The Haihe Conservancy Commission (HCC) was established for Sino-foreign cooperation in dredging the Hai River and existed between 1897 and 1949. The existing studies have clarified the main business and operation system of the HCC and outlined the connections between the HCC and the local, national, and international communities and institutions. Building upon this body of work, this article exploits various archives and newspapers to examine the events surrounding the leasing of two icebreakers, the breach of the Chaobai River, and the sluices in the Qiangzi Canal, in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the operation of the HCC. The article argues that the HCC was flexible with its identity and role in practice, adjusting its strategies to respond to different parties, and exerting a unique influence in international politics, water conservancy, and local society. At the same time, the HCC’s imperialist characters persisted. In 1916, two icebreakers owned by the HCC were found de-icing in Vladivostok. Germany and Austria-Hungary accused China of violating its promised neutrality during the Great War. In the conflicts to follow, various parties demonstrated how they took advantage of the ambiguous status of the HCC to serve their purposes. The eventual resolution of the incident was reached after a series of deliberations within the institution, which shows the ability of the HCC of balancing interests and resolving disputes among the Chinese and foreign authorities. The breach of the Chaobai River in 1911 made the HCC an active player in the long-lasting conflicts between the overall water planning of Zhili and the economic development of the port of Tianjin. The HCC represented the local commercial interests of Tianjin in fighting against other Chinese water agencies. Through its diplomatic privilege, it facilitated the establishment of the Zhili River Commission, a platform for cooperation among various river authorities, and managed to intervene in the national water planning of the Chinese government. At Tianjin, the HCC was also involved in the recurring disputes between the foreign concessions and the Chinese communities over the sluices in the Qiangzi Canal. The HCC initially teamed with the foreign concessions and actively sought the power of control over the sluices in the Qiangzi Canal. Then, the HCC gradually withdrew from issues regarding the sluices in an attempt to cultivate a more neutral and professional public image. However, it failed to reverse the opinion of the Chinese people who still saw the HCC as a representative of foreign interests. In summary, the constitution of the HCC left room for interpretation, and the HCC constantly adjusted its status in coping with different situations to achieve its purposes in the tumultuous times. Although the HCC was designed to be an independent non-governmental institution, its existence and functioning were dependent on the unequal treaty system and could never be truly independent.