Cleverest attack yet on China's firewall

[Lemur]

This is brilliant, absolutely brilliant. The Obama administration is attacking China's vast internet censorship system as a violation of WTO free trade rules. I love it! No talk of free speech, no discussion of liberty, just an appeal to the one court China will listen to. It's nice when our government has a moment of cleverness. Details: (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/10/china-censorship-trade-barrier/)

The administration, citing World Trade Organization rules, is demanding that China explain its censorship policies. [...] The Obama administration’s move is the first step of a long WTO process that theoretically could end up with trade restrictions imposed on Chinese exports.

“The United States is seeking detailed information on the trade impact of Chinese policies that may block U.S. companies’ websites in China, creating commercial barriers that especially hurt America’s small business,” Kirk’s office announced.A thoughtful reaction (http://www.informationdissemination.net/2011/10/us-launches-wto-nuke-towards-chinas.html):

[W]hile this WTO move by the Obama administration may politically represent a nuclear attack against China's Great Firewall censorship of free speech, the economics of this move is not trivial at all in the internet driven economy of the US today. For years China has systematically attacked the United States with lawfare, including attacking the US Navy indirectly through maritime environment related lawsuits. It is really nice to see the US government turning the tables and now doing the same to China for a change. I want to send a heart felt well done to someone in the State Department!What do the Orgahs think? Clever move or a needless provocation of a sleeping giant?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This is brilliant, absolutely brilliant. The Obama administration is attacking China's vast internet censorship system as a violation of WTO free trade rules. I love it! No talk of free speech, no discussion of liberty, just an appeal to the one court China will listen to. It's nice when our government has a moment of cleverness. Details: (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/10/china-censorship-trade-barrier/)

The administration, citing World Trade Organization rules, is demanding that China explain its censorship policies. [...] The Obama administration’s move is the first step of a long WTO process that theoretically could end up with trade restrictions imposed on Chinese exports.

“The United States is seeking detailed information on the trade impact of Chinese policies that may block U.S. companies’ websites in China, creating commercial barriers that especially hurt America’s small business,” Kirk’s office announced.A thoughtful reaction (http://www.informationdissemination.net/2011/10/us-launches-wto-nuke-towards-chinas.html):

[W]hile this WTO move by the Obama administration may politically represent a nuclear attack against China's Great Firewall censorship of free speech, the economics of this move is not trivial at all in the internet driven economy of the US today. For years China has systematically attacked the United States with lawfare, including attacking the US Navy indirectly through maritime environment related lawsuits. It is really nice to see the US government turning the tables and now doing the same to China for a change. I want to send a heart felt well done to someone in the State Department!What do the Orgahs think? Clever move or a needless provocation of a sleeping giant?

Worthy of the Foriegn Office at the turn of the last Century.

Well done.

[Major Robert Dump]

It can be easily argued that their censorship gives them an undue advantage in global economics, as it should be because it does. It may seem like outright apples and oranges, but the Chinese state in regards to public dissent, opinion and outside influence is not unlike North Koreas. I'm actually surprised they haven't tried to stop the leakage of the video showing the little girl getting run over and ignored because it tarnishes their national image.

[Dîn-Heru]

Well done. China* needs to get its *** metaphorically kicked. By that I mean stop throwing temper tantrums and generally acting like a bully whenever they disagree with something somewhere in the world. So any non-violent act that can remind them that they are not alone in the world and put them in their place alongside (not above) the rest of the world's countries I'm all for.

* By China I mean the leadership of the country not the people. (And the above argument sadly applies to most other countries as well...)

[CountArach]

Cunningly played, Obama.

[Papewaio]

Well if they win they might not be able to do much against China... As it is essentially a political system being undercut.

But it would be funny seeing Cisco being declared an enemy of the state and Seal Team five apprehending John Chambers for being a key implementor of the Great Firewall. Seriously the biggest creators of this firewall are some of the biggest hardware makers in the world. So would the US put sanctions on the last part of their economy that is functioning that of Silicon Valley?

Might be time to buy shares in a competitor like Juniper.

[rory_20_uk]

Great... annoy China over something that at the end of the day the USA has no direct affect over.

Why not whack penalties on imports as well? That is goign to really help the world recovery recover...

~:smoking:

[Lemur]

Great... annoy China over something that at the end of the day the USA has no direct affect over.
I think you're missing the point. Of course the USA cannot influence China's censorship policies. But by posing it as a trade issue and lobbing it to the WTO, we re-frame the argument into a whole different realm. People pay attention to the WTO because they can and will levy fines, tariffs, etc., if a nation is found to be doing anti-competitive things.

In other words, we push our freedom agenda as a trade issue, which makes it very hard for China to resist. I think it's devilishly clever. Politicos could talk for the next two centuries about liberty and freedom and get nowhere with China. But put their trade at risk? Put their 8% annual growth at risk? Suddenly you've got a knife to the necks of the elite.

[rory_20_uk]

You speak as thought China is completely unrelated to all other nations and China will not see through this transparent alteration of focus.

Attacks on China will also hurt the USA as well as the rest of the world.

~:smoking:

[Lemur]

You speak as thought China is completely unrelated to all other nations and China will not see through this transparent alteration of focus.
No, obviously China will recognize what our administration is up to. Which changes nothing, and gives them no advantage once this is framed as a trade issue.

You speak as though the status quo ante is worth preserving no matter how distasteful or restrictive. I think the billions of Chinese citizens deserve to get their failblog and cats who look like hitler (http://www.catsthatlooklikehitler.com/cgi-bin/seigmiaow.pl) without a filter. If the ruling party in China is forced to choose between loosening their grip on information or losing their guaranteed growth, which way will they jump? The answer is obvious.

[Tellos Athenaios]

I don't think the answer is obvious, or will be meaningful. WTO rulings take ages, and the WTO rules are not always enforced effectively. Consider the ever running agriculture subsidy spats between the US & EU, or industry ones between EU/Japan & USA.

Then there is the counterpoint issue: what happens once China lobs a complaint to the WTO over undue and unfair restrictions on Chinese companies when procuring US ones? Additionally, China will argue that US companies are free to compete in Chinese markets under fair and equitable terms, namely those set forth in Chinese law, and therefore there is no trade dispute to speak of. They will further argue that censorship is enforced through voluntary cooperation from companies (which it is, Chinese censorship is primarily self-censorship from the Chinese), pointing at MS Bing for one, and therefore not in the hands of Chinese state which means that WTO is not qualified to rule on the matter in any case.

Finally, at this point China's medium term growth is quite safe from any WTO ruling encroachment: its service economy is positively tiny within the greater whole. Which is the main sticking point: China's long term ambitions involve moving from raw materials and raw labour into more refined industry where it will be in direct competition with the USA, South Korea and Japan. That is not the services economy so any WTO ruling would remain marginally effective at best and it is an economy wherein China becomes increasingly able to point the WTO in the USA's general direction.