Diplomatic dealings

Andrew Higins' account (June 28, 1997) of Hong Kong is interesting, as it is regarded as the world's most valuable patch of real estate, assessed at over US$96 billion, with a population of only 6.4 million.

To students of history and diplomacy, the Sino-British accord on the Hong Kong handover has served a useful lesson. It is remarkable that the termination of the treaty, which lasted for one and a half centuries after the Treaty of Nanking (1842), took a downright peaceful course.

At first glance, two outstanding features of national traits are revealed; the British brand of reconciliatory spirit in international diplomacy, and the typical Chinese spirit of perseverance in surmounting stalemates. More than 20 rounds of negotiations dealing with matters of principles and substantive issues preceded the signing of the Joint Declaration of Beijing on Sept. 18, 1984.

Britain's adroitly accommodative disposition in solving the Hong Kong question was in sharp contrast to the agonizing use of force Britain resorted to in a quid pro quo to the unilateral takeover conducted by the other side in the settlement of the Malvinas (Falklands) crisis.

On the Beijing side, it was the astonishing ability and resoluteness of China under Deng Xiaoping to demonstrate in the 1980s a position of strength with respect to Hong Kong, which is admirable.

In the U.S. during the Eisenhower administration, with the late John Foster Dulles as secretary of state, that the position of a strength policy was championed in the mid-1950s. It identified a containment policy that was regarded as helpful in confronting the Soviet Union at that time.

Another interesting feature to note in the terminology of the accord is that the legal instrument which terminated the cession of the Crown colony is called the Joint Declaration of Beijing of Dec. 19, 1984, which was ratified on May 27, 1985. The term declaration has a strong political connotation. The legal instrument which effected the cession of Hong Kong used the term treaty, the Treaty of Nanking of 1842.

Finally, listening on TV to the statesmanlike speech given by Prince Charles in the handover ceremony, one feels gratified that the British diplomacy has set a true and worthy example of fraternal rapprochement in the pursuit of its objectives in Asian affairs. One wonders if such rapprochement is possible to be pursued by the ASEAN community in facing the Cambodian crisis.

SAM SUHAEDI

Jakarta