Updated: Jul 3
Open-source intelligence (OSINT)
a. Exposing interventions of foreign NGOs is banal and cliched due to its fatal lack of a historical materialist approach to class holistic society. I won't follow any conspiracy theorists and their platforms. Conspiracy theories are only destructive to brains and intelligence analysis.
b. This is neither an op-ed piece nor any news report. This is intelligence analysis. Thus, it must wait for adequate information and development of incidents.
c. The US presidential election 2020 is the hottest topic, and it is the best litmus test for local and Chinese state media for measuring the degree of being infiltrated by democratic agents. How to respond to the election to inevitably reveal their political nature and status. This topic is deliberately avoided in this report and reported in the future as long as it is still disputed. In short, the Chinese state media and ''pro-establishment'' media all rushed to celebrate Biden and the democrats for the disputed election victory on November 3, 2020, while they totally ignored pre-Trump era wars and regime change attempts by the Obama-Biden regime (2009-2017). They even totally ignored the fact that the Umbrella Revolution and the colour-revolutionary network of NOYDA were mainly established by NDI=democrats. Democrats are still playing more active roles in the front line of anti-Chinese and anti-Russian campaigns than republicans. Thus, the Chinese state media ''propaganda machines'' and pro-establishment reactions to the disputed Biden victory are unsophisticated, negative and careless. They became the mocking birds of democrats and the western mainstream media on this. A sheer contrast to the intelligent Putin regime and the respected Russian state media.
d. Both pro and anti-Chinese news sources are broadly cited and referenced to avoid one-sidedness.
e. True intelligence analysis is only possible when there is no pressure or order for ''political correctness.'' This caused the situation in which ''professional'' intelligence analysts just follow the ''official narrative'' without critical thinking about themselves and others. Respected professionals will understand this.
f. Exposing foreign NGOs - especially banal claims and cliched ''theories'' on the conspiratory NED network - can't even help containing the Thailand protests due to a fatal lack of a historical materialist approach. The ''pro-monarchy'' camp should learn lessons from HK. I just don't engage in it, because I just need to concentrate on the domestic political issues of HK in terms of world politics. They must know that solving domestic political issues is the best help or contribution to foreign politics simultaneously.
The Reverse Course in HK against HKNSL (6/30/2020-present)The Reverse Course in HK started just after the introduction of HKNSL on June 30, 2020 in the grip of the vested interests of HK against the CPC (a.k.a. CCP) as conscious people easily predicted before that. As the result, black-shirts are gradually and systematically released without actual sentences due to biased judges and highly suspicious technical ''errors'' made by a Justice Department, and infiltrators of the HK SAR government. Now they are trying to make HKNSL ''a dead letter'' in the financial field. Furthermore, promoting ''development of innovation and technology'' (which means creating local tech giants) can only be a PR stunt of the HK SAR government while they will strive to maintain the speculation-driven crony capitalist framework of the city. Vested interests have no intention or obvious tendency to make any risky changes to the present class caste and city's governing structures. For them, maintaining the status quo of the international financial hub and the policy shift to ''development of innovation and technology'' from speculation-based land and real-estate monopoly capitalism are ridiculously incompatible policy choices in practice. Thus, only Beijing's active roles, direct interventions and effective management of HK politics and economic policies can solve both regional protectionism of the mainland against HK and the reactionary resistance of vested interests of HK (the latter took the form of ''Occupy Central' and ''Anti-Extradition Bill'' colour revolutions with help from foreign meddlers) against mainland China. Indeed, holistic resolution to the two major political and economic obstacles between HK and the mainland is dialectically and historically necessary. It can only be achieved by direct management, full governing of the city by central government initiatives while they claim to have the rights. Structural stagnation and stubborn resistance of HK oligarchs can only postpone the end of their broadening-inequality-based profit-making at the cost of benefits of the working class. Their largest scheme to intensify the present profit-making system of oligarchs is the notorious ''Lantau Tomorrow Vision'' (2018-). Then they can safely and comfortably exploit both HK and China in the following decades with this oligarch-led construction project which totally ignores the mass scale of wasted lands and abusive use of land.
The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) passed the legal decision titled ''disqualification of legislators concerned in accordance with NPCSC's decision on qualification of HKSAR legislators'' on November 11, 2020 (DQ4; disqualifying Alvin Yeung; Dennis Kwok Wing-hang; Kwok Ka-ki; Kenneth Leung; Carrie Lam is empowered to directly disqualify any legislators who violate criteria defined by the decision; it even can't be challenged by court in HK) and following mass resignation of 15 opposition legislators (the total opposition number is reduced to 2 out of 21 legislators; 11/12) help oligarchs to not only relieve their financial burdens on donations of both camps at the legislative council (LegCo) but also help drilling through the unfavourable law proposals with paid ''pro-establishment'' camp (41 legislators) which would contradict class interests of the working class and ultimately torment China itself. On the entire reverse course, any one-sided or isolated move without subsequent structural reform will unexpectedly intensify the influences and powers of HK oligarchs even if it can reduce the influence of foreign meddlers to some extent. Unfortunately, foreign critics and analysts only see the latter ''influence of foreign meddlers '' one-sidedly, hence they always blindly lack insight into the inner politics and local class war. Fortunately ''pro-democracy'' district council representatives are untouched by the decision, thus they will attend the next legislative council election so 2021. Beijing showed their estimation and was wary that the existing ''pro-establishment'' camp couldn't win the next LegCo election of 2021 majority of grassroots voters in HK always go for the opposition camp therefore it's more about the next legislative election than separatism itself.
FACTS (October & November 2020)
1. Postponement of Annual Policy Address (10/11); Shenzhen Special Economic Zone's 40th Anniversary (10/14); The Fifth Plenary Session (10/26-29) of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) + The Fourteenth Five-Year Plan (2021-2025) and Carrie Lam's Visit to Beijing for Economic Recovery Talks with Technocrats (11/3-7)
57.保持香港、澳門長期繁榮穩定。全面准確貫徹「一國兩制」、「港人治港」、「澳人治澳」、高度自治的方針，堅持依法治港治澳，維護憲法和基本法確定的特別行政區憲制秩序，落實中央對特別行政區全面管治權，落實特別行政區維護國家安全的法律制度和執行機制，維護國家主權、安全、發展利益和特別行政區社會大局穩定。支持特別行政區鞏固提升競爭優勢，建設國際創新科技中心，打造「一帶一路」功能平台，實現經濟多元可持續發展。支持香港、澳門更好融入國家發展大局，高質量建設粵港澳大灣區，完善便利港澳居民在內地發展政策措施。增強港澳同胞國家意識和愛國精神。支持香港、澳門同各國各地區開展交流合作。堅決防範和遏制外部勢力幹預港澳事務。 - The Fourteenth Five-Year Plan (2021-2025) (1)
It can be summed up as two requirements. (a) integration of the Hong Kong economy into mainland China; (b) transformation of the obsolete economic model of HK by ''development of innovation and technology'' like Shenzhen. The new five-year plan surprisingly did not mention ''maintaining the prestigious status of being an international financial hub.'' Hong Kong is no longer required to play the past monopolistic role in the entire national developmentalist strategy of China. In fact, Shenzhen and other parts of China are replacing HK with more advanced GDP scores. Is it a victory of the vested interests of HK? No, it is pretty close to abandonment or degrading of HK strategically as certain economic and bureaucratic competitions still do exist between mainland and HK. ''Maintaining the prestigious status of being international financial hub'' is now only the narcissistic self-defined PR policy of HK and declining ''pro-establishment'' camp (even though they occupied all 18 panels' chairman seats at legislative council of HKSAR on November 3, 2020; it doesn't make any difference for their ''two-faced'' patrons who are rich enough to fund both camps; ''blue & yellow'' colour-identity politics is to divide and conquer the class opponents in class war in HK thus ''two-faced'' patrons and ''two-faced'' corporate private media are real class enemies for the working class).
According to the communique of the fifth plenary session of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) released on Oct. 29, 2020, Beijing thinks the colour revolution 2019 ceased in HK; rebuilding and integrating economy of HK into the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area project (Belt and Road Initiative; announced in 2014; estimated completion in 2049) is the next priority; regional protectionism of mainland's rural governments still are ''unsolvable'' major barriers for HK when integrate itself into mainland economy) , however both the anti-extradition bill colour revolution 2019 and COVID-19 epidemic 2020 are not finished yet in HK.
On the contrary to the official narrative of Chinese state media - their ''news reports'' are rather bureaucratic announcements which are meant to prevent any OSINT attempts by intelligence agencies - , what really happening in HK politics is extremely grim for China and any patriots. This analysis refers to several current incidents which are critically significant for the next step of political gambling of the ''two-faced'' ruling class of HK.
First of all, postponement of the annual policy address of Carrie Lam (originally planned to be held on October 14 but suddenly postponed on October 11, 2020; estimated to be published within November like Macau) was a result of the first time refusal of Beijing on insincere bureaucratic formalism of HK SAR government because president Xi's visit to Shenzhen for the celebration of the linchpin of the bay area Shenzhen Special Economic Zone's 40th anniversary was scheduled beforehand and Carrie Lam had to visit Beijing for economic recovery talks in following days (November 3-7). They are intolerable about this. Beijing surprisingly took apparent initiative in governing Hong Kong. That's positive for China, yet Hong Kong's future transformation of its economic model has still been disputed by many between ''maintaining the world class financial service hub'' and ''strategically'' developing highly uncompetitive IT sectors and other equally tiny industries as part of Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area since 2015. In fact, the present Hong Kong economy is heavily run by speculation of stock prices, land and real estate properties without proper social welfare for the people. Thus, vested interests are major obstacles to the rapid transformation of the hollowed Hong Kong economy into a more competitive one within the entire China (can HK be or should be the next Shenzhen?). There is neither powerful momentum nor a strong tendency for abrupt changes to the present economic structure of Hong Kong. Simply, it's politically only allowed to push purely quantitative limited amendments within the present social framework of oligarchs who actually run politics of HK behind both ''pro-establishment'' and now defunct ''opposition'' camps. Hence, the postponement and rewrite of the annual policy report can only be empty in practice as long as the economic leverages and influences of HK oligarchs are untouched by Beijing. However, there is some suggested solutions to improve the status quo. For instance, CPC (a.k.a. CCP) officials and members joining the HK government and political parties of HK,. That will be practical threats to the vested interests of HK as Hong Kong still has no political party law. (All political parties of HK are ''limited companies''; ''social organisations'' equal with ''NGOs'' not professionally trained political parties under Societies Ordinance or Companies Ordinance; in other words, ''HK political parties'' are more like ''companies'', and their chairmen are ''capitalists'')
The lack of professional POLITICAL PARTY LAW in HK indicates its fundamental reliance on external or foreign advisers and support in various fields. It's one of the fatal differences of HK in world politics which is completely unknown to most of the media and ''professional'' journalists. For further understanding the analysis above, several facts must be known:
a. For the HKSAR government, what they always seek from the mainland is only short-sighted ''beneficial'' policy on both CEPA and individual/ business travel, not any structural changes or improvement of social welfare in HK itself. Thus, the general policy goal of ''improvement of social welfare'' is distorted and narrowed by silly HKSAR bureaucrats due to its exclusion of HK itself. On November 6, 2019, HKSAR published the article below:
b. The Hong Kong-Shenzhen Innovation and Technology Park construction project (HK's only ''innovation and technology'' project; 2017-2021) is one of the prominent instances to grab the fundamental differences between HK and Shenzhen. Although the start of economic innovation in Shenzhen was later than HK, Shenzhen successfully finished construction of the Shenzhen part of the project with a total of 102 tech categories that have been introduced there since April 2020 while HK has still stacked in the middle of construction postponement on their own part. HKCD reported the news on April 26, 2020:
c. Hong Kong 2030+: Towards a Planning Vision and Strategy Transcending 2030 (2016-2019) is just another PR stunt because it is to only justification, the decoration of the status quo without any dramatic structural changes to itself. And filled with empty slogans. It's true that real reformism is a taboo in HKSAR. In fact, HKSAR bureaucrats are good at PR stunts and use PR stunts to replace actual reforms and actions. THINK HONG KONG published on November 6, 2020:
d. HKTDC and InvestHK's PR stunts are ''no policy'' on the Belt and Road Initiative (2014). Transformation of the economy and innovative development can't be achieved by more PR activities and pure accumulation of capital. It needs strategic management by the government, not by self-profit-driven capitalists. At present, what they have already completed is the late inauguration of the Belt and Road Office staff within the Industry and Tourism Branch, Commerce and Economic Development Bureau this year. The annual international conference, The Belt and Road Summit of HKTDC, is sheer PR. All of them indicate ''no policy'' and ''no strategic actions.'' HKTDC reported on September 8, 2019:
Mission leader Edward Yau Tang-wah said he believes with the city’s global outlook and international connectivity, Hong Kong enterprises and professionals play an indispensable role in making Hong Kong the prime platform for enterprises in both countries to participate in the Belt and Road Initiative.
The HKTDC will continue to strengthen its efforts in fostering collaboration with members around the world to maximise the opportunities arising from the Belt and Road Initiative. (5)
Pouring money and making ordinary investment deals bilaterally don't fulfil the strategic transformation of the HK economic structures. On the contrary, they just talk about bilateral investment deals which have nothing to do with the actual strategic planning of the Belt and Road. Those PR stunts are just made in the name of The Belt and Road. That's all.
e. Obsolete Industrialisation Model of HK No Longer Applicable in Mainland and Anywhere in the World: Historically, the HK's sweatshop-driven industrialisation of the Guangdong province between 1979 to 2010 by HK entrepreneurs and investors was based on their industrialisation model of the 1950s and 1960s. That's all gone now even though the HK sweatshop-driven industrialisation successfully transformed the Guangdong province into China's major industrial centre during the 1980s and 1990s. Furthermore, at its peak, HK capitalists employed more than 10 million forces in 2007. Then, a policy change came. The entire Guangdong province no longer needed to rely on HK sweatshops to boost their export-driven economy with a cheaper labour force, low technologies, and labour-intensified consumer commodities. The new measures taken by the local government made their sweatshop-model unprofitable. Finally, HK-capital firms have halved their entire work force in 2010. Thus, HK's past successful business model ''sweatshop-driven'' industrialisation will have no place in the entire Chinese development plans forever. The cheaper-labour oriented neoliberal value is no longer acceptable to the CPC and the central government. The Guangdong province became the core of the Chinese industrial revolution. It showed a ''Scientific'' Outlook on Development which fundamentally differs from the anarchistic neoliberalism of HK.
自2008年以來，廣東的經濟發展戰略和經濟發展格局與趨勢出現了較大的改變和調整。除了廣東經濟發展的內在因素外，促成這種調整的外在因素，一是中共十七大的召開和汪洋擔任廣東省委書記，提出了廣東經濟發展的新路向，二是金融海嘯引發的全球經濟衰退以及國家應對的舉措。第一個因素是政治上和政策上的，第二個因素則是市場上的，兩大因素共同促成了廣東經濟發展格局與趨勢的調整。在此基礎上，順應國內、國際經濟發展的趨勢，廣東省明確提出“`十二 五'時期(2011-2015 年)，是廣東深入實施《珠江三角洲地區改革發展規劃綱要(2008-2020年)》，深化改革開放，加快轉變經濟發展方式攻堅克難的關鍵時期，是全面建設更高水準的小康社會，向基本實現社會主義現代化目標邁進的關鍵時期，必須承前啟後搶抓科學發展戰略新機遇，緊緊圍繞`加快轉型升級、 建設幸福廣東'這個核心，全面開創科學發展、社會和諧新局面。" (6)
2. Never Ending Story: Unjustifiable Release of Black-shirts by Justice Department's Negligence, Technical ''Errors'' And Politically Biased Judges (6/9/2019-10/31/2020) The Reverse Course of HK means that anti-China reactionaries systematically coordinated to reverse the effects of HKNSL without apparently confront the central government. The work of infiltrators. In general, police arrested a total of 10 and 148 suspects during the ''anti-extradition bill'' colour revolution between June 9, 2019 to October 31, 2020. However, there are still only 23% of ''black-shirted protesters'' legally charged, and the major categories of charges are (1) rioting (690 suspects) ; (2) illegal gathering (412 suspects) and (3) possession of offensive weapons in a public place (337 suspects). According to a news report from ON.CC on November 10, 2020, 603 out of 726 defenders were sentenced.
In other words, there are only 603 criminals out of 10,148 suspects actually got sentenced until October 31, 2020. 0.06 (6%) of the entire ''peaceful and polite'' PROTESTERS proven guilty during the ongoing ''anti-extradition bill'' colour revolution is unbelievable. Many of them got released at the phase of prima facie on their charges. One symbolic incident of this is the Sham Siu-man court case on October 31, 2020 in which the regional judge of The District Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region released seven suspected rioters by depicting them as ''bystanders'' while they actually possessing ''protester goods'' at the site of illegal ''demonstration'' (riot) in Wan Chai on August 31, 2019. VOA reported this news on November 1, 2020:
Both the 0.06 (6%) extremely low criminal sentence rate of FREEDOM FIGHTERS and the 10.31 full release of seven 8.31 Wan Chai rioters can be seen as the height of the anti-HKNSL reverse course before arrests (11/1-2) and disqualifying of opposition legislators (11/11) in November. There are ups and downs during the entire reverse course. This is a battle between the central government and the anti-China vested interests of HK. As a matter of fact, the HK law system is still under the control of the UK, thus the main battle against the central government is essentially fought by common-law judiciaries locally.
3. SFC's Treason: Privately Suggesting Locally Operating Banks to Enforce US Sanctions Against Own Government Officers? The most astonishing and ridiculous news was recently reported by the Financial Times on November 9, 2020:
Hong Kong’s securities regulator has privately advised financial institutions they can implement US sanctions without automatically violating a tough national security law imposed on the city by Beijing. The move, which is aimed at reassuring foreign investors in the Asian financial hub, comes as international companies complain that the government has yet to release concrete guidelines on the law’s implementation months after its introduction. ......
Yet lawyers have warned that institutions that did so ran the risk of triggering a clause in the security law that threatens harsh penalties for offenders who “collude” with a foreign government to impose sanctions on Hong Kong. In response to the confusion, officials from Securities and Futures Commission, Hong Kong’s markets regulator, have privately assured global banks that it would be unlikely they would be breaking the law were they to implement the US sanctions, two people with direct knowledge of the situation said. ......
The SFC declined to comment. The Hong Kong government said it had “not heard any negative feedback” from members of the IBC about its response and its “door remains open” to international chambers. (9)
There are several issues about this. (1) Why doesn't SFC simply inquire the National Security Department of the Hong Kong Police Force and the Office for Safeguarding National Security of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region on this? It's simply lack of communication among different governmental departments. This scandal is a by-product of the narrow-sighted jurisdictional tribalism of HKSAR, which can be broadly seen in their mismanagement of social issues. (2) Passively enforcing US sanctions against their own governments is legal under HKNSL? Who said that? Read the original provisions for yourself.
第四節 勾結外國或者境外勢力危害國家安全罪 第二十九條 為外國或者境外機構、組織、人員竊取、刺探、收買、非法提供涉及國家安全的國家秘密或者情報的；請求外國或者境外機構、組織、人員實施，與外國或者境外機構、組織、人員串謀實施，或者直接或者間接接受外國或者境外機構、組織、人員的指使、控制、資助或者其他形式的支援實施以下行為之一的，均屬犯罪： （一）對中華人民共和國發動戰爭，或者以武力或者武力相威脅，對中華人民共和國主權、統一和領土完整造成嚴重危害； （二）對香港特別行政區政府或者中央人民政府制定和執行法律、政策進行嚴重阻撓並可能造成嚴重後果； （三）對香港特別行政區選舉進行操控、破壞並可能造成嚴重後果； （四）對香港特別行政區或者中華人民共和國進行制裁、封鎖或者採取其他敵對行動； （五）通過各種非法方式引發香港特別行政區居民對中央人民政府或者香港特別行政區政府的憎恨並可能造成嚴重後果。 犯前款罪，處三年以上十年以下有期徒刑；罪行重大的，處無期徒刑或者十年以上有期徒刑。 本條第一款規定涉及的境外機構、組織、人員，按共同犯罪定罪處刑。 第三十條 為實施本法第二十條、第二十二條規定的犯罪，與外國或者境外機構、組織、人員串謀，或者直接或者間接接受外國或者境外機構、組織、人員的指使、控制、資助或者其他形式的支援的，依照本法第二十條、第二十二條的規定從重處罰。(10)
It clearly states that any organisations and individuals committing NSL violations even under threat from foreign forces are criminals under the law. The US sanctions, including recent ones (SC4; Deng Zhonghua; Edwina Lau; Steve Li; Li Jiangzhou; announced by Pompeo on November 9, 2020) are all instructed and ordered by the US government, thus passively implementing the sanctions in HK is sheer violation of HKNSL.
Another suspicious SFC movement was identified simultaneously. Apple Daily reported on November 9, 2020,
This news information is more threatening than the former because most operating companies in HK fear forcible measures by authorities requiring them to provide data of clients and financial activities. It was abandoned by SFC after the rejection from Amazon, Microsoft and Google, who are operating in HK. Financially, HKNSL was nullified by the two suspicious moves by SFC.
4. All Opposition Lawmakers ''Gone with the Wind''? Unexpected Application of Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance for the Mass Arrest of Opposition Legislators (11/1-2); DQ4 of November 11 , 2020 And Subsequent mass resignation of ''pan-democrat'' camp (11/12)First of all, citizens must know that no matter how you like or hate so called ''pan-democrat'' camp (a.k.a. HK opposition), we must admit that the vast majority of voters support them. For instance, the entire opposition camp got a total of 1,193,061 votes against the ''pro-establishment'' camp's 871016 votes in the 2016 Hong Kong legislative election (9/4/2016). The failure of the opposition is due to the proportional representation voting system of LegCo (total 70 seats) and internal division among opposition parties. (12)
For instance, the ''pro-establishment'' camp only had 8 parties; 'the 'opposition'' camp had at least 14 parties at that time. Thus, the opposition's strategic failure was mathematically inevitable, when they were split into pieces and unable to unify candidates under proportional representation. This is the basic understanding of the LegCo electoral situation. On this basis, we can easily realise that the series of administrative purges of the opposition camp is purely political. Now, there are only 2 opposition legislators against 41 ''pro-establishment'' legislators in LegCo on November 13, 2020. It will be a one-sided game for patrons of ''pro-establishment'' legislators to push or refuse any law/ budget proposals because LegCo just requires more than half of the ''all legislators''. 41 is adequate to pass any proposals they want after the effective date of mass resignation (12/1). (13) It also relieved the financial burdens of patrons behind both camps. A big help for anti-CPC oligarchs. Obviously, this move itself can't even weaken the gigantic influence of localist oligarchs. The BBC reported the mass arrest of opposition figures on November 2, 2020:
BBC's unbiased on this report. It is true that the Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance clearly defines criminal behaviour of legislators. Thus, it is uncontroversially legal to prosecute LegCo violators for crimes they commit.
At least Raymond Chan Chi-chuen's claim is not groundless that no arrest for violators in the ''pro-establishment'' camp can be seen as an undeniable sign of ''selective'' enforcement of the law. In other words, it's politically motivated by administrators. For DQ4+ mass resignation of 15 opposition legislators on November 11-12, SCMP's news report of November 13 cited interviews of the ''victims'':
Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung, who stepped down as the Labour Party’s sole lawmaker, admitted it would be difficult for his party to move forward.
“We have to seriously discuss what to do and whether the Labour Party should disband or not after our sole seat in the legislature is gone,” Cheung said.
Cheung, who served as a lawmaker in the 2004-08 term and was re-elected in 2012, co-founded the Labour Party with opposition stalwart Lee Cheuk-yan in December 2011. At its height, the party held four Legco seats from 2012 to 2016.
Apart from deciding whether to directly take part in elections again, Cheung said he believed the party needed to focus on maintaining the energy of civil society. He has expressed support for the younger generation of politicians.
“We still have seven seats in the district councils,” he said. “These young councillors are able to communicate with the radical forces. I believe in their abilities to think of something new.” (16)
Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung's words perfectly reflect the future tendency of the opposition camp in HK. Yes, they still have dominated the majorities (389 seats against 86 seats of the ''pro-establishment'' camp) of district councils throughout the entire city since the victorious 2019 Hong Kong District Council Election (November 24, 2019). The opposition secured their political base, a bastion for seeking more popular support from the grassroots and international communities. Furthermore, ''pro-establishment'' is totally incompetent in the political struggles on the street and the international communities. What Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung implied is that there will be the next colour revolution attempt in the near future. In that time, district council members will be play major roles in protecting FREEDOM FIGHTERS from administration.
5. Consulate General of the United States in Hong Kong and Macau Seeking Temporary Office Places for Renovation HK01 reported on November 6, 2020:
The last interesting news of November (at the time of writing this report) is this one. It can reveal which developer has a close tie with the US State Department in HK politically. As OBO's 2.566 billion HKD sale of US properties at #37 Shouson Peak, Shouson Hill to a local ''pro-US'' developer Hang Lung Properties (American CEO Ronnie Chichung Chan) proved, the rent of office space in Central or Admiralty by OBO will reveal another collaborator of US in HK. Besides this, the actual number of staffs at the largest spy hub in China is still mysterious. According to the report, there are at least more than 600 staff working at the consulate and seeking some offsite location for them. It means the number of staff actually increased after 1997 and 2014. Therefore, The Hon. Ambrose Lee Siu-kwong's statement is persuasive and not far from reality about their suspicious number. Strategically, it is important to know that the Consulate General of the United States in Hong Kong and Macau can ''independently'' operate in HK with mobility and resiliency. It means that China is still facing the most powerful consulate (intelligence hub) in the territory. However, we can't see any apparent DEA activities in HK as drug trafficking is one of major categories of anti-China operations in East / South East Asia. This is one of the political differences between South America. In fact, one of the regime engineers DEA is in HK.
The Far East Region is responsible for oversight and management of DEA operations in 34 countries in Southeast Asia. These activities are executed by personnel assigned to 14 DEA offices located throughout the Region, to include: Bangkok and Chiang Mai, Thailand; Beijing; Guangzhou and Hong Kong, China; Canberra and Sydney, Australia; Jakarta, Indonesia; Manila, Philippines; Seoul, South Korea; Tokyo, Japan; Hanoi, Vietnam; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; and Rangoon, Burma.
DEA’s enforcement priorities in the Far East include disrupting:
Diversion of pharmaceuticals, New Psychoactive Substances (NPS), and Fentanyl by Far East Region sources of supply
Chinese chemical companies supplying Transnational Criminal Organizations with precursor chemicals
Transnational Criminal Organizations distributing illicit substances in the Far East Region
Utilization of Far East banking and informal value transfer systems to launder illicit proceeds
Regional sources of supply distributing methamphetamine and heroin within in the Far East Region
DEA also provides assistance to Host Nation governments within Southeast Asia in capacity building to combat international drug trafficking and money laundering. (18)
There is only one news piece of DEA activity in HK which is impressively positive, and such news is now almost unimaginable under the current political turmoil between China and the US. Info.gov.hk reported on May 9, 2006:
Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department, the Anti-Smuggling Bureau (ASB) of Shenzhen Customs and the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) have smashed a Colombia-based cocaine trafficking syndicate. ......
The intelligence provided by the DEA comprised two main crucial elements - (a) a huge amount of cocaine had been delivered to the southern part of the Mainland and (b) the members of the drug trafficking syndicate would seek buyers in Hong Kong. Following extensive analysis, Hong Kong Customs officers tracked down a targeted person and put him under close surveillance.
When the targeted person departed for Shenzhen via Lo Wu Control Point in late January, Hong Kong Customs officers immediately contacted ASB of Shenzhen Customs requesting them to keep a close eye on the target across the boundary. Since then, Hong Kong Customs managed to get more and more information regarding the activities of other members of the syndicate.
In the following operations, the law enforcement agencies investigated a Colombia-based cocaine trafficking syndicate active in Hong Kong and Shenzhen, and took enforcement actions with the co-ordination of the General Administration of Customs.
Undercover Hong Kong Customs officers obtained one kilogram of cocaine as sample from the syndicate at a place in Kowloon in mid-March. Parties on the Mainland and Hong Kong meticulously analysed intelligence and monitored the activities of syndicate members across the boundary. They took synchronous enforcement actions in respective jurisdictions at an optimum time.
On March 15, the ASB of Shenzhen Customs notified Hong Kong Customs they had arrested two Hong Kong people and a Mainlander in an operation, seized some dangerous drugs and obtained information of the drugs storage centre. Hong Kong Customs then tightened surveillance on the ring members in Hong Kong in a bid to neutralise the whole ring.
On the afternoon of March 16, acting upon notification that ASB had seized a large quantity of cocaine from a storage centre in Zhongshan, Hong Kong Customs mounted a corresponding operation, arresting two Colombians, who were syndicate members, at two locations in Hong Kong. They were aged 32 and 27. (19)
Although this is politically a ''symbolic'' event, US must know that this kind of international cooperation is what foreign countries expecting from you always. It's quite opposite from imperialist interventions, wars, sanctions, assassinations and colour revolutions against their undesirable foreign regimes.
The reverse course against HKNSL (nullifying HKNSL in practice) is not suspended by recent political moves of Beijing against vested interests of HK and foreign meddlers. The SFC scandal itself is an attempt to nullify HKNSL in the untouchable field, the financial sector. ''Developing innovation and technology'' by HKSAR is just a PR stunt. They always replace strategic actions with more PR stunts. And even the HK's only ''innovation and technology'' project has been stacked in the construction phase for years due to systematic postponement by real estate oligarchs and HKSAR bureaucrats. Furthermore, only 6% of all arrested ''protesters'' are found guilty and actually sentenced during the still sporadically ongoing ''anti-extradition bill'' colour revolution" (6/9/2019-). Finally, a mass purge of opposition legislators at LegCo prepares for the next colour revolution in the near future in which 389 opposition district council representatives will play major roles. The economic, judicial, educational, social work and media sectors which are seen as ''protester-factories'' are still untouched by Beijing. Without structural changes to these key sectors, it is quite impossible to end the political chaos in HK. Genuine grassroots movements are already strangled to death and don't even exist in crony capitalist HK. Thus, the key player is the central government. At present, any local reformist attempts and criticism of mismanagement of HKSAR are all systematically nullified to maintain the status quo.
Additionally, I have to mention three issues. (a) the correct stance on COVID-19 is that HK must completely contain the number of COVID cases to zero with compulsory measures, then HK can reopen the economy and relieve any containment rules. And then HK can even properly think about the Travel Bubble with other nations where the epidemic was contained. Thus, it is not, proper time for HK to start the Air Travel Bubble with Singapore from November 22 as HK is, the fourth wave of the epidemic now. (b) the Education Bureau, the revoking the license of a teacher at Holap Ho Lap Primary School for ''Opium War''- related historical revisionism on November 12, 2020 was just another act of scapegoating because there were at least 222 complaints placed for ''misbehaviours'' of teachers until May 2020 (but only two teachers' license got revoked). (c) Although the US president Donald Trump is undoubtedly a foreign interventionist of the US empire but he is not a warmonger at all because his greatest contribution to the world politics is that he still desperately tries ending the ''forever wars'' in Middle East as he promised to his American voters. It's surprisingly unprecedented as US president. Diplomatically, Trump's policy is broadly popular among the Middle East countries. Furthermore, this is even well realised by intelligence agencies of Iran, Syria and Russia. RT reported on November 13, 2020:
Trump’s withdrawal appeared to make good on his campaign-trail promise to extricate the US from its “forever wars” in the Middle East. Trump, who referred to Syria in 2018 as “sand and death,” angered a host of Pentagon chiefs and diplomats when he announced the near-total pull-out from the country last October. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis resigned in protest when Trump first announced withdrawal plans in 2018, and Jeffrey said on Thursday that the decision was “the most controversial thing in my fifty years in government.”
Jeffrey’s predecessor, Brett McGurk, also handed in his notice when Trump revealed the pull-out. Taking over from McGurk, Jeffrey and his team routinely misled the president to ensure that “there was never a Syria withdrawal.”
Even before he signed up to work for the Trump administration, Jeffrey’s opposition to the president was well known. Shortly after Trump was named as the Republican candidate in 2016, Jeffrey signed a letter declaring that the businessman and TV host “would be the most reckless president in American history.” The letter’s other signatories included a host of Bush administration security officials, who helped shape the policies that destabilized the Middle East and gave rise to Islamic State.
Despite his open and secret opposition to Trump’s policies, Jeffrey told Defense One that the president’s “modest” approach to the Middle East has yielded better results than George Bush’s military interventionism or Barack Obama’s apologetic overtures to Muslim leaders while arming extremist militias in Syria.
Trump, by contrast, has managed to put together a political alliance between Israel and a number of Gulf states, while maintaining relations with Iraq and focusing pressure on Iran. Conflict in the region is frozen in a “stalemate,” Jeffrey noted.
“Nobody really wants to see President Trump go, among all our allies,” he said. “The truth is President Trump and his policies are quite popular among all of our popular states in the region. Name me one that’s not happy.” (20)
Later, Biden published his Department of Defense landing team on November 10, 2020. RT reported on November 14 in detail:
On matters of defense, restoring America’s “soul” apparently means placing weapons manufacturers back in charge of the Pentagon.
Biden announced his Department of Defense landing team on Tuesday. Of these 23 policy experts, one third have taken funding from arms manufacturers, according to a report published this week by Antiwar.com.
A knot of hawks
Leading the team is Kathleen Hicks, an undersecretary of defense in the Obama administration, and an employee of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a think tank funded by a host of NATO governments, oil firms, and weapons makers Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Atomics. The latter firm produces the Predator drones used by the Obama administration to kill hundreds of civilians in at least four Middle-Eastern countries.
Hicks was a vocal opponent of President Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw a number of US troops from Germany, claiming in August that such a move “benefits our adversaries.”
Two other members of Biden’s Pentagon team, Andrew Hunter and Melissa Dalton, work for CSIS and served under Obama in the Defense Department.
Also on the team are Susanna Blume and Ely Ratner, who work for the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). Another hawkish think-tank, CNAS is funded by Google, Facebook, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin. Three more team members – Stacie Pettyjohn, Christine Wormuth and Terri Tanielian – were most recently employed by the RAND corporation, which draws funding from the US military, NATO, several Gulf states, and hundreds of state and corporate sources.
Michele Flournoy is widely tipped to lead the Pentagon under Biden. Flournoy would be the first woman in history to head the Defense Department, but her appointment would only be revolutionary on the surface. Flournoy is the co-founder of CNAS, and served in the Pentagon under Obama and Bill Clinton. As under-secretary of defense for policy under Obama, Flournoy helped craft the 2010 troop surge in Afghanistan, a deployment of 100,000 US troops that led to a doubling in American deaths and made little measurable progress toward ending the war.
‘Forever war’ returns
President Trump, who campaigned on stopping the US’ “forever wars” in the Middle East and remains the first US president in 40 years not to start a new conflict, has nevertheless also staffed the Pentagon with hawkish officials. Recently ousted Defense Secretary Mark Esper was a top lobbyist for Raytheon, while his predecessor, Patrick Shanahan, worked for Boeing. Trump’s appointment this week of National Counterterrorism Center Director Christopher Miller as acting secretary of defense, coupled with combat veteran Col. Douglas MacGregor as senior adviser, looked set to buck that trend, given MacGregor’s vocal opposition to America’s Middle Eastern wars. (21)
China Prefers the Return of the US ', 'Forever War Regime'? ''Forever War(s)'' (advocated by CSIS; CNAS; RAND; NATO; military industrial complex and their paid mainstream media including social media etc.) mean total sacrifice of American workers' lives and others. In other words, the Biden regime will only mean the return of the ''forever wars'' policy. Unfortunately, the Chinese state media and the incompetent ''pro-establishment'' camp of HK (it doesn't mean they are ''pro-China'' or patriots; they are just royal to HKSAR bureaucrats and localist oligarchs in order to join the government) still don't understand Trump's real historical role and his positive side due to the ongoing trade war and his apparent ''anti-China'' stunts. The most important thing about US president Donald Trump is his desperate attempt to end the ''forever wars'' and prevent new wars from the establishment. This is why he is increasingly popular among Americans. From this point of view, China and Chinese patriots shouldn't miscalculate the political tendency of the Trump administration and the nature of the upcoming ''Biden regime'' (if democrats win the court cases nationwide). Don't be misled by impression management and narrative management of the mainstream ''fake news'' media. We must realise the most beautiful thing about US politics now.
HKET, 【十四五規劃】中央對十四五與2035建議全文公布 合共60條, November 3, 2020.
Bayarea.gov.hk, 便利惠民, November 6, 2019.
HKCD, 國家大科學基礎設施項目首次落戶深港科技合作區, April 26, 2020.
Jia-yin, Lin, THINK HONG KONG, 新界遼闊土地沒有盡用 永續研究下2030遠景淪空談, November 6, 2020.
HKTDC, HKTDC Belt and Road outreach: Promoting Hong Kong as the commercial hub for the Belt and Road, September 8, 2019.
Bauhinia Foundation Research Centre, 十二五期間廣東經濟結構轉型與香港的機遇(研究報告), August 2011.
ON.CC, 黑暴示威拘逾萬人僅23%被控 議員批律政司繼續歎慢板, November 10, 2020.
VOA, 香港七人被控暴動罪庭審被裁定無罪獲釋, November 1, 2020.
Primrose Riordan and Nicolle Liu, FINANCIAL TIMES, Hong Kong regulator clears funds and banks to implement US sanctions, November 9, 2020.
Npc.gov.cn, 中华人民共和国香港特别行政区维护国家安全法, July 1, 2020.
Apple Daily, 港版國安法｜傳證監會建議銀行可實施美國制裁 因不太可能觸犯國安法, November 9, 2020.
Elections.gov.hk, Election Results, September 6, 2016.
LegCo, 立法會及轄下委員會的 會議法定人數, December 12, 2017.
BBC, 香港泛民主派議員被捕引發立法會「特權法」爭議, November 2, 2020.
Elegislation.gov.hk, Cap. 382 Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance, February 15, 2017.
Lilian Cheng, SCMP, In wake of Legco disqualifications, Hong Kong’s opposition mulls an uncertain future, November 13, 2020.
陳嘉洛 蔡偉南, HK01, 01獨家｜美駐港領館擬翻新 覓樓面搬遷遇阻滯 領館：屬初步階段, November 6, 2020.
DEA, Far East, accessed on November 13, 2020.
Info.gov.hk, HK and Mainland Customs, DEA bust Colombia-based drug trafficking ring (with photo), May 9, 2006.
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.