5 ms·

Also, one could imagine, these “Persuasion” tactics, might be more successful than, the Western approach of where extradition treaties exist. Putting social (fa

by Amfy 4y ago

Also, one could imagine, these “Persuasion” tactics, might be more successful than, the Western approach of where extradition treaties exist. Putting social (family?) pressure on someone probably more likely leads to a person giving in, than just being exposed to legal pressure that possibly can't reach them.

walterbell 4y ago
Westphalian nation states were established to supercede private armies of mercenaries. If societies now accept extra-legal methods of influence, as vividly illustrated on TV shows like The Sopranos, there will be many organized non-state actors lining up to join the party. If citizens want a new legal category for extra-territorial operations, beyond extradition, this can be negotiated in a formal international treaty.
- im3w1l 4y ago
  What would "not-accepting" these methods of influence even look like?
  - walterbell 4y ago
    Step 1: picket/protest and close the overt "police stations". Any would-be kidnappers can run a covert operation like countries have done since time immemorial, at the risk of unscheduled encounters with local city, state and federal authorities. Or they can work through the legal extradition system. If this is allowed to stand after global public disclosure, it can be taken as implicit "consent" having been granted by citizens and their elected representatives, which means the next phase of extra-territorial activity (e.g. new laws on 1st December 2022) will push boundaries even further. If some countries want to sell their territorial integrity and citizen safety down the proverbial river, at least they can negotiate a good price, e.g. bounty per head, prisoner exchange, or reciprocal global kidnapping by <foreign-country> of <host-country> targets. Good luck recruiting nomadic tech talent after opening such Dantean doors.
- dendriti 4y ago
  The fact that you think a "formal international treaty" means anything, tells us that you're not ready. States will do whatever states CAN do. Treaties mean nothing by themselves, especially in this context. (side note: nearly all treaties are both formal and international by default)
  - walterbell 4y ago
    > States will do whatever states CAN do. Of course. But there's a big difference between doing covertly and doing in daylight with an office. Should foreign countries open US "Corporate Intellectual Property Donation" physical offices? Treaties set a floor on behavior. For those who claim laws don't matter, remember that contracts and all global supply chains are based on laws of trade and finance. No law = no economy = war until agreement and law is re-established.
    - tsimionescu 4y ago
      Treaties and international law in general are only relevant for weak states. Powerful states ignore any negative decision against them - especially the most powerful. This is even official in some cases. For example, the USA does not recognize any authority of the the International Criminal Court (neither do China, Russia and a number of other big states), but that doesn't stop them from occasionally using it against smaller nations. You can look for a long time, but you'll never find an example of a superpower/empire, or a close ally of one, submitting to any kind of international judgment against it, criminal or in a trade dispute. At most, they may accept a negative ruling to a case they brought against someone else.
      - walterbell 4y ago
        > You can look for a long time, but you'll never find an example of a superpower/empire, or a close ally of one, submitting to any kind of international judgment against it, criminal or in a trade dispute. At most, they may accept a negative ruling to a case they brought against someone else. Since 2020, China's Huawei has been subject to semiconductor supply chain restrictions which have been enforced by multiple countries. This has materially impacted Huawei consumer smartphone revenues. But in the long term, such restrictions are likely to accelerate technical self-sufficiency, https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/22/china_smic_7nm_chips/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/22/china_smic_7nm_chips/
stjohnswarts 4y ago
Do you know if the families are punished (incarcerated?) in lieu of the AWOL citizen if they can't persuade their family member to come back home and face CCP "justice" ?
- kelnos 4y ago
  They must be, in some way, otherwise this "persuasion" wouldn't be effective. If not incarceration or violence, some kind of social or economic punishment.

by Amfy 4y ago

walterbell 4y ago

Westphalian nation states were established to supercede private armies of mercenaries. If societies now accept extra-legal methods of influence, as vividly illustrated on TV shows like The Sopranos, there will be many organized non-state actors lining up to join the party. If citizens want a new legal category for extra-territorial operations, beyond extradition, this can be negotiated in a formal international treaty.

im3w1l 4y ago
What would "not-accepting" these methods of influence even look like?
- walterbell 4y ago
  Step 1: picket/protest and close the overt "police stations". Any would-be kidnappers can run a covert operation like countries have done since time immemorial, at the risk of unscheduled encounters with local city, state and federal authorities. Or they can work through the legal extradition system. If this is allowed to stand after global public disclosure, it can be taken as implicit "consent" having been granted by citizens and their elected representatives, which means the next phase of extra-territorial activity (e.g. new laws on 1st December 2022) will push boundaries even further. If some countries want to sell their territorial integrity and citizen safety down the proverbial river, at least they can negotiate a good price, e.g. bounty per head, prisoner exchange, or reciprocal global kidnapping by <foreign-country> of <host-country> targets. Good luck recruiting nomadic tech talent after opening such Dantean doors.
dendriti 4y ago
The fact that you think a "formal international treaty" means anything, tells us that you're not ready. States will do whatever states CAN do. Treaties mean nothing by themselves, especially in this context. (side note: nearly all treaties are both formal and international by default)
- walterbell 4y ago
  > States will do whatever states CAN do. Of course. But there's a big difference between doing covertly and doing in daylight with an office. Should foreign countries open US "Corporate Intellectual Property Donation" physical offices? Treaties set a floor on behavior. For those who claim laws don't matter, remember that contracts and all global supply chains are based on laws of trade and finance. No law = no economy = war until agreement and law is re-established.
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    Treaties and international law in general are only relevant for weak states. Powerful states ignore any negative decision against them - especially the most powerful. This is even official in some cases. For example, the USA does not recognize any authority of the the International Criminal Court (neither do China, Russia and a number of other big states), but that doesn't stop them from occasionally using it against smaller nations. You can look for a long time, but you'll never find an example of a superpower/empire, or a close ally of one, submitting to any kind of international judgment against it, criminal or in a trade dispute. At most, they may accept a negative ruling to a case they brought against someone else.
    - walterbell 4y ago
      > You can look for a long time, but you'll never find an example of a superpower/empire, or a close ally of one, submitting to any kind of international judgment against it, criminal or in a trade dispute. At most, they may accept a negative ruling to a case they brought against someone else. Since 2020, China's Huawei has been subject to semiconductor supply chain restrictions which have been enforced by multiple countries. This has materially impacted Huawei consumer smartphone revenues. But in the long term, such restrictions are likely to accelerate technical self-sufficiency, https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/22/china_smic_7nm_chips/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/22/china_smic_7nm_chips/

stjohnswarts 4y ago

Do you know if the families are punished (incarcerated?) in lieu of the AWOL citizen if they can't persuade their family member to come back home and face CCP "justice" ?

kelnos 4y ago
They must be, in some way, otherwise this "persuasion" wouldn't be effective. If not incarceration or violence, some kind of social or economic punishment.