Hong Kong protests and their implications for business in Greater China

For many, the magnitude and impact of the protests in Hong Kong are difficult to understand. Some may see the protests as an extension of the 1989 Tiananmen uprising and a general revolt against an oppressive one-party regime. Others may see a movement that looks similar to Occupy Wall Street, with streets filled with young idealistic activists. While certainly there are some similarities to these historical protests, the truth is a bit more nuanced. To start, an understanding of Hong Kong’s historical significance is necessary.

Hong Kong’s Historical Significance

  1. Hong Kong as a gateway for unwanted change

    Even prior to the United Kingdom handover of Hong Kong to China in 1997, Hong Kong has long been a region of experimentation. From the mid-1700s, the greater Guangzhou region (the area surrounding Hong Kong, also known as Canton) was the only point of trade and contact with the Western world under the Canton System. This system was meant to not only limit the perceived commercial threat posed by foreigners, but also to limit a perceived political threat from abroad as well. Following the First Opium War, the UK seized Hong Kong as part of the Treaty of Nanking in 1842, forcefully opening more points of free trade. One of the goals of this war was to rectify a trade balance, wherein the West was purchasing large amounts of Chinese goods but were limited from selling products to the Chinese mainland. What resulted however, was the forced trade of opium into China. This was the first of many unequal treaties, in which China was subjected to the whims of the Western powers during what Chinese historian’s describe as the “Century of National Humiliation.” After a Second Opium War and years of forced opium trade, 27% of China’s male adult population regularly used opium by 1906. From a historical perspective, Hong Kong and the greater Guangzhou region represented an entry point for physical poisons.

  2. Hong Kong as a gateway for controlled experimentation

    Since the United Kingdom handed Hong Kong back to China in 1997, Hong Kong has existed as a Special Administrative Region (SAR), with a different set of rules and regulations than the rest of the Mainland. Under this system, Hong Kong was granted a high degree of autonomy with a separate political system and economy described by Deng Xiaoping as “One country, two systems.” In particular, Hong Kong maintained its own currency, economy, and most importantly, government. The establishment of neighboring Shenzhen as a Special Economic Zone served as an experiment for market capitalism under the system of “socialism with Chinese characteristics.” The investment of large international firms like Foxconn, resulted in large economic successes that drove the rapid acceptance of market capitalism throughout the rest of China.

As a result of Hong Kong’s history, there is a subtle but important cultural gap between Hong Kong and the Mainland. Rightly or wrongly, many Hong Kong citizens see themselves as superior to Mainlanders. Nevertheless, China has continued to allow Hong Kong special privileges not afforded to the rest of China in maintaining Hong Kong as a place for economic experimentation. Given its special status in China, changes in Hong Kong have major implications on business in Greater China

Implications for Business in Greater China

Given this historical perspective on Hong Kong, there are a few key questions that businesspeople need to examine in the wake of these protests:

  1. Will China allow Hong Kong’s historical role as a gateway into China extend beyond an experiment in economics into an experiment in politics?

    What started these protests was that Beijing proposed a change that would limit the existing democratic election process, by effectively limiting the chief executive candidates to those handpicked by the mainland government. Thus, the results of these protests have very specific implications for the future of democracy in Hong Kong, and by proxy democracy in China. Although democracy in China is unlikely at this point, any steps towards or away from democracy in Hong Kong will likely effect the political discourse in greater China.As any who have worked in China know, it is very necessary to have relationships or guanxi (關係) in order to do business there. As market capitalism has spread through China from Hong Kong, business reform has also spread. Thus, the political discourse in China will likely have a long-term impact on the way business in China is done.

  2. Will these protests lead to more severe unrest in Hong Kong and Greater China?

    This is a key question with the potential for more severe short-term financial implications. Since the start of the protests, the Hang Seng Index has already plummeted over 6.4% as investors pull money out of Hong Kong. Certainly, these investors are afraid that extended unrest in Hong Kong will negatively impact business potential in Hong Kong.In addition to the effect of unrest on Hong Kong, one must also consider the impact of unrest in Hong Kong on greater China. Instagram has been blocked in China since Sunday, and other social media and search sites are being actively censored by the government. If the unrest contagion spreads to greater China, it is likely that the PRC will clamp down in a much more extreme manner, but this is dangerous territory. Images of protestors being met by police armed with tear gas and riot shields are likely to evoke memories of Tiananmen, even in China where this event is actively censored. China must tread very lightly, as a violent clampdown of prospects in Hong Kong would likely crush the future of Hong Kong as an international business center.

  3. How will this impact cross-strait relations and the prospect of Taiwan joining greater China?

    China has extended to Taiwan the offer of rejoining China as a special administrative region similar to Hong Kong. Given Taiwan’s status as one of the “Four Asian Tigers,” this certainly has large implications for business, especially for the information technology and high tech manufacturing industries. Since the election of Ma Ying-Jeou (馬英九) as president of Taiwan in 2008, cross-strait relations between China and Taiwan have improved dramatically, resulting in substantial Taiwanese investment and emigration to China.In recent years, one of the simpler ways for foreigners to invest in Chinese growth was to invest in Taiwanese firms investing in China such as Foxconn. How things play out in Hong Kong will have a substantial impact on the future of cross-strait relations and continued Taiwanese investment in China.

The PRC has a very delicate task ahead in figuring out how to address these protests. Extended protests and backing away from previous moves will certainly cause the PRC to “lose face,” but violent clampdowns would have very dramatic repercussions. For businesspeople, it is important to understand that these events could radically change the future prospects of doing business in greater China and Asia Pacific.

Advertisements

Identity in the Business World

Over spring break, I traveled to Copenhagen, Denmark to work on a short engagement with Danaher. Over the course of the week working with my Danish and Polish teammates, I noticed something peculiar about our conversations. After a few days of trying to put my finger on what it was, I realized that they were treating me as an American rather than as a Chinese American. When I told people I was from the US, there were no followup questions like “What about your parents?” or the more insidious “Where are you really from?” It was simply accepted that I was an American. When discussing Danish food at lunch, I was asked questions only about American cuisine, and not Chinese. Teammates were excited to tell me about the time they went to Pennsylvania or Ohio, not the time they went to Shanghai.

While the distinction is subtle, this came as quite a shock. In the years prior to business school, I worked a cumulative one year in China, often leveraging my Mandarin-speaking ability to attain new professional opportunities. Certainly there were instances where I would downplay my identity as a Chinese American, like when I was working with blue-collar workers in the South. Nonetheless, being a Chinese American has always been a large part of my identity in the workplace.

Over the last few years, I’ve had a number of professional identities, ranging from chemical engineer to project manager to negotiator. My racial identity is just one component of who I am as a professional. In this case, the lack of a racial identity allowed me to avoid some of the stereotypes associated with Chinese Americans, but also forced me to think actively about perceptions of Americans. As businesses become increasingly global and complex, professional identity will become increasingly multifaceted. Understanding how you are perceived is important to effective teamwork and management.

Why Diversity and Inclusion are Important to Me

Last week, I was honored to be elected as Section D’s international and diversity student advisory group representative. What this means is that I will be meeting with the International Student Advisory Group (ISAG) and the Diversity Student Advisory Group (DSAG) to facilitate conversations about diversity and inclusion at Darden, advocate on behalf of international students, and promote understanding and awareness to build a stronger Darden community. To be elected, I submitted a statement to explain why diversity and inclusion are important to me. I want to share this piece to provide my perspective.

I am passionate about connecting people of different ethnicity, religion, sexual orientations, or any other label people use to put people into buckets. No matter what your background, each one of us is the same. We’re all human beings with hopes and dreams, successes and failures, triumphant wins and heart-crushing defeats. I’d like to tell you a personal story of one of my heart-crushing defeats that I hope will show why I’m so passionate about connecting people of different backgrounds.

On July 4th, 2011, I was celebrated Independence Day by driving 190 miles to Austin to meet up with some high school friends from Dallas. Over the next several hours we reminisced about the past, caught up on each other’s lives, and had a blast watching fireworks. After I’d had enough, I took my leave and started walking back to my hotel.

Suddenly, a car screeched by. A man leaning out the window yelled at me, “GO BACK TO CHINA!”

Go back to China? I’ve lived here all my life. Am I Chinese? I thought this was home. I thought I belonged here. Am I American? Who am I?

Am I Chinese? Over the last four years, I have spent a substantial amount of time working abroad in China. Even though I speak Mandarin fluently, my Taiwanese/American accent was obvious and Chinese people could always tell that I was not Chinese. They could tell even before I even opened my mouth by the way I dressed. I am not Chinese.

Am I Taiwanese? Although, I have relatives in Taiwan, I cannot even communicate with my grandparents because I cannot speak the local dialect, Taiwanese. While I’ve visited Taiwan many times during my childhood, it’s never felt right to me. The very environment seems to reject me. Too hot. Too humid. Too many mosquitoes. It’s as if the entire climate of Taiwan is trying to make me recognize that I don’t belong there. I am not Taiwanese.

Am I American? I worked at a chemical plant with mostly blue-collar workers. Here I am even more different. Not only am I a different ethnicity, I am the ethnicity that is stealing jobs from them. They associate me with the Chinese sweatshops that are taking food off of their tables. I tell them I’m in the same boat. I’m fighting to keep a job in America as many engineering jobs are getting outsourced to China. They can’t see past my skin color. I am not American.

After the incident, I posted a status update about it onto Facebook. I was instantly flooded with sympathetic Facebook messages and texts. In times of crises, none of these labels matter. I am not Chinese or American, Christian or Buddhist, Republican or Democrat. I am a human being with friends and family that love and support me through thick and thin. I am passionate about diversity and inclusion because they are essential to the development of strong bonds that will last beyond the time we are here at Darden and endure across cultural, religious, and political borders.

The True Intent of SOPA

The Great Firewall of China has been an inapt metaphor for the entirety of its existence. Its purpose is to keep its citizens in rather than to keep invaders out like the original Great Wall. Some will point to its exclusion of non-Chinese companies from the Chinese web space, but ultimately, the government was more than willing to play ball with those who were willing to compromise. The only thing the Great Firewall has in common with the Great Wall, is that they were both built to protect the builders.

Reasons Claimed by SOPA Proponents

The Great Firewall of America is no different. It is being built by the people who would benefit most from its construction. Just take a look at the witness list at the House hearing for the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA or H.R. 3261). 5 of the 6 witness list are outspoken advocates for SOPA. Most notable is Michael O’Leary, Senior Executive Vice President of Global Policy and External Affairs for the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America). During the course of the hearings, O’Leary made multiple fallacious claims that googling names of movies such as “J. Edgar” or “The Grinch Who Stole Christmas” would return pirated versions of the movie. According to O’Leary, this link will show you lists of pirated versions of the movie. I’ll let you judge for yourself the veracity of his claim.

Many in support of the SOPA bill will claim that enforcement would be balanced and fair. They would claim that I am exaggerating the effects of the SOPA bill through hyperbole. During the course of the hearing, Michael O’Leary not only showed support for SOPA, but stated that “the Internet isn’t broken” in places like China and Iran. Wait. Isn’t China the home of some of the worst copyright infringement in the world? O’Leary’s statement must be made from either pure ignorance or to fallaciously support legislation that is not truly intended to protect against copyright infringement. When countries notorious for human rights abuse are held up as successful Internet models, it’s quite apparent that the Great Firewall of America is an apt name for the SOPA construct.

Let’s look at other potential motivations for SOPA. While the name of the bill certainly seems reasonable and desirable, how big of a problem is online piracy? The MPAA published this document about piracy in America. If you analyze their claim that there are $58 billion in losses per year from piracy and that 13% of all adults have pirated, you’ll find that the MPAA claims that your average downloader should be buying 200 more DVD’s a year. Lest we forget, the MPAA has a history of using hyperbole to defend its own interests. In his 1982 testimony, Jack Valenti, former President of the MPAA, stated the following to Congress,

“I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.”

Clearly the effects of the VCR on the media industry was poorly understood and greatly exaggerated by the MPAA. Videotape sales ended up being a significant new revenue stream for the MPAA for many years, even spawning the spinoff media rental industry which still exists today.

Failure to Understand the Internet as as Medium

During the hearing, it became painfully obvious that the proponents of SOPA simply do not understand the Internet as a medium. Representative Ben Quayle expressed concern that there were no successful business models that could survive without SOPA to prevent piracy. Yet services like iTunes, Netflix, and Amazon now represent some of the largest services in media representing billions in revenue every year. Furthermore, there have even recently been disruptive business models like Spotify which have been able to assert themselves in the environment that SOPA proponents claim is not possible to exist in.

It is apparent that proponents of SOPA like the MPAA are simply failing to adapt their business model as technology evolves. In the 1980’s, the MPAA fought against the VCR claiming concerns over about copyright violations. In the 2010’s, the MPAA is fighting against the Internet as a medium. The difference is, this time the stakes are much higher. SOPA’s scope extends far beyond alleged piracy. It creates a web environment almost identical to that of China that restricts internet access, which has recently been declared a human right by the United Nations.

The True Intent of SOPA

If the most recent hearing was any indication, the proponents of SOPA are not interested in working with the technology and Internet industries to find solutions to stem online piracy. When has a fair and balanced discussion ever been held when the debate is stacked 5 to 1? Supporters of SOPA clearly do not understand the Internet as a medium and are constructing a system in which the deck is stacked in their favor. As many tech giants have pointed out, SOPA is devastating to the technology and Internet industries. How long will we suffer the claims that media giants cannot make enough money, even as they are increasing their own compensation?

The Stop Online Piracy Act is being constructed to allow a stranglehold on the American Internet. Make no mistake. Its constructors are building it with this intent in mind. Just like the Great Firewall of China, the Stop Online Piracy Act is a misnomer. Hidden behind an innocuous name, the bill’s intent is not to stem piracy as its proponents suggest, its true intent is to control the Internet itself.

US Bill Creating the Great Firewall of America

History of Chinese Internet Censorship

In the western world, China has long been infamous for its human rights abuses. Prior to Deng Xiaoping’s re-opening of China to the west in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, these abuses were largely hidden from the West. With the advent of globalization, the PRC quickly realized the dangers of the internet to China’s fragile societal balance. Beginning in 2005, China began enlisting Western aid in Chinese internet censorship. Western companies like Cisco and Google have long abetted the Chinese government in establishing the so-called Great Firewall of China.

As Western social media developed, the PRC quickly recognized the power of these sites and moved to restrict its citizen’s access to these web sites. While some of these actions may appear to be antitrust behavior to allow local Chinese companies a competitive edge, make no mistake that the primary reason for censorship is the ongoing restriction of information from Chinese citizens. Nonetheless, as the Chinese web has developed, Chinese ‘netizens’ actively find ways around the Great Firewall and discuss social issues around the world. Numerous free tools such as Freegate, Freenet, and Vtunnel provide solutions for Chinese netizens to access the internet in the free world. As Chinese netizens find ways around the firewall, China has continued to step up its policing of the Chinese web.

The Power of Social Media in China

Over the past few years, more and more of China’s human rights abuses have come to light through social media. Ai Weiwei’s recent incarceration and the PRC’s bullying of Ai through gigantic back tax charges has resulted in Ai Weiwei speaking out about his incarceration. Using Google+, Ai was able to communicate methods of donation to help fight back against the $2.4 million back taxes claimed by the Chinese government. According to Chinese law, in order to contest tax charges of this nature, half of the sum must be presented as  collateral. In an awe-inspiring demonstration of the power of Chinese social media, Ai’s supporters around the world have already donated more than $1 million in 2 weeks.

Despite the outpouring of support from the West, Ai Weiwei is quick to criticize Western foreign policy.

“Today, the West feels very shy about human rights and the political situation. They’re in need of money. But every penny they borrowed or made from China has really come as a result of how this nation sacrificed everybody’s rights… With globalization and the Internet, we all know it. Don’t pretend you don’t know it. The Western politicians—shame on them if they say they’re not responsible for this. It’s getting worse, and it will keep getting worse.”

Unfortunately, Ai is more than correct in his assessment. Unfortunately, Western politicians’ short-sightedness extends beyond Chinese foreign policy.

Internet Censorship in the United States

On October 26, 2011, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) was introduced in the House of Representatives. This bill aims to quell loosely defined “online piracy.” I’d like to compare SOPA to the Chinese web landscape by discussing the two major things that SOPA would do if passed.

1. SOPA allows for suspension of service prior to being found guilty

SOPA does away with the “safe harbors” defined in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). These safe harbors allow some degree of protection for providers like Facebook, Youtube, and Google from liability for copyright infringement. SOPA would hold any site with user-generated content responsible. In Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., it was demonstrated that big media corporations have not considered fair use in the past when issuing takedown notices. In the SOPA world, the alleged rightsholder would be able to force former safe harbors to suspend service prior to being found guilty of infringing on rights. None of the sites that rely on user-generated content would be able to survive in this environment.

While China is not as concerned with IP laws as America is, there are obvious parallels here. The major Chinese Twitter-clone, Sina Weibo, is often forced to censor information without proof of guilt. This frequently involves blocking references to activists like Ai Weiwei who are trying to express free speech. The important point to note here is that in Ai’s case, he has not necessarily been proven to be guilty of anything prior to the repression of his speech. Similarly, whether or not the rightsholders’ property is being infringed upon, the alleged infringer would have to suspend services immediately.

2. SOPA allows the US government to blacklist web sites

Under Section 102 of SOPA, the Attorney General could order American companies from doing business with any alleged infringing web site. While proponents of SOPA have avoided using the term blacklist, make no mistake. SOPA allows the US government to blacklist websites.

If alarm bells aren’t ringing in your head yet, they should be. This is exactly what China has done with the Great Firewall. We have seen many times in China and recently in the Arab Spring that the censorship of internet is a strong component of the suppression of human rights. Recently, the UN has declared internet access a human right. SOPA would be infringing on American human rights in order to protect big media companies from infringement on their content.

Ultimately, SOPA attempts to control the American web space in the same way that the PRC suppresses human rights in China in the name of intellectual property protection. Look, at the end of the day, online piracy is a serious problem. However, SOPA is not the way to deal with it. If the DMCA needs to be revised to adjust to today’s web, then so be it. Let’s be clear here. This is not a slippery slope argument. SOPA puts in provisions that allows the US to control the internet the same way that the PRC does in China.

To  help fight this bill,

Contact your Congressmen

AND

visit americancensorship.org and show support for American Censorship Day tomorrow, November 16, 2011.

Business Negotiations – Parallels with Texas Hold’em Poker

Recent lapses in blog posting have been a result of traveling overseas. I’m currently in China participating in some high level business negotiations. As a former semi-professional online poker player, I’ve found a number of parallels between business negotiations and poker.

1. Both are games of Partial Information

At the inception of any new business relationship, there will always be some hesitancy in the sharing of information. As the relationship deepens, more and more information is shared. However, at no point will all information be shared. In both scenarios, parties playing optimally will make decisions based on a limited data set, making assumptions for information which cannot be confirmed. Poker players do this by analyzing a hand range, or a set of hands that the opponent could possibly have.

Extra information can be gained in a number of ways. In business negotiations, parties may choose to perform due diligence to gain an information advantage. Quid pro quo information exchanges can help one party gain an advantage if the information being given has less value than perceived by the other party. In poker, players may analyze previous hands to determine betting and sizing patterns, or physical tells. Poker players often engage in ‘table talk,’ the use of speech to elicit a verbal or physical reaction that may cause the opponent to unintentionally reveal information.

2. Information Valuation is essential

While the scale of the information may be different, it is crucial for successful players to understand the value of their information. In a business negotiation, falling revenue streams would be extremely valuable information that should not be relinquished easily. A poker player making a bluff certainly would not reveal his cards to his or her opponent.

Information valuation extends beyond valuation of your own assets. Parties must successfully evaluate the value of their opponent’s assets as well. This may seem obvious in business, as many deals involve extensive valuations of the other party’s assets. Poker players attempt to judge how valuable their opponent thinks their hand is.

However, this is still a very shallow view. Experienced poker players will understand not only their opponent’s valuation of their own hand, but the relative value of their chips relative to the value of their hand. Different players will have different views of chip values. Wealthier players may value their chips less than poorer players. This analyses is important for successful negotiations as well. The other party’s valuation of its own assets should be the basis of negotiations, not your own valuation of their assets. If my desire for your asset is high but your desire for your own asset is low, I would be remiss to to pay a high cost for your asset.

3. Empathy allows parties to gain more information

To fill in gaps in information, assumptions are made in unclear areas. These assumptions can be sharpened by evaluating the situation from the shoes of the other party. In both business and poker, it’s important to understand the thought processes of the other parties in order to understand how they value different assets. An obvious empathetic gain would be to understand that a drunk poker player is likely to value his chips more for their entertainment value than their monetary worth. A prudent poker player would realize that his opponent may be less risk adverse and try to give opportunities for the opponent to gamble at a lower expected value.

While drunk businessmen may be a common sight, prudent businessmen will obviously avoid situations where their judgment will be impaired. Nonetheless, crucial pieces of information can still be gained. As business negotiations deepen, parties will find themselves more and more familiar with other parties. An indication that one party may be fired if a deal does not go through is an obviously valuable piece of information that can only be gained through empathy.

4. Emotional Detachment is important to success

Human beings naturally incorporate emotions into their everyday decisions. While some are certainly more easily influenced by emotion than others, any claiming immunity from emotion in decision-making are delusional or some sort of advanced robot. In the previous discussion of empathy, the employee who may be fired if a deal does not go through should not allow this information affect his decision in the negotiations process. In the same vein, a poker player should not allow his or her anger at a previous hand to cause him to gamble out of frustration.

This emotional detachment is obviously difficult for all humans. At the poker table, there are few mechanisms that will help deal with emotional stresses.When I was playing online poker extensively, I would change my computer background to simple text such as “Relax, poor decisions will lose money in the long run.” To disconnect me from the value of the money, I would surround my monitor with sticky notes with notes like “A big blind is just a tool.” However, the most important tool by far was my network of friends, poker playing and otherwise who would provide support during runs of bad luck.

While emotional impact on business negotiations is generally more subtle, it is still important to build teams who will be capable of preventing you from allow emotion to affect your decision-making. This can only occur through the allowance of open, honest discourse. If a team member fears your wrath, he or she may neglect to alert you of a bias that you are not accounting for in your own decision-making.

Information comes through diligent research. Understanding of value comes through extensive experience. Empathy and emotional detachment however are human traits. Some are of course naturally better than others. Nonetheless, these abilities can be strengthened through practice and team-building. Ultimately, these traits must be carefully balanced. The more empathy you have for someone, the more difficult it will be to make a decision that may harm them.

While all analogies are imperfect, there are many valuable lessons which can be learned at the poker table, although they may be more expensive then they are worth.

The 100 Year Anniversary of the Republic of China and Sino-US Relationship Trends

Today marks the 100 year anniversary of the Republic of China, known to most of the western world as Taiwan. October 10th, 1911 marked the end of traditional imperial rule in China, and the first attempt at democracy. Below is a promotional video from the event (Chinese), primarily discussing the history of the ROC and associating past figures and events with the freedom and prosperity seen in Taiwan today.

Prior to the 1970’s, the US recognized the Republic of China as the legitimate government of China, and actively worked to prevent the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from claiming a seat in the United Nations. At the height of the Cold War, the PRC were active combatants in the Korean and Vietnam wars. Nonetheless, in 1972, just 2 years after the end of the Vietnam War, President Nixon made a famous trip to China to normalize relations with the PRC.

PRC-US relationship normalization culminated in the Joint Communique on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations in 1979, beginning US recognition of the PRC as the legitimate government of China in lieu of the ROC. At the same time, the US passed the Taiwan Relations Act, allowing for de facto diplomatic relations to continue with Taiwan.

While the Taiwanese economy far outpaced the PRC’s from the 60’s to the 90’s, the shift of PRC policy to the socialist market economy in 1978 has allowed the PRC to excel in recent years. With World Trade Organization acceptance of China in 2001, offshoring of American jobs to China have propelled the Chinese economy.

With the recent US economic struggles, many Americans have become increasing frustrated with perceived trade imbalances between the US and China. While have speculated about the resurgence of a red scare in response to economic pressures, others have been more vocal about denouncing China. However, the use of patriotism as thinly veiled racism is nothing new. Nonetheless, American policymakers have begun to combat aggressive Chinese economic policies with constructs like the recent China currency bill. At the same time, many US companies like Merck continue to move jobs overseas to China.

While relationships between the US, China, and Taiwan continue to be rocky, American corporations have tied the US to the hip with China. As the largest US bondholder, China has expressed concerns in US economic performance. Ultimately, US foreign and economic policy are supporting the continued shifting of jobs from the US to China. Measures like the China currency bill are too little, too late in the struggle to maintain US economic dominance. The wheels were set in motion when Nixon first visited China nearly 40 years ago.

While obviously, it is not beneficial for the US to normalize relations with Taiwan at this point in time, this is a stunning reminder of how US political rhetoric is often markedly different from US policy.