Hong Kong Intelligence Report #152 The Present Study will undertake a thorough Analysis of the 2025 US-UK State Reports on Hong Kong
- Ryota Nakanishi
- Apr 7
- 12 min read
Open-source intelligence (OSINT)
🔻 IMPORTANT - Hong Kong
▪️ The primary subject of this article is the Report to Congress on Conditions in Hong Kong of Interest to the United States, Section 1256 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (PL 115-232) (22 U.S.C. 5731) and Six-monthly report on Hong Kong: July to December 2024 (27 March 2025).
▪️ The Anti-Monopoly Law of China, as evidenced by its application to the CK Hutchison deal of 43 ports in 23 billion dollars to Blackrock, has established a new benchmark in the wake of the introduction of the HKNSL in 2020. This development is of particular significance in the context of the HKSARG, which, following the post-1997 era, functions as a caretaker government for British interests. The decision made by China is aligned with its national interests, as evidenced by its strategic move to assert state control over the Hong Kong oligarchy. This extension of China's Anti-Monopoly Law to Hong Kong, as part of the broader reform initiative initiated by the Chinese People's Government (CPG), underscores the significance of this development within the context of the "One Country, Two Systems" principle.
▪️ China's recent imposition of a 34% tariff on all US imports, as announced two days ago, has been met with a notable response from the HKSARG, a caretaker of British interests. The HKSARG has abstained from implementing reciprocal measures in response to the 54% tariff imposed on Chinese imports to the US under Trump 2.0.
As articulated by Paul Chan, a Hong Kong-based real estate speculator and financial bureaucrat, Hong Kong will persist in implementing free trade policies and ensuring the "free and convenient" flow of goods, capital, and information. This stance was articulated by the Financial Secretary in a blog post published on Sunday. In a recent discourse, Trump 2.0 articulated that the imposition of tariffs by the United States is a strategic maneuver employed in the pursuit of securing concessions from other nations.
It should be noted that Hong Kong bureaucrats are permitted to engage in commercial activities outside of their official roles.
▪️ According to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, over 50 nations have initiated negotiations with the U.S. since the previous Wednesday's announcement. In an interview on NBC News' Meet the Press, Bessent remarked, "He has strategically maximized his leverage."
▪️ On Saturday, U.S. customs agents initiated the collection of President Trump's unilateral 10% tariff on all imports from numerous countries. Higher "reciprocal" tariff rates ranging from 11% to 50% on specific countries are scheduled to take effect on Wednesday at 12:01 a.m. EDT (4:01 a.m. GMT).
▪️ It is in the interest of the United States under the reformist administration of President Trump 2.0. For the American populace, President Trump has amassed significant political capital, positioning the nation to negotiate further concessions that will reshape the trade and budgetary landscapes. In this context, it is pertinent to examine the implications of these developments on Hong Kong politics. For the HKSARG, the intensified trade conflict could impede progress in implementing necessary reforms, while concurrently burdening the economically disadvantaged by reducing subsidies for transportation and education, thereby driving up rental costs to a level that only a small segment of wealthy tenants can afford, and consequently, raising public healthcare costs. Moreover, the public education system is being undermined under the guise of 'reforms,' which are intended to preserve the high salaries of public servants and the integrity of the exclusive social welfare system. It is also noteworthy that those who hold positions of authority in this affluent yet callous southern Chinese metropolis benefit from the limited social welfare programs intended for the less fortunate. These adjustments, characterized by their neoliberal and deceptive nature, are consistent with the prevailing interests of the vested interests within the neoliberal framework. The policy tactic employed by the HKSARG is presented as a "reform," yet the true nature of the measure remains opaque. However, the reform is conspicuously absent. The local reform can only be regarded as a superficial adjustment. The termination of adverse possession in 2027 is the only discernible reform. The policy tactic of the HKSARG is merely a ruse to disguise the true nature of these adjustments, which are neoliberal and deceptive in nature.
It should be noted that these adjustments do not constitute independent attempts; rather, they are incorporated into the calculation of the domino effect, which results in an eventual increase in property prices.
▪️ On February 27, 2025, the government formally announced the introduction of the Registration of Titles and Land (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2025 to the Legislative Council (LegCo). The purpose of this bill is to implement a title registration system on newly granted land, with the Land Titles Ordinance (Cap. 585) (LTO) being amended to this end. However, it should be noted that this announcement is merely a declaration and has not yet been implemented. There has been no discernible improvement in the current state of affairs. Despite the substantial and calculated PR campaign designed to promote the concept of 'prosperity' to the public, the true economic data, such as the PMI, inevitably reveals a different statistical reality.
▪️ The seasonally adjusted S&P Global Hong Kong Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) for March registered at 48.3, which denotes a decline compared to February's figure of 49. This result also lies below the 50 threshold that delineates expansion and contraction in the business sector. This observation persists as the second consecutive month, indicating a pronounced deterioration in the overall business environment at the close of the initial quarter of the current year. Notably, this decline represents the most substantial contraction witnessed in the past nine months, underscoring the prevailing challenges faced by businesses in the region.
▪️ A general observation reveals that the reports do not address the grave livelihood concerns of Hong Kong citizens (i.e., all Hong Kong citizens of all races, not limited to Cantonese tribes).
🔻 Reviews
▪️ Report to Congress on Conditions in Hong Kong of Interest to the United States Section 1256 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (PL 115-232) (22 U.S.C. 5731)
(1) This report is the deep-state version of the report, as opposed to the Trump 2.0 version. The term "deep state" refers to bureaucracy as an interest group. This perspective aligns with the historical precedent set by USAID and the State Department.
(2) The report in question seeks to equalize the interests of the United States, the Basic Law, and the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984. Consequently, it is further inferred that the HKSAR, HKSARG, and 1C2S are also equalized with US interests. This assertion is not mere propaganda, as the report candidly acknowledges the truth. This particular thesis unveils the reality that lies behind media reports and public relations stunts within the political theater. The concepts of semi-autonomy and the nature of the HKSARG are not, as commonly perceived, indicative of cognitive failures in the public, but rather, are the result of systematic brainwashing through the repetition of superficial narratives. The British perspective on the "semi-autonomy" and the caretaker role of the HKSARG aligns with this viewpoint. From their perspective, Hong Kong is regarded as a distinct entity under the jurisdiction of the United States and the United Kingdom. The HKSARG, in this view, is regarded as a mere caretaker of interests, akin to a real estate management entity overseeing a collection of mansions. This assertion, however, raises questions about the validity of this perception. The veracity of this assertion is indisputable.
(3) While they verbally support the "opposition," this report only serves to solidify the prosecutions against them, thereby confirming their status as "foreign agents" in China's eyes. This outcome is a consequence of their alleged support for "freedom, democracy, and human rights" in the context of R2P and humanitarian interventions.
(4)The inquiry into the nature of the reports' focal point, namely the opposition figures in prison, including harassed pro-Western journalists, is a salient point of concern. Operatives and agents are not merely literal actors but rather political bargaining chips, not the literal subjects of "politics" or "political issues." The focus on technical terms supersedes concerns related to livelihoods. In essence, the concept of "opposition" is not a solution to the pressing social and economic challenges faced by the city, but rather a strategic instrument utilized by foreign political forces to advance their own agendas. This phenomenon gives rise to a dualist worldview. These operatives do not directly address the interests of any antagonistic vested interests within this city, as their primary objective is to safeguard these interests.
(5) While the public relations and media narratives of the warring camps are, as is customary, aligned, the report candidly reveals the impracticability of decoupling or the Sakoku attitude toward each other, particularly in law enforcement. This aspect is a fundamental truth that underlies the media narratives, and it is crucial to recognize that there is no such thing as an absolute warring situation between law enforcement agencies of allegedly warring camps. While the HKSARG maintains liaison with other intelligence agencies and law enforcement entities, it is imprudent to subscribe to the notion of a 'battle between the CIA and the HKPF.' This specious proposition, propagated by the dubious 'pro-establishment,' is an affront to the CIA. The most significant and revelatory section of the report pertains to U.S.-Hong Kong Cooperation, Sanctions, and Export Controls.
Hong Kong law enforcement entities exhibited a pattern of delay in their responses, and they frequently declined official requests from U.S. law enforcement agencies. These requests were often met with passive refusals and repetitive requests for additional information, much of which proved to be irrelevant. In contrast, the United States complied with similar requests from the Hong Kong government, which were not reciprocated. Hong Kong law enforcement maintained indirect contact with U.S. counterparts and received U.S. lead information regarding a broad array of criminal offenses. However, Hong Kong agencies replied sporadically with limited information. Conversely, U.S. law enforcement demonstrated a notable absence of substantive official engagement with the Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF) National Security Department during the period under review. In certain instances, Hong Kong authorities redirected U.S. law enforcement to their counterparts in Beijing, thereby accentuating the Special Administrative Region's (SAR) dearth of autonomy. The United States communicated with Hong Kong authorities on issues involving sanctions implementation. The Hong Kong government maintained that it would exclusively implement UN sanctions, refraining from "unilateral" sanctions such as those designated by the United States. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority clarified to banking institutions that, while not legally obligated to observe foreign government unilateral sanctions, they must establish and implement policies for their Hong Kong businesses that incorporate a comprehensive assessment of any legal, business, and commercial risks involved. In the period spanning from January 1 to December 31, 2024, the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security identified and designated 54 entities based in Hong Kong that provided support to a foreign military entity acting in a manner contrary to U.S. foreign policy and national security interests.
It is important to note that both the United States and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) routinely engage with foreign intelligence agencies and law enforcement entities as part of their standard operational procedures. Consequently, it is imprudent to accept any unilateral war narratives propagated by these bilateral channels. However, these aspects are often omitted from mainstream media portrayals, as they do not align with the preferred narratives promoted by certain entities.
▪️ Six-monthly report on Hong Kong: July to December 2024
(1) The text under consideration is a chronicle of events and the concerns of the parties involved in the city. This document functions as a technical report, delineating a series of political bargaining chips held by the British.
(2) The report further delineates a comprehensive autonomy for specific domains extending beyond the realms of diplomacy and defense. These domains may encompass a distinct city from China, a British enclave akin to Bermuda, or a residual colony encircled by the stipulations of the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984, also referred to as the Basic Law. Alternatively, this autonomy could be constituted by a pro-British market or a business stronghold, both of which would be overseen by a caretaker establishment comprising British nationals. In the eyes of the esteemed writers of the report, Hong Kong is depicted as a distinct city from China. This perception, however, is not without its nuances, particularly when viewed in contrast to the alleged infringements perpetrated by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The British side continues to perceive Hong Kong through the lens of its historical relationship with China. This includes the caretaker role of the HKSARG. The United Kingdom aligns with the United States in its commitment to transparency and disclosure of facts. The political reality is nuanced and multifaceted. These contrasting images, in addition to the superficial concerns surrounding "national security," fundamentally contradict the narratives espoused by both the "pro-establishment" and "opposition" factions within this city. The "pro-establishment" and "opposition" factions are primarily engaged in public relations and shaping public opinion, while the reality on the ground is quite different. This discrepancy is not obscured by the report.
(3) Although the former Governor of Hong Kong, Lord Christopher Patten, expressed reservations about the full disclosure of British involvement in the HKSARG, even referring to bureaucrats as "traitors," it is my recommendation that the five eyes' nationals, including those who have retired and immigrated to their respective countries, as well as consultants within the HKSARG, be fully exposed if their objective is to subvert the regime. As the report indicates, this is not in the UK's interests at present, as the HKSARG is a caretaker for both the US and UK businesses. It is imperative for Hong Kong's "opposition" to give this report their undivided attention.
(4) The Special Administrative Region (SAR) is characterized as being in a perpetual state of transition, as delineated in Article 31 of the Chinese Constitution. "The state may establish special administrative regions when necessary. The systems to be instituted in such regions shall be prescribed by law enacted by the National People's Congress in the light of the specific conditions". The implications of this status are significant and require careful consideration. It is imperative to reiterate that the Special Administrative Region (SAR), inclusive of its Basic Law, is in a perpetual state of transition, subject to alteration or abrogation at the discretion of the state at any given moment. This suggests that the legitimacy of the Basic Law is derived from Article 30-31 of the PRC constitution. Consequently, the HKSARG and the Basic Law are both subject to the authorizations of the CPG, implying that the city lacks inherent rights intrinsic to its own existence. However, the political reality remains as depicted in the report, a fenced enclave that protects UK interests.
(5) The section of primary importance is not the 'national security' sections in the report that reveal the true British stance on Hong Kong. The economic system (p. 22); the monetary system (p. 23); civil aviation (p. 24); education (p. 24); foreign affairs and bilateral relations (p. 24); British National Overseas (p. 25); trade and investment (p. 26); and culture (p. 26). These are a series of complements to the HKSARG, a caretaker government entity while those "opposition radicals" are disgruntle. It should be noted that the report does not address the pressing economic challenges faced by the underprivileged. The report merely alludes to general economic policies that serve UK businesses, without explicitly naming any specific business entities operating within this city. The primary concern of the UK government is the protection of UK businesses operating within this city. This is a standard practice for any foreign government. It is important to note that the Hong Kong population should not expect the UK to act as a savior, given that both the HKSARG and the CPG are in place. Consequently, the UK government is not obligated to serve the entire populace of this city. This position is consistent with established norms and expectations. This stance is not subject to criticism.
The Hong Kong SAR Government continued to manage civil aviation in accordance with the provisions of the Joint Declaration. Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) continued to facilitate both commercial and tourism flows and enabled the city to maintain its status as an international and regional aviation centre.
The airport is, in fact, the Swire airport, a British asset along with Cathay Pacific. The caretaker government is performing well for the UK business sector, despite the "NSL" PR stunt. It is important to note that such actions are fully compliant with the 1C2S legal framework. The report does not identify any negative aspects associated with this situation. The actions of the self-proclaimed "patriots" have enabled this state of affairs, and they continue to support it.
The subsequent section delineates the aspects that are deemed favorable for the UK. It is evident that a caretaker government can effectively serve as a guardian of the UK's interests in the present context.
The decision to extend the application of international treaties signed by the PRC to Hong Kong continued with consultation of HKSAR, as required by the Joint Declaration. (pp.24-25)
It should be noted that the term "way of life" is used in the context of legislation and political science to denote the established legal framework that governs a particular society.
See Reference below:
Report to Congress on Conditions in Hong Kong of Interest to the United States Section 1256 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (PL 115-232) (22 U.S.C. 5731)
Comments