regina ip in hong kong, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. good to talk to you. let me ask you a very simple first question. 0k. since 2020, hong kong has been living with a very draconian national security law that was imposed from beijing. now, it seems that the hong kong government is determined to legislate an even tougher national security law during 202a. why? well, our national security law, mandated by beijing, is not draconian at all. it is far less comprehensive and sweeping than the national security act that your parliament enacted lastjuly, you know? you created a lot more new offences. our national security law enacted by beijing is nothing compared to what you have. what you have is far more stringent, comprehensive and draconian. well, i think a lot of it depends on the implementation, doesn t it? and when your territory uses the laws that you have through the national security legislation to lock up opposition politicians, pro democracy activists, to eliminate i
straight after this programme. welcome to hardtalk. i m stephen sackur. when chinese sovereignty was restored in hong kong, beijing s communist rulers saw the logic of maintaining the one country, two systems principle. so, how come some 26 years later, hong kong s autonomy looks more like a convenient fiction than a fact? my guest is regina ip, convenor of hong kong s executive council and leader of the new people s party. what does hong kong s fate tell us about beijing s worldview? regina ip in hong kong, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. good to talk to you. let me ask you a very simple first question. 0k. since 2020, hong kong has been living with a very draconian national security law that was imposed from beijing. now, it seems that the hong kong government is determined to legislate an even tougher national security law during 202a. why? well, our national security law, mandated by beijing, is not draconian at all. it is far less comprehensive and sweeping than the nati
regina ip in hong kong, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. good to talk to you. let me ask you a very simple first question. 0k. since 2020, hong kong has been living with a very draconian national security law that was imposed from beijing. now, it seems that the hong kong government is determined to legislate an even tougher national security law during 202a. why? well, our national security law, mandated by beijing, is not draconian at all. it is far less comprehensive and sweeping than the national security act that your parliament enacted last july, you know? you created a lot more new offences. our national security law enacted by beijing is nothing compared to what you have. what you have is far more stringent, comprehensive and draconian. well, i think a lot of it depends on the implementation, doesn t it? and when your territory uses the laws that you have through the national security legislation to lock up opposition politicians, pro democracy activists, to eliminate
his abraham accords helped normalize relations between it and some arab states but if re elected, perhaps his most controversial intervention could be on russia and ukraine. he said this on gb news. if i were president and i say this, i will end that war in one day. it ll take 2a hours. president zelensky has called his rhetoric dangerous . and on climate change, donald trump pulled out of the paris climate accords. this pulitzer prize winning historian argues that although america first isn t new, and there s long been a tension in the us politics between interventionism and isolationism, donald trump s first term still saw a shift. american power, no matter how great, in relative terms, it s ultimately limited. so you ve got to work with others. trump, of course, as we know, questioned this, to say the least, was inclined to pursue a much more unilateral, unilateralist course. and i say inclined because, in practice, one could argue that donald trump didn t change things
one thing we ve been consistent in saying is, ok, if stormont comes back, so be it. but let s not pretend that a border in the irish sea is a good thing. let s not gloss things. let s be honest about, well, there s brexit and there s this happened and the other thing happened and this is the situation that we re in and we have to manage it. but we re quite clear editorially about that, that a barrier to internal uk trade is a bad thing. i grew up overlooking belfast lough. there were ships coming in and out when i was a child. i remember it clearly. all my life that s been the situation. it was unthinkable. you could see scotland on a clear day. it was unthinkable in my lifetime that there would be any significant barrier or checking on that route. and that s a big deal that there now is. i think really this is now a test of sir jeffrey s authority. he has to bring his party with them. he has to go in and sell that deal and face down his internal critics. an academic sees a m