On Sept 9, the US House of Representatives, with a large majority, passed the Countering the PRC Malign Influence Fund Authorization Act, a bill that authorizes annual funding of $325 million for the State Department to work with “allies, partners, and other nations to counter the CCP’s malign influence”. It is inconceivable that such an astronomical sum of US taxpayers’ money would be used to launch an unwarranted hostile propaganda campaign against another country. This substantial amount could be better utilized to enhance the US’ overstressed medical and health system to reduce the high mortality rate among elderly Americans because of a host of chronic diseases.
Because of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s importance to China, undoubtedly, part of the fund will be used for Hong Kong bashing. This anti-China initiative complements the active role played by notorious US groups such as the National Endowment for Democracy, which has spent millions funding anti-China organizations, including those operating in Hong Kong.
Thus, it is not surprising that on Sept 24, the US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) and the Hong Kong Democracy Council jointly published a report, titled Hong Kong: Academic Freedom Declines Under Security Law, which is loaded with fabricated content and highly egregious remarks alleging a decline in academic freedom in Hong Kong. My first question is whether these two organizations have ever received any subsidies directly or indirectly from the US government to finance their anti-China activities.
If HRW did its job evenhandedly, it would publish a global report comparing academic freedom across all countries and regions rather than singling out Hong Kong for criticism. If it had done so, it would have exposed the far more serious retrogression of academic freedom in the United States. For example, the harassment of thousands of US university students peacefully protesting against the genocide in Palestine, with riot police intruding on campuses, beating students, and subjecting them to arrest, constitutes a serious breach of academic freedom and freedom of expression. Additionally, university administrators have faced dismissal for showing sympathy toward protesting students. Furthermore, the US’ “China Initiative” has targeted academic researchers and scientists of Chinese descent in US universities, framing them as spies, alongside suppressing Confucius Institutes. Why has HRW never commented on these blatant violations of freedoms in the US?
The HRW’s report is based on the views of 33 interviewees, 31 of whom remain anonymous. Using pseudonyms is a tactic frequently adopted by anti-China groups, making it difficult to ascertain the veracity of the interviewees. Therefore, the authenticity and credibility of this so-called report are questionable. Anyone familiar with Hong Kong’s media knows that local journalists are eager to address any complaints from the public regarding the government and universities. If there were incidents of academic freedom breaches, they could not simply be swept under the carpet. So why are these anonymous interviewees not speaking out publicly to the local media? I believe these anonymous individuals referenced in the report are fabricated entities.
The report highlights the declining role of university student unions. However, it fails to show what these unions have done to cause universities to distance themselves from them.
The University of Hong Kong’s student union was the first to promote “Hong Kong independence” in its magazine The Academy as early as January 2015. Such secessionist articles would never be tolerated in any Western country, but they were allowed in Hong Kong in the absence of national security laws then.
The real reason the US and its allies want it repealed is to allow their operatives and pawns unfettered access to continue sabotaging the Chinese mainland through Hong Kong
All university student unions, controlled by political radicals, without exception, played a crucial role in mobilizing students and the public to support the 2019 insurrection upheaval. Union offices were used to manufacture firebombs and store weapons to attack the police. Both the Chinese University of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University became fierce battlegrounds, with thousands of students and other nonstudent rioters confronting the police on campus, throwing petrol bombs, setting fires, and causing millions of dollars in damage. To this date, the Chinese University is still labeled “Rioters’ University”. These union-organized protests disrupted classes and examinations, affecting many innocent students’ academic progress. Many misguided students were arrested for rioting offenses, with criminal records ruining their future career prospects, all thanks to the incitement of the student unions.
Indeed, Nathan Law Kwun-chung, one of the fugitives wanted for national security offenses, was the secretary-general of the Hong Kong Federation of Students at that time, the overarching body for the student unions of all universities, and one of the masterminds behind the 2019 “black-clad” insurrection. He is also one of the founders of the Hong Kong Democracy Council and is acknowledged to be responsible for the research behind the report. That speaks volumes for the incredibility and hidden agenda of the report.
Only after enactment of the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL) in June 2020 could universities restore normalcy. Hong Kong universities continue to rise in international rankings. In the QS World University Rankings 2024, five Hong Kong universities were included among the world’s top 100, highlighting their enviable reputation in the global academic community, with excellent ratings in teaching quality, research, and internationalism, allowing them to attract top talent from various fields worldwide. The enrollment of overseas students has reached unprecedented levels, with students from over 100 countries. Currently, four Hong Kong universities rank among the top 10 most internationalized universities in the world. Such achievements would not have been possible had Hong Kong lost its academic freedom.
The West continues to smear Hong Kong’s national security laws out of undisguised political bias. For instance, if one cares to examine the origins of the NSL, its sole purpose was to close a legal vacuum on national security offenses such as secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion, which are standard offenses in Western countries. The real reason the US and its allies want it repealed is to allow their operatives and pawns unfettered access to continue sabotaging the Chinese mainland through Hong Kong.
As a spokesperson for the HKSAR government stressed: “Academic freedom is an important social value treasured in Hong Kong and the cornerstone of Hong Kong’s higher education sector. The HKSAR government attaches great importance to upholding academic freedom and institutional autonomy, both of which are enshrined in the Basic Law. These safeguards are clear and specific, and their effectiveness has never changed. Since the implementation of the NSL, academics and postsecondary education institutions in Hong Kong continue to engage in normal exchanges with their foreign counterparts.
“After the implementation of the HKNSL, Hong Kong residents continue to enjoy various rights and freedoms, including the freedom of academic research, literary and artistic creation, and other cultural activities, as well as freedom of expression, assembly, and association. According to Article 137 of the Basic Law, educational institutions of all kinds may retain their autonomy and enjoy academic freedom. Hong Kong residents can exercise their freedom of expression legitimately, including criticizing government policies or decisions made by officials. Law-abiding individuals, including students, scholars, and other academics, will not engage in acts that endanger national security and will not unwittingly violate the law; therefore, they have no reason to be worried.”
When one cares to examine the facts, it’s clear that the HRW’s report is nothing but a politically motivated and malicious smear!
The author is an honorary fellow of HKU Space and the Hong Kong Metropolitan University, and a council member of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
