Editor’s note: Following is the second of a series focused on the “one country, two systems” principle.

When the implementation of “one country, two systems” ran into obstacles, some people wondered why “one country, two systems” was chosen in the first place and whether there had been other options in terms of system arrangements for Hong Kong after China resumed sovereign rule over the city.

Undoubtedly, there was sufficient jurisprudential grounds for China to implement “one country, one system” in Hong Kong upon resuming the exercise of sovereign rule over the city in 1997.

Choosing “one country, two systems” over “one country, one system”, according to Deng Xiaoping, was a political decision “in full respect of Hong Kong’s history and reality”. The decision was accepted by all parties concerned because its original intent of preserving Hong Kong’s unique advantages as much as possible would let the city maintain its prosperity and stability after its return to China

Sovereignty is always accompanied by jurisdiction. Ever since China resumed the exercise of sovereign rule over Hong Kong, its central government has been authorized by the Constitution to exercise overall jurisdiction over the SAR. As the Communist Party of China is the sole governing party of the country, it is authorized by the Constitution to exercise overall jurisdiction over Hong Kong as it does over the rest of the country. That means China has every right to introduce the socialist system in Hong Kong if it chooses to replace the capitalist system and lifestyle under the British rule with its own socialist system and lifestyle after the resumption of sovereign rule over Hong Kong. A sovereign state can adopt any social system at its own discretion because it is a universal principle recognized by the international community.

However, the central government refused to do so. Instead, it set up a Special Administrative Region in Hong Kong and bestowed it a high degree of autonomy that allows Hong Kong people to govern Hong Kong. For this purpose, the National People’s Congress enacted the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, which prescribes the relationships between the central government and the SAR, defines its autonomy, and promises to keep this framework unchanged for 50 years.

Choosing “one country, two systems” over “one country, one system”, according to Deng Xiaoping, was a political decision “in full respect of Hong Kong’s history and reality”.

The decision was accepted by all parties concerned because its original intent of preserving Hong Kong’s unique advantages as much as possible would let the city maintain its prosperity and stability after its return to China.

Li Ruihuan, former chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), once told Hong Kong and Macao members of the CPPCC a story about a used teapot. An elderly woman brought a used purple clay teapot that had been with her family for over a century to the flea market to sell for a fraction of one silver tael. An experienced antique buyer saw a thick layer of residue built up inside the teapot and knew it was worth much more than her asking price (in ancient China, people believed the older a purple teapot is and the more residue it contains, the better the tea in it tastes). So he offered almost 10 times more in silver for the teapot and asked the elderly woman to wait for him while he went home to get more silver because he did not have enough on him. While waiting for the buyer, the elderly woman decided to make the teapot look better by thoroughly cleaning it up inside and out, much to the horror of the buyer. The story was Li’s way of showing how much the central authorities value what Hong Kong has to offer and why Beijing chose to implement “one country, two systems” in the SAR.

Hong Kong had been separated from the motherland for so long, it had a hard time getting used to being a part of the family, given how different the motherland was from the United Kingdom. That was why the great majority of Hong Kong residents wanted the existing social system and lifestyle to remain unchanged, as did the central government. Back in the 1980s and 1990s, Hong Kong was already a regional center of international finance, trade and shipping with its own unique business environment, complete with the rule of law and worldwide connections unmatched by its mainland counterparts. Had China chosen “one country, one system” for Hong Kong, the latter would have become just another mainland city, losing its splendor as the “Pearl of the East” for good. Hong Kong, thanks to its unique advantages as a free port and international financial center in the region, has played an irreplaceable role in the country’s reform and opening-up in the past 42 years. Keeping the existing social system and lifestyle would not only allow Hong Kong to remain prosperous and stable but continue playing its irreplaceable role in the nation’s peaceful development. In Deng Xiaoping’s words, “one country, two systems” is “a very important part” of socialism with Chinese characteristics.

The author is a veteran current affairs commentator. 

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.