Beijing expresses "strong dissatisfaction" with G7 on Hong Kong

Geng Shuang expresses opposition to a statement made by the leaders


Afp August 27, 2019
G7. PHOTO: ONLINE

Beijing on Tuesday voiced "strong dissatisfaction" with a joint statement issued by the G7 leaders, who backed Hong Kong's autonomy and called for calm after months of civil unrest.

"We express our strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition to the statement made by the leaders of the G7 Summit on Hong Kong affairs," said foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang at a press briefing in Beijing.

G7 leaders meeting in France on Monday backed Hong Kong's autonomy as laid out in a 1984 agreement between Britain and China, and called for calm in the protest-hit city.

Iran president makes case for talks as G7 gambit slammed

But Beijing has repeatedly accused foreign governments of interfering over Hong Kong, and Geng said Tuesday that the G7 was "meddling" and "harbouring evil intentions".

"We have repeatedly stressed that Hong Kong's affairs are purely China's internal affairs and that no foreign government, organization or individual has the right to intervene," he said.

Hong Kong has been wracked by more than two months of protests over an attempt by its Beijing-backed government to pass an extradition bill that opponents saw as a huge dent in Hong Kong's autonomy. It has since morphed into a wider call for greater democratic freedoms.

In the G7 statement, the leaders of Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States called for calm in the tense city.

Brazil rejects G7 aid to fight Amazon fires

"The G7 reaffirms the existence and the importance of the 1984 Sino-British agreement on Hong Kong and calls for avoiding violence," it said.

China has previously accused former colonial power Britain of interfering in the semi-autonomous Chinese territory, which the British handed over to China in 1997.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ