China Will Sanction Lockheed Martin Over Arms Sales To Taiwan (cnn.com)
- Reference: 0133358536
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/07/14/1832204/china-will-sanction-lockheed-martin-over-arms-sales-to-taiwan
- Source link: https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/14/business/china-sanctions-lockheed-martin-hnk-intl/index.html
> "China firmly opposes US arms sales to Taiwan," Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said at a press conference. Taiwan is a self-ruled island, but China has long vowed to unify it with the mainland. The United States is one of Taiwan's main arms suppliers. The US State Department last week approved a request by Taiwan to upgrade its Patriot Surface-to-Air missiles at an estimated cost of $620 million, according to Taiwan's state-run Central News Agency. In response, China is imposing "sanctions on the main contractor of this arms sale, Lockheed Martin," Zhao said, without going into detail. The United States should "stop selling arms to Taiwan and cut its military ties to Taiwan, so it won't do further harm to bilateral relations between China and the United States," he added.
[1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/14/business/china-sanctions-lockheed-martin-hnk-intl/index.html
[2] https://slashdot.org/~hackingbear
Doublespeak issue (Score:4, Insightful)
This is how doublespeak can be problematic. The People's Republic of China (PRC) has never accepted the Republic of China (ROC, aka Taiwan's) independence. So the PRC is essentially sanctioning a company for selling armaments to...the PRC.
Of course, the PRC said the word "Taiwan" in it's statement. Was that a translation error?
Re: (Score:2)
It all makes perfect sense. There's a re-education camp that will help you understand it shortly.
Re: Doublespeak issue (Score:2)
Oh China... implying Americans are ediucated in the first place ... how flattering of you! ;)
Re: Doublespeak issue (Score:2)
"Can be" problematic?
You say that as if it could also not be...
You meant from the standpoint of the devil's advocate, right? Not shifting the discussion...
Re: (Score:2)
What you mean is that the PRC cannot stomach the idea of millions of Chinese on an island of their own being free and independent. Never accepted is bullshit, the CCP will stop at nothing to counter any examples that point out the CCP is a bunch of lowlife screwups.
Re: (Score:2)
Free and independent? For the last 20 years, kind of, sort of, almost, but prior to that it was just another corrupt dictatorship of the kind so often favored by Washington. The native Taiwanese people are still seriously oppressed by the ethnic Chinese.
Re: Doublespeak issue (Score:2)
So did you read the latest study that suggests immunity to covid dies after only a few months? The antibody load just drops sharply. Imagine a situation where in order to get your vaccine every 3 mos you must tow the party line and have a high social credit score. How Dystopian is that?
Not only china, but every government could implement rules for denying a vaccine. Its total dominance in a syringe.
Re: (Score:2)
> you must tow the party line
You must TOE the party line. It's about where you stand in formation, not pulling barges upriver....
Re: Doublespeak issue (Score:2)
Lol, trusting siri to dictate had its downsides. At least she didnt try to order Albanian food.
Re: (Score:2)
They only serve Elbonian.
Re: (Score:2)
Antibodies are just easy to test for, they might not be relevant to immunity. Could well be t-cells doing all the heavy lifting.
Re: (Score:2)
> This is how doublespeak can be problematic. The People's Republic of China (PRC) has never accepted the Republic of China (ROC, aka Taiwan's) independence. So the PRC is essentially sanctioning a company for selling armaments to...the PRC.
I don't see how that's an example of problematic doublespeak? The US prohibits sales of very many things (controlled drugs, firearms, fireworks, some fissile materials) to members of its own population. The only problematic speech issue is that your final use of the term "PRC" referred collectively to everyone in China and Taiwan, but your first two uses of the term referred to the government of mainland China.
Re: (Score:2)
> This is how doublespeak can be problematic. The People's Republic of China (PRC) has never accepted the Republic of China (ROC, aka Taiwan's) independence. So the PRC is essentially sanctioning a company for selling armaments to...the PRC.
> Of course, the PRC said the word "Taiwan" in it's statement. Was that a translation error?
Doesn't the RoC also still - formally at least - think that they are the legitimate (and elected...) government of China, and that the communist rebel dictatorship on its occupied territory is just a temporary setback?
Re: (Score:3)
There are two different regimes fighting over control of China: Mainland PRC who won the war on the Chinese mainland, and ROC government that lost the war, but managed to flee to Taiwan and entrench there.
PRC considers Taiwan a rebel province of China, just like ROC considers mainland China a group of rebel provinces of China. Therefore it's completely correct to talk about "Taiwan the rebel province of China" and arms sales to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Taiwan has changed it's stance over time. The two main political parties today are those wanting re-unification with the PRC, and those wanting independence. But both parties are relatively moderate in outlook on both of those issues. The view that Taiwan is the rightful ruler of all of China seems to be very rarely held in modern times.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the claim of the pro-independence Taiwan activists and those that listen to them over looking at what is actually the case.
No official declaration rescinding ROC's claims on the issue has been given. Just a handful of ambiguous empty statements by anti-KMT party currently in charge. KMT being the party of the government that was beaten in civil war and fled to Taiwan. Notably many of the ROC's claims continue being actively pursued by ROC today under their rule.
KMT's views were in fact pro-"some kind
Re: (Score:1)
If a company was selling missiles to the Govt of Texas without permission, USA could sanction them. Would not be a contradiction.
Re: (Score:2)
China wants to have their cake and eat it too. The doublespeak is intentional.
Watching Hong Kong (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure the people living in Taiwan are watching the actions of the Chinese government in Hong Kong with a great interest. I would doubt that those actions are fostering feelings of optimism towards reunification, at least as far as most of those in Taiwan are concerned. Though I will admit I do not know a lot of people living over there.
Re: (Score:1)
As a person living here (Taiwan), yes our government is watching Hong Kong with great interest. Not the least of which is because we have friends and family there. They (China) have long given up (or have self-deluded themselves) on the idea of optimism of reunification. The recent elections proved that. I do find it odd that they called us a "Self-Ruled Island" which is closer to saying we're an independent than they've ever come. Which is really odd of them (or they slipped up. one of the two).
Why Lockheed? (Score:1)
Multiple issues with this. First, the Patriot isn't a LM product, it's made by Raytheon. Next, what business are our defense contractors doing with China that can be sanctioned by them? And finally, fuck China if they think they can just land grab another place after the shit they're pulling with Hong Kong.
Re: (Score:2)
> Next, what business are our defense contractors doing with China that can be sanctioned by them?
From TFA, apparently a Chinese owned company makes parts for the F-35. Wish I was kidding.
Re: (Score:2)
Wtf.
There are only two countries on this planet that:
1. Are even remotely a challenge to the US militarily, and
2. Are in bad relations with the US such that conflict is remotely possible
and China is one of them.
So again, wtf?!?!?
Re: (Score:2)
> From TFA, apparently a Chinese owned company makes parts for the F-35. Wish I was kidding.
So... what exactly is the point of America's stupendously expensive military-industrial complex if they're outsourcing it ?!
Re: (Score:2)
If this Chinese owned company has US facilities, they should simply be seized.
Re: (Score:2)
An option, but it would have serious impacts elsewhere. When a country starts seizing property owned by overseas companies, it really scares away investors, and investment is a good thing. I am sure the US has a contingency plan for doing just that, but only as a last resort.
No one's friend (Score:1)
It was pointed out earlier this week that China's government doesn't really have friends or allies. Some countries tolerate them or do cautious business with them. Some others cooperate because they have common rivals. But none of these relationships are very friendly.
Sanctions can work when you have help from other countries. Sanctions from the government of China aren’t going to be a big problem for Lockheed Martin.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the Chinese government doesn't know how to be friends.
Re: (Score:2)
> It was pointed out earlier this week that China's government doesn't really have friends or allies. Some countries tolerate them or do cautious business with them. Some others cooperate because they have common rivals. But none of these relationships are very friendly.
To be fair, the other major power mentioned in the summary is trying its best to [1]lose and distance itself [nytimes.com] from its friends and allies too.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/25/opinion/trump-soft-power.html
Re: (Score:1)
For all the talk of that, NATO is a huge alliance. And there are several others. It's almost as if that talk were exaggerated by partisans.
China has nothing of the sort. Can't make exaggerated claims of imperfect friendship or strained alliances with no friends or allies.
Re: China is going to get lonely... (Score:2)
3 Gorges has some cracks and serious structural issues but there's another problem going on that isn't talked about as much: silt. There's a huge amount of it collecting up against the wall which will eventually rise high enough to make the whole thing useless. In theory, the silt could be dredged out but that's its own huge project and may not be feasible.
For the sake of the bazillion people living down stream I hope it doesn't break. Shutting it down and slowly releasing the built up water would be bet
Re: (Score:2)
Countries have no permanent friends or enemies. They have interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? You can say this with a straight face in spite of Chinese-financed infrastructure projects all over the Third World? Projects that benefit those countries populations rather than just their extraction industries, and don't come with the IMF/World Bank's ruinous economic demands and extortionate interest rate? Something tells me that you're an American with essentially no awareness of the world beyond your borders, unfortunately there's a heaping shitload of you. Do us all a favor and don't vo
One word explains it all (Score:2)
Hwawei.
The Communist is trying to play tit-for-tat with the world (well except for its cronies participated in the Belt and Road trap) if you noticed. Australia, USA, Canada, UK...
Good luck making friends with the developed world again.
Re: One word explains it all (Score:2)
Which communist?
That is like calling (former) East Germany "the democrat".
Re: One word explains it all (Score:1)
Also, sorry Murican. You're not the developed world anymore. You go sit with China now.
-- Rest of the world
Re: One word explains it all (Score:2)
What perfect country are you from? Stones. Glass houses. Throwing bad.
Good for karma whoring though.
Re: (Score:2)
Belt and Road trap? I take it you have absolutely know knowledge of how the IMF/World Bank function. Belt & Road is a bargain compared to any IMF/WB financed project, and don't require the recipient country to become a slave to foreign resource extraction companies.
China doesn't care a whole lot about "making friends with the developed world", they have a slightly longer view. “When it comes time to hang the capitalists, they will vie with each other for the rope contract.”—Major G
Sooo. Wait a minute ... Lockheed sells to China? (Score:2)
/That/ is not right...!
Re: (Score:2)
From what I heard on the radio this morning, Lockheed sold some civilian helicopters to China a while back. Obviously they are banned from selling weapons under ITAR. This is basically an empty threat from China, Lockheed's footprint in the country is tiny.
Re: (Score:1)
Huawei's footprint in USA is 0 as USA does not permit Huawei to sell in USA. So you could say USA's sanctions preventing Huawei from selling to Iran have zero impact yet the CFO of Huawei is under arrest in Canada.
What this does is that any Lockheed Martin exec travelling outside of the US has to do a threat assessment that any of the airports they are changing planes in might be feeling friendly enough to China that week to recognize the warrant out for their arrest on sanctions violations.
Does put a crim
Lockheed Martin should be forced to not coplie (Score:2)
Lockheed Martin should be forced to not do stuff for china or lose the US contract.
The upgrade (Score:1)
The upgrade makes the Patriot missiles even more patriotic!
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately no less useless though . . .
Missing bits (Score:2)
The summary missed a few points in my original submission (highlighted in bold):
> China said on Tuesday it would place sanctions on Lockheed Martin for its involvement in arms sales to Taiwan, a move that could further escalate tensions between Beijing and Washington. Taiwan, an island broke off from mainland China after the Republic of China government lost in a protracted civil war, has spent billions of dollars on advanced American military hardware since the US dumped the island and established formal diplomatic relation with the People's Republic in 1978 in a quasi-partnership to fight the Cold War. The US State Department last week approved a request by Taiwan to upgrade its Patriot Surface-to-Air missiles at an estimated cost of $620 million, according to Taiwan's government-run Central News Agency. In response, China is imposing "sanctions on the main contractor of this arms sale, Lockheed Martin," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said, without going into detail. The United States should "stop selling arms to Taiwan and cut its military ties to Taiwan, so it won't do further harm to bilateral relations between China and the United States," he added. It is also considered a tit-for-tat response against the US sanctions on Chinese firms Huawei and ZTE for their alleged business deals with Iran, a long-time arch rival of the US and Israel. It is not clear what kind of impact, if any, China’s action would have on Lockheed Martin. Some analysts have estimated that China represents 2 percent of the company’s revenue. Lockheed Martin subsidiary Sikorsky is involved in a joint venture called Shanghai Sikorsky Aircraft Co, a civilian helicopter company.
Japan,... (Score:1)
...TaiwÃn, South Korea, Philippines, and Mongolia should team up to invade China and put and put the hurt on those shifty Chinamen once and for all.
Re: (Score:2)
The Kuomintang got the boot in 1949, and the last time the Mongols invaded, China didn't have nukes.
Re: (Score:3)
Retaliation for the US attacks on Huawei.
We've always... (Score:2, Funny)
...been at war with EastHuawei.
Re: (Score:3)
This is pretty much the Official Chinese stance on so many things happening in the region. They say this in exactly the same way as you expect a brainwashed individual in a dystopian novel to say them. Ie, The South China Seas have always belonged to China. Taiwan is currently a part of China. Tibet has always belonged to China. The disputed land on the border with India has always belonged to China. The Uighurs just need vocational training.
Or an exact quote (after translation): We urge the US to cor
Re: We've always... (Score:2)
We have always been allies with Eurasia, its Eastasia that are the assholes.
Re: Wow (Score:2)
And apparently to China too. WTF.
But I guess, profit always goes above human lives and rights. Which rule of acquisition was that again?
Re: (Score:2)
> Which rule of acquisition was that again?
The first one.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
No, it is just that with the American economy on the ropes, the rump government of China decided now was the time to press for screwing Taiwan just a little bit more.
How's the ethnic cleaning of the Uighurs going, China? Have you stopped all the indigenous births yet or are you still trying out new methods for birth control? And while we're on the subject of ethnic cleansing, how that working in Tibet? Have you managed to make it majority Han yet or must you try harder. Let's not forget Hong Kong, the last thing the CCP can tolerate is free Chinese thinking for themselves. And just think, there's that nice juicy Taiwan with 23+ Million Chinese and natives just waiting for your ravenous Party bureaucracy to screw up.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Taiwan should be armed to the hilt.
For every ship China can float, Taiwan should have 10 antiship missiles.
For every plane China can send over, Taiwan should have 50 Anti-Aircraft missiles.
Taiwan should have patriot missiles and super quiet hunter killer subs and air to ground missiles to shoot back at the Chinese mainland.
Taiwan should be to China what Switzerland was to Nazi Germany. They could take it, but at what price?
And of course, the US should commit to defending Taiwan.
Re: (Score:3)
We also need an Asian Defense pact. There are enough nation in that part of the world that can put some serious hurt on China. We need to make it clear to the ChiComs that if they go Imperial Japanese, then they will regret it.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with your Asian Defense pact theory is that lots of huge American corporations make billions out of China, either by exploiting their cheap labour, or by selling them stuff.
This includes the massive American Corporation I work for.
So that is going nowhere.
Re: (Score:1)
And China can do the same to Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Libya and Cuba. Pretty soon all American aircraft carriers would have to hide at home.
Re: Wow (Score:2)
Its not the aircraft carriers that is the base of out naval power. Research the boomer subs and what their mission entails. Its the single most powerful deterrent still.
Re: (Score:2)
Boomers are only good for deterrence. Only a madman would actually want to use them.
Aircraft carriers are indeed the base of US power project capabilities. But, while I think there are valid concerns about their vulnerability, I think those concerns are overstated.
This discussion also ignores the US attack submarine fleet. A little-remembered fact about World War II is that the American attack sub fleet accomplished in the Pacific what the German U-boats failed to do in the Atlantic. It's likely that any sh
Perhaps not Switzerland (Score:2)
> Taiwan should be to China what Switzerland was to Nazi Germany.
What, you mean a place to hide all their ill-gotten loot? ...or had you forgotten about all the Nazi gold? As the old saying goes: "For six days a week Switzerland works for Nazi Germany, and on the seventh it prays for an Allied victory.". I've lived in Switzerland and love the place but their record during WWII was not exactly their finest hour.
Re: Wow (Score:2)
That were to happen Taiwan would become another puppet to the US. Being dependent on us provided weaponry, that is likely to have been purposely sabotage to provide for us espionage and interference. Whether they are taken over and controlled by either China or the US, it represents the same fall to Their country and autonomy. What is the taiwan's benefit for the US and China to continue to curtail each other's attempts to dominate Taiwan. Domination weather by the closed fist (direct Force) or the o
Re: (Score:2)
> No, it is just that with the American economy on the ropes, the rump government of China decided now was the time to press for screwing Taiwan just a little bit more.
Or just demonstrating that if this is OK for the US to do to European and Chinese companies trading with Iran, why shouldn't China be able to do the same thing to non-Chinese companies trading with someone they don't like?
Re: Wow (Score:2)
I really dont care. I dont want china buying our lockheed aircraft. Let them build their own made in china shit. Just dont get on one of their planes.
Re: (Score:3)
Tibet has been majority Han for a while. They're entering fourth stage of Han style assimilation, which is where Inner Mongolia has been for a few decades. Where indigenous culture is largely rooted out, and every remaining Mongol is strongly incentivised to marry into Han families for their own good. Or else.
This is not actually about Communism. Han people started in the Eastern China some five thousand years ago. That's where "five thousand years old culture of China" meme comes from. Their expansion has
Re: (Score:2)
Seems like a much better system than almost any other system of expansion.
At least this way you are not left with minority subcultures hostile to the majority liek we have in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
US didn't expand into the territory of those subcultures. Those were imported from outside. As violent as most of the Indian cultures were, Indians were assimilated into Old World colonisers, not the other way around. It's the mish mash of the European, Asian and African cultures that created many of those subcultures you're talking about.
Modern Russia as well as modern Germany make for two decent alternatives to this mechanism of "conquer and expand" system. Prussians stuck mostly with German-speaking sort
Re: Wow (Score:2)
Yea this assimilation shit goes back centuries. Its ingrained even in their language. The symbols for china literally mean center kingdom. Which explains why they feel the need to insert themselves into fucking everything. They need a swift and massive nuclear dose of - mind ya business - otherwise youll never get this genie back in the bottle.
Re: (Score:2)
Not centuries. Millenia. Five to be precise. That's about fifty centuries.
And their written language is actually one of the central tools for integration. You can speak two completely different spoken languages (example: Mandarin and Cantonese), but in Chinese bureaucracy, bureaucrats speaking those two languages had one common language. Written one. Reports from a Cantonese area could be read by a Mandarin manager with no need for translation.
Obviously that has been destroyed by CCP with their project of s
Re: (Score:1)
You're mistaken. The Untied States is the one stuck with President Rump.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but the current political tension is increasing, CCP elites have to maintain the narrative. That means that this upgrade must have some kind of a credible (at least to CCP internally) response.
Re: (Score:2)
I think china is just using it as an excuse to be pissed off because they got their bullshit called.