Search

Begin New Search Topic Science and Technology Political Geography China

271. "Key Individuals Management" and the Roots of China's Anti-Muslim Surveillance System

Author:
Emile Dirks
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
The repression of Xinjiang’s Uighur population by the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) continues to horrify world opinion. Along with interning an estimated one million people in a network of re-education camps, the Chinese state has built extensive systems of daily surveillance directed at the region’s Muslims (China Brief, March 14, 2017; China Brief, November 5, 2018). Police inspections of local homes, blacklists of suspect Muslims, and biometric data collection are widespread. Previous research has illustrated how such policies have their roots in earlier (and ongoing) repression campaigns against Falun Gong and other religious groups (China Brief, February 1). However, evidence now suggests that these systems of social surveillance and repression also originated in programs directed at wider groups of Chinese citizens, identified as “key individuals” (重点人员, zhongdian renyuan). Systems of “key population management” (重点人口管理, zhongdian renkou guanli) possess many of the features associated with Xinjiang’s security state: profiling, extensive personal and biometric data collection, and location-based tracking.
Topic:
Islam, Science and Technology, Prisons/Penal Systems, and Surveillance
Political Geography:
China and Xinjiang

272. Arrests in Poland Contribute to the International Controversies Surrounding Huawei

Author:
John Dotson
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
The December 1, 2018, arrest of Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou, and the arrest of another Huawei employee in Poland, come on the heels of a series of escalating measures—or measures under consideration—by governments in North America and the Pacific Region to restrict the use of Chinese-manufactured telecommunications equipment. Such measures are now increasingly under consideration in Europe, as well, with major implications not only for the international profile of companies such as Huawei, but also for the construction of advanced communications infrastructure throughout much of the world.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, Economy, and Research
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, Poland, North America, and United States of America

273. U.S. Trade Policy in North America, China, and Beyond

Author:
Andy Green and Daniella Zessoules
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
In recent decades, economic, political, and technological barriers to international trade and investment have collapsed around the world. This rapid globalization of commerce has lifted many out of poverty in developing countries, but due in part to a lack of meaningful labor and environmental standards and enforcement, it has also resulted in an outsourcing of production and jobs as well as downward pressure on workers’ real wages in developed countries such as the United States.1 The key trade agreements and international institutions put in place to manage globalization, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO), have failed to rebalance the rules to enable globalization to work on behalf of all workers—not just in the United States, but in Mexico, China, and more broadly. And in many cases, the trade rules have exacerbated economic pressures on many U.S. workers.2 For years, progressive voices in the United States have called for efforts to make globalization work better for working families, communities, and the environment.3 Now, the Trump administration has sought claim to the trade reform mantle. Those claims, however, should be met with skepticism. The 2017 congressional Republican tax law slashed taxes for corporations and the wealthy on the false promise of raising wages for workers.4 Corporate profits, share buybacks, and mergers and acquisitions have all boomed, but working-class wages have barely budged.5 The international provisions of the 2017 tax law further incentivize offshoring operations at the expense of domestic investments and sourcing.6 The Trump administration’s domestic economic agenda of financial deregulation, budget cuts, and attacks on workplace safety and labor rights protections will simply make matters worse for working families. The administration’s record on trade policy has been mixed and largely incoherent. The president railed against NAFTA and other trade agreements for harming workers and U.S. jobs yet renegotiated a new NAFTA deal that fails to make labor and environmental standards meaningfully enforceable.7 His administration has slapped tariffs on adversaries and allies alike with little strategy—often in the name of national security and without addressing the root causes of the problem. Threatening further tariffs, the administration now is engaged in negotiations with China over intellectual property theft, market access for foreign multinationals, and a state-led industrial strategy.8 The president announced a delay in the additional tariffs, suggesting a deal with China is coming together, but concerns have long existed that the administration may settle for high-profile spot sales of U.S. commodities while effectively letting structural impediments and China’s industrial policies continue.9 The cost of what may be President Donald Trump’s high-profile deal with China could be real concessions for the United States, including in the technology and national security space, without providing lasting, solidly enforceable benefits more broadly.10 As U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer makes his first appearance this week before the new U.S. House of Representatives, the Trump administration will finally have to answer for its approach. Here are several questions that Congress should ask in order to hold the administration accountable to the American people.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, and Science and Technology
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

274. Whither US-China Trade War? Impacts on global trade, technology and finance, and strategies to mitigate risks

Author:
Lia Valls Pereira, Tatiana Rosito, and Gabriel de Barros Torres
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI)
Abstract:
For its twelthth meeting, CEBRI's China Analysis Group organized discussions on the economic and geopolitical causes and consequences of trade frictions between China and the United States, considering its impact on different actors and on the multilateral trading system at large. Despite the original focus on trade imbalances, participants noted that the bilateral rivalry’s underlying drivers relate to competition for leadership in high-tech sectors and, fundamentally, to the conciliation of practices associated with different development models. Notwithstanding the uncertainty surrounding the next steps in the dispute, there was a consensus among participants that a complete decoupling between both economies is virtually unfeasible in the short-term and not likely in the long-term. The speakers at the event were Marcos Troyjo, Jin Canrong, Kellie Meiman and Niu Haibin and comments were made by Lia Valls and Tatiana Prazeres. The event was coordinated by CEBRI Senior Fellow Tatiana Rosito.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, Finance, Trade Wars, Risk, and Trade
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

275. China’s Race to Global Technology Leadership

Author:
Alessia Amighini
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
The current trade war between the US and China looks like a small piece in a much larger puzzle over world leadership in which China plays the part of the ascending challenger seeking to upset the existing balance of power. Technology and innovation seem to be Beijing’s weapons of choice in its frontal assault on Washington in sectors traditionally led by the US. China is not only acquiring technology. Its ambitions include the regulation of international trade and global governance. Just what a China-led global order would look like is still unclear, but the inherent dangers of technology need to be meticulously assessed, as they have the potential to alter the core values of modern societies. To what extent will technology facilitate China’s rise?
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Science and Technology, Governance, Leadership, and Trade Wars
Political Geography:
China and Asia

276. China's Global Power and Development: The Made in China 2025 Policy

Author:
Diego Pautasso
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:
Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:
The purpose of this article is to analyze the relationship between development and global power of China. And, more specifically, how the Made in China 2025 policy is designed to deepen China’s development by driving strategic sectors of smart manufacturing and other innovations. To do so, it needs to understand how China has taken advantage of systemic changes since the 1970s to unleash a cycle of comprehensive reforms mobilizing industrial, commercial and technological (ICT) policies. That is, without state emulation there is no economic complexity or expansion of the country’s presence in the world. The proposed argument is that the interweaving between the internal and international dimensions compose the key of the rise of the powers - imperative underestimated by the narratives of liberal globalization - whose epicenter remains the national development.
Topic:
Development, Globalization, Science and Technology, Hegemony, Manufacturing, and Industrialization
Political Geography:
China and Asia

277. Technological Competition and China

Author:
James A. Lewis
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
Napoleon’s famous quotation about a sleeping giant moving the world when it awoke seems prescient, but a closer examination presents a more complex story. China’s rise is often accompanied by corresponding predictions of inevitable conflict and U.S. decline. These predictions are simplistic and rest on assumptions of China’s economic and political trajectory that may not be valid. In the near term, competition is unavoidable, and the more important challenge comes from China’s efforts to “return to the center of the world stage” and the means China uses to attain this at a time when the United States is reassessing its global role. The United States and China are in a growing competition, perhaps verging on conflict, but it is not a nineteenth century competition between empires for control of territory and resources. Unlike great power competition in previous centuries, the focal point is not military strength or territorial expansion. This conflict is over control of the modern levers of power—global rules and institutions, standards, trade, and technology. The ability to create new technologies, particularly digital technologies (given their importance for politics, security, and economic growth) have become key factors in the U.S.-China relationship, which is marked by close commercial cooperation and deep governmental distrust. This disparity creates unavoidable tensions. The link between technology, innovation, national security, and international power is now widely recognized. When Vladimir Putin says that the country that leads in artificial intelligence (AI) “will be the ruler of the world,” it is hyperbole, but hyperbole that confirms that political leaders recognize that the ability to innovate is a potent source of national power. In the digital age, national security and national power have different requirements shaped by technological change and cyberspace. Innovation has become a central element of its international influence.1 This is not new—the U.S.-Soviet space race was a contest of the ability of different systems to produce new technologies, but those were unique government programs. Technological competition today is as much between companies as states. A country’s ability to innovate and produce advanced technologies provides economic strength, military power, and an intangible benefit of perceived leadership. Both China and the United States have advantages and disadvantages in this contest, and while it is usual to focus on quantitative aspects—such as the number of engineers or patents and spending on research and development (R&D)—these are not the key determinants of technological competition between states. This competition is a contest of ideas on governance for investment, innovation, and the internet. The internet and global connectivity not only reshape the environment for competition but also create political and market forces that both nations find difficult to control.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Hegemony, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China and Asia

278. Comparative Industrial Policy and Cybersecurity: A Framework for Analysis

Author:
Vinod K Aggarwal and Andrew Reddie
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Berkeley APEC Study Center
Abstract:
This comparative project evaluates the role of firms, governments, and other key stakeholders in the rise of industrial policy in important states in the cybersecurity industry. In particular, we focus on the U.S., China, Taiwan, Japan, the EU and other key European states. Our goals are as follows: 1) to examine the motivation for government promotion of the cybersecurity industry; 2) to inventory existing measures employed by these countries; 3) to understand the driving forces of cybersecurity industrial policy in these countries; and 4) to examine the likely conflicts that will arise from the competitive pursuit of such industrial policies and how they might possibly be resolved through international cooperation. To this end, we suggest an analytical framework to serve as the comparative structure for this project, drawing on a variety of approaches to understand industrial policy.
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Cybersecurity, and Industry
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Europe, Taiwan, and United States of America

279. The Rise of China as a Cybersecurity Industrial Power: Principles, Drivers, Policies, and International Implications

Author:
Tai Ming Cheung
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Berkeley APEC Study Center
Abstract:
This paper examines China’s cybersecurity industrial development over the past two decades since the arrival of the internet in that country. This analysis takes place from a primarily security and technology perspective because the national security apparatus occupies a powerful presence in China’s cyber affairs. Moreover, the development of the cybersecurity industry is significantly driven by the development of technological capabilities. Key issues explored include: 1) Chinese decision-making and thinking on cybersecurity development within the context of the Chinese leadership’s general approach to development, national security, and technology advancement; 2) the nature and characteristics of recent Chinese cybersecurityrelated development strategies and plans; 3) the drivers behind the development of China’s cybersecurity industry, looking especially at market failures, national security rationales, and government intervention; 4) the proliferation of principal actors and coalitions in the Chinese cybersecurity industry and how this influences its development; and 5) the nature of the relationship between the state and cybersecurity firms, in particular examining four types of interactions: the state as a customer; state hiring of talent; the state’s direct regulatory power, and the state as an investor. The paper concludes by considering the international implications of China’s rise as an increasingly capable and confident cybersecurity power.
Topic:
Development, Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, and Industry
Political Geography:
China and Asia

280. The Strategic Importance of Antartica for China and India Under Mearsheimer's Offensive Realism

Author:
Monica Heinzaelmann and Leonardo Faria de Mattos
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:
Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:
The Antarctic Treaty was signed during the Cold War and intended to preserve the continent and transform it into a conflict free territory, prioritizing scientific cooperation. Despite having quadrupled the number of its signatories, the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) faces nowadays the uncertainties of the new international order. Starting out from John Mearsheimer’s realistic perspective, this paper aims to analyze, the strategic importance of Antarctica and the interests that China and India have on the continent, as well as speculate on how their rise on the international scenario can impact the future of the Antarctic Treaty System.
Topic:
International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Science and Technology, and Treaties and Agreements
Political Geography:
China, India, Asia, and Antartica