You are using an older browser version. Please use a supported version for the best MSN experience.

Sadly, Hong Kong is just collateral damage in the US economic war against China

South China Morning Post logo South China Morning Post 27/03/2023
Gregory May, US consul general for Hong Kong and Macau, said in a video address for the Centre for Strategic and International Studies on January 25 that around 15,000 Americans have left Hong Kong in the past two years, amounting to 20 per cent of the diaspora in 2019. Photo: Twitter Gregory May, US consul general for Hong Kong and Macau, said in a video address for the Centre for Strategic and International Studies on January 25 that around 15,000 Americans have left Hong Kong in the past two years, amounting to 20 per cent of the diaspora in 2019. Photo: Twitter

I sometimes wonder just what it is we Hongkongers have done to cause so many senior American officials to hate us.

We watch your films in the cinema, your shows on TV, we listen to your music and sing your songs, we send our children to your colleges, we buy your goods, we visit your country as tourists. We take the family to Hong Kong Disneyland in the holidays. We like American products and services so much that on a per capita basis, we are probably the biggest consumers in Asia. Yet somehow, we seem to have rubbed you up the wrong way.

This is partly, of course, a spillover from the economic war the US is waging on China; we are simply collateral damage. Because the blows have landed so frequently, we have become numb to just how many shots have been fired in this struggle.

Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team.

America has a list of goods and services it will not buy from China, even if they are best in class and competitively priced. The list is not a comprehensive and final one: additions can be, and are, made to it.

No meaningful justification is offered, just vague references to national security and data security. The real purpose seems to be to deny Chinese companies the volume of business their innovation has earned. And thereby, incidentally, also to deny American consumers better value for money.

There is a similar list of products and services that America has declared it will not sell to Chinese companies and individuals. These items would serve to boost the Chinese economy and improve the quality of life for ordinary people, but - the argument seems to be - would incidentally strengthen our country and make it too powerful, hence a threat to US interests.

Paradoxically, the ban is sometimes accompanied by a demand that China buy more goods and services from America. Anyway, the result is that American companies lose business, and workers there lose employment opportunities.

The US has also placed under tighter scrutiny foreign investments in US assets that involve personal data and advanced technologies, in a move that clearly targets China.

There is another list comprising economic sectors in which foreign investments will be closely scrutinised, with China being the clear target. Such measures deny American companies access to capital they might need to expand, while simultaneously denying other companies access to technology that would improve things for ordinary people.

As if this situation were not bad enough, Washington also pressures its allies to introduce similar measures, even when such steps are clearly not in the best interests of those countries. That includes "pass on" controls on products manufactured elsewhere that contain American technology.

The result is the world economy being denied many of the benefits of free trade. Protectionism is the name of the new game, even though we know from history that such policies make us all worse off.

Hong Kong, of course, is adversely affected, directly and indirectly from this situation, even if we are not the primary target.

Replay Video

But apart from the general damage which hits all Chinese communities, there are some measures targeted at Hong Kong. I am thinking here of the sanctions imposed on half a dozen of our senior officials, including Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu. How does that help anyone? When Lee attends the next Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) meeting, in the US this year, how will American officials be able to relate to him? How does the US consul general relate to him now on routine matters, where a quick phone call could settle a minor matter and prevent it from escalating?

The "justification" - I use the term loosely - offered for this blackballing is the involvement of these officials in the national security law. Why is it the business of any other government how a country protects its own security? The US and other countries have similar legislation.

The national security law may not be perfect - I have already suggested in a previous column two ways in which it might be improved. But that is China's business and not something requiring participation by Washington.

This interference was best illustrated back in February when the chairman of the House of Representatives Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party (what an arrogant title!) Mike Gallagher challenged the participation by American Chamber of Commerce chairman Geoffrey Siebengartner in the government's "Hello Hong Kong" promotional video.

Replay Video

What a contrast from 2003 when then Amcham chairman Jim Thomson played a full role in the recovery of the Hong Kong economy from the severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars) outbreak. The American Chamber and its member companies have a direct commercial interest in the health of the Hong Kong economy. Are they now to be prevented from defending their corporate interests?

The next unjustified attack on Hong Kong interests is already being lined up, and that is on direct flights by Cathay Pacific Airways to East Coast US cities such as New York. Already there are noises in some quarters that Hong Kong and mainland carriers have an unfair advantage because they can fly through Russian airspace, a privilege not available to US airlines. But that situation is a direct result of American choices and actions; it is nothing to do with Hong Kong.

Just how far down this anti-Hong Kong road the US government is prepared to travel is not yet known. But one thing seems certain: Hongkongers' love for all things American is unlikely to be requited any time soon.

Mike Rowse is the CEO of Treloar Enterprises

More Articles from SCMP

Hong Kong air passenger traffic surges 24-fold to 2.1 million, but falls short of pre-pandemic levels

‘Shed tears of grievance’: father’s ‘surprise present’ of exercise book angers daughter and many on social media in China

Fire at Hong Kong village home forces 10 to flee for safety

Covid: more mainland Chinese visitors in Hong Kong, but they’re not rushing for bivalent vaccine booster shots

‘Hong Kong back in business’ and will benefit from China’s post-Covid growth, Standard Chartered chair Jose Vinals says

This article originally appeared on the South China Morning Post (, the leading news media reporting on China and Asia.

Copyright (c) 2023. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.

image beaconimage beaconimage beacon