A S THE TRADE war chips away at its allure, China wants to retain the affection of foreign businesses. It has promised to level the playing field between them and their domestic rivals. This pledge is meant as reassurance that Chinese firms will receive no special favours. But it has taken on a different light over the past week, in the wake of China’s assault on Cathay Pacific, Hong Kong’s flagship airline. China is taking a hard line against foreign companies that displease it, lashing out at their bosses and demanding obedience, much as it wields control over domestic enterprises. Firms in Hong Kong are in the cross-hairs, but it would be a mistake to think China will stop there.

With 26,000 employees in Hong Kong, Cathay initially took a neutral stance as protests engulfed the city. The airline would not dream of telling its employees what to think, its chairman proclaimed. His defiance withered, though, as criticism from China mounted. When the Chinese aviation authority, absurdly, accused the airline of imperilling safety because its employees had joined the protests, Cathay dumped its chief executive. A climate of fear now pervades it. Chinese inspectors have started screening the phones of Cathay crew for anti-Beijing material.

Global firms may console themselves with the thought that Cathay was uniquely vulnerable. Although it is Asia’s biggest international carrier and a perennial contender for best airline in global rankings, its fate rests almost entirely on China. As much as 70% of its cargo and passengers pass through Chinese airspace. Its biggest shareholder is Swire Pacific, a Hong Kong-based group immersed in China, from soft drinks to property. Swire executives appear to have concluded that any resistance would be an act of corporate self-immolation.

Cathay is far from alone. It joins a list of foreign firms that have wound up on the wrong side of politics in Beijing. Often the remedies are relatively simple, if nauseating. A series of luxury brands—Versace, Coach and Givenchy—have recently offered profuse apologies for selling T -shirts that appeared to identify Hong Kong as being separate from China (see article).

As a general rule, the more foreign companies prize China’s market, the more they have to fear (see article). HSBC , Europe’s biggest bank, has come under pressure for sharing information with American authorities that helped them build a fraud case against the chief financial officer of Huawei, a Chinese telecoms giant. With its strategy predicated on growth in China, HSBC cannot afford to become a villain there. This month it ousted both its chief executive and the head of its China unit, though it denied any connection with the Huawei controversy.

Cathay’s predicament shows why global boardrooms are growing more anxious about Chinese anger. The main worry used to be consumer boycotts, fuelled by state media. These harmed Japanese carmakers and South Korean retailers, but their Chinese sales typically recovered after a few quarters.

The attack on Cathay went further. China’s airline regulator declared it unsafe, the international arm of ICBC , a bank, recommended selling its shares and CITIC Bank boycotted it. The bogus regulatory warning gave all Chinese firms a pretext to shun it. These entities are not household names outside China but are active around the world. ICBC is the planet’s biggest bank by assets. CITIC Bank belongs to one of the most global of Chinese state conglomerates. Their participation in the flagellation of Cathay is a reminder that their ultimate loyalty is to the party.