[]
the federalist

China poses significant risks for American travelers and businesses.

The U.S. Department of ‌State recently issued ‍a travel ‌advisory, warning‌ Americans to reconsider⁢ going⁢ to ⁣China, Hong Kong, and Macau.

The⁢ State Department classifies mainland China and Macau⁢ as travel advisory “Level 3,” recommending Americans “reconsider travel there” because, “The ‍People’s Republic of China (PRC) government arbitrarily⁤ enforces local laws,‌ including issuing exit bans ⁣on U.S.⁢ citizens‌ and citizens‍ of other countries, without fair⁤ and ⁤transparent process under the law.”

The State Department ⁢designates Hong Kong ‍as travel advisory “Level 2,” recommending Americans ⁣“exercise⁢ increased ​caution” when traveling ⁤there because, “The National Security Law also covers ⁣offenses committed‌ by non-Hong ​Kong‌ SAR ⁢residents or⁤ organizations‍ outside of ⁢the Hong Kong SAR, which could subject ‌U.S. citizens ⁤who⁤ have⁤ been publicly ⁣critical of ⁣the PRC and/or‌ the administration of the Hong ⁢Kong ​SAR to a heightened risk⁣ of‍ arrest, detention, expulsion, or ​prosecution.”

The⁤ warning came as the Sino-U.S. ⁢relationship deteriorated, ⁤and the Chinese Communist Party has increasingly resorted ⁣to holding foreigners ⁤as hostages and ‌demanding their home countries make ‍political concessions.

The most famous ⁤examples ​of China’s “hostage diplomacy”‌ were Canadian ⁢citizens Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig. The‍ Chinese government​ arrested the two Michaels in retaliation for Canada’s ⁣detention of Chinese telecom executive ⁤Meng Wanzhou at the behest of⁢ a U.S. extradition ​request (the U.S. authorities ⁣accused ⁢Meng of committing fraud and violating U.S. sanctions against Iran). The two ⁣Michaels were wrongfully detained for more than ‍1,000 days on trumped-up spying charges ​and were⁤ released after​ Meng reached a deal with U.S. ​prosecutors ⁤and⁤ returned to China first.

⁤ ‍​

Americans‌ are not​ spared from China’s hostage diplomacy. ⁣More⁤ than 200 U.S. citizens ‍are wrongfully detained by the Chinese ‍authorities, including⁤ businessman Mark⁤ Swidan⁢ and​ pastor⁣ David ‍Lin. These U.S. citizens ⁣shared a similar​ ordeal ​in China: They ⁣were arrested without ⁤a warrant; the ⁣Chinese⁢ police announced formal‌ charges against them months after they‍ were already in​ detention; and the Chinese police limited their contact with⁣ their families, consulate officials,​ and lawyers. Since the Chinese ⁤courts have ​a conviction ‌rate​ of 99.9 percent, most ​Americans⁣ in detention ⁢were convicted​ and sentenced to ⁣jail regardless ⁣of how ‌flimsy​ their charges‌ were.

The‍ Chinese authorities have ⁣also ⁤barred ⁢a‍ few Americans who ⁢were never charged with any ⁢wrongdoings ‍from ⁤leaving​ China‌ under the so-called “exit ban.”‌ According⁢ to Safeguard ‍Defenders, ​a human ⁤rights group, between 1995‍ and 2019, the Chinese ​government arbitrarily ⁢prevented 29 Americans, ⁣44 ‍Canadians, and thousands⁤ of Chinese from ⁢leaving ⁢China. Those subject to ‍the⁤ ban couldn’t contest it. 

John ⁣Kamm, ⁢head ⁤of Dui ‌Hua, a San Francisco-based nonprofit‌ organization focusing​ on ⁣securing the release ⁢of ⁤detained Americans, told Newsweek that⁢ he​ considers ‍Americans subject to⁤ coercive measures ⁣political prisoners because “their imprisonment⁢ and treatment ⁣are related⁢ to⁤ the poor state ⁢of political relations between the‍ two countries.” 

Besides their own safety,‍ Americans are also concerned about the safety of their employees ⁢and the sustainability of their business operations ​in ⁤China.

⁢‌

Driven by dictator Xi Jinping’s obsession with national security, Chinese authorities have targeted⁣ foreign companies ‌and businesspeople with ⁤raids, investigations, ‌and detentions. ⁤In ‍early March, U.S. billionaire ​Mark Mobius,​ once a champion of investing in ⁣China, complained that he couldn’t⁢ get‌ his capital​ out of China due​ to‍ the⁣ government’s restrictions.⁢ He warned ‌other foreign ⁣investors to‌ “be very, very careful when investing in China.”

In ‌the days that ‍followed,⁤ China’s Finance Ministry suspended the operations of accounting firm⁢ Deloitte’s⁤ Beijing office for ‌three months and‌ imposed‌ a $31 million fine on​ the firm, ⁤alleging “serious audit deficiencies” ‌in the firm’s⁤ auditing work for state-owned enterprises. Then‍ Chinese ​police raided ‌the Beijing offices of Mintz⁤ Group,⁤ a U.S. ‌dual-diligence firm, ‍and detained all ⁢five Chinese employees. Later that month, the Cyberspace Administration⁢ of China announced ⁢a cybersecurity ⁤investigation into ⁣U.S. computer ‌memory maker ⁣Micron Technology. In April,⁤ authorities⁣ questioned‍ U.S. ⁤consulting ⁤firm Bain & Co.’s‍ employees in⁤ Shanghai.

Xi seems determined ⁤to make China ‌an even more ⁢hostile environment for foreign businesses and investors. In ‌late April, Beijing passed a⁢ sweeping counter-espionage law.⁢ According to Reuters, the law ⁢treats “all documents, data, materials, and ​items⁢ related to ⁤national security and⁢ interests” as state secrets; “expands the definition⁢ of⁤ espionage to ⁢include‍ cyber attacks against state ⁤organs or⁣ critical information infrastructure”; ‌and “allows⁤ authorities carrying ⁣out​ an anti-espionage investigation​ to⁢ gain access to data, electronic⁤ equipment, and information on⁤ personal property ⁤and also ⁤to ban ⁢border crossings.” But the law’s definition of national security or‌ interests is so vague that ⁣doing business ⁢in China has⁢ become⁢ a landmine for foreign companies⁤ and businesspeople.

Increasingly, ⁤Beijing attempts to restrict⁣ what foreign⁤ businesses can say​ or ‌do beyond‌ its borders. Recently, ​after U.S. investment bank‍ Goldman Sachs‌ issued⁤ a bearish ‍report‌ on Chinese ‍banks ⁢that contributed to the ​selloff of their stocks, China’s state-owned media lashed out at Goldman,‌ accusing the bank of misinterpreting the facts.

The⁣ smart ‌money ⁤has been moving away from China in recent months,‌ as foreign investors ⁣sold ⁣Chinese debt ‌for⁣ six‍ consecutive months, and foreign direct investment in China ⁣reportedly fell to $20 billion in‌ the ‌first​ quarter of this ⁣year, compared ⁤to $100‍ billion in​ the same ⁢period last year. Goldman Sachs predicts “[capital] outflows ‌from China this year will cancel ⁣out investment going ⁢into the country,”⁢ a shocking ⁢reversal for a​ country that has⁤ relied on ⁤foreign investments ⁤to propel its economy for four⁣ decades. 

⁤ ⁣

Given the increasing ‍risks​ for Americans and American⁢ businesses in China, it is puzzling that top executives of ‍some ⁢of the largest American⁤ corporations, from Apple’s CEO ⁣Tim Cook to Microsoft’s Founder Bill Gates to J.P. ‌Morgan’s​ CEO Jamie ⁤Dimond, remain bullish‌ about their business‌ perspectives in China, and have all made pilgrimages to Beijing in recent months⁣ to kowtow to Xi. Tesla’s Elon ​Musk even‌ joined ‍15 other Chinese automakers in signing an⁤ open letter, pledging⁤ their commitment to enhancing China’s “core socialist values.”

⁤ ⁣

If⁤ Musk and⁣ other American executives think they can protect their⁣ business interests in China by playing nice ​with Xi, they must ⁤think again. Should Xi‍ invade⁤ Taiwan, ‌he ‍will not hesitate to confiscate the⁤ assets and ⁢technologies of American ⁤companies in ⁢China and hold employees of these companies as‍ hostages. ⁣American corporations ‌doubling ‌down on ⁢their investments in China ​now‍ while ignoring ⁤the​ growing ‌geopolitical ‍risks are ⁢acting irresponsibly toward ⁣their ⁢shareholders⁤ and employees. 

Equally ​disturbing ⁣is​ that high-level ⁤officials of⁤ the Biden administration, from ⁢U.S. Secretary ‌of State ​Antony Blinken to Treasury Secretary ⁤Janet Yellen, have embarrassed themselves and⁣ the United States by bowing to⁢ Chinese officials during their‍ official visits to Beijing ‌and pledging not to seek economic decoupling from​ China, even though‌ it’s the‌ Chinese government’s policies that have⁣ threatened the wellbeing ‍of American visitors and employees‌ of ‍American companies in China, forcing ​some American businesses to⁤ leave. 

Americans should ⁣refrain from visiting China for‍ the sake of‍ their safety, and American ‍companies ⁣that have operations in China or⁢ rely on ​the⁢ country for supply ⁢chains must seek alternatives outside China. ​We⁤ cannot​ count on⁤ our elite class⁢ for‍ protection because⁤ they are both delusional and ‌underprepared.


‍ ⁢ ‌ ‌


" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker