Confronting China

Trump’s decision to begin pushing back is good, but so far his steps have been ill-chosen.

America has a China problem — as does the rest of the free world. For that reason, we welcome the shift by the Trump administration to begin confronting China over human rights abuses and other outrages.

But forcing the sale of TikTok, the wildly popular social media app that has become a daily habit for millions of Americans, just because it is owned by a Chinese firm is not the way to change the behavior of China’s increasingly autocratic leadership. Like the decision last month to abruptly close the Chinese Consulate in Houston, Trump’s announcement that he’ll shut down access to TikTok from the United States reads more like another tit-for-tat response than a sustainable strategy aimed at standing up for democracy and human rights — both of which are under serious attack on the mainland and in Hong Kong.

Since Trump has been president, Democrats have at times been too cautious to say so, but China has long been guilty of rampant intellectual property theft, unfair trade practices such as its currency manipulations and increasingly aggressive territorial claims in nearby international waters. Within its borders, China has repressed its own dissidents, operated so-called “black jails” (read: secret jails) and targeted ethnic minorities such as the Uighur in the Xinjiang region.

It’s true that engagement with China has been part of the geopolitical strategy of U.S. presidents since Richard Nixon reestablished diplomatic relations with the giant rival. Presidents of both parties have had to weigh the simple fact that China is one of America’s largest trading partners, an enormous market for our products and at times an important partner in maintaining stability in Asia, including its role as an occasionally useful check on erratic North Korea.

But lately, the balance has begun to tip. China’s crackdown on prodemocracy protesters in Hong Kong, widespread reports of ethnic cleansing in Xinjiang and the introduction of restrictive new security laws now demand a forceful objection from the United States and the rest of the world. More is at stake than trade.

Trump has been slow to recognize this, in part because of the exalted value he places on personal relationships with China’s leader, the newly declared president for life, Xi Jinping. But while it’s worth applauding Trump’s decision to begin pushing back, it’s important to note that so far his calculated steps have been ill-chosen.

That was evident last month when the president ordered the sudden closure of China’s consulate in Houston, a step that predictably led to retaliatory steps in China but no significant pressure on the regime to change. It is evident again in his TikTok threat.

When he first announced it a week ago last Friday, members of his own party recoiled. Immediately, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina was enlisted to change his mind. It worked, kind of.

Trump quickly agreed to delay the order to give Microsoft time to complete negotiations with TikTok’s owners to buy its U.S. operations. Last week, he issued the order and a 45-day countdown began, prompting many Trump allies to sigh with relief. Sen. John Cornyn of Texas aid it looked like a “win-win.”

But is it? America speaks most powerfully when its actions are grounded in concern for human rights, for civil liberties and for fair play. Holding a gun to the head of a company to force a sale — Chineseowned or not — is hardly something America can be proud of. Nor is the president’s astounding declaration that any proceeds from a sale must be shared generously with the U.S. Treasury.

“It is quite ironic that, while discussing protecting Americans from China’s government, the U.S. is considering firewalls and censorship — one of the hallmarks of the Chinese internet strategy,” said David Greene, the civil liberties director and senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

He’s right. This nation has usually — and properly — condemned China whenever it refused to allow its citizens access to U.S.-based companies such as Google, Facebook or YouTube.

While Greene and others acknowledge there are grounds to be concerned about TikTok’s collection of user data, and about the Chinese surveillance state that could win access to that data, the solution can’t be so blunt as to ban tens of millions of Americans from accessing the video platform of their choice.

When America stands up for human rights or for privacy, it must be careful not to rely on the tools of the same autocrats it seeks to confront.