Donald Trump's stint in office unleashed a global tariff war, built on a foundation of economic fallacies that sought to penalize trade partners across the globe. Hong Kong, as a bastion of free trade with minimal tariffs, found itself in the crosshairs, slapped with punitive duties by Washington.
Trump consistently argued that nations enjoying a trade surplus with the US were "cheating and exploiting" America, a narrative he wielded to justify imposing "reciprocal tariffs."
Yet, the reality flips Trump's claims on their head: the US enjoys a substantial trade surplus with Hong Kong. US Trade Representative data from 2024 reveals a US$21.9 billion surplus in Washington's favor. Trump's logic would suggest the US has been "cheating and exploiting" Hong Kong for years. Nonetheless, on April 2, the US declared sweeping "reciprocal tariffs" on China, including Hong Kong, ballooning rates to a staggering 145%. Such measures flout WTO regulations and disregard Hong Kong's status as a distinct customs territory, separate from mainland China.
Even with the preliminary trade accord of May 12, which offered a 90-day reprieve on most tariffs, a 30% levy remained on goods from both mainland China and Hong Kong. This move is not just inequitable for Hong Kong; it undermines Trump's own rhetoric of "reciprocity."
《Bastille Post》(巴士的報) commissioned a professional polling agency to conduct a survey to gauge the public’s sentiment on the tariff conflict. Between May 6 and 14, the agency interviewed randomly selected 702 Hong Kong residents over 18 by phone. The poll revealed that: A resounding 79.7% of respondents deemed it unfair for the US to impose high tariffs on Hong Kong, while the US benefits from a trade surplus and faces no tariffs in return. A mere 5.8% found it justifiable.
A clear majority, 72.2%, concurred that Trump's tariff war would inflict severe damage on the global economy, including the US, branding it a self-defeating strategy. Only 13.2% disagreed.
An overwhelming 73.9% denounced Trump's tactics of extracting concessions through tariff threats as blatant bullying. A mere 13.9% dissented.
The Hong Kong public's sentiment is unequivocal: the unilateral tariffs imposed by the US are met with strong disapproval, seen as an act of aggression with counterproductive consequences.
US politicians often posture as champions of Hong Kong, advocating on its behalf. Now, it's time to relay a clear message: nearly 80% of Hong Kong residents vehemently oppose Washington's tariff bullying. If the US truly seeks to represent Hong Kong's voice, it should heed the will of its people.
Central government officials have long exposed the hypocrisy of Washington's stance. On April 15, Xia Baolong – Director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office – condemned the US's imposition of tariffs reaching 145% on tariff-free Hong Kong as "absurd" (this was before the preliminary agreement to reduce tariffs). He highlighted that the US had amassed a US$271.5 billion trade surplus with Hong Kong over the past decade, yet it persisted in levying such tariffs – a display of "sheer arrogance and shamelessness." This underscores that the US cannot bear to see Hong Kong prosper and is the primary force undermining its freedoms, rule of law, and economic stability. The US “isn’t just after our tariffs—it’s after our very lifeblood.”
Xia's words cut to the core: the US, masquerading as a benefactor of Hong Kong, is in reality attempting to suffocate the city. The temporary tariff truce brokered in Geneva on May 12 should not lull anyone into complacency. On the same day, the US Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security moved to revoke some Biden-era export controls on advanced computing semiconductors, but simultaneously issued new AI chip export guidelines, stating that “using Huawei Ascend chips anywhere violates US export control regulations.” Despite minor revisions to the wording, the move was severely condemned by Beijing. The US campaign to contain China continues unabated.
It's no surprise that mainland netizens have wryly dubbed Trump "Chuan Jianguo" – "Trump the Nation Builder", here “Nation” refers to China. The one good thing abut his returning to office is showing the world that the US is a wolf in sheep's clothing, with only its own resurgence in mind. America's constant meddling in Hong Kong affairs is akin to a fox offering New Year's greetings – a facade for ulterior motives. Our poll confirms that Hong Kong people are not fooled: they recognize the bullying nature of the US regime.
Bastille Commentary
** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **
A few days ago, I found myself discussing the “India–Pakistan Air Battle” with a young acquaintance. To my surprise, he had no idea what I was talking about. It made me realize just how little coverage this textbook case of modern warfare has received. For the benefit of those who don’t follow military affairs, let’s break down why this event matters.
Earlier this year, India suffered a terrorist attack, which it swiftly attributed to a group operating out of Pakistan. In response, the Indian Air Force launched “Operation Sindoor” in the early hours of May 7, targeting what it called “terrorist facilities” inside Pakistan. India expected a swift, overwhelming victory—after all, it had the numbers and the hardware. Yet, the outcome was a resounding victory for Pakistan.
What unfolded was a beyond-visual-range(BVR) air battle—jets from both sides never even saw each other. India fielded over 70 fighters; Pakistan, just 30. Neither side crossed the border; missiles flew across invisible lines. Despite India’s numerical advantage, it got nothing for its trouble. On that day, Pakistan scored an astonishing 6–0: using Chinese-built J-10CE fighters and PL-15 long-range air-to-air missiles, it downed three of India’s latest French Rafale jets, two Russian Su-30s, a MiG-29, and even an Israeli drone. In over an hour of dogfighting, Pakistan’s J-10CEs emerged unscathed. In the days that followed, they also downed an older French Mirage 2000 and even neutralized a Russian S-400 air defense system.
So, what happened? Pakistan deployed a fully integrated Chinese aerial combat system. India threw its best jets into the fight (notably, the US refused to let Pakistan use its F-16s). Indian jets, shielded by early warning aircraft, tried to sneak in at ultra-low altitude to avoid Chinese-made HQ-series missiles. They stayed well inside Indian airspace, planning to hit-and-run. Yet, despite their careful planning, they were tracked and shot down 70–90 kilometers from the border—without ever crossing it.
How? Pakistan used Chinese ZDK-03A early warning planes, electronic warfare jets, and ground radars to monitor the whole airspace. They even intercepted the downed Indian pilots’ radio chatter. The attack model was “A shoots, B guides”: early warning aircraft locked onto Indian jets, relayed targeting data to the J-10CEs, which, without switching on their own radar, fired PL-15 missiles from extreme range. The Rafales didn’t even know they were being targeted.
The PL-15 is the world’s first air-to-air missile with a dual-pulse engine. It’s guided by external data links in its early phase—no need to use its own radar, so it flies “silent.” The Rafale’s sensors pick up nothing. Only when the missile is 20 kilometers from its target does it ignite again, sprint for the kill, and switch on its own radar for a terminal lock. By then, the pilot has only seconds to react—nowhere near enough time to evade or jam the missile.
The PL-15’s range is up to 300 kilometers; the export version Pakistan uses is rated for 145 kilometers. By comparison, India’s air-to-air missiles don’t exceed 100 kilometers. The Rafale’s MICA missiles, with an 80-kilometer range, were found still attached to the wreckage—never fired. The Indian pilots likely never even knew what hit them.
No other country in recent years has fought such a lengthy, large-scale air battle. This India–Pakistan clash is a case study for every air force—a 6–0 scoreline that shocked even seasoned observers. For years, claims about China’s advanced, affordable weapons were met with skepticism. But after this battle, with $50 million J-10CEs downing $250 million Rafales, the evidence is hard to ignore.
Many analysts have called this China’s “DeepSeek Moment”—a breakthrough as significant as the debut of its AI language models earlier this year. Even the usually skeptical US magazine The National Interest acknowledged the J-10CE’s performance, saying China’s air combat capabilities now have “undeniable credibility.” And remember, the J-10CE is only China’s fourth-ranked fighter.
What does this mean for international relations?
First: China understands what it means to be weak. Recently, a clip of US scholar John Mearsheimer resurfaced online. He said:
“The Chinese talk at great lengths about the “Century of National Humiliation,” which ran from the late 1840’s to the late 1940’s. The cause of that was that China was weak, of which the Great Powers in the system took advantage. So if you’re Chinese today, you understand full well that you don’t want to be weak, because you don’t want to suffer another Century of National Humiliation.”
Second: The US is a ruthless power. Mearsheimer also said:
“The United States, as many of you know and probably many of you don't know, is a ruthless great power. You never want to underestimate how ruthless the United States is. Despite all the liberal rhetoric that we use to cover up our ruthless behavior, we are tough customers, and the Chinese are finding that out now.”
The US is ruthless if anyone dares to challenge it's position
If China cannot develop the world’s most powerful military, how can it face America’s ruthlessness? Fortunately, China has now proven its capability—validated not in its own war, but in real combat elsewhere. In the 2020 China–India border clash, the PLA faced Indian troops with broadswords and spiked clubs, leaving the J-10C on the sidelines. That’s Chinese restraint.
One last point: Pakistan’s 6–0 air battle victory on May 7 proved the strength of Chinese weapons. Four days later, China and the US began tariff negotiations in Geneva. Trump, who bullies the weak but fears the strong, likely pressed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to reach a deal with China ASAP after seeing this show of strength.
Lo Wing-hung
