3 ms·
Isn't it relating to fraud because they lied about the transactions, as in the US is perfectly fine if third parties conduct trade with blacklisted entities, bu
by JCharante 7y ago
Isn't it relating to fraud because they lied about the transactions, as in the US is perfectly fine if third parties conduct trade with blacklisted entities, but the third parties have to suffer the consequences of those trades (such as they themselves getting blacklisted).
- roenxi 7y agoThat might be true but rates as a bit of a "so what?" in practice. I'm sure all i-s are dotted and t-s crossed under US law. However, compare and contrast this to the US law lovingly nicknamed 'Hague Invasion Act' [0] - sovereign states are not expected to quietly sit down and take it quietly when foreigners start harassing their authority figures. It certainly has terrible optics - the US decides to bully a strategically threatening Chinese company with superior capability? That is likely to disrupt their extensive data gathering and surveillance operations? In the middle of trade talks? Whatever legal quibbling they want to argue over, it is a tough sell as a rules-based decision. It looks highly political. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Prot...