Google should be commended for its courage in standing up against Big Brother in China after announcing its plan to stop censoring search results on its google.cn platform — a condition imposed on the US Internet giant when it entered the Chinese market in 2006.
Two weeks have passed, however, and Google has yet to end censorship on its platform. This tells us that it is remains caught between its business interests in China and the universal principle of Internet freedom it should stand for.
This is not an easy decision, since the management of Google has to look after the interests of its shareholders, who are obviously keen on securing its share of the booming Internet market in China.
Ironically, if Google were to make good on its threat and pull out of the Chinese market for good, it could be doing the authorities a favor. In Beijing’s eyes, the Internet giant is a threat to its control of information on the Internet.
Nevertheless, Google should be reminded that if it were to rescind its threat and continue to play a role in China’s Internet censorship, its businesses outside China could be jeopardized, as Internet surfers may not brook its tainted integrity.
Google, therefore, should stop prevaricating and put an end to the censorship of search results in China — unless it has a backup plan that guarantees it can “go around” China’s efforts to censor the Internet, as Microsoft founder Bill Gates proposed on Tuesday.
The ultimate outcome, though, could be ugly: Should it refuse to go along with Beijing’s conditions, the search engine could be forced out of the market. If this happened, China would only have itself to blame, and it is hard to believe that the breakup would last very long.
Alongside its economic progress, China has every ambition to become a world leader. To achieve this goal, it will face external pressure to make its domestic market more fair and transparent and to democratize.
In the Google case, we have seen mounting support from the US government and European countries, which should stick to their guns until changes in China follow.
In the end, however, the biggest force behind China’s liberalization will come from within.
Unfortunately, there are very few signs at the moment to indicate that the Chinese public or businesses are taking advantage of the opportunity created by the Google spat to demand more Internet freedom. What we’ve witnessed, instead, is comments such as those by Alibaba Group Holding CEO Jack Ma (馬雲), who called Google a failure in China, arguing in Taipei last week that the conflict was nothing more that Google’s poor attempt at making excuses for its shortcomings.
In the world of global business, Alibaba is no match for Google. The largest online business-to-business marketplace in China makes less than US$150 million in quarterly revenues, hardly on par with Google’s US$5.9 billion in the third quarter last year.
Unless Alibaba wishes to limit its growth to China alone, it is bound to stumble if, as it seeks to expand, it continues to operate in a way that serves not its clients but an authoritarian regime. Now that is a recipe for failure.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS