Flashed back to the pre-colonial days in Hong Kong, it was an open secret that the English-language South China Morning Post was the first newspaper senior officials read in the morning before they held a daily so-called “morning prayer meeting” with the then British governors, of whom most could not read Chinese.

Those days were gone. Ta Kung Pao (TKP) and Wen Wei Po, the two sister Chinese-language dailies with Beijing’s backing, have become the “first-to-read” newspapers for not just senior SAR government officials, but political and business leaders. The two dailies are being seen as the window of the central government’s Liaison Office. Pro-democracy activists read looking for signs of imminent trouble before it is too late.

Indicate the thoughts of Beijing

The news-and-views in articles published on the two dailies are often indicative of the thoughts of Beijing. A recent example is the list of commentary and news articles that are critical of a plan by CK Hutchison to sell its global port assets, including those in Panama, to a US consortium led by BlackRock.

The multi-billion-dollar deal, announced on March 4, took a sharp turn into turbulent waters on March 13 when TKP published a signed article denouncing the deal as “grovelling” and “betrayal.” It argued that it was not an “ordinary commercial deal”, urging the company to think twice and decide “which position and side it wants to be on.”

It was soon proved to be no ordinary article after it was reposted on the websites of the State Council’s Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office and the Liaison Office in Hong Kong.

Since then, CK Hutchison and tycoon Li Ka-shing became a punching bag for writers on mainland-backed media and blogs and a list of pro-Beijing figures in Hong Kong, including former chief executive Leung Chun-ying and Executive Council Convenor Regina Ip.

The intensity of attacks has increased sharply. As of Saturday, Li and the company have kept mum.

Breach the national security laws?

Eyebrows were raised on Friday when another signed commentary published on TKP claimed the deal might have breached the national security laws, of which the first was enacted in 2020, followed by another rolled out in 2024.

Weeks before the first NSL was imposed by China’s national legislature in June 2020, former justice chief Elsie Leung was busy allying fears over the legislation.

She stressed that the NSL targeted a “very small number of people;” they included foreign forces and people who “opposed China, disrupted Hong Kong.”

No one then and until the publication of the TKP article on Friday would have envisaged Li Ka-shing, Hong Kong’s richest man, might become a target for his role in the ports deal.

It sounds unthinkable, if not unreal. But few would dismiss articles carried in the Beijing-backed newspapers lightly.

The article argues that the highest principle of “one country, two systems” policy in upholding the nation’s sovereignty, security and development interest” has already been written in the NSL.Therefore, the article says it is an article that has legal effect.

It went on to argue national security and development interest will be undermined as a result of the deal, therefore amounting to a breach of the article that states the principle of the legislation.

The logic, if any, and basis of the argument may sound novel to ordinary citizens, let alone the law professionals. That the article was given prominent space in the newspaper speaks volumes of the increased ferocity of punching by Beijing’s propaganda machine against Li and Hutchison.

With the basis of claims of a breach of the NSL and any Hong Kong laws unclear, the deal-bashing propaganda campaign focuses on what the critics consider as nationalism and patriotism.

The rule of business has been rewritten

The principle of upholding the interests of the nation, including security and development interest, is above the rule of doing business, according to the critics in the pro-Beijing camp.

Regina Ip, who also heads a political party, has argued Hutchison should have taken into account national interest and consulted the central government before selling assets with strategic value.

Li, dubbed as one of the most successful businessmen in Hong Kong and Asia and pioneers who ventured into business in the mainland decades ago, probably knows better than Ip when it comes to dealing with communist leaders.

It could not be more ironic now that the rule of business has been rewritten with new rules dictated as if it is a matter of fact by those who are seemingly close to the authorities.

Adding to the irony, Beijing’s top official in charge of Hong Kong affairs Xia Baolong talked in length on Beijing’s determination to maintain the city’s “free and open” business environment at a meeting with a European trade group in Beijing on Thursday.

Xia reportedly told the business representatives from Hong Kong the Chinese government has always insisted on implementing the “one country, two systems” principle “comprehensively, accurately and unswervingly” and fully supported Hong Kong in maintaining its unique status and advantages in the long term.

Press reports said the Hutchison deal was not discussed.

Isn’t it a case of “one country, two deal-making rules” for Hong Kong business people when it comes to deals that involve what the authorities consider as national interest, security and development interest?

▌[At Large] About the Author

Chris Yeung is a veteran journalist, a founder and chief writer of the now-disbanded CitizenNews; he now runs a daily news commentary channel on Youtube. He had formerly worked with the South China Morning Post and the Hong Kong Economic Journal.