Big Lychee, Various Sectors

If Beijing imposes anti-sanctions laws in Hong Kong, it could harm the city as an international corporate hub. It could also lead to perhaps the ultimate test of how the CCP values Hong Kong’s business model versus various iterations of national security: Mainland-style Internet restrictions. It is one respect in which Hong Kong is still a glaring anomaly. Bitter Winter on China’s recent actions against VPNs…

Many Chinese users use them to watch international entertainment services, but their true importance goes beyond that. Without these tools, it becomes impossible to read uncensored news, access foreign academic resources, or visit websites blocked by the Great Firewall, including “Bitter Winter.” 

Recently, a series of internal notices shared online and collected by “China Digital Times” has raised concerns that these ladders might soon be forcibly removed. One document from a regional content-delivery provider shares instructions from its upstream telecom partner requiring that all international connections be terminated for business clients. The wording is broad: every IP address under their control must block traffic to any location outside mainland China. The same notice directs customers to remove any signs of VPNs, proxies, or other tools used to bypass restrictions. Those who do not comply will face immediate disconnection, data loss, and no refunds. 

…For many, [use of such tools] is not a political statement but a basic necessity: they want to watch a foreign show, read an international newspaper, or access a blocked academic article. Yet the normality of this behavior is what troubles the authorities. A tool that makes it easy to bypass censorship is inherently a threat to a system that relies on that censorship. 

Do you find yourself skimming over SCMP stories about China’s military prowess (assuming you read the publication at all)? Pekingology explains how the paper hypes up supposed findings in Chinese scientific papers…

These reports sensationalize and politicize the research by taking it out of context and linking it to current events, even when there is no prima facie evidence to support such associations. A key tactic is attributing everything to the actions of the Chinese government, not just disregarding the agency of individual researchers and institutions but also dismissing apparent evidence that sidelines the significance of these papers, for example, the poor quality and remote locations of the Chinese journals that publish them.

…The descriptions and narration in these reports are so hyperbolic that they sometimes sound like science fiction.

The author cites several examples in detail. Submarines are a common subject, involving ‘unjustifiable exaggeration and sensationalization’.

Another Japanese act is pulling out of a planned appearance here in Asia’s World City Events Hub-Zone…

Japanese singer-songwriter Fujii Kaze has abruptly cancelled the Hong Kong stop of his Prema World Tour.

The cancellation comes after Koda Kumi and ONE OK ROCK also called off their Hong Kong performances, raising concerns over whether other Japanese concerts in the city could face similar disruption.

In an update on Tuesday … Kaze’s official website showed that the Hong Kong date had been removed from the tour schedule, with a new show in Seoul added on January 9, 2027 instead. The site stated simply that the “show in Hong Kong has been cancelled,” without giving a reason.

The Asian leg of the tour was announced in December and originally included Hong Kong, Bangkok and Kaohsiung.

Attention has now turned to upcoming shows by Japanese acts including LiSA, back number, Vaundy and YOASOBI.

The Standard doesn’t mention why Japanese acts are cancelling Hong Kong visits. Maybe the authorities should clarify that – like sushi – Fuji Kaze, Vaundy et al are welcome to come here so long as they pass a radiation check.

Fans of Japanese pop culture: click on the pic to hear Aiko perform Skirt, theme tune of TV anime series Apocalypse Hotel.

Hong Kong CE John Lee says the government will issue a ‘public consultation’ document on the city’s first ‘Five-Year Plan’ by the end of June…

“We have referred to the mainland’s experience in formulating five-year plans – it usually takes 18 months to two years for preliminary research. This is the first time for Hong Kong to draft a five-year plan, the timeline is tight and we are facing a heavy workload in research,” he said.

“Therefore, the government and the Legislative Council have established a synergistic mechanism to study a number of development topics under the executive-led principle, and gather public opinions after the government publishes the public consultation document.” 

From HKFP…

Lee announced in February, ahead of the Two Sessions in Beijing, that Hong Kong would launch its first blueprint alongside China’s 15th Five-Year Plan…

The chief executive also said on Tuesday that the inaugural plan would be “closely related to livelihood issues,” encompassing areas such as economic development, property, housing and education.   

“The five-year plan will create a synergising force in society… and provide more certainty for businesses to pursue development,” he said in Cantonese.

Since the 1950s, five-year plans in China have set the stage for the country’s social and economic development initiatives outlined by the Chinese Communist Party.

…Lee added that the plan would ensure Hong Kong can integrate into the national blueprint and contribute to the success of One Country, Two Systems. 

The Standard has a story with the headline ‘Xia Baolong meets senior HK civil servants in Beijing, urges alignment with 15th Five-Year Plan’, though it doesn’t mention the HK and Macau Affairs boss saying anything… 

[Secretary for the Civil Service Ingrid] Yeung noted that the National 15th Five-Year Plan supports Hong Kong in consolidating and enhancing its competitive edge across multiple key areas. Hong Kong is formulating its first five-year plan, and under the leadership of the Chief Executive, the civil service will proactively align their work with the national plan to lay a more solid foundation for Hong Kong’s long-term prosperity and stability.

A quick reminder from Wikipedia that Five-Year Plans originated in the USSR in the 1920s and assume a centralized, state-controlled system…

In each five year plan, the plans for all sectors of the economy are synchronized for a period of five years. 

The idea being that the Party and civil servants could manage state-owned industries in such a way as to meet Stalin’s production targets for steel, wheat and tractors. By definition, it is a top-down process. In Hong Kong’s case, it is also supposed to align with the Mainland’s own blueprint (which nowdays is more a wish-list of nice things rather than a detailed strategy). It’s hard to see how a ‘public consultation’ can have a meaningful role.

(Public input into a plan to introduce, say, household waste-charging or seat belts on buses might make good sense. Or you can have an election every five years.)

So what is this all about? Probably symbolism. The administration has long-term measures in the pipeline on housing, hub-zones, etc. These can be relabelled components of the ‘Five-Year Plan’ as required – as happened with CEPA (remember that?), ‘Belt and Road’, and the ‘Greater Bay Area’. Hong Kong must look more integrated.

Asia Nikkei reports that Beijing might introduce an anti-sanctions law in Hong Kong…

…years after the idea was shelved amid concerns that it would damage the city’s reputation.

In February, China’s State Council issued a white paper titled “Hong Kong: Safeguarding China’s National Security Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems.” The paper called for strengthening “systems and mechanisms for countering foreign sanctions,” placing greater attention on security in areas such as finance, shipping, trade and the protection of overseas interests.

…[China’s] Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law … implemented in 2021, allows Beijing to take countermeasures against individuals and organizations that comply with foreign sanctions, including asset freezes, visa bans and transaction restrictions.

There was a proposal in 2021 to extend the law to Hong Kong, but this was delayed. The white paper is understood to be the first time in five years that a public Beijing document has mentioned the issue directly.

“In 2021, foreign businesses successfully pushed back against the PRC imposing the [AFSL] on Hong Kong, arguing that it would hurt its standing as an international legal and financial center,” said Sam Goodman, senior policy director of the China Strategic Risks Institute (CSRI)…

“Today, the PRC signals in its white paper that it will likely push ahead with imposing the law in Hong Kong,” he told Nikkei Asia. “This will create significant risks for foreign businesses.”

Eric Lai, a senior fellow with the Georgetown Center for Asian Law, said that Beijing would consider introducing the AFSL in Hong Kong partly due to the controversy surrounding two Panama Canal ports previously operated by Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison, after the ports were taken over by the Panamanian government following pressure from Washington.

…a private analysis by the CSRI shared with Group of Seven foreign ministries and seen by Nikkei Asia warned that foreign investors would likely be spooked if a Hong Kong AFSL brings the city closer to mainland-style restrictions.

…”If the law is applied to Hong Kong, it will hurt Hong Kong’s attractiveness as a location of corporate headquarters,” [Johns Hopkins University’s professor Hung Ho-fung] said. “It will also hurt Chinese companies, particularly financial companies, as they lose a space from where they can do business in both U.S. and China.”

Such a law could put local, Mainland and international companies in Hong Kong in an impossible position, as they would face penalties from one side or the other whatever they do.

AFP report via HKFP from August 2021…

On Tuesday, Hong Kong’s chief executive Carrie Lam confirmed Beijing had consulted her on adding the law to the city’s mini-constitution, known as the Basic Law.

“The purpose of the Anti-Sanctions Law is to defend our country’s sovereignty, security and development interests,” she told reporters.

Lam said her advice had been for Hong Kong to pass its own legislation.

But she said Beijing could also impose the measures directly like it did with a sweeping national security law last year that snuffed out dissent.

“Some foreign forces, foreign governments and western media will definitely stir up this issue, hoping to weaken our status as a financial centre or the outside world’s confidence in Hong Kong,” she said.

Beijing is introducing new regulations allowing it to retaliate against (mainly US) extra-territorial measures affecting Chinese companies and individuals.

Eric Lai piece on the white paper in Jamestown Foundation’s China Brief…

The [CK Hutchison Panama ports] episode underscores Beijing’s growing sensitivity to the overseas commercial activities of Hong Kong-based enterprises. It suggests that the conduct of Hong Kong businesses abroad is increasingly viewed not merely as a commercial matter, but as an extension of Beijing’s broader national security governance framework. 

Lai covers the white paper more broadly, saying it…

…links the 2003 [Article 23] setback to later protest movements, including the 2012 campaign against national education, the 2014 Umbrella Movement, the 2016 “Fish Ball” unrest, and the 2019 anti-extradition bill protests.

The inclusion of this narrative signals that mainland authorities now retrospectively characterize the 2003 mass mobilization—when more than 500,000 people protested the proposed Article 23 legislation—as a threat to national security. This reinterpretation stands in tension with the fact that the protests were widely regarded at the time as a lawful exercise of freedoms of expression and political participation protected under the Basic Law.

By framing the 2003 protests as security risks, the white paper recasts Hong Kong’s long-standing democratization efforts and defense of civil liberties as destabilizing forces. Through this revisionist account of post-handover social movements, the document provides ideological justification for Beijing’s hardline turn, which culminated in the imposition of the National Security Law in 2020.

Former Civic Party lawmaker and urologist Kwok Ka-ki was disbarred last week…

…after a [HK Medical Council] disciplinary panel found that his national security conviction had caused “damage” to the profession and that he “showed no remorse.” 

…Kwok was quoted in the judgment as telling the panel that: “[his] conviction was not related to [his] clinical practice. Basically, the charge arose from [his] political commitment as a member of the Legislative Council in the participation in the primary election in 2020. There was no complaint [about his] integrity, and no dishonesty and negligence to [his] duties as a doctor.” 

The panel said Kwok’s plea showed that he was “still putting his political agenda [at] the forefront.”

The judgment added: “In his subsequent correspondence with the Secretary [of the council], [Kwok] went so far as to [say] that ‘It is an uphill battle for me to face all these challenges in preparing for the inquiry. While I am facing an authority with resources and manpower, I am here alone. I am always ‘an egg in front of a high wall.’

“This illustrates to us that the Defendant has shown no remorse and let alone been rehabilitated.”

You may think all this also illustrates that the Medical Council is ‘putting a political agenda at the forefront’ here.

A translation of Kwok’s Facebook post…

I am not surprised by this at all. When everyone knows that there are teachers who cannot hold the teaching baton, social workers who can no longer assist those in need, and lawyers who cannot engage in legal work, it was only to be expected that I would be deprived of my medical practice qualification. This incident did not stem from professional negligence, but because I had participated in the 2020 Legislative Council primary election and was subsequently convicted for it.

…the following facts cannot be erased: In 1985, I graduated from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Hong Kong; in 1990, I became a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh and a founding Fellow of the Hong Kong College of Surgeons; in 1993, I became a founding Fellow of the Hong Kong Academy of Medicine.

A translation of a piece by writer Freddy Fung Sze-kan hints at Hong Kong entering a ‘better-red-than-expert’ future …

…the threshold for permanently striking off a doctor in Hong Kong is very high—it takes either a heartless, beastly pervert or a quack who’s killed patients twice over, and the reasons for deregistration are always tied to medical matters. Dr. Kwok Ka-ki … argued in his written response that his conviction had nothing to do with his medical practice, that he had not engaged in any dishonest or violent behavior, and that his involvement in the primaries was limited and should not be deemed a serious offense. But the Medical Council saw things differently. 

…Because he refused to grovel obsequiously to the regime or deeply “acknowledge” the severity of his political crimes, he ended up sacrificing an entire hard-earned professional career. Does politicizing the profession in this way really maintain public confidence in the medical field? I’m afraid it will only backfire. Dr. Kwok wrote on Facebook yesterday: “During my four years in prison, I studied diligently to maintain my specialist qualification in urology.” Unfortunately, today’s Hong Kong no longer prioritizes professionalism above all; instead, everything is “politicized” and “securitized.” Mr. Kwok’s pure heart can only shine in vain upon the gutter.

At this point, all I can say to Mr. Kwok is a modest “thank you,” and wish him safety. 

A LegCo paper on Hong Kong’s shortage of doctors.

…the overt property-developer shoe-shine is back. The Standard reports…

The address from the director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council Xia Baolong on National Security Education Day interpreted a high-level strategic roadmap for Hong Kong, outlining the inseparable relationship between security and development, said chairman of Henderson Land Group Peter Lee Ka-kit.

…Lee, also a member of the Standing Committee of the 14th National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference … noted that the entire community must strengthen its national security awareness to protect Hong Kong’s current positive trajectory. With the opportunities presented by the nation’s “15th Five-Year Plan” on the horizon, the key for Hong Kong is to translate its stable environment into tangible results.

…Lee believed that as long as all sectors of Hong Kong society grasp the One Country, Two Systems principle and work with greater confidence, the city will solidify its advantages and make new, significant contributions to the nation’s modernization.

The golden age of tycoon preemptive cringe was back in the 80s and 90s, when the (now mostly departed) original generation of real-estate moguls performed their ‘instant-noodle patriots’ trick, discovering a sudden love for the Chinese government. There was a lot riding on it in those days, when Hong Kong (and Mainland) asset values were undergoing a historic uplift – and the professions of loyalty were impressively eager. Li Ka-shing donated an entire Hong Kong HQ to the Chinese Foreign Ministry. 

Things are different now. The guaranteed vast profit margins are history. Beijing officials are more skeptical of the role of property developers in Hong Kong’s economy and society. And the younger generation of scions are a shadow of their fathers when it comes to both style and substance

RTHK reports…

Xia Baolong, Director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office, said some people attempted to politicise last year’s deadly Tai Po fire to stir up chaos.

Delivering a keynote speech via video link at the opening ceremony for National Security Education Day, Xia said Hong Kong must stay alert to the interference of external forces and fight smears against the SAR and attacks on the “One Country, Two Systems” principle.

Also…

…lawmaker Priscilla Leung said the National Security Education Day helps people to learn and understand the implementation of National Security Law and the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance.

“National security education now is very important for ordinary people, as well as for the youth, to truly appreciate the implementation of the national security law as well as the national security ordinance in Hong Kong,” she said, adding it also acts as a protective layer for people’s lives and the nation.

…She believed that national security education [for students] had been “going on the right way”, noting that there were more education styles such as drama, music, and holding parades that allowed young people to participate and feel the significance and importance of national security “in a soft way”.

Plus…

Chief Secretary Eric Chan stressed on Wednesday that safeguarding security and promoting development are both essential to the implementation of “One Country, Two Systems”, while national security is the cornerstone of Hong Kong’s prosperity.

…”The SAR government will continue to adopt a multi-pronged approach to solidify the system for protecting national security, enhance law enforcement coordination, deepen national security education, uphold the principle of patriots administering Hong Kong, and prevent and mitigate all types of security risks,” he said.

Wait – there’s more…

Secretary for Justice Paul Lam said on Wednesday that Hong Kong does not strive for absolute security, which is in line with the country’s policy on national security.

…Lam said both the Chinese Constitution and the domestic security law see national security in terms of the political regime and sovereignty being “relatively” free from danger.

He noted that pursuing absolute security would be unsustainable and impractical, and that it would stifle development and go against international relations and the concept of peaceful co-existence.

“It’s made crystal clear that Hong Kong does not pursue absolute or generalised security. This is indeed, and has always been, the crux of our country’s approach to national security,” Lam said.

So it’s not “absolute or generalised”. But, from HKFP…

A Hong Kong man has been jailed for a year under the city’s homegrown national security law after pleading guilty to making seditious remarks on Facebook, including comments supporting Hong Kong and Taiwan independence.

…The magistrate handed [Raymond] Chong, a retiree in his early 60s, an 18-month sentence but discounted it by six months after considering his guilty plea.

Chong was accused of making 53 seditious social media posts between March 2024 and November 2025, local news outlet The Witness reported.

Apparently, you are threatening the national security of the People’s Republic of China – a country with the world’s second most powerful military – by posting on Facebook such phrases as: “dissolving the Chinese Communist Party is the most important thing”, “Hong Kong independence is within sight”, and “Heaven will destroy the Chinese Communist Party, God bless Hong Kong”.

Remember textiles-fortune scion and lawmaker Michael Tien sweeping the streets and sleeping in a tiny ‘cage home’ around 15 years ago? It was part of an RTHK TV series called Rich Mate Poor Mate, in which rich people experienced poverty in Hong Kong. Some of it was uploaded to YouTube back in the day. This playlist contains several 11-minute segments (with low visual quality). Worth checking them out in order: first, second, and third, in which snooker star Eric Lee sleeps on the streets and eventually gets work delivering food. 

Try to ignore the female narrator’s wildly inappropriate cheerful tone.

RTHK has since transformed from a public-service to a government broadcaster (and has wiped many of its archives). It’s hard to imagine this sort of content today.

HKFP reports…

The Hong Kong Women Development Association (HKWDA) said at a press conference on Monday that 98.7 per cent of respondents identified economic pressure as the biggest barrier to having children.

Meanwhile, 92.7 per cent mentioned housing problems as an obstacle, followed by a busy work schedule at 80.6 per cent.

The group said it surveyed a total of 2,413 people aged 19 to 49 between January 26 and February 23 this year.

The results showed that 33 per cent of those aged 30 to 39 wanted to have children – the highest share compared with other age groups. For the 19 to 29 and the 40 to 49 age groups, the figure was 16 per cent.

The Standard adds…

Housing remains a key concern. Although respondents viewed priority housing schemes for families with newborns as relatively effective, scoring 6.37 out of 10 for subsidized home ownership and 6.24 for public housing allocation, the association noted that such measures mainly benefit those eligible for subsidized schemes.

For many middle-class families struggling in the private housing market, the policies offer little direct relief, which may explain why housing continues to be cited as a major constraint.

Small surveys by NGOs are not always hyper-accurate, but this sounds broadly right. In my neighbourhood, more people have dogs than kids. Of around 15 people/couples in Hong Kong I think of as friends – none under 35 years of age – just three have children. And of course the government’s own stats show a birth rate of 0.73.

We all know that birth rates are now at similar levels in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, which also have high housing costs and/or nightmarish school systems. And they’re in the 1.1-0.8 range in countries like Spain and Italy. US conservatives recently expressed alarm at the country’s birth rate hitting around 1.0. But developing countries are going the same way. China of course has never recovered from the one-child policy. Thailand is now below one child per woman. And, amazingly, the Philippines’ fertility rate has dropped below the 2.1 replacement level to 1.7. 

The HKWDA proposes lower salary taxes and cuts in home-purchase stamp duty for people with kids. These would yield trivial amounts of extra cash for most couples. If you offer every family with three kids a free 1,000-sq-ft apartment plus a domestic helper, you might see results. Otherwise, just live with the reality: women (in particular) want more from life than child-rearing, and we are entering an era of population decline.

From the (probably paywalled) WSJ…

China has helped Tehran endure years of U.S.-enforced isolation and has allowed it to sell oil and buy missile parts, drone components and other supplies to build up its military.

A significant part of that trade goes through Hong Kong. The city’s ease of setting up new companies and moving money has made it a global financial hub and a useful spot for evading sanctions.

A Treasury Department analysis found that entities in Hong Kong—most of them likely shell companies—transacted $4.8 billion in financial activity potentially related to Iranian shadow banking activity in 2024.

That was second only to the United Arab Emirates, which recorded $6.4 billion in transactions, almost entirely in Dubai. With the war in Iran raising new concerns about the security of Dubai, and the U.A.E. considering several options to crack down on Iranian shadow banking, more of this activity could shift to China.

Niao Collective presents an online collection of Hong Kong protest art.

Without informal, non-government (often missionary-run) schools on Kowloon rooftops, half of Hong Kong’s 1950s and 60s generation would have been illiterate. But today, a bookseller hosting a Spanish interest class in his store can be prosecuted…

Before handing down the [HK$32,000] fine, Magistrate Arthur Lam said he had found [store-owner Pong Yat-ming and his company] guilty of five charges alleging that [they] ran an unregistered school and allowed a person without a permit to teach.

…Magistrate Lam said the case centred around whether Book Punch met the definition of a school under the city’s Education Ordinance, which defines a school as an institution that provides formal education or “any other educational course by any means” for 20 people or more in a day, or eight people or more at one time.

Lam rejected the defence’s argument that an educational course must involve an assessment mechanism, such as exams, or lead to an academic qualification.

“A course is concerned about progress or… a series of lessons about a particular topic,” Lam said in Cantonese.

“In this case, it was obvious that Montane was teaching and the [students] were learning,” he said.

He also rejected the defence’s submission that Pong was led to believe that an interest class did not require registration because of a 2017 remark by ex-education chief Kevin Yeung … that interest classes such as those teaching dance and acting would not require school registration “because they are interests.”

Lam said Yeung’s remark came with a precondition that an interest class does not provide educational activities.

“The Spanish class in question offers information on basic grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, as well as common phrases for travelling,” the magistrate said. “These are clearly educational content.”

The fact that a CCP-run newspaper had mentioned the bookstore in connection with ‘soft resistance’ didn’t enter into the case at all – which seems odd. 

The magistrate hints at a distinction between ‘educational’ and ‘interest’ content. The law (here) seems to concern itself with actual schools, rather than informal study groups. But if the magistrate is right, it sounds as if ‘educating’ a group of eight people or more about anything is illegal unless you register with the authorities.

So who else should be fined for having an ‘unregistered school’? 

The fancy butcher chain Feather and Bone’s sausage-making classes? BiteUnite’s pasta-making ones? Corvino’s wine-appreciation courses? Dozens of pottery workshops? Flower-arranging? The YWCA’s swimming training for domestic helpers and refugees? Christian Sunday schools and Bible studies, and Buddhists’, Muslims’ and Jews’ equivalents? Golftec’s lessons on hitting little balls with sticks? What if nine people are trapped in an elevator because of a voltage dip and, to pass the time, one teaches the others some (say) Italian?  And let’s not forget ‘Learn English with Regina’…

Where do we report these outrages? It’s unregistered-school mayhem out there.

From RTHK…

Deputy Chief Secretary Warner Cheuk said on Saturday that the public should remain highly vigilant against “soft resistance” and acts that “skirt the line”.

His remarks came ahead of the National Security Education Day on April 15.

In an interview with Ta Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po newspapers, Cheuk said safeguarding national security is a long-term battle and that it is crucial to bear in mind the lessons learned from 2019 ‘colour revolution’ in Hong Kong.

“Apart from the more conventional areas of national security concerns like political, military and homeland security, many non-conventional types of national security are also very important – such as financial, economic, social, cultural, technological, resource and data security, etc. Altogether there are 20 fields of national security,” he said.

“This is what we call a holistic national security concept.”

Sounds as if those people holding classes in sausages, pasta and wine need to watch out.

From Maya Wong of HRW, an obituary of Koo Sze-yiu…

…he continued protesting even after Beijing imposed the draconian National Security Law in 2020, under which dissent is punishable by life imprisonment. He also continued after being diagnosed with terminal cancer in 2020. As growing repression intimidated most Hong Kongers into silence and forced many into exile, Koo stayed. He protested the Beijing Winter Olympics in 2022. His last arrest came in December 2023 for “attempted sedition” after he planned to protest Hong Kong’s sham elections.