U.S. Puts Its Thumb in Hong Kong’s Pie

American diplomacy too often tends to be influenced by the Law of Unintended Consequences. Last year in Kuala Lumpur, Vice President Al Gore stunned an Asian audience by attacking Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, the host of the summit. Before the speech, Mahathir had not been a whole lot more popular among fellow leaders than the junta in Myanmar; after this lashing in his own backyard, Mahathir became a sympathetic figure. Last week, another U.S. official publicly offered up an unexpected, unwanted opinion about the internal policies of an Asian country. It landed like a thud right in the middle of roiling Sino-U.S. relations--and may unintentionally complicate Hong Kong’s desire to do the right thing.

Consider that Hong Kong, the 1997 takeover by China notwithstanding, remains one of the most free-wheeling environments on the planet. Its press corps, reflecting its inimitable roller-derby culture, is lively, championed by opinionated Chinese-language newspapers and distinguished by one of Asia’s most respected English dailies, the South China Morning Post. The place is nothing if not entrepreneurial and independent-minded--but also sometimes excessive, especially in its down-market media, fiercely competing for every Hong Kong dollar with screaming headlines and overplayed stories. Recently, a frustrated Hong Kong government, trying hard to please the people without irritating Beijing, came forth with the idea of a press council to oversee media behavior, chaired by a government appointee.

The notion of press councils holding the media’s hand (and occasionally slapping it) comes up now and again all over, even in Britain, democracy’s citadel, because of its privacy-invading tabloid press. The British more or less gave up on the idea; so should Hong Kong. Maybe it would, if left to its own devices. Yet this is the new Hong Kong: In years past, the British could do almost anything there without the Western media making a big deal of it. These days, under Chinese rule, every move is put under the microscope of a Western press unwilling to accept that the 1997 West-to-East hand-over has proceeded with fewer bumps than anticipated.

The creation, with China’s concurrence, of a government-chaired press council would undermine that gain. In fact, it would be China’s most visible mistake since 1997. That’s why, left alone, the bright guys in Beijing and Hong Kong, who Monday happily announced a deal with the Disney Co. for an amusement park, would probably not venture much farther down this dead-end road than London ever has. Yet the West won’t leave Hong Kong alone.

Enter, opining, the highest-ranking U.S. government official there: “If Hong Kong wants to be woefully misunderstood in the rest of the world,” declaimed U.S. Consul General Michael Klosson last week, “there is no better way to do so than to put in place a government-appointed statutory body wielding penalties to ‘improve’ the press.”

This was said in a public forum in Hong Kong, where many undoubtedly would concur with Klosson, a 50-year-old career foreign service officer, on the issue’s merits. Yet for Klosson to lay his views out so publicly seemed a diplomatic indelicacy, to be diplomatic about it.

Americans need to understand that Asians, whether in Beijing or Hong Kong (or, for that matter, Tokyo) don’t like being lectured to by foreigners about how to live their lives or how to run their country any more than we Americans do. Imagine the official howl if a Beijing official were to call, in a speech in Washington, for press councils to tame vulgar local TV news shows in the United States.

Earlier this week, the consul general declined my request for an interview. Undoubtedly Klosson, on the job for two months, might wish he could recall his words; they kicked up a storm he surely didn’t want. And they clearly agitated Beijing, already in a state of high perturbation and persistent paranoia over what it regards as U.S. meddling in Taiwan. Too bad for Hong Kong, which has been trying hard to steer clear of Beijing-Washington tension.

The consul general’s remarks should rankle the Clinton administration, which, rightly, has been at pains to repair relations with Beijing. What’s so unnerving is that the incident wasn’t triggered by some political hack whose campaign contributions had to be repaid with a diplomatic plum, but by a respected career diplomat who should have known better. What is it in our character that runs so deep (and not so silent) that as a nation we seem incapable of fielding a sensitive, nuanced global diplomacy commensurate with our immense domestic achievements?

Times contributing editor Tom Plate’s column runs Wednesdays. Go to the web site https://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu for the full text of the Klosson speech.