Hong Kong is a vital bridge and gateway for China to the rest of the world, and for the United States to China. China and the United States would be wise to maintain the city’s cosmopolitanism while reining in detrimental sanctions, respectively.

By disrupting the world’s interconnected economic, social, and geopolitical spheres, the COVID-19 crisis has exposed just how fragile and inequitable the institutions that govern them really are. It has also highlighted how difficult it is to address systemic fragility and inequity amid escalating national-security threats.

The National Security Law for the special administrative region is a necessary prerequisite to the restoration of prosperity. Unfortunately, some businesses may be reluctant to show their support because they fear retribution.

The devil is in the details, and there are plenty of details suggesting that the United States will not be successful in punishing China for its new national security law as applied to Hong Kong. American businesses are likely to be hurt most.

Both human rights and the rule of law are protected in the SAR, even as the United States, with its long-arm jurisdiction and unilateral sanctions, returns to Cold War cliches that are not good, either for itself or for others.

Washington’s plea for its allies to condemn China’s actions in Hong Kong largely fell on deaf ears. An embarrassed Trump administration is now taking an even tougher stance on Taiwan – a decision with potentially lethal consequences.

The 2020 Hong Kong Policy Act Report demonstrates that the current administration lacks nuance and understanding of the current region’s needs.

The national security law proposed by the NPC is firmly grounded in law and will benefit of the region, notwithstanding the willful distortions of opponents who seek independence.

Some people worry that the legislation will erode freedom of speech, press and assembly and damage the judiciary. Similar dire predictions never materialized after the handover, and these new ones will likewise prove unfounded.

There is a divide among China hawks in the US, evident in the mixed messages of Trump’s May 29 speech. Concessions are made to two contending schools of thought.