Transcripts For CSPAN House Foreign Affairs Hearing On Chinas Security Law In Hong Kong 20240712

Journal, live at 7 00 eastern thursday morning. Be sure to join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages, and tweets. Announcer the House Foreign Affairs Committee Held a hearing on the implications of chinas new National Security law in hong kong, which has led to arrests and clashes between police and protesters. The new law coincides with the 23rd anniversary of the handover of hong kong between the United Kingdom and china. This is almost 3. 5 hours. Forum. E have a and before i go forward i understand the speaker of the house, ms. Pelosi, will be stopping by, and i ask unanimous consent that she participate at any point she arrives. And there she is. Madam 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 and 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, general secretary 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 call attention to all of this. The commission on human rights, a 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. And whats so sad about it is that the chinese just think, the chinese regime thinks they can act with impunity in repressing the spirit of democracy. Two Million People turned out against the extradition law, two Million People. Thats a big crowd in the United States. But when you understand it was 25 of the population of hong kong, its as if anybody who could go out showed up against what chinese regime was going to do. And 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 is imprisoned because its for the regime to say, nobody cares, theyre not paying attention to what youre doing, nobody remembers that 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 the young people commemorated in Tiananmen Square, having the guidance of 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 u. K. 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 peacefully demanding the freedoms they have long been owed. All freedom loving people must come together to condemn the law, which accelerates beijings yearslong 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, now 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 is 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. So 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 because of commercial interests, 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. So, 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. Please 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 scurrying around trying to put together an Opening Statement, so i will recognize the Ranking Member to deliver his Opening Statement after which i will recognize myself for five minutes. Mr. Mccaul 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. But 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. And by brutally suppressing democracy in hong kong, the ccp is challenging the underlying assumptions that have guided the world since 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. And 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 in 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 that its violations of International Commitments and its commitments to the people of hong kong will have consequences. And i urge the administration to issue the sanctions authorized by this congress. And 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. Rep. Sherman 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 fairly , 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 a 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 that hong kong was perfectly free or that the system it had in place last year was perfectly democratic. 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 hosted a forum called authoritarianism in china, 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 a resolution at my suggestion by unanimous consent last year supporting the right of hong kongers to protest. No one should go to jail for voicing their right to opposition. Not in this country, not anywhere. 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 have witnesses in the last 24 hours, nothing short of terrifying events in hong kong. We need to reject this chinese violation of chinas own International Commitments and the commitments they have made to their own people. The peoples 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 2014 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 by introducing new punishments for socalled crimes against the state. It will serve really it will severely curtail freedom of expression. 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 weaker people the uyegher people, it simply will not catch the attention of the administration. We have squandered months without speaking out at the executive level. Hong kong has been on the backburner 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, 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 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 . I wasnt keeping time. It was three minutes. I think that would open it up to everyone here. 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. Frank wolf, 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. Thats it. And live up to your own promises made in the basis of law and the joint communique between hong kong and china. Which facilitated the transfer of the conveyance of hong kong to 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 that 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 people by the united nation. They really pointed out that theyre using those tools of repression as a means of genocide to eliminate the muslims, 10 million strong, theyre going after them to destroy their children, their families, and of course one to two million are in concentration camps. It continues unabated and of course theres no labor rights, and under xi jinping theres an all out effort to endall religious practice unless it comports with marxist principles. It is going from bad to worse. The hong kong human rights act that i was the house sponsor of, it was a bipartisan bill, 130 cosponsors or so, backed by everybody 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 unite against this pervasive human rights abuser xi jinping and this law draconian law they just put into effect. I yelled back. Thank you for those comments and for decades of dedication to human rights. I am going to introduce all the witnesses and then call on them in turn. Our second witness is going to be 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 youngestever elected law make whr he won a seat on the hong kong legislative counsel in 2016. Last, we will have a hong kong democracy activist known for that christatement a statement with 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. [indiscernible] the passing of the law yesterday sounded the death knell for the country system. This represented a second hand over for hong kong and for me personally, my third hand over. On july 1, 1997, hong kongs hand over to china under the promise of one country, two systems guaranteed by basic law. The imposition of National Security law on hong kong represents the second handover 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, this is my third hand over. Why is that . I was arrested on june 5, 1989 just after the Tiananmen Square for bringing support to the march Democracy Movement in Tiananmen Square in support of the people of hong kong. And i was released after three day, i havence that 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 or handed over for of our candlelight vigil every year, or our continuous support for human rights in china . Will there be a fourth hand over awaiting me . The new law just promulgated 11 00 p. M. , 30 of june, 2020, is a complete destruction of the rule of law in hong kong. It threatens every aspect of freedom the people of hong kong enjoy. When i read through the detailed description of four mechanisms to create crime. Terrorism, collusion with foreign power, the net is spread very, very wide. And i believe that in the drafting of law, it 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 criminalized every act in the past and tried to cover it this time under the National Security they can be revenge against the people of hong kong for what they have done over the past year. You know, to give you an example, waiving of independence may come under susection. There arey, july 1, already people who just because they waived Something Like the flag, they are arrested. And even the police made a banner warning people if you wave a flag or slogan you may be charged under the law, National Security law of secession or subversion. And other things also included in the law is to attack or governmentng kong facility or severely interfere with illegal with the legal functioning. Of course 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 blocked the Central Government from implementation of law and policy 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, interception of communication. Everyone knows this is like a secret police. People in the hong kong iance [indiscernible] your five minutes is expired. If you could give us just a couple of sentences and i need to move onto the next witness. Ok. So with the destruction of one country, two systems and the rule of law in its 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 past activities and not be deterred by the new law. We will fight on for freedom and democracy. Thank you. Thank you. Now i recognize professor peterson for five minutes. Thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. [indiscernible] i taught law in hong kong from 1989 to 2006, and i coedited a book on the american governments first attempt to enact legislation. Although i now teach in hawaii, i continue to visit hong kong for research. And i have spent most of my academic career writing about hong kong. My initial written testimony 72 days ago was based on the limited summary of the law that was published at that point. Now that the actual law has been published, i have no doubt that it violates chinas obligations under the joint british declaration. The joint declaration makes it clear that hong kong is to operate a separate criminal justice system. It shall maintain its common law legal 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 all the relevant authorities in the Hong Kong Government. [indiscernible] hotspot. 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 approved 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 broadly defined offenses. Time does not allow me to explore them all with you today but one example 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 a hong kong resident. Anyone can be prosecuted so long as they commit the offense in hong kong, or the consequences of the act occur in hong kong. For individuals who are permanent residents of hong kong, and thousands of american citizens are in that category, 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 never ordered. Moreover, if a person wanted to prosecute that person in the mainland, it might decide to invoke article 55. The remainder of my testimony discusses a number of vague provisions in the law and raises the question of who will be interpreting it. We do know the mpc Standing Committee has the power to interpret vague 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 of its obligation under the british declaration 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 that 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 the joint declaration. 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 filed by nongovernmental organizations. 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. Thank you. Thank you, professor. Nathanrecognize mr. Lah . Mr. Lah . There seems to be a technical difficulty. Can we unmute mr. Lah . At this point, im going to go onto our 4th witness and try to circle back to mr. Lah. We have brian lee young, whos recognized for five minutes. Congressman sherman, Ranking Member mccall, 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 imposed a National Security 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 is purveyed by a sense of political fear, selfcensorship, and legal persecution. We have to reckon with the reality that [indiscernible] instructive of the law on the First Anniversary of the 2019 extradition bill movement. On this very 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 very modest demands, the chinese and Hong Kong Government have chosen to ramp up their relentless oppression, and ultimately the selfdestruction of one country, two systems. Since last year 9000 protesters have been arrested. 600 of them are being charged with rioting. The police continued to be unaccountable and instead have seen an increase of 25 . Will only worsen under the new National Security law, which i will explain. Into al has now morphed Chinese Agency and hong kong capable of extraditing defendants to china, and the Chinese Communist party has muffled the public outcry for food and democratization that was guaranteed in the basic law, and responded with a resounding assertion of Party Dominance inside hong kongs geopolitical system. The great danger of the new National Security law are not limited to its legal ramification. The new criminal offense will no doubt be used as legal weapons against dissidents and send them to prison. No one in hong kong can be certain about the legal definition, and that their definition will forever remain forever elusive as the National People congress has the Sole Authority to interpret the law , strike down any conflict in local legislation, 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 mpc forcefully inserts the law into our legal system. Not only has the loan legislature been complete loose circle, 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 proved to be a mirage. A set of parallel institutions will be set up in hong kong. First and foremost, the office of National Security commissioner will be established in hong kong and will directly report to the communist party and xi jinping himself. Not bound by basic laws, this office has the fact to supervise and guide the Hong Kong Government with jurisdiction over cases pertaining to National Security. This jurisdiction and both the power to extradite defendants to china where there is no respectable rule of law. It is a fundamental intrusion into our Judicial Independence that is the cornerstone of one country, two systems. As National Security becomes the springboard for the ccp to tighten its grip, normalize a secretive operation, and extradite people. What we are witnessing is the crumbling of one country, two systems. Since last Years Movement ive n asked numerous times [indiscernible] 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. Narrowing your chance of safe return. But my answer is always this. Once we have tasted and breathe freedom, we can never be forced to kneel again. The false pompous of partial freedom will one day dissolve into no freedom at all, as the case in Hong Kong Well illustrates. Whats happening in hong kong will soon happen to the world, and thats why i believe the United States must hold china accountable. China should not be allowed to disregard its obligation. We must act now to exert pressure on china including the use of a range of instruments provided by the new hong kong autonomy act and provide assistance to hong kong protesters such as favorable immigration, for it may soon be too late. So thank you, and i welcome any 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. Hello, is it working . Yes 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. In a little over your one year, in a little over one year, i have testified on fights involving the situation in hong kong. And then before the pacific and east asian subcommunities. Both times i did not have to worry about going back to hong kong afterward to continue my activism, but this time its different. Speaking about the place of hong kongers contradicts the new National Security law. Under this new legislation beijing just passed 24 hours ago , anyone who would dare speak up would likely face imprisonment. So much is now lost in the city i love. 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 has left us very anxious. Now that we can finally read it, we are far from assured. In addition to closed trials in hong kong and even the possibility of extradition to china, offenders could be barred from bails and a jury trial with their rights trampled upon interrogation. Powersef executive has to determine whether covert surveillance like wiretapping can be deployed. Judges assigned to handle the cases [indiscernible] one observed clause even depicts the hatred inside hong kong and china is illegal. Erms so fake a new Hong Kong Based National Security agency will have sweeping power requiring the cooperation of all local government departments. We used to think as secret police as something abstract. Now it is a very real fear. The kind of corruption beijing once had to hide, may well become a new legalized norm. China is exerting de facto direct rule over hong kong, including 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 mystery suicide deaths. Kongershese brave hong keep the Movement Alive for the sake of future generations as well as a more democratic world free from the threat of chinese imperialism and expansionism. Rose for thelag first time while its people were understandably worried in 1997, there was at least a sense of optimism that given the perception of our city, people could move to the right of china which would in turn embrace freedoms and democratize. Littlerned out to be a more than wishful thinking. Over time, china has not followed hong kongs lead, but has made hong kong more like itself, erasing our unique way of life while benefiting from the economy we provide. Perhaps the National Security no longer reviews the true nature of what they have 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. More stressing the dominance of one country. They have shown no regard for the separation of powers and democratic accountability, which was long taken for granted by hong kongers. Through fear, intimidation, and they tried to keep hong kong its own city while keeping its outer shell. In doing so it helps to preserve the illusion the city is still autonomous. The International Community must not be confused. The high degree of autonomy once promised is just another blatant lie. It takes decades, if not longer, to build a city, but it takes just weeks to destroy it. This is what we have all seen lately, what now lies ahead of us is not just the personal safety of my friends or other opposition figures, but the survival of hong kong as an idea. Thatfore, it is vital while our friends in the International Community, including policymakers in washington, do not pretend that everything is still normal. They do not look away. Even though it could be conceded as a violation of National Security law, i was to say out loud on behalf of my beloved hong kong people. Foreign language] and i wishfighting, hong kong and all the world the very best. Thank you for your testimony, and i want to thank all our witnesses not only for their testimony, but given the risk of chinese retaliation, i want to thank them for their courage. I will now recognize members for five minutes each. Alltime yielded for the purposes of questioning our witnesses. Behind because of the hybrid format of the hearing, i will recognize members of the committee by seniority, alternating between democrats and republicans. Recognize will first 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 your microphone and address us verbally. I will start by recognizing the speaker of the house of representatives. 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 for the opportunity to be here. Mr. Smith and i talked about the 30 years we spent on this issue, but we always want to be current. More valuable than the one i just spent here with what is happening in hong kong in terms of this law. The concern that i have, which there may not be an answer to hear, we will see, is, is this law retroactive . Do they go back to any flying of flags are making statements, or is it from now forward . Which would be horrible enough. But that is a fear that i have. Want to thank our witnesses again, he has courageously testified. Paid to them i think the highest compliment they can receive. This is an overflow crowd of democrats and republicans in this committee honoring the spatial distance overflowing into this audience. This is quite remarkable, and a real expression of the bipartisan concern that we for for democracy, democratic reform, and the socalled, well, i do not even want to identify it by the name they use, because it doesnt have to do with security, it has to do with repression. But i think all of you for turning out for this. Because when we talk to the people of hong kong about what they want to see from us, they want to see our support. This committee in a bipartisan way is done that very significantly. With that, i think you for the opportunity to spend my very valuable our here to hear our witnesses and complement you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for being here, madam speaker. As you point out, although this room doesnt look full, we have limits on how many members are are allowed to be in the room and virtually all the other members are participating virtually. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you, madam speaker, for honoring us with your presence. Thats how important this issue is to all of us. I guess my first question i you did the secretary, the autonomous nature of hong kong. The Chinese Communist party is in violation of the treaty. To question to both professor peterson, in addition to the sanctions that i believe are forthcoming under the law that we passed in congress, what else can be done to remedy and address the violation of this historic treaty . I think thank you for the question. I think it is important to understand the implementation of National Security law is not just about law, but is a governing philosophy that beijing is openly and blatantly using to discredit human rights. The International Community should enact mechanisms to hold them accountable because they are going to a race the culture of hong kong and the human rights protection we have had. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the street today in protest of the implementation of the National Security law. We have seen a lot of obvious Human Rights Violations after the implementation. I think the International Community, other than these sanctions, which it is difficult to hold it together, but i think we need a new guiding principle going against expansionist china, which we have to hold them accountable in whatever human rights violation happens inside the border. This is what the International Community should do and should do it jointly. I agree with you. Fessor petersen thank you for the question. I want to respond to the speakers question. The law is not retroactive. There were rumors that might be, but it will not be. We cant roll out the possibility that action taken before the law went into force may contribute to decisions to target people for investigation or prosecution. Regarding what can be done, i would like to suggest we focus on the United Nations and the International Community as a whole because i do think it is important we try to avoid things that could hurt the hong kong people at try to focus more on International Human rights monitoring mechanisms. Thats why i was mentioning that the human Rights Committee will be renewing hong kongs report this summer with a list of issues and going on into 2021. I think the International Community can participate in that. Although china likes often to react badly to international monitoring, the truth is the Chinese Government agreed to this progress process when it agreed the ictr would continue to apply to hong kong and hong kong would continue to report to the u. N. Human Rights Committee. That committee and other mechanisms in the United Nations i think can help to sign a light on violations of the sino british declaration. I think that is our next course of action. I see chairman engel has arrived and with that i yield back. Rep. Engel good morning, everyone. I apologize for running a little behind this morning. Let me thank the honorable speaker for having joined us today. Her presence underscores the importance of this issue. We have had many discussions about hong kong. As we look to the uncertain future of hong kongs autonomy and democratic system, we see our speaker has been a tireless champion of human rights and the rights of the people of hong kong in china. Thank you to our witnesses for your time this morning. Thank you to mr. Mccall, our Ranking Member, and other members of the committee. As the Chinese Government escalates aggression toward hong kong, i am Proud Congress has spoken again with a bipartisan voice in support of the people of hong kong in support of their struggle to preserve their rights that have been guaranteed by treaty and International Law. At the end of the day, the white house sets policy and i fear our policy has gone astray, perhaps involving china. We should be focused on two major elements in policy toward hong kong. One is does it support autonomy and democracy in hong kong . Second, does it advance american interests . Talks lots of tough 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 cracked down on protests in hong kong, soft mining concerns about human rights to get a good trade deal, has set the stage for what we are seeing today. Nothing the beijing government would do could surprise me. If there is one thing i think americans should be united on it is this. I remember when the agreement , goingned with the u. K. To be two different types of government. One china but two systems. Of course the chinese, beijing government is not abiding by that at all. Did anybody ever think they would . So let me say that one of the more unanticipated provisions of the National Security laws article 38, which states the law applies to persons who are not permanent residents of hong kong and commit crimes under the law outside of hong kong. When combined with beijings diplomacy,se of such as the case of the two impeached canadians, this law could have implications for anyone visiting hong kong, including u. S. Persons studying, doing business, or working as government officials or diplomats. How safe should i or any other american feel about visiting hong kong in the future . Many are talking about ok, ok. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I think i can respond to that. It is true china intends to apply this law extraterritorial ly. I dont think anyone should feel safe, particularly if you have been involved in any campaign for sanctions or other actions against the Chinese Government or hong kong. When you combine the provisions, article 36 to 39 together with article 29, the definition of collusion with foreign forces, it creates an incredibly broad potential net for legal liability. While i would have said until a few years ago that hong kong is one of the safest places in the world to visit i lived there 17 years and always felt safe i dont think it is so safe to visit now. Thank you. I would also like to add, article 38 stipulates clearly that even if you have no hong , you will still be subject to the law. I think it adds a lot of to academics and ngos who might have criticized chinese abuse of human rights before. If they come to hong kong for an international conference, they could be subject to that law. I think it is true county and and communities should be very i think it is draconian and communities should be very concerned. As they mentioned about that law applying to persons who are , i wouldnent residents also point out [inaudible] arrested already inside china. Passing, the security law would apply to mainland chinese trying to support human rights in hong kong. [inaudible] can we come back to hong kong to visit us . No. [inaudible] this is a very Wide Application of law to anyone in the world. Anyone in the world can be caught by this law. Thank you very much let me ask you another question. Risks tomentioning personal safety for those involved in the hong kong Democracy Movement from the days of the handover until now. Several of you speaking to us today have repeatedly put yourselves at great personal risk. You are very courageous and i take my hat off you off to you. We have seen announcements in the United Kingdom and from taiwan regarding safe haven for hong kongers. My question is, what can the United States do best to ensure we are doing our part to welcome those in hong kong who face persecution under these new laws . Question. Ou for your i would like to express my gratitude. Governmentd the u. S. Has proposed a plan for human rights defenders in hong kong, including those who protest being indicted or have criminal records regarding the protest. I think this is indeed a great way support hong kong protesters on the ground. For hong kong people, one thing i would like to mention is after they implement the National Security law, there were more than 100,000 people marching in the street facing a high risk of Police Brutality and the risk of being in prison for more than 10 years. These are this attitudes toward autocracy is very admirable. I think not only offering a safe plan for these people, but the International Community should implement more and more mechanisms to hold china accountable so we can let those people fighting on the ground feel more safe and the Chinese Government more scared to implement more draconian fusion these laws again implementation of these laws again. In addition to nathan, i think it is a reality we have to face some of the best and brightest hong kong protesters, intellectuals, academics, have to flee the city because of their involvement in the Democracy Movement since 2019. It is very saddening and unfortunate that people are forced to seek refuge elsewhere, but it is a reality. Many, myself included, have to be selfsufficient. I know that in america two bills have been proposed. The first is hong kong safe harbor act. The other is Hong Kong Freedom and choice act. Provide refugee policy to hong kong people. I think those would be a very good mechanism to ensure the safety of those who are in danger and in great need. Createthey will discussion around the human rights abuse situation in hong kong. Hong kong is an International Financial city that could produce a generation of exiles. This is unacceptable. We need to help them. Rep. Engel thank you very much. Anyone else care to answer the question . To mr. Smithll go of new jersey. Thank you very much and thank you for calling this important and timely hearing. Thank you to our witnesses, mr. Lee, mr. Nathan law, for the tremendous sacrifices you have made years to date and the risks you face now. Just a couple of points. Reverses jinping course, i think everyone has to be on notice that every treaty obligation that china has added its name to, its voice, its signature, are worthless. They made solemn obligations freely entered into and now are breaking it with impunity. We often talk about the rule of law. In china, it is the role of unjust law. Ms. Petersen, i thank you for your testimony. Your point on the retroactive, because i was thinking that as well. I think that is a technical omission in the law. Nothing precludes this dictatorship from looking back and Holding People to account. It is just their way. Let me ask a couple of questions. Do you have a sense the world will unite . There needs to be i think a very serious sanctions regime. Mention was made about the secretary of state. He did on may 27, pursuant to the hong kong human rights and democracy act language, he made thaty strong statement hong kong does not warrant treatment under u. S. Law in the same manner as before its handover. That is because of the autonomy issue as well as human rights. He stated the administration would eliminate different and special treatment for hong kong, including export controls on dual use technologies and more. 26,nth later on june secretary pompeo announced the imposition of visa restrictions, which we all were calling for, for those chinese officials who are undermining the high degree of autonomy is guaranteed in the 1984 signer british declaration. Obviously more has to be done now that they have all the trigger. Pulled the they have trigger. Witnesses can speak to whether there is any possibility of that. I hope the people around xi jinping realize he is dishonoring the communist party, dishonoring the government of china. See thatthe world can they give their word and break it with impunity, thats exactly what they are doing right now. I would ask our witnesses if they want to speak to corporations. The reach of the law is beyond people physically residing in hong kong. They have put language in this law that reaches beyond that. There are a lot of members of this house and senate. I am among them. I was briefed by the fbi. I am a target, whatever that means. I think this campaign of intimidation against the world, especially hong kong nurse hong kongers, we need to meet this as never before. We did not do it after Tiananmen Square. George Herbert Walker bush did not do it, nor did clinton. We acquiesced and they took notice. Give it time and people will let it go. I think, as the speaker pointed out, there are a lot of us on both sides of the aisle who realized the nefarious nature of this dictatorship and we need to draw that line and hopefully there are people within the xi jinping government who will say, timeout, you have gone too far. You are doing it with genocide against the uighurs and now here. If any witnesses would like to speak on any of those points let me just say to nathan law. You said, do not look away. We will not look away. We will further engage. Thank you, congressman. 38,ave talked about article explicitly an intimidation against the Global Community for speaking up about hong kong. The second one, it is important to recognize xi jinpings strategy of political control is about compartmentalizing politics, ensuring the Business Community, you should not concern yourself with politics, you will not be affected by the new law. Recently hsbc and standard chartered, the two biggest banks in hong kong, were forced to count out to the security law. It showed the division between business and politics is only a political expediency in the eyes of china and they can force the Business Community to align themselves with party interests. It is important to send a message that we should not fall into the divide and conquer tactic by xi jinping. Not only do we have to take a tougher position, we have to unite different nations, such as the eu, the biggest exporter of china, such as the United Nations, a different platform that professor petersen mentioned. We have to come up with a united front. Rep. Smith thank you. Mr. Lee, i may 29 trump announced there would be targeted sanctions against chinese and hong kong officials, but he did not provide any names or less lists. I along with the Ranking Member of the asia subcommittee introduced a house version of the hong kong autonomy act to impose mandatory sanctions on entities that violate chinas obligations to hong kong under the joint declaration of the basic law, and also the banks that do business with them. Positionsong kongers on the u. S. Implementing targeted sanctions in light of the National Security law decision . Mr. Lee . Thank you. Let me read the articles on collusion with a foreign power. This is the problem now. With that law,hen you read through that law it could be anything. Things targeted to article inviting sanctions. [inaudible] i will leave it to the wisdom to how to go about supporting hong kong. I want to mention when you look mechanism,ed nations usually there is a powerful statement on china and hong kong. Rep. Smith i am going to ask you to wrap it up. I do need to go on to another question. Thank you. 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 millions of hong kongers. We want freedom from hong kong, not immigration to hong kong, but we have to deal with the situation as it stands. I will be joining our colleagues in introducing in the house the hong kong safe harbor act to designate hong kongers as priority two refugees. Priority two allows individuals to access the refugee system without going through the unhcr, which does not have an office in referral and without a 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 two refugees . I wonder if mr. Law can answer that. Czechia for the question thank you for the question. It is important to provide a way out for those who have been targeted, especially under the National Security law. People who may face lifelong imprisonment, politically assistancedividuals, is likely needed. Countriesre more offering helping hands, that would be a better result to them. At least they are offered choices for them. That will ease the pressure. Rep. Smith i will point out political activists from china dedicated to freedom have had a major and positive impact on the world. With that, i yield back. Rep. Engel thank you. Mr. Perry . Rep. Perry thank you, mr. Chairman. The first question i have is regarding agreement for people that are unfamiliar with the specific tenets and the text of the agreement. Since obviously china and the communist party in beijing have decided they are not going to honor any of the commitments in the agreement, what are, if any, the remedies . Before anybody answers, let me remind everybody 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. Organizations and countries like north korea, like iran, china, russia. This is why you dont make agreements with them. You demand action and have a reaction to their action. With that, what are the remedies . May i comment . The question about the sino british joint declaration, i particular declaration was registered with United Nations. One problem is they dont have any remedy for violation. Resolution,k at the there is one text that says, states tothe member remedy over the suggestion. I think the u. K. Government has a responsibility to make sure the sinobritish joint declaration that they agree on should be respected. Ones that goe the to the United Nations and ask for the respect of the joint declaration. We hope we would see something in the future about the sinobritish joint declaration. Can i add something to that . Mr. Lee is correct that there is no clause in the sinobritish joint declaration providing for dispute resolution. But the General Assembly of the United Nations can always seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of justice. There is 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. Icj issued 2019, the an advisory opinion on whether decolonization was lawfully completed with the chagos islands. The u. K. Was not happy that request was made. It was made because a majority of the General Assembly voted for it. Even though advisory opinions are nonbinding, they can be very influential. I think even a campaign seek a vote in the General Assembly to seek that advisory opinion would put some pressure on the Chinese Government to be more careful about living up to the letter of the sino british joint declaration. Rep. Perry i appreciate your comments. I got a newsflash for everybody. Public pressure and opinions, nonbinding, etc. , have little effect on the communist Chinese Party. That is all tilting at windmills in my opinion. Let me ask this question. With the advent of the security law in hong kong, what are the ramifications of this . What do you see the ramifications for taiwan . Obviously the law actually applies to hong kong residents. On the one hand, they have been very active in supporting hong kong. On the other hand, the pursuit of democracy is branded a subversion of the same power. I think it could be a very good signal about how china will actually treat taiwan, given that taiwan will one day succumb to the one country, two systems. It shows how ambitious china would be once you fall into the agreement, that they will not honor. Think whats happening in hong kong shapes tremendously the discussion in taiwan. Autonomy, etc. , etc. Rep. Perry thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield. Rep. Engel thank you very much. Mr. Meeks . Rep. 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. It is already happening. I woke up this morning to reports that the police and hong kong have made at least one arrest today of a demonstrator for violating the National Security law. As i read the testimony of witnesses, i felt a deep connection to the struggle for democracy described. I would be remiss if i did not say here in america, i am part of the struggle of black americans to realize the promise of democracy in this great nation. I can identify with the lifelong nature of this struggle. It is because of the history and challenges of mike unity 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 Martin Luther king. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Ande i think this committee the house of representatives for standing up, i am so deeply disappointed in the faltering up the white house when it comes to its u. S. Global standing. This is a moment for strong u. S. Leadership, but it is also a moment when the president s geopolitical failures are emboldening china and other nations 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 a resolve to hold china accountable. Instead of using these authorities, the president shows early on to praise beijings handling of protests in hong kong and did nothing as the Chinese Government vigorously oppressed the weakest. 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 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 . Prof. Petersen 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 u. N. Human Rights Council has been asked by a group of independent human rights experts to establish a special rapatory special repertoire on human rights in china, and it would be nice if the United States played a more active role on that campaign. The United States could also ratify more human rights treaties because that means we could elect independent experts to sit on those monitoring committees. Thank you. Rep. Meeks 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 of that slippage be on the one country two, systems doctrine . Mr. Leung thank you for the question. 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. So 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 hong kong to enjoy hi autonomy nor freedom. So i think withdrawing that privilege and negotiating 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 . Rep. Meeks yield back. Rep. Engel thank you very much. Mr. Yoho . Rep. 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 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 . Will 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, poles 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. Loop ofcontinual sad human endeavors, a fight of right versus wrong, good versus evil, freedom against suppression. In the end, freedom will prevail. My questions to the panel, have any of you seen or heard 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. Mr. Leung thank you for the question. I think in the eyes of the communist party, everything could be falling under the concept of National Security. State,u go against the whether you speak publicly or demonstrate, it can be construed as subversion to the 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, and which half of the seats are actually not democratically elected, not to mention our chief executive, who is the one to blame for the crisis since 2019, and still remains in power. It is 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. Rep. Yoho thank you for your answer. Im out of time, and i yield back, mr. Chairman. Rep. Engel thank you very much. Thank you very much, 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 of 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 they are 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 a transitional kind of 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. The question about credibility, i think it is 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, as mr. Lee has said, is 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 think the support from the u. S. To hong kong in our pursuit of freedom has been bipartisan, very vocally since last year. And for me myself, i studied at Yale University last year and i 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. Sires rep. Engel okay, thank you. Mr. Curtis. Rep. Curtis thank you, mr. Chairman. Yesterday i introduced the bipartisan hong kong safe harbor act, along with my partner, represented of castro, and other members of the community the committee. And take note of the bipartisan nature of this bill and the strong bipartisan support. I hope by doing so, those who are watching here will take notice that we are committed as a congress regardless of party to act on this. This bill would designate hong refugeess priority two , streamlining the refugee admission process. This bill sets up an asylum path for those in hong kong in immediate danger from the ccp. Frontline activists covering the protest, frontline responders, anyone who provided Legal Services to those arrested, and anyone arrested since june 9, 2019. The legislation instructs the secretary of state to work with likeminded countries to accept refugees from hong kong. This bill addresses the immediate humanitarian crisis. The u. S. Must act fast. This legislation is needed immediately. I would also like to note that more legislation is in process and point out the good work of others on this community this committee 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 that as i have listened to the propaganda regarding this bill, i frequently hear it is a passive bill that will only be used in extreme circumstances, that it will not be exercised as feared. Specifically since the law went into effect, i understand there have been arrests. Are you seeing any impact of the bill . 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 have created a full National Security institution in hong kong to enforce the law. Its not at all passive. And now today, just today, 10 people have been arrested. 300 people have been arrested, but out of the 300 arrested, 10 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. Recently said that there are lots of incidents of really low thresholds that people could be violating the National Security law, like certain rumors that could kind of like create hatred towards the government. And also in todays 10 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. Rep. Curtis thank you. Im out of time, and i appreciate the witnesses. Mr. Chairman, i yield my time. Rep. Engel thank you very much. Mr. Connelly. Rep. Connolly 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 elephant in this 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 refugees. 110,000he number from 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. Prof. Petersen 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 rep. Connolly professor, if i could just 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 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. Prof. Petersen i 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. Rep. Connolly mr. Chairman, could mr. Law just respond to the impunity question . I, of course, yield back my time. Rep. Engel certainly. Think foreah, i 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 chinea 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 especially those more liberal ones, how they could join hands and apply pressure to support those on the ground in these places in regards to chinas expansionist nature. Rep. Engel engel thank you very much. Mr. Wright. Rep. Engel ok. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I will say for the record i will 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 enjoyed it. I hope you consider me a friend, because i consider you one. 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 the Chinese Communist party will stay true to their word. The ccp has shown time and time again they are not to be trusted. They play by their own rules. A few examples attending to coverup the origins of the covid19 by destroying forensic evidence, silencing doctors, and failing to notify the International Community over covid as a whole. They continue to bully their neighbors in the South China Sea with absurd claims of territorial rights. Bloodshed along the line of the actual control with india, based on recent events, we can say china is to plan completely. They have forced over one million uyghurs into prison camps. Areard reports that they forcing abortions, solitary confinement, and more. It leaves you speechless, mr. Chairman. I dont know why we should expect any better than a group of people who have a history of doing this to their own people. We have to call them out for these acts whenever and wherever they do it. Terday, a Political Group i am not sure if i am pronouncing this right and two other independence groups dissolved with hong kong. Is this the point of no return for hong kongs Democratic Movement . I will ask our distinguished group that is gathered. Mr. Law thank you for your question. It is important for us to recognize any forms of disagreement with beijing or hatred their own terms, towards them, could be considered a violation of the National Security law. Basically none of us could speak freely because we can never get when they will feel hated. This case inially, hong kong, we are basically chained for most of the occasion if we dont want to face lifelong imprisonment. This is a terror they created. Howus, we have to attest they will implement that law and. Djust this is not the end. This panelsee, giving out testimony, there were 100,000 people marching down the street. There are a lot of brave hong kong people who are not afraid and still march regardless of the intimidation. Movement iong think the International Community should treasure the brace people in brave people in this darkest time. Rep. Burchett i will hear from the others. I am the chair of the Hong Kong Alliance. That was founded in 1989. We have been fighting for democracy for china and hong kong over the past 31 years. Whether we was asked will dissolve because of the new law. Why are they asking that . Of bringingplatform to those who were massacred in Tiananmen Square. We have the platform of building democracy. [inaudible] we do not know, to be honest. Have told the media we will hold on to our principals and we will not retreat, though we do not know what lies ahead of us. That weit is important oureve in democracy and beliefs. We do not know what lies ahead. There are a lot of artifacts inside the museum, whether we move them out of hong kong to somewhere safe no, we will not do that. As you said, we do not know when we will return. Rep. Burchett thank you. I have run overtime. I hope we continue to support free people everywhere. I think if we are finally going to take care of this problem, weve just got to stop buying chinese junk and stop putting up with their garbage. Talk is cheap. We need to put something behind all this talk. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate your friendship, brother. 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 for 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 uyhgur 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 uyghur 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 ambitious to ways law,are anathema to normal allowing the breakdown of civil laws and liberties. In spite of beijings 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. She has been doing it for 30 years. There is no doubt that my friend mr. Smith has likewise been standing up for human rights everywhere in 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 countries. 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 . Rep. Deutch mr. Law 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 adjusting their priority and 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. Rep. Deutch thank you very much. Dp. Engel thank you, mr. Eutch. Misses wagoner. Wagoner 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 . Prof. Petersen thank you for that question. Well, i think obviously, we should be condemning it. We should join multilateral groups in 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 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. Rep. Wagner thank you. More than just talk, i think is the operative word there. To communist partys move impose this National Security law on hong kong seems to be inspired in part by domestic instability stemming from the partys catastrophic handling, 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 . Mr. Lee thank you for the question. We expect the communist party of china will [indiscernible] 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 British Colonial times, and then they changed it in 1997 to make it a Public Security ordinance. I was charged for seven charges the securitynder ordinance because now they are using the excuse of covid19 and saying they will ban all gatherings. So when we want to organize 1 million and 2 million marches in june last year it is impossible to do that now. Rep. Wagner real quickly, china seems to have accelerated the timeline for implementing 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 the International Community take to protect the proDemocracy Movement this september . Prof. Petersen 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. Rep. Wagner thank you. My time has 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. It is an honor to serve with you, sir. I yield back. Rep. Engel thank you. Very appreciated, those kinds words kind words. 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 those negotiations and subsequent to them. 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 uyghurs 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 effort to coddle 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. Any of the witnesses who can provide an answer to that would be helpful. Mr. Law, maybe you could start. Mr. Lee 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 less volatile government to handle these cases. But i think sometimes its strategic. I think most importantly that structural direction towards china are more assertive and an attitude Holding China accountable is already established. So i think longterm im not worried that this kind of consensus will fade. Rep. Cicilline 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 has already been reported the first arrest this morning under this new law for a gentleman holding a hong kong independence flag. So what should we expect to see in terms of the imposition or the use of this new law . Mr. Lee 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 Political Parties have to in advance to spend themselves advance disband themselves. And protesters will no longer enjoy the freedom to express political beliefs and hanging political flags or slogans. Those pervasive intrusions into Civil Liberties that we have enjoyed over many decades is now under great threat and the second level is about the institutional presence of the ccp in hong kong that theyre office, their operation is not bound by basic law, not bound by local 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 Civil Society. Rep. Cicilline 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 a 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 . Mr. Law 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 expensive rian expansive nature. We could think of Something Like the upcoming winter olympic and also issues not only happening in hong kong, but elsewhere like taiwan in order to pileup the pressure and coordinate pressure and allow them to be aligned with international ruling. Do we have time . Chairman will let you answer. I think the world has to reckon with a risen china that is economically very powerful and the world has to formulate a stable, cohesive and multielectoral policy 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 on economic fronts, especially the issue of hong kong. Rep. Cicilline before i yield back, i want to thank you for your extraordinary leadership of this committee. Thehave 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 service to our country and i yield back. Rep. Engel thank you so much. Mr. Watkins. Rep. 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. The ccp is problematic. Many Chinese People have immigrated to the United States and im biased because i married one. Usingp has been multidimensional strategies to degrade and undermine democracy around the world. Xi jinping has been using these recently and clearly 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. Mass detention of uyghurs and sterilization of women over the past 30 years and not 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 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 economically, they have stolen hundreds of millions of dollars of intellectual property from the United States. They forced Technology Transfer and interfere with Global Supply chains, supply economics and international business. So countering the ccps 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 we must steer the u. S. In a direction that is less dependent on china and economically and in terms of manufacturing. My question is to mr. Law, who, sir, you understand the United States very well, you went to Yale University. I represent eastern kansas. To knowkansans need about the situation . What can i take home to tell my constituents . Mr. Law 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. We are seeing in the general ,lection in the u. S. Infiltration and manipulating Information Campaign. The same happens in hong kong. Both share a lot of things that originated things from authority and things from authoritarian powers like russia and china. My greatest status is to educate more u. S. Citizens to understand were in a global fight. We should hold hands together and suppressed these authoritarian expansionists and to let us know that fighting for democracy in hong kong, in this foreground, is indeed helping the world to preserve democracy and values. Rep. Watkins thank you. To 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 10 years because of the ccp . Can tellt think anyone the future, but we hope democracy will return to hong kong, but i think we are in a very difficult time. Not just us, but i think the whole china, everyone will see authoritarian regime [indiscernible] i think we are in a hard time. But i want to mention one thing just mentioned, educating the American Public about the situation in hong kong. One thing i think the communist party also mentioned about for ngos, theyforeign want to intervene into how these changes go on. But i think it is very important and very encouraging for the people of hong kong that these changes continue. 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 campus that sensor chinese activists. We could talk about this Information Campaign on twitter and facebook, social media platforms owned by china and sensitive informations such as tik tok, which 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 citizen in america will be affected. Rep. Watkins thank you very much. I appreciate the bravery of the panelists. I yield. Rep. Engel i now recognize myself. The Chinese Government is not only violating the rights of hong kongers, but also violating an international treaty. Sinobritish 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 its clashes with india and vietnam and the increased oppression of the uyghurs. I believe china has been emboldened by the fact that no one is minding the shop at the white house. President trump has consistently failed to hold china accountable on a range of issues and demonstrated no interest in doing so, specifically 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, bicameral 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 commitment to upholding human rights in the face of a very repressive regime. We must work with our allies such as the United Kingdom and taiwan in protecting hong kongers who now face retaliation by mainland 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 who would give hong kongers who face persecution 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 inpled with other seniors Civil Society who led 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 need 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. Rep. Castro 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 arrests and prosecutions under the law and many of them are under the law of the crime of socalled crime of riot. That may end up in four or six years or even more jail time for them. It is that they have not left see it as and police a riot and they are caught by police and may be sentenced to jail for four years. Pastst movements in the already [indiscernible] these victims of Police Brutality and Police Harassment and prosecution should be the one that have should be supported with this new bill. Rep. Castro thank you. I will keep myself on time and thank you for your answers. Well, thank you very much. 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 against the tear gas when they appointed the First Special executive. 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. That seems to now be out of the window. There doesnt seem to be much pretense that that still exists. So i wish you all would 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, students, academics, professors and hong kong. Because the way the line is defined as subversion 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. Academia and hong kong intellectuals whether they are young or most senior are extremely worried about the future. They worry about whether they could conduct independent research and whether previous work will be scrutinized and used as evidence against themselves. And also not local academics, even scholars in america, because the law is so pervasive that it covers american citizens, academics who study on china and hong kong are worried about the future. Will they be able to enter hong kong safely for a teacher conference . Future conference . So i think academics is under tremendous pressure under this law and a lot will happen. Lastly, to go back to the first part of the question, you rightly point out that it is not a new phenomenon. Gigi inn 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 its formulation of one country two systems completely from hong kong people knowing that it is about the party ruling hong kong and parties that control every sector of hong kong. 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 local community and also scholars and students. They are worried whether they have Academic Freedom in hong kong. So a lot of them are seeking opportunities to study abroad or work overseas. I had the experience of talking to them and i think sometimes if we, for example, if a School Provides scholarships, they could think of hong kong as a region from china and give them separate quarters, it will separate quotas, that will facilitate them to get the funds and to continue their career as a scholar. 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 grounds which are supposed to be given to them, but for now stopped because of political reasons. These funds could be transferred to hong kong students who are being suppressed because of their political beliefs. I think this is one thing we could support them locally and culture them in a free space and they could repay back to hong kong with their own terms. Rep. Titus we need to look at that specifically as we think about sanctions or safe harbors, to not forget about that whole student academic, faculty researcher population. Anybody else . Yeah. Just one more point. The way the Community Party, they are having a multipronged attack over Civil Society, including universities, academics and also school teachers. 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. In every aspect of life, they want only one thing, loyalty to the party. Rep. Titus thank you. Castro the representative of ohio. 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, i apologize in advance. Im one of founding cochairs of the congressional taiwan caucus and im cochair of the caucus themll, so i would ask based on the Chinese Communist decisions relative to the hong kong National Security law, what should we expect chinas next move against taiwan to be . What should taiwan learn from hong kongs experience . I again yield to any of the witnesses who might like to respond. Thank you for the question. Do you wanttersen, to jump in . Prof. Petersen i would say very briefly i think taiwan knows that one country two systems was not going to be fulfilled. It was originally developed for taiwan and people used to say when i first moved to hong kong in 1989 people would say that hong kong was the insurance policy because the government wanted to show taiwan it will keep its promises, but clearly that hasnt happened and i dont think china is trying to take any sort of soft diplomatic approach to taiwan any more. Theyre just trying to scare taiwan. Rep. Chabot thank you very much. Any other witnesses want to weigh in . I think in recent years there has been tremendous interaction and exchange of hong kong and taiwanese Civil Society. Wane commenters ive heard learned how ccp ideology about control, how dominant one country two systems can be once implemented in hong kong. So i think i agree with professor petersen that it shows that one country two system is a broken promise and has not been implemented in taiwan. The last year the movement helped tremendously to sway discussion in taiwan about how to proceed and i think china will not give give up hong kong and i think they will try to exert that National Security council to taiwan, if not formal legislation, some formal institution and channel of inference. Rep. Chabot 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 its companies who are in tremendous conduct, lets say, ipos or champions in hong kong. Benefited from hong kong as a gateway to international finance. So those are where america could exert tangible influence on china. And without a democratized 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 their special economic status. So i think the support is actually there to implement more tangible sanctions on china. Rep. Chabot thank you. And one last question if i can. One of hong kongs principal strengths 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. They are thinking about leaving hong kong, ive talked with some business stakeholders. They are thinking about not moving into hong kong and waiting to inject more funds until hong kong is more stable. It is important to 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 that can embrace different opinions. Y is vital for business, so es, indeed, we are suffering much from the implementation of National Security law. Rep. Chabot thank you very much. I yield back, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to recognize our witnesses for their continued courage on speaking on behalf of the people of hong kong. We are all aware that were in a contest with the Chinese Communist party, a contest of ideas. 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. Leung 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, for 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 have offered an additional piece of legislation, 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 communist 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. Me begin with you. Do you believe that this kind of action might be noticed in beijing and might actually affect its calculations . Mr. Leung well, definitely i think beijing is under pressure and that is why they want to implement the National Security law in order to squash the movement in hong kong. But in effect commit actually reignites the whole movement. We have a lot of people coming down the street to protest and they are obviously afraid of the newly implemented National Security law. International community which should have a multilateral comprehensive strategy dealing with china issues, not only in hong kong, but for example and they will have an impact really soon. Should we endorse that, should we areicipate that, if to hold china accountable. I think it is important that we put this kind of angle looking at china in 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. We need a multilateral and aggressive actions for them. Rep. Malinowski anyone else want to chime in . Yeah. About thetalk business of hong kong to pressure 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 my account was being blocked by zoom. Apart from me, two other activists in america because of our involvement our account was blocked. The relation is there because the Chinese Government 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 chinese assistance. This is the way of the businessman behavior. Willing toth being sign on to the National Security law so business has to be held responsible for Human Rights Violations in many parts of the world. [indiscernible] rep. Malinowski about 10 seconds. Add substantive pressure on china. 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. There are substantively owned by a Property Developer from china. So when hong kong people leave from hong kong on a substantive scale, it hurts chinese interests when our financial market, our stock market, our Housing Market. Rep. Malinowski i apologize. These are all very engaging questions and answers, but i want to make sure all of the members have time to engage with the witnesses and ask questions, especially before we have to vote in just a bit. I will now recognize mr. Phillips now. Rep. Phillips 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. Stalkedna software 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 some credit. He accomplished something that many thought was impossible, and that is unifying democrats and republicans in the u. S. Congress , citizens of the United States in opposition to his oppressive and repressive policies. The 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 condemnations, but i like the notion of invitations. As my colleague just spoke to, that is why i am an original cosponsor of his bill, the hong kong peoples and choice act which will protect hong kongers facing persecution and i celebrate Boris Johnsons 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 the 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 perspectives on how effective such policies might be. If we might start with you, mr. Leung. Mr. Leung thank you for the question. 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 anymore because the chief executive could hand pick judges is extremely important. So i think secondly, invitation and sanction are not mutually exclusive. I would reference the ideology of the movement that has been very popular in hong kong. I think people in hong kong are very flexible in their tactics. If they have to leave for immediate danger, they would do so, and they would continue the 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. Rep. Phillips thank you, sir. Professor petersen, if you might share on expectations. Prof. Petersen i would fully support the idea of the safe harbor act and the freedom of choice act. And i would like to also circle 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 International Network known as scholars at rick and a network of universities around the world that tries to support academics and students at 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. Thank you. Mr. Law . Well, i think it is very important for us to realize were not only people that are facing oppression 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 can get it from the International Communities for hong kong in the longterm, not 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. Reschenthaler 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. Thats nice. But maybe we should take an hour today and actually run the hong kong autonomy act. It passed unanimously in the senate. It would actually doing something. It would actually sanction the bad actors cracking down on hong kong. So i hear about the one hour a day, it frustrates me because im glad people are doing but we could combat ccp aggression in hong kong. 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 erode 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 . 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 the chinese 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, but 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 health organization. The w. H. O. Has parroted ccp talking points. International courts 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 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 hour of day to be better spent running bills to hold the ccp accountable. Thank you, and i yield back my time. Thank you. I now 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 stand up to the chinese and present a united front of the International Community and engage in the diplomatic mechanisms in the u. N. And elsewhere is to raise and legitimate issues with china. The United States is the only country that can gather the world around these issues. So we have to lead. These International Treaties and mechanisms are only as strong as the u. S. s commitment 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 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 overstate how harmful this is to our status as a leader around the world in human rights. History books will write about this unspeakable breaking of the u. S. 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 expound 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 can 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 gathering and would they be arrested, should i keep my because the Community Party wants to 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 trying 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 exile and leave my home place and come to america, to resume my studies, ive met incredible stories of families that pled the countries in the 1970s or under nazi rule so it comforts me in the sense to know that the 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. Ok, 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 then in the history of hong kong, certainly the biggest id ever seen. And i was in chung do on june 4, 1989 and witnesses the killing of demonstrators there in numbers never really recorded properly by history. Today an estimated 1 million uyghurs and other muslim minorities are interned in sing jong, as mr. Allred said in concentration camps. The tibetan people are denied basic human rights and 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 cornell 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 chinese 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 independent 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 model 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 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 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 . Its 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 ms. Spanberger. 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. Weve supported hong kong, 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 memoir 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 jinpings 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 interfered 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 can we ensure that hong kong is not a pawn in the strategic competition . And ill turn my question over to any of the witnesses. Well, ill stake a stab at that. Its 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 faith in democracy and i think any government that are not using these principles, there will be a check and balance on the part of the legislation and also the peoples movement. So i think its 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 everyday lives of the people of the United States and linking up union. 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. Ms. Spanberger. I would like to begin by thanking every one of our Witnesses Today for speaking with us. Particularly given the risks 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. During my time as a cia case officer, i saw the impacts of tools that i consider to be part of the dictator playbook. For example, it is common for authoritarian leaders to use the guise of National Security and the flexibility of vague laws to re press opposition and deter democratic progress. Ms. 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 iccpr, the International Covenant of political rights, shall continue to be respected in hong kong, and that potentially should serve as a guide to interpret the clauses. Unless 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, etc. But we dont know whether the hong kong courts will be able to interpret 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 overly broad definitions to capture peaceful advocacy and to prosecute people for peaceful advocacy. Thank you. In followup to the answer that you just gave, 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 affect autonomy . It really depends, first of all, on where the cases are tried. The chief executive has said and the law has said that the general rule should be 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. Final 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 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. Iam concern, as are some of my while i am concerned, as are some 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 28 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 fewer 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 because 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 likeminded countries. Thank you very much. And to all the witnesses who may be experiencing time differences with us 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. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] here as i look at our live coverage thursday. At 10 a. M. Eastern on cspan, the cdc director and National Institutes of Health Director testified for a Senate Appropriations subcommittee about the development of a coronavirus vaccine. Later in the day, more on the Coronavirus Response with the general joseph lange l, chief of the National Guard bureau. On cspan two, the senate is back at 10 a. M. Eastern to continue work on the defense programs and policy bill for fiscal year 2021. Senators will vote to advance the nomination to the white house budget director. The house select subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis holds a hearing on efforts to obtain personal protective equipment and other supplies in response to the pandemic. That gets underway at 9 a. M. Eastern. Cspan has unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and Public Policy events. Cspans Public Affairs programming on television, online, or listen on the free radio app. Be part of the National Conversation through cspans daily Washington Journal Program or our social media feeds