HONG KONG : Wary of China, Text Publishers Stop the Presses : Despite promises of autonomy for the colony after the 1997 hand-over, Beijing has recommended that schoolbooks reflect ‘political realities.’

It’s a textbook lesson in political differences: Worried that they might offend China, some Hong Kong publishers are refusing to print schoolbooks that will be in use after Beijing takes over this territory in 1997.

The publishers want assurances that the books designed to accompany a new 1996 curriculum will not be rejected by the Chinese government after the 1997 hand-over.

Although China has promised Hong Kong 50 years of autonomy under its rule, a notion captured by the slogan “One Country, Two Systems,” a Chinese committee has recommended that textbook contents reflect “the spirit of Chinese nationalism and political realities.”

Chances are slim, say publishers, that the Chinese will accept a textbook written under the British administration.

“I believe almost all the publishers are worried in one way or another,” says Tsang Yok Sing, a secondary school principal and political leader. “Two have pulled out already, and I’m afraid others may follow suit. Schools will be left with a new syllabus and no textbooks.”

It’s not math books that are making publishers and teachers nervous.

The new book list is for “general studies,” which include sensitive subjects such as history, Hong Kong’s relationship with China and civic education.

“Not all the content of the books needs to be changed--only the paragraphs which are not proper,” says Lisa Yip, an energetic school principal.

She cites as an example the 1839-42 Opium War, the clash in which Britain won Hong Kong from China: “You may have a different point of view on the Sino-British War, if you’re Chinese or a colonial.”

Just as Hong Kong prepares for the change of sovereignty--removing the Queen of England’s bust from coins, reprinting stationery and mulling new names for roads honoring royalty and colonial heroes--textbooks must reflect these transformations. The latest editions already use Hong Kong’s new official name, “the Special Administrative Region of China.”

But in a territory where more than half the population consists of refugees from Communist China, subjects such as ideology and nationalism are especially tricky.

“Teaching nationalism can be quite slippery,” says Chan Nai-kwok, a curriculum development officer at Hong Kong’s education department. “We have to define what the students must love, support and identify with. But we must also teach the students to be critical.”

Chan says the department considers suggestions from teachers and parents--and now China--when planning a new syllabus. But he argues that education and politics should be kept separate.

He flips through a primary history text, pausing at a cartoon of the Western powers enthusiastically carving up China like a pie.

“Every generation rewrites history,” Chan says. Maybe, he adds hopefully, there won’t be any revisions after 1997 after all. “If you believe in ‘One Country, Two Systems,’ then 1997 should not be a watershed or turning point.”

A committee of officials from Britain and China will meet this month to discuss solutions that won’t upset the delicate balance of Hong Kong’s confidence.

But political observers point to the textbook issue as another sign of more changes to come post-1997. Already, those who have business contracts straddling the changeover must get an unofficial stamp of approval from Beijing’s representatives in Hong Kong. China has said it will replace the existing legislature with lawmakers of its own choosing and will reject any of the laws passed in the run-up to 1997 that represent substantial changes.

“It’s like buying a house,” says David Chu, a prominent Hong Kong businessman and an adviser to Beijing on the transition. “You don’t want the current owner making drastic changes after you’ve already signed the deed.”