The US House of Representatives passed the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office Certification Act on Tuesday, which could alter the operational landscape for the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Offices (HKETO) operating in the United States as it seeks to revoke the privileges historically granted to them.
However, a closer examination reveals that this legislative action is simply another piece of political maneuvering aimed at undermining the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s economy, underpinned by a misrepresentation of the city’s sociopolitical realities.
The HKETOs play an indispensable role in fostering substantial economic, trade, investment and cultural ties between Hong Kong and the US. Situated strategically in New York City, Washington DC and San Francisco, these offices have enhanced bilateral understanding and cooperation. They have significantly contributed to the US economy through vigorous trade and investment activities. Data from the Census and Economic Information Center highlight that Hong Kong has been a significant foreign direct investment source for the US, injecting billions of dollars annually. This robust economic interdependence has supported thousands of American jobs and propelled economic growth in both regions. The role of the HKETOs extends beyond merely promoting economic and financial ties; they serve as vital conduits for cultural exchange and mutual understanding, which are essential to sustaining long-term economic relationships.
READ MORE: US Congress slammed over bill targeting HK trade offices
The economic benefits of the Hong Kong-US relationship are substantial, with the US enjoying a trade surplus of $271.5 billion with Hong Kong over the past decade, the highest among all its global trading partners. More than 1,200 American companies have established their operations in Hong Kong, leveraging its strategic position as a gateway to broader Asian markets, particularly the Chinese mainland. This significant presence underscores the critical importance of Hong Kong as a commercial hub that benefits US economic interests. However, the HKETO Certification Act threatens to undermine this mutually advantageous relationship. If the US proceeds with the goal of this legislative action — revoking the privileges for HKETOs that facilitate these beneficial bilateral exchanges — it risks damaging longstanding economic ties.
Such a move could disrupt the flow of billions of dollars in foreign direct investment from Hong Kong and lead to job losses in the US. Therefore, it is imperative that US policymakers carefully consider the financial repercussions of such legislative action that could disrupt the well-established and mutually beneficial relationship between Hong Kong and the US.
The allegations that the HKETOs function as “proxies” for the Chinese government, primarily to advance Beijing’s political agenda, are both unfounded and derogatory. Such claims starkly misrepresent the principal activities of these offices, which are centered on promoting economic and cultural ties rather than furthering any political objectives. The accusations from some US lawmakers that the HKETOs are involved in espionage or propaganda activities lack any empirical substance. They are reflective of a larger pattern of Sinophobia that skews policy debates in Washington. This trend of viewing engagements with China including the HKSAR through a lens of suspicion and fear undermines the genuine functions of the HKETOs. It impedes the objective analysis necessary for informed policymaking. It is critical that discourse surrounding the role and operations of HKETOs remains grounded in verified facts, and maintains a clear distinction between legitimate security concerns and prejudicial assumptions that serve only to distort bilateral relations and policy discussions. Therefore, it is imperative to reiterate the importance of maintaining a balanced and fact-based discourse in policy debates, to emphasize the need for objective analysis and informed decision-making.
The prevailing narrative that Hong Kong has lost its high degree of autonomy with the implementation of national security laws in the city represents a considerable oversimplification and misrepresentation of the region’s complex legal and political landscape. These laws were introduced to restore stability and peace after extended periods of violent civil unrest in 2019-20, and they bear similarities to national security frameworks found in numerous countries, including the US.
ALSO READ: US urged to stop advancing HK economic, trade office act
It is crucial to acknowledge that despite the criticisms from various quarters, the national security laws do not operate in a vacuum but are designed to function within the broader context of Hong Kong’s established legal system. Notably, the laws affirm continuing the rights and freedoms stipulated under the Basic Law and the Sino-British Joint Declaration. Detractors often overlook this aspect, focusing instead on “potential abuses” without recognizing the legal mechanisms and protections explicitly preserved within the laws’ provisions. Therefore, a more nuanced understanding of the laws’ implications and operational context within Hong Kong’s legal framework is essential to counter the prevailing narrative of Hong Kong losing its high degree of autonomy.
The legislative actions against the HKETOs represent yet another geopolitical ploy against China. Such actions are detrimental to the interests of both Hong Kong and the US and reflect a broader pattern of unwarranted interference in China’s internal affairs, showcasing a selective and often biased presentation of facts. It is imperative for US policymakers to base their decisions on accurate, unbiased information and to consider the broader implications of their actions on their own country’s international relations and economic stability. The relationship between Hong Kong and the US is too significant to be jeopardized by unfounded allegations and political rhetoric and maneuvering.
The author is a solicitor, a Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area lawyer, and a China-appointed attesting officer.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
