A pincer movement is a tactic in which forces simultaneously attack both flanks of a target. The United States is currently deploying just such a move against Hong Kong, with malign attempts to harm its economy. 

Whereas, on Sept 6, President Joe Biden issued an “updated Hong Kong business advisory”, hoping to frighten away American companies, the US House of Representatives (the House), on Sept 10, in a parallel move, voted for a bill that would, if Biden approved it, facilitate the closure of the country’s three Hong Kong Economic and Trade Offices (HKETOs).

There are currently 14 HKETOs worldwide, with those in the US being based in Washington, DC; New York; and San Francisco. They promote economic and trade relations, and also stimulate Sino-American academic exchanges. If those in the US were to close, it would be in neither side’s interest and the fallout would be detrimental to both.

The only winners would be the anti-China organizations operating in the US, including the Hong Kong Democracy Council and the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation. Each is stuffed with rabid Sinophobes (some of whom have been sanctioned by Beijing and face arrest warrants) who spend their days urging the political establishment to adopt measures to harm Hong Kong and, thereby, China. None has the wider interests of the American people at heart.

In an election year, when there are votes to be had in upping the ante over China, Congress has not only provided these hate-mongers with platforms but also lapped up their bile.

However, undermining trade relations between the US and Hong Kong would be self-defeating. In 2023, for example, US goods exports to Hong Kong rose to $27.7 billion (according to Statista), and it enjoyed a trade surplus of over $23 billion (one of its highest). Hong Kong is host to about 1,300 American companies, with an estimated 90,000 Americans calling it home.

Indeed, Hong Kong is precisely the sort of vibrant capitalist economy that the US should be encouraging, not undermining. This was why, after the American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong (AmCham) surveyed its membership in January, it was revealed that 76 percent of members regarded Hong Kong as a competitive business hub. They cited its connectivity with other cities in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (where two-thirds do business), as well as the free flow of capital and the simple tax system.

As AmCham explained earlier, Hong Kong has “a crucial role to play as an international business hub”.

However, common sense may not carry the day. Biden wants to do all he can to help his vice-president, Kamala Harris, to succeed him. He fears the Republican nominee, Donald Trump, will accuse her of being “soft on China” and that this might resonate with some voters. He could conclude that one way of rebutting Trump’s claim is to move against the HKETOs, throwing reason to the wind.

Although the closure of the HKETOs would be unfortunate for both sides, it would not be a body blow for Hong Kong. Life would go on, just as it did after Trump imposed punitive measures on the city after the enactment of the national security legislation in 2020. There are viable alternatives Hong Kong could fall back on to promote itself and advance its interests.

Quite apart from leveraging on the Chinese consulates, there are also the offices of the Trade Development Council in Chicago, Los Angeles and New York, and InvestHK could also up its game. There is no reason to suppose that the American public would imagine Hong Kong had somehow disappeared from the radar or think that constructive engagements were ending.

However, Hong Kong cannot expect much from the US, and must continue to diversify. Its membership in the Regional Cooperation Economic Partnership (RCEP) is hopefully imminent and the city will benefit from having more reliable partners. The chief executive, John Lee Ka-chiu, is forging closer ties with the Middle East and members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and an HKETO is expected to open shortly in Kuala Lumpur.

Indeed, for over a decade, ASEAN has been Hong Kong’s second-largest merchandise partner, with trade totaling $145 billion last year. In the first seven months of 2024, parent companies from within the bloc have established about 50 offices in Hong Kong, adding to the 650 already operating. Moreover, on Lee’s recent trips to six of the ASEAN countries, 90 cooperation agreements were signed in the space of a year.

The House, however, is not simply gunning for Hong Kong. It also passed bills aimed directly at Beijing; one, titled “CCP Initiative”, to curb China’s access to US intellectual property, and the other to vet international mergers and acquisitions for national security concerns. Although Biden reportedly has reservations over both bills, anything is possible with somebody prepared to play fast and loose with the future of Hong Kong and its people.

Indeed, on Sept 13, in a crude affront to global trade, he slapped fresh tariffs on Chinese exports, including clothing, solar panels and syringes, with 100 percent tariffs on Chinese electric cars.

If Harris, despite Biden’s efforts, still loses out to Trump, she will have only herself to blame. However, she must still acknowledge that he did everything possible to help her, including wading into the sewer.

If, as seems likely, Biden moves against Hong Kong, the question arises of what Beijing can do about it. His intimidatory tactics, reckless as they are, necessitate a response. The Chinese Foreign Ministry has already warned of “resolute and strong countermeasures” if he insists on a policy of confrontation (Sept 11).

When Trump ordered the closure of the Chinese consulate in Houston, Texas, in 2020, Beijing reciprocated by closing the US consulate in Chengdu. Actions have consequences, and other possible repercussions are also readily imaginable.

They might, for example, involve reassessing collaborative projects, strategic discussions, information exchanges, travel freedoms and the ambit of diplomatic activities.

Given the liberality of the US sanctions regime deployed against Chinese officials and companies, a response in kind against US-based entities and individuals involved in trying to harm Hong Kong would also be amply justified (including a criminal dimension).

Moreover, any responses would have to be meaningful, not pinpricks. As history teaches, this is the only language the global bully understands.

If, therefore, Biden promotes confrontation for debased motives of his own and tries to harm Hong Kong, he will have only himself to blame if he dislikes whatever results.      

The author is a senior counsel and law professor, and was previously the director of public prosecutions of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.