British courts' swift trials and severe sentencing a good reference for Hong Kong

The case against online news website “Stand News” has concluded with two chief editors and the parent company found guilty of "conspiring to publish seditious publications." Western governments, including the United States and the United Kingdom, promptly criticized the verdict, alleging that freedom of speech and the press are diminishing in Hong Kong. However, when compared to actions taken by these same Western governments, Hong Kong's measures appear relatively restrained.

In the United Kingdom, swift trials and severe sentencing have once again set a precedent. British Undersecretary of State (Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office), Catherine West, posted on the social media platform X, urging Hong Kong authorities to halt what she termed "political prosecutions" of journalists and to uphold the freedom of the press as stipulated in the Basic Law. This criticism is ironic given the UK's recent harsh sentencing of instigators of domestic riots.

On July 29, nationwide riots erupted across the UK following a knife attack at a children's dance school perpetrated by a member of a minority group. The British government responded by employing rapid trial and sentencing procedures reminiscent of those used during the 2011 London riots. By August 13, authorities had arrested 1,024 individuals, with 572 swiftly prosecuted. Many received immediate prison sentences ranging from several weeks to ten years, including an 11-year-old boy and a 69-year-old man.

By West's own standards critiquing Hong Kong, some of those heavily sentenced in the UK were merely engaging in what could be described as "free exchange of opinions" online, without participating directly in the riots. For example, 28-year-old Jordan Parlour from Leeds admitted to posting racially charged messages on Facebook and was sentenced to 20 months in prison, becoming the first individual sentenced in connection with the UK riots. Parlour's posts included statements such as, "smash [the] f--- out of Britannia hotel (a hotel housing migrants)". He also claimed in a comment on Facebook that migrants were given "the Life of Riley off the tax us hard-working people earn when it could be put to better use". Compared to the 11 articles by “Stand News” deemed seditious, Parlour's comments seem relatively minor. Notably, the maximum sentence for "sedition" in Hong Kong at that time was two years, making it unlikely that the defendants in the “Stand News” case will face harsher penalties than Parlour. In some instances, individuals in the UK received several weeks of imprisonment merely for reacting with supportive emojis to radical posts—outcomes unimaginable in Hong Kong.

Similarly, U.S. State Department spokesman Matthew Miller stated on X that the conviction of “Stand News” represents a direct attack on press freedom and tarnishes Hong Kong's reputation for openness. However, recalling the sentencing following the 2021 Capitol Hill riots, Enrique Tarrio, former leader of the right-wing group Proud Boys, was sentenced to 22 years in prison—the longest sentence among all defendants involved. Tarrio was convicted of "seditious conspiracy" despite not being physically present at the Capitol during the riots; he was coordinating activities online from a hotel in Baltimore. When comparing the 2021 Capitol Hill riots to the prolonged unrest in Hong Kong in 2019, the U.S. incident was relatively brief, yet one of its organizers received a 22-year sentence. By American standards, it raises the question of why Tarrio's sentence is not considered a violation of freedom of speech.

The situation in France further highlights this apparent double standard. A spokesperson for the European Union's External Action Service criticized the “Stand News” verdict as another example of shrinking press freedom in Hong Kong, warning that it could further limit diverse opinions and the free flow of information—both fundamental to Hong Kong's economic success. But look at what the French did. France recently arrested Pavel Durov, founder of the messaging app Telegram, accusing the platform of facilitating unchecked criminal activities. It’s noted that Telegram was widely used during Hong Kong's 2019 unrest, with several groups directly organizing riots through the app. Despite this, Hong Kong authorities have not taken action against such communication platforms, which often claim they cannot control the content shared by users. Now that  France directly hit on a communication software provider, but the EU spokesperson says nothing about freedom of expression in France.

In summary, the United States and other Western governments often exhibit inconsistencies between their words and actions. The UK's handling of rioters and France's arrest of Telegram's founder inadvertently support the Hong Kong court's judgment in the “Stand News” case by demonstrating methods of addressing incitement to rebellion. Notably, the UK's rapid sentencing effectively quelled the riots within 11 days—an approach Hong Kong should seriously study and consider.

Wing-hung Lo

Bastille Commentary

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Trump's talking up his China visit next year with all the enthusiasm of a dealmaker closing a big one. Fine. But the thing is: America's got to pick between two paths ahead. Either Washington works with Beijing to uphold a genuine international order—not the selective "rules-based" playbook the West loves to cite—or it rallies the old imperial gang for an "Empire Strikes Back" scenario across the Asia-Pacific.

Two days back, China's carrier Fujian slipped through the Taiwan Strait. First time since commissioning. The Fujian isn't just China's third carrier—it's the first one designed, developed, and built entirely in China, and it's got electromagnetic catapults. That's not just hardware. That's a statement.

Then, Washington green-lit $11.15 billion in arms sales to Taiwan—the biggest weapons package to the island in U.S. history. The Pentagon's spin? The sales "serve “U.S. national, economic, and security interests by supporting the recipient’s continuing efforts to modernize its armed forces and to maintain a credible defensive capability." China's Foreign Ministry didn't mince words today: U.S. arms sales to support (Taiwan) independence will only backfire on itself.

Okinawa Radar Games
Meanwhile, the U.S. and Japan are making their big moves. On December 15, Japan's Ministry of Defense signed a land lease deal to deploy mobile radar on Okinawa's easternmost island—all to track Chinese carriers and aircraft operating between Okinawa and Miyako islands. Beijing's spokesperson fired back with a pointed question: Is Japan creating incidents and engaging in close-range provocations to provide cover and excuses for its own military expansion? Is it following the track of right-wing forces down the evil and dead-end path of militarism?

Here's something worth to note: Japan's an old imperial power too. And it was once a major carrier nation.

Back in September, the U.S. military website Army Recognition broke the story that China's first nuclear-powered carrier, the 004, is already under construction. When foreign media pressed China's Defense Ministry on whether "China is building a fourth aircraft carrier and whether it will be nuclear-powered," the spokesperson played it cool: they "do not have specific information."

But as the saying goes: God is in the details. Expert analysis suggests the PLA's aiming to go toe-to-toe with America's supercarrier USS Gerald R. Ford. The 004 nuclear carrier is expected to displace somewhere between 110,000 and 120,000 tons with a length of 340 meters—outclassing the Ford-class at 100,000 tons and 337 meters. The 004's projected to carry over 90 aircraft, beating the Ford's roughly 75.

Twenty-Five Years, Three Carriers
What can you call a miracle? Everyone knows aircraft carriers were the domain of major industrial powers from the early 20th century, taking a full century of development to achieve dominance over the seven seas. Here's some context: China purchased the Varyag in 1999 and started refitting it at Dalian Shipyard on April 26, 2002. On September 25, 2012, it was officially renamed Liaoning and entered service. China went from zero to carrier capability in just 25 years. Are Chinese carriers really viable? That's the question many netizens keep asking—mainly the ones from Japan.

The great architect and Bauhaus pioneer Ludwig Mies van der Rohe summed up his life's work by pointing out that architecture lives in the details. "Precise details and vivid vitality can create a great work," he said. Flip side? Sloppy details destroy order and rules—as terrifying as the devil himself.

China's carrier success reflects its industrial achievements and excellent execution capability—rooted in outstanding historical traditions. Look at the infrastructure built during the “Spring and Autumn” and “Warring States” periods: the Qin Speedway, Dujiangyan, Zhengguo Canal, and the Great Wall. You'll quickly realize that Chinese culture goes way beyond mere "craftsmanship." What's the difference? Strategic vision combined with meticulous attention to detail.

Trump's Details Problem
Trump doesn't sweat the small stuff—but he can't establish himself through integrity either. Take the Nobel Peace Prize, for instance. Today's world isn't the world of 200 years ago. America's current situation looks exactly like Spain's futile attachment to the Americas back then. But perhaps it's even worse, and this comes down to details: U.S. carrier aircraft repeatedly lose wheels during takeoff, and there have been incidents of accidentally shooting down their own planes in the darkness.


Postscript: Don't know what you're thinking, Trump. But if you want to fight, you've got to get the details right first—especially quality control. A superpower can't be this sloppy and disorganized, yeah?