U.S. and Hong Kong (1985-1997)

Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright - Press Briefing, J.W. Marriott Hotel, Hong Kong (6/29/1997)

Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright
Press Briefing, J.W. Marriott Hotel
Hong Kong, June 29, 1997
As released by the Office of the Spokesman in Hong Kong,
July 1, 1997
U.S. Department of State

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, you are now in Hong Kong for the first time. You have seen the big picture and you have also seen some of the details. Do you think that perhaps some of the pessimistic expectations about the PLA troops or whatnot have been overblown? What do you want to say about that?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: As I said yesterday, there is an agreement that was reached between the British and the Chinese about preserving the way of life of Hong Kong. It is very important for the government in Beijing to offer reassurances to the people of Hong Kong about their way of life. It is not so much what any agreement permits, but it seems to me that what we are looking for are the kind of message that is being sent by what they are doing. I do not think that this is the best way to start off. I think we have to watch this very carefully.

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, just to follow up on that. Today, your comments, actually, to the television, were much more forward-leaning on that subject than it had been when we were in Vietnam and I just wonder what has changed your thinking? Had you gotten advice about this or have you mulled it over more?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: I had said all the things that I had just finished saying to you yesterday in Vietnam in terms of reassurance and the kind of messages that they were sending at the moment. Yesterday, frankly, I was focused on Vietnam and in terms of some discussions that I have had and observing it, I think that it is useful to say that the message that has come, I personally think, is not the best way to get started.

QUESTION: Do you think that Martin Lee's objections to the decision to have Mr. Boucher represent the United States at the second swearing-in have any validity?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: I think that we all have our priorities and the U.S. has two, basically. One, President Clinton really wanted me to come here and deliver a powerful political message by saying that we supported the way of life of Hong Kong and democracy, and the rule of law, and free markets, and by my not going to the swearing-in I believe that Mr. Blair and I are sending a powerful political message.

But we also have another priority here and that is that it is essential for us to have to have a working relationship with the authorities of Hong Kong. It is not just the Legislative Council that is being sworn in but the civil service and other parts of the authority structure. There are 40,000 Americans who are in Hong Kong. There are, on average, sixty-five ship visits a year. There is a great deal of need to service the American community here. We determined that it was appropriate to have a working-level representation because the Consul General is going to have to work with the authorities here.

QUESTION: You do not think that the power of your original message is at all diluted?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: I do not think so. I think that it will be very evident that I am not, along with Prime Minister Blair, not going to be at the swearing in.

QUESTION: When you met with the Congressional delegation at Richard Boucher's house, was there any discussion of trying to have a unified American position on which things to attend?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: We talked about it and I basically said that they had to make their own decision.

QUESTION: (inaudible)

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: Well, I think they have all done an awful lot of talking about it you have to ask them.

QUESTION: You are not telling them what to do?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: No, absolutely not. I learned that that is not useful.

QUESTION: Is there any sympathy in Washington for Beijing's view that Governor Patten went too far in changing the election rules?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: I have not heard any sympathy with that. In discussions that I have had people are very interested in how complicated the history of Hong Kong has been. It is not a story that is easy to explain and that there are many levels as to the Chinese feelings about what happened here and the things that Governor Patten did. But I think most people feel there had been advances made in movement towards democracy, a variety of democratic reforms that were important. That kind of fit with what was going on around the world, an increase in the sense of people wanting to participate in decisions about how they carry on their political lives and civil liberties, etc. People want to make sure that there is no rolling back of that.

What is also important, and I think that I have said this to you all before, is that this is not a snapshot here. We are going to be following this for some time. It is a movie. It is going to unfold over the next months and that we are going to watch it very carefully. So I think we have to be careful not to make snap judgments.

QUESTION: As you go ahead into the future, judging that it is not a snapshot, will the United States, after the handover, become more willing to make a judgment about whether the Chinese are living up to their commitments in Hong Kong or will we continue to wait to see what the British think because they were the ones who obviously negotiated the Basic Law and the Joint Declaration? Will this change our position about when we judge Hong Kong?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: I think we have our responsibility to carry out U.S. national interests. Obviously, nothing changes in terms of the legality of the fact that the agreement is made between the British and Chinese, but I think that we will be watching this very carefully and be making our assessments and judgments. The Sino-American relationship is one that is multi-faceted and that we will be looking at various aspects of it. Clearly the United States is the major Pacific power. We have responsibilities and we are going to be carrying out what we think is appropriate for our national interests.

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, the Australian Foreign Minister met with Tung Chee-Hwa earlier today and after this meeting he told reporters that Tung is preparing to announce elections in May next year. Have you heard anything along these lines?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: I am going to meet with him tomorrow. I just did this interview and I heard Tung and he basically did say that there would be elections within the year. That was what had been agreed to. When I met with the spectrum of political leaders earlier today, May was a date that people talked about but I have not met with Tung, but this kind of all tracks.

QUESTION: Would this be something that you would welcome?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: From our perspective, the sooner the better. I think we would like to see early elections that really lived up to the commitments of universal suffrage and that there really was a way to get a legislature that is reflective of the population.

QUESTION: Was the original plan not to send any American delegation to the swearing-in ceremony or was the fact that Richard Boucher was going to go made at the same time that you decided you would not be present?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: It was made at approximately the same time.

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, in your remarks at the reception today you summarized the long list of U.S. interests in Hong Kong itself. Given those interests, where does Hong Kong stand on the list of these multi-facets in the relationship with China? Can you prioritize Hong Kong as against, let us say, human rights, missile sales, Taiwan, whatever?

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: Hong Kong is very high on that list. Preservation of the way of life of Hong Kong is important to the United States because we believe democracy here is very important for its function. It is important because of the cooperation that has taken place in terms of law enforcement. It is important because of the fact that our ships visit, so it has strategic importance to us, and it is important for business reasons. Basically there are a variety of reasons that Hong Kong, per se, is important.

I think that what we are going to be watching to see is that the Hong Kong of tomorrow is like the Hong Kong of today and that the Chinese understand that the preservation of the magic of Hong Kong is not only important to us but is important to them. What I found very interesting in my discussions today with this diverse group of leaders is their understanding and explanation of how Hong Kong and the People's Republic of China are already -- the only word that I can think of is -- into each other. In terms of the fact that there is a $100 billion worth of Hong Kong investment in China, and $50 billion worth of Chinese investment in Hong Kong, and that there are four million mainland Chinese employed by Hong Kong companies. There has been a great deal of interaction already. There is indication that the Chinese understand that the preservation of Hong Kong is important for China and that they will be judged internationally by their ability to keep it intact.

(###)