But it only sounds that way if the fundamental purpose of Beijing's grand plan for Hong Kong is misunderstood. When the People's Republic of China resumed sovereignty over the former British colony, it wanted nothing less than to preserve the colonial nature of its new acquisition with all the implication of subservience that this entails.

I have never doubted this was the plan and in the year following the handover I wrote a book called Hong Kong: China's new colony. The basic contention of the book was criticized in some quarters. But the putative appointment of Sir Donald to lead the SAR provides ample evidence of the mainland's desire to preserve its version of a colonial system.

The mainland might have saved a lot of trouble by appointing a former British colonial official as the first new leader. But Anson Chan, the obvious candidate, showed worrisome signs of independent-mindedness. In any case, there was a good argument to be made for starting with someone who did not come directly from the old colonial circle.

The idea became more attractive when Beijing decided it would name the top post in government as being chief executive in keeping with the policy of stressing that Hong Kong was ``an economic city, not a political city.''

Tung Chee-hwa had the credentials that impressed the old men in Zhongnanhai. He was a businessman unlikely to step on the toes of their other powerful business allies. He was a firm believer in autocracy and a paid-up patriot.

Moreover he was not Cantonese, a big plus to the people in the north who have an instinctive distrust of southerners.

Even the most fervent critics of the central government underestimated what a blunder it was when Tung was anointed by that famous handshake with the former Communist Party boss Jiang Zemin. The extent of his blundering incompetence became clear to his sponsors when they realised that his stewardship was giving rise to an unprecedented degree of political activism in Hong Kong.

The old men believed in the weary old myth that the people of the SAR were only really interested in making money and had no real desire for representative government. After all, they figured, the former colonial regime had spent 150 years ruling autocratically and only encountered minor resistance to this form of administration.

History will have a tough time judging whether Tung's incompetence stimulated the demands for democracy or whether they would have come without his intervention.

But the view from Beijing was that, whatever prompted this dangerous outpouring of support for the one thing that really frightens the Communist Party, there was an urgent need to get back to the placid days of British rule.

Who better to perform this task than a knight of the realm?

Unlike Tung, Tsang knows how the system operates and even appreciates the give-and-take necessary to make the upper echelons run smoothly. In opting for Tsang, it has opted for conservatism. It does not want to experiment with another businessman, nor even with someone like Leung Chun-ying, a lifetime Beijing supporter.

In essence, the selection of Tsang is a cry from the heart to return to the old colonial days of civic calm and strong government.

In Tsang, Beijing has found the perfect colonial official. He is a stickler for status and respects hierarchy. To prove himself acceptable to the new masters he has had to be even more humble and subservient than was deemed necessary in his dealings with the old masters. And Tsang is a true believer in the idea that the government knows best and that the people will discover this wisdom in due course. He does not have the self-doubt that politicians carry on their backs when plunging into affairs where the state should be wary of plunging.

It is, for example, no coincidence that he is determined to push through plans for the West Kowloon cultural district project in the face of widespread opposition. Like other life-long bureaucrats he does not understand that public dismay over a government plan may not merely be based on perversity but on a genuine desire for something better.

Tsang understands how big bureaucracies work and what it takes to survive in the belly of these turbulent beasts. He understood how to prosper under the British and made it his business to learn how to do the same under the new masters.

This ability to survive and prosper is admirable in some ways, but it is not a quality that is guaranteed to satisfy the needs of a sophisticated society with legitimate aspirations for involvement in public affairs.

If Tsang believes that he will succeed merely by pleasing his rather demanding masters in Beijing, he might get some nasty shocks from the people of Hong Kong who have an entirely different set of objectives.

vines@netvigator.com

Stephen Vines is a journalist and entrepreneur