By Tom Fowdy
Five years ago, following the passage of the National Security Law (NSL), the "fourth era of Hong Kong" began. An era is defined as a period of time representing a political status quo, of which is both started and ended by a seismic event which changes everything. While there is much to debate to had on what "eras" we can derive from Hong Kong's history, for the purposes of this piece, I am defining four. First, the early colonial era, 1841 to 1945, the Cold Boom War era, 1945-1997, the handover era 1997-2020, and now the China-US competition era (2020-).
In each respective period, the status quo of the city, as a global hub, has adapted to changing global conditions. Thus, when the NSL was passed, it came amidst growing tensions between the United States and China. Whilst the law was enacted to end the riots in the city which were a byproduct of these tensions, the broader geopolitical climate, as well as the covid pandemic, enacted changes in the coming years which went far beyond the question of security; and by the time life in Hong Kong had returned to normal, the world was a very different place. With this, although the region remains a global financial centre, its purpose and broader strategy have changed completely, even leading it to benefit from this status quo.
In past eras, Hong Kong was a bridgehead of Western influence into China. A British-ruled territory, it was envisioned that the city would serve as a mechanism to secure the country's opening up and liberalisation to the world, buoyed by an ideology at the time that believed the free market was a catalyst to political transformation. The Neoliberalism of the 1980s taught that free trade and markets were virtuous, and thus the United States and its allies became the champions of liberalisation. China was thus to be transformed through engagement, and Hong Kong was a means to do that by providing access to capital and the outside world. On that premise, the handover was an inevitable, yet also acceptable venture for the mainland would "become more Hong Kong."
The emerge of US-China tensions, starting in the late 2010s, however, heralded the realisation that even as Beijing grown, this liberalisation was not happening. As a result, these old beliefs surrounding confidence in the free market were gradually replaced with a new regime of protectionism, which sought to preserve the West's technological and strategic advantages against China. Likewise, as Hong Kong itself was no longer "changing China", the city became a flashpoint in tensions as some residents rejected affiliation with the country. Beijing increasingly saw Western political influence in the city as a problem, and in 2019-2020, the outbreak of riots, which were backed by American politicians, proved to be a breaking point. The NSL was imposed, and a new era began.
Considering this, what changed? While many Western media commentators and editorials proclaimed the "death of Hong Kong," arguing that the removal of "freedoms" would hurt its status as a global financial centre (conveniently ignoring Singapore), this is not what happened. Instead, the city calibrated itself. As Chinese capital increasingly found itself unwelcome in American financial markets due to political hostility and risk, big mainland firms have relocated themselves to Hong Kong in recent years. As a direct result of this, the city has had more initial public offerings than anywhere else in the world. In 2025, the city was number one worldwide, earning over $285 billion from 119 listings, a 200% increase.
This tells us a story of what is happening: While Hong Kong was once a bridgehead for the West to go into China, those roles have now been reserved. Instead, the city is now a bridgehead for China to go "out" into the world. The city is no longer in a sense of uneasy existence with Beijing, instead, Hong Kong has increasingly aligned itself as a component of China's national development objectives, even as it retains its autonomous status. The West wanted the city to be part of China "in name only," that is, existing legally in form, but not cooperating with or serving China's purposes in any way, arguing that the Sino-British declaration meant Beijing had absolutely zero"sovereign rights" over the territory in practice.
Likewise, as the United States and Britain have faded as its traditional sources of capital and political backers, the city has also diversified itself to new partners too. In the fourth era, Hong Kong has deepened its ties with the Middle East, Southeast Asia and other regions of the globe, attaching itself to the world's most critical emerging markets and providing new opportunities to these countries. In conclusion, the designated purpose of Hong Kong as a Western conduit to influence China has ended, but this did not bring about its decline. Instead, the city has reinvented itself as China's own beacon to the world, which has ironically increased its global financial standing as it is now seen as an attractive, politically secure location.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | Trump's nonsensical blockade of Hormuz and the US doctrine of 'no compromise'
Opinion | The end of the Middle East 'oil' paradigm
Opinion | Is the effort to 'contain' China starting to fail?
Comment