133
submitted 4 months ago by naturalgasbad@lemmy.ca to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world 54 points 4 months ago

Obviously the whole security threat thing is just BS to justify restricting trade. You’re really not allowed to restrict trade under wto rules unless it’s a national security concern. It makes sense that the US would want to protect its industry but, it’s really infuriating that the US, the country that thrust neoliberalism free trade policies down developing countries throats, sometimes by force, now wants to do protectionism. Many developing economies growth was hampered and their economic ability to met their own needs to spiked into the ground by American coercion and sometimes violence. It further goes to show that the powerful countries really just do whatever the fuck they want often at the detriment of weaker nations.

[-] hellequin67@lemm.ee 21 points 4 months ago

They did the same to Huawei and lots followed. This has nothing to do with security and all to do with preventing China's leap ahead of US as a global economic technology powerhouse

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 8 points 4 months ago

It does have something to do with security.

For Huawei, the USA was concerned that China could build in backdoors to its communication technology similar to how the USA probably does with its local technology.

For EV, it is becoming apparent that battery and microchip technology has the same wartime industry power that oil and steel has, so the USA doesn't want to completely give up on those industries.

[-] hackerwacker@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Everything has something to do with security if you're paranoid/creative enough. It's a useless thought.

[-] hellequin67@lemm.ee 6 points 4 months ago

For Huawei , if that's the case why did US not target all Chinese manufacturers and only the one that, at the time, was becoming the most technologically competitive one.

As for EV the argument regarding takeover as a wartime industry whilst maybe true not it still smacks of US protectionist practice rather than a genuine security fear.

load more comments (8 replies)
this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2024
133 points (90.8% liked)

World News

31525 readers
1165 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS