The only time I visited Hong Kong was in 1987. This included a side trip by train into China, up to Guangzhou (formerly Canton) on the Pearl River. It was indeed a tale of two cities: the rundown and dowdy Communist Chinese city versus the bustling and dynamic capitalist powerhouse.
I found it odd that businesses were investing so much money in the gleaming Hong Kong skyscrapers and remember thinking cynically at the time, "don't they realise they will be taken over by China in 10 years? They must have great faith in that government's promise for 'two systems in one country".
The agreement with the UK, the departing colonial power, was that the people of Hong Kong could retain their democratic system of government and the western rule of law as part of China, for at least 50 years.
In 2019, this came under threat when the Chinese government tried to impose some draconian mainland laws on the people of Hong Kong. So much for the 50-year agreement due to expire in 2047. They were reneging after only 23 years.
The people's revolt was dramatic. The images of the regular widespread protests by thousands of Hong Kong's citizens were captured most nights on our TV screens, throughout most of 2019.
This year, during the chaos of the pandemic, China has tightened its grip on the former British colony by announcing its harsh plans to impose Communist Chinese law on Hong Kong. This threatens to destroy the precious freedoms that the people of this island have long enjoyed.
Here Beijing has form.
Still etched deeply in the world's memory is the brutal Tiananmen Square crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in 1989.
This led to the massacre of thousands of students, according to some estimates. This atrocity took place in front of the great hall of the people in Beijing. In response, prime minister Bob Hawke offered asylum to 40,000 Chinese students who were studying in Australia at the time.
Thirty years on, it seems that a hard-line approach to dissent still prevails. China's legislature has approved a plan to 'suppress subversion, secession, terrorism and seemingly any acts that might threaten national security' in the semi-autonomous city.
There are reports that a crackdown will take place when the law comes into effect in September. In response, there has been an immediate pushback in Hong Kong with protesters again taking to the streets.
Now international tensions over this issue have risen dramatically. The British have blindsided the Chinese government by offering new passports to its former Hong Kong citizens. A ticket to flee. British PM Boris Johnson may grant up to three million Hong Kong residents British passports and a path to citizenship. This raises the spectre of a "brain drain" from the Asian financial centre. China is not happy.
Several Five Eyes nations (UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the US) pointedly accuse China of breaking the legal promises it had made to Britain to reclaim Hong Kong in 1997. The US has signalled that it is likely to end some of its special trade and economic relations with Hong Kong because of China's move.
Hong Kong residents who fear persecution already have a pathway into Australia if they meet our refugee criteria. But will the Chinese authorities let them leave the island?
The US Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (Republican) said, "the US response should mirror those of other democracies who have opened their doors to Hong Kongers fleeing oppression".
Australia has responded by offering visas to up to 10,000 Hong Kong workers and students for five years. They then become eligible for permanent residency. Part of this bold and savvy move is the Morrison government's decision to offer incentives to entire companies and their staff to migrate.
China's reaction has been furious, and tensions between our countries have significantly escalated - again. The response in Australia seems to be that we have struck the right balance.
Hong Kong residents who fear persecution, already have a pathway into Australia if they meet our refugee criteria. But will the Chinese authorities let them leave the island?
Will there be a replay of the authoritarian repression that the world saw in East Germany in the 1960s, where a wall was built to contain citizens seeking to flee Communism to the West?
This time, Chinese authorities will only need to stop departing Hong Kong residents at the local seaport or airport. If this happens, what will be the next move by the world's democracies?
Where will the line in the sand be drawn against the Chinese repression of Hong Kong's residents?
