The committee on Foreign Affairs will come to order. The chair is authorized to declare a recess at any point and all members will have five days to submit statements, materials and questions for the record subject to the length, limitations in the rules. To insert something in the record please have your staff email the previously mentioned address or contact of the full committee staff. I see that we have a quorum and before i go forward i understand the speaker of the house, miss pelosi, will be stopping by this hearing and i ask unanimous consent she participate in any point she arrives during the hearing. So ordered. There she is. Madame speaker, would you like to make some remarks . Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. I thank you and mr. Mccaul, mr. Eliot engel for having this hearing today. It is with Great Sadness that i come here because we had such optimism and such hope. The u. S. Congress has always spoken in a bipartisan house and senate, democrats and republicans, with one voice in defense of those who are oppressed by beijing in support of freedom, justice and real autonomy for the people of hong kong. We continue to urge President Trump to hold chinese officials accountable for abuses including taking steps under the hong kong human rights and democracy act we must consider all tools available including visa limitations and economic penalties. But here today im very honored to join cheuk yan lee, confederation of trade unions, carroll peter sen, professor of Law University of hawaii, brian leung, ph. D. University candidate university of washington and virtually electronically nathan law, Legislative Council, former Member Council of hong kong and former chairman. Again, for years, the world has watched in horror as beijing has accelerated its campaign to dismantle the rights and freedoms of the people of hong kong. From its brutal response to peaceful protests to the introduction of the horrific extradition law that we condemned. So many times this committee, mr. Mccaul, mr. Eliot engel, the senate, marco rubio, mr. Cardin and others, have put now chris van hollyn, mr. Toomey over there, democrats and republicans have put the bright spotlight on what is happening. The executive commission on china, chaired by mr. Mcgovern and cochaired by chris smith, vice chair chris smith, have worked very hard with hearings, et cetera, as has this committee to all attention to all of this. The commission on human rights, former chair of this committee, in a bipartisan way has called attention to all of this over the years since Tiananmen Square and then in terms of hong kong more specifically leading up to 1987 and including that whats so sad about it the chinese just think the chinese regime thinks they can act with impunity in repressing the spirit of democracy. 2 Million People turned out against the extradition law, 2 Million People. Thats a big crowd in the United States. But when you understand it was 25 of the population of hong kong, almost anybody who could go out showed up against what chinese regime was going to do. What they want they want the most horrible form of horror, just keep using the same word for someone who was fighting for democracy or imprisoned because its for the regime to say nobody cares, theyre not paying attention to what youre doing, nobody remembers youre in prison and that or why youre even there. We know why theyre there, something deep in the soul of all of us, something that young people commemorated in tianamen square, having democracy as their symbol, something that we have led the way on and that we cannot turn our backs on. When beijing announced its intention to pass a socalled National Security law, socalled, we were concerned. It was frightening. It is nothing short of an allout effort to negate the rights of the people of hong kong in violation of the agreements made under the one country, two systems. We were concerned of what it might be and it exceeds even those horrors. The law is a brutal, sweeping crackdown against the people of hong kong intended to destroy the freedoms they were promised. Thanks to the committee for holding this hearing which asks the question, is this the end of the one country, two systems . It seems as it is. As i have stated beijings socalled National Security passed on the eve of the 23rd anniversary of the handover of hong kong from the uk to china signals the death of the one country, two systems principle. The purpose of this law is to frighten, intimidate and suppress the people of hong kong who are demanding the freedoms they have been owed. All freedom loving people must come together to condemn the law which accelerates beijings years long assault on hong kongs political and economic freedoms. Many of us have been working for mr. Smith and i have been working for three generations, martin lee, another generation, nathan law and joshua to see the courage of these people speaking out as they have done and to see it matters just getting worse in terms of the regime. Of course, right now were also concerned about the uyghurs in china, the tibetans, the list goes on. In terms of the uyghurs what were finding out this morning not only are they putting uyghurs in concentration camps, they are by social media and the rest, tracking uyghurs throughout the world and what their communication is with people inside. This reaches into our own, reaches into our own country. Again, ill say all freedom loving people must come together to condemn this law. We must Work Together in a multilateral way to monitor the implementation of this law and hold beijing accountable for its violations of the joint declaration and the basic law. As ive said many times over, ive said this over and over again, if we do not speak out for human rights and democratic freedoms in china, lets just talk about human rights, if we do not speak out for human rights and religious freedom in china we lose all moral authority to speak out any place if our silence is because of commerce. We refuse to speak out on human rights in china we lose all moral authority to speak out for human rights any place in the world. Again, mr. Chairman, acting chairman, mr. Sherman, thank you for the recognition, thank you to mr. Mccaul and to the members for the opportunity to with the unanimous consent to express some of the views which i hold to be bipartisan in support of the people of china in this case hong kong. I yield back. Thank you. Madam speaker, i want to thank you for your decades of fighting for human rights, particularly for the people of china, and your presence here underlines for the world the importance that america puts on the subject of this hearing. Thank you. Thank you very much and thank you for mentioning the uyghurs as well. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. As a reminder to members, staff and all others physically present in the room per the guidance of the office of attending physician, masks must be worn at all times during todays proceedings and are strongly advised when a member is speaking from their microphone. Please also sanitize your seating area. The chair views these measures as a safety issue and therefore an important matter of order and decorum of this proceeding. Keep your video function on at all times if you are participating remotely, even when you are not recognized by the chair. Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves and please remember to mute yourself after you finish speaking. Just a few minutes before the hearing was scheduled to begin, i learned that our distinguished chair eliot engel could not attend or at least could not attend for the first portion of this hearing. He has done an outstanding job of chairing hearings year after year and i will try to fill in for him here today. I dont im trying to put together an Opening Statement and i will recognize the Ranking Member to deliver his Opening Statement after which i will recognize myself for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, madam speaker, for being here today. That shows how important this hearing is. You have been a stedfast champion of human rights and democracy around the world and if we dont youre right if we dont have moral authority here, we have it nowhere. Just i think it means a lot to us on both sides of the aisle, that you have taken the time from your busy day to be here and to be in our presence. Today is the 23rd anniversary of the handover of hong kong to the Chinese Communist party. Under the british treaty that set up this handover the people of hong kong were promised one country, two systems where they could be allowed some level of autonomy. The one country, two Systems Approach worked well for many years. Recently, the ccp began to rapidly erode the system by peeling away the rights and freedoms guaranteed to the people of hong kong. Then yesterday the ccp took a sledgehammer to one country, two systems by passing sweeping socalled National Security legislation that strips away the autonomy of hong kongers violating the terms of the british treaty. They view democracy, individual liberty and free markets as a threat and have declared war on each. Unfortunately, this wasnt the ccps only act of brutal suppression. We learned about this week. On monday the world was made aware the Chinese Communist party is using forced sterilization, forced abortion, and coercive Family Planning against ethnic minorities including the uyghur muslims. It is clear the ccp does not care about the people of china. They only care about preserving their own power. By brutally suppressing democracy in hong kong, the ccp is challenging the underlying assumptions that have guided the world sinces the end of the cold war. We sit here as the speaker said not as republicans or democrats, but as americans united in our strong support for hong kong. This is a battle between democracy and dictatorship, between liberty and tyranny, and between freedom and oppression. It is a battle that the world must win. I would like to take this opportunity to speak directly to the people of hong kong. America stands with you and america will always support you. Last year when we heard you sing our National Anthem and when we saw you carrying our american flag, we knew and we know that you were telling us we are not two people but one, both united in our belief and freedom and democracy for all. Today is not just the anniversary of the first handover of hong kong to the ccp, its also the oneyear anniversary of the heroic act by one of our witnesses here today brian leung. One year ago today, during demonstrations in hong kong, mr. Leung gave a moving speech where he revealed his identity, subjectingly subjecting himself to significant prosecution. Ive met another one of our witnesses, nathan law. Last year when we passed the hong kong human rights and democracy act he is an incredible young man who along with other democracy activists like joshua leung are risking their safety and security every day to fight for freedom. They are all commendable and im grateful to have them with us here today. As chairman engle and i said in a letter earlier this year, quoted its critical the United States use the available tools under the hong kong human rights and democracy act and other authorities to make clear to beijing its violations of International Commitments and commitments to the people of hong kong will have consequences. And i urge the administration to issue the sanctions authorized by this congress. With this hearing today, we have this opportunity, american stands in solidarity with the freedom loving people of hong kong and will continue to be a beacon of hope for all those fighting for democracy around the world. So with that, mr. Chairman, i thank you and i yield back. Thank you. Consistent with House Resolution 965 accompanying regulations staff will only mute witnesses when not under recognition and will do that for the purpose of eliminating background noise. Pursuant to notice we meet today to discuss the new National Security law that the Chinese Government has forced on the people of hong kong on the 23rd anniversary of the handover. This is beijings latest and most aggressive challenge to hong kongs autonomy. I now recognize myself for five minutes as an Opening Statement. It is important to know how we got here. In 1997, we had the adoption of the one country, two systems arrangement that guaranteed 50 years of relative autonomy to hong kong. Freedom of expression, independent judiciary, strong democratic systems, and over the past two decades hong kongs unique status has allowed it to flourish, to prosper, human capital, privileged financial position as a gateway to china with a trusted common law system of law and courts have turned hong kong into a hub of finance and trade. Historically in hong kong corruption is low, contracts are honored, judges can rule are honored, judges can reel fairly and independently, journalists and academics enjoy freedom of expression and human rights are generally respected. Hong kong has seen its success create a vibrant society. This is glaring embarrassment to the chinese mainland. One country two systems is an embarrassment if the smaller system is working much better. Now, this does not mean hong kong was perfectly free or that the system it had in place last year was perfectly democrac. But compared to the government in beijing it shows the people of china what can be done by moving in the direction of freedom. In december as chair of the asia subcommittee i hosted a Forum Political and human rights challenges in china and that hearing featured the Vice President of the City University of hong kong students union. The committee passed the resolution at my suggestion by unanimous consent last year according to the right of hong kongers to protest. The one country two systems was designed to safeguard hong kongs rule as a thriving financial center. Now hong kongers are fleeing hong kong out of fear for their safety and we should support their right to do so, though the right we really want to support is the right of all hong kongers to the level of autonomy promised in the one country two systems agreement. We need to reject this chinese violation of chinas own International Commitments and the commitments they have made to their own people. The peoples ofs of hong kong expected china to honor the commitment under the two systems part of the agreement, but over the past few years beijing has chipped away at hong kongs freedoms in o2014 when officials in beijing curtailed Voting Rights for the people of hong kong a new generation of democracy activists under the banner of the Umbrella Movement came to the forefront. Year after year, injustice after injustice a broadening coalition of hong kongers from all walks of life have taken to the streets to protest their rights. Now chinese president xi jinping has launched an unprecedented attack against hong kong, beijings National Security law undermines the very essence of hong kongs autonomy for socalled crimes against the state. So why is china willing to break these commitments . Unfortunately when we look down pennsylvania avenue we see an administration willing to in effect tell china its obligations to human rights whether it be in hong kong or whether it be the people it simply will not catch the attention of the administration. We have scandered months without speaking out at the executive level. Hong kong has been on the back burner in an effort to sell soybeans and we havent even sold the soybeans. President trump spent january and february this year praising xi personally for how he handled the coronavirus. Now, you know, he has taken the exact opposite approach. We need consistency in the white house, and we need a consistent adherence to our own standards of human rights. Im grateful to our witnesses for the insight and experience they bring us, and i will new move forward towards introducing the witnesses. Our first witness is mr. Lee, a former member of the hong kong legislative counsel. Hes the general secretary of the hong kong trade unions and vicechairman of the hong kong labor party. And why dont we hear from mr. Chairman, mr. Smith would like to make a few opening remarks if that would be acceptable. Are your opening remarks less than five minutes, mr. Mccall . Wasnt keeping time. It was three minutes. I think that would open it up to everyone here. Is there mr. Chairman, i ask unanimous consent mr. Smith be recognized for three minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you my good friend from virginia. Thank you, madam speaker for your very eloquent statement and we have worked together for well over three decades on combating human rights by china during all the other battles we were joined in a very, very bipartisan way. All of us speaking very aggressively against aiding and abetting this horrific dictatorship which has only gotten worse under xi jinping, so thank you for your leadership. Mr. Chairman, the great freedom loving people of hong kong have just had another draconian, antidemocratic law imposed upon them, and that is the socalled National Security law. It severely penalizes democracy activists and even terms like collusion are outlined in the new law, and it defines that any contact with external actors like human rights organizations, members of congress, those people like joshua wong and others and said and all we ask, xi jinping, is for freedom and thats it and live up to your own promises made in the basis of law and the joint communique between hong kong and china. They have broken their word. You know, words matter, and it is a matter of International Law that they committed for at least 50 years to having these two chinas two systems, one china and now theyre breaking it with impunity. And lets not forget xi jinping continues to permit pervasive human rights abuse against Chinese People including the use of torture which has been documented over and over again by the special repetours by the United Nation. Theyre using those tools of repression as genocide to eliminate the muslims, 10 million strong theyre going after them to destroy their children, their families and of course 1 to 2 million are in concentration camps. Of course theres no labor rights, and under xi jinping theres an all out effort to endall religious practice unless it comports with markexi principles. The hong kong human rights act and i was the sponsor of it. It was a bipartisan bill, 130 cosponsors or so backed by aefbld on this committee, that is now law and the president did sign it. And pursuant to that law on schedule he did make this statement that the loss of autonomy has happened. So we need to unite now. Democrats, republicans, weve done it before, and weve got to do it with the president , and the world needs to runite against this pervasive human rights abuser xi jinping and this law they just put into effect. Thank you for those comments and decades of dedication to human rights. Professor of law at the william s. Richardson school of law and graduate chair. Next we will have mr. Nathan law, the founding chairman of the prodemocracy organization and the youngest ever elected law make whr he won a seat on the hong kong legislative counsel in 2016. Last we will have a hong kong democracy anthivist kno democra democracy activist known for reading a statement the five demands for the 2018 antiextradition movement. Id like to thank our witnesses for being here today. Ill recognize each witness for five minutes, and without objection your prepared written statement will be made part of the record. I will first call upon mr. Yan for his testimony. Thank you, mr. Chairman. This represented a second hand over for hong kong and for me personally my third hand over. The imp position of National Security law on hong kong represents the second hand over with the promise of High Autonomy for 50 years are broken and hong kong was hand over back to china as one country, one system. For me personally it is my third hand over. Why is that . I was arrested on june 5, 1989 for bringing support to the Democracy Movement in the square. And i was released after three days and since that time i devoted my lifetime to as one of the leaders in the Hong Kong Alliance in support of the Democratic Movement in china. Will people like me be tried in hong kong and our continuous support for human rights in china. Will there be a fourth hand over awaiting me . The new law just promulgated is a complete destruction of the rule of law in hong kong. When i read through the detailed description of four mechanisms to create crime. The net is spread very, very wide. And i believe in the drafting of law is all the action taken over the past protest movement. So when they are so angry with the protest movement so they come at the end and try to criminalize in the past and try this time under the National Security law. You know, to give you an example waiving of independence may come under susection. There are already meme just because they waved Something Like the flag and they are arrested. And even the police the banner warning people if you wave a flag or slogan you may be charged under the law National Security law of secession or subversion. We dont like to see damage of a government facility but is that subversion or damaging public transport can fall under terrorism. And collusion of foreign power through illegal mean is promotion of hatred towards a central government. No one wants to promote hatred. We just want freedom and severely block the government on implementation of law with serious consequences. So collusion will include blocking of policy . So the law and also enforcement of the law the law will be enforced by the National Security agency with personnel from china and hong kong with a special unit of the Hong Kong Police and the power to search, conduct secret surveillance, int int interceptance of communication. Your five minutes has expired. Just a couple of sentences and i need to move onto the next witness. Okay, so with the destruction of one country two systems and the rule of law in place rule of fear, hong kongers have to learn and survive in a very suppressive environment and still we must retain the will to resist, and for us we will continue our activities and not be deterred by the new law. We will fight on for freedom and democracy. Thank you. Now i recognize professor peterson for five minutes. Thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. I taught law in hong kong from 1989 to 2006, and i coaided a book on the american governments first attempt to enact legislation. Although i now teach in hawaii i continue to visit hong kong for my research. Now that the actual law has been published i have no doubt that it violates chinas obligations under the sign of british joint declaration. The joint declaration makes it clear hong kong is to operate a separate criminal justice system. It shall maintain its common law system, control prosecutions free from any interference and exercise independent judicial power. Unfortunately, this law destroys that firewall. It allows mainland Chinese Security personnel to operate openly in hong kong and in some cases to remove individuals entirely from the protections of hong kongs legal system. As mr. Lee said it establishes numerous institutions in hong kong, which will be directly under the authority of the chinese central authorities. The office for safeguarding National Security will be functioning in hong kong to collect and analyze information, guide, coordinate, support and generally supervise in the Hong Kong Government. They are subject to National Supervisory authorities only and not to the jurisdiction of the Hong Kong Sar. There will also be a special branch of the police and a special branch of the Prosecution Authority and they will be primarily accountable to the central authorities. If these mechanisms did not give beijing enough control it can also take complete jurisdiction over a case and remove it from hong kongs legal system under article 55. The conditions that allow for this to happen are very broad, and there are very limited procedures. A simple request from the chief executive which he will surely give if directed to do so can be accrued by the central government. At that point hong kongs legal system simply does not apply. The mainland chinese criminal procedure will take over, and the person will be prosecuted and tried under mainland law presumably in the mainland. The extensive involvement of chinas Central Security officials and the enforcement of this law is particularly worrying when we combine it with the offenses. Time does not uhuh low me to explain them all with you today but one is collusion with a foreign country. That is defined so broadly that if a person merely testifies today and asks a Foreign Government to impose sanctions that could be considered a violation of article 294. More over it applies whether youre a Hong Kong National or hong kong resident. Anyone cancan be prosecuted as long as they commit the offense in hong kong or the au consequencesker in hong kong. The coverage of the law is even broader. If a permanent resident of hong kong whos now living in the u. S. Merely requests sanctions against hong kong or china that person could be held criminally liable even if the requested sanctions were not ordered. If that sanction wanted to prosecute the person in the mainland it might decide to invoke article 55. The number of my testimony discusses the vague provisions in the law and raises the question who would be interpreting it. We do know the committee has the power to interpret clauses but the law is silent as to whether the courts of hong kong also have the power to interpret the law. This is significant because the courts of hong kong will probably try to interpret this law to comply with the iccpr so long as theres no direct conflicts. Where there is a direct conflict then this law will prevail, and that means china will be in breach to ensure that the iccpr continues to be enforced in hong kong. One of the examples of a clear conflict is article 42 which says no bail shall be granted unless the judge has sufficient grounds for believing the criminal suspect or defendant will not continue to commit acts endangering National Security. Not only does this violate article 9 but also violates the presumption of innocence because it assumes that the person has already committed acts threatening National Security. These and other conflicts violate, incidentally the u. N. Human Rights Committee will be reviewing hong kongs compliance beginning this summer when the report is reviewed. Professor, it appears that just sum up in a couple of sentences please. Certainly. Traditionally the review process before the u. N. Human Rights Committee includes extensive shadow reports. However, this year i fear ngos will be afraid to file those shadow reports for the fear of just asking the u. N. Human Rights Committee to declare theres been a violation of the iccpr might bring about the threat of criminal prosecution. Thank you. There seems to be a technical difficult. Can we unmute mr. Lah . At this point im going to go onto our fourth witness and try to circle back to mr. Lah. We have Brian Lee Young whos recognized for five minutes. Congressman, and members of this committee id like to thank you for the opportunity to address the Critical Development in hong kong and also thank you to Speaker Pelosi and congressman smith for the Opening Statements. Chinas npcsc has unilaterally proposed a law on hong kong. Theres no longer a meaningful distinction between the system of hong kong and that of china. The legal firewall between two places has been utterly dismantled. The Chinese Party state has engulfed our governance system. Our Civil Society is under full assault and purveyed by a sense of political fear, selfcensorship and legal persecution. We have to reckon with the reality that. On this day last year i read out on behalf of a protester the statement of the five demands of the movement inside the legislative counsel rather than responding to those demands the chinese and Hong Kong Government have chosen to ramp up their relentless oppression and ultimately selfdestruction of one country two systems. Since last year 9,000 protesters have been arrested. 600 of them are being charged with rioting. The Police Continue exertion of the Party Dominance inside hong kong. In this light the new National Security law are not limited to its legal ramification. The new criminal offense will now doubt be used as weapons against dissidents and send them to prison. Their definition will forever remain forever elusive as the National People congress has the Sole Authority to interpret the law and beijing can advise our chief executives to hand pick judges to adjudicate cases according to the party line. But the newly enacted law is also about institutionally asserting parties dominance in hong kong. The npc inserts the law into our legal system. Even our top local officials were utterly clueless about the details of the law. Hong kong people ruling hong kong as kind of the original forulation of one country two systems prove said to be a mirage. A set of parallel institutions will be setup in hong kong. First and foremost is office of National Security commissioner will be established in hong kong and will directly report to the communist party and xi jinkpenijinping himself. This jurisdiction and both the power to extradite in china where theres no respectable rule of law. A numerous set of parallel as National Security becomes the springboard for the cctp to tighten its grip, and extradite people. And what were witness sg the scrumbling of one country two systems. Since last Years Movement ive been asking numerous time. Many young protesters have to make the same distressing decision that i had to, which is either to be imprisoned for life or to be exiled and forced to seek refuge elsewhere. But my answer is always this. Once we have taste and breathe freedom we can never be forced to kneel again. Whats happening in hong kong and thats why i believe the United States must hold china accountable. China should not be allowed to disregard its natural obligation. We must act now to exert pressure on china including the use of a range of instruments provided by the new hong kong at autonomy. So thank you and i welcomeby questions. Thank you. And well see if we can hear from mr. Nathan lah, whether weve got the technology working. Hello, can you hear me . Yes, we can. Thank you very much. Sorry about the technical issue. Thank you, mr. Chairman and all the members of the committee inviting me to this hearing. I have testified on fights involving the situation in hong kong. And then before the pacific and east asian communities. Both times i did not have to worry about going to hong kong afterward to continue my activism, but this time its different. Under this new legislation beijing just passed 24 hours ago so much is now lost. The freedom to tell the truth. In typical chinese fashion none of us knew what was in the bill until it was actually effective which had left us anxious. In addition to closed trials in hong kong and even the possibility of extradition to china offenders could be barred from bails in a jury trial with their rights trampled upon executive. And whether covert surveillance like wiretapping can be deployed. Prior screening wii this communist party. One observed clause even depicts the hatred inside hong kong and china is illegal. A new Hong Kong Based National Security agency will have sweeping power requiring the cooperation of all local departments. We used to think as secret police as something abstract. Now it is a very real feral. China is exerting de facto rule over hong kong in clear violation of the declaration that promises one country two systems. Even before the National Security law the price of resistance in hong kong has always been high. Ive seen far too many young faces beaten, detained, tortured, prosecuted and jailed just for protesting our basic human rights. There have also been numerous incidents of suicide deaths. Still against these deaths brave congers keep the Movement Alive for the sake of our future generation as well as more democratic and feel from the threat of chinese imperial and expansionism. While its people were understandably worried in 1997 there was tloat least a sense o optimism people could move to the right of china which would in turn embrace freedom. Oftentimes china has not followed long congs leap but has indestead making hong kong perhaps the National Security no longer reviews the true nature of what country they have shown no regard for the separation of powers and democratic responsibility which along taken for granted by hongers and enshrined in the basic law. Through fear, intimidation and heavy handed guvance while trying to keep his outer shell. In doing so it helps to preserve the illusion the city is still autonomous. The high degree of autonomy once promised is just another blatant lie. Its takes decades if not longer to build a city but it takes just weeks to zrdestroy it. This is what weve all seen lately although its not just the personal safety of my friend. Therefore it is vital that while our friends in the International Community do not pretend everything is normal. They do not look away. I wish to say it out loud on behalf of my beloved hong kong people. Lets keep fighting in different sect squrz i wi sectors and i wish hong kong and all of the world the very best. Thank you for your testimony, and i want to thank all our witnesses for their testimony but given the risk of chinese determination ill recognize them for their courage. Because of the hybrid format of this hearing i will recognize members of the committee by seniority alternating between democrats and republicans. Although i will first recognize the speaker. If you miss your turn please let our staff know and we will come back to you. If you seek recognition you must unmute their microphone and address verbally. Thank you very much, mr. Speaker. Im going to yield back to you so we can hear questions from the members, but i want to thank you you for being the opportunity to be here. M mr. Smith and i always talk about the current issues. None more valuable than hearing what is happening in hong kong tin terms of this law. The concern i have which there may not be an answer to is it ret row active. Do they go back to any flying of the stales or making statements. I want to thank our witnesses and nathan. Once again he has courageous ly testified. And compliment this is overflow cloud of democrats and republicans and the distance overflowing into the audience. This is quite remarkable and a real expression of the bipartisan concern that we for democracy, democratic reform and the socalled well, i dont want to identify it by the name they use because it doesnt have to do with security. With hes has to do with a refregz. But i thank youological of you for turning out for this because when when e talk to the people hong kong what they want to see from us they want to see our support. So with that i thank you for the opportunity to spend my very valuable hour here to hear witnesses to kmecomplement you. Thank you, for being here madam speaker. As you point out although this room doesnt look full we have limits how many members a are allowed to be in the room and how many can participate virtually. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you madam speaker, for honoring us with your presence. Thats how important this issue is to all usch am i met with the secretary and he did solidify the autonomous nature of hong kong. They are in violation of the treaty, and my question to both or professor peterson in in addition to the sanctions i believe are forthcoming in to law we passed to congress what else can be done to address the remedy and violation of this historic treaty. Well, i think thank you for the question. I think it is important for us to understand that the implementation of National Security law is not just about a piece of law but is a governing fits publicity. That is what theyre going to do, theyre going to erase the protections we have had. While there are hundreds and thousands of people falling down today, and weve already seen there are i think the National Security committee other thab desanctions while it is difficult to hold it together i think we need mead a new guiding principle in which we have to hold them accountable. So i think this is what the International Committee should do and should do it jointly. And i agree with you. Professor peterson . Go ahead. Thank you for the question. I dant want to sbnd to the speakers question, youre right the law is not retroactive . However we cant rule out the possibility that actions taken before the law went into force may contradict to target people for investigations or prosecution. Regardlessing what can be done i would like to suggest that we focus on the United Nations and turn out the International Community as a whole, because i do think its mornt we try to avoid things that can hurt the hong kong people and try to focus more on the National Human rights monitoring mechanisms. I do think the International Community can help participate in that. And although china likes often to react badly to International Monitoring the truth is that the Chinese Government voluntarily agreed to this process when it agreed that the iccpr would continue to apply to hong kong and the hong kong will report to u. N. Human Rights Committee. Other kmert mechanisms in the united i think can help shine a light. And i think that is our next course of action. I see chairman engel has arrived, and with that i yield back, mr. Chairman. Good morning, everyone. I apologize for running a little behind this morning. Shes always been in the forefront of this issue. Weve had many, many discussions about hong kong. And as we look to the uncertain future of the atonmy and democratic system we see our speaker has been a tireless champion for human rights and the rights of the people of hong kong and china. Thank you to our witnesses as well for your time this morning and thank you to mr. Mccaul, our Ranking Member and other members of the committee. As the Chinese Government escalates its aggression towards hong kong im proud that the congress has spoken, again, in a bipartisan voice again and again in support of the people of hong kong, in support of the struggle to preserve their rights, rights that have been guaranteed by treaty and International Law. But at the end of the day its the white house that sets policy, and i fear that our policy has gone astray perhaps involving china. We should be focussed on two major elements in our policy towards hong kong. One is does it support atutonom and democracy and second does it advance american interests. We hear lots of tough talk about vietnam from the administration, but i fear that months of this attitude of heaping praise on xi, looking the other way as the Chinese Government side lines concerns of any human rights or trade deal that has set the stage for what were doing today. Nothing the beijing government does should surprise me. Nor should it surprise anyone. If theres one thing all americans should be united on its this. I remember when the agreement was signed with the u. K. Going into two different types of government. One china, but two, banaling government does not abide by that at all and did anybody ever think that they would . So let me say that one of the more unanticipated provisions in this National Security law is article 38 which states that the law applies to persons who are not permanent residents of hong kong, and commit crimes under the law outside of hong kong. This law could have far reaching implications for anyone visiting hong kong including u. S. Persons who are studying, doing, burn or working as government officials or diplomats. So fhow safe should i or anyone feel like visiting many are talking about okay, so let me have the witnesses respond if any of you care to. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I think i can respond to that. It is true that china intends to apply this law torextra tutoral. When you combine the provisions article 3639 together with article 29 the definition of collusion with Foreign Forces it created an incredible broad back net for liability. While i would have said up until a few years ago hong kong is one of the safest places in the world to wifbt because i lived it for seven years and it always felt very safe i dont feel safe now. Naung. Als also liif you have any hg residency and your contact in a place outside hong kong you will still be subject to the lar, and i think in a lot who might have criticized chinese or abused human rights aboard. If they came to hong kong then they could be subject to that law. So i think its draconian and i think the International Community should be very concerned about this rlaw. Thank you for coming. As theyve mentioned about that law to persons whos still a permanent resident of the region. If mainland Chinese Support hong kong which in the past from the Umbrella Movement, or protest movement and now with this law testing also is mainland chinese to fights for human rights in hong kong. So its really catching on. I was wondering actually can we come back to hong kong to viz s he may have a problem. And so this is really a very wide, you know, application of law to anyone in the world. So anyone in the world can be caught by this law. You can see the atrophy on this side of society, ones that can detect everyone. Thank you very much. Let me ask you another question. Many are mentioning the risks to Public Safety for those who have been involved in the Hong Kong National movement in the days until the hand over until now. Several of you speaking here today have repeatedly put yourselves at rick. Youre very courageous and i really take my hat off to you. Weve seen announcements in the United Kingdom and in taiwan regarding safe haven for hong kongers. But my question is what can the United States do best to ensure were doing our best for those in hong kong who face persecution under these new laws. Gh thank you for your question. So i think this is a great way to support hong kong protesters on the ground. For hong kong people, well one thing id like to mention is that after the day implementing it today there are mer than 100 thoen people marching down the street. I think this attitude towards the autocracy i think is very admiral. And i think not only offering people plans for these people but ale which plan should do more to hold china accountable so we can let those people on the frudoss. Thank you, chairman. If i may speak on that issue i think its a reality we have to face. Some of the best and brightest hong kong protester intellectuals, have to lead city because of enforcement to our democracy . Unit. Its very saddening and many people are using to seek refuge elsewhere. I know that in america now two bills have been proposed. The first is hong kong safe harbor act. The other is called Hong Kong Freedom and choice act. Those will provide immediate refugee policy favorable to hong kong people. I think those will be a very good mechanism to identify those who are in danger and great need. I hope the act trust key is as an actual Financial System that will produce a general of political refugees, but this is unacceptable. We need to help them. Thank you very much. Anyone else want to answer the question sphthen well go to mr. Smith of new jersey. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Thank you to all of us witness and thank you mr. Lee and nathan lah for the atrend s sacrifices you have made to date and the risks you face new. Unless jinping reverses course i think everyone has to be on notice in the world every treaty obligations nutting those into the w. T. O. China has added its name to it. They make solmd, solemn obligations and thou theyre breaking up with impunity. In china its the of rule of chinese law. Your point on the rote retroact because i was think that as well i think thats a technical. Let me just ask a couple of questions. One, do you have the sense the world will unite with World Leaders. I think there needs to be a very serious sanctions resume. The secretary of state he did on may 27th spur sunt to the hong kong human rights and democracy act language he made a very strong statement that hong kong does not continue to warrant treatment under the law same in the same way as before. Thats murdered. He stated the administration would eliminate different and special treatment for hong kong including export controls on technologies and mere. And then on june 26th secretary pompeo announced the visa restrictions which we all were calling for those china officials who are undermining the high degree of autonomy. Obviously more now has to be done if they have pulled the trigger. My hope is that they will revisit it or maybe ourquences can think whether theyre a witness or not. But the people around xi spijing is dishonoring china. I would also ask our witnesses and maybe they want to speak to corporations. This law is far beyond just people physically residing in hong kong. They have put language in this degree, this law that retches beyond that. Im a target. They put this out and im a target, whatever that means. And i think this we need to meet this as never before. George Herbert Walker bush didnt do it, nor did bill clinton. We acwessed and said give a little time i thankp people will let it go. There are whole lot of us on both sides of the aisle who really realize the nefarious nature of this dakitatictatorshd we need to really draw that chine and wait a minute theres people from the if any of the bnss would like to speak to any of those points. Let just just say to nathan lah. We will not look away. We will further if gauge. And the second one i think is important to recognize the strategy of political control is always about compartmentalizing, assuring the Business Community you should not be concerned by politics, and hong kong would force to koupsal counsel and it show its only a political expediency through the eyes of china and force a community to obey its law and align themselves with the popular interest so i think its really important to send a message we should not fall into we also have to unite different nations in the world which is the eu which is the biggest exporter of china, different platforms peterson mentioned, so i think have had to provide a counter mr. Sherman. Thank you. Mr. Lee, on may 29th thered be targeted sanctions to impose mandatory sanctions to hong kong under the joint declaration and basic law and also the banks that do business with them. What are hong kongers positions on the u. S. Implementing sanctiy targeted visa bans, in light of the National Security law decision . Mr. Lee. Yeah, thank you. The articles on collusion of foreign power, i think this is the problem now. You know, with that law in place, when you read through the law, you know, anything, you know, suggesting anything to the International Community, maybe sort of a solution of foreign power, and one of the things that very specifically targets is the letter, article, inviting sanctions. I think that is exactly what they really have in the past and they would try to stop or anywhere in the world from sanctioning of the Chinese Communist party. So i think, how to go about in the future, to support hong kong, but the one thing i want to mention is that when you look at the special United Nation mechanism. Theres a very powerful nation, and trying to get a joint statement on china and hong kong. Im going to ask you to wrap it up. I do need to go on to another question. Thank you. Ill build on the comments of our chair, mr. Engel, as he points out that taiwan and the United Kingdom are talking about opening their doors to hundreds of thousands or even millions of hong kongers. We want freedom for hong kong, not immigration from hong kong. But we have to deal with the practical situation as it stands. Ill be joining our colleagues and mr. Curtis and mr. Castro in introducing house introducing in the house the hong kong safe harbor act to designate hong kongers as priorities to refu e refugees. This is necessary because it allows the refugees to access the system without going through an office in hong kong, and it doesnt without a referral from an ngo, that china could block. Do hong kongers generally support the effort to make it easier for hong kongers to be classified as priority to refug refugees . I wonder if mr. Lah could answer that. Thank you for the question. Its important for us to provide a way out, not only for the ordinary protesters but for those who have been heavily targeted, especially under the National Security law that people who may face lifelong imprisonment, these political individuals, theyre likely well, the assistance for them is likely needed. I think for now, yes, indeed, if there is more hands offering help to them, that would be a better result for them, and they are not necessarily leaving, but at least theyre offered choices for them to make that will ease their pressure. I would point out political activists from china dedicated to freedom have had a major and positive impact on the world, including, of course, mr. Sin, and with that, i yield back. Thank you, mr. Sherman. Mr. Perry. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. I thank our guests. The first question i think i have is regarding the agreement for people that are unfamiliar with maybe the specific tenants and the text of the agreement, what are, since obviously china and the communist party in beijing have decided theyre not going to honor any of the commitments in the agreement, what are, if any, the remedies, and before you answer, before anybody answers, just remind everybody thats listening, watching, that breathes a breath, this is the reason that you dont make agreements with nations or criminal organizations that have no intent on maintaining their side of the bargain, that are known liars. Organizations and countries like north korea, like iran, like china, like russia. This is why you dont make agreements with them. You demand action, and then you have a reaction to their action. But with that, what are the remedies . May i comment . Yeah, the question about the declaration. I think in that particular it created a register, but one problem with the declaration is they dont have any socalled remedy for violation. When you read through the text, theres one particular text that says encourage the Member States to go to the International Justice and seek remedy over the breaching of the declaration. But of course, this is a suggestion. But whether legally you can do that, we still do not know. And of course, i think the uk government has a responsibility to make sure that they agree on, should be respected. And now when theres a breach, they should be the one that really, you know, go to the United Nations and ask for a respect of the joint declaration. But we hope that we will see something in the future about the british declaration. Can i add something to that . Mr. Lee is correct that theres no clause in this final british joint declaration provided for dispute resolution. But the General Assembly of the United Nations can always seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of justice. And theres nothing that china could do to prevent them seeking that nonbinding advisory opinion as long as the majority of the General Assembly voted to seek it. Just recently in 2019, the icj issued an advisory opinion on whether decolonization was lawfully completed with respect to the islands. And although the uk wasnt very happy that that request was made, it was made because a majority of the General Assembly voted for it. Now, even though advisory opinions are nonbinding, they can be very influential. And i think even a campaign to seek a vote in the General Assembly, to seek that advisory opinion, would put some pressure on the Chinese Government to be a little more careful about living up to the letter of the sign of british joint declaration. I sure appreciate your comments and i have a news flash for everybody. Public pressure and opinions, et cetera, have little effect on the communist Chinese Party. So thats all just tilting at windmills in my opinion. Let me ask this question. With the advent of this security law in hong kong, what are the ramifications of this for what do you see the ramifications for taiwan . Obviously, first, i thank you for the question. Obviously, the law actually applies to hong kong residents, including taiwan. And on the one hand, they are active in supporting hong kong. On the other hand, their long pursuit for democracy is also branded as a version of the state power. So i think it also would be a very good signal about how china will actually treat taiwan, given taiwan were one day to be succumbing to the one country, two system. I think it shows how ambitious china will be one day once you fall into the agreement that they will not ohonors, as you point out, and it shifted the discussion of whats happening in hong kong, shifted tremendously the discussion in taiwan that they know the city is not trustworthy and their socalled political arrangement, high degree ougautonomy, et cet, are a lie. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield. Thank you very much. Mr. Meeks. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The National Security law that beijing drafted in secrecy and imposed on hong kongers will be swiftly used to suppress. The fact of the matter, its already happening. I woke up this morning to reports that the police in hong kong have made at least one arrest a day of a demonstrator for, quote, violating the National Security law. As i read the testimony of our witnesses this morning, i felt a deep connection to the struggle for democracy described. I would be remiss if i didnt say right here in america, i am part of the continued struggle of black americans to realize the promise of democracy in this great nation. And i can identify with the lifelong nature of this kind of struggle. It is because of the history and present challenges for my community in america that i know we must care deeply about what happens in hong kong. History has shown us that the push for freedom, equality, and human rights is always connected anywhere it exists. It reminds me of the words of dr. King when he said injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. And while i thank this committee and the house of representatives for standing up, i am so deeply disappointed in the faltering of the white house when it comes to its u. S. Global standing. This is a moment for strong u. S. Leadership. But its also a moment where the president s geopolitical failures are emboldening china and other nations that now seek to press their agenda unchecked. It is no coincidence that china has chosen this point in time to blatantly disregard commitments it made decades ago to grant hong kong a high degree of autonomy. Congress has given the Trump Administration the tools to address chinese Human Rights Violations. We have shown strong bipartisan support for hong kong and the resolve to hold china accountable. Instead of using these authorities, the president of the United States chose early on to praise beijings handling of protests in hong kong. And did worse than nothing as the Chinese Government vigorously oppressed the uighurs. As i have traveled to meet with World Leaders since the 45th president took office, i have heard concern about the increasingly erratic nature of American Foreign policy. Our closest allies continue to see this as a problem, but others see it as an opportunity. China has emboldened to take the actions it has in hong kong. Just as it similarly emboldened on its borders with india and the South China Sea and increasingly to prussia, taiwan. So with that, i ask, ms. Petersen, in what ways can the United States redeem its credibility and work with the Global Community to get china to honor its International Commitments and what role, if any, can multilateral organizations play in this Inflection Point, at this Inflection Point . Thank you very much for that question. We could start by becoming more active in the u. N. Human rights monitoring mechanisms. Particularly the u. N. Human Rights Council. Because since the United States has ceased to be active in that council, china has gained more influence on the council. And its now served three terms on the Human Rights Council, and it recently secured an appointment to a very influential panel, plays a role in nominating independent u. N. Human rights experts. So the United States needs to become active again in the u. N. Human Rights Council. The United States Human Rights Council has been asked by a group of independent human rights experts to establish a special rapatory on human rights in china and it would be nice if the United States played a more active role. They could also ratify more human rights treaties because that means we could elect independent experts to sit on those monitoring committees. Thank you. Thank you. And also, i have a concern in regards to hong kongs status as a financial hub. And im concerned with the lack of Strategic Thinking by the administration that could limit hong kongs access to american dollars in markets. Im wondering, mr. Leung, do you anticipate any slippage in hong kongs Financial System and trade standing, and what might that affect be on the one country two systems doctrine . Thank you. China has always taken advantage of hong kongs economic status. That is globally recognized. That is treated separately from china. But that recognition is conditional upon the fact that hong kong is sufficiently autonomous. I think in future, the discussion around sanction is actually not so much about sanction. Its about restoring the privilege that the International Community confer upon china, given it has honored its promises. Now it has completely ruined its promises and do not want to allow china to enjoy autonomy. Until china is willing to honor its promises, i think we have to think about, you know, that economic privilege. Does that warrant the International Recognition that china enjoys now and keeps benefitting from actual economic status. Thank you very much. Mr. Yoho. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The Chinese Communist party and xi jinping have blatantly disregarded the agreement between Great Britain and china. The International Agreement to allow for the self rule and independent governance of hong kong has been washed away. The rioting going on today in hong kong is a direct result of communist beijings lack of respect for rule of law in International Agreements. It also shows the communist party is intimidated by people with free thought. Chinese communism cannot survive in a free society. Unfortunately, xis communists have brought shame to the Chinese People once more as he leads them into their second century of shame. It is agreed that hong kong is a province of china. The United Kingdom agreed in 1997 to cede its claim of the territory and return full control to china 50 years into the future. 2047. The chinese leaders at the time accepted these terms in good faith. The rioting in hong kong approaching a year now is solely the results of xi and the communist Party Breaking those agreements and is driven by the lust for authoritarian power and fear. The fear of, again, free thinking people. In modern civil societies, there must be a mechanism or forum for people to address grievances to their government peacefully without fear of reprisal from the government. This is exactly what the people of hong kong attempted to do when carrie lam, hong kongs chief executive officer, introduced the now illfated extradition bill last year at the direction of chinas communist party. The people of hong kong attempted to peacefully address their concerns, but their concerns fell on deaf ears. We now know why. Chinese communism cannot survive where people have free thought. Their goal, that is of the ccp, is to remove any form of democratic existence near its border. In essence, beijing has broadcast to the world china and the communists are not to be trusted. The question is, what are International Businesses operating in hong kong going to do . Well, they put profit above International Agreements, will they place the concerns of their Board Members over human rights . Will year end dividends and stock reports justify their operations, investments, and manufacturing to overlook actions approaching the atrocities of the nazi regime inflicted upon millions of jews, czechs, pols and others, lets hope not. Is chinas assault on its province of hong kong a prelude to misguided actions against the sovereign nation of taiwan . This fight in hong kong is not between china and the United States. It is a continual sad loop of human endeavors, a fight of right versus wrong, good versus evil, freedom against suppressi suppressi suppression. In the end, freedom will prevail. My questions to the panel, have any of you seen or heard personal personally, any actions of the protesters to secede from china . Or is their concern only to have of the protesters to have rule of law with an independent judiciary system restored . Mr. Leung, well start with you. Thank you for the question. I think in the eyes of the communist party, everything could be falling under the concept of National Security and secession, once you go against the state, whether you speak it publicly, whether you demonstrate it, it can be construed in some way as subversion to a state power. When you look into the 2019 antiextradition bill movement, the majority, the consensus is really about implementing the much needed institutional reform and much delayed reform in hong kong. I grew up in hong kong and have witnessed 23 years where we have not made substantive democratic progress in our Legislative Council where at least half of the seats are not democratically elected, not to mention our chief, who is to blame for the crisis since 2019, and still remains in power. Staggering to think about a quarter of the population go against a government, and that leader can still remain in power for many years. It shows that chief executive carrie lam now is a total pawn for the ccp to execute agenda rather than reflecting hong kong peoples will and interests. So again, i think the whole movement up to now, the core consensus is really about initiating the much needed and much delayed institutional reform. Thank you for your answer. Im out of time, and i yield back, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. First, let me compliment my colleague from new jersey for fighting always for human rights, all these years. And working with the speaker on some of these issues for many, many years. I worry very much about this whole situation for the people of hong kong and for the people in the rest of the world. I worry that if we do not send a strong response to hong kong, there are many people, many leaders in the western hemisphere that are looking at this and saying, well, if the chinese did it in hong kong, i can do it here in venezuela. I can do it here in nicaragua, i can do it here in cuba. So a strong response is very, very important. Especially from this country. Going to the United Nations is also very important. But the response from china has to be strong. Because we cannot let china set the example that they can do anything. And theyre going to get away with it. So i worry very much that they play the long game. I worry that theyll say, well, there will be an upheaval in the world now, but well get away with this just like we have gotten away with this in the past. I worry about the administrations approach and the president s approach to transitional politics that we are practicing now in this country. And there are many things that can be said but i think havent been said. So with that, i ask the panel, does this country now have the credibility to make strong statements on what is going on in hong kong . Anyone on the panel. Thank you for the question i think sorry. Nathan, you want to go . You go. Your turn. You know, on the question about, you know, its very important that action always speaks more than words. And we want to see a mention in the United Nations and a lot of the International Community institutions to support hong kong. And in hong kong, the other question that had already been asked is what are we looking for . Were looking for democracy only. And we have been promised democracy. And for 23 years, we have been disappointed after the handover. And the disappointment is now really cycling in hong kong, and we feel very much very disappointed that over many years the world has not spoken against the broken promise. I would just add, hong kong people are actually watching very keenly about what u. S. Is doing and has done. So i think action and words coming from u. S. Government from now on will be closely watched and will be in the deep interest of hong kong people. I think the first step to building credibility is as mr. Lee has said, to build action, to speak up for hong kong whenever there is a critical crisis, and implement concrete policy from now on. So i think that credibility will be built. Yeah, i thank the support from the u. S. To hong kong in our pursuit of freedom has been a strong bipartisan since last year. And for me myself, i studied at Yale University last year and felt very encouraged that a lot of my fellow students came to me and vocally support my pursuit and actions in hong kong. I think its not only about the government and not only about the bipartisan support in congress. But for ordinary americans, we have felt that they really are giving us enormous support, no matter on twitter or some other platforms. So i think that kind of noise and vocal support is much needed, and i think it will encourage other people when they feel alone and feel helpless when they face these giant authoritarian regime. Okay, thank you. Mr. Curtis. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Yesterday, i introduced the bipartisan hong kong safe harbor act along with my partner, representative castro, and other members of this committee, including representative sherman, yoho, kissinger, and others, and smith. I want to pause and take note of the bipartisan nature of this bill and the strong bipartisan support. And i hope by doing so, those who are watching this hearing will take notice that were committed as a congress, regardless of party, to act on this. This bill would designate hong kongers as priority two refugees. Streamlining the refugee admission pros. It also sets up an asylum path for those in hong kong who are in immediate danger from the ccp. Frontline activists, journalists harmed while covering the protests, first aid responders at the protest, anyone who provided Legal Service to those arrested for the protests, and anyone arrested during the protests since june 9th, 2019. The legislation also instructs the secretary of state to work with likeminded ally countries to accept refugees from hong kong. This bill addressed the immediate humanitarian crisis. The u. S. Must act fast. This legislation is needed and its needed immediately. I would also like to note that more legislation is in process and i would like to point out the good work of others on this committee, representative malinowski and others, and note that we have a lot of work to do. I hope the house will act quickly on this legislation. My question to the witnesses is, as i have listened to the propaganda regarding this bill, i frequently hear that its a passive bill, that it will only be used in extreme circumstances. That it wont be exercised as feared. And like their comments on that, and specifically since the law went into effect, i understand there have been arrests since then, and are you seeing any impact already of the bill, and is this passiveness that was promised simply propaganda . Firstly, i think its not at all a passive bill. When you look at the way they framed it and what they enforce, the bill is really very scary. Firstly, they have enacted security headed by the communist party in china. And then they have a National Security agency stationed in hong kong to operate with the police, of course, and Police Personnel to get security set up. And then the police will have the power to confiscate your computer, seize your house, confiscate your passport. All these are important to the law. Its not at all passive. They haveare creating a nationa Security Institution in hong kong to enforce the law. Its not at all passive. And just today, ten people have been arrested. But of the 300 arrested, ten of them were arrested for breaking the National Security law. And so today already, its very active in arresting people in the demonstrations that we have just today. And to add one more point, when you look at how the police enforce the law, they have already, as i mentioned in my witness statement, abandoned already, warning people you may get arrested, with National Security laws protection. So its not at all passive, and sadly, they are now already starting to take a very active law so that people of hong kong will be fearful of standing up for their rights and to be fearful for exercising our freedom. I think the comment, only about the execution, but its Cultural Impact toward hong kong as a society is immense. They recentlied that there are lots of incidents, but really low thresholds that people could be violating International Law, like rumors that could kind of like create hatred to the government, and also in todays ten arrested, there are cases that individuals carrying banners or stickers without even displaying it when the Police Conduct the stop and search. They were actually arrested in the names of National Security law. So you can see how broad and how shallow the whole execution is. And i think its not only about really getting people in jail but also creating a terror among the crowd to remind us that our rights are all being deprived and we can only exempt to what the communist party said. Thank you. Im out of time, and i appreciate the witnesses. I yield my time. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you to our panel for being here and thank you for your bravery to our hong kong friends who are with us today. I want to talk about two things. Leverage and impunity. And i think the elfnephant in ts room is the fact that the Trump Administration has unilaterally given up leverage that would be profoundly helpful in the situation in hong kong. On human rights, the president is almost silent. He misses every opportunity to talk to foreign leaders about it. And in fact, is an enabler. Look at saudi arabia. Look at russia. When it comes to International Treaties, our moral high ground is compromised by our retreat, whether it be the paris climate accord, whether it be the iran nuclear agreement, whether it be the inf, or the fact that we still havent signed the law of the seas, meaning we dont have much leverage in that body either, which really matters with respect to china. We talk about mr. Castros bill, a good bill to try to provide a relief valve for hong kong refugees. But this administration has limited the number of ref dwru g refugees, it cut the number from 100,000 to 20,000, and were not even going to come close to that this year. Its about to lay off 13,500 people who work for immigration and citizenship services, making it impossible to naturalize or process asylum claims. And then with respect to china, we know from john bolton, this president pled with president xi, the man were trying to influence, to do the right thing, to help him with his reelection. By buying u. S. Goods and agricultural goods especially. Mr. Bolton says in the mass protests a year ago in hong kong, President Trumps reaction was, i dont want to get involved. And at one point he even praised president xis handling of it. Where is our leverage . Where is our moral high ground . We can say whatever we want here, but actions of this Administration Speak a lot louder than rhetoric. And then theres impunity. Chinese impunity. Professor petersen, you talk a lot about International Forums and human rights resolutions and using our influence to try to pressure the chinese, but it seems to me the chinese have decided it doesnt matter. Theyre acting with impunity against the agreement with the handover of hong kong, against International Law, against International Pressure on human rights. What is the leverage we have got, i ask you, professor petersen, and why do the chinese operate with such clear impunity . And mr. Law, you might want to comment on that as well. Yes, thank you for that question. International law is inherently difficult to enforce. Thats right. But i dont agree with you, sir, that china doesnt care at all about the human rights norms, and the reason i disagree is that i see the Chinese Government investing a great deal of time and resources to become a more active participant in the u. N. Human rights monitoring bodies and to try to shape the norms into a form that suits them. So we do see the Chinese Government trying to, for example, intimidate treaty monitoring bodies so they dont post shadow reports that are critical of the Chinese Government. We see the Chinese Government trying to professor, if i could interrupt because i dont have a lot of time. Im not sure that proves your point. I think all that does is prove that china is using its leverage to completely dilute the effect of International Law. Look at how they have ignored the ruling which was decisive on the philippines rights, the law of the seas and the arbitration panel. They have ignored it. They dont care. They have shown no interest in caring about that at all other than trying to continue to dilute rulings of the body and to isolate those rulings when they dont come in their favor. Accept your point on the case with the philippines, but i still dont agree that its worthless to invest time in the u. N. The reason they have more leverage in the u. N. Human rights Monitoring System is that the United States has become inactive. And thats where i do agree with you. We have lost our leverage because we are not on that stage as much as we should be. And the truth is, the United States has sometimes ignored rulings as well. We have not always accepted rulings of the International Court of justice even when they had jurisdiction in contentious cases. I think no actor on the International Stage is perfect, but if we want to help the people of hong kong, one way we could help in my opinion is to be more active in the u. N. Human rights Monitoring System. Mr. Chairman, could mr. Law just respond to the impunity question . I, of course, yield back my time. Certainly. Yeah, i think for decades the world has been tuning in for china in terms of trade agreement or in terms of international treaty. And for now, it is very difficult to find an International Mechanism that could really hold them accountable from what we have now. So i think it is important that we recognize how china has been manipulating this and treating issues on taiwan and hong kong, the South China Sea, and also in india even, with huge disrespect for international norms. So i think this is not only about the current mechanisms we could use but also the attitude of the countries around the world, especially those broad ones to apply pressure and support those on the ground in these places in regards to chinas expansionist nature. Thank you very much. Mr. Wright. Okay, mr. Burchett. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And i will say for the record, im going to miss you and your leadership. You have been a great leader of this committee in the short time i have been here, and i have thoroughly enjoyed it. I hope you consider my a friend because i sure consider you one, brother. Thank you very much, mr. Burchett. Much appreciated. Yes, sir, mr. Chairman. Chinese officials in beijing and hong kong have said this new security law will target an extremely small number of people. I dont believe anybody believes these officials. We cannot assume that the Chinese Communist party will stay true to their word. The ccp has shown time and time again theyre not to be trusted. They play by their own set of rules. A few examples im going to take my mask off. Attempts to cover up the origins of the covid19 by destroying forensic evidence, silencing doctors who dared to speem out and failing to identify the International Community and continue to bully their neighbors in the South China Sea. Blood shed along the line of the actual control with india, i think its based on recent events, we can probably say china is to blame completely. They have forced over 1 million uighurs into prison camps. I have heard reports go on that are shocking, forced abortions, beatings, tortures, solitary confinement and more. It leaves you speechless, mr. Chairman. But i dont know why we should expect any better of a group of people that are oppressing. They have a history of doing this to their own people. We need to call them out for these acts whenever and wherever they do it. Yesterday, prodemocracy Political Group im not sure if im pronouncing this right, demosisto and two other independent groups dissolved with hong kong. Is this the point of new return for hong kongs Democratic Movement . Ill ask our distinguished group thats gathered. Thank you for your question. I think it is important for us to recognize that any forms of disagreement with beijing or even in their own term, hatred toward them, could be seen as a violation of the National Security law. Basically, none of us could speak freely because we can never guess when they will feel hated. So i think this is especially this case in hong kong for all the locals, we are changed for the occasion if we dont want to face lifelong imprisonment. Sometimes, this is a terror they have created, and for us, we have to attest how their execution would be, how they would implement that law, and adjust our way of countering our activism. But i dont think this is the end of our mission, because as you can see, there are three hong kong activists on the panel giving out testimony and about 100,000 people marching in the street. There are a lot of people who are not afraid of the tyranny and they still reel from the intimidation of them. I think the movement is still alivetenacity, and the International Community should treasure and admire this group of brave people that give us hope in this darkest time. Any of the others . Actually, im the chair of the Hong Kong Alliance in support that is founded in 89. We have been fighting for democracy for china and for hong kong over the past 31 years. And every day, i am asked by a journalist whether we will dissolve our organization because of the security law. Why are they asking that . Because we have, of course, we have the platform of bringing justice to those who have been massacred in Tiananmen Square. We have the platform of the one party rule and also building a democratic china. So people are asking us whether the one party rule will be something that will be helped by the National Security law and undermining the system in china. We do not know, to be honest, but we have told the journalists, the media, we hold on to our principles and we will not retreat. We dont know what lies ahead of us, but i think its very important that we believe in democracy a democracy. And so we do not know what lies ahead, and we will and people also ask me, because we have the museum, theres a lot of artifacts inside, we are not going to do that. We will stay on and practice whthe activities we have conducted in the past, but as you said, we dont know when we can return. Thank you. I have run over time. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I hope we continue support for free people everywhere, and i think if were finally going to take care of this problem, we just have to stop buying chinese junk and we have to stop putting up with their garbage and talk is cheap. And we need to put something behind all this talk. Thank you, mr. Chairman, again. I appreciate your friendship, brother. Thank you, mr. Burchett. Mr. Deutsche. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. First, i would like to thank each of the witnesses for their testimony, as well as their continued bravery and advocacy in support of the people of hong kong. Were grateful to those of you especially who took risks appearing here today. This National Security legislation is just one more example of the political persecutions, suppression of human rights and prodemocracy groups and civil rights lawyers and religious groups conducted by the government of china. In tibet, we have seen cultural genocide to control the desire for tibetan self determination. We have seen the cruelty in gin jang, where uighur muslims are surveilled, both in and out of the country. Theyre forced to provide blood samples, voice prints, facial scans, and other personal data all before being thrown into mandatory reeducation camps designed to suppress the uighur language and culture, transforming it into a Virtual Police state. And just today, Hong Kong Police arrested protesters under the new law for crimes yet to be divulged, and we must ask ourselves, whats next . Who is next . The communist party in china has grown more ambyssusbitious to ways that enable the environment for breakdown of civil laws and liberties and in spite of their increasing encroachment of freedoms, we stand with the people of hong kong for their bravery and their courage to advocate for their freedoms. When the freedom and democracy of future generations are at stake, we have no choice but to speak up. And to act. But it cannot come simply from this congress. There is no doubt that the speaker of the house, Speaker Pelosi, who chose to spend time with us today, is committed to fighting for human rights. Mr. Smith has likewise been standing up for human rights around the globe and hes been doing it for 30 years. But the leadership also needs to come at the top. And were having this hearing today even as were struggling to understand how the president s former National Security adviser wrote of the president stressing the importance of farmers and increased chinese purchases of soybeans and wheat and the electoral outcome, and quote, pleading with xi to insure he would win, close quote. And then also, the former National Security adviser said that at a g20 meeting in june 2019, xi had explained to trump why he was basically building concentration camps, and according to our interpreter, mr. Bolton said, trump said that xi should go ahead with building the camps, which trump thought was exactly the right thing to do. The National Security councils top asia staffer told me that trump said something very similar during his november 2017 trip to china. That also from the former National Security adviser, and even on hong kong, the president said after a quarter of the population of hong kong turned out for weeks of protests, the president said, i think president xi of china has acted responsibly, very responsibly. They have been out there protesting for a long time. I hope that president xi will do the right thing, he said, adding china could stop the protests if they wanted. I am i want to commend the state department for its may 28th joint statement with the governments of australia, canada, and the uk, loudly opposing beijings imposition of National Security law on hong kong, but im so troubled at the way the president has conducted the relationship, his relationship with president xi, and all of the ways that i just laid out that so clearly contradict the great bipartisan commitment to standing up for the human rights of the people of china and today especially, people of hong kong. That we have seen exhibited here in this committee. Mr. Law, if i can just ask, United States clearly has to work with likeminded country. What more can be done, should be done with the United States leading the way in a multilateral effort to respond to this new law, the imposition of this new law, what can be done . Thank you very much, congressman, for the question. I think for now, as we have pushed forward multiple bills condemning hong kong situation, that we indeed need a strong action to implement them. And to see what we can do to hold china accountable, because for the past few years we have been pushing for hong kong democracy, and im glad it was passed last year, end of last year, and we have seen a lot of upcoming bills that are going to be passed. And will be pending to have effect on them, and i think this is an important process to show the world that even the u. S. Or the western world, when they are dealing with china, they no longer see trade or business interests as their priority but for human rights and for the pursuit of freedom. So these likeminded countries i think are getting an agenda right. Its the most important thing that we could expect, and we would definitely feel encouraged if these countries do it with a very obvious faction. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Mrs. Wagner. I thank the chairman and certainly our witnesses for bringing attention to chinas attempt to bully and intimidate hong kong into abandoning its rights and freedoms. Hong kongs success as a free and open city exposes the injustices and hypocrisies of the communist system in china. Congress stands in unity, in bipartisan unity with hong kong residents, as they fight to protect rule of law and respect for human rights in their city. Yesterday, the Standing Committee of chinas National Peoples Congress Formally approved the National Security law in time for it to go into effect today on july 1st, the anniversary of hong kongs handover to china. This is a date of great significance for prodemocracy advocates in hong kong. Ms. Petersen, i think we know how this new law has affected the annual july 1st protests, sadly. But how should the United States respond to these violent crackdowns on protesters . Thank you for that question. Well, i think obviously, we should be condemning it. We should join multilateral groups that the United Nations to condemn it. We should become more active in the u. N. Human Rights Council which is asked to set up an independent monitoring mechanism, and i fully agree with everyone who has suggested the safe harbor act because i think it is very a very strong and significant show of support, more than just talk, to tell people that you will provide safe harbor if they have to flee an authoritarian regime. I want to say one brief thing about this, the statement that this law will only be enforced against a small number of people. I think that was carrie lams hope because she hoped everyone would be so frightened by the law that everyone would stay at home, and thats one of the reasons the law was brought into force during the covid restrictions. Because it makes it easier for the Hong Kong Government to try to persuade everyone to stay home, but clearly, that hasnt been the case. I think there will be far more arrests than carrie lam had predicted, and the big question will be whether people are tried in hong kong, where i do think the judiciary is still independent, or whether the mainland will use article 55 to bring them to the mainland for trial, which would really be a terrible violation. Thank you. More than just talk, i think is the operative word there, their move to impose National Security law on hong kong seems to be inspired in part by domestic instability stemming from the partys catastrophic handling, as you just mentioned, ms. Petersen, of the coronavirus pandemic. I just came from the China Task Force where i presented a compensation for americans act piece of legislation that i hope we can move forward. Mr. Lee, do you expect discontent at home could push an unstable beijing to take even more shocking actions against the people of hong kong . Thank you for the question. We expect the communist party of china will, you know, in the way they try to stop the protests. I think we all have to appreciate the people all marching today. And they have actually seen instruments of suppression. One is the National Security law. They have another law that is which is a draconian law in the colonial times and then they changed it in 1997 to make it more effective. I was charged for seven charges for an incident under the policy. Because now theyre using covid19 and saying they will ban all gatherings. So when we want to organize 1 million and 2 million marches like we did last year thank you. Totally impossible to do that now. Thank you, mr. Lee. Real quickly, china seems to have accelerated the timeline for implemented the National Security law in order to turn the tide against prodemocracy candidates at septembers hong kong Legislative Council elections. I dont know if you have time to answer, because my time is about out, ms. Petersen, but how do you anticipate the National Security law will impact the makeup of hong kongs Legislative Council. What actions can we take to protect the proDemocracy Movement this september . Thank you for that question. Very briefly, i do anticipate that the beijing and appointed Hong Kong Government will try to use this law to disqualify prodemocracy candidates running for office. I think the Democracy Movement is being very careful to try not to violate the law or at least to make sure that there are candidates who can still stand, but its going to be very difficult. I think they will try to use it as a pretense for disqualifying them. Thank you. My time is expired. I appreciate the indulgence of the chair and i want to thank chairman elliott for his leadership on this committee and here in congress. Its an honor to serve with you, sir. I yield back. Thank you very much, mrs. Wagner. Very much appreciated, those kind words. Thank you. Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you to our extraordinarily courageous witnesses for being here today, for this really important hearing. And while it is comforting to know there is strong bipartisan support for human rights on the Foreign Affairs committee of the congress of the United States, we have to recognize that the president s policy toward china has undermined American Leadership and called into question, frankly, decades of strong bipartisan support for hong kong. And the american policy toward hong kong should of course be based on advancing the interests of our own country and supporting autonomy and democratic freedoms for hong kong. But we know, of course, that just a few months ago, the president wanted a trade deal and couldnt offer president xi enough praise or deference during those negotiations. And subsequent to them. We also know now there is new reporting that the president also sought assistance in his Reelection Campaign from the chinese and supported the Chinese Governments efforts to continue to put uighurs in concentration camps and actually praised president xis handling of earlier protests in hong kong. So my first question is, despite strong clear bipartisan support for democracy and freedom in hong kong, how does the president s conduct and his failure to speak out in support of human rights broadly and then the specific effort to specific the chinese president and advance his own political interest, how does that impact what is happening in hong kong, how the Chinese Government responds to protests in hong kong and any of the witnesses who can provide an answer to that would be helpful. Mr. Law, maybe you can start. Yes, thank you for the question. I think it is important that we have a stable and Strong Alliance including the cooperation from the congress and the white house. That when our resolution passed in the congress then we could swiftly implement it. And i think it is important that we need more or less volatile government to handle these cases. But i think sometimes its tragic and i think most importantly that structural direction towards china are more assertive and more Holding China accountable is already established so i think longterm im not worried that this kind of consensus will fade. Thank you. Mr. Capping, you could speak to how you think the Chinese Government will use this new law. Again, it is not a security law, it is a law of repression and destroy democracy in hong kong. It is reported the first arrest this morning under the law for a gentleman holding a hong kong independence flag and so what should we expect to see in terms of the imposition or the use of this new law . I think on two levels you could see the impact that is immediate on hong kong. First i think there is a sense of selfcensorship that pl Political Parties have to selfsensor and protesters will no longer enjoy the political beliefs and hanging of a flag or slogans. Those pervasive intrusion into Civil Liberties that we have enjoyed for many decades is now under great threat and the second level is really about the ccp in hong kong that theyre office could now basically it is about the law, the operation is not bound by basic law, not bound by Hong Kong Government, there is no way to hold them accountable. They could do surveillance, they could intercept information, they could do secretive arrests of protesters and then extradite them to china. So the law is really comprehensive in the sense and it is a presence pervasive in every corner of the society. Thank you so much. My final question is i know that speaking out and condemning this conduct of the Chinese Government is something we all will do and the purpose of the hearing is to shine the light on it. I know many have suggested moving forward with sanctions which is appropriate. But my final questions is are there other things, other actions we should take both as the United States and along with partners around the world, our allies, that will have a meaningful impact on the Chinese Government in terms of their efforts to destroy the democracy of hong kong, and, if so, what are they . Well, i think at least for now the problem in hong kong is not only about hong kong, it is about how china will continue its nature. We could think of Something Like the upcoming winter olympic and also issues not only happening in hong kong but elsewhere like shing jong and taiwan and to apply pressure and to be alive in connection with international ruling. And if i may to add to that, i think do we have time sorry. Sure, as long as the chairman will let you answer. Yes, yes, certainly. I think the world has to reckon with a risen china that is economically very powerful and the world has to formulate a stable and cohesive and multipolicy toward china especially on terms of trade and business conducting. There are still u. S. Companies that operate in a chinese region and we have to take into account human rights when dealing with china, especially in dealing with hong kong. I want to thank you for your extraordinary leadership of this committee. You have been a mentor from day i arrived in congress and i had the privilege of serving on the Foreign Affairs committee and i will be forever in your debt and thank you for your great debt and service to our country and i yield back. Thank you so much, mr. Cicilini, prech very much appreciates. Mr. Watkins. Thanks to the panelists for your bravery. The Chinese Community party poses a serious threat not just to the United States but international interest. This is Chinese Government clearly not the Chinese People. As the cpc is problematic and many Chinese People have immigrated to the United States and theyre welcome and im biased because i married one. But the ccp has beening multidimensional strategies to degrade and demine hedge and monies around the world. Most recently and clearly apparent in ccp dealings with hong kong. Obviously ccp has violated the promise of one country, two systems by clamping down on hong kong and they have shown a blatant disregard for human rights. Amassed detention of uyghurs and sterilization of women over the past 30 years and now allowing the freedom of speech. Chinese citizens who disappear, we have seen that play out during the coronavirus where now the world has over 10 million cases and half a million deaths. They didnt share lifesaving information. They covered up how infectious and dangerous the disease was. They didnt report humantohuman transmission for a month and they censored anyone trying to warn the world. And let some 5 Million People leave wuhan without screening and they destroyed samples and hoarded ppa and blamed the United States soldiers so they have not been a good actor with regard to coronavirus and with regard to national and regional disruption and theyve stolen hundreds of millions of dollars of intellectual property from the United States and they forced Technology Transfer and interfere with Global Supply clains and economics and international business. So countering the ccp aggression, thankfully we have a president who will hold the ccp accountable. An american president unlike any other history in will be tough on china. Republican leader Kevin Mccarthy established the China Task Force spearheaded by this committees own Ranking Member. It is clear that the country is less dependent on china and economically and in terms of manufacturing so my questions to mr. Law, who, sir, you understand the United States very well, you went to Yale University. I represent eastern kansas, what do kansasans need to know. What could i take home to tell my constituents . Well, i think when we talk about human rights and also the human rights violation in hong kong, we have to understand that were facing a global fight. Were seeing it in the general election in the usa and orientals are getting infiltration and manipulating information for a campaign and the same happens in hong kong. So i think in the u. S. And in hong kong we both share a lot of things that originated from those in powers like russia and like china. So i think for me, my greatest part is to educate more u. S. Citizens to understand were in a global fight. We should hold hands together and to suppress the expansionists and to let us know that fighting for democracy is actually in hong kong, in this foreground, it is indeed helping the world to preserve democracy and values. Thank you. To either any of the other panelists, ive been to hong kong. I love hong kong. How will the future be different in the next five or ten years because of the ccp . Um, i dont think anyone could tell them, but we hope democracy will return to hong kong but i think we are in a very difficult time and not just us but i think the whole china and everyone will be making [ inaudible ]. I think we are having hard times. But i want to mention one things about people say that educating the American Public about the situation in hong kong and one thing that i think the Community Party also mentioned about foreign and i think they are the ones that should intervene into how these changes go on. But i think we should be very it is very important and very encouraging for the people of hong kong that these [ inaudible ]. If i may add a last word about how do we want to speak to american audience. I think we have to recognize chinese inference is not only about hong kong, it is also about people around the world. We think lets talk about soon and perhaps they have been using american censorship of chinese activist and we could talk about this Information Campaign on twitter and facebook, social media platforms owned by china and such as tik tok is widely used by american teenagers so i think we have to recognize a global inference of china is actually infiltrating to every corner of the world and every sentence, even in america it will be an effect. Thank you very much. I appreciate the bravery of the panelists. I yield. Thank you mr. Watkins. I now recognize myself. The Chinese Government is not only violating the rights of hong kongers but also violating an international treaty. The sign of british joint declaration, this again undermines the credibility of the Chinese Government when it comes to public pledges and International Agreements. The National Security law is part of a Larger Campaign of increased aggression from china in recent months. From the clashes with india and vietnam nam and the impression of the uyghurs. I believe china has been em boldered that no one is mining the shop at the white house. President trump has consistently failed to hold china accountable on a range of issues and had a demonstrated no interest in doing so, specificallily on human rights. Last summer President Trump adopted the Chinese Governments language by calling hong kongs peaceful protests riots. He also promised president xi from the beginning that he would not get involved in hong kong in a misguided attempt to win concessions on china in trade talks. That strategy, like most of President Trumps failed, failed and is now costing the folks in hong kong. I joined representative curtis in introducing a bipartisan, bicamera bill the hong kong safe harbor act that would expedite the process for hong kongers being persecuted to seek Refugee Status in the United States. This is a common sense policy that will protect the protesters who inspired so many of us for their dogged economiment to upholding human rights in the face of a very repressive regime. We must work from our allies such as the United Kingdom and taiwan in protecting hong kongers who now face retaliation by main land chinese forces. With that i have a few questions. And as i mentioned, mr. Curtis and myself and other members of the committee introduced a bill yesterday to give hong kongers an easier path to receive Refugee Status in the United States. Can any of the witnesses speak to whom in hong kong or whom in hong kong is most at risk of being targeted by the chinese and being persecuted because of the National Security law, should the United States pay special attention to student leaders and other specific groups. And i ask that question of anyone on the panel. Thank you. Thank you for the question. I think since 2012, i think hong kong has seen a wave of new movement. We have chosen in 2012, we have a group of student leaders peppered with others in Civil Society who left the movement and now the antiextradition movement subsequently involved a lot of young protesters. So i think party leaders, for example, nathan and joshua, are under tremendous pressure by the ccp. I think those political leaders from our generation do neat certain protection but also just other activists who have been legal consultants, who have been just reporting news as they would also be under pressure under the National Security law. Okay. Anyone else on the panel . And i think about the young protesters and all of the protesters that have been arrested over the past year, there are already 9,000 tests and prosecutions under the law and many of them are under the law of the crime of socalled crime of riot and that may end up in four or six years or even more years for them. But very often what happened is not that they have an in the scene, it is that they have not left it and then the police define that as a scene of a rightot and then they are by the police and then it is not just the National Security law, what i want to say is also the protest movement in the past already [ inaudible ]. So i think in the past, these victims of Police Brutality and Police Harassment and prosecution should be the one that have should be supported with this new bill. All right. Thank you. Im going to keep myself on time here. And thank you for your answers. Im going to go to ms. Titus of nevada. There we go. Well, thank you very much. And most of the hearing has focused on just this particular law and the context of the covid virus. But as you just said in these last two speakers, this really isnt new. It goes back to 2014 with the Umbrella Movement and the tear gas when they appointed the First Special executive and last summer i was in hong kong and we saw the early protesters against the extradition law. That was withdrawn. But certainly some of the other demands werent. But throughout all of that, carrie lam said we still have the one country two systems and that seems to now be out of the window. There doesnt seem to be much pretense that still exists. So i wish you all would rel elaborate on how we should have seen this coming and the second question because of my background i wonder what the impact is going to be on universities and students in hong kong because the way the line is defined sub version of state power, terrorist and collusion those are broad terms that could be applied any way the regime wants to and that would certainly target, i would think, people like professors and students in the social sciences. Thank you for the question. If i may just address the second part of your question. I myself as in academia and hong kong intellectuals whether they are young or most senior are extremely worried about the future. Worried about whether they could conduct independent research and whether previous work will be scrutinized and used as evidence against themselves and also not only about local academics even scholars in america because the law is to pervasive that covers american citizens, academics who study on china and hong kong are worried about the future for future research and not to mention china. So i think academics is under tremendous pressure under this law and a lot will happen. And lastly to go back to the first part of the question, you rightly point out that it is not a new phenomenon. They did issue a white paper on formulation of one country two system policy and it is explicit that the ccp under xi jinpings leadership is about total control and Party Dominance. So we should take into account the historical trajectory of ccp changing the formulation of one country two systems completely different from the era in beijing for example about hong kong people knowing that it is about the party ruling hong kong and parties that control every sector of hong kong. Thank you. Well, if you mind, for the second part of the question, because i think we have witnessed a lot of suppression and worries from the loke App Community and also scholars and students. They worried whether they have Academic Freedom in hong kong. So a lot of them are seeking opportunities to work overseas. So i had the experience of talking to them and i think sometimes if we, like for example, if they provide a scholarship, they could think of hong kong as a region from china and give them separate quotas then will facilitate them to get the funds and to continue their career as a scholar. And i think that it is important because while in the u. S. We have a lot of speculation about whether there are Covert Missions from the chinese students, whether they are guided by their party and sometimes there are a lot of vacancies on the ground which are supposed to be given to them but for now not because of political reasons and these funds could be transferred to hong kong students who are really in but being suppressed because of their political beliefs. So i think it is one thing to support them locally and culture them in a free space and they could repay back to hong kong with their own terms. We need to look at that specifically as we think about sanctions or safe harbors to not forget about that whole student academic, Faculty Research or population. Anybody else . Yeah. Just one more point. The way the Community Party, they are having a multiparty attack, of course including the universities, academics and also school teachers. So they will been because they blame everything on the teachers, about what the behavior of the youth. But actually it is the youth that is leading the movement, not the academics. But one thing they do in hong kong, they will put political loyalty above anything. Any profession that you may be very, very, you know, sharp and outstanding in the profession but if you are not politically loyal, then they will not hire you and civil servant, every aspect of life they wasnnt only one thing, loyalty to the party. Thank you, ms. Titus. To mr. Chabot of ohio. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And i unfortunately didnt hear all of the questioning because im the Ranking Member of the House Small Business Committee so if i repeat anything that others have already asked and i apologize in advance. But i open this question up to any of the witnesses who might like to respond. Im one of founding cochairs of the congressional taiwan caucus and im cochair of the caucus as well so i would ask that based on the Chinese Community Party Decisions relative to hong kong with the National Security law, what should we expect chineses next move against taiwan potentially to be and what should taiwan learn from hong kongs experience . And i again yield to any of the witnesses who might like to respond. Thank you for the question. Professor, did you want to climb in. I would say very briefly i think that one country two systems was not going to be fulfilled. It was developed for taiwan and when i first moved to hong kong in 1989 people would say that hong kong was the insurance policy because they wanted to show taiwan it will keep its promises but clearly that hasnt happened and i doan think that china is trying to take any sort of soft diplomatic approach to taiwan any more. Theyre just trying to scare taiwan. Thank you very much. Any of the other witnesses want to weigh in . Thank you for the question. I think in recent years there has been tremendous interaction and exchange of hong kong and Taiwanese Society and what ive heard actually learned how ccp ideology about control, how dominant one country two system can be once implemented in hong kong. So i think i agree with professor peterson that it shows that one country two system is a broken promise and not implemented in taiwan. The last year the antiextradition movement helped tremendously to sway discussion in taiwan about how to proceed with klichina and i think china will not give up to hong kong and i think they will try to exert that to taiwan if not formal legislation, some formal institution and informal channel of inference. Thank you very much. Let me go to another question. What should the International Community specifically the United States do to impose real consequences on the ccp for suppressing freedom in hong kong while minimizing any blowback or any consequences or any hardships on the people of hong kong itself who we obviously want to help and stand with. We dont want to make their lives more challenging than they already are. But what is the best way to impose hardship for the bad behavior of china without harming the people of hong kong, and again to any witness who might like to take that. Thank you for the question. Again, china has used hong kong as a conduit to import Sensitive Technology to finance companies who are in tremendous debt to conduct, lets say, ipos or champions in hong kong so china has benefited as hong kong as a gateway tonight finance, a gateway tonight technology from america. So those are where america could exert tangible influence on china. And without a democracy parliament or institution, actually hong kong people have not benefited tremendously from those economic arrangements. So the consensus in hong kong now is basically we have to hold china accountable and stop them from abusing the economic status so i think the support is actually there for implementation more tangible sanctions on china. Thank you. And one last question if i can. One of hong kongs principal strength is that it is such a great place to do business. If any of the maybe one of the witnesses could discuss whether this new National Security law will have a Chilling Effect on businesses and their International Employees over and above any political activity. Well, thank you very much. Those thinking about leaving hong kong, ive talked with some business stakeholders they are also thinking about moving from hong kong until hong kong is more stable. We realize that were not the ones who are harming hong kong or creating economic difficulties for hong kong but the Chinese Community party is destroying hong kong as a city to embrace different values and opinions and this is really a fight for business so i think, yes, indeed, we are suffering much from the implementation of National Security law. Thank you very much. I yield back. Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you. I recognize mr. Mullin owski. Thank you. And i encourage you to speak out on behalf of the people of hong kong. We are all aware that were in a contest with the Chinese Community party, a contest of ideas an unfortunately for the people of hong kong they are playing a role similar to the people of berlin during the cold war, this is a battleground in that contest. And we cannot underestimate how important this is and how difficult it is going to be given the determination of beijing to crush the freedom of the people of hong kong. My focus has been on what can we practically do about it. I strongly support targeted sanctions but to be frank i dont think theyre going to do much good in terms of deterring the Chinese Government from these actions. I think more important, as mr. Long mentioned, it is to take action to withdraw some of the privileges that corporations doing business in hong kong currently receive. That is a difficult conversation were going to have to continue to have. Weve spoken also a lot here today about the importance of offering safe haven for people from hong kong and i think that is incredibly important. And i want to make sure were all clear, we have two pieces of legislation that i think are equally important. Mr. Curtis, mr. Castro and others have offered a piece of legislation that ive cosponsored to provide expedited Refugee Status for activists and people in hong kong who have a credible fear of persecution. That is a lifeline for the people who need it the most. A number of us, including myself, mr. Curtis as well, mr. Phillips, mr. Kensinger and mr. Mcgovern has offered the freedom and choice act which is meant not only as a lifeline but a warning to beijing. Because in that legislation we also offer the admission to the United States to people from hong kong with advanced degrees, business owners, those who have completed undergraduate degrees in the United States. The idea here is very simply to say to the Community Party of china that if you, indeed, suffocate and crush hong kong, you will lose its wealth and talent to the United States. You will lose its wealth and talent to what you consider to be your greatest adversary. And frankly your loss will be our gain. The point here is, again, not just to provide a lifeline but a warning in order to try to deter beijing from doing its worst to hong kong. And i wanted to ask the witnesses about this combination of efforts and particularly whether they think that that warning might have some impact on beijings calculations. Because after all they want hong kong because of its wealth and talent and we know they are very worried about the brain drain to the United States, to the United Kingdom, to canada, to australia. Mr. Long, maybe begin with you. Do you believe that this kind of action might be noticed in beijing and might actually affect its calculations . Well, i think beijingo appreciation and that is why they want to implement in order to try to squash the movement in hong kong. But in effect it actually reignites the whole movement. We have a lot of people coming down the street to protest and they are afraid of the new implemented National Security law but i think beijing and for the International Community which we should have a multilateral comprehensive strategy dealing with china issues. Not only in hong kong but also for example while they have an impact really soon and should we endorse that and participate in that, if we are not then what message could we deliver in order to hold china accountable and i think it is important that we put this kind of angle looking at china issue in every respect and every perspective, including the human rights violation and the implementation in taiwan, the cultural genocide in tibet. So i think, yes, indeed, china is really pressured but we have to push more than only words but we need coalition. We need alliance. And we need a multilateral and aggressive actions for them. And anybody else quickly want to chime in on whether offering to the United States. Yeah. I want to talk about the business of hong kong to pressure from the Chinese Community party in suppressing human rights in china and hong kong. And one example i think i mentioned about zoom. Actually im the victim of being blocked, i was being blocked by zoom and afterwards apart from me two other activists in involvement for our and then because the Chinese Government had asked them to block our accounts. And then the answer to the media is that okay, in the future they wont block us but they will block all assistance. This is the way of the businessman behavior. The same with the willing to sign on to the National Security law so business had to be held also responsible for human rights violation in many parts of the world and not just [ inaudible ]. If i may just add very quickly. You want to for about 10 seconds. Actually, the pressure on china, for example the u. K. Was mentioned favorable opening of the bmo, it was met with severe criticism from the Foreign Affairs department from chinese companies, from Chinese Government. For example hong kong Housing Market is sustained by hong kong people and there are substantively owned by Property Developers from china so when hong kong people leave on a substantive scale it hurts chinese interest when our Financial Market and our stock market and Housing Market and im going to have to. I apologize. These are all very engaging questions an answers but i want to make sure all of the members have time engage with the witnesses especially before we have to go vote in just a bit. So with that, thank you mr. Mullin owski, ill recognize mr. Phillips now. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And to each of our witnesses, i celebrate your courage and gratitude on behalf of this entire committee for being with us today. I woke up to two very troubling headlines in the New York Times this morning. One china soft war stopped uyghurs earlier and more widely researchers learn. And second arrests in hong kong as security law sends chill over the city. As we see live reports right now what is happening in the streets of hong kong. I have to give president xi spl credit. He accomplish the something this thought was impossible and that is unifying democrats and republicans here in the u. S. Congress, citizens of the United States in opposition to his oppressive and repressive policies. Foundation of hong kong is freedom. And that foundation has been dealt a terribly damaging blow in the past 24 hours. With that said, we talk about sanctions, we talk about condemnation but i like the notion of invitations. That is why im a original cosponsor of the hong kong peoples and choice act which will protect hong kongers facing persecution and i celebrate Boris Johnson announcement that the United Kingdom will offer 3 million hong kong citizens with British National status a path to full citizenship. And i want to take this opportunity to call on the rest of theu;n world to consider extending those same invitations to hong kongers who are now being oppressed and repressed. So on the notion of invitations versus sanctions, i would love to hear from our panelists today, their perspective on how effective such policies might be. If we might start with you, mr. Loom. Thank you, for the question. Again, i myself and many Close Friends have to face a very difficult situation of leaving hong kong because of decades of possible imprisonment. So having a life boat, a safety raft for people who are in immediate danger and in the situation where the court is not independent any more because the chief executive could hand pick judges is extremely important. So i think secondly invitation and sanction are not mutually exclusive and i would reference the ideology of the movement that has been very popular in hong kong which is be and i think theyre flexible if they have to leave for immediate danger they will do so and continue to fight overseas, for example in the United States. So i think a combination of that strategy by offering tangible pressure on china and on the other hand offering a viable option for hong kong people, extremely important and well balanced. Thank you, sir. Professor peterson if you might share perspective on invitations. Yes. I would fully support the idea of the safe harbor act and the freedom of choice act. And i would like to also circle back to a point that one of the representatives made about academics and students. And i would just like to suggest that you might look into the neck lar, an International Network known as scholars at rick and a network of universities around the world that tries to support academics in support of risk of having freedoms violated and often what that needs is some funding to be able to help bring academics on academic visits where they could escape persecution and actually do some research. So i think that would be very productive. And then i would just like to reiterate the importance of the United States being more active in the u. N. Human rights treaty monitoring bodies and getting reactivated when the u. N. Rights council. Thank you. Mr. Law . Well, i think it is very not only people that are facingo appreciation and some of them for those working on the ground, they also need the attention of the world. These combination of strategies are much needed. Thank you. And mr. Lee, if you want to share some perspective. We have about 20 seconds left. Yeah. Thank you. I think invitation is one strategy and i think people in hong kong, those especially who are under immense fear of their future security could have a safe harbor is very important. But at the same time, we are in for the long haul. I think the system in hong kong will be in for the long haul and we need longterm support and we hope that we could get it from the International Communities for hong kong in the longterm not just just this moment but it will go on for some time. Thank you, sir. A good reminder to all of us. I yield back my time. Thank you. I recognize now mr. Resh enthraller of pennsylvania. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Earlier today i heard the speaker come in here and say she studies chinese history and politics for an hour a day. That is nice. But maybe we should take an hour today and actually run the hong kong autonomy act. It passed unanimously in the senate. It is actually doing something. It would actually sanction the bad actors cracking down on hong kong. So i hear about the one hour aday, it frustrates me because im glad people are doing but we could combat ccp aggression in hong kong in every day, every hour that we delay this we allow the ccp to consolidate power, we allow the ccp to arrest more Freedom Fighters to aerode and chip away at hong kongs autonomy. So how about instead of studying this issue like the speaker said she does, how about we take an hour each session day and run bills to hold china accountable. How about we take an hour and do something about the atrocities to the uyghurs and take an hour and do something about the theft of intellectual property, how about we take an hour out of one session day and talk about how the chinese and ccp steal innovation from our colleges and universities and how about we take an hour and do something about the chpts dumping fentanyl in the United States particularly in my district where people are dying of overdoses. So im glad that the speaker takes an hour a day to study the issues how about instead of studying the issues we do something to hold china accountable. And with all due respect to the witnesses, theyre great people, theyre doing a great job testifying today, but i dont want to single anybody out, but ive heard about International Institutions and how these are the answers. Well the chinese have already exploited our International Institutions and taken over the World Trade Center health organization. The w. H. O. Has become parroted ccp talking points and do nothing but single out americans and brits and israelis and do nothing about transgressions of the pla. So i hope the airconditioning is nice in your ivory tower. But how about you get out of it and take a realistic view of Foreign Policy and advocate that my speakers and others across the aisle will run an act that is doing Something Better than writing a strongly worded letter and have sanctions on ccp members that are overrunning hong kong. Again an hourer of day to be better spent running bills to hold the ccp accountable. Thank you and i yield back my time. Thank you. I know recognize mr. Allred from texas. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And i want to thank the witnesses for appearing before us today and commend you for your incredible bravery. I and Many Americans watched in awe as the people of hong kong took to the streets to protest the extradition laws nearly a year ago in just amazing numbers. And the bravery of the people of hong kong i think is an inspiration to people around the world. The fight for democracy in hong kong is not just a fight for only hong kongers, it is a fight for selfdetermination, human rights, and the advancement of freedom around the world. And as the worlds oldest democracy, we must, in a bipartisan way, not only stand with the people of hong kong, but we must act. And i agree with my colleagues statements about the legislation and offering safe harbor and Refugee Status to hong kongers and the need to not only sign our bipartisan legislation, but to also issue sanctions against chinese officials. While i recognize that that may alone not be enough. The point raised by mr. Long several times today and about professor peterson is one i want to stress. The witness to china is not through bluster and unilateral trade restrictions. While asking for help with the reelection. The way to present it to the clps is to present a united front of the International Community and engage in the diplomatic mechanisms in the u. N. And elsewhere to raise and legitimate issues with klichina. And so we have to lead. These International Treaties and mechanisms are only as strong as the u. S. Is committed to them. When we withdraw, they dont go away. Theyre simply used by the chinese and others who dont believe in the expansion of democracy and human rights and the right of selfdetermination and as a member of the chitty meeting for the first time after some pretty big revelations have been issued about the administration, i think we have to talk about the elephant in the room which is that the president of the United States has been accused by his former National Security adviser, john bolton, of offering his support for concentration camps, concentration camps. This is such a departure from past u. S. President s that i cant even really over state how harmful this is to our status as a leader around the world in human rights. History books will write about this unspeakable breaking commitment to the human rights. Now we have about two minutes left in my time. My only question to the witnesses is to offer you a chance to ex pound upon some of the things youve said today so that the people in my district in texas and the American People can put a face here in our democratic elected and empowered forum to what is happening in hong kong and to ask you how you feel about this law that has been put in place, this repressive law and how you feel about what youre seeing and not seeing from the United States. And you could go in any order that you want. Yeah, thank you, chairman. I think everyone in hong kong, when they wake up every day, they have to make decisions now, after the law was being passed. What kind of message they could put on, should they come out to march and gatherings and would they be arrested, should i keep my because the Community Party wants to [ inaudible ]. These are the things that everyday life of the people of hong kong are now being threatened and they are now living in fear of, you know, crossing the red line, socalled. And for me personally, of course, as a political activist, but i think the people of hong kong, we are tried to be innovative and well continue our fight. Thank you. Thank you for the question. When i know the fact that ill be forced to exiled and leave my homeplace and come to america, to resume my studies, ive met incredible stories of families that pled the countries in the 70s or under nazi rule so it comforts me in the sense to know that u. S. Is actually composed of many people like me and other Freedom Fighters who actually have to be forced to leave their country. So i hope that the u. S. Will continue to inspire people and i hope that more hong kong people will be able to continue their struggle in this place or other countries. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I now go to mr. Levin. Thank you so much, mr. Chairman. You know, it feels to me like this is the most troubling time for human rights in china since 1989. And i was in hong kong in late may of 1989 in what was the biggest demonstration there in the history of hong kong, certainly the biggest id ever seen. And i was in chung do on june 4th, 1989 and witnesses the killing of demonstrators there in numbers never really recorded properly by history. Today an estimated 1 million uyghurs, keergys and wee and other muslim minorities are interned in sing jong as mr. All red said in concentration camps. The tibetan people are denied basic human rights an the very existence of their culture is threatened. And now the freedom of hong kongers hangs in the balance. I wish i could say that the United States has been a champion for the rights of these peoples. But as many of my colleagues have made clear here today, this administration has sent exactly the wrong signals. And taken exactly the wrong steps in the case of sin jong and hong kong and others. Professor peterson, do you believe that the failure of the United States to be more forceful in the defense of human rights earlier about hong kong, certainly about sing jong has emboldened xi jinping. Thank you for the question. Yes, i do. I think that even though the naming and shaming process may not be a very coercive enforcement process, it is one process that can be effective particularly if all of the worlds leaders get together and really name abuses of human rights publicly when they see them. And if one very influential country like the United States does not participate actively in the interNational Human rights Monitoring System, then we weaken it. So yes, i agree with that. Thank you. Thank you. You know last month the Washington Post published a piece by a colonel professor named alan carlson titled whats in store for hong kong, look at tibet. Carlson writes just as china has imposed more rather than less assimilation policies, each time tibetans protested misrule, beijing has now set the table to adopt a much tougher response to hong kongs ongoing protest movement and ill add brave protest movement. Professor peterson to what extent do you believe the cases of tibet and hong kong are similar in this way . I think that there are some very important differences. And one of the differences is that hong kong did have a very independence legal system and a lot of advantages to begin with. And i think that is one of the reasons that many scholars of autonomy and the modelled autonomy and International Law thought that it could work in hong kong, because hong kong had the tradition of an independent Legal Profession and independent judiciary and free press and had all of the advantages of being an International Financial city. Right. The fact that it hasnt worked shows how it makes it all the more disappointing. I think it shows that the repression of the Chinese Government is even more extreme than we thought. The fact that they could do this and get away with it so far. Even in hong kong. Yeah, well let me that seems so right. Let me ask all of you, i mean, i feel like a thread, ive harped in this whole hearing and the thread throughout it is that the human rights of people anywhere are threatened when the human rights of people elsewhere are undermined. The Chinese Government has used advanced Surveillance Systems in tibet and sin jong and now really everywhere to undermine peoples human rights. I feel like it is really a question of all of the countries in the world coming together to make a renewed commitment to human rights and without u. S. Leadership it is hard to see that happening. Thoughts from any of you. I think we need to put values abo above profit. I think when people around the world, people may talk about human rights and then sign an agreement on trade and then go away very happy with the profits, the money that he is gaining. But where is the human rights . It is hypocrisy and we lead the world we need the world to really stick to values and not just looking for the money. I think that is very important. Thank you. I guess my time is expired mr. Chairman so i yield back. Thanks to our tremendous witnesses. Thank you. Im going to recognize miss amberger. Do you need a second . Thank you, mr. Chair. Congress has consistently demonstrated bipartisan support for the people of hong kong and im fortunate enough to have been able to do a lot work over in hong kong and in asia in general. And weve supported tibetans and made sure chinese officials who are responsible for Human Rights Violations are punished against the populations. Despite this and many of the authorities in congress have provided to the Trump Administration to hold the chinese individuals accountable, President Trump has failed to meaningfully act in support of human rights in china or really anywhere else. John bolton wrote in his moment our that President Trump did not want to get involved when millions in hong kong were taking to the streets last year. President trump even praised xi jinping handling of the situation. President trump also reportedly held off on imposing sanctions against chinese officials involved with the mass detention camps because he would have infeared with his trade deal with beijing. My question to you all is what message does this send to the people of hong kong, to the uyghurs to the tibetans and those fighting for freedom everywhere. Given trumps Foreign Policy how could we assure that hong kong is not a pawn in the strategic competition and ill turn my question over to either of the witnesses. Well ill stake a stab at that. It is a very difficult question. And i dont think that the people of hong kong deserve to be a political football or a strategic chip to be played. And so while i very much support any measure that will offer safe harbor to the people of hong kong and help to name and change Human Rights Violations anywhere, i do think it is important that we have a stable Foreign Policy and one based on multilateral actions and institutions. Thank you. Do you all have anything else to add to that . On the second question, i think that we have faced democracy and i think any government that are not using these principles, there will be a check and balance on part of the legislation and also the peoples movement. So i think it is very important that the message of supporting hong kong human rights and freedom of democracy should not stay on just the level of the politics but really go to the every day lives of the people of the United States and linking up union and i talked just yesterday on the situation in hong kong linking universities, university students, so we need a really a people to people solidarity in order to make sure that all democracy in the world will listen to the people and be on the side of the freedom and democracy. Thank you. I very much appreciate your time and your testimony. And i yield the balance of my time. Thank you. Mrs. Samberger. I would like to begin by thanking every one of our Witnesses Today for speaking with us. Particularly given the risk as associated with publicly discussing these very sensitive matters. I stand with the people of hong kong and their calls for human rights, democracy and autonomous rule. And during my time as a cia case offer i saw the impacts of tools that i consider to be part of the dictator playbook. For example it is common forage or tearan leaders to use the guise of National Security and the flexibility of vague laws to re press opposition and deter democratic progress. Mrs. Peterson, how do you expect the Chinese Community party to take advantage of the lack of specificity in the new specificity in the new law for hong kong to curb freedom of expression and consolidate power . Thank you. Well, that goes back to one of the points that i didnt quite get to in my testimony, which is that there are a number of Bank Provisions in the new National Security law. However, one of the provisions also says that the icc, the International Covenant of Political Rights shall continue to be respected in hong kong, and that potentially should serve as a guide to interpret ing the clauses. Theres a direct contradiction, a vague clause should be interpreted so as to comply and the u. N. Human Rights Committee has repeatedly held that National Security cannot be used as a basis to quash peaceful advocacy for multiparty democracy, constitutional change, et cetera. But we dont know whether the hong kong courts will be able to interritory the law because the law is silent on that fact and we know that the Standing Committee has the overriding power of interpretation. So its going to be difficult to know until we see actual cases that theres real danger that the Chinese Government will use their overly broad definitions to capture peaceful advocacy and to prosecute people for peaceful advocac advocacy. So then is it your assessment that it will be the hong kong officials who will have the power to interpret and implement the newly released National Security law about how these authorities will affectautonomy . It a really depends, first of all, on where the cases are tried. It says that the Hong Kong Sar has jurisdiction. That means tried in hong kong courts and i have to say that hong kong judges, i believe, are by and large, very independent and in general, they have done a good job of enforcing the iccpr and holding both the Hong Kong Government and legislation accountable to that, so if theres a big clause, they try to interpret it to try to comply. Now, the problem however is that the law says the power of interpretation of this law rests with the Standing Committee, which will issue legislative interpretations. Its silent on whether the courts also get to interpret it. I know my colleagues and i have discussed this and we believe that the power of interpretation is inherent in the hong kong judiciarys power of financial adjudication. So im hopeful that the courts of hong kong will be able to interpret the law in the course of trying cases, but i cant predict with any certainty, because if the ncp Standing Committee decides it doesnt want that to happen, it can issue an overriding interpretation, which the hong kong courts will have to follow. So i cant give you a definite answer. Im sorry. No, i appreciate it. Thats very helpful. While i am concern ed as are soe of my colleagues, that the Trump Administration has not been consistently firm in executing its policy against china, i do commend the state department for its very strong may 28th joint statement with the governments of australia, canada and the United Kingdom in our clear opposition to beijing imposing a National Security law in hong kong. One more question for you. Can you speak a little bit about how the United States can demonstrate continued leadership in multilateral settings, that you believe would actually set a strong message, send a strong message, to beijing, and encourage the Chinese Government to comply with its International Obligations . Yes, i can. Thank you for that question. First, i think the United States should ratify more multilateral human rights treaties. Weve actually ratified u few few uer than china. That doesnt mean we have a worse human rights record, but were not active so were not as influential. Secondly, we need to become active again in the human rights counsel, rather than turning away from it pause we might not like everything it does, we should become more active in that. So i think participating in these efforts is very, very important and can give the United States more solidarity with other like mind eed countries. And to all the other, thank you so much. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you. All right. Well, that concludes questions from members and ill move to Closing Remarks now. I want to thank our witnesses for their insight and expertise and i want to take a moment to acknowledge the hong kong American Community here in the United States. And although hes not at the witness stand today, i wanted to extend special thanks to samuel chu and the hong kong democracy counsel for their tireless advocacy, help and support for hong kong. To my colleagues, thank you for joining this important conversation. Im glad we can convene, in this case, across many time zones through video conferencing, to continue our committees work in these challenging times. And with that, our hearing is adjourned today. Well take you live to a House Intelligence Committee hearing on u. S. Relations with china after the coronavirus outbreak. It will include an update on u. S. National security issues. Relatively fair manner. Theyre really wanting and looking for powerful countries to lead a multilateral response to how such a vaccine would be distributed. And thats certainly one area, if we decide to go back and reengage the World Health Organization in the middle of a global pandemic, this is one area where these emerging market economies dont feel comfortable with no leadership at the helm and wouldnt feel comfortable with just china at the helm. Theyre looking for u. S. Leadership to be part of this solution. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Quigley. Thank you. Thank you all for participating. If i could, id like to go back to the china india boundary issues that are taking place right now. Doctor, if you could, a little deeper dive, how deep are these two sides willing to go . What triggers should we be concerned about many the likelihood of escalation . Thank you, congressman. The two sides, in my opinion, do not want to go to war. We have in place over 20 years from about the early 90s, put in place a whole set of agreements and protocols at the boundary to ensure that while they have frequent standoff, because both sides patrol these areas that are essentially both mans land, that they have been bumping up against each other during these patrols and as these standoffs increase, theres been concern that they could escalate. So these agreementse
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.