It is a rare sight indeed for either Hong Kong and Singapore to make it into the world headlines. For both of them to be the centre of attention at once, is rarer still – and yet, there they both were this week.

The city-states of Singapore and Hong Kong are, in many ways, cut of the same mould in terms of the strengths which have made them successful. Both are dominated by business interests. Both serve as vital container ports in the Asia-Pacific region. Both are international finance centres, underpinned by the rule of law. And both are positioned on the edge of larger more populous neighbours, which are viewed as fast emerging economic superpowers. These neighbours (Indonesia in the case of Singapore, Mainland China, in Hong Kong’s case) enable both city-states to position themselves as a two-way gate, firstly offering international companies a stepping stone into these vast markets, and secondly offering domestic Indonesian and Chinese business interests with access to the international capital markets.

In Singapore’s case, this week its vast neighbour, Indonesia, has been proving itself to be more of an undermining weakness rather than an underpinning strength. Thick, porridge-like smog has engulfed the Singaporean streets from Indonesian forest fires. The Pollution Standard Index rocketed to 401, the highest on record in Singapore as the pavements were awash with people wearing masks. Unfortunately for Singapore this highlights one of its impotencies. Being a sovereign state, it has no real power to stop what is going on in Indonesia and is solely reliant on threatening legal action against any Singapore based owners of businesses which are responsible for the smog, or through the unenforceable diplomatic channels offered by ASEAN.

Hong Kong, meanwhile, is undergoing its own test as the United States seeks extradition of Philip Snowden from the city-state where he has sought refuge, to face espionage charges. For a city that prides itself on the operation of the rule of law as its greatest asset, it is imperative that the proper legal channels are followed and Snowden’s assertions against extradition are given a fair hearing. Statements coming from the US like: "If Hong Kong doesn't act soon, it will complicate our bilateral relations and raise questions about Hong Kong's commitment to the rule of law," are hardly helpful in this respect as they are clearly designed to obtain the desired outcome for the United States whether or not the rule of law is followed.

The larger issue lurking in the background is whether the Mainland Chinese authorities (from Hong Kong’s own dominant neighbour) will get involved. The Snowden issue potentially provides the same sort of test to the relationship between the two most powerful countries in the world, as occurred with blind-lawyer activist Chen Guangcheng in 2012, when he sought refuge in the US embassy in Beijing. That time, we saw the relationship between the two countries mature, as it was decided Chen could go to the United States to study and a potential embarrassment was avoided prior the generational change of leadership in Beijing.

Probably the best outcome for the situations in Singapore and Hong Kong is for the former (the Smog) to be dealt with diplomatically through ASEAN and for the latter (Snowden) to be dealt with by the Hong Kong courts. This is a case of finding the right horse for the right course and if ASEAN is seen to step up, it will underpin the emergence of that organization as an important player on the world stage. Similarly, by giving Snowden the fairest of fair hearings, Hong Kong can reinforce itself as a place where the rule of law prevails above all, including the nonsense spouted from the mouths of politicians.

Let’s hope, for the sake of both the city-state rivals, solutions are found which do not compromise the assets which have underpinned their success.