REMARKS BY BENEDICT ROGERS AT SINO EURO VOICES CONFERENCE 30 SEPTEMBER 2022
Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen:
It is a great privilege to join you today at this important conference. I want to congratulate the organisers, and pay tribute to all the other speakers with whom it is an honour to share this platform.
I want to start by making four simple points: I love China. I love Hong Kong. I love Taiwan. And I love freedom. And these four points need not be mutually incompatible.
I first went to China when I was 18 years old, to spend six months teaching English in Qingdao – famous for the best beer in China, though that was not the reason I went (it was a nice discovery once I was there). I made many friends there. I returned over the years many times, and travelled extensively throughout China, from Beijing to Kunming, from Shanghai to Shenyang, from Nanjing and Suzhou to Dali and Yangshuo, from Guangzhou to Dandong. So I am not anti-China. On the contrary, the reason I devote so much of my time and energy to speaking out for human rights in China is that that I am pro-China – pro-the peoples of China – and I want them to be free. It is the Chinese Communist Party regime I oppose, not China – and that is a vital distinction that we should never tire of emphasizing.
I lived in Hong Kong for the first five years after the handover, from 1997-2002. It was where I began my working life, as a fresh graduate from university. It was where I started my career as a journalist and human rights activist. And when I left Hong Kong in 2002, I truly believed that, although I witnessed some early warning signs of problems to come, nevertheless “one country, two systems” was working well, Hong Kong’s freedoms and autonomy were protected and I never imagined that, two decades later, I would have founded an advocacy organisation – Hong Kong Watch – to campaign for Hong Kong’s human rights. I would never have imagined that so many of my friends in Hong Kong would either be in jail or in exile, and that I would have to be cautious about contacting those that are not in prison and are still in Hong Kong, for fear of endangering them. Under Xi Jinping, the CCP has broken its promises, violated an international treaty – the Sino-British Joint Declaration – and dismantled “one country, two systems.”
I love Taiwan. I have only visited three times – I would like to visit again at the earliest opportunity. I will never forget arriving in Taiwan in 2019 to attend a conference on religious freedom, at which the President of Taiwan was giving the keynote speech. It was so wonderful to be in a Chinese-speaking culture where I was not at risk of being arrested, jailed or deported, but instead was welcomed. I met senior government officials, civil society, media and on 4 June, I joined the 30th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre – in Taipei’s Liberty Square. It is Taiwan’s vibrant, impressive democracy, as well as its commitment to human rights, that makes me passionate about the need to stand with Taiwan. Taiwan shows that it is a total lie to suggest that democracy and human rights are “Western” values, that Chinese or Asian people are culturally not ready for freedom: to those who perpetuate that myth, I say look at Taiwan.
I have recently finished writing a book – The China Nexus – which will be published at the end of next month, as a surprise gift for the CCP’s Party Congress. The book looks at China’s human rights crisis – the crackdown on civil society, media, lawyers, dissidents in mainland China, as well as the genocide of the Uyghurs, the atrocities in Tibet, the persecution of Christians, the crackdown in Hong Kong, the threats to Taiwan and many other issues. Among the many people I interviewed for the book was the Tiananmen Square activist Wu’erkaixi, who now lives in Taiwan. And he said this: “A regime that opens fire on peaceful demonstrators, that has no democracy, represses freedom of assembly, expression, information, is the regime that is recognised as legitimate, while a free, vivid and exemplary democracy, with free elections, free flow of information, freedom of assembly, and where the military is under a civilian elected government and neutral from the political process, is the one the world calls illegitimate. It is ridiculous.” We don’t necessarily have to go as far as to recognise Taiwan fully diplomatically – that may well be a provocation too far, which might precipitate the war we want to prevent. But we should do everything possible short of full recognition, to indicate that we support Taiwan, that we know Taiwan shares our values, that Taiwan is our friend.
Let me conclude with some thoughts on why “One Country, Two Systems” as a model is dead. Totally dead. Dead in Hong Kong, and therefore inconceivably irrelevant for Taiwan.
Although the erosion of Hong Kong’s freedoms and autonomy was building up, the turning point was the Umbrella Movement in 2014. Peaceful protests demanding what was promised to them in Hong Kong’s own mini-constitution, known as the Basic Law. Universal suffrage. Beijing initially agreed to this – on the condition that they pick the candidates. What a joke. So you can have universal suffrage, as long as you choose between – for example – the acolytes of Xi Jinping, Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin. Or as Martin Lee put it, “what’s the difference between a rotten apple, a rotten orange and a rotten banana?”
So the people rose up, and protested – peacefully, beautifully. Students sat doing their homework in the street by day and chanting slogans by night. And they were met with teargas and police batons. Peaceful protest leaders – like Benny Tai and Joshua Wong, still in jail, like my friend Nathan Law, who spent time in jail and is now in exile – were arrested and prosecuted.
From that point on, the deterioration in Hong Kong accelerated. Pro-democracy legislators were elected to the legislature, then disqualified. Mainland Chinese law was applied at the high-speed rail terminus. Booksellers were abducted into the mainland and jailed. And in October 2017, I was very publicly denied entry to Hong Kong, on the orders of Beijing, probably the first Westerner to experience that fate, though a growing number of others have followed.
Then there was Carrie Lam’s ridiculous extradition bill; the extraordinary protests for months in 2019; the horrific police brutality; the draconian National Security Law; the expulsion of the pro-democracy camp from the legislature, the transformation of the legislature into a puppet subsidiary of the National Peoples Congress, the shut-down of press freedom, the jailing of Jimmy Lai, the arrest of 47 pro-democracy legislators and activists for simply holding a primary election to choose their candidates for the legislature, and more recently the arrest of 90 year-old Cardinal Zen, whose trial began this week. A regime that arrests a 90 year-old Cardinal on spurious political grounds is not a regime that can inspire any trust whatsoever.
In March this year, I woke up in London one morning and turned on my laptop, to find in my email two letters: one from the Hong Kong Police Force, the other from the Hong Kong National Security Bureau. These two letters told me that my activities and the work of Hong Kong Watch pose a serious threat to China’s national security, that I and Hong Kong Watch are in violation of Hong Kong’s National Security Law, and that unless we cease our activities and shutdown our website within 72 hours of receipt of the letter, I personally could face a fine of HK$100,000 and a prison sentence of between one year, three years or life imprisonment. Hong Kong Watch is entirely based in London, as is our website – we have absolutely no entity, no personnel, no presence in Hong Kong. So this was the Hong Kong authorities exercising the “extraterritoriality” clause of the National Security Law, in an attempt to silence a critic well beyond China’s borders. Well, they failed.
Throughout the past four years, I have received numerous anonymous threatening letters by post at my home in London. Some letters went to my neighbours. Even my mother, who lives in a totally different part of the country, a long way from London, has received letters asking her to tell me to stop my work. MPs have been lobbied by the Chinese embassy in London to ask them to tell me to shut up. Thankfully my mother is very supportive – her response is simply to laugh and to say that she gave up trying to tell me to shut up many years ago. And the MPs told the embassy where to go. But the fact that this regime goes to these lengths to try to silence critics around the world tells you what you need to know.
The regime in Beijing should not be allowed to get away with what it has done to Hong Kong. It has broken a treaty. It must face consequences. That is why I believe sanctions are urgently needed. Co-ordinated, targeted, effective sanctions from the EU, from the UK, as well as from the US, Canada, Australia and other democracies. Beijing must not be allowed to get away with destroying Hong Kong’s freedoms and autonomy with impunity.
And we need a lifeboat scheme from Germany and the EU. Britain has provided a very generous scheme to allow thousands – up to 3 million – Hong Kongers to come to the United Kingdom. The EU and others should do their part to help those Hong Kongers who are not eligible for the UK scheme to find sanctuary if they wish to.
One country, two systems could have worked. With a decent, humane government in Beijing, one which respected human rights and human dignity, freedom and the international rules-based order, and kept its treaty promises, it might have worked. But under Xi Jinping and this CCP regime it is a lie, a broken promise and a broken model. We must keep the spotlight on Hong Kong, keep up the pressure in response to the human rights crisis in China, and increase our support for Taiwan.
Let me end by saying this: last night I went to the Brandenburg Gate. As I did so, President Ronald Reagan’s words echoed in my mind, from his 1987 speech. “This wall will fall,” he said. “For it cannot withstand faith; it cannot withstand truth. The wall cannot withstand freedom.” Two years later, the Berlin Wall fell. I do not seek the fall of the Great Wall of China – but I do desire the collapse of the Great Firewall of China – and the rise of an open, free, democratic China, a free Tibet, freedom for the Uyghurs and Southern Mongolia, the restoration of freedom for Hong Kong and the defence of freedom for Taiwan. Let’s work together for this cause.
Thank you.
Benedict Rogers is a British human rights activist and journalist based in London. He is the co-founder and deputy chairman of the Conservative Party‘s human rights commission. He is also the founder of Hong Kong Watch.
一國兩制：對香港的承諾打破了，破碎的模式適用於台灣嗎？
各位來賓、女士們、先生們：
今天很榮幸與大家一起參加這個重要的會議。我要祝賀組織者，並向所有其他有幸分享這個平台的演講者表示敬意。
愛中國、愛香港、愛台灣、愛自由
我想簡單地以四句話開頭：我愛中國，我愛香港，我愛台灣，我愛自由。這四點不必相互矛盾。
18 歲那年，我第一次去中國，在青島教英語六個月。青島以中國最好的啤酒而聞名，儘管那不是我去的原因（到了那裡後，才有這個美妙的發現）。我參觀了由德國人建造的啤酒廠，並愛上了同樣是由德國人建造的青島老城區。我在那裡交了很多朋友。這些年來，我多次重返，走遍了中國各地。從北京到昆明、上海到瀋陽、從南京、蘇州到大理、陽朔，從廣州到丹東。所以我不反華。相反地，我之所以花這麼多時間和精力為中國的人權發聲，是因為我支持中國——支持中國人民——我希望他們自由。我反對的是中國共產黨政權，而不是中國——這個重要的區別，是我們永遠不應厭倦，必須一再強調的。
在香港的五年，今非昔比
香港回歸後的頭五年1997-2002年，我住在香港。這裡是我大學畢業後最先開始工作生活的地方，我開展了記者和人權活動的職業生涯。當我2002年離開香港時，雖然看到了一些問題的先兆，但我真的相信「一國兩制」運作良好，香港的自由和自治得到了保障。萬萬沒想到二十年後，我必須成立一個組織——「香港觀察」——來為香港的人權呼籲。也更沒想到，這麼多我的香港朋友，要麽坐牢，要麽流亡。接觸那些還在香港、沒有坐牢的人，必須十分小心，免得危及他們。我從來不支持港獨，我一直支持「一國兩制」。但在習近平的領導下，中共違背了諾言，違反了一項國際條約——《中英聯合聲明》——並摧毀了「一國兩制」。
台灣有生動活潑的民主體制
我愛台灣。我只訪問過那兒 3 次——我很想在新冠限制放寬後儘早再次訪問。我永遠不會忘記2019年來到台灣參加宗教自由會議，台灣總統在會上發表主旨演講。在一個中文的文化氛圍裡，我沒有被逮捕、監禁或驅逐出境的風險，而是受到歡迎，這真是太棒了。我會見了政府高級官員、民間社會、媒體，並於 6 月 4 日在台北自由廣場參加了天安門大屠殺 30 週年紀念活動。台灣充滿活力、令人印象深刻的民主體制，以及對人權的承諾，深深感動了我，使我迫切地想與台灣站在一起。說民主和人權是「西方」價值觀，中國人或亞洲人在文化上還不夠成熟來接受自由，這完全是一個謊言。誰製造這樣的神話，我對他說，請來看看台灣。
我的新書《中國鏈》The China Nexus
我最近寫完了一本書——《中國鏈》——將於下月底出版，作為送給中共黨代會的驚喜禮物。這本書著眼於中國的人權危機——包括中國大陸對公民社會、媒體、律師、持不同政見者的鎮壓，以及對維吾爾人的種族滅絕、西藏的暴行、對基督徒的迫害、香港的鎮壓、對台灣的威脅和許多其他問題。我為這本書採訪了許多人，包括現居台灣的天安門廣場活動人士吾爾開希。他說：「一個向和平示威者開火、沒有民主、壓制集會、言論、信息自由的政權，是一個被公認為合法的政權。而另一個自由、生動和模範的民主國，那裏有自由選舉、信息的自由流通、集會自由，軍隊由民選政府領導，並且在政治進程中保持中立，卻被世界稱為非法，這太荒謬了。」我們不一定要在外交上完全承認台灣——這很可能被視為一種過分的挑釁，可能會引發我們想要阻止的戰爭。但我們應該盡一切可能，在沒有充分承認的情況下，表明我們支持台灣，我們知道台灣與西方有共同的價值觀，台灣是我們的朋友。
「一國兩制」死於香港
讓我總結一下為什麼「一國兩制」作為一個模式已經死了，徹底死了，死在香港，因此不適用於台灣。儘管香港的自由和自治日益受到侵蝕，但轉折點是 2014 年的雨傘運動。人們和平抗議，要求北京對香港的小憲法，即《基本法》以及普選保持承諾。北京最初同意這一點——條件是由他們挑選候選人，這真是笑話。所以你可以擁有普選權，只要你在習近平、胡錦濤和江澤民的聽命者之間做出選擇。正如李柱銘 Martin Lee 所說：「爛蘋果、爛橙子和爛香蕉有什麼區別？」
於是人們站起來抗議——和平、優美。學生們白天坐在街上做作業，晚上高呼口號。他們遭到催淚瓦斯和警棍的襲擊。和平抗議的領袖如戴耀廷 Benny Tai 和黃之鋒 Joshua Wong，仍然在監獄裡，就像我的朋友 羅冠聰Nathan Law曾經經歷的，他在監獄裡待了一段時間，現在流亡到英國，他曾被逮捕和起訴。
從那時起，香港惡化速度加快了。親民主的立法者被選入立法機構，然後被取消資格。高鐵的站台上得採用中國大陸法律。書商被綁架到大陸投入監獄。 2017 年 10 月，在北京的命令下，我被公開拒絕入境香港，我可能是第一個經歷這種命運的西方人，儘管越來越多的其他人也遭此命運。
然後是林鄭月娥荒謬的引渡法案； 2019 年持續數月非同尋常的抗議活動；可怕的警察暴行；嚴厲的國家安全法；將民主派驅逐出立法機構，將立法機構轉變為全國人大的傀儡附屬機構；封鎖新聞自由；黎智英入獄；47名民主派立法委員遭逮捕；活動人士只能舉行初選來選擇他們的立法機構候選人；最近還逮捕了 90 歲的紅衣主教陳日君，他的審判將於本週開庭。一個以虛假的政治理由逮捕一位 90 歲紅衣主教的政權，不是一個能夠獲得人們信任的政權。
港警的手伸到倫敦
今年三月的一天清晨，我在倫敦醒來，打開筆記本電腦，在郵件中發現兩封信：一封來自香港警務處，另一封來自香港國安局。這兩封信告訴我，我的活動和「香港觀察」的工作，對中國的國家安全構成嚴重威脅，我和「香港觀察」違反了香港的國家安全法，在收到信函後 72 小時內，我們必須停止活動，並關閉我們的網站，否則我本人可能面臨罰款港幣 100,000 元及監禁一年至三年或無期徒刑。「香港觀察」位於倫敦，我們的網站也在倫敦，我們沒有機構，沒有人員，在香港也無運作。因此，這是香港當局行使《國家安全法》的「治外法權」條款，試圖讓中國境外的批評者噤聲。他們註定會失敗的。
在過去的四年裡，我在倫敦的家中收到了許多匿名的威脅信。有些信是寄到我鄰居那裡， 連我住在離倫敦很遠地方的母親，也收到了這樣的信，要求她叫我停止工作。中國駐倫敦大使館一直在遊說國會議員，要求他們讓我閉嘴。謝天謝地，我母親非常支持我，她的反應是，笑一笑然後說，她多年前就放棄了讓我閉嘴的嘗試。國會議員回應大使館：去你的吧！這個政權竭盡全力試圖讓世界各地的批評者保持沉默，這樣作是告訴你，你該知道些什麼。
國際社會必須制裁中國違約
北京政權對香港所做的一切必須背負責任。它既違反了條約，就必須承擔後果。這就是我認為必須立刻對他們進行制裁的原因。歐盟、德國、英國以及美國、加拿大、澳大利亞和其他民主國家應當發起有協調性、針對性的有效制裁。絕不能允許北京破壞香港的自由和治卻逍遙法外。
我們需要德國和歐盟的救生艇計劃。英國提供了一個非常慷慨的計劃，允許成千上萬（最多可達 300 萬）香港人來到英國。歐盟和其他國家應該儘自己的一份力量，幫助那些不符合英國計劃的香港人，讓他們找到避難之地。
「一國兩制」本來可以奏效。如果北京有個誠信、人道的政府，一個尊重人權和人的尊嚴、自由和遵循國際規則秩序，並信守條約承諾的政府，那麼它是可行的。但在習近平和這個中共政權下，這是一個謊言，一個失信，一個破碎的模式。我們要繼續聚焦香港，繼續施壓來應對中國人權的危機，加大對台灣的支持力度。
謝謝。
作者羅傑斯是英國著名人權運動家，任保守黨人權委員會副主席。於2017年12月11日創辦香港監察 （Hong KongWatch）
貝迪克特·羅傑斯（Benedict Rogers），在柏林「自由民主人權的保衛戰——2022年中國民主化國際媒體研討會」上演講視頻：
