A name that keeps popping up in the Jimmy Lai trial is Luke de Pulford, the CEO of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), a coalition of hawkish Western politicians. Having been involved in the 2019 anti-extradition bill saga and his association with Lai, he's no stranger to controversy. Now, it seems he's stirring the pot again in the UK, this time taking aim at an American fund’s bid to buy The Telegraph newspaper. He's rallying the usual anti-China political figures to pressure the Labour government, spinning a tale that the fund’s chairman is so close to China it would create a "backdoor" for Beijing to control British media. It’s a familiar playbook, reminiscent of the dubious claims made against the Chinese Embassy in the UK, showing that the campaign to undermine China and Hong Kong is always bubbling under the surface.
Luke de Pulford, a key figure in the anti-China lobby, is leading the charge to block The Telegraph's sale, citing a "Chinese backdoor" threat.
A Straightforward Deal Complicated
What started as a simple business acquisition has been twisted into a geopolitical drama. The Telegraph, a paper with a 170-year legacy, has been struggling financially. Its owners, the Barclay family, are in debt and looking to sell. Back in May, the American private equity firm RedBird Capital, in a partnership with Abu Dhabi's IMI, put in a successful bid of £600 million for the paper. But the deal immediately ran into trouble, with cries of "foreign government influence" prompting the then-Conservative government to pass legislation to block the acquisition on national security grounds. In a bid to get past these political roadblocks, RedBird Capital has recently decided to buy out the Abu Dhabi fund’s shares and go it alone.
Enter the "China Risk" Narrative
Just when it looked like the deal might finally cross the finish line, de Pulford and his allies launched their offensive. They've issued a "warning" that if RedBird Capital buys The Telegraph, it would open the door to "Chinese state influence," effectively turning the newspaper into a Trojan horse for Beijing's interests in the British press.
The so-called evidence for this is thin, to say the least. De Pulford points to RedBird Capital's chairman, John Thornton, and his business ties to China. Thornton is on the international advisory council for China's sovereign wealth fund , the China Investment Corporation, and has established companies to invest in the "Belt and Road" initiative. On top of that, RedBird Capital has a regional headquarters in Hong Kong. Based on these connections, de Pulford paints a picture of a man whose judgment can't be trusted. The claims have become increasingly wild, with Thornton being branded a supporter of “suppression” in Xinjiang simply because he was once invited to visit the region.
RedBird Capital's chairman, John Thornton, finds his business ties to China used as ammunition by hawks trying to derail The Telegraph takeover.
Politics vs. Pragmatism
De Pulford is trying to frame this as a test case for how "soft power can bypass democratic defenses." He and other hawks are piling pressure on the Labour government to block the deal. However, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Lisa Nandy, seems to be taking a more pragmatic approach. She is reportedly considering amending the law to allow the acquisition to proceed. The reality is that industries across the UK are struggling, and the media is in a particularly tight spot. If you start blocking all foreign investment, especially from major global players, you’re going to see a lot of companies go under. It’s unlikely the Labour government will sacrifice economic sense for the sake of anti-China rhetoric.
This whole saga shows how anti-China and anti-Hong Kong politicians in the West are willing to pressure and sabotage businesses that have any connection to China. It’s a clear warning shot, not just for this deal, but for any foreign company operating in Hong Kong. While things might seem calm on the surface, these undercurrents of political interference are a real and present danger.
What Say You?
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
Think back to Hong Kong's turbulent years. Jimmy Lai had three brothers-in-arms, comrades he bankrolled through thick and thin – Cardinal Joseph Zen, Martin Lee, and Anson Chan. But their bonds weren't just ideological. Money changed hands, and plenty of it. Anson Chan pocketed HK$3.5 million from Lai's war chest. Cardinal Zen took in far more – at least HK$26 million in secret donations that the Hong Kong Diocese never knew about and never investigated. Where did all that cash go? That's the million-dollar question. Or rather, the 26-million-dollar question that remains unanswered.
Cardinal Zen met Pope Leo XIV in Rome, reportedly pushing for Jimmy Lai's release – but Vatican intervention looks unlikely.
Word broke earlier that Cardinal Zen just made a pilgrimage to the Vatican for a sit-down with the newly minted Pope Leo XIV. The private meeting lasted about an hour. On the agenda: the conviction of "Catholic" Jimmy Lai. Sources say Zen pressed the pontiff hard to "save Lai." What did the Pope say? Nobody's talking. But you can bet the Vatican knows all about the questionable financial ties between Zen and Lai – a relationship the Cardinal has never properly explained to his own Diocese. Did personal interests play a role? The doubts are real.
A Vatican Gambit
Cardinal Zen's "612 Humanitarian Relief Fund" case is still grinding through the courts, and authorities had confiscated his passport. But when the Vatican called its recent "Special Consistory" – bringing cardinals from around the world to Rome – the court granted him temporary travel privileges. During the gathering, Pope Leo XIV carved out time for a private one-on-one with Zen after a breakfast session. The topics? Whether the China-Vatican agreement should be renewed, and the fate of Jimmy Lai, now convicted under Hong Kong's National Security Law. But whether the Pope took any position on Lai remains under wraps.
Zen views Jimmy Lai as both a close friend and a comrade-in-arms, so naturally he's pushing the Vatican to intervene. But here's the Vatican's dilemma: it's not just about China-Vatican relations. It's about the unresolved financial relationship between Zen and Lai – a relationship that has seriously damaged the Cardinal's credibility.
The Secret Pipeline
October 2011 brought a massive leak. Jimmy Lai's secret donations to political parties, politicians, and organizations spilled into public view – and Joseph Zen, then Bishop of Hong Kong, was on that list. Between 2006 and 2010, he received HK$20 million from Lai over four years. From 2012 to 2014, another HK$6 million landed in his hands. The total: a staggering HK$26 million.
When the news broke, Zen went silent. Only after relentless media pressure did he offer an explanation, claiming the money went to support underground churches in the Chinese Mainland and other charitable organizations. With a casual smile, he described himself as a "spendthrift," saying most of the money had already been spent with only a few hundred thousand remaining – and even expressed hope that Lai would keep the donations coming.
Talk is cheap. He provided no concrete evidence to back up his claims. The Hong Kong Diocese knew nothing about his receipt of this massive sum from Lai – the entire "money pipeline" operated in secret. To this day, he has never given the Diocese a complete accounting.
Because this financial channel remained so deeply hidden, suspicions naturally arose that personal interests were involved. But given Cardinal Zen's position, the Diocese refrained from investigating him. The true destination of the funds? Still shrouded in doubt.
HK$26 million from Jimmy Lai to Cardinal Zen – Diocese in the dark, money's whereabouts still a mystery. The trio behind Hong Kong's unrest!
Vatican Cold Shoulder
Cardinal Zen's questionable relationship with Jimmy Lai, combined with his overly hawkish stance toward China, put him in the Vatican's bad books after Hong Kong's National Security Law took effect in late June 2020. Around that time, Zen traveled uninvited to the Vatican, demanding a meeting with then-Pope Francis to discuss Hong Kong's bishop selection and issues facing underground churches in the Mainland. The Pope gave him zero face. Francis refused to see him. After cooling his heels in Rome for four days with nothing to show for it, Zen returned to Hong Kong empty-handed.
Later, Zen and Lai joined forces on Jimmy Lai's "Live Chat" livestream program to blast the Vatican, accusing it of staying silent on underground churches, Tibet, and Hong Kong human rights issues. This clearly shows how the "Zen-Lai duo" consistently conspired to incite underground church activities in the Mainland, stir up religious conflicts, and undermine China-Vatican relations.
Cardinal Zen's latest Vatican trip for a private papal audience, where he lobbied to "save Lai" and reiterated his opposition to renewing the China-Vatican agreement, proves one thing: at 94 years old, the cardinal's anti-China, pro-chaos heart hasn't changed one bit.
Long Odds
The new Pope's willingness to meet him represents a slight thaw from his predecessor's icy attitude. But the chances of Vatican intervention to "save Lai"? Extremely low. The unresolved questions about Zen's financial relationship with Jimmy Lai have significantly diminished his influence with the Vatican.
From a legal perspective, his cardinal status currently shields him from serious consequences. But risks remain. Perhaps it's time for him to follow Anson Chan's example and retire from such activities while he still can.
Lai Ting-yiu
