Lucky fat ladies, porcelain pigs, ceramic musicians and giant Buddhas are crammed into Hong Kong's antique boutiques, but some experts, backed by Chinese law, say many of them shouldn't be there at all.
By a curious twist of history and geopolitics, Hong Kong has become the legitimate outlet for the ill-gotten treasures of Chinese history, a legal market for illegally obtained objets d'art that can and do command huge sums.
On Hollywood Road, Hong Kong's famed strip of art and antique outlets, the shopfronts provide a veritable tour of Chinese and Asian history, selling everything from Tibetan temple carpets and centuries-old Chinese wedding cabinets to giant Cambodian and Burmese Buddhas that arrive in the territory in wooden crates.
Shopkeepers will gladly provide a potted history of each object, with details of how it was unearthed -- perhaps by Chinese peasants dropping dynamite down sink holes in Shanxi Province to find well stocked burial chambers.
Apparently genuine, the items are clearly labelled and many are still covered in soil to prove that they have only recently been unearthed from their ancient Chinese resting places.
Experts in Hong Kong say that most of the Chinese ceramics for sale on Hollywood Road have been smuggled in from China -- in contravention of Chinese law -- and that their murky provenance is an open secret.
"If we are talking about the authentic objects on Hollywood Road, all of them were made in China," said Professor Cheng Pei-kai (鄭培凱), director of City University's Chinese Civilisation Centre.
And the objects on sale in recent years were "mostly smuggled," he said.
Sally Chu, who runs a shop selling Chinese and Tibetan textiles on Hollywood Road, said: "We talk about it all the time, me and the other traders. We know that relics dug up from historic sites are being traded here. It's an open secret."
Currently most Chinese historical relics that pre-date 1795 cannot be legally exported out of mainland China. Since its return to Chinese sovereignty in 1997 after more than a century as a British colony, Hong Kong has remained a separate customs entity.
Chinese law is set to become even more strict by the end of the year when a new regulation making 1911 the cut-off date comes into force, the State Administration of Cultural Heritage said earlier this year in an indication of Beijing's eagerness to stem the outward flow of the nations antiquities.
And while the shops of Hollywood Road appear well-stocked and Beijing attempts to stem the flow of treasure over China's borders -- even executing grave robbers to try to stop the plunder -- it seems Hong Kong's authorities see little problem.
Indeed, in the past 10 years Hong Kong's customs and excise department has stopped just three consignments of antiques illegally entering the territory, it said.
"In view of the small number of cases over the last decade, it is considered that smuggling of relics into Hong Kong is not prevalent," a spokesman said in an e-mailed statement.
But among collectors and experts there is a much different consensus.
"It's very easy. If so many people can sneak in and out of China, they of course can do this [smuggling]," Cheng said. "Ten years ago it was more serious. At that time even some local government and military units were also involved in smuggling, then the central government began to crack down."
Now even though the supply end of the market is less organized, more individuals are involved, Cheng said.
"In the countryside the local people are more conscious of the commercial value of these things, that's a big change," he said. "This change in the last 10 years has increased the local people's involvement in digging up and stealing these objects."
And in a recent twist in the market trend an increasing number of buyers from mainland China are crossing the border to buy antiques smuggled from the nation's hinterland provinces, which they take back to China as legitimate purchases.
"The big buyers are from mainland China," Sally Chu said. "When they buy from Hong Kong, the pieces have certificates," she said, explaining the advantage of purchasing at a premium in a market where "people are entitled to buy whatever is available legally."
The buyers from China range from private collectors to public museum curators, Cheng said.
"You can not sell in China, because it is illegal. However, there is no law against the sale of whatever objects are already in Hong Kong," he said.
Some collectors express concern that the ready availability of smuggled antiques in Hong Kong makes the market here an easy target for money laundering. With certificates of authenticity provided by Hong Kong dealers, the goods can be legitimately sold on to the international markets of New York, Paris or London, or passed on to customers and acquaintances in China as corporate gifts.
"Many private collectors bring cash, It's a way to launder money," said one Hollywood Road dealer who did not want to be named.
For City University's Cheng, the real issue is the destruction of history.
"If you just think they are beautiful, that's one thing," he said of China's historic treasure trove of artefacts and art works. "But where they are buried or stored in historical layers they can show their cultural meaning. That's what's being destroyed and that's terrible."
Chinese themselves waged wholesale war on their own cultural heritage during the Cultural Revolution of the late 1960s, as frenzied youths directed by Mao Zedong (毛澤東) set about trying to wipe out the "four olds" -- old customs, old culture, old habits and old ideas.
But Cheng says the Red Guards' targets were above ground.
"Now what's happening is underground," he said. "For historical and cultural relics above ground you usually have records. But what's happening now is that they are destroying things underground, where things should be discovered in their right place, by the right people. Now we have a problem in understanding. That's the real problem. It's as bad as the Cultural Revolution."
But Cheng said that under present circumstances there is little besides education that can be done to change the trend.
"It's one-country two-systems, and it's legal, so they can really sell," Cheng said, referring to the political and economic system under which Hong Kong has functioned since 1997 as an "special economic zone" of China.
"We are living in a capitalist world. We are living in this environment of profit-making and this is legal, so you cannot stop it," he said.
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS