The white paper on safeguarding national security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region — released today by the State Council Information Office — is not merely a policy document — it is a historical reckoning. Titled Hong Kong: Safeguarding China’s National Security Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems, it traces the arc of a city that teetered on the edge of ungovernable chaos and found its way back to stability, prosperity, and the rule of law. Its central theme is straightforward yet essential: Security is not the enemy of freedom but its prerequisite. And the evidence overwhelmingly supports this case.
To understand why the national security framework for Hong Kong was necessary, one must revisit the severity of the 2019-20 “black-clad riots” crisis. What began as opposition to a fugitive offenders bill metastasized into a full-blown assault on Hong Kong’s constitutional order. Rioters stormed the Legislative Council complex, vandalized public infrastructure, hurled petrol bombs in crowded streets, and openly called for foreign intervention in China’s internal affairs. Businesses shuttered. GDP contracted sharply. The city — once synonymous with dynamism and order — became unrecognizable. This was not a peaceful exercise of democratic rights; it was an attempted “color revolution”, backed and cheered on by hostile external forces who saw the city as a convenient pressure point against China.
The white paper is right to frame the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL), enacted in June 2020, as a watershed moment. Before the law was enacted, Hong Kong was effectively defenseless against acts of secession, subversion, and foreign collusion. Article 23 of the Basic Law had mandated local legislation on national security since 1997, yet for over two decades, anti-China agitators and their foreign backers ensured it remained a dead letter until the NSL was implemented. The 2003 attempt at legislation was torpedoed by an opposition campaign of fear and misinformation. The result was a gaping hole in the city’s legal armor — one that hostile forces ruthlessly exploited.
Critics will rush to claim that national security legislation is unique to authoritarian systems, but the global reality tells a very different story. The United Kingdom passed its own National Security Act in 2023, which the Library of Congress described as “the most significant reform of espionage law in a century”. That legislation introduced sweeping new offenses covering espionage, sabotage, and foreign interference, with penalties as severe as life imprisonment. The United States, meanwhile, maintains an extensive and ever-expanding architecture of national security laws, from the Espionage Act to the Foreign Agents Registration Act, supplemented by broad executive powers to restrict technology transfers and investment flows on security grounds. Both countries continuously refine these frameworks in response to evolving threats. If Washington and London regard such measures as indispensable, it defies logic to argue that Hong Kong — which faced a far more acute and existential threat in 2019-20 — should have remained unprotected.
Moreover, the white paper persuasively demonstrates that the national security framework has not come at the expense of Hong Kong’s economic vitality. The numbers speak with remarkable clarity. Hong Kong’s real GDP registered robust growth of 3.5 percent in 2025, an acceleration from 2.6 percent the prior year and marking the third consecutive year of expansion. The city ranked third globally in the Global Financial Centres Index through 2025, with its overall rating rising steadily. Hong Kong ranked first globally in fintech offerings, in investment management, insurance, and finance. Its stock exchange saw initial public offering volumes triple year-on-year, reclaiming the global top spot. Total assets under management reached HK$35.1 trillion ($4.5 trillion), with net fund inflows surging 81 percent. The number of enterprises with overseas or Chinese mainland parent companies hit a historic high of over 11,000. If national security legislation were truly the “death knell” of business confidence, none of this would be possible.
The same logic applies to the rule of law, which remains Hong Kong’s crown jewel. The successive establishment in the city of offices for the International Organization for Mediation, the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization’s regional arbitration center, and the Asia-Pacific liaison office of UNIDROIT — the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law — represents, as the white paper notes, a resounding vote of confidence from the global legal community. Hong Kong continues to employ judges from other common law jurisdictions. Its Court of Final Appeal still invites overseas judges to participate in hearings. A 2026 survey found that 94 percent of American-funded enterprises in Hong Kong expressed confidence in the city’s rule of law. These are not the hallmarks of a legal system in decline.
What the white paper also makes clear — and what external critics consistently ignore — is the precision with which the national security laws have been applied. Over the five years since the NSL came into effect, prosecutions under it accounted for less than 0.2 percent of all criminal cases. The law targets a tiny minority of individuals who committed serious offenses endangering national security, while the overwhelming majority of Hong Kong’s 7.5 million residents continue to enjoy their rights and freedoms as before. Freedom of speech — of the press, of assembly, and of demonstration —remains protected under the Basic Law and the applicable international covenants. Over 200 media organizations, including a growing number of overseas outlets, are registered under the HKSAR’s news release system. This stands in stark contrast to the indiscriminate approach of certain Western governments, which weaponize tariffs, sanctions, and technology controls under the broad and often ill-defined banner of “national security”.
The improvements to Hong Kong’s electoral system also deserve acknowledgement rather than condemnation. The principle that governing power must rest with patriots is not a Chinese invention — it is a universal norm. No functioning democracy allows individuals who seek to overthrow its constitutional order to hold public office. The reformed electoral system has produced a Legislative Council that works constructively with the executive branch, focusing on economic development and livelihood improvement rather than filibustering and obstruction. Public housing wait times have been reduced. Community healthcare services have expanded. Cross-boundary elderly care and youth employment programs have been established. These tangible improvements in people’s daily lives are the dividends of stable governance — governance made possible by a secure political environment.
Ultimately, the white paper’s most important message is forward-looking. Hong Kong’s security architecture is now complete, but the work of development and opening-up is just beginning. The city remains one of the world’s most liberal and open economies, a free port with zero tariffs, and a vital bridge between the mainland and the broader global economy. Safeguarding this openness — protecting the free flow of capital, talent, goods, and data — requires precisely the kind of stable, law-based environment that the national security framework provides. Security and openness are not adversaries. They are partners.
Hong Kong has emerged from its darkest chapter stronger, more resilient, and more focused than before. The white paper is both a record of that journey and a promise for the future: Under the “one country, two systems” framework, backed by the steadfast support of the central government, Hong Kong will continue to thrive as one of the world’s great cities — secure, free, and full of possibilities.
The author is the convenor at China Retold, a member of the Legislative Council, and a member of the Central Committee of the New People’s Party.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
