BEIJING — It is a common riposte among those who oppose the pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong, especially here in mainland China: Where were the champions of universal suffrage during the many decades that Britain denied Hong Kong residents the right to govern themselves?


北京——反對香港親民主抗議活動的人，普遍會以這個問題還擊：在英國剝奪香港民眾自治權的那麼多年裡，普選衛士身在何處？這種反問在中國內地尤為常見。



“In 150 years, the country that now poses as an exemplar of democracy gave our Hong Kong compatriots not one single day of it,” People’s Daily, the Communist Party mouthpiece, said in a recent editorial. “Only in the 15 years before the 1997 handover did the British colonial government reveal their ‘secret’ longing to put Hong Kong on the road to democracy.”


「150多年間，自詡民主典範的英國沒有給過香港同胞哪怕一天的實在民主，」共產黨的喉舌《人民日報》在前不久的一篇評論文章中說。「直到1982年至1997年香港回歸前的15年間，港英政府抱着『不可告人』之心開啟了香港民主的『超速發展』之路。」



But documents recently released by the National Archives in Britain suggest that beginning in the 1950s, the colonial governors who ran Hong Kong repeatedly sought to introduce popular elections but abandoned those efforts in the face of pressure by Communist Party leaders in Beijing.


但英國國家檔案館(National Archives)最近公開的一些文件顯示，從上世紀50年代開始，管治香港的殖民總督多次尋求推行民眾選舉，但迫於北京的中共領導人的壓力，最終放棄了那些努力。



The documents, part of a batch of typewritten diplomatic dispatches requested by reporters from two Hong Kong newspapers, reveal that Chinese leaders were so opposed to the prospect of a democratic Hong Kong that they threatened to invade should London attempt to change the status quo.


這些用打字機打出的文件，是香港兩家報紙的記者請求公開的一批外交檔案的一部分。檔案顯示，中國領導人極力反對香港實行民主的前景，以至於威脅稱，如果倫敦試圖改變現狀，就會入侵香港。





“We shall not hesitate to take positive action to have Hong Kong, Kowloon and New Territories liberated,” Liao Chengzhi, a senior Chinese official in charge of Hong Kong affairs, was reported to have said in 1960, referring to the areas under British administration that would later be returned to China.


檔案顯示，主管香港事務的中國高官廖承志曾在1960年表示，「我們將毫不猶豫採取積極行動，解放香港、九龍和新界。」他提到的這些地區當時處於英國的管治下，現已歸還中國。



Another document recounts a meeting two years earlier, during which Premier Zhou Enlai told a British military officer that any attempt to introduce even a modicum of self-governance to Hong Kong would be viewed as “a very unfriendly act” and a “conspiracy,” one he suggested would be seen as a ploy to set the colony on a path to independence.


另一份文件記述了早前兩年的一次會議。在那次會議上，周恩來總理告訴英國的一名軍官，任何在香港引入哪怕一點點自治的嘗試，都會被視作「非常不友善的舉動」和「陰謀」。周恩來表示，這種做法會被認為是讓香港走上獨立道路的手段。



The threats had the desired effect. Britain made little effort to introduce electoral democracy in Hong Kong in the decades that followed.


這些威脅達到了預期的效果。在隨後的幾十年裏，英國沒有為在香港引入選舉民主做出多少努力。



In addition to confirming that China’s opposition to a democratic Hong Kong began almost a half-century earlier than was commonly known, the documents, coupled with published accounts of former colonial officials, also highlight how Beijing’s vehemence intensified in the early 1980s as the two sides began discussing Hong Kong’s future. Then in the early 1990s, when Chris Patten, the last colonial governor, began aggressively advocating limited elections for the territory, Beijing’s opposition became more openly strident.


除了證實中國最初反對香港實行民主的時間，比廣為人知的早了幾乎半個世紀之外，這些文件連同前殖民地官員已經公開出版的敘述，也突顯出隨着上世紀80年代初，雙方開始討論香港的未來，北京的態度變得愈發激烈。後來到上世紀90年代初，最後一任香港總督彭定康(Chris Patten)開始大力倡導在香港實行有限選舉時，北京的公開反對變得更加強硬。



In the end, Mr. Patten ignored China’s claims that democracy would beget chaos and gave Hong Kong residents the right to elect 30 members of what was then a 60-member Legislative Council. The move so infuriated Lu Ping, the senior Chinese official then in charge Hong Kong affairs, that he called Mr. Patten “a man to be condemned through the history of Hong Kong,” according to newspaper accounts at the time.


最後，彭定康無視中國稱民主會招致混亂的論調，賦予了香港民眾選舉30名立法局議員的權利。當時的立法局共有60名成員。當時的新聞報道稱，時任香港事務主管的中國高官魯平對此舉感到極度憤怒，稱彭定康「在歷史上，要成為香港的千古罪人」。



Today’s critics in Beijing are correct, however, in suggesting that Britain, which took over Hong Kong in 1842, came late to the democracy game.


今天北京的批評人士稱，英國在1842年就接管香港，然而在民主的遊戲裏卻姍姍來遲。這一點，北京的批評人士說對了。





Britain’s democratic impulses in the 1950s came after it had been ejected from India and the country was trying to head off revolts in several colonies. “It was at a time when Britain was introducing democracy in many of its colonies around the world, and the idea was Hong Kong should be treated the same,” said Danny Gittings, an assistant professor in law at the University of Hong Kong.


在上世紀50年代推行民主的衝動之前，英國已被趕出了印度，並且正在努力阻止多個殖民地的反抗。「當時，英國正在全世界許多英屬殖民地推行民主，當時的觀點是，對香港也應該一視同仁，」香港大學法學院副教授賈廷思(Danny Gittings)說。



After the rebuff from Beijing, Britain did not make a concerted push for popular elections until the 1990s, when it was on its way out. Britain hoped democracy would calm a citizenry anxious about their impending return to Communist China, historians say, and ensure the stability of British investments.


遭到北京的拒絕後，英國直到上世紀90年代，香港即將脫離英國管治時，才取得共識推動民眾選舉。歷史學家稱，英國希望民主能讓香港民眾鎮靜下來，並確保英國投資的穩定。當時香港人對於回到實行共產主義的中國治下感到焦慮不安。



In his public statements at the time, Mr. Patten said he thought Hong Kong residents deserved a role in local governance. “People in Hong Kong are perfectly capable of taking a greater share in managing their own affairs in a way that is responsible, mature, restrained, sensible,” he told reporters in 1992.


在當時公開發表的言論中，彭定康曾表示，他認為香港人理應在本地的治理中扮演一定角色。他在1992年對記者說，「香港人完全能夠以負責、成熟、剋制和理性的方式，在更大程度上參與自身事務的管理。」



It was Mr. Patten’s recent defense of the protesters’ goals that prompted the People’s Daily attack. The newspaper’s editorial acknowledged his role in promoting democracy in the 1990s but said his aim was to create “a not inconsiderable gulf between the mainland and Hong Kong.”


彭定康最近為抗議者的訴求所做的辯護，招致了《人民日報》的攻擊。該報的評論承認他上世紀90年代在推動民主方面起到的作用，但又提出，他的目的是製造在內地與香港之間製造「不小的隔閡」。



The recent drumbeat of commentaries in the Chinese news media that have sought to shape the historical narrative may have inadvertently strengthened the resolve of many Hong Kong activists, who say such heavy-handed efforts remind them of the political and press freedoms they are fighting for, liberties absent in the rest of China.


為了塑造歷史敘事，中國媒體最近發表了大量評論文章，這可能恰恰增強了許多香港活動人士的決心。他們表示，這種高壓手段讓他們想起了自己為之奮鬥的政治自由和新聞自由。這些自由在中國其他地方都不存在。



“I was personally very stunned that Beijing could unabashedly tell lies in the face of so many Hong Kong people, because Hong Kong people can vividly remember the democracy struggle between the former British government and the Chinese government,” said Ming Sing, a political scientist at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.


香港科技大學的政治學者成名(Ming Sing)說，「北京面對這麼多香港人無恥地說謊，我個人非常震驚，因為香港人清楚地記得過去的英國政府和中國政府之間就民主展開的角力。」

 





The Chinese never made good on their threat to invade, in part because they hoped the “one country, two systems” model they eventually adopted for Hong Kong would encourage peaceful reunification with Taiwan, the self-governed island China claims as its own. Beijing also had no interest in disrupting Hong Kong’s wildly successful economy, a vital outlet for foreign trade and hard currency at a time when China was largely isolated from the industrialized world.


中國並未兌現出兵香港的威脅，其中一個原因是，他們希望「一國兩制」的模式可以促成台灣的和平統一。台灣是一個自治島嶼，中國聲稱對其擁有主權。北京也沒有興趣破壞香港極為成功的經濟。在中國內地基本上隔絕於工業化國家的當時，香港是從事外貿和獲得硬通貨的重要渠道。



“We want to get Hong Kong back in a good state and not in a state of ruin,” is how Mr. Liao put it in the early 1960s.


「我們希望收回的，是一個發展良好的香港，而不是一片廢土，」上世紀60年代初，廖承志如是說。



Despite its apparent qualms about democracy on its doorstep, in 1990, Beijing committed to the aim of electing Hong Kong’s leader by universal suffrage after it regained sovereignty. “How Hong Kong develops democracy in the future is a matter entirely within the sphere of Hong Kong’s autonomy, and the central government cannot intervene,”People’s Daily quoted Lu Ping as saying in 1993.


儘管對在家門口實行民主明顯心存疑慮，但北京在1990年承諾，在收回香港主權後，將通過普選產生香港領導人。《人民日報》1993年援引魯平的話說，「將來香港如何發展民主，完全是香港自治權範圍內的事，中央政府不會幹涉。」



But in 1997, not long after the handover, China scrapped Mr. Patten’s newly introduced legislative elections. Faced with too much democracy, China simply “set up a new kitchen,” as Mr. Lu had earlier suggested the Chinese might do.


但在1997年，香港移交後不久，中國就廢除了彭定康新推行的立法會選舉。面對太多民主，中國乾脆「另起爐竈」，正如魯平早些時候暗示的中國可能的做法。



Since then, however, direct elections have been restored for 35 representatives, besting Mr. Patten’s system by five seats. (Another 35 members of the Legislative Council are chosen by professional or special interest groups).


然而此後，直接選舉的議員達到35名，比彭定康的規定還增加了五人。（立法會的另外35名成員由職業團體或特殊利益團體遴選。）



Likewise, Beijing argues that its promise to allow Hong Kong residents to elect their leader, the chief executive, by universal suffrage starting in 2017 is more democracy than Britain ever offered.


同樣，北京還指出，它承諾允許香港人從2017年開始，通過普選產生領導人的做法，也比英國統治香港時更為民主。