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.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS