and Leo Goodstadt’s chapters highlight the Hong Kong government’s autonomy in film censorship and the management of public finance. David Clayton’s chapter illustrates how the local administration could develop its water policy with minimal interference from London. All three chapters call attention to the room for negotiation between metropole and periphery, a perspective that is highly relevant to an understanding of the relationship between Beijing and Hong Kong after 1997. Section 3 reveals the sociocultural dimensions of decolonization and PRC (re)colonization, and examines the important issue of identity. Felicia Yap’s chapter offers a rare analysis of the struggle of Eurasians in their craving for acceptance by the British. Law Wing Sang revisits the intellectual debates on Chinese nationalism and Hong Kong identity with an insightful analysis of selected historical texts in the 1960s and 1970s. And through a case study of the operation of the National Education Centre, Kevin Carrico dissects the assumptions and logics of Beijing strategy in educating Hong Kong people to be “authentic” Chinese.
Is Hong Kong an internal colony of the PRC? The book does not provide a direct answer. Yet it provokes further reflection on the cultural, political, as well as overall power relationship between Hong Kong and China after the reunification. It reminds us that the history of colonization is not just about domination of the metropole. There is ample evidence in the book confirming the resistance and insubordination of the local officials and indigenous communities in colonial Hong Kong. The tenacity of local society in bargaining and even resisting its “master” is a key aspect of British colonialism in Hong Kong, the book contends. Factors like the business community’s resourcefulness and connectivity, rule-of-law institutions, and the vibrancy of civil society that had empowered Hong Kong to defy its colonial master may have come under increasing pressure in recent years, yet many of the socioeconomic conditions and institutional settings that enabled the pursuit of parochial interests have remained intact since 1997. Beijing’s formula of reunification, which hinges on the promise of continuity and status quo, has also unintentionally preserved the leverage of Hong Kong. The book seems to offer a glimpse of hope despite Beijing’s tightening grip over the territory.
Yet whether Hong Kong is a new Chinese colony or not has little impact on the emergence of Hong Kong identity. Hong Kong people may or may not embrace the idea of independence, but the younger population in particular will continue to see themselves as culturally distinct from the Mainland community and desire further detachment. A growing segment of this population sees China’s presence as an obstacle to freedom and democracy. How can they live with China then? This is the essence of the debate over Chinese colonization after 1997. The book ends with a very forceful statement from Carrico: “An autonomous and democratic Hong Kong founded upon complete isolation from its neighbor and a simplistic hatred of a group of neighboring others would in the end be a Hong Kong on which the promise of autonomy and democracy are wasted through self-closure. A Hong Kong nationalism that promotes a simplistic and exclusionary vision of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ would be a nationalism that loses track of the promise and potential of Hong Kong, becoming merely an echo of the nationalism currently employed as a legitimizing ideology in Beijing, simply providing different ‘us’ and ‘them’ variables in the same nationalist equation” (280). A timely reminder indeed.
Ray Yep
City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China