Can Hong Kong find its Goldilocks zone?
Too much emphasis on ‘one country’ over ‘two systems’ will hobble the dynamism that made Hong Kong such a powerful magnet to talent and capital
As pressure mounts on Hong Kong to align with the mainland, it is often forgotten that the city’s great strength has always been its freewheeling style.
Hong Kong took risks, made fast decisions, and executed them with speed. It had a spirited attitude towards competition. And it learned from its mistakes. This anything-goes dynamism gave it the star power to attract adventurers and an endless supply of can-do talent and capital.
This dismal finding was compounded by another telling statistic from the Youth Development Blueprint: 52.7 per cent of people aged 25 to 39 are still living with their parents, and the number is growing. Where is the Lion Rock spirit that elevated the city from pirates’ bolt-hole to laissez-faire poster child?
While Singapore has been criticised for its overly cautious follow-the-leader approach compared with Hong Kong, these roles have seemingly been reversed. Across the border, even Shenzhen is racing ahead.
For a slowing mainland China, there is a temptation to tinker, and unleash Hong Kong’s proverbial horsepower. “One country, two systems” ensures a clear separation of roles, but things can change.
Running Hong Kong through trickle-down mainland pronouncements – however well-meaning – runs the risk of pushing the city further into the shadows. More importantly, it colours international perceptions and makes it difficult for Hong Kong to operate with its trademark élan.
Too much instruction will stymie the city’s political evolution. For the past 25 years, Hong Kong has been run by civil servants who are brilliant administrators but poor leaders. This comes as no surprise. Bureaucrats are not trained for visionary leadership. And Hong Kong’s political class is still in its infancy.
04:11
July 1 celebrations mark 27th anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to Chinese rule
Hong Kong desperately needs ideas, debate and divergent opinions to broaden perspectives, find better solutions and challenge mediocrity. As chewing gum tsar William Wrigley Jnr put it: “When two men always agree, one of them is unnecessary.”
The city must reimagine its own bold future. Hong Kong’s energetic Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu has gone about it with one eye on Beijing’s sensitivities and the other on opportunities in the West and closer to home in Southeast Asia.
There is mutual benefit in the tie-in with the rest of the Greater Bay Area and access to the mainland’s vast consumer market. But this should not detract from Hong Kong’s core competencies abroad that require a very different approach and mindset. It is a careful balancing act.
Tourism makes for a solid fourth pillar that creates employment, fosters closer ties and opens the way for soft diplomacy. It is a talent magnet generating excitement about the miracle of Hong Kong – a tiny bump on the rump of the dragon. In years past, adventurous souls visited as tourists and returned as entrepreneurs. They will do so again.
The principle of two systems is the bedrock of success. The city provides a cultural and economic bridge to mainland China but speaks the language of international commerce. This unique dual identity must not be inadvertently hobbled by the “one country” side of the equation, either through statements by visiting envoys or through the actions of local politicians eager to impress Beijing.
Hong Kong is slowly transitioning out of its turbulent years into a political-economic Goldilocks zone of “manageable difficulty”, whereby challenges that are just hard enough can unleash motivation. The city is recalibrating and will get things right. It has done so in the past.
Vijay Verghese is a Hong Kong-based journalist
