All too little noticed in the flurry of executive orders and chaos of the opening weeks of the Trump administration was a statement with potentially profound consequences sandwiched into the new 10 percent tariff imposed on China – that “the articles that are products of China” will “hereinafter… include products of Hong Kong.”
This insert, published in the Federal Register, represents a decision that, for the first time since Trump’s 2020 Executive Order on Hong Kong Normalization, implements tariff treatment of Hong Kong as indistinguishable from China, disregarding Hong Kong’s status as an autonomous territory.
There is a real discussion to be had about whether “one country, two systems” exists anymore in any meaningful sense – there was and is compelling logic to the 2020 executive order. But this consequential question is not just a matter of economic statecraft or foreign policy, but one of law. Congress must assert its voice, given both its constitutionally enumerated powers to set tariffs and the strong role it has played on Hong Kong policy over the years.
Indeed, we are under no illusion about what China is doing. It is critical to expose and address how Beijing has sought to use Hong Kong’s trade and economic status to game its advantages – to the disadvantage of the United States and others. Chinese companies, for example, have been able to export through Hong Kong to secure lower tariff treatment from the United States and, prior to 2020, were also able to avoid restrictions on dual use items or other sensitive technologies that applied to China. Chinese companies can also tap into the city’s access to global investors, which they cannot do on the mainland due to Beijing’s strict capital controls.
But for the United States to walk away from its commitment to the people of Hong Kong – to forgo any recognition of its innate difference from China and any hope Hong Kong has for a democratic future without even a cursory debate in Congress – is unconscionable.
Bipartisan Support
The United States has sought to support Hong Kong’s autonomy since passing the U.S.-Hong Kong Policy Act in 1992. The act promotes trade and economic engagement, supports Hong Kong’s government and civil society, and advances educational and cultural exchanges as well as democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.
Congress passed the act with a clear, bipartisan message – with both the House and Senate approving the measure by voice vote. It stated that the United States must support Hong Kongers to continue to live in freedom and with dignity, and that the United States should “seek to maintain and expand economic and trade relations with Hong Kong” and continue to “treat Hong Kong as a separate territory in economic and trade matters.”
That goal, while laudable, is one that has been receding ever more rapidly over the past decade or so. Beijing has conducted a concerted campaign to return Hong Kong to the fold, erasing its autonomous political and judicial systems and turning it into simply another megacity under Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s authoritarian thumb, just like dozens of other megacities across China.
Xi has asserted a strong hand because he wants the independent, democratic, capitalist essence of Hong Kong to die. Working through its handpicked chief executive, Xi’s regime has jailed the brave voices who dared to speak out – people like student leader Joshua Wong and publisher Jimmy Lai. But Xi also knows that the city is not with him – that Hong Kongers, for the sake of survival, for now, may choose to remain silent, but in their heart of hearts they loath what is happening to their city.
And Beijing’s iron fist has been heavy as a result.
In 2020, in response to large protests in Hong Kong, China’s rubber-stamp legislature introduced draft national security legislation – bypassing elected leaders in Hong Kong – that targeted broadly-defined acts of secession, unspecified “terrorist activities,” and efforts to subvert State power in the city. Beijing deployed its “nuclear option” to silent dissent, effectively reneging on the promise that it made in the Sino-British Joint Declaration – an international treaty signed by former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and China’s then-paramount leader Deng Xiaoping in 1984 – to preserve Hong Kong’s way of life even under Chinese rule.
Beijing’s goals are clear, and the Chinese Communist Party has been relentless in seeking to impose its will on the people of Hong Kong. And, arguably, as Beijing aggressively seeks to erase the lines between the “two systems,” reconsideration of where, how, and whether the United States should continue to treat Hong Kong as different from the rest of China is in order, especially if that treatment creates risk for export controls, investment flows, and critical supply chains.
The Role for Congress
But that’s a debate that needs to happen out in the open and should include congressional engagement, considering how important Congress has been in driving U.S. policy on Hong Kong over the past several decades. Moreover, having hearings and debate on Capitol Hill also means that the voices that Beijing fears most – the dissidents, the brave Hong Kong civil society groups still operating globally – might have a say.
Indeed, the proposed Hong Kong Policy Act of 2024, introduced in December 2024, too late in the last Congress to be passed, recognized that Beijing’s actions are stifling Hong Kong’s political and economic autonomy. The legislation stated that U.S. policy toward Hong Kong “should be updated with a new policy framework that protects United States national security interests and is centered on the people in Hong Kong, including their aspirations, their human rights and well-being, and their desire for autonomy and a democratic system of government in Hong Kong.”
Just as the United States considers how to treat Hong Kong’s trade and economic status in the face of Beijing’s pressure, so too do U.S. lawmakers need to reconsider what the best and most effective policy options are to keep faith with the people of Hong Kong – and their desire for a future characterized by democracy, rule of law, a free press, and a vibrant civil society. It should be a future in which Hong Kong’s unique history, culture, and politics can continue to flourish.
This is an especially critical time for Congress to weigh-in, given the Trump administration’s clear disregard for these once uncontroversial and bipartisan priorities, as evidenced by the dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development, the National Endowment for Democracy and other organizations that have long garnered bipartisan support for their support of human rights globally.
All too often in recent years – even under administrations that expressed a commitment to democracy, rule of law and human rights – the United States has failed to stand by Hong Kong in its moments of need, turned its back on Hong Kong’s democratic voices, and looked the other way as Beijing has sought to crush the spirit of Hong Kongers. While American leaders may ultimately determine that the time has come to treat Hong Kong and China the same for the new tariff designations, the United States should not do so without any attention or consideration, allowing Hong Kong’s democracy to die in silent darkness.