Hong Kong tests China’s commitment to a rules based international system

The new Hong Kong security law also threatens the territory's prosperity and character argues Maximiliaan van Lange in this op-ed for commonspace.eu

While the international community is busy dealing with the humanitarian and economic consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic Beijing last week decided to impose a new national security law on Hong Kong. The new law criminalises support for secession from China, as well as foreign interference in Hong Kong affairs, terrorism, and insulting Chinese symbols such as the flag and anthem. It also opens the prospect of Chinese security agencies operating in the territory.

Following its approval by the country's National People's Congress last week, the law is now expected to be incorporated directly into Hong Kong's Basic Law. This puts into question the guarantees for Hong Kong's autonomy that were enshrined in the Basic Law by the Chinese authorities in 1997 as part of the deal brokered with Britain. When the British renounced power in 1997, it was agreed that for 50 years, until 2047, Hong Kong would not be subject to the same laws as China in an arrangement referred to as "One country, two systems". Many in the international community consider that by introducing the new security law China has broken the 1997 agreement. The introduction of the new law is therefore seen as yet another Chinese challenge to a rules-based international system.

Given the ban on public demonstrations in Hong Kong because of Covid-19, Beijing hoped to quietly push through the security law without too much opposition in the territory itself, and avoiding a stand-off with the international community, particularly the United States (US). However, last Friday (29 May) President Donald Trump ordered his government to withdraw trade and other concessions that the US had granted Hong Kong because of its special status. The Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, stated in an interview with Fox News (31 May) that President Trump will take steps against Chinese and Hong Kong officials directly involved in the administration of the new law, and that a stricter supervision policy on Chinese students in the US will be introduced. The US and Hong Kong enjoyed visa-free travel, and import and export duties were low. This helped make, Hong Kong one of the most important business centres in Southeast Asia. The revocation of the concessions will have significant consequences for the territory. China itself sees American sanctions as nothing but a show of political posturing.

The international community has a keen interest in Hong Kong's prosperity and stability. It is a major trading hub. In 2019 Hong Kong's exports amounted to $535.7 billion and its imports to $578.6 billion. Hong Kong is a major export market for EU products. The US has 1,300 companies and about 85,000 US citizens currently live in Hong Kong. Compared to China's gross domestic product (GDP), which was worth $14200 billion in 2019, Hong Kong, with 7.4 million citizens accounted for $365.10 billion of GDP. Currently, 60 to 70 per cent of all Chinese foreign direct investments go through Hong Kong and many Chinese companies are listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The new situation is likely to very negatively impact the commercial interests of Western businesses who have invested heavily in the territory, and of westerners who live there. The restrictions on Hong Kong's civil liberties put in question its autonomy, and the "One country, two systems" system that has enabled it to become so prosperous, so the new law is also seen as detrimental to the very character of the territory, and its prosperity.

For the moment, the US appears to have taken the lead in responding to the new law, and it has secured the support of the United Kingdom (UK), Australia and Canada. In a joint response to the new Beijing Security Act, the four countries stated that the territory has "flourished as a bastion of freedom" and that the international community has a "substantial and lasting interest" in Hong Kong's prosperity and stability. They said that the new law threatens confidence in the Chinese government, and will undermine international cooperation. The four Western governments added that the new security law is in direct conflict with China's international obligations under the principles of the legally-binding, Sino-British Joint Declaration that was deposited with the United Nations on 27 May 1985.

Europe has so far reacted cautiously to developments in Hong Kong. The High Representative's statement on behalf of the EU, issued on 29 May 2020, declared the EU's "grave concern" about the situation and said that it will "raise" Hong Kong as part of its ongoing dialogue with China. German Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, who will take over the rotating presidency of the EU on 1 July, and High Representative Joseph Borrell, have already stated that the EU will not follow the US in imposing trade sanctions against China.  

Many consider that the EU's response on Hong Kong has been too weak. As a self-proclaimed defender of freedom and democracy, the EU has a responsibility to provide a strong response to ensure Hong Kong's autonomy. Only Sweden asked for sanctions against China during the meeting of the European Ministers of Foreign Affairs on Friday (29 May). But it is also possible that the EU is for the moment keeping its powder dry. With a whole range of issues on which China is now at odds with the rest of the international community - ranging from trade to territorial disputes in the South China Sea and the Himalayas, China's power projection in Africa and the Pacific, and repression of dissent inside China itself - there are going to be plenty of problems on which a stand will need to be taken, and appropriate action executed.

It is clear however that it is necessary for the EU to quickly update its China policy to address the new realities to reflect considerations beyond trade, and to address serious geo-strategic challenges coming from China, many of which have been around for some time, but which the coronavirus pandemic has somehow made more starkly clear.

source: Maximiliaan van Lange is a Research Associate on Safety, Security and Transparency in the EU and beyond at LINKS Europe and currently studies History at Leiden University.
Photo: Hong Kong general view (archive picture)
The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners

 

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Russia adds pressure on Armenia ahead of key elections; recalls Ambassador in Yerevan for consultations

Russia adds pressure on Armenia ahead of key elections; recalls Ambassador in Yerevan for consultations

Ahead of key parliamentary elections,scheduled to be held in Armenia on Sunday, 7 June, Russia continues to attempt to put pressure on the Armenian Government led by prime minister Nikol Pashinyan. On 30 May, Russia recalled its Ambassador to Yerevan for consultations. A terse statement, published on the website of the Russian Foreign Ministry, said, "The Ambassador of the Russian Federation to the Republic of Armenia , S.P. Kopyrkin, has been summoned to Moscow for consultations in connection with the steps taken by the Armenian leadership to move closer to the European Union, which are detrimental to cooperation within the EAEU." This followed a statement issued the day before, by the leaders of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) that challenges the Armenian trajectory towards approximating to the European Union. Vladimir Putin is undertood to have personally pushed the other four EAEU leaders to issue the statement, which said: "Taking into account the significant risks to the economic security of the member states of the Eurasian Economic Union (hereinafter referred to as the Union) arising in connection with the preparation of the Republic of Armenia for accession to the European Union, as well as the need to prevent the associated damage to the member states of the Union: decided that the members of the Eurasian Intergovernmental Council from the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic and the Russian Federation will report at the next meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council in December 2026 on the possible consequences of the suspension of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union with respect to the Republic of Armenia. We share the position on the need to hold a national referendum in the Republic of Armenia as soon as possible on joining the European Union or continuing to be part of the Eurasian Economic Union."
Editor's choice
News
The leaders of the states of the Eurasian Economic Union issued a tough statement warning fellow-member state Armenia of the consequences of its desire to join the European Union.

The leaders of the states of the Eurasian Economic Union issued a tough statement warning fellow-member state Armenia of the consequences of its desire to join the European Union.

The leaders of the states of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEAS) issued a tough statement warning fellow-member state Armenia of the consequences of its desire to join the European Union. The stark, sharply worded,  warning, comes days before crucial parliamentary elections in Armenia, scheduled for 7 June. The full statement said, “We, the Presidents of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic and the Russian Federation, Taking into account the actions of the Republic of Armenia aimed at joining the European Union, including the approval in 2025 by the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia and the signing by the President of the Republic of Armenia of the Law of the Republic of Armenia "On the Start of the Process of Accession of the Republic of Armenia to the European Union", as well as the confirmation by the European Union of the European aspirations of the Government of the Republic of Armenia, expressed in the joint declaration following the first Armenia-European Union summit, adopted on 5 May 2026, Taking into account the significant risks to the economic security of the member states of the Eurasian Economic Union (hereinafter referred to as the Union) arising in connection with the preparation of the Republic of Armenia for accession to the European Union, as well as the need to prevent the associated damage to the member states of the Union: decided that the members of the Eurasian Intergovernmental Council from the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic and the Russian Federation will report at the next meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council in December 2026 on the possible consequences of the suspension of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union with respect to the Republic of Armenia. We share the position on the need to hold a national referendum in the Republic of Armenia as soon as possible on joining the European Union or continuing to be part of the Eurasian Economic Union. Astana, May 29, 2026” A meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council was held in Astana, Kazakhstan, on May 29, 2026. The meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council in a restricted format was attended by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko , Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev , Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov , Armenian Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan, and Chairman of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission Bakytzhan Sagintayev. From the Russian side, the meeting was also attended by Deputy Prime Minister and member of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission Alexey Overchuk and Presidential Aide Yury Ushakov . The heads of delegations from EAEU observer states, including President of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev , Vice President of Cuba Salvador Valdés Mesa, Minister of Industry, Mines, and Trade of Iran Mohammad Atabak, and CIS Secretary General Sergei Lebedev, joined the expanded meeting . Following the meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council, a number of documents were signed .

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)