I. An Unrelenting Fight for Safeguarding National Security in Hong Kong

After the Opium War of 1840, Hong Kong was forcibly separated from the motherland. From that point forward, the Chinese people, including their compatriots in Hong Kong, never ceased their fight for the country to resume the exercise of sovereignty over the region. The fundamental conditions for this to become a reality came in 1949, with the founding of the People's Republic of China (PRC). Then, following the launch of the reform and opening-up initiative in 1978, the Chinese government – from conceiving the scientific proposal of One Country, Two Systems to its full implementation as a policy – has been consistent and resolute in safeguarding China's sovereignty, security, and development interests and ensuring sustained prosperity and stability in Hong Kong.

1. The Chinese Government's Resolute Stance on Safeguarding China's National Sovereignty, Security, and Development Interests

The Communist Party of China has always approached the Hong Kong question from an overall and strategic perspective, and the three unequal treaties¹ imposed on China by the United Kingdom have never been recognized as valid by the government of the PRC.

In March 1972, in a letter to the UN's Special Committee on Decolonization, China stated that "the settlement of the questions of Hong Kong and Macao is entirely within China's sovereign right and does not at all fall under the ordinary category of 'colonial territories'." Through the efforts of the Chinese government, later that year in November, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 2908, which removed Hong Kong and Macao from the list of colonial territories covered by the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.

To realize peaceful national reunification, in the early 1980s, the Chinese government proposed the unique policy of One Country, Two Systems and applied it in addressing the Hong Kong question. During negotiations with the British government, the Chinese government emphasized the following: The PRC holds the sovereignty of Hong Kong; the question of sovereignty was not open to discussion, with no room for compromise on the matter; and troops should be stationed in Hong Kong as a demonstration of China's sovereignty over the region, and to safeguard national security and prevent disturbances. Should events endangering the fundamental interests of Hong Kong and the country arise within the special administrative region, the central government would have no choice but to intervene.

The protracted negotiations with the UK eventually led to the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration by the Chinese and British governments in December 1984. The declaration confirmed that the government of the PRC would resume the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong effective July 1, 1997 and the British government would return Hong Kong to China on the same day. The document also outlined the steps to be taken during the transitional period prior to the return date.

During the transitional period, the Chinese government formulated the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in accordance with China's Constitution, and took resolute, justifiable, yet restrained measures to combat acts violating the Basic Law and endangering national security, for the benefit of Hong Kong. It stood firmly against the "electoral reform" rolled out with ulterior motives, established the governance structure for the HKSAR in strict accordance with the Constitution and the Basic Law, and advanced the preparatory work for establishing the HKSAR in an orderly manner.

On July 1, 1997, the Chinese government resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong, and the HKSAR was established. Through resolute actions, the Chinese government provided security guarantees for the implementation of One Country, Two Systems in Hong Kong.

2. The Protracted Fight Around the Local Legislation on National Security Required by Article 23 of the Basic Law

After its return, as a local administrative region of China, Hong Kong is obliged to honor and uphold the country's fundamental systems and take effective measures to safeguard China's national security. The Constitution and the Basic Law provide clear constitutional arrangements in this regard.

Specifically, Article 23 of the Basic Law stipulates that "the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the central people's government, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies." The legislation under Article 23 of the Basic Law is a special arrangement under the policy of One Country, Two Systems, reflecting the central authorities' trust in the HKSAR and stipulating that the region should fulfill its constitutional responsibility for safeguarding China's national security through local legislation.

However, internal and external complications stalled legislation under Article 23 of the Basic Law for an extended period after 1997. In September 2002, the HKSAR government started the legislative process required by Article 23 of the Basic Law. Anti-China agitators in Hong Kong and hostile external forces had long feared and opposed the legislation, regarding it as an obstacle to their seditious activities. To obstruct the legislative process, they attempted various subversive schemes, exploiting some residents' dissatisfaction with issues in economic and social development and the adverse impact of the onslaught of the SARS epidemic. They went to great lengths to swing sentiment and made false claims that the legislation under Article 23 violated human rights and freedoms, creating panic among the public.

On July 1, 2003, marches opposing the legislation broke out in Hong Kong. Anti-China agitators seized the opportunity to pressure the HKSAR government. Some Legislative Council members who had originally supported the legislation had a change of heart and asked for a postponement, adding to the complexity surrounding the proposed legislation. In September 2003, the HKSAR government withdrew the draft of the Article 23 legislation, effectively postponing its enactment. Backed by hostile external forces, anti-China agitators spared no efforts in stigmatizing and demonizing the legislation, turning it into a taboo subject that haunted Hong Kong society.

This delay in completing the legislation required by Article 23 of the Basic Law left significant loopholes in the region's system of laws on national security and resulted in serious deficiencies in institutional setup, staffing, and law enforcement mechanisms, rendering Hong Kong almost defenseless in terms of national security. Seizing this opportunity, agitators and external anti-China forces intensified their sabotage and openly challenged the One Country, Two Systems principle. Exploiting loopholes in the electoral and deliberative platforms, they ramped up their efforts to reject the constitutional order, undermine Hong Kong's prosperity and stability, and sabotage national security under the guise of defending democracy, freedom, and human rights.

In 2012, the agitators smeared the national education initiative promoted by the HKSAR government as "brainwashing" and incited demonstrations, assemblies, joint signature campaigns, and student strikes that ultimately forced the government to shelve the national education guidelines. In 2014, they launched the illegal Occupy Central movement – a 79-day campaign that disrupted the operation of the HKSAR government, blocked the major roads in Central and Admiralty, and delayed emergency medical treatment – which severely undermined the rule of law, disrupted public order, hit the local economy hard, and plunged daily lives into chaos.

In 2015, anti-China agitators in the Legislative Council voted down the bill of the HKSAR government on the methods for electing the HKSAR chief executive for 2017, impeding the implementation of the August 31 Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) on the election of the chief executive by universal suffrage and the method for forming the Legislative Council of the HKSAR in the year 2016. In February 2016, during normal law enforcement actions against unlicensed hawkers in Mong Kok, agitators incited a large gathering that clashed with the police, which became known as the Mong Kok riot, resulting in injuries to approximately 100 police officers.

In March of the same year, anti-China agitators founded the so-called Hong Kong National Party, openly advocating for "Hong Kong independence", "national self-determination" and the establishment of an "independent and free 'Republic of Hong Kong'". In October, while taking the oath of office, some members-elect of the Sixth Legislative Council intentionally violated protocol to advocate for "Hong Kong independence", insulting the country and the nation.

In the face of these risks and challenges, the central government firmly supported the chief executive and the government of the HKSAR in responding effectively for ensuring Hong Kong's overall social stability. This included taking lawful action to address the illegal Occupy Central movement, banning the Hong Kong National Party, and revoking the membership of those advocating "Hong Kong independence" in the Legislative Council.

3. The 2019 Turmoil Posed the Greatest Challenge for Safeguarding National Security in Hong Kong

In 2019, external anti-China forces intensified their meddling in Hong Kong affairs. Following the HKSAR government's proposed revision of regulations on the surrender of fugitive offenders, agitators in Hong Kong, under the pretext of opposing the revision, spread alarmist claims in society, exploiting local residents' concerns and limited knowledge about the proposal. These actions ultimately culminated in the prolonged turmoil of 2019 and an attempted color revolution in Hong Kong. During this period, extreme violence and mutually destructive incidents with secessionist aims were widespread, inflicting so much damage on Hong Kong that it became unrecognizable from devastation. They imperiled China's security and posed the greatest challenge for the One Country, Two Systems practice since the return of Hong Kong.

– Advocating "Hong Kong independence" in an attempt to split the country, anti-China agitators in Hong Kong refused to recognize the legal authority of the Constitution over HKSAR and rejected the central authorities' overall jurisdiction, challenging and disrupting the constitutional order. They called for "national self-determination", "liberation of Hong Kong, revolution of our times", and clamored for "establishing a state by force" and "drafting a constitution in the streets". Through repeated secessionist activities aimed at undermining national unity, they sought, in futility, to turn Hong Kong into a de facto independent or semi-independent political entity.

– Anti-China agitators challenged the authority of the central leadership and endangered state power. They launched vicious attacks against the CPC leadership and China's fundamental system. They engaged in provocative public acts, including insulting and burning the national flag and defacing the national emblem and the emblem of the HKSAR. They stormed the central government agencies in the HKSAR, besieged the HKSAR government headquarters, and forced entry into the Legislative Council Complex, where they destroyed facilities and copies of the Basic Law. They attempted in vain to take control of the Legislative Council by manipulating its elections, with the intent of vetoing any government bills to paralyze Hong Kong's governance and thus creating a constitutional crisis, to ultimately subvert state power.

– Anti-China agitators were perpetrators of violence and terrorism and disruptors of social order. Manipulating instruments of public opinion, they incited hatred and advocated violence, instigating young students and coercing them into illegal activities. They vandalized buses, traffic lights, and other public facilities; damaged property in subway stations and at the airport; hurled Molotov cocktails and petrol bombs in public spaces during violent confrontations against law enforcement; besieged the police headquarters; and attacked Chinese-funded banks and businesses associated with the Chinese mainland or the HKSAR government, severely disrupting social order. These acts took a heavy toll on Hong Kong's economy. Commercial activities grounded to a halt, and once-vibrant streets lost all vitality, leading to a sharp decline in Hong Kong's GDP. The daily lives of local residents were profoundly disrupted, with employment, schooling, medical care, and transportation severely impacted. Hong Kong's international interactions were greatly disturbed, and the region suffered a sharp decline in investment and business climate and a tarnished international image as a result.

– Anti-China agitators trampled on human rights and personal freedom and undermined democracy in Hong Kong. They attacked anyone who dared to question them, carrying out unlawful detentions, mob assaults, and beatings, and even setting victims on fire with gasoline. They perpetrated violence in communities and infringed the rights of residents to life and property. They disrupted the fair and orderly electoral processes by coercing, intimidating, and attacking candidates and voters, and went so far as to openly desecrate the family graves of a Legislative Council member. In addition, they abused the rules of the Legislative Council and engaged in deliberate disruption of the council's normal proceedings and operation, preventing the rational discussion and adoption of key bills bearing on the economy and people's lives, thereby inflicting severe harm on residents' interests and wellbeing.

– Anti-China agitators colluded with hostile external forces, and solicited their interference. Acting as political agents for hostile foreign forces, they frequently travelled overseas to supply evidentiary material for the concoction of Hong Kong topics overseas, call for foreign sanctions on the Chinese mainland and Hong Kong and even suggest the method of sanction and provide a targeted list for sanction. They claimed that they "wish foreign countries to exert influence on us", that they "desperately need foreign forces to assist us to pull through", and they even pledged to "fight for the United States".

These acts constituted a direct challenge to Hong Kong and the rest of China, demonstrating flagrant disregard for the fundamental interests of the country and nation, including those of Hong Kong. By shoring up agitators in Hong Kong, external anti-China forces arbitrarily distorted the successful practice of One Country, Two Systems, meddled in Hong Kong affairs, and committed gross interference in China's internal affairs through the imposition of baseless sanctions.

By exploiting the turmoil they had themselves created, anti-China agitators took a majority of seats in the elections for the sixth-term district councils in November 2019, turning the district councils into a platform for advocating secession, violence, and mutual destruction. Once entering the council, they unveiled a three-step plan to take full control of the Legislative Council and the Election Committee for electing the HKSAR chief executive, and manipulate the election of the chief executive, in a brazen attempt to seize overall power in Hong Kong.

The attempted color revolution plotted by Hong Kong agitators and the external anti-China forces posed a grave challenge to the One Country, Two Systems principle, severely undermined the constitutional order and rule of law in Hong Kong, and ultimately endangered China's sovereignty, security, and development interests. It also exposed the legal loopholes and institutional deficiencies in safeguarding China's national security in the HKSAR.

Despite its best efforts to quell the riots and restore order, the HKSAR government could no longer effectively control the situation and safeguard China's national security on its own. The central government therefore had to act quickly to establish a legal shield to protect China's national security in Hong Kong in order to neutralize this major threat.

¹ The three unequal treaties are the Treaty of Nanking, the Beijing Convention, and the Convention Between Great Britain and China Respecting an Extension of Hong Kong Territory. On August 29, 1842, Britain forced the Qing government to sign the Treaty of Nanking, the first of the unequal treaties in China’s modern history, which ceded Hong Kong Island to Britain. On October 24, 1860, Britain forced the Qing government to sign the Beijing Convention which ceded to the UK the part of Kowloon Peninsula south of present-day Boundary Street. On June 9, 1898, Britain again forced the Qing government to sign the Convention Between Great Britain and China Respecting an Extension of Hong Kong Territory, by which the New Territories were leased to Britain for 99 years. As a result, Britain occupied the entire area that is now known as Hong Kong.