The Hong Kong crisis is no longer simply a confrontation between pro-democracy protesters and the communist government in China and its subservient local administration. It has expanded into a campaign in the information warfare conducted by China against the West.
Beijing once again has accused the US and other democratic nations of interfering in Hong Kong’s affairs, and thus in China’s, and fomenting the disturbances that have rocked the territory for more than three months.
The protests were triggered by the Hong Kong government’s attempt to adopt extradition legislation that would have sent its residents to China for legal prosecution.
This occurred after years of Beijing reneging on the political freedoms enjoyed by Hong Kong under the “one country, two systems” formula guaranteed by the Basic Law of 1984.
The extent and intensity of the demonstrations escalated after the police used harsh measures to suppress the protesters, and Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥) refused to withdraw the bill or meet the other demands for an investigation of police tactics, detainee releases and universal suffrage. (No one knows what form of torture is being inflicted on the arrested protesters in dark cells at the hands of police who were willing to break hands, arms and legs before cameras in broad daylight.)
Beijing almost immediately began blaming a US “black hand” for instigating the demonstrations, despite official US government denials of involvement.
At one point, Beijing even identified US embassy personnel and released personal information about them, prompting the US Department of State to issue a strong protest about what it described as “dangerous” Chinese behavior.
However, China’s renewal of its false claims now constitutes a challenge to the diplomatic integrity and credibility of the US and other governments — and a test of Beijing’s success at blatant disinformation.
That is so whether China’s complaints and accusations derive from genuine paranoia on the part of an insecure dictatorship, or from clever posturing to keep the West on the defensive.
In either case, it requires an appropriately firm response from Washington.
The State Department should declare that Beijing’s persistence in falsely blaming the US and other Western countries for the communist regime’s own governance failures is unacceptable.
It should state that, henceforth, Washington would abandon its prior official reticence — despite protesters’ appeals for support — and adopt a more active role.
The new proactive stance would mean immediately commencing an information campaign directed at the Chinese people — including Tibetans, Uighurs and Mongolians — to counter Beijing’s suppression of the truth about what is happening in Hong Kong.
Furthermore, Washington should state that it would ask Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan — which Beijing also has accused of “harboring ulterior motives” and interfering in Hong Kong — to join in this international truth-telling effort.
The democratic countries, led by the US, would thus finally be in the position of mounting a sustained response to the China’s extensive disinformation campaign against the West on a range of international issues.
It would prove to be an important test of the democracies’ will and ability to meet the information challenge head-on and, if effective, it would be a game-changer in the war of ideas with Communist China.
It would finally get the West off its back foot by confronting Beijing’s “win without fighting” strategy of undermining US and Western interests and values.
Since China constantly accuses the West of interfering in its internal affairs whenever international rules and norms are invoked, some overt non-kinetic interference is long overdue.
As the old political saw goes, we will stop telling the truth about Communist China when it stops telling lies about the West.
Finally, the US should advise Beijing that any substantial use of force against Hong Kong by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, the People’s Armed Police or the regular police force, would trigger an immediate termination of the territory’s special status under the US-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992.
That would deprive Beijing of the immense economic benefits it derives from Hong Kong’s privileged place as a safe, reliable international banking center, unlike every other Chinese city.
Again, reciprocity and honoring commitments should be the watchwords of US policy toward China. Hong Kong’s moment of truth must mean getting the truth into China.
Joseph Bosco served as China country director in the office of the US secretary of defense. He is a fellow at the Institute for Taiwan-American Studies and a member of the advisory committee of the Global Taiwan Institute.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
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