4 ms·

I can see what you mean. Europe should force the US to divest from Facebook and have it transferred fully to European owners.

by gklitz 2y ago

brigadier132 2y ago
The US is following a tit for tat strategy. Which European companies has the US forced to divest their holdings to justify the action you're proposing?
- mschuster91 2y ago
  I remember the Nord Stream saga, where the US (or, at least a few senators) threatened to sanction a harbor if it would not cease to provide support for pipelayer ships [1]. I mean, in hindsight the US were completely right in their position towards NS, but it's a prime example of the US being not afraid to go even against allied countries. [1] https://www.dw.com/en/us-sanctions-nord-stream-2-gas/a-54565504 https://www.dw.com/en/us-sanctions-nord-stream-2-gas/a-54565...
- nearbuy 2y ago
  Which US companies has China forced to divest their holdings?
  - brigadier132 2y ago
    To operate in China you need to partner with local businesses and give up 50% of the local business. Also many American businesses are simply banned and were effectively forced to divest to recover funds.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    Probably none, or very few, but the reason for that is China doesn't allow local companies to be majority-owned by foreign entities in the first place. Another, somewhat equivalent answer to your question is, "all of them".
    - wnevets 2y ago
      doesn't that mean any company that does business in China should share the same security concerns if not worse than TikTok? I would be much more concerned about hardware that is being made and/or assembled by Chinse companies in China that a smartphone app
      - ThunderSizzle 2y ago
        Bingo. The anti-Tiktok focus might be more about the fact the CIA and FBI don't have control like they do with Facebook or YouTube. Notice they also want to shut down X since Musk bought it probably for a similar reason.
  - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
    Almost all of them? Microsoft had to divest its Chinese cloud to a Shanghai water utility company (they do sewers, water reclamation and Microsoft Azure cloud!). All the auto companies that setup in China had to do it as 49/51 JVs so Chinese companies could learn lots of "how to make auto" IP, well, Tesla is the first one that was allowed to come in whole.
    - nearbuy 2y ago
      > Microsoft had to divest its Chinese cloud to a Shanghai water utility company (they do sewers, water reclamation and Microsoft Azure cloud!) Odd mix. Do you have a source for this?
      - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        Well, I was working for Microsoft in China at the time. Here is an article about it at the time: https://www.wired.com/2012/11/azure-goes-to-china/ https://www.wired.com/2012/11/azure-goes-to-china/ It gets a bit confusing: https://learn.microsoft.com/bs-latn-ba/azure/china/overview-operations https://learn.microsoft.com/bs-latn-ba/azure/china/overview-... So from what I heard at the time was that this was spinning out of a Shanghai water utility, but ownership gets mixed up a bit, Shanghai blue cloud is owned by Beijing based 21vianet, but I’m pretty sure there was some deal that involved the Shanghai municipal government. Ah here we go: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/21vianet-teams-with-microsoft-for-shanghai-based-cloud-offering/ https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/21vianet-teams-wi...
    - SturgeonsLaw 2y ago
      A sewerage company sounds perfectly qualified to operate modern internet infrastructure, they deal with much the same material
  - junon 2y ago
    Literally almost all of them.
  - IncreasePosts 2y ago
    You literally can't open a business in China as a foreigner without giving a large percentage ownership to a Chinese citizen or forming a joint venture with a local Chinese company. So that is basically forced divestment upon business creation.
- croes 2y ago
  Tit for tat? When do European governments get private data about US citizens like the US get per CloudAct?
  - SR2Z 2y ago
    Plenty of European governments have intelligence-sharing agreements with the US, so I'm not sure what your point is here.
    - croes 2y ago
      US agencies have access to more data from EU citizens than, conversely, EU agencies have access to data from US citizens.
pjmlp 2y ago
Time for the great wall of Europe.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
Why haven't they? Think hard.
- sschueller 2y ago
  Because the US can break Europe by removing our ability to use the dollar. We are completely attached to it like with swift or visa etc. Until we decouple from the dollar which will probably never happen as the US will prevent it, we will always be under the reign of the United States. China does not have this problem.
  - rchaud 2y ago
    That is not the reason. The US wouldn't commit an unforced error in the battle to maintain global reserve currency status. There are too many countries that would be delighted to switch to non-USD options to conduct export/import transactions. The issue is as old as the Cold War. Europe is dependent on the US' continued spending on its military machine to prop up NATO. For a deal that good, they're mostly OK with the trade-off of giving their privacy away to American tech companies.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
    Or maybe we are friends/allies and not adversaries? You're over complicating it by ignoring the glaring differences in relations with Europe vs China.
    - sschueller 2y ago
      Friends/allies don't spy on each other. [1] For one second imagine the outrage that would have occurred if it were the other way around. The US does not operate in the interest if the EU. It will always be "America First" and if that means fucking over a European country or all of Europe, they will. I don't blame them for this as it is in essence their job to protect them selves but Europe needs to realize that even Article 5 in NATO will not protect them if the US doesn't want to. The US operates on this planet only in their final interest and if that means ignoring international laws and signed treaties so be it. In fact the US has recently claimed that UN Security Council resolutions are non-binding to the outrage of most UN members. [2] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/08/nsa-tapped-german-chancellery-decades-wikileaks-claims-merkel https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/08/nsa-tapped-g... [2] https://english.elpais.com/usa/2024-03-29/us-sparks-controversy-at-the-un-with-claim-that-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-is-non-binding.html# https://english.elpais.com/usa/2024-03-29/us-sparks-controve...
bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago
No, because Europe and America aren't that different in terms of how they want to organize their societies.

I can see what you mean. Europe should force the US to divest from Facebook and have it transferred fully to European owners.

by gklitz 2y ago

I can see what you mean. Europe should force the US to divest from Facebook and have it transferred fully to European owners.

brigadier132 2y ago

The US is following a tit for tat strategy. Which European companies has the US forced to divest their holdings to justify the action you're proposing?

mschuster91 2y ago
I remember the Nord Stream saga, where the US (or, at least a few senators) threatened to sanction a harbor if it would not cease to provide support for pipelayer ships [1]. I mean, in hindsight the US were completely right in their position towards NS, but it's a prime example of the US being not afraid to go even against allied countries. [1] https://www.dw.com/en/us-sanctions-nord-stream-2-gas/a-54565504 https://www.dw.com/en/us-sanctions-nord-stream-2-gas/a-54565...
nearbuy 2y ago
Which US companies has China forced to divest their holdings?
- brigadier132 2y ago
  To operate in China you need to partner with local businesses and give up 50% of the local business. Also many American businesses are simply banned and were effectively forced to divest to recover funds.
- kelnos 2y ago
  Probably none, or very few, but the reason for that is China doesn't allow local companies to be majority-owned by foreign entities in the first place. Another, somewhat equivalent answer to your question is, "all of them".
  - wnevets 2y ago
    doesn't that mean any company that does business in China should share the same security concerns if not worse than TikTok? I would be much more concerned about hardware that is being made and/or assembled by Chinse companies in China that a smartphone app
    - ThunderSizzle 2y ago
      Bingo. The anti-Tiktok focus might be more about the fact the CIA and FBI don't have control like they do with Facebook or YouTube. Notice they also want to shut down X since Musk bought it probably for a similar reason.
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  Almost all of them? Microsoft had to divest its Chinese cloud to a Shanghai water utility company (they do sewers, water reclamation and Microsoft Azure cloud!). All the auto companies that setup in China had to do it as 49/51 JVs so Chinese companies could learn lots of "how to make auto" IP, well, Tesla is the first one that was allowed to come in whole.
  - nearbuy 2y ago
    > Microsoft had to divest its Chinese cloud to a Shanghai water utility company (they do sewers, water reclamation and Microsoft Azure cloud!) Odd mix. Do you have a source for this?
    - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
      Well, I was working for Microsoft in China at the time. Here is an article about it at the time: https://www.wired.com/2012/11/azure-goes-to-china/ https://www.wired.com/2012/11/azure-goes-to-china/ It gets a bit confusing: https://learn.microsoft.com/bs-latn-ba/azure/china/overview-operations https://learn.microsoft.com/bs-latn-ba/azure/china/overview-... So from what I heard at the time was that this was spinning out of a Shanghai water utility, but ownership gets mixed up a bit, Shanghai blue cloud is owned by Beijing based 21vianet, but I’m pretty sure there was some deal that involved the Shanghai municipal government. Ah here we go: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/21vianet-teams-with-microsoft-for-shanghai-based-cloud-offering/ https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/21vianet-teams-wi...
  - SturgeonsLaw 2y ago
    A sewerage company sounds perfectly qualified to operate modern internet infrastructure, they deal with much the same material
- junon 2y ago
  Literally almost all of them.
- IncreasePosts 2y ago
  You literally can't open a business in China as a foreigner without giving a large percentage ownership to a Chinese citizen or forming a joint venture with a local Chinese company. So that is basically forced divestment upon business creation.
croes 2y ago
Tit for tat? When do European governments get private data about US citizens like the US get per CloudAct?
- SR2Z 2y ago
  Plenty of European governments have intelligence-sharing agreements with the US, so I'm not sure what your point is here.
  - croes 2y ago
    US agencies have access to more data from EU citizens than, conversely, EU agencies have access to data from US citizens.

pjmlp 2y ago

Time for the great wall of Europe.

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago

Why haven't they? Think hard.

sschueller 2y ago
Because the US can break Europe by removing our ability to use the dollar. We are completely attached to it like with swift or visa etc. Until we decouple from the dollar which will probably never happen as the US will prevent it, we will always be under the reign of the United States. China does not have this problem.
- rchaud 2y ago
  That is not the reason. The US wouldn't commit an unforced error in the battle to maintain global reserve currency status. There are too many countries that would be delighted to switch to non-USD options to conduct export/import transactions. The issue is as old as the Cold War. Europe is dependent on the US' continued spending on its military machine to prop up NATO. For a deal that good, they're mostly OK with the trade-off of giving their privacy away to American tech companies.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  Or maybe we are friends/allies and not adversaries? You're over complicating it by ignoring the glaring differences in relations with Europe vs China.
  - sschueller 2y ago
    Friends/allies don't spy on each other. [1] For one second imagine the outrage that would have occurred if it were the other way around. The US does not operate in the interest if the EU. It will always be "America First" and if that means fucking over a European country or all of Europe, they will. I don't blame them for this as it is in essence their job to protect them selves but Europe needs to realize that even Article 5 in NATO will not protect them if the US doesn't want to. The US operates on this planet only in their final interest and if that means ignoring international laws and signed treaties so be it. In fact the US has recently claimed that UN Security Council resolutions are non-binding to the outrage of most UN members. [2] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/08/nsa-tapped-german-chancellery-decades-wikileaks-claims-merkel https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/08/nsa-tapped-g... [2] https://english.elpais.com/usa/2024-03-29/us-sparks-controversy-at-the-un-with-claim-that-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-is-non-binding.html# https://english.elpais.com/usa/2024-03-29/us-sparks-controve...

bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago

No, because Europe and America aren't that different in terms of how they want to organize their societies.