- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 25694 Hour
- Reading permission
Since Iran took the US embassy hostage there has been a strict policy of what can be shipped there. If you want to use US parts then you must adhere to the Iran no ship policy. Meng fraudulently change the books to ship to Iran. ZTE shipped to North Korea which we are technically still at war with. Again, if you want to use US parts for your products then you must adhere to US policy in regards to exports. If you don't then too bad, so sad.
Your argument has been presented 10,000 times and it still ain't going to work on the 10,001st attempt.
If you use this "parts-represent-the-whole" excuse then it can also be asserted that the U.S. has been illegally trading in offensive weaponry with Taiwan -- a renegade province of China, a fact recognized by America in the Three Communiques emphasizing that there is only one China called the PRC and that Taiwan is part of that One China -- in selling Taiwan helicopters in which many electronic and non-electronic components were made in Mainland China.
So if your claim here is allowed to stand, then turmoil would ensue with the Chinese government legally seizing the female CEO of Lockheed Martin in retaliation using the same rationale.
When you sell your parts to a business, those parts become the property of that business entity at the moment of the sale. If you are uncomfortable with this arrangement then you shouldn't even be trading with that business at all.
Companies like Qualcomm depend on sales to Chinese companies to keep themselves afloat. That's the main reason why sales to ZTE were quickly restored after negotiations last year because if ZTE founders, Qualcomm would be looking at a huge financial loss.
What the U.S. has done is to endanger the prospects of its own companies mulling over its own future purchase of Chinese parts since China is already the most innovative nation in the world in terms of patents filed and approved in the last two years, and the prospect of massive U.S. high-tech procurement from China is fast approaching.
For instance, in the future there are bound to be unique AI-related electric-car parts that American companies will want to buy for their final assembly in Michigan. Should China deny the sales of such parts to U.S. companies if they are suspected of trading with Taiwan or should she also seize the CEOs of U.S. companies during their transits through a third nation?
As to North Korea, Trump himself is talking to Kim Jr. and who are you to tell ZTE not to trade with the North before there were Security-Council-approved sanctions against that nation?
If there is a business conflict then the case should involve attorneys from both parties and shouldn't involve the seizure of executive officers like Meng.
The very fact that Meng's arrest occurred on December 1, 2018 -- the same day that there was a scheduled meeting between the two leaders -- and the fact that Trump himself was offering 'help' at the crucial moment of the trade talks, proved beyond any reasonable doubt that it was a politically-motivated plot hatched in the minds of criminals camouflaged as hawks in Trump's entourage.