Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

Three hidden stories expose Chris Patten's political machinations – from offering Knighthood to planting a “Trojan Horse”

Blog

Three hidden stories expose Chris Patten's political machinations – from offering Knighthood to planting a “Trojan Horse”
Blog

Blog

Three hidden stories expose Chris Patten's political machinations – from offering Knighthood to planting a “Trojan Horse”

2024-09-11 11:21 Last Updated At:19:02

A bunch of pro-democracy supporters, alongside a group of hawkish British politicians, held a gathering two days ago to celebrate the 80th birthday of Chris Patten, the last Governor of Hong Kong. Patten, known for his deep addiction to political manoeuvring, has never stopped doing his bits to stir unrest in Hong Kong. For instance, after the recent conviction of two Stand News executives on charges of incitement, Patten resurfaced, voicing his dissatisfaction and indulging in self-promotion. A senior media figure, who has followed Patten’s political activities for over 30 years, vividly recalls how, during his tenure as Governor of Hong Kong, Patten employed a series of cunning political tactics that left long-lasting issues for Hong Kong after the handover. This media colleague revealed three hidden stories to me, each highlighting Patten's high level of political craftiness.

The First Story: A Knighthood as Bait

The late former Executive Council member Lee Peng-fei disclosed the first secret in his memoirs. According to Lee, less than 10 days after Patten’s arrival in Hong Kong in 1992, he invited Lee to breakfast. After a round of flattery, Patten abruptly suggested recommending Lee for a knighthood. Since Lee only held a Certificate of Identity (CI) and was not a British citizen, his first reaction was disbelief: "Can I really be a knight?" Patten quickly reassured him, “No problem. I will recommend you to the Queen.”

Lee, however, suspected ulterior motives. At the time, he was leading the Co-operative Resources Centre, the precursor to the Liberal Party, which held 25 solid votes in the Legislative Council. It became clear to Lee that Patten intended to secure his support by offering him a knighthood, thereby gaining control over the Legislative Council.

Nevertheless, Lee did not take the bait. He refused to be manipulated, leading to a confrontation during an Executive Council meeting. The meeting was meant to review relations with China. Lee pointed out that most issues had already been resolved under Patten's predecessor, Sir David Wilson, but Patten and Chief Secretary David Ford disregarded him, clearly seeking to undo past agreements. Lee stood his ground, resulting in a heated and unproductive meeting.

As a result of his defiance, Lee not only lost the opportunity for a knighthood but was also removed from the Executive Council.

The Second Story: Consolidating Power

The second story revolves around how Patten skilfully restructured the core decision-making body of the Executive Council. Former Chief Secretary David Akers-Jones revealed in his memoirs that shortly after taking office, Patten decided to restructure the Executive Council to align with his new policies. Senior Executive Council member Lydia Dunn suggested that, to allow Patten to govern freely, all current members should resign. In the end, only Dunn was reappointed, and no Legislative Council members were included in the new lineup.

Akers-Jones noted that this was a calculated move by Patten to eliminate troublesome Executive Council members who had been involved in drafting the Basic Law. These individuals would have undoubtedly opposed Patten's future political agenda had they remained on the Council.

The Third Story: Luring Martin Lee into the “Trojan Horse Scheme”

Patten not only controlled the Executive Council but also strategically aligned himself with pro-democracy leaders. One of his key manoeuvrers was forming an alliance with Martin Lee, chairman of the United Democrats of Hong Kong (the precursor to the Democratic Party). This was part of Patten’s broader strategy to cultivate pro-Western forces in Hong Kong to counter Beijing after the handover, a so-called "Trojan Horse" strategy.

A senior media colleague recalls that shortly before Patten assumed his role as Governor of Hong Kong, he met in London with Martin Lee and Yeung Sum, vice-chairman of the United Democrats of Hong Kong. They discussed disbanding the Executive Council, which operated similarly to a cabinet, and replacing its members with a new group.

One week earlier, Lee Peng-fei and other members of the Co-operative Resources Centre had also visited the UK but were met with a cold reception. In stark contrast, Lee and Yeung were warmly welcomed by British government officials, indicating that they had already been identified as key players in the political strategy being formulated.

Upon Patten’s arrival in Hong Kong, he treated Martin Lee as a key ally. Patten’s vocal advocacy for "democracy" and his willingness to confront China impressed Lee, who saw Patten as a different kind of Governor. After Patten’s first policy address, Lee was even more encouraged by his rhetoric. In private, he reportedly told a British journalist, “Chris Patten has come up with a brilliant idea to bring real and full democracy to Hong Kong... the comrades were ecstatic last night!” Patten’s psychological tactics eventually drew Lee and his allies into close collaboration.

These three hidden stories reveal Patten’s skilful use of political deception, leaving Hong Kong with lasting problems. The damage caused by his actions has resulted in significant turmoil. However, after enduring these painful experiences, the public has seen through his schemes, and his influence has significantly diminished.

Nevertheless, Patten’s nature as a “political player” is unlikely to change. He doesn’t want to be left alone and will continue to engage in political games, and it remains crucial to remain vigilant against such manipulative politicians.

Lai Ting Yiu




What Say You?

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Trump's Venezuela play just gave Western progressives a masterclass in American hypocrisy.

Steve Bannon, Trump's longtime strategist, told The New York Times the Venezuela assault—arresting President Nicolás Maduro and all—stands as this administration's most consequential foreign policy move. Meticulously planned, Bannon concedes, but woefully short on ideological groundwork. "The lack of framing of the message on a potential occupation has the base bewildered, if not angry".

Trump's rationale for nabbing Maduro across international borders was drug trafficking. But here's the tell: once Maduro was in custody, Trump stopped talking about Venezuelan cocaine and started obsessing over Venezuelan oil. He's demanding US oil companies march back into Venezuela to seize control of local assets. And that's not all—he wants Venezuela to cough up 50 million barrels of oil.

Trump's Colonial Playbook

On January 6, Trump unveiled his blueprint: Venezuela releases 50 million barrels to the United States. America sells it. Market watchers peg the haul at roughly $2.8 billion.

Trump then gleefully mapped out how the proceeds would flow—only to "American-made products." He posted on social media: "These purchases will include, among other things, American Agricultural Products, and American Made Medicines, Medical Devices, and Equipment to improve Venezuela's Electric Grid and Energy Facilities. In other words, Venezuela is committing to doing business with the United States of America as their principal partner."

Trump's demand for 50 million barrels up front—not a massive volume, granted—betrays a blunt short-term goal. It's the classic imperial playbook: invade a colony, plunder its resources, sail home and parade the spoils before your supporters to justify the whole bloody enterprise. Trump isn't chasing the ideological legitimacy Bannon mentioned. He's after something more primal: material legitimacy. Show me a colonial power that didn't loot minerals or enslave labor from its colonies.

America's Western allies were silent as the grave when faced with such dictatorial swagger. But pivot the camera to Hong Kong, and suddenly they're all righteous indignation.

The British Double Standard

Recently, former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith penned an op-ed in The Times, slamming the British government for doing "nothing but issuing 'strongly worded' statements in the face of Beijing's trampling of the Sino-British Joint Declaration." He's calling on the Labour government to sanction the three designated National Security Law judges who convicted Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai of "collusion with foreign forces"—to prove that "Hong Kong's judiciary has become a farce." Duncan Smith even vowed to raise the matter for debate in the British Parliament.

The Conservatives sound principled enough. But think it through, and it's laughable. The whole world's talking about Maduro right now—nobody's talking about Jimmy Lai anymore.

Maduro appeared in US Federal Court in New York on January 6. The United States has trampled international law and the UN Charter—that's what Duncan Smith would call "American justice becoming a farce." If Duncan Smith's so formidable, why doesn't he demand the British government sanction Trump? Why not sanction the New York Federal Court judges? If he wants to launch a parliamentary debate, why not urgently debate America's crimes in invading Venezuela? Duncan Smith's double standards are chilling.

Silence on Venezuela

After the Venezuela incident, I searched extensively online—even deployed AI—but couldn't find a single comment from former Conservative leader Duncan Smith on America's invasion of Venezuela. Duncan Smith has retreated into his shell.

Duncan Smith is fiercely pro-US. When Trump visited the UK last September amid considerable domestic criticism, the opposition Conservatives didn't just stay quiet—Duncan Smith actively defended him, calling Trump's unprecedented second UK visit critically important: "if the countries that believe in freedom, democracy and the rule of law don’t unite, the totalitarian states… will dominate the world and it will be a terrible world to live in."

The irony cuts deep now. America forcibly seizes another country's oil and minerals—Trump is fundamentally an imperialist dictator. With Duncan Smith's enthusiastic backing, this totalitarian Trump has truly won.

Incidentally, the Conservative Party has completely destroyed itself. The party commanding the highest support in Britain today is the far-right Reform Party. As early as last May, YouGov polling showed Reform Party capturing the highest support at 29%, the governing Labour Party languishing at just 22%, the Liberal Democrats ranking third at 17%, and the Conservatives degraded to fourth place with 16% support.

The gutless Conservative Party members fear offending Trump, while voters flock to the Reform Party instead. The Conservatives' posturing shows they've become petty villains for nothing.

Lo Wing-hung

Recommended Articles