Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

Why an Iraqi Journalist Cried at Beijing’s Parade — And What It Says About China

Blog

Why an Iraqi Journalist Cried at Beijing’s Parade — And What It Says About China
Blog

Blog

Why an Iraqi Journalist Cried at Beijing’s Parade — And What It Says About China

2025-09-06 20:37 Last Updated At:20:37

“People are blessed and don’t know it” sounds like a cliché, but truly grasping it is anything but easy.

China’s Victory Day parade rolled out world‑leading new weapons that left foreign political and military circles stunned, and it stirred pride across China too. Yet next to one young Iraqi’s reaction, that pride felt almost restrained.

Tears on Tiananmen

He’s in his twenties and his Arabic name is Amin Obadi, but Chinese audiences know him as Fang Haoming, a Beijing‑based correspondent for Chinese Arabic TV who took a Chinese name.

  

  

Cameras caught him covering his face in tears as the parade concluded, and when interviewed afterward he admitted he was overwhelmed, saying he couldn’t calm down for a long time and that once the doves and balloons were released, he just couldn’t stop crying.

  

  

He added that he wished the Middle East could finally find peace — He especially hope people in the Middle East can live like the Chinese do.

If his own country had such military armament, he said, it wouldn’t be living under the shadow of war. And with China inviting so many partners to co‑develop, he hoped the world could become one family — just like the slogan on Tiananmen proclaims: “Long live the great unity of the world’s peoples.”

The Contrast of Peace and War

The Middle East he comes from is still riven by conflict today, and Iraq — invaded by the US in 2003, which toppled Saddam Hussein — never truly rebuilt in the 14 years that followed despite elections and a sustained American military presence.

His words inevitably summon memories of China more than a century ago, when in 1894 the Qing fought Japan with modern German‑built battleships like Dingyuan and Zhenyuan — only to see them sunk soon after hostilities began and to suffer a crushing defeat that forced the humiliating Treaty of Shimonoseki.

Who would have imagined that a century on, China would develop military capabilities that shock the world — not only far outpacing Japan, but formidable enough to counter the United States — such that if conflict erupted tomorrow in the Asia‑Pacific, it’s hard to envision America winning.

Stability Before Strength

China carved this path through brambles and hardship, and the crucial ingredient was political stability and a sound environment that allowed over four decades since 1978 to focus relentlessly on economic development — the long road to prosperity and strength.

At the parade, some fellow attendees from industry shared hard‑earned lessons about investing overseas: for lagging regions, the West once dangled preferential tariffs, and with low labor and production costs, manufacturers were lured to build plants.

But as one seasoned industrialist put it, overseas investment boils down to the “PEST” equation: P for political stability, E for economic conditions, S for social conditions, and T for industrial technology — and P trumps everything, because without stability, nothing else matters.

When Instability Burns Capital

Building a factory in a developing country easily means pouring in hundreds of millions to construct facilities and buy machinery, and only after a decade of operation — once the equipment has fully depreciated — can the investment be counted as a win.

The catch is obvious: if turmoil erupts three to five years in, the whole bet can go up in smoke.

Several industrialists pointed to Madagascar: a decade or two ago, many firms built plants there, but after the large‑scale unrest in 2009, long‑term political turbulence took hold — a HKD 300 million‑level investment was wiped out, the factory shut, and even the machinery couldn’t be recovered.

Many, having swallowed a Western narrative, judge development chiefly by “democracy and freedom,” but too often that’s just a tool to prop up pro‑US regimes, and importing such systems doesn’t guarantee long‑term political stability.

Once politics destabilize, investments vanish, scars remain, and capital doesn’t come back — as seen in recent years in Myanmar, where half the country has fallen into rebel hands and factory investors have taken painful losses.

The Air We Breathe

Political stability is like air — invisible when present, suffocating by its absence — and it brings to mind Warren Buffett’s blunt reminder at his May shareholder meeting. Asked by a Shanghainese attendee how to face setbacks, he said: “You were born in the best era China has seen in a thousand years; you waited in the womb for thousands of years and were born today — how lucky you are; don’t dwell on the bad, focus on the beauty of life.”

For Chinese born today, that good fortune is real.

Lo Winghung




Bastille Commentary

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

On April 2, The HKSAR government applies to the court to confiscate property connected to crimes committed by Jimmy Lai.
 
The SAR government files an application with the High Court Court of First Instance to confiscate Jimmy Lai's property under Article 43 of the Hong Kong National Security Law Implementation Rules.
 
The SAR government states that the confiscation order "prevents those who commit offenses endangering national security, their accomplices, or agents from using property linked to their crimes to continue engaging in acts that threaten national security. This cuts off the funding chain for such offenses and diminishes their capacity to reoffend."
 
Earlier, Jimmy Lai was found guilty by the High Court of three offenses endangering national security and was ultimately sentenced to 20 years in prison. The court described Lai as the "mastermind and instigator" who deliberately leveraged Apple Daily and his personal influence to conduct a sustained campaign aimed at undermining the legitimacy and authority of the Central Government, the Hong Kong SAR government, and its institutions.
 
He severely damaged the relationship between the Central Government, the SAR government, and Hong Kong residents beyond legal limits. He also repeatedly colluded personally with foreign forces, petitioning them to impose sanctions on both governments and carry out hostile actions. The circumstances were extremely serious.
  
According to Schedule 3, Section 1.1 of the Implementation Rules, "crime-related property" means (a) property owned by a person who commits or assists in committing offenses endangering national security, or (b) any property intended for use or previously used to fund or otherwise assist in committing offenses endangering national security.
 
In other words, Jimmy Lai has committed offenses endangering national security, and all his assets are classified as "crime-related property." The known assets mainly include shares in Next Digital and its subsidiaries.
 
It is important to note that Article 2 of Schedule 3 to the Implementation Rules states that "This schedule applies to property whether it is situated in Hong Kong or elsewhere." If Lai transfers assets outside Hong Kong or even to his children overseas, the Hong Kong SAR government still has the authority to recover them.
 
According to Article 3.1 of Schedule 3 to the Implementation Rules, the Secretary for Security may issue a written freeze order on any property reasonably suspected to be crime-related property. Anyone who violates such an order faces fines and up to seven years’ imprisonment. Thus, transferring related assets is a criminal offense in itself.

So, is property confiscation unique to Hong Kong?

Certainly not. Hong Kong’s asset confiscation orders focus on extremely serious crimes like violations of the National Security Law, money laundering, and bribery. But the United States casts a much wider net, as reflected in its confiscated assets.
 
Media reports show the US government holds 326,588 bitcoins, making it the world’s largest government bitcoin holder. All were seized, mainly from the Silk Road darknet, the Bitfinex platform, and several major cases involving the Prince Group. The Prince Group case is the largest single bitcoin forfeiture ever by the US Department of Justice, confiscating 127,271 bitcoins from Prince Group leader Chen Zhi, suspected of telecom fraud—worth $14 billion at the time.

The amount of Bitcoin confiscated by the United States alone is staggering, making Hong Kong’s figures look minuscule by comparison. The US appears to use criminal asset forfeiture as a tool to boost government revenue, while Hong Kong focuses on seizing criminal assets primarily to prevent crimes from happening.
 
Although 'Fatty' Lai is already behind bars, people overseas continue violating the National Security Law during his trial, attacking Hong Kong’s judicial system. Money drives everything in this world, and confiscating Fatty Lai’s assets cuts off critical funding channels linked to these offenses.

Lo Wing-hung

Recommended Articles