When Mike Pence, the former vice president of the United States, recently attended an economic and financial conference in Hong Kong, his visit quickly became a lightning rod for controversy. What was supposed to be an economic dialogue spiraled into a political spectacle, with Pence openly commenting on the case of Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, the jailed media tycoon and an alleged national security offender. Pence’s remarks, seen as blatant interference in Hong Kong’s affairs, underscored the enduring challenges to China’s national security.

Pence’s foray into Hong Kong’s legal matters is not just tone-deaf; it’s a stark reminder of the delicate balance Hong Kong must maintain as an international financial hub under the “one country, two systems” framework. In a world increasingly defined by geopolitical rivalries, the city’s ability to uphold its unique governance model depends on unwavering vigilance against foreign encroachments and a steadfast commitment to the rule of law.

Since the 2019 riots, Hong Kong has been striving to recover from the chaos that tested its legal and social fabric. Many individuals involved in the violent unrest have faced trial, with punishments meted out in accordance with the longstanding legal principles. These trials are a reaffirmation of the rule of law, a cornerstone of any civilized society. Without accountability, the specter of lawlessness looms, threatening to disrupt the lives of ordinary people and tarnish Hong Kong’s reputation as a global city.

The case of Lai is no different. As a high-profile figure, Lai should neither be exempt from scrutiny nor afforded special treatment. The judicial process must proceed with fairness and transparency, offering him the opportunity to defend himself while allowing the public to gain a fuller understanding of the charges against him. It is through such processes that Hong Kong can demonstrate not just the strength of its legal system, but also its commitment to impartial justice.

Yet Pence, a former US political heavyweight, chose to disregard these principles. By publicly calling for Lai’s release during his visit, he not only attempted to undermine Hong Kong’s judicial independence but also displayed a troubling lack of respect for the city’s jurisdiction. Hong Kong operates under a common law system, with rulings based on evidence and precedent rather than political sentiment. Pence’s demand for special treatment for Lai flies in the face of this tradition, revealing arrogance and showing a contempt for the professionalism and independence of Hong Kong’s judicial authorities.

Pence’s actions are made even more egregious when viewed through the lens of history. During the turbulent months of 2019, when Hong Kong was shaken by violence and riots, Pence was serving as vice president under the Trump administration. His influence during that period was not neutral; he openly supported political figures and activists who were at the forefront of the anti-government movement, the “black-clad riots”. Among them was none other than Lai, whom Pence personally met in Washington DC to discuss the movement.

Far from advocating for peace or reconciliation, Pence’s words and actions during that time fanned the flames of unrest. His tacit approval of the chaos emboldened some to escalate their actions, bringing widespread disruption to the city. Now, years later, his return to Hong Kong, cloaked in the guise of economic engagement, seems more like a continuation of that interference rather than a sincere effort to engage with the city.

Pence’s presence at the financial conference was ostensibly intended to promote economic dialogue. Hong Kong has been working hard to attract global financial elites to reaffirm the city’s standing as a premier financial hub. The conference was meant to showcase Hong Kong’s unique strengths, not to become a platform for political grandstanding.

Instead, Pence transformed the event into a personal soapbox, injecting divisive rhetoric into what should have been a unifying moment for international collaboration. His actions not only undermined the focus of the conference but also Hong Kong’s efforts to enhance its global reputation.

Despite this, Hong Kong must not retreat. The city’s leaders should continue to host such international events, refusing to let isolated incidents deter their vision of re-establishing Hong Kong as a beacon of global finance. The actions of one individual, no matter how prominent, should not derail Hong Kong’s efforts to engage with the world.

Pence’s comments serve as a stark reminder that Hong Kong’s national security challenges are far from resolved. While significant progress has been made since 2019—both in terms of public awareness and institutional safeguards—complacency is not an option.

Critics may argue that Hong Kong has already achieved a level of stability that allows it to move past the tumult of recent years. But as an open, outward-facing city deeply integrated into the global economy, Hong Kong will continue to face pressures from those who seek to exploit its vulnerabilities. Pence’s remarks, though seemingly isolated, could easily be weaponized to justify broader attacks on Hong Kong’s jurisdiction and governance.

This is why national security must remain a priority. It is not merely a matter for the government or law enforcement authorities; it is a collective responsibility that requires the vigilance of every resident and institution. The lessons of 2019 are clear: Hong Kong’s unique position within China and the world is both a strength and a risk. Safeguarding it requires constant effort, not just in law enforcement but also in fostering a society that values stability and has a sense of national security.

Pence’s remarks made some headlines. The noise of external interference will always be there. The challenge for Hong Kong is not to silence it but to rise above it, proving the city’s resilience through action.

The author is the convener 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.