foreignpolicy--2020-07-08--Mexico’s President Lands in Washington To Help Trump Tout Trade Deal

Mexico ’ s President Lands in Washington To Help Trump Tout Trade Deal Here is today ’ s Foreign Policy brief : Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador visits the White House , Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro tests positive for the coronavirus , and a top U.S. general questions Russian bounty intelligence .
We welcome your feedback at morningbrief @ foreignpolicy.com .
Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador visits the White House today for his first foreign trip since winning the presidency in 2018 .
His arrival in Washington on Tuesday evening was typically on-brand for the leftist leader : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commercial airliner ( albeit in an exit row ) .
What ’ s on the agenda ?
While the meeting is ostensibly to tout the success of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement ( USMCA ) , the trade deal that replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA ) on July 1 , it ’ s also a chance for U.S. President Donald Trump to trumpet his achievements on immigration to his hardline base .
Trump has not gotten Mexico to pay for his border wall , but he has convinced his neighbor to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the southern border .
The number of individuals making the journey has decreased significantly in 2020 , in part due to a policy of holding U.S.-bound asylum seekers in Mexico while their claims are being processed .
Common ground on coronavirus .
Although it ’ s unlikely either leader will want to draw attention to it , both presidents will also have a chance to compare notes on their poor responses to the coronavirus pandemic .
The United States still leads the world in both the total number of cases and deaths , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it has the ninth highest number of coronavirus cases worldwide , but has recorded the fifth highest number of deaths .
If current trends continue , Mexico will overtake the United Kingdom in total cases by the end of the week .
Es la economía , estúpido .
Unlike Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau—who spurned an invite to today ’ s meeting as the U.S. government threatens to place tariffs on Canadian aluminum—this summit is too good an opportunity for López Obrador to turn down .
That ’ s largely because of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s economy—which is predicted to contract by 10.5 percent this year , according to the International Monetary Fund .
As his approval rating gradually falls along with Mexico ’ s economic performance , López Obrador is aiming to stay on Trump ’ s good side rather than bet on a loss for the U.S. president in November .
“ This is about the economy , it ’ s about jobs , it ’ s about well-being , ” López Obrador said before he departed for Washington .
Bolsonaro tests positive for COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the coronavirus , Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has tested positive , joining the roughly 1.6 million other Brazilians who have contracted the virus over the course of the country ’ s outbreak as well as the other 42,517 Brazilians who tested positive yesterday .
Bolsonaro has attempted to spin the positive diagnosis as a strength .
“ I have to admit , I thought I had gotten it earlier , considering my very dynamic activity in the face of the people , ” he said on Tuesday .
Trump begins U.S. exit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ formally notified the United Nations of his intention to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization , beginning a process that would see a U.S. departure from the body on July 6 , 2021 .
Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden said he would reverse the decision on the first day of his presidency , should he beat Trump in November .
The withdrawal would lead to changes at the WHO if other funding sources are not found .
In 2019 , the United States contributed roughly 15 percent of the WHO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday , global health experts Matthew M. Kavanaugh and Mara Pillinger discuss why leaving the WHO will be “ difficult , disruptive , and damaging.
” Top U.S. general speaks on Russian bounty case .
Gen. Frank McKenzie , the head of U.S. Central Command , has poured cold water on recent allegations , first reported by the New York Times , of a program run by Russian intelligence offering cash to Afghan militants for killing U.S. soldiers .
McKenzie called the reports “ very worrisome , ” but said he couldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could have had a direct link to the alleged program .
McKenzie said that Russia ’ s actions in Afghanistan should , however , still be watched closely .
“ They are not our friends in Afghanistan .
And they do not wish us well , and we just need to remember that at all times when we evaluate that intelligence , ” he said .
Suleimani killing “ unlawful.
” In a new report , Agnès Callamard , the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial , summary or arbitrary executions , concluded that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Suleimani by a U.S. drone strike was arbitrary and unlawful under international human rights law , citing a lack of any imminent threat posed by Suleimani in the lead up to the assassination .
Callamard will present her findings to the U.N. Human Rights Council on Thursday .
The United States left the council in 2018 .
OECD unemployment rate to hit record highs .
The world ’ s wealthiest countries will see record unemployment rates as a result of the coronavirus pandemic , according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 9.4 percent unemployment rate across the 37 countries that make up the group ’ s membership , a number that could go as high as 12.6 percent if these countries see a second wave of coronavirus cases .
In releasing the data , OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría called on wealthy countries to better protect the economically vulnerable across their societies .
“ In times of crisis , ‘ normality ’ sounds very appealing .
However , our normal was not good enough for the many people with no or precarious jobs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and limits on their ambitions , ” Gurría said .
WHO acknowledges airborne coronavirus threat .
The World Health Organization has acknowledged the possibility of coronavirus transmission by airborne means after an open letter from over 200 scientists in the Clinical Infectious Diseases journal urged the organization to update its current guidelines .
Maria Van Kerkhove , the technical lead on the coronavirus pandemic at the WHO , said it would publish a scientific brief highlighting the latest knowledge on how the virus is transmitted , and underlined that “ a comprehensive package @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the spread of the virus .
Guaidó allies ousted .
The Venezuelan Supreme Court has removed the leaders of the Juan Guaidó-aligned Popular Will party ahead of December legislative elections .
The move mirrors similar actions taken in recent weeks to remove leaders of two other opposition parties : Democratic Action and First Justice .
Leopoldo López , Popular Will ’ s leader , said his party would not obey “ dictatorial impositions.
” Guaidó resigned from Popular Will after he assumed the role of acting president in 2019 .
Hot takes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daily Beast found that a number of conservative-leaning U.S. outlets , including the Washington Examiner , The National Interest , and Newsmax , unwittingly published fake authors posing as Middle East experts .
The Daily Beast identified at least 19 fake authors who had published over 90 opinion pieces using bogus personas and author photos generated by artificial intelligence .
It ’ s not known who was behind the network , but the content of the pieces—often critical of Qatar—suggest an involvement from one of the country ’ s rivals in the region @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a U.S. passport is not what it used to be , according to an update of the Henley Passport Index—a running measure of the most travel-friendly passports .
Japan tops the list , as holders are allowed visa-free or visa-on-arrival travel to 191 countries , the most of any country .
The United States currently shares seventh place on the list , but according the index ’ s authors , temporary travel bans imposed due to coronavirus measures knock the country way down the list to number 28—giving U.S. citizens about the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The news won ’ t bother all Americans as only about half of them—146 million—hold a valid passport .
For more from FP , visit foreignpolicy.com , subscribe here , or sign up for our other newsletters .
Send your tips , comments , questions , or corrections to morningbrief @ foreignpolicy.com .

Here is today’s Foreign Policy brief: Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador visits the White House, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro tests positive for the coronavirus, and a top U.S. general questions Russian bounty intelligence.
If you would like to receive Morning Brief in your inbox every weekday, please sign up here.
White House Prepares For AMLO Arrival
Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador visits the White House today for his first foreign trip since winning the presidency in 2018. His arrival in Washington on Tuesday evening was typically on-brand for the leftist leader: He flew in economy class on a commercial airliner (albeit in an exit row).
What’s on the agenda? While the meeting is ostensibly to tout the success of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the trade deal that replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on July 1, it’s also a chance for U.S. President Donald Trump to trumpet his achievements on immigration to his hardline base. Trump has not gotten Mexico to pay for his border wall, but he has convinced his neighbor to stem the number of asylum seekers crossing the southern border. The number of individuals making the journey has decreased significantly in 2020, in part due to a policy of holding U.S.-bound asylum seekers in Mexico while their claims are being processed.
Common ground on coronavirus. Although it’s unlikely either leader will want to draw attention to it, both presidents will also have a chance to compare notes on their poor responses to the coronavirus pandemic. The United States still leads the world in both the total number of cases and deaths, but Mexico is not far behind: it has the ninth highest number of coronavirus cases worldwide, but has recorded the fifth highest number of deaths. If current trends continue, Mexico will overtake the United Kingdom in total cases by the end of the week.
Es la economía, estúpido. Unlike Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau—who spurned an invite to today’s meeting as the U.S. government threatens to place tariffs on Canadian aluminum—this summit is too good an opportunity for López Obrador to turn down. That’s largely because of the importance of the United States to Mexico’s economy—which is predicted to contract by 10.5 percent this year, according to the International Monetary Fund.
As his approval rating gradually falls along with Mexico’s economic performance, López Obrador is aiming to stay on Trump’s good side rather than bet on a loss for the U.S. president in November. “This is about the economy, it’s about jobs, it’s about well-being,” López Obrador said before he departed for Washington.
What We’re Following Today
Bolsonaro tests positive for COVID-19. After months of downplaying the dangers of the coronavirus, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has tested positive, joining the roughly 1.6 million other Brazilians who have contracted the virus over the course of the country’s outbreak as well as the other 42,517 Brazilians who tested positive yesterday. Bolsonaro has attempted to spin the positive diagnosis as a strength. “I have to admit, I thought I had gotten it earlier, considering my very dynamic activity in the face of the people,” he said on Tuesday.
Trump begins U.S. exit from WHO. U.S. President Donald Trump formally notified the United Nations of his intention to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization, beginning a process that would see a U.S. departure from the body on July 6, 2021. Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden said he would reverse the decision on the first day of his presidency, should he beat Trump in November. The withdrawal would lead to changes at the WHO if other funding sources are not found. In 2019, the United States contributed roughly 15 percent of the WHO budget.
Writing in Foreign Policy on Tuesday, global health experts Matthew M. Kavanaugh and Mara Pillinger discuss why leaving the WHO will be “difficult, disruptive, and damaging.”
Top U.S. general speaks on Russian bounty case. Gen. Frank McKenzie, the head of U.S. Central Command, has poured cold water on recent allegations, first reported by the New York Times, of a program run by Russian intelligence offering cash to Afghan militants for killing U.S. soldiers. McKenzie called the reports “very worrisome,” but said he couldn’t point to any U.S. casualties that could have had a direct link to the alleged program. McKenzie said that Russia’s actions in Afghanistan should, however, still be watched closely. “They are not our friends in Afghanistan. And they do not wish us well, and we just need to remember that at all times when we evaluate that intelligence,” he said.
Suleimani killing “unlawful.” In a new report, Agnès Callamard, the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, concluded that the January killing of Iranian Commander Qassem Suleimani by a U.S. drone strike was arbitrary and unlawful under international human rights law, citing a lack of any imminent threat posed by Suleimani in the lead up to the assassination. Callamard will present her findings to the U.N. Human Rights Council on Thursday. The United States left the council in 2018.
Keep an Eye On
OECD unemployment rate to hit record highs. The world’s wealthiest countries will see record unemployment rates as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The OECD forecast a 9.4 percent unemployment rate across the 37 countries that make up the group’s membership, a number that could go as high as 12.6 percent if these countries see a second wave of coronavirus cases. In releasing the data, OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría called on wealthy countries to better protect the economically vulnerable across their societies. “In times of crisis, ‘normality’ sounds very appealing. However, our normal was not good enough for the many people with no or precarious jobs, bad working conditions, income insecurity, and limits on their ambitions,” Gurría said.
WHO acknowledges airborne coronavirus threat. The World Health Organization has acknowledged the possibility of coronavirus transmission by airborne means after an open letter from over 200 scientists in the Clinical Infectious Diseases journal urged the organization to update its current guidelines. Maria Van Kerkhove, the technical lead on the coronavirus pandemic at the WHO, said it would publish a scientific brief highlighting the latest knowledge on how the virus is transmitted, and underlined that “a comprehensive package of interventions” was needed to halt the spread of the virus.
Guaidó allies ousted. The Venezuelan Supreme Court has removed the leaders of the Juan Guaidó-aligned Popular Will party ahead of December legislative elections. The move mirrors similar actions taken in recent weeks to remove leaders of two other opposition parties: Democratic Action and First Justice. Leopoldo López, Popular Will’s leader, said his party would not obey “dictatorial impositions.” Guaidó resigned from Popular Will after he assumed the role of acting president in 2019.
Odds and Ends
Hot takes, served fake. An investigation by the Daily Beast found that a number of conservative-leaning U.S. outlets, including the Washington Examiner, The National Interest, and Newsmax, unwittingly published fake authors posing as Middle East experts. The Daily Beast identified at least 19 fake authors who had published over 90 opinion pieces using bogus personas and author photos generated by artificial intelligence. It’s not known who was behind the network, but the content of the pieces—often critical of Qatar—suggest an involvement from one of the country’s rivals in the region.
Pariah passports. The power of a U.S. passport is not what it used to be, according to an update of the Henley Passport Index—a running measure of the most travel-friendly passports. Japan tops the list, as holders are allowed visa-free or visa-on-arrival travel to 191 countries, the most of any country. The United States currently shares seventh place on the list, but according the index’s authors, temporary travel bans imposed due to coronavirus measures knock the country way down the list to number 28—giving U.S. citizens about the same ease of travel as their Mexican neighbors. The news won’t bother all Americans as only about half of them—146 million—hold a valid passport.
That’s it for today.
For more from FP, visit foreignpolicy.com, subscribe here, or sign up for our other newsletters. Send your tips, comments, questions, or corrections to morningbrief@foreignpolicy.com.


foreignpolicy--2020-07-08--Countries Are Opening Their Doors for Hong Kong’s Exodus

Countries Are Opening Their Doors for Hong Kong ’ s Exodus You may see it as Hong Kong ’ s second return to China or the betrayal of the principles behind the city ’ s handover from the United Kingdom in 1997 , a killing of the goose that laid the golden eggs or the end of Hong Kong altogether .
Whatever expression you choose , after decades of holding Hong Kong gingerly in its palm , China finally closed its fist on July 1 with a new security law that threatens what little remains of Hong Kong ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial center.China finally closed its fist with a new security law that threatens what little remains of Hong Kong ’ s raison d ’ être as an offshore financial center .
The whole point of Hong Kong is to be a place where people can do business in China without being subject to Chinese law .
The security law brings Hong Kong into the cold .
That may make Beijing more confident in its ability to impose its will on the territory and its people , but it makes Hong Kongers themselves more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it comes as no surprise that record numbers are heading for the door—or at least making preparations to do so .
Even before the new security law was proposed , more than 40 percent of Hong Kong ’ s population was considering emigration .
Highly skilled expatriates were also reportedly leaving Hong Kong in the wake of massive protests and the coronavirus epidemic .
A June membership survey by the American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong revealed that the national security law was likely to drive even more foreign residents—and their companies—out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a healthy skepticism that these intentions will ever be realized , the overall mood is certainly not bullish on Hong Kong .
If Hong Kongers want to leave , those with the highest skills will find doors wide open for them all around the world .
To begin with , all Hong Kong natives who are over 23 years old—and were thus British subjects on the day the former colony was handed over to China on June 30 , 1997—are automatically eligible for British National ( Overseas ) passports .
These have not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has now offered these passport holders and their dependents the right to live , work , and study in the United Kingdom as well as a six-year pathway to citizenship .
That offer alone could cover more than half of the current population of Hong Kong .
Several hundred thousand Hong Kongers also hold Canadian or Australian citizenship or permanent residency rights .
Both countries are considering measures to make it easier for more to make the move , with Canada cryptically reviewing options and Australia considering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Hong Kong , Japan is actively pitching for financial firms to relocate to Tokyo while considering an expedited residency permit for high-skilled finance professionals .
Taiwan has set up an entire government department , the Taiwan-Hong Kong Services and Exchange Office , to facilitate relocations from Hong Kong.Taiwan has set up an entire government department to facilitate relocations from Hong Kong .
Meanwhile in the United States , the Hong Kong Safe Harbor Act—which would grant refugee status to Hong Kongers threatened by the new security law—has strong bipartisan support in Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the humanitarian character of their outreach efforts , but the reality is that they are also eying Hong Kong ’ s extraordinary concentration of human capital .
After all , 1.4 billion people in mainland China are also subject to the tyranny of arbitrary laws under the Chinese party-state , but no one is scrambling to offer them a new home .
Hong Kong is different : It is most famous as a financial hub , but it is also a major center for consulting , design , education , fashion , merchandising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other professional services .
These are undertaken by both locals and expats , and nearly all of them are mobile .
Most of them speak English .
Many of today ’ s native Hong Kongers are descended from people who fled Communist Party rule in China at the end of the civil war in 1949 .
Others fled during the Cultural Revolution .
More recent arrivals from mainland China include roughly 1 million immigrants who have been allowed into what ’ s now called the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region ( which maintains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through a program that approves up to 150 people a day to be reunited with relatives .
And then there are the immigrants from around the globe , for whom Hong Kong is a magnet .
As of the latest census in 2016 , Hong Kong ’ s population of 7.3 million included 570,000 non-Chinese immigrants .
The largest groups are from the Philippines ( 190,000 ) and Indonesia ( 160,000 ) , many of them domestic workers .
But that still leaves some 200,000 who are mostly footloose professionals , including 35,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and 11,000 Japanese .
Other figures based on immigration data put the numbers even higher .
Both natives and foreign-born residents are equally subject to the new national security law , which creates new penalties for secession , subversion , terrorism , and “ collusion with a foreign country or with external elements.
” Other countries also outlaw secession , subversion , and terrorism , but China notoriously construes these crimes extraordinarily broadly .
Even worse for Hong Kong , the new security law ’ s provisions on collusion are broader still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China or “ provoke hatred ” toward China can now receive sentences ranging from three years to life imprisonment .
What ’ s more , China claims global jurisdiction for these supposed crimes .
That means , for example , that a human rights activist based in the United States or elsewhere who calls for sanctions against China for its internment of minority Uighurs in concentration camps could , in principle , be arrested and tried on arrival in Hong Kong .
Similarly , a foreign university that held a Hong Kong democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city .
Forget about holding a democracy debate in Hong Kong itself .
Foreign professors at Hong Kong universities will have to be especially wary .
Of course , everything that now applies to Hong Kong has always applied on the mainland .
But the prohibition on criticizing China was always tacit .
In Hong Kong , it is now explicit .
It seems unlikely that Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam , or even Beijing ’ s new man in Hong Kong , Zheng Yanxiong ( whose mouthful of a title @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Safeguarding National Security of the Central People ’ s Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region ” ) , will start having expats arrested for anti-China tweets anytime soon .
But you never know .
Hong Kong has always taken special pride in being governed by the rule of law , and now the law says that an errant tweet carries a minimum three-year prison sentence .
Who will want to take that chance ?
Native-born Hong Kongers , longtime expats , and professional services companies all have strong incentives to leave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay if they want to continue to do business in China , including their lucrative role in handling all manner of capital flows in and out of the world ’ s second-largest economy .
Many have criticized banks like HSBC and Standard Chartered for publicly endorsing the new Hong Kong security law .
No doubt they came under strong pressure to do so , and no doubt their acquiescence is a sign that they have no intention of abandoning the city .
But the continuing competitiveness of Hong Kong as a business and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousands of smaller firms , their owners , and their employees .
Having greater opportunities to relocate , they may be less willing than the banks and bankers to kowtow to their new emperor , Chinese President Xi Jinping .
For although China may not value “ troublesome ” Hong Kongers , much of the rest of the world does .
Both Hong Kong natives and longtime foreign residents have skills and connections that are welcome almost everywhere .
The locals have emigration options that span the Asia-Pacific region and the English-speaking world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it difficult for them to leave , but in practice , that seems unlikely .
Just as damaging for Hong Kong , the expats can follow the locals out of the territory—or just go home .
Hong Kong itself will always remain firmly under Beijing ’ s control .
But to paraphrase Princess Leia of Star Wars fame , the more Beijing tightens its grip , the more Hong Kongers will slip through its fingers .

You may see it as Hong Kong’s second return to China or the betrayal of the principles behind the city’s handover from the United Kingdom in 1997, a killing of the goose that laid the golden eggs or the end of Hong Kong altogether. Whatever expression you choose, after decades of holding Hong Kong gingerly in its palm, China finally closed its fist on July 1 with a new security law that threatens what little remains of Hong Kong’s raison d’être as an offshore financial center.China finally closed its fist with a new security law that threatens what little remains of Hong Kong’s raison d’être as an offshore financial center. The whole point of Hong Kong is to be a place where people can do business in China without being subject to Chinese law. The security law brings Hong Kong into the cold. That may make Beijing more confident in its ability to impose its will on the territory and its people, but it makes Hong Kongers themselves more vulnerable—and their city less viable.
You may see it as Hong Kong’s second return to China or the betrayal of the principles behind the city’s handover from the United Kingdom in 1997, a killing of the goose that laid the golden eggs or the end of Hong Kong altogether. Whatever expression you choose, after decades of holding Hong Kong gingerly in its palm, China finally closed its fist on July 1 with a new security law that threatens what little remains of Hong Kong’s raison d’être as an offshore financial center.China finally closed its fist with a new security law that threatens what little remains of Hong Kong’s raison d’être as an offshore financial center. The whole point of Hong Kong is to be a place where people can do business in China without being subject to Chinese law. The security law brings Hong Kong into the cold. That may make Beijing more confident in its ability to impose its will on the territory and its people, but it makes Hong Kongers themselves more vulnerable—and their city less viable.
Thus it comes as no surprise that record numbers are heading for the door—or at least making preparations to do so. Even before the new security law was proposed, more than 40 percent of Hong Kong’s population was considering emigration. Highly skilled expatriates were also reportedly leaving Hong Kong in the wake of massive protests and the coronavirus epidemic. A June membership survey by the American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong revealed that the national security law was likely to drive even more foreign residents—and their companies—out of the jurisdiction. While some express a healthy skepticism that these intentions will ever be realized, the overall mood is certainly not bullish on Hong Kong.
If Hong Kongers want to leave, those with the highest skills will find doors wide open for them all around the world. To begin with, all Hong Kong natives who are over 23 years old—and were thus British subjects on the day the former colony was handed over to China on June 30, 1997—are automatically eligible for British National (Overseas) passports. These have not historically conferred residency rights in Britain, but U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has now offered these passport holders and their dependents the right to live, work, and study in the United Kingdom as well as a six-year pathway to citizenship. That offer alone could cover more than half of the current population of Hong Kong.
Several hundred thousand Hong Kongers also hold Canadian or Australian citizenship or permanent residency rights. Both countries are considering measures to make it easier for more to make the move, with Canada cryptically reviewing options and Australia considering a special protection visa scheme. Closer to Hong Kong, Japan is actively pitching for financial firms to relocate to Tokyo while considering an expedited residency permit for high-skilled finance professionals. Taiwan has set up an entire government department, the Taiwan-Hong Kong Services and Exchange Office, to facilitate relocations from Hong Kong.Taiwan has set up an entire government department to facilitate relocations from Hong Kong. Meanwhile in the United States, the Hong Kong Safe Harbor Act—which would grant refugee status to Hong Kongers threatened by the new security law—has strong bipartisan support in Congress.
Most of these countries officially emphasize the humanitarian character of their outreach efforts, but the reality is that they are also eying Hong Kong’s extraordinary concentration of human capital. After all, 1.4 billion people in mainland China are also subject to the tyranny of arbitrary laws under the Chinese party-state, but no one is scrambling to offer them a new home. Hong Kong is different: It is most famous as a financial hub, but it is also a major center for consulting, design, education, fashion, merchandising, publishing, and a range of other professional services. These are undertaken by both locals and expats, and nearly all of them are mobile. Most of them speak English.
Many of today’s native Hong Kongers are descended from people who fled Communist Party rule in China at the end of the civil war in 1949. Others fled during the Cultural Revolution. More recent arrivals from mainland China include roughly 1 million immigrants who have been allowed into what’s now called the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (which maintains its own passports and immigration controls) through a program that approves up to 150 people a day to be reunited with relatives.
And then there are the immigrants from around the globe, for whom Hong Kong is a magnet. As of the latest census in 2016, Hong Kong’s population of 7.3 million included 570,000 non-Chinese immigrants. The largest groups are from the Philippines (190,000) and Indonesia (160,000), many of them domestic workers. But that still leaves some 200,000 who are mostly footloose professionals, including 35,000 British, 15,000 Americans, 15,000 Australians, and 11,000 Japanese. Other figures based on immigration data put the numbers even higher.
Both natives and foreign-born residents are equally subject to the new national security law, which creates new penalties for secession, subversion, terrorism, and “collusion with a foreign country or with external elements.” Other countries also outlaw secession, subversion, and terrorism, but China notoriously construes these crimes extraordinarily broadly. Even worse for Hong Kong, the new security law’s provisions on collusion are broader still: People who advocate international sanctions on China or “provoke hatred” toward China can now receive sentences ranging from three years to life imprisonment.
What’s more, China claims global jurisdiction for these supposed crimes. That means, for example, that a human rights activist based in the United States or elsewhere who calls for sanctions against China for its internment of minority Uighurs in concentration camps could, in principle, be arrested and tried on arrival in Hong Kong. Similarly, a foreign university that held a Hong Kong democracy conference might be unable to recruit in the city. Forget about holding a democracy debate in Hong Kong itself. Foreign professors at Hong Kong universities will have to be especially wary.
Of course, everything that now applies to Hong Kong has always applied on the mainland. But the prohibition on criticizing China was always tacit. In Hong Kong, it is now explicit. It seems unlikely that Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam, or even Beijing’s new man in Hong Kong, Zheng Yanxiong (whose mouthful of a title is “director of the Office for Safeguarding National Security of the Central People’s Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region”), will start having expats arrested for anti-China tweets anytime soon. But you never know. Hong Kong has always taken special pride in being governed by the rule of law, and now the law says that an errant tweet carries a minimum three-year prison sentence. Who will want to take that chance?
Native-born Hong Kongers, longtime expats, and professional services companies all have strong incentives to leave. Only the big banks have to stay if they want to continue to do business in China, including their lucrative role in handling all manner of capital flows in and out of the world’s second-largest economy. Many have criticized banks like HSBC and Standard Chartered for publicly endorsing the new Hong Kong security law. No doubt they came under strong pressure to do so, and no doubt their acquiescence is a sign that they have no intention of abandoning the city. But the continuing competitiveness of Hong Kong as a business and financial center depends on the decisions of thousands of smaller firms, their owners, and their employees. Having greater opportunities to relocate, they may be less willing than the banks and bankers to kowtow to their new emperor, Chinese President Xi Jinping.
For although China may not value “troublesome” Hong Kongers, much of the rest of the world does. Both Hong Kong natives and longtime foreign residents have skills and connections that are welcome almost everywhere. The locals have emigration options that span the Asia-Pacific region and the English-speaking world. In theory, China could make it difficult for them to leave, but in practice, that seems unlikely. Just as damaging for Hong Kong, the expats can follow the locals out of the territory—or just go home. Hong Kong itself will always remain firmly under Beijing’s control. But to paraphrase Princess Leia of Star Wars fame, the more Beijing tightens its grip, the more Hong Kongers will slip through its fingers.


foreignpolicy--2020-07-08--Trump’s Mount Rushmore Speech Is the Closest He’s Come to Fascism

Trump ’ s Mount Rushmore Speech Is the Closest He ’ s Come to Fascism On July 3 , at Mount Rushmore , U.S. President Donald Trump warned about the threat of a novel fascism : “ In our schools , our newsrooms , even our corporate boardrooms , there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance .
If you do not speak its language , perform its rituals , recite its mantras , and follow its commandments , then you will be censored , banished , blacklisted , persecuted , and punished .
It ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the fascist leaders of the past , there was in Trump ’ s speech a contradiction between his words denouncing tyrannical invisible forces and his actual dictatorial leanings .
In fact , Trump echoed a classic technique of past fascist leaders ; fascists always deny what they are and ascribe their own features and their own totalitarian politics to their enemies .
Had he lived to see the speech , the late Israeli historian Zeev Sternhell would have no doubt recognized that Trump was perpetuating a lie that he ’ d spent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week before Trump ’ s tirade , the world lost Sternhell—its most important historian of fascism .
In recent years , there has been a resurgence of interest in fascism , which has become a clear and present danger across the globe rather than simply a historical problem .
This is why Sternhell ’ s death should be not only a time of sorrow for the loss of a great mind and an engaged citizen but also an opportunity to learn from his life , during which he escaped fascism and then sought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1935 , Sternhell survived the Holocaust , but his mother and sister were killed by the Nazis .
He escaped the Przemysl ghetto and disguised himself as a gentile—posing as an altar boy and eventually converted to Catholicism .
Once the war was over , he immigrated to France in 1946 and then to Israel in 1951 .
He was a man of letters , a professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem , as well as a soldier and a public intellectual .
Sternhell refused a popular understanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only banalized fascism but also distorted “ the true nature of the European disaster of our century , ” he wrote in the Journal of Political Ideologies in 2000 .
Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini destroyed democracy , and Sternhell recognized that today democracy stands vulnerable to the forces of the right due to their lies , ideologies , and violence .
When democracy , truth , and history are under intense attack by propagandists who act out of the fascist playbook , Sternhell ’ s explanation of fascism is even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been on the extreme right .
They emerged out of a long tradition of anti-Enlightenment thought that developed in reaction to the French and American revolutions and against the notion that universal values such as pluralism , equality , and freedom should be defended .
Fascism stands as the most radical outcome of this revolt against universal values .
It was an anti-left and anti-liberal counterrevolution , and while it appropriated the vocabulary of the left—it bears remembering that the Nazi movement ’ s official name was the National Socialist German Workers ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right-wing domination and oppression .
Sternhell ’ s most original contribution was his argument that fascism had a long intellectual history and did not start with the economic , cultural , and political crises of the 1920s and 1930s .
He wrote about this in pathbreaking works such as Neither Right nor Left : Fascist Ideology in France ( 1986 ) ; The Birth of Fascist Ideology ( co-written with Mario Sznajder and Maia Asheri , 1994 ) ; and The Anti-Enlightenment Tradition ( 2009 ) .
Fascism can not be simply defined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberalism , Marxism , and democracy .
Fascism had a vision of the world , which was “ an alternative political , moral , and intellectual system , ” he argued .
For Sternhell , fascism always had two essential components : 1 ) a brand of anti-liberal and anti-bourgeois tribal nationalism based on social Darwinism and , often , biological determinism ; and 2 ) a radical formerly leftist , anti-materialist revision of Marxism .
Thus , fascism combined anti-rationalist thinkers like the French Catholic chauvinist Charles Maurras and Georges Sorel—a leftist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a road map for revolutionary politics—and reformulated nationalist and social themes in an extreme right-wing form .
To be sure , Sternhell ’ s model overemphasized French intellectual history .
It also did not pay sufficient attention to how fascist movements spread chaos , violence , and political unrest or the role of leadership cults in fascist regimes .
As an intellectual historian , he stressed ideas as the origin of all politics .
But from his attention to ideas came his most important insight : Fascism was first and foremost an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ domination .
Sternhell did not see fascism as a French or European creation but as a global form of politics .
For him , fascism transcended the old reactionary right by mixing it up with leftist themes to produce a new racist and nationalist approach to social , economic , and political problems—an approach to politics that has reemerged today from Europe to Brazil to the United States .
In Sternhell ’ s formulation , fascism was “ neither right nor left ” in the traditional sense but rather an extreme right-wing appropriation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights for all , fascism wanted no rights for people who were ethnically or racially distinct or who behaved or thought differently .
In other words , fascists attacked political and ethnic minorities in the name of the nation and the sacred .
Indeed , when the Nazis talked about their social concerns , they had in mind a racist society with a sort of social equality among the members of the master race .
And that is why Sternhell saw so many resonances of the past in our present .
In recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from using the F-word to point out parallels between past fascist regimes and the far-right leaders of the present .
He called these links by their proper name .
Using history to understand the present , fascism is a concept that frames authoritarian leaders who today reconnect populism with key elements of Hitler ’ s rule : the glorification of violence and the militarization of politics ; racism and discrimination ; and a propaganda technique that follows on the tradition of the Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels .
Leaders like Trump in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Narendra Modi in India , and Viktor Orban in Hungary are helping to take contemporary far-right populism back to its fascist roots .
Sternhell even saw ominous signs in Israel .
A founder of Peace Now who also considered himself a Zionist , Sternhell saw the foundation of Israel as the product of a problematic bargain where religion and exclusionary nationalism had an underserved place .
These anti-Enlightenment traditions did not , in his view , belong in an egalitarian secular state .
As Sternhell argued in Foreign Policy last year , Israeli @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the xenophobic European far-right created a collaboration with a “ Trojan horse ” that sought to destroy Israel ’ s democratic values .
Sternhell was a vocal critic of the post-1967 settlements in Palestinian lands , and in 2008 he was the victim of a terrorist attack by an extreme right-wing U.S.-born settler .
A pipe bomb was planted outside his home in Jerusalem , but this attempt to silence him did not succeed ; Sternhell publicly warned in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in 2014 that “ Israeli democracy has become increasingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hell of the Holocaust and dedicated his life to study the ideology behind its horrors .
He also supported younger scholars and looked to the next generation .
He once wrote to me , “ I am happy to see that the history of research is a history of Progress .
The young generation … is improving on the work of its elders.
” It is impossible to understand Hitler ’ s rise in the 1930s , Bolsonaro ’ s popularity in Brazil , or Trump ’ s recent strategy of lies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ books on fascism .
At Mount Rushmore , Trump argued that “ the radical ideology attacking our country advances under the banner of social justice .
But in truth , it would demolish both justice and society .
It would transform justice into an instrument of division and vengeance , and it would turn our free and inclusive society into a place of repression , domination , and exclusion.
” Trump ’ s own sense of emergency and claims of an imminent threat to the nation—as he narrowly conceives of it—represent the closest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ form of argumentation .
Contrary to what he proclaimed at Mount Rushmore , it is Trump who is constantly undermining democracy and inclusion—and his nativist populism is anchored in the fascist past .
As students , citizens , and readers , we need the Sternhells of the world to shine a light on these connections between past and present—because we are living in a time when human rights , secularism and democracy are under attack .

On July 3, at Mount Rushmore, U.S. President Donald Trump warned about the threat of a novel fascism : “In our schools, our newsrooms, even our corporate boardrooms, there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance. If you do not speak its language, perform its rituals, recite its mantras, and follow its commandments, then you will be censored, banished, blacklisted, persecuted, and punished. It’s not going to happen to us.”
On July 3, at Mount Rushmore, U.S. President Donald Trump warned about the threat of a novel fascism: “In our schools, our newsrooms, even our corporate boardrooms, there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance. If you do not speak its language, perform its rituals, recite its mantras, and follow its commandments, then you will be censored, banished, blacklisted, persecuted, and punished. It’s not going to happen to us.”
As with the fascist leaders of the past, there was in Trump’s speech a contradiction between his words denouncing tyrannical invisible forces and his actual dictatorial leanings. In fact, Trump echoed a classic technique of past fascist leaders; fascists always deny what they are and ascribe their own features and their own totalitarian politics to their enemies.
Had he lived to see the speech, the late Israeli historian Zeev Sternhell would have no doubt recognized that Trump was perpetuating a lie that he’d spent his career discrediting. Sadly, a week before Trump’s tirade, the world lost Sternhell—its most important historian of fascism.
In recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest in fascism, which has become a clear and present danger across the globe rather than simply a historical problem. This is why Sternhell’s death should be not only a time of sorrow for the loss of a great mind and an engaged citizen but also an opportunity to learn from his life, during which he escaped fascism and then sought to explain it.
Born in Poland in 1935, Sternhell survived the Holocaust, but his mother and sister were killed by the Nazis. He escaped the Przemysl ghetto and disguised himself as a gentile—posing as an altar boy and eventually converted to Catholicism. Once the war was over, he immigrated to France in 1946 and then to Israel in 1951. He was a man of letters, a professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, as well as a soldier and a public intellectual.
These are times of confusion when the racist right depicts itself as democratic while falsely presenting fascism as an ideology of the left—as Trump did at Mount Rushmore and Brazil’s far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, has done for years.
Sternhell refused a popular understanding that conflated fascism and communism. This not only banalized fascism but also distorted “the true nature of the European disaster of our century,” he wrote in the Journal of Political Ideologies in 2000. Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini destroyed democracy, and Sternhell recognized that today democracy stands vulnerable to the forces of the right due to their lies, ideologies, and violence. When democracy, truth, and history are under intense attack by propagandists who act out of the fascist playbook, Sternhell’s explanation of fascism is even more essential.
Sternhell knew fascists have always been on the extreme right. They emerged out of a long tradition of anti-Enlightenment thought that developed in reaction to the French and American revolutions and against the notion that universal values such as pluralism, equality, and freedom should be defended.
Fascism stands as the most radical outcome of this revolt against universal values. It was an anti-left and anti-liberal counterrevolution, and while it appropriated the vocabulary of the left—it bears remembering that the Nazi movement’s official name was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party—it put it at the service of right-wing domination and oppression.
Sternhell’s most original contribution was his argument that fascism had a long intellectual history and did not start with the economic, cultural, and political crises of the 1920s and 1930s. He wrote about this in pathbreaking works such as Neither Right nor Left: Fascist Ideology in France (1986); The Birth of Fascist Ideology (co-written with Mario Sznajder and Maia Asheri, 1994); and The Anti-Enlightenment Tradition (2009).
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner (left) visits Israeli historian Zeev Sternhell at the latter's house in Jerusalem on Oct. 5, 2008.
Fascism cannot be simply defined only by what it stood against: liberalism, Marxism, and democracy. Fascism had a vision of the world, which was “an alternative political, moral, and intellectual system,” he argued. For Sternhell, fascism always had two essential components: 1) a brand of anti-liberal and anti-bourgeois tribal nationalism based on social Darwinism and, often, biological determinism; and 2) a radical formerly leftist, anti-materialist revision of Marxism. Thus, fascism combined anti-rationalist thinkers like the French Catholic chauvinist Charles Maurras and Georges Sorel—a leftist anti-Marxist philosopher who proposed myth and violence as a road map for revolutionary politics—and reformulated nationalist and social themes in an extreme right-wing form.
To be sure, Sternhell’s model overemphasized French intellectual history. It also did not pay sufficient attention to how fascist movements spread chaos, violence, and political unrest or the role of leadership cults in fascist regimes. As an intellectual historian, he stressed ideas as the origin of all politics. But from his attention to ideas came his most important insight: Fascism was first and foremost an idea of politics, violence, and domination.
If the left sought rights for all, fascism wanted no rights for people who were ethnically or racially distinct or who behaved or thought differently. In other words, fascists attacked political and ethnic minorities in the name of the nation and the sacred.
Sternhell did not see fascism as a French or European creation but as a global form of politics. For him, fascism transcended the old reactionary right by mixing it up with leftist themes to produce a new racist and nationalist approach to social, economic, and political problems—an approach to politics that has reemerged today from Europe to Brazil to the United States.
In Sternhell’s formulation, fascism was “neither right nor left” in the traditional sense but rather an extreme right-wing appropriation of both. If the left sought rights for all, fascism wanted no rights for people who were ethnically or racially distinct or who behaved or thought differently. In other words, fascists attacked political and ethnic minorities in the name of the nation and the sacred. Indeed, when the Nazis talked about their social concerns, they had in mind a racist society with a sort of social equality among the members of the master race. And that is why Sternhell saw so many resonances of the past in our present.
In recent years, Sternhell did not shy away from using the F-word to point out parallels between past fascist regimes and the far-right leaders of the present. He called these links by their proper name.
Using history to understand the present, fascism is a concept that frames authoritarian leaders who today reconnect populism with key elements of Hitler’s rule: the glorification of violence and the militarization of politics; racism and discrimination; and a propaganda technique that follows on the tradition of the Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels. Leaders like Trump in the United States, Bolsonaro in Brazil, Narendra Modi in India, and Viktor Orban in Hungary are helping to take contemporary far-right populism back to its fascist roots.
Sternhell even saw ominous signs in Israel. A founder of Peace Now who also considered himself a Zionist, Sternhell saw the foundation of Israel as the product of a problematic bargain where religion and exclusionary nationalism had an underserved place. These anti-Enlightenment traditions did not, in his view, belong in an egalitarian secular state. As Sternhell argued in Foreign Policy last year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s love for the xenophobic European far-right created a collaboration with a “Trojan horse” that sought to destroy Israel’s democratic values.
Sternhell was a vocal critic of the post-1967 settlements in Palestinian lands, and in 2008 he was the victim of a terrorist attack by an extreme right-wing U.S.-born settler. A pipe bomb was planted outside his home in Jerusalem, but this attempt to silence him did not succeed; Sternhell publicly warned in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in 2014 that “Israeli democracy has become increasingly eroded.”
Sternhell lived and escaped from the hell of the Holocaust and dedicated his life to study the ideology behind its horrors. He also supported younger scholars and looked to the next generation. He once wrote to me, “I am happy to see that the history of research is a history of Progress. The young generation … is improving on the work of its elders.”
It is impossible to understand Hitler’s rise in the 1930s, Bolsonaro’s popularity in Brazil, or Trump’s recent strategy of lies and polarization without reading Sternhell’s books on fascism.
At Mount Rushmore, Trump argued that “the radical ideology attacking our country advances under the banner of social justice. But in truth, it would demolish both justice and society. It would transform justice into an instrument of division and vengeance, and it would turn our free and inclusive society into a place of repression, domination, and exclusion.”
Trump’s own sense of emergency and claims of an imminent threat to the nation—as he narrowly conceives of it—represent the closest he has ever come to a fascist form of argumentation. Contrary to what he proclaimed at Mount Rushmore, it is Trump who is constantly undermining democracy and inclusion—and his nativist populism is anchored in the fascist past.
As students, citizens, and readers, we need the Sternhells of the world to shine a light on these connections between past and present—because we are living in a time when human rights, secularism and democracy are under attack.


foreignpolicy--2020-07-08--Is This the Beginning of the End for Western Tech in China?

Is This the Beginning of the End for Western Tech in China ?
Welcome to Foreign Policy ’ s China Brief .
The highlights this week : What the national security law in Hong Kong could mean for U.S. tech firms in China , how foreign student visa restrictions in the United States are a gift to China , and a critical Chinese scholar is arrested .
If you would like to receive China Brief in your inbox every Wednesday , please sign up here .
The ramifications of China ’ s draconian national security law in Hong Kong are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beyond .
Libraries are pulling pro-democracy books from the shelves , lawyers have issued a strong but likely futile letter of protest , political songs are banned at schools , and the police have sweeping new powers .
And in the United States , the Senate has passed new legislation targeting Chinese officials and banks for their role in repression in Hong Kong .
One of the hottest battlefields is technology .
U.S. companies that were once happy to comply with the Chinese authorities on the mainland or that desperately sought President Xi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , following China ’ s hard swing into even deeper authoritarianism this year , that the reputational cost of giving in to Beijing—both among the public and with the U.S. government—outweighs the benefits of a Chinese market that can be snatched away at an authoritarian ’ s whim .
Over the last three days , numerous firms—including Zoom , which faced recent criticism over its cooperation with Beijing—have rushed to state they will not comply with requests under the national security law .
( They ’ ve said little about requests under mainland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s in part because the law targets speech globally , not just in the city itself .
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has praised firms for their actions , which is likely to provoke Beijing further .
Uncertain ground .
Some analysts have argued that tech companies are uncertain because of the newness of the law : As on the mainland , over time they will find compromises and methods of lobbying that allow compliance without too much cost .
But this ignores the increasing uncertainty of mainland politics , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is now often demanded .
Beijing is very likely to see Hong Kong as a proxy for how willing tech firms are to go along with the whole of the Chinese order , and straddling the fence is no longer likely to be an option .
Apple , which maintains a huge presence in China unlike Google or Facebook , faces the hardest choices .
The Hong Kong decisions may be the breaking point for what once seemed to be a mutually profitable relationship between Western tech and the Chinese Communist Party .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that students whose universities only offer remote teaching in the fall will face expulsion from or be banned from admittance to the United States is a gift to China , which has long decried the brain drain of talent to the United States .
Even if the rule is successfully challenged in court , the damage is already done : The money and talent of international students will flow in great volume elsewhere .
The Trump ’ s administration ’ s racism has often focused in particular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white nationalists such as Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon .
Meanwhile in Silicon Valley , anti-Asian racism—long a simmering source of resentment—appears to be finding more public expression .
Critic and scholar arrested .
The scholar Xu Zhangrun , one of the few remaining open critics of Xi ’ s rule in the mainland , was arrested Monday on what appear to be trumped-up charges of soliciting prostitution .
Twenty police officers and 10 vehicles were used to detain the 57-year-old academic , who has been under house arrest since earlier this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of fire since condemning Xi ’ s abolition of presidential term limits in late 2017 , a move that other intellectuals in China decried in private but remained silent on in public .
The arrest reinforces the absolute intolerance for criticism under Xi .
Pullback on the Indian border .
Chinese forces have withdrawn from the border area where a deadly skirmish with Indian troops erupted several weeks ago .
But the cooling of tensions is unlikely to repair the long-term damage done by the Galwan clash , and Indian analysts fear that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with troops , fortifications , and other infrastructure , as it did after the Doklam conflict in 2017 .
Meanwhile , China has widened its territorial conflict with Bhutan this week .
It ’ s hard to tell if there ’ s a coherent national strategy here or if nationalistic posing is now seen as a powerful route to advancement by individual officials and generals .
Sea posturing .
The U.S. deployment of two aircraft carriers to the South China Sea has considerably heated up already hot tensions with China .
China ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegal claims in the oceans that are disputed by almost all of its neighbors has stepped up in recent years .
The state media response has been typically aggressive , prompting a sharp response from the U.S. Navy on social media .
TikTok bans .
In the wake of India ’ s ban on Chinese mobile apps—not yet fully implemented—the Trump administration has made noises about also banning the video app TikTok .
Many have raised concerns about TikTok , but it ’ s unclear how such the ban would work .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ multiple grounds , including free speech .
TikTok maintains that its U.S. and Chinese operations are separate .
The site has become a popular locus for young users posting anti-Trump and anti-conservative videos , muddling the waters further when it comes to the motivation behind government action .
Berlin looks east .
Germany is hoping to strengthen its economic ties with China , setting itself apart from the rest of the West and the United States in particular .
Germany ’ s relationship with China has always been divided .
On one hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public , and figures such as Ai Weiwei and Liao Yiwu are well known there .
But on the other , trade between China and Germany is significant and largely responsible for Germany ’ s post-2008 prosperity .
The antagonism shown by President Donald Trump and his team toward German Chancellor Angela Merkel has also poisoned any attempts by the United States to sell Berlin on a split with Beijing .
Global AI conference .
On Thursday , the Global AI Conference kicks off in Shanghai .
Despite its title , the forum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to travel bans and geopolitical tensions .
Notably , the Chinese artificial intelligence firms present , such as SenseTime , will highlight their contributions to city management and new infrastructure construction—government projects that are flush with money and are seen as euphemisms for control , surveillance , and genocide in Xinjiang .
In the wake of his arrest , I recommend returning to Xu Zhangrun ’ s essay that assaults Xi ’ s failures on the coronavirus , though never mentioning the president by name and using only a series of increasingly parodic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I would posit that the political life of the nation is in a state of collapse and that the ethical core of the system has been rendered hollow .
The ultimate concern of China ’ s polity today and that of its highest leader is to preserve at all costs the privileged position of the Communist Party and to maintain ruthlessly its hold on power , ” Xu writes , pointing to failures predating the pandemic : “ A collapse in consumer confidence ; widespread panic about the long-term security of private property @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anger ; a general shutting down of society as a whole ; and , a depressed cultural and publishing industry.
” That ’ s it for this week .
We welcome your feedback at newsletters @ foreignpolicy.com .
You can find older editions of China Brief here .
For more from Foreign Policy , subscribe here or sign up for our other newsletters .

Welcome to Foreign Policy’s China Brief. The highlights this week: What the national security law in Hong Kong could mean for U.S. tech firms in China , how foreign student visa restrictions in the United States are a gift to China, and a critical Chinese scholar is arrested.
Welcome to Foreign Policy’s China Brief. The highlights this week: What the national security law in Hong Kong could mean for U.S. tech firms in China, how foreign student visa restrictions in the United States are a gift to China, and a critical Chinese scholar is arrested.
If you would like to receive China Brief in your inbox every Wednesday, please sign up here.
For Tech Firms, Hong Kong May Be the Last Straw
The ramifications of China’s draconian national security law in Hong Kong are growing, both within the city and beyond. Libraries are pulling pro-democracy books from the shelves, lawyers have issued a strong but likely futile letter of protest, political songs are banned at schools, and the police have sweeping new powers. And in the United States, the Senate has passed new legislation targeting Chinese officials and banks for their role in repression in Hong Kong.
One of the hottest battlefields is technology. U.S. companies that were once happy to comply with the Chinese authorities on the mainland or that desperately sought President Xi Jinping’s favor have apparently realized, following China’s hard swing into even deeper authoritarianism this year, that the reputational cost of giving in to Beijing—both among the public and with the U.S. government—outweighs the benefits of a Chinese market that can be snatched away at an authoritarian’s whim.
Over the last three days, numerous firms—including Zoom, which faced recent criticism over its cooperation with Beijing—have rushed to state they will not comply with requests under the national security law. (They’ve said little about requests under mainland Chinese law itself, however.) That’s in part because the law targets speech globally, not just in the city itself. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has praised firms for their actions, which is likely to provoke Beijing further.
Uncertain ground. Some analysts have argued that tech companies are uncertain because of the newness of the law: As on the mainland, over time they will find compromises and methods of lobbying that allow compliance without too much cost. But this ignores the increasing uncertainty of mainland politics, where active obeisance instead of passive compliance is now often demanded.
Beijing is very likely to see Hong Kong as a proxy for how willing tech firms are to go along with the whole of the Chinese order, and straddling the fence is no longer likely to be an option. Apple, which maintains a huge presence in China unlike Google or Facebook, faces the hardest choices. The Hong Kong decisions may be the breaking point for what once seemed to be a mutually profitable relationship between Western tech and the Chinese Communist Party.
What We’re Following
Foreign student debacle. The recent announcement by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that students whose universities only offer remote teaching in the fall will face expulsion from or be banned from admittance to the United States is a gift to China, which has long decried the brain drain of talent to the United States. Even if the rule is successfully challenged in court, the damage is already done: The money and talent of international students will flow in great volume elsewhere. The Trump’s administration’s racism has often focused in particular on Asian students, a target of white nationalists such as Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon. Meanwhile in Silicon Valley, anti-Asian racism—long a simmering source of resentment—appears to be finding more public expression.
Critic and scholar arrested. The scholar Xu Zhangrun, one of the few remaining open critics of Xi’s rule in the mainland, was arrested Monday on what appear to be trumped-up charges of soliciting prostitution. Twenty police officers and 10 vehicles were used to detain the 57-year-old academic, who has been under house arrest since earlier this year. Xu has been in the line of fire since condemning Xi’s abolition of presidential term limits in late 2017, a move that other intellectuals in China decried in private but remained silent on in public. The arrest reinforces the absolute intolerance for criticism under Xi.
Pullback on the Indian border. Chinese forces have withdrawn from the border area where a deadly skirmish with Indian troops erupted several weeks ago. But the cooling of tensions is unlikely to repair the long-term damage done by the Galwan clash, and Indian analysts fear that China will keep reinforcing the disputed border with troops, fortifications, and other infrastructure, as it did after the Doklam conflict in 2017. Meanwhile, China has widened its territorial conflict with Bhutan this week. It’s hard to tell if there’s a coherent national strategy here or if nationalistic posing is now seen as a powerful route to advancement by individual officials and generals.
Sea posturing. The U.S. deployment of two aircraft carriers to the South China Sea has considerably heated up already hot tensions with China. China’s decadeslong effort to make sweeping and illegal claims in the oceans that are disputed by almost all of its neighbors has stepped up in recent years. The state media response has been typically aggressive, prompting a sharp response from the U.S. Navy on social media.
Tech and Business
TikTok bans. In the wake of India’s ban on Chinese mobile apps—not yet fully implemented—the Trump administration has made noises about also banning the video app TikTok. Many have raised concerns about TikTok, but it’s unclear how such the ban would work. It would certainly produce a legal fight on multiple grounds, including free speech. TikTok maintains that its U.S. and Chinese operations are separate. The site has become a popular locus for young users posting anti-Trump and anti-conservative videos, muddling the waters further when it comes to the motivation behind government action.
Berlin looks east. Germany is hoping to strengthen its economic ties with China, setting itself apart from the rest of the West and the United States in particular. Germany’s relationship with China has always been divided. On one hand, human rights issues preoccupy the German public, and figures such as Ai Weiwei and Liao Yiwu are well known there. But on the other, trade between China and Germany is significant and largely responsible for Germany’s post-2008 prosperity. The antagonism shown by President Donald Trump and his team toward German Chancellor Angela Merkel has also poisoned any attempts by the United States to sell Berlin on a split with Beijing.
Global AI conference. On Thursday, the Global AI Conference kicks off in Shanghai. Despite its title, the forum will see almost entirely Chinese attendees thanks to travel bans and geopolitical tensions. Notably, the Chinese artificial intelligence firms present, such as SenseTime, will highlight their contributions to city management and new infrastructure construction—government projects that are flush with money and are seen as euphemisms for control, surveillance, and genocide in Xinjiang.
What We’re Reading
“Viral Alarm: When Fury Overcomes Fear,” by Xu Zhangrun, ChinaFile
In the wake of his arrest, I recommend returning to Xu Zhangrun’s essay that assaults Xi’s failures on the coronavirus, though never mentioning the president by name and using only a series of increasingly parodic titles.
“First and foremost, I would posit that the political life of the nation is in a state of collapse and that the ethical core of the system has been rendered hollow. The ultimate concern of China’s polity today and that of its highest leader is to preserve at all costs the privileged position of the Communist Party and to maintain ruthlessly its hold on power,” Xu writes, pointing to failures predating the pandemic: “A collapse in consumer confidence; widespread panic about the long-term security of private property; administrative and academic frustration and pent-up anger; a general shutting down of society as a whole; and, a depressed cultural and publishing industry.”
That’s it for this week.
We welcome your feedback at newsletters@foreignpolicy.com. You can find older editions of China Brief here. For more from Foreign Policy, subscribe here or sign up for our other newsletters.


foreignpolicy--2020-07-08--Hong Kongers Say Taiwan Is Their First Choice as Exile Looms

Hong Kongers Say Taiwan Is Their First Choice as Exile Looms As a draconian new national security law is imposed in Hong Kong , locals face a bleak choice : fight or flight .
While plenty remain committed to defending freedom and democracy in Hong Kong , another alternative is to emigrate away from the city .
Since last summer , Hong Kong protesters began to flee for safer countries out of fear of political persecution .
Now that Beijing has enacted the national security law , talk of departing Hong Kong among the masses has spread .
This leads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are Hong Kongers about leaving their home , and where do Hong Kongers plan to move to ?
We conducted an online survey of 890 Hong Kong citizens through Survey Sampling International ( Dynata ) between June 22 and 26 , right before the passage of the national security law .
Our sample demographics match trends released previously by the Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute in terms of ethnic identification , showing a large rift between those who identify as Chinese versus Hong Konger .
Over three-quarters of our sample identified as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be held among the young .
Our sample ’ s proportion of Chinese-identifying individuals mirrors the share of those who affiliate with a pro-Chinese establishment political party ; the same is the case for the comparable proportion of those who identify as Hong Konger to those identified with a non-establishment movement ( pan-democrat , localist , or self-determinist ) .
We explicitly asked about where Hong Kong citizens stand on the issue of fleeing their city .
We found that a serious percentage ( about 50 percent ) have considered emigrating away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respondents who indicated interest in moving to rank destinations they would plan to immigrate to .
The chart below displays the first choice of location among Hong Kong residents in our sample who stated that they had thought about moving .
The top choice is Hong Kong ’ s democratic neighbor , Taiwan , which also struggles with coercion from Beijing .
Twenty-nine percent of interested immigrants said that Taiwan is their first country of choice .
A much lower percentage , 12 percent , stated that they would first move to Mainland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residents who were older and identified with a pro-Chinese establishment political party .
Our results also speak to how Hong Kongers feel about non-East Asian locations .
Canada and Australia were viewed as more suitable for immigration as a first choice compared to Hong Kong ’ s former colonial ruler , the United Kingdom .
Only 10 percent of interested immigrants ranked the U.K. as their first choice .
This is surprising given U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson ’ s recent pledge to create pathways to let millions of Hong Kongers into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.K. ’ s low ranking is that Johnson ’ s program only allows for British National ( Overseas ) passport-holders , most of whom are older .
Younger Hong Kongers born after the handover in 1997 may find the U.K. less appealing because they lack that passport status .
Canada , meanwhile , has become a popular destination for Hong Kong ’ s wealthy elite , which helps explains why it is held in such high esteem .
While some want to relocate to the United States , there is little preference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ option .
For contrast , the above chart also shows the last destination of choice for immigration among Hong Kong citizens who had interest in moving out of their city .
The undoubtedly least-desired outcome for potential immigrants is to move to Mainland China , with 68 percent ranking it in last place .
This likely reflects Hong Kongers ’ preference not to live in a communist regime .
Notably , about 10 percent say that the United States and Australia are least suitable for them if they were to decide to emigrate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hold important implications for the future of Hong Kong and Hong Kong-Taiwan relations .
Taiwan especially should begin to seriously prepare for Hong Kongers attempting to permanently relocate .
Over the last year , hundreds of Hong Kong protesters have fled to Taiwan .
Yet , because of Taiwan ’ s lack of asylum law , most have been stuck in a state of ambiguity , unable to gain residency or employment .
After a year of Hong Kong protesters calling on the Taiwanese government to offer formal assistance , the administration of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office aimed to help Hong Kongers seek humanitarian assistance in Taiwan last month .
Tsai ’ s program is designed to use existing laws within Taiwan to help relocate businesses , nongovernmental organizations , and individuals to Taiwan .
However , legal experts have already noted weaknesses in Tsai ’ s action plan , notably the lack of definition of who from Hong Kong is qualified to apply for humanitarian assistance .
Tsai ’ s program is set up to help any Hong Konger who is interested in relocating to Taiwan rather than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Tsai may actually need to press forward on this broader agenda .
Beyond protesters , our data shows a large number of average Hong Kongers are eying Taiwan as a new home .
If interest in Taiwan materializes , Tsai will need to make Taiwan ’ s new Hong Kong assistance office even more robust .
Fortunately , the issue of Hong Kong has been viewed with more consensus across party lines , with the pro-Beijing Kuomintang even supporting legislation to help Hong Kongers flee to Taiwan .
Taiwanese society , meanwhile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ larger share of new Cantonese-speaking neighbors .
Although symbolic support for Hong Kong was high during the 2020 Taiwanese election , we still do not know the extent to which those in Taiwan support allowing Hong Kongers to become Taiwanese residents on a more substantive policy level .
Hong Kongers face a seemingly impossible decision : Should they stay and defend their home and risk a new kind of political oppression , or seek refuge somewhere else where Hong Kongers can live freely ?
In the following months , especially with the passage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , such decisions will have a major influence on civil society .
Continued discussion and consideration of relocation is likely , along with some more Hong Kong citizens leaving their home .
While our survey can not speak to whether or not those in Hong Kong will actually emigrate , it does show that such an idea is being seriously considered .
Unfortunately , many Hong Kongers will be torn between deciding to stay and resist on the one hand , and fleeing the place they call home on the other .

Lev Nachman, Nathan Kar Ming Chan and Chit Wai John Mok

As a draconian new national security law is imposed in Hong Kong, locals face a bleak choice: fight or flight. While plenty remain committed to defending freedom and democracy in Hong Kong, another alternative is to emigrate away from the city. Since last summer, Hong Kong protesters began to flee for safer countries out of fear of political persecution. Now that Beijing has enacted the national security law, talk of departing Hong Kong among the masses has spread. This leads to two important questions: How serious are Hong Kongers about leaving their home, and where do Hong Kongers plan to move to?
As a draconian new national security law is imposed in Hong Kong, locals face a bleak choice: fight or flight. While plenty remain committed to defending freedom and democracy in Hong Kong, another alternative is to emigrate away from the city. Since last summer, Hong Kong protesters began to flee for safer countries out of fear of political persecution. Now that Beijing has enacted the national security law, talk of departing Hong Kong among the masses has spread. This leads to two important questions: How serious are Hong Kongers about leaving their home, and where do Hong Kongers plan to move to?
We conducted an online survey of 890 Hong Kong citizens through Survey Sampling International (Dynata) between June 22 and 26, right before the passage of the national security law. Our sample demographics match trends released previously by the Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute in terms of ethnic identification, showing a large rift between those who identify as Chinese versus Hong Konger. Over three-quarters of our sample identified as Hong Konger, an affiliation more likely to be held among the young. Our sample’s proportion of Chinese-identifying individuals mirrors the share of those who affiliate with a pro-Chinese establishment political party; the same is the case for the comparable proportion of those who identify as Hong Konger to those identified with a non-establishment movement (pan-democrat, localist, or self-determinist).
We explicitly asked about where Hong Kong citizens stand on the issue of fleeing their city. We found that a serious percentage (about 50 percent) have considered emigrating away from Hong Kong. We further asked respondents who indicated interest in moving to rank destinations they would plan to immigrate to. The chart below displays the first choice of location among Hong Kong residents in our sample who stated that they had thought about moving. The top choice is Hong Kong’s democratic neighbor, Taiwan, which also struggles with coercion from Beijing. Twenty-nine percent of interested immigrants said that Taiwan is their first country of choice. A much lower percentage, 12 percent, stated that they would first move to Mainland China; these were largely Hong Kong residents who were older and identified with a pro-Chinese establishment political party.
Our results also speak to how Hong Kongers feel about non-East Asian locations. Canada and Australia were viewed as more suitable for immigration as a first choice compared to Hong Kong’s former colonial ruler, the United Kingdom. Only 10 percent of interested immigrants ranked the U.K. as their first choice. This is surprising given U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s recent pledge to create pathways to let millions of Hong Kongers into the United Kingdom. One possible reason for the U.K.’s low ranking is that Johnson’s program only allows for British National (Overseas) passport-holders, most of whom are older. Younger Hong Kongers born after the handover in 1997 may find the U.K. less appealing because they lack that passport status. Canada, meanwhile, has become a popular destination for Hong Kong’s wealthy elite, which helps explains why it is held in such high esteem. While some want to relocate to the United States, there is little preference to make this move as a first option.
For contrast, the above chart also shows the last destination of choice for immigration among Hong Kong citizens who had interest in moving out of their city. The undoubtedly least-desired outcome for potential immigrants is to move to Mainland China, with 68 percent ranking it in last place. This likely reflects Hong Kongers’ preference not to live in a communist regime. Notably, about 10 percent say that the United States and Australia are least suitable for them if they were to decide to emigrate out of Hong Kong.
Our findings hold important implications for the future of Hong Kong and Hong Kong-Taiwan relations. Taiwan especially should begin to seriously prepare for Hong Kongers attempting to permanently relocate. Over the last year, hundreds of Hong Kong protesters have fled to Taiwan. Yet, because of Taiwan’s lack of asylum law, most have been stuck in a state of ambiguity, unable to gain residency or employment. After a year of Hong Kong protesters calling on the Taiwanese government to offer formal assistance, the administration of President Tsai Ing-wen finally established a new office aimed to help Hong Kongers seek humanitarian assistance in Taiwan last month.
Tsai’s program is designed to use existing laws within Taiwan to help relocate businesses, nongovernmental organizations, and individuals to Taiwan. However, legal experts have already noted weaknesses in Tsai’s action plan, notably the lack of definition of who from Hong Kong is qualified to apply for humanitarian assistance. Tsai’s program is set up to help any Hong Konger who is interested in relocating to Taiwan rather than focusing on activists. Given our data, Tsai may actually need to press forward on this broader agenda. Beyond protesters, our data shows a large number of average Hong Kongers are eying Taiwan as a new home.
If interest in Taiwan materializes, Tsai will need to make Taiwan’s new Hong Kong assistance office even more robust. Fortunately, the issue of Hong Kong has been viewed with more consensus across party lines, with the pro-Beijing Kuomintang even supporting legislation to help Hong Kongers flee to Taiwan. Taiwanese society, meanwhile, may also be met with a larger share of new Cantonese-speaking neighbors. Although symbolic support for Hong Kong was high during the 2020 Taiwanese election, we still do not know the extent to which those in Taiwan support allowing Hong Kongers to become Taiwanese residents on a more substantive policy level.
Hong Kongers face a seemingly impossible decision: Should they stay and defend their home and risk a new kind of political oppression, or seek refuge somewhere else where Hong Kongers can live freely? In the following months, especially with the passage and implementation of the national security law, such decisions will have a major influence on civil society. Continued discussion and consideration of relocation is likely, along with some more Hong Kong citizens leaving their home. While our survey cannot speak to whether or not those in Hong Kong will actually emigrate, it does show that such an idea is being seriously considered. Unfortunately, many Hong Kongers will be torn between deciding to stay and resist on the one hand, and fleeing the place they call home on the other.