It seems to me that the article’s thesis isn’t well formed. It basically boils down to whether western companies should be allowed to do business in basically-h

It seems to me that the article’s thesis isn’t well formed. It basically boils down to whether western companies should be allowed to do business in basically-hostile states. But that feels like it should apply to major mgmt consulting firms the least. These firms are privately owned. The contracts with Chinese state owned businesses were probably landed by Chinese partners in the company. The majority of work done in China is probably done by Chinese consultants. Probably the same for Russia. Probably not for some of the smaller ones mentioned. I doubt we would raise a fuss if American companies supplied, say, the materials for chinas artificial land so it feels like the complaint here is that they view consulting as too valuable to provide?