一國兩制下的中港關係（1982-2007）－從整合理論的角度分析

Abstract

一九八四年，中英聯合聲明簽署，中港關係有了新的開始。在前過渡期，中英雙方關係基本上是融洽的，中英雙方基本上是以合作為主。中共確立以一國兩制作為理論基礎，透過制定香港《基本法》實現一國兩制的對港政策，成為這個時期中共對港政策的重點。六四事件後，中共對港政策出現改變。在制度面上，《基本法》在未來香港特別行政區的制度設計上，突顯了中共的意志與對香港民主化的懷疑。六四事件確實影響了中國對香港的態度，而中國透過《基本法》樹立起未來香港特別行政區的政治架構。

香港回歸後，香港的政治氛圍與港英時代不同，隨著港人治港的政治訴求在香港落實，港人要求特區政府能對香港人民負責。然而一場亞洲金融風暴，港人積累對特區政府的不滿，北京重新審視對港政策，改採主動介入策略。香港遭遇金融風暴的襲擊，經濟受到嚴重打擊，北京及港府為了挽救香港的經濟，加速香港與中國的經濟整合成為必要的方向。

面臨亞洲金融風暴、SARS及港人對港府的信任度跌落谷底的情形下，北京方面為了挽救香港經濟以及董建華在香港的威信，毅然決定與香港簽訂CEPA，透過經濟上的整合，試圖復甦香港經濟。在CEPA的簽訂與談判過程之中，對北京與香港雙方都有利及各有考量的情形下，談判過程可謂順利。CEPA的簽訂也標示著中港雙方的經濟整合由市場自行整合擴散到了政治菁英的合作。經濟整合在雙方互蒙其利的情況下進展快速，CEPA的各項補充協定也陸續出爐，加速中港的經濟整合，亦使香港經濟逐步內地化，香港經濟已不可能脫離中國，故在經濟的整合上，中港之間可說日益密切。

回顧本文，吾人可以發現整合理論在中港整合過程中的適用性與侷限性。從整合理論的三個面向：聯邦主義、功能主義、新功能主義來看，聯邦主義主要適用在一國兩制以及《基本法》的制定過程上。從功能主義的角度來看，在整個中港的整合過程中，似乎只有前過渡期由於中英雙方的關係較為平穩，故雙方在經濟面上的合作才能擴散到政治的整合。而後過渡期與回歸之後，儘管雙方在經濟整合的步伐上從未停止，經濟的整合似乎並未有效地擴散到政治面，故從功能主義的角度來看中港整合，似乎侷限性大於適用性。最後，從新功能主義的角度來看，中共的政治菁英對於中港整合的態度較為一致，而在香港的政治菁英方面，除了民主派的人士之外，對與中共進一步整合的態度基本上是支持的，中港政治菁英的態度使中港整合更加快速，故新功能主義的適用性大於其侷限性。

最後，筆者認為，綜觀整個中港關係可說分成制度、政治與經濟整合三軌進行，制度建立、政治整合失敗但經濟整合成功，可說是自一九八○年以來中港關係的總結。未來的中港關係可能亦會如此發展，即港人對進一步與中國的經濟整合充滿期待與信心，但對政治整合則敬謝不敏。因此，對北京與香港的政治菁英而言，如何將經濟整合的成果再次擴散到政治面，重拾港人對一國兩制的信心，加速中港之間的整合進程，才是北京與香港雙方要思考的地方。In 1984, China and the United Kingdom signed the Sino-British Joint Declaration, marking a brand new start for the relationship between Chinese Mainland and Hong Kong. During the early transition period, Sino-British relationship has a sound development on the basis of corporation. Since “One Country, Two Systems” has been established as the theoretical base, the Communist Party of China has implemented this principle as the key policy towards Hong Kong through the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China. But the Event of June 4 changed the situation. Chinese government’s policy towards Hong Kong was truly affected by the event and the political frame of Hong Kong Special Administration Region, set up through the Basic Law, was an evident demonstration of the will of CPC and her doubting of Hong Kong’s democratization. After Hong Kong’s return to Chinese sovereignty, the political atmosphere in Hong Kong differed from that under British rule. With the application of the political appeal of “Hong Kong people administering Hong Kong”, people in Hong Kong required a government with responsibility. Nevertheless, Hong Kong people’s dissatisfaction against the HKSAR government broke out in the Asian Financial Crisis, which forced central government of China to review her previous policy towards Hong Kong and finally applied an active participation strategy instead. To recover Hong Kong’s economy from hard hit in the financial crisis, government of China and Hong Kong acknowledged that it was indispensable to accelerate the economy integration between Mainland and Hong Kong. Regarding the severe situation of Asian Financial Crisis, SARS outbreak and low public trust against Hong Kong government, the central government took upon herself to sign CEPA with Hong Kong aiming of rescuing Hong Kong’s economy and Dong Jianhua’s prestige by economic integration. Under the circumstances of mutual benefit and respective consideration, the whole process of negotiation and signing was indeed smooth and it also indicated that the economic integration between both sides would extend from self market integration to political corporation. With the signing of subsequent supplementary agreements on CEPA, economic integration develops quickly. As economy in Hong Kong gradually become Mainland-oriented, the economic prospects for Hong Kong have been tied more closely to the mainland in terms of economic integration. Through this article, the author concluded the applicability and limitation of Theory of Integration in the integration progress of Chinese Mainland and Hong Kong. Regarding three aspects of the Integration Theory, federalism, functionalism and neo-functionalism, it seems that federalism was mainly applied to the establishment of “One Country, Two Systems” principle and the Basic Law. From the perspective of functionalism, it indicated that the corporation between China and Britain in the early transition period of the whole process of Chinese Mainland-Hong Kong integration was quite sound which brings a further corporation from economy to politics. In the late transition period and after Hong Kong’s return sovereignty to China, although both sides kept on their economic integration steps, it hasn’t been effectively extended to the political level yet. Thus, from the view of functionalism, Chinese Mainland-Hong Kong integration was more of limitation than applicability. Finally, neo-functionalism shows that the attitude towards integration of Chinese Mainland and Hong Kong of political elites from CPC are consistent when political elites from Hong Kong support for the further integration with CPC as well, except some democratic politicians. The consistent attitude of political elites from Mainland and Hong Kong accelerated the integration of Chinese Mainland and Hong Kong, indicating more applicability than limitation in terms of neo-functionalism. In the end, the author took a comprehensive view on the relationship between Chinese Mainland and Hong Kong and divided it into three parallel aspects of integration, system, politics and economy. The author also concluded that Chinese Mainland-Hong Kong relationship after 1980 was a failure in system buildingand political integration but a success in economic integration. It may well be the same development path for the future of Mainland and Hong Kong, which means that Hong Kong people would be full of anticipation and confidence in economic integration with Mainland while getting far away from politics. Thus, it is necessary for political elites both from Beijing and Hong Kong to consider how to further extend the integration from economic to political level, re-enhance Hong Kong people’s confidence in “One Country, Two Systems” and accelerate the integration process.