Just six years after the "black riots" tore through Hong Kong, the city has found its footing again—thanks largely to police who've learned to stay one step ahead of trouble. But as Chief Executive John Lee rightly points out, we must not let down our guard for national security. The anti-Hong Kong brigade isn't going anywhere, and they're nothing if not persistent.
"Hong Kong Watch"—that familiar gang of anti-Hong Kong agitators—just dropped a report specifically designed to tank Hong Kong's stock market. Talk about showing your hand.
Here's what's fascinating: with Hong Kong's IPO market absolutely booming and capital flooding in, these political opportunists have pivoted their strategy. They've now got their sights set squarely on the stock market.
Market Reality vs. Political Theater
Hong Kong's stock market has been absolutely stellar. HK$108.7 billion raised in IPOs during the first half of the year, capturing 24% of global IPO activity and ranking first worldwide. That's got to sting for the crowd who've been predicting Hong Kong's demise.
Financial sector insiders aren't losing sleep over these political theatrics, and frankly, they shouldn't. Money follows opportunity, and as long as Hong Kong's markets are performing, Wall Street will keep showing up. The "poisonous plot" brigade can scheme all they want—profit-seeking capital doesn't care about their political narratives.
The "Risky Business" Report: A Calculated Attack
Enter their latest weapon: a report cheekily titled "Risky Business: How Sanctioned Entities Access Capital via Hong Kong." The premise: that Chinese companies are supposedly using Hong Kong's markets to dodge sanctions, and American investors need protecting from having their money "siphoned off."
The real objective here is clear: crashing Hong Kong's stock market. It's a pretty brazen move, even by their standards. Of course, Wall Street doesn't particularly care about political posturing when there's money to be made. If Hong Kong stocks are turning a profit, that capital will keep flowing eastward regardless. Still, these kinds of coordinated political attacks are worth watching.
The anti-Hong Kong outfit "Hong Kong Watch" has been making the rounds—from Washington's Hudson Institute to planned events in London—trying to drum up support for investment restrictions. They've even wheeled out Joey Siu, the fugitive wanted under the National Security Law, to scaremonger about the risks of doing business in Hong Kong. It's the same tired playbook: create fear, lobby for restrictions, hope the market tanks.
The Jimmy Lai Gambit: Canada Says No
Meanwhile, they've been pulling out all the stops trying to save Jimmy Lai. The latest scheme involved Canadian MPs proposing to grant him "honorary Canadian citizenship"—putting him in the same category as Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama, which is quite something.
Under Trudeau, this sort of grandstanding might have sailed through. But times have changed. With Mark Carney now leading the Liberal Party—the same guy who stood firm against Trump's trade war tactics—Canada's priorities have shifted. The government needs China as an economic lifeline, not another diplomatic headache.
They tried teaming up with Canadian MPs to fast-track Jimmy Lai's "honorary citizenship," but the Liberal Party's House Leader wasn't having it. Another swing and a miss for the "Saving Lai" campaign.
Sure enough, Liberal House Leader Steven MacKinnon stepped in last Friday and shelved the motion. His diplomatic language about "consensus" and "proper foreign policy" was code for: we're not torpedoing our relationship with Beijing over this.
Conclusion: Bad Timing, Worse Strategy
As Jimmy Lai's case heads toward its conclusion, expect his supporters to ramp up their efforts even further. But here's their problem: the timing couldn't be worse. When the Canadian government focuses on economic recovery, these anti-Hong Kong campaigners are bound to keep hitting brick walls.
Their latest efforts are just more evidence that their influence is waning, and Hong Kong's resilience is only getting stronger.
Lai Ting-yiu
What Say You?
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
The US-Israel joint attack on Iran has stretched into its 29th day. Trump claims daily it will end soon, but both sides remain locked in a stalemate—unable to win decisively or withdraw cleanly. No path to swift resolution is visible.
While observers focus on battlefield conditions, few have noticed Netanyahu's precarious domestic position. He faces a critical hurdle that could cost him power entirely. Should he stumble, he could lose office in disgrace, and the Iran war could shift dramatically.
Trump, meanwhile, faces his own crisis. Recent signals show Republican electoral prospects darkening and his ratings collapsing. If the conflict drags on, his political position will become catastrophic. He and Netanyahu are truly partners in misfortune.
Netanyahu faces a deep political crisis — if parliament rejects the budget on Tuesday, snap elections will be triggered, and his grip on power could collapse.
Netanyahu pushes forward to project strength these days, hammering Iran relentlessly and ignoring even Trump's calls to stop. Behind the bluster, he is under siege domestically, his grip on power increasingly fragile. The immediate threat is his government's budget vote on Tuesday, March 31st. If it fails, early elections must be held within 90 days—moved up from October.
Current polls show Netanyahu’s coalition losing its parliamentary majority. Defeat means forced removal from office, followed by corruption trials. Imprisonment is the worst-case outcome.
Netanyahu's Precarious Hold on Power
Netanyahu is notoriously cunning. His calculation at the war's outset was straightforward: early parliamentary elections would favor him. The Israeli military had successfully eliminated Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei and senior officials.
Initial offensives had gone smoothly. If elections were held after March 31, his ruling coalition could ride the wave of military victory to secure a parliamentary majority. His grip on power would solidify, and he'd escape legal accountability.
But the war hasn't unfolded as he envisioned. Despite relentless US-Israel strikes on Iran, they've achieved no decisive results—just endless stalemate.
Israel now faces three bitter realities.
First, Iran strikes back hard, pounding Israeli cities with missiles and drones. Most are intercepted, but some hit their targets, leaving the public living in fear.
Second, the war costs $1.6 billion weekly, leaving nothing for welfare and development.
Third, the military is under immense strain. Soldiers are exhausted. Chief of Staff Zamir has warned bluntly: ten red flags are already raised, troop replenishment is urgent, or the war effort faces collapse.
War-weariness is swelling among Israelis. Anti-war protests have erupted in some areas, and public resentment shows up in polls. According to recent polling by The Times of Israel, if elections were held now, Netanyahu's Likud party would win only 28 seats—six fewer than its current 34. His ruling coalition, including other conservative parties, would secure only 51 of parliament's 120 seats, falling short of a majority.
If that happens, Netanyahu's position as prime minister won't survive.
War's Toll Erodes Israeli Support
If Netanyahu falls from power, he loses not just his grip on the Iran war but faces reckoning for starting it. Corruption cases loom. Prison is possible. So he pivoted: push the budget through Tuesday's parliamentary vote to stave off early elections. His political survival hinges on that single vote.
Trump's domestic picture is equally dire. His Iran campaign stalls while his own backyard burns. In Florida's congressional district where Mar-a-Lago sits, a 40-year-old Democratic newcomer just toppled the Republican candidate Trump backed. This district has always been a MAGA stronghold and Republican vote bank. The political warning is unmistakable.
Trump’s standing at home is slipping — Republicans just lost a House special election, hinting that his once-formidable political pull is fading.
Trump's Crumbling Electoral Advantage
Voter opposition to Trump's Iran war is direct and measurable. According to the latest Pew Research Center poll, 50% of Americans say attacking Iran was wrong, while just 38% support the decision. That public disapproval is eroding Trump's political standing. Reuters and Ipsos surveys show his approval rating has collapsed to 36%—a nine-point drop from the 45% he held when returning to the White House.
Public anger is moving beyond polls into the streets. On Saturday, 9 million Americans protested across multiple states in "No Kings" demonstrations, with anti-war sentiment as a central theme. The scale and intensity echo the anti-Vietnam War movement that convulsed the nation in the early 1970s—a historical parallel that should unsettle Trump's political strategists.
Mass Protests Echo Vietnam War Era
History doesn't just rhyme—it echoes. The massive anti-Vietnam War movement of the early 1970s opposed a senseless conflict and marked President Nixon's pivot from ascendancy to decline. Trump has now launched a similarly questionable Iran conflict, seemingly treading Nixon's path. Whether the political trajectory will mirror that era remains to be seen.
Lai Ting-yiu
