US, Finland and Ireland, in response to China’s National Security Law, suspended their extradition treaties with Hong Kong. France stated that it would not be ratifying an extradition treaty with Hong Kong. These suspensions ostensibly were intended to safeguard the rights of nationals (and others) in the suspending States. In some cases such as the UK the same act could constitute retorsion, meaning that it could have been intended as a patently lawful (albeit less than friendly) reaction to the National Security Law. Thus, a foreign State – albeit apparently not the UK which, as a party to the Sino–British Joint Declaration, had declared a breach of the Sino–British treaty – could still treat the National Security Law as Beijing’s lawful prerogative, or in any case may have no clear legal right to press, yet still react with a perfectly lawful act of its own to show its displeasure.