The UK government, by offering BN(O) passport holders from Hong Kong an “easier” way to obtain British resident status or citizenship, has not only changed the nature of BN(O) passports against its own promise in the Sino-British Joint Declaration but also interfered in China’s internal affairs in violation of established norms of international relations. The unjustifiable move is without question aimed at dividing Hong Kong society.

Historically speaking, alarmed by an influx of “citizens of the UK and colonies (CUKC)” from British colonies in Africa and Asia in the mid-1960s, the UK government passed the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1968 and Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1971 to deny prospective immigrants the right of entry in Britain the CUKC’s originally had. As a result Hong Kong residents with CUKC travel documents at that time also lost the right of entry in the UK, presumably to prevent them from adding to the burden of the British Empire. 

After the UK and China signed the Sino-British Joint Declaration in 1984, the Privy Council of the UK passed the Hong Kong (British Nationality) Order 1986, establishing the British National (Overseas) legal status, which is by no means equal to UK citizenship. Truth is BNO has never been regarded as proof of British citizenship but only a scam to fool Hong Kong residents. And it is defined clearly in the Joint Declaration as a mere travel document.

The UK government absolutely loves wielding the Joint Declaration as a magic wand whenever it needs an excuse to interfere with China’s handling of Hong Kong affairs but has not bothered explaining why it changed the nature of BN(O) passports in violation of the Joint Declaration. The move is nothing but a double-standard take on established bilateral agreements between sovereigns and another show of hypocrisy. It proves the UK government cannot be trusted to honor the promises it has made to another country, particularly China, as demonstrated in its betrayal of the Joint Declaration.

To the UK government, the introduction of BN(O) passports before Hong Kong’s return to China is never about justice or the interest of Hong Kong residents. It is meant to benefit the UK only. It was defined as just a travel document because the UK government had to make sure it would never lead to an influx of immigrants from Hong Kong and consequent objection from British public. Now its legal use has been changed but the purpose remains serving the interest of the UK economically as well as politically.

The UK government is betting on the influx of both capital and talent, along with their consumption expenses in the UK, which would give a boost to the country’s sagging economy beaten by the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit. At the very least, the expected influx of Hong Kong immigrants would provide British employers with an alternative supply of cheap labor after they can no longer avail of cheap labor from EU. 

The British government is playing the BN(O) card only to make some money out of the applicants and expects about 120,000-150,000 BN(O) passport holders from Hong Kong to move to Britain a year under the scheme initially. It even predicts the number could rise to 250,000-320,000 a year within five years, contributing billions of pounds a year to the British economy. 

But the UK has no qualms about treating the expected new immigrants as second class citizens. According to the “5+1” formula offered by the UK government for BN(O) passport holders from Hong Kong to obtain British citizenship, the latter must live in the UK for at least six years continuously, but without free access to social welfare including national health services. They have to bear all living expenses even if they can not find a job, which may cost a family of four 3 million pounds to live in the UK for six years, other spending not included. Many people believe this requirement alone can squeeze a middle-class family dry financially, even though the UK government has not promised British citizenship after six years or no termination of the scheme halfway. Of course, there is no guarantee the “5+1” formula would remain effective after Boris Johnson and his conservative government’s term in office ends, either.

That means BN(O) passport holders from Hong Kong are not guaranteed UK citizenship even if they manage to live in the country for six years or longer entirely at their own expense and could be kicked out empty-handed. Given its utilitarian and opportunist track record in handling former subjects of the British Empire, the UK government simply cannot be trusted to keep its own words for six years. Besides, it can always change course on grounds of voter pressure or economic consideration. All those BN(O) passport holders interested in jumping onboard the “5+1” ship had better think everything over at least twice before taking the leap of faith/fate.

Frankly, attempting to obtain UK citizenship through a 6-year gamble is not a smart move for BN(O) passport holders from an economic perspective. It is public knowledge that Britain is only a shadow of its past glory in terms of comprehensive national power, not to mention the profit drain from Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic, or there is no point for the UK government to try to feed its economy with immigrant “blood”. 

The UK government used the promulgation of the National Security Law in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region as an excuse to play the BN(O) card in violation of the Joint Declaration, but does Britain not have a national security law of its own? Does the UK allow its people to undermine its own national security? The truth is, London has been dancing to the tune of Washington, along with other members of Five Eyes, in carrying out Washington’s geopolitical strategy against China; and it is still in the mood even though Washington’s toughest China hawks like Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo have departed.

Not surprisingly, some people cannot wait for another “exodus” of Hong Kong residents to materialize, just like the one before China resumed the exercise of sovereignty over the city in 1997, when many misinformed locals emigrated overseas only to regret it soon afterward. Many of those people have returned to Hong Kong, including some 300,000 from Canada alone. And don’t forget how much better and stronger China has become since then. 

The author is a current affairs commentator. 

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.