4 ms·

As a geopolitical tool, they serve the same purpose. China doesn't control SWIFT, so it will coerce in other ways. There's no meaningful difference unless you h

As a geopolitical tool, they serve the same purpose. China doesn't control SWIFT, so it will coerce in other ways. There's no meaningful difference unless you honestly think Magnisky is for human rights in which case we'll just have to agree to disagree. The significance is overall signalling method, China is stating their national security concerns _publicly_ extends around the world the same way US does. They're not going the oblique route of exploiting interpol or quietly coercing with United Front in this case. It's a new development. It has nothing to do with authoritarianism, just a growing power declaring it's claims on customary supranational privileges that comes with the territory. Though it's hardly enforceable, that said countries with extradition treaties to China aren't insignificant. In the meantime it's designed to chill anti-China diasphora abroad.

hker 6y ago
Saying so is like saying that all laws are the same as a tool, they serve the same purpose, and there is no difference between felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions. Or, you are saying that even though the Magnitsky act does not entail imprisonment, it is the same as the national security law which does.
- dirtyid 6y ago
  I'm saying supranational instruments like this is designed to influence behavior beyond the borders of the origin country, to said countries interests. Countries have different interests and capabilities, so who the target and how they sanction will be different. US uses SWIFT because only she can, Russia publicly assassinates while denying with a wink, China is... just calling for arrest so far. It's not particularly credible outside of diaspora chilling affect because many countries will never accede to it. The important highlight is that China is formalizing it's supranational toolset. Like this list is no where near GuoWenGui / Miles Kwok tier of irritant for CCP, but China was only trying to arrest him via Interpol in 2017.
camgunz 6y ago
Your posts defending the CCP are full of false equivalencies and whataboutism. Let's look at the people targeted under the CCP's National Security Law vs. the people targeted under the Magnitsky Acts: National Security Law: - Samuel Chu: an American activist and lobbyist working for democracy in HK, and also fighting hunger as the National Organization for MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger. - Nathan Law: former LegCo rep and student activist, also working for democracy in HK until he fled to the UK. - Simon Cheng: a former UK consulate staffer and pro-democracy activist, abducted and tortured by the CCP. - Wayne Chan: founder of the Hong Kong Independence Union - Ray Wong: an interior designer and founder of Hong Kong Indigenous - Honcques Laus: a student (like, look at this kid [1]) who founded the Hongkongers Utilitarian Party, a group that works towards HK democracy and independence. Real bad people, yeah /s Magnitsky Acts: These people [2] all of whom were either: - Heavily involved in the murder of Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky (for whom the acts are named) - Responsible for the murder of Paul Klebnikov - Responsible for the murder of Umar Israilov - Heavily involved in involved with the Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi - Accused by Human Rights Watch of "Crimes against Humanity" Etc. Etc. Etc. There is no comparison. This is a false equivalency. [1]: https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/3024883/hong-kong-judge-rejects-retrial-teenage-independence https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/30... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnitsky_Act#Individuals_affected https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnitsky_Act#Individuals_affe...
- dirtyid 6y ago
  They're both tools for large power with supranational privileges for geopolitical interests. Which makes them directly comparable and functionally equivalent. Drawing up a list trying to label one group good and other group bad misses the point. Each group is bad for interest for the respective countries, that's all that matters. Also, follow the news, Magnitsky was just applied to XinJiang paramilitary organization XPCC/Bingtuan. They had key XJ leadership on the list already like ChenQuanguo, but just slapped the act 24 hours ago on an organization with 2.4 million people. Prior to this they were threatening to ban all of CCP members and associates - 1/6 of the country. Before they labelled IRGC an terrist organization. US supranational instruments are being interpreted beyond their limits under this admin, especially Pompeo and his Chinahawk clique. China announcing their own supranational instruments is overdue, and all it does is target obviously anti-state actors, instead of something like the entire republican party, or entire US special operations command, which is downright restraint and responsible in comparison.

hker 6y ago

Saying so is like saying that all laws are the same as a tool, they serve the same purpose, and there is no difference between felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions. Or, you are saying that even though the Magnitsky act does not entail imprisonment, it is the same as the national security law which does.

dirtyid 6y ago
I'm saying supranational instruments like this is designed to influence behavior beyond the borders of the origin country, to said countries interests. Countries have different interests and capabilities, so who the target and how they sanction will be different. US uses SWIFT because only she can, Russia publicly assassinates while denying with a wink, China is... just calling for arrest so far. It's not particularly credible outside of diaspora chilling affect because many countries will never accede to it. The important highlight is that China is formalizing it's supranational toolset. Like this list is no where near GuoWenGui / Miles Kwok tier of irritant for CCP, but China was only trying to arrest him via Interpol in 2017.

camgunz 6y ago

Your posts defending the CCP are full of false equivalencies and whataboutism. Let's look at the people targeted under the CCP's National Security Law vs. the people targeted under the Magnitsky Acts: National Security Law: - Samuel Chu: an American activist and lobbyist working for democracy in HK, and also fighting hunger as the National Organization for MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger. - Nathan Law: former LegCo rep and student activist, also working for democracy in HK until he fled to the UK. - Simon Cheng: a former UK consulate staffer and pro-democracy activist, abducted and tortured by the CCP. - Wayne Chan: founder of the Hong Kong Independence Union - Ray Wong: an interior designer and founder of Hong Kong Indigenous - Honcques Laus: a student (like, look at this kid [1]) who founded the Hongkongers Utilitarian Party, a group that works towards HK democracy and independence. Real bad people, yeah /s Magnitsky Acts: These people [2] all of whom were either: - Heavily involved in the murder of Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky (for whom the acts are named) - Responsible for the murder of Paul Klebnikov - Responsible for the murder of Umar Israilov - Heavily involved in involved with the Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi - Accused by Human Rights Watch of "Crimes against Humanity" Etc. Etc. Etc. There is no comparison. This is a false equivalency. [1]: https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/3024883/hong-kong-judge-rejects-retrial-teenage-independence https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/30... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnitsky_Act#Individuals_affected https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnitsky_Act#Individuals_affe...

dirtyid 6y ago
They're both tools for large power with supranational privileges for geopolitical interests. Which makes them directly comparable and functionally equivalent. Drawing up a list trying to label one group good and other group bad misses the point. Each group is bad for interest for the respective countries, that's all that matters. Also, follow the news, Magnitsky was just applied to XinJiang paramilitary organization XPCC/Bingtuan. They had key XJ leadership on the list already like ChenQuanguo, but just slapped the act 24 hours ago on an organization with 2.4 million people. Prior to this they were threatening to ban all of CCP members and associates - 1/6 of the country. Before they labelled IRGC an terrist organization. US supranational instruments are being interpreted beyond their limits under this admin, especially Pompeo and his Chinahawk clique. China announcing their own supranational instruments is overdue, and all it does is target obviously anti-state actors, instead of something like the entire republican party, or entire US special operations command, which is downright restraint and responsible in comparison.