3 ms·

> 99% of the imported products from China are not getting blocked because it's impossible. the US offloaded low-added-value manufacturing to China, exchanging

• infecto 2y ago
  I am not sure I follow your point. There have been both National Security risks as well as protectionist economic policy enforced against china that benefits domestic players. In a lot of those protectionist cases, there is either a case of China flooding the market or there are cases where the government makes a choice that its beneficial to keep domestic manufacturers alive. In the above provided examples its quite clear that there are possible national security risks involved with China being involved in US infrastructure and technology. If DJI was from the EU there would not even be a discussion. If you have better example beyond hyperbole I am all ears.
  • suraci 2y ago
    > If DJI was from the EU there would not even be a discussion. 1. of course there'll be no 'national security risks' because EU is an ally, and the US is spying on it 2. even though, troubles come to US's allies sometimes, like what Alstom and ASML met 3. EU products are mostly less compatible, overall, it cannot challenge the position where the US holds in the global value chain, so pose less of threat
    • infecto 2y ago
      You still have not given any evidence how DJI is not a national security risk?
      • palata 2y ago
        Doesn't it work the other way round? You'd have to prove that they are a national security risk? Because it's hard to prove a negative.
        • infecto 2y ago
          Like the way your irony works? I listed my arguments as why you can make a case that they are national security threats. You are more than welcome to call it a fake pretense but the fact remains that the majority of Chinese imports are not restricted and that includes tech/high-tech related items. If you have nothing more than America is ironic I can see where your endless questions stem from.
          • glurblur 2y ago
            The burden of proof lies on the accuser. If you are not able to provide a proof of national security threat from tiktok or dji, then don't treat it like it's a fact. All the "ifs" don't constitute as a proof.
            • infecto 2y ago
              You obviously have a bias here so its going to be impossible to have any real discussion. There are very simple facts that I will restate for you. The CCP has seats at every major mainland corporation. Chinese corporations have in recent years been caught in some very spy like espionage, this is happening globally. China is an adversary to the US and Europe. There is no further burden of proof needed when talking about sensitive industries. You don't need to catch DJI in the act, similar to TikTok, if you cannot sever data/ties with the mainland there are real risks. Geopolitics suck but its a real risk that has to be snipped before it becomes a problem. Do the five eyes and other countries have national intelligence that are collecting data, absolutely. I cannot recall any recent published articles about overt Western corporate espionage and especially any that were supported by a parent country.
              • palata 2y ago
  • palata 2y ago
    > If DJI was from the EU there would not even be a discussion. If DJI was from the EU, the US would manage to buy it.