Trump Strikes Deal With China's ZTE on Sanctions (usatoday.com) 145
The Trump administration struck a deal Thursday with a Chinese telecom that will allow it to do business with U.S. companies even though it violated sanctions. From a report: China's ZTE will pay a $1 billion penalty and will embed a U.S. appointed compliance team, terms that are similar to those President Trump discussed last month when he revealed that Chinese leaders had asked him to look into the matter. "At about 6 a.m. this morning, we executed a definitive agreement with ZTE," Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told CNBC in an interview Thursday. "And that brings to a conclusion this phase of the development with them." Trump asked the Commerce Department to investigate the restrictions on ZTE in April following a request from Chinese President Xi Jinping. Commerce imposed a seven-year ban after the company sold American-made products to Iran, a violation of U.S. sanctions.
So Much Winning (Score:1)
Make China Great Again
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
This is how international trade works in the real world. If you completely screw your big trading partners, they screw you back and everyone loses.
ZTE's demise helps no-one. It wouldn't have made America great again, that's for sure. For once Trump did the right thing.
Re:So Much Winning (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"And, of course, this has NOTHING to do with the new batch of Chinese trademarks that Ivanka got - on the same day he announced this."
The things we do for love.
Re: (Score:1)
What would alleged trademarks (clothing I assume, since you provided no citation or evidence) have to do with a telecom company?
Spin for spin's sake, I guess.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From your own link. "Coincidence? Well, probably".
Re:So Much Winning (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
No thanks, I don't buy into the media hype train. The bottom line is still, "probably not". The rest is only speculation, subject to bias and subjectivity, as if the NYT would ever write anything positive about him.
ZTE just got fined a BILLION US dollars. As fines go, that's not small potatoes, plus there'll be additional monitoring by a compliance team.
Other US companies are actually helped by this agreement that have nothing to do with the the trumps.
Re: (Score:2)
Any group that can watch the 'Clinton Global Bribe Fund' operate, then watch it's income go basically to zero after she lost and conclude: 'nothing suspicious here' is beyond reasoning with. It's simply tribal to them...
Re: (Score:2)
And we hear from the deranged troll.
Keep it up, we're all laughing at you, poor buthurt snowflake. You set the standard for passing corruption as long as it's on your side.
Trump was, until recently, a lifelong D...the RNC hates him as much as the DNC. The hope is he triggers a dirt dump by both, giving American politics a hard reset and leaving Hillary dying in prison.
Re: (Score:2)
In the short term, perhaps. I would imagine ZTE (and others) will think twice about using US parts in future.
Re: (Score:2)
So facts that some moderator doesn't like is now trolling? That's just an abuse of moderation. It's a fact: The article sums up with "Coincidence? Well, probably". It's right in the article, and then followed by speculation.
Nothing trollish about my post.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:So Much Winning (Score:5, Insightful)
That isn't what whataboutism is, comrade. But nice try on trying to discount the entire concept by misusing it.
Re: (Score:3)
Nice whatboutism
This isn't whatboutism but correlation fella!
Re: (Score:2)
We don't want to live in a world where Zaibatsu hegemony makes the law of the land.
Sorry A/C, but if you're American you already live in a world where corporate interests write the laws they want and pay your elected officials to enact them. See George W Bush's energy policy as one of many examples.
Your country is run by corporate interests for their own benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
corporate interests write the laws they want and pay your elected officials to enact them. See George W Bush's energy policy as one of many examples.
Obviously you can't be right, since Bush the second's administration's energy policy was decided and enacted with full transparency [go.com] and under open public scrutiny [washingtonpost.com]. Moreover, we know Republicans always put people first, so corporations can't have had any influence [nydailynews.com] on the policy.
Re: (Score:2)
That's what you get if you elect the perpetually puzzled.
So now we know how much it costs! (Score:5, Insightful)
[Pinky finger to corner of mouth] Only $1 Beeelllyon to sell out national security and do away with trade sanctions.
Not really that much in today's markets.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Economic sanctions are just the systematic murder of poor and middle-class--including their children--while pretending to keep your hands clean. They're not fundamentally-distinct from charging into villages and shooting 10-year-olds with flamethrowers.
The whole "national security" thing was a bunch of crap. They suggested ZTE could possibly put some kind of malicious espionage software on their phones--not that they, Huawei, or Xiaomi have done any such thing, but they could. Meanwhile CISCO routers
Re:So now we know how much it costs! (Score:5, Informative)
ZTE illegally sold US-made goods in Iran and North Korea, making hundreds of millions from Iran alone. ZTE then promised to punish 7 people caught directly violating these US laws, instead it gave them bonuses.
The espionage claims resulted in US government employees being prevented from using their phones, and is completely separate from these actions.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and the whole legal basis is fine and dandy; the response is a big fine and some other action; and people are all in a huff because they think sanctions are some sacred cow.
The WTO and UN should put economic sanctions on the list of things that will get your leaders arrested and tried for war crimes. Extending from a reasonable legal response to a huge moral response against ZTE is like calling for the death penalty for a person who murdered a child rapist during the rape of a child: your moral fou
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see a problem with the act, but the how is clearly suspect. This is not the type of thing the president should be involved in, especially one who's adviser and daughter just got preferential treatment, and lawyer just took a bunch of money from China, and who's family business just got millions of investment from a Chinese government run business.
When it is out of character (Publicly trump as been very anti china not enforcing sanctions. Very anti Chinese business.) and does a sudden 180 turn. Deci
Re: (Score:2)
tl;dr it's an obvious conflict-of-interest.
Re: (Score:2)
> ZTE illegally sold US-made goods in Iran
The Reagan administration conspired to do the very same and yet half the people freaking out on this article don't seem to give a rat's ass about that.
Fixed that for you.
Re: (Score:2)
The "National Security" issue is that the NSA didn't have access to ZTE devices. Now they will. Go read a few hundred Snowden slide decks if you don't know that this is how they work.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it only costed China $500M in a Trump hotel. That $1B is a public figure for "punishment". But probably will go into the Chinese government coffers to repay that investment.
That's it.
Meanwhile, Canadian steel and aluminium are the greater national security threat. Because war of 1812.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
By the way the examples I brought up you didn't give a shit about when they happened.
They never happened. Stop watching fake news that has been proved to be false and have defended themselves in court as "just entertainment". You get some seriously messed up ideas of reality that way.
Re: (Score:3)
You want to know what's funniest about the whole Uranium one conspiracy theory?
Not one ounce of Uranium has been mined in the US since the 1980's. I don't know the exact date they stopped but it was a LONG time ago. You want to know what's even funnier?
If every nuclear power plant stays open for the next 30 years they won't need to mine uranium for another 30 years.
Not much of a conspiracy.
Re: (Score:2)
Explain why the flow into the 'Clinton Global Bribe Fund' went basically to zero after she lost?
At this point, you are just willfully ignorant.
Re: (Score:2)
None.
Every year we import several hundred pounds of weapons grade uranium from the form Soviet union, blend it down to 3% and make power production nuclear rods out of it. We've been doing this since the mid-90's and after we exhaust all that leftover soviet Uranium we've got several dozen tons of US weapons grade uranium that's of no use that will also be blended and used in power plants.
This is the reason they won't need to mine any new Uranium until 2050 if all the Nuclear plants stay open, but with the
Re: (Score:1)
because trump WON, dumbass. Why would companies give a loser donations for policies that she can no longer affect? You put your bribes....er donations to work the best way that maximizes results. Are you gonna bribe your plumber to get you out of a ticket because he was a cop 10 years ago? Your dumbass might.
Re: (Score:2)
It could be coincidence, but China granted Ivanka Trump (who is working in the White House in a somewhat nebulous capacity) a number of trademarks.
Trump's taking such personal efforts to save ZTE is curious to say the least, given its involvement with transferring sensitive US technology to Iran, the fact that it is ultimately mainly owned by the Chinese State, and the fact has been implicated in various overseas bribery scandal.
I'm not saying where there's smoke, there's fire, but that's a hell of a lot of
Re: (Score:2)
Trump's taking such personal efforts to save ZTE is curious to say the least [...]
Not really. It is pretty much the way the world works. One big man asks another big man for something, and so the world turns to make it happen.
First of all, it is a chance to show off how powerful Trump is.
Second it is a favor. Trump did a favor for Xi. Someday Xi may do a favor for Trump.
Third, refusal to do a favor is an insult. Insulting Xi (and China) would be bad for international relations.
This is how business (and politics) works.
Many jobs lost! (Score:1, Informative)
So ZTE were blocked from US for national security reasons. Trump has his meeting and starts singing the praising of ZTE:
"President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast. Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 13, 2018"
Right.... worried about jobs in China..... sure you are.
If you look at the payments Cohe
ZTE got away with it, and others will too (Score:3, Insightful)
ZTE will easily recoup the $1B just by the fact that its share price will certainly jump up with this news alone. Essentially, ZTE will have suffered very little penalties after all the transgressions it has done against the US. This sets a precedent that many other foreign companies with good ties to their government will surely follow.
Re:ZTE got away with it, and others will too (Score:5, Interesting)
It certainly pays to have friends in high places.
ZTE will easily recoup the $1B just by the fact that its share price will certainly jump up with this news alone. Essentially, ZTE will have suffered very little penalties after all the transgressions it has done against the US. This sets a precedent that many other foreign companies with good ties to their government will surely follow.
Well, they had China give Trump a few hundred million in business deals, so you need a mechanism for giving the Trump businesses money.
Re: (Score:2)
1B is a lot of money for selling a few phones to Iran. Also based on sanctions that are not justifiable. Agree?
True. But that doesn't defend the graft taken to lift the sanctions.
Re: (Score:3)
Obviously a lot less severe t
Open for business (Score:5, Insightful)
The message seems pretty clear: laws don't matter if you pay enough money.
This is essentially an open invitation for other businesses to bribe the Trump administration. Just pay the right "fine" to the right department, and any violation of those pesky rules will just be forgiven. Either Trump will start negotiating on your behalf, or he'll just pardon the liable people. Either way, "consequences" will be left for those poor people who lack the business skill to blatantly ignore morality.
...Where's Martin Luther gone off to now?
Re: (Score:2)
"The message seems pretty clear: laws don't matter if you pay enough money."
If you _have_ enough money is enough.
Re: (Score:3)
They're called "fines".. what a novel idea. The fact that he got ZTE to admit any wrongdoing at all is pretty remarkable.
Re:Open for business (Score:5, Insightful)
They already had admitted the wrongdoing, and said they'd make amends... then they didn't follow through. That's what triggered the last round of sanctions, adding a US business ban on top of their existing billion-dollar fine.
In a functional administration, this wouldn't be something the White House would interfere with at all. The DOJ would make their recommendations, following any directional guidance the White House would establish in policy. That's a nice and predictable process, where one can review the law and policy before committing crimes, and know with a good degree of certainty how things will turn out.
Now we've defenestrated the rule of law. The policy doesn't actually matter. If you think you have enough money, you can go ahead and break the laws, and just buy an ad on Fox or host a party for Kanye, and you won't need to worry about anything the DOJ says.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
The problem with blocking US chip technology is that it then preempts China to start making their own chips, reducing their reliance on the US. So theres a very good reason, especially as US doesnt want to compete with chips subsidized by the Chinese government, they would flood the US pretty quickly.
Re:Open for business (Score:5, Insightful)
In case you missed the news, Hillary isn't our president, and neither is Obama any more. I complained plenty when the Democrats were in charge, but now it's the Republicans who are undermining the Constitution, so they get the complaints.
I know it's shocking, but it is actually possible to criticize an authority without caring what party they represent. It's called "having strong principles", and it appears to be an utterly foreign concept to this administration. I don't necessarily agree with the Democrats' principles, but at least they have them.
Re:Open for business (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, goody! It's time for a history lesson!
When slavery was a major issue in the United States, the parties looked very different from what we have now. The Democrats and Republicans had a lot of dissent within the parties, on pretty much every issue except one: slavery.
It seems weird to say it, but prior to the founding of the Republican party, political movements were more like sports teams than they are today. There was heavy anti-federalist sentiment, so people would usually support their state's party at a national level, mostly just to promote their own state's interests. Handling important issues federally was a rarity.
Then the civil war broke out.
The newly-formed Republican party was literally started as a one-issue party. They wanted to end slavery. They also absorbed a lot of the old Whig supporters (mostly from northern states), who wanted strong business support and social reform. When the southern Congressmen left their offices to join the Confederacy, the Republicans took over, by wide margins.
Obviously, slavery didn't last very long. The Union won the war, leaving Republicans in charge as the heroes of social equality, which worked until the Democrats came back a decade later. That's when segregation and Jim Crow laws came in from the Democrat side, and the Republicans pushed the Whig legacy of strong business.
The next big shift came with the Great Depression. All of that business-central policy collapsed on the Republicans, and people started leaving the party. Notably, the folks mainly concerned with social reform ended up in the Democrat camp, slowly reversing the Democrats' position on social equality. By the 1960s, with still no major opposition on that front by the Republicans, the Democrats actually ended up pushing to reverse their own segregation policies.
That support for the civil rights movement was very unpopular among the traditional southern Democrats, so they left the Democrat party, just like the Republicans had 30 years earlier. They ended up in the Republican camp.
In short, through the middle of the 20th century, the two major parties swapped their positions on social policy, while keeping their position on economic policy. That's pretty much the situation we have today, where the Democrats push for strong social equality and small-business economics, and the Republicans want big business and try to ignore racism entirely.
To wit, then: Democrats have principles today, but the Democrats we have today aren't the Democrats we had when the Democrats supported slavery.
(For clarity, I mostly align with the Whig ideas, mixed with a bit of socialism and statism... I don't really care who you are or how you were born, but if you follow the law you should have an equal opportunity for success as anyone else)
Re: (Score:2)
That support for the civil rights movement was very unpopular among the traditional southern Democrats, so they left the Democrat party, just like the Republicans had 30 years earlier. They ended up in the Republican camp.
Then you would expect deep southern states to have turned red during that period, except they did not. They did not turn Republican until the 90's (some early, some late). For most so-called "dixiecrats", political identity was second only to God.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I should have worded that a bit better... I meant that immediately after the war, the Republicans were literally social justice warriors. For a few years, they had fought and won for social equality. You are right, though, that the glory faded away pretty quickly and the Republicans focused on business. As I understand, that's why the Democrats were able to enact segregation with little cohesive opposition.
While the economic events around the turn of the century certainly didn't help the Republican pa
What does Trump get out of it? (Score:5, Interesting)
Trump's administration is openly pay-to-play, which begs the question, what does Trump get out of this transaction?
Also, who will appoint the compliance team proposed? If it's Trump controlled cronies instead of competent engineering talent, what will that mean for national security going forward?
Re:What does Trump get out of it? (Score:5, Interesting)
Trump's administration is openly pay-to-play, which begs the question, what does Trump get out of this transaction?
Ivanka's trademarks in China? The funding of the Trump resort in Indonesia? I'm sure there are a few more things goin on that we don't know about yet.
Re:What does Trump get out of it? (Score:5, Informative)
Trump's administration is openly pay-to-play, which begs the question, what does Trump get out of this transaction?
China gave Trump a favorable business deal in the tune of a few hundred million dollars just before he wrote his tweet about "so many jobs lost in China, we must do something".
Re: (Score:2)
Trump gets a talking point to show how great of a deal maker he is.
Trump doesn't care about money, it is about his Ego.
However the key problem with the Trump Administration is a lack of any long term strategy. Most countries are playing nice right now, as to avoid losing out on existing effort and investments. However for the long term, countries, and companies, will start to look for a more diverse trading base to help keep their market stable. Historically counties likes to work with the US because we we
infrastructure expertise (Score:3)
Have you seen America's crumbling infrastructure? How about China's country spanning high speed rail network? If you wanted to fix up your infrastructure, say build a wall maybe, who would you ask to help? China made a pretty good wall back in the day, imagine what they could do now with all that home grown advanced technology they have been developing.
Mexico was never going to pay for it, but maybe China will, it would certainly help the trade balance too.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
China provided a $500M loan to an Indonesian development project of which the trump organization has a licensing deal with and will profit from directly:
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/05/is-china-straight-up-bribing-donald-trump-zte
The next day trump tweets we need to save Chinese jobs. Whats it going to take for all you die hard trumpers to realize you're the ones hes fucking over worse than anyone!? The second you question you're undying devotion to him he'll sell you out like "poor" Jeff Sessions.
Re:What does Trump get out of it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump's administration is openly pay-to-play, which begs the question, what does Trump get out of this transaction?
$500million
May 8th: Trump announces sanctions on ZTE.
May 9th: ZTE announces it will shutdown phone business.
May 11th: $500m investment from China http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/... [scmp.com]
May 13th: Trump tweets concern about Chinese jobs lost with ZTE, confirms he spoke to Xi, and tells the commerce department to "get it done".
Re: (Score:1)
If the Trump-hate doesn't completely blind you, you might consider that this move would be in exchange for China leaning on Kim Jong Un to start negotiating with the US on denuclearization.
Secret part of the dealio... (Score:3)
Re:Secret part of the dealio... (Score:4, Informative)
ZTE has to embed NSA spyware into their US-market devices... or maybe all of their devices.
Don't be daft. Trump is in this for personal gain not to prop up the NSA: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.... [huffingtonpost.co.uk]
Where have I read this before? (Score:1)
Update Servers... (Score:2)
So does this mean they will turn the OTA update servers online? The disruption wasn't just to ZTE's future business. It really caused problems for millions of ZTE phone users also.
So ... (Score:1)
Now how about a deal for Carrier? (Score:3, Interesting)
Show up to your primaries people. If we're ever going to fix this mess that's where we're gonna do it. And yes. that means registering for the Democratic party if that's what it takes to vote in their primary. The Dems aren't blameless, but they're not so far gone that they couldn't be made into a pro-working class party again.
Dem primaries, this time we mean it (Score:2, Troll)
With the proven reliability of a super delegate block to help make sure your vote really matters!
Care about the working class? So do we! We're ready to import all the workers our wonderful corporate sponsors will ever need to keep those costs low low looow. Rule of law got you down? No problem, sanctuary cities got you covered! H1B's? Yes, please!
Vote Dem!*
white males and other deplorables need not apply.
Is being unpredictable his strategy? (Score:3)
I think lots of countries don't know what to make of the current situation. When you put someone in charge of a country who has no prior political experience, I think the more established politicians are just trying to figure out what's going through his mind.
I don't think he's totally incompetent, having at least dealt with running a business, and hopefully he's listening to someone in his administration who has had some experience in international trade negotiations. But I do think someone needs to telegraph the fact that trade policy isn't the same as lowballing a property/business owner on an offer, or paying a local politician a bribe, or dealing with some construction union boss. Because if that's the experience he's drawing from, the results he's expecting aren't going to come about.
One thing I worry about is national politics getting as openly corrupt as local politics. Local businessmen don't even try to hide it -- it's pretty much out in the open that the mayor or city council or town supervisor will do whatever a business owner wants for the right amount of cash in a paper bag. National politics is still a little veiled -- you have the veneer of lobbyists, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
So the threat of action
Re:Is being unpredictable his strategy? (Score:5, Informative)
He's not in the least bit incompetent. He is doing the thing he knows how to do best: Enrich himself through corruption. ZTE had nothing to do about politics. https://www.huffingtonpost.co.... [huffingtonpost.co.uk]
5 days. That's all it took. 5 days from May 9th where Trump helped kill ZTE, to getting a major investment from the Chinese, to Trump helping bail ZTE out tweeting about his concern for Chinese jobs.
Re: (Score:1)
Because if that's the experience he's drawing from, the results he's expecting aren't going to come about.
Well, so far the track record of these "Trump will fail because idiot" predictions is pretty poor.
Just from the man from Mars perspective.
Re: (Score:1)
What would that man from Mars consider a failure? He is pretty good at pissing off allies, which surely will have consequences in the future, but he is also pretty good at getting bribed. So it is true, there is a point of view from which he is not a failure.
Re: (Score:2)
"dealt with running a business"...errrr....you mean the ones that bankrupt four times?
Foreign leaders should not bother attempting to figure out what's going through his head. There isn't anything other than hatred of "them others". Never feed a troll. Giving him any sort of appeasement only makes him think he can go back for more. Best thing to do is kick him in the balls really hard. And when he comes back (and he will), kick him in the balls harder.
Germany is kvetching over the U.S. Ambassador saying he
Re: (Score:1)
I am glad you're not in change of German Diplomacy. As satisfying as a few kicks in Trump's balls would be, even only metaphorically, there must be a smoother way to teach Donald not to shit on the carpet. A rolled-up newspaper is probably not enough, though.
Re: (Score:3)
I know your domestic politics is none of our concern, but seen from the rest of the world, a president that tweets he can pardon himself looks pretty damn ridiculous and is not really a good negotiation signal...
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe he should open a 'Trump Global Fund' and collect his bribes into that? You are apparently fine with that...even after the politician loses and it becomes obvious to all it was just a bribe stream, as the flow disappears overnight.
where does the billion dollars go? (Score:2)
make check payable to Donald J. Trump
War with Canada but Buddy with China (Score:4, Insightful)
WTF!!!!!
We are in multiple trade wars with multiple democratic allies of ours. Allies that share our democratic ideals, share our common defense, and are not actively trying to undermine our global economic and military leadership position. Yet, we are openly helping authoritarian countries that violated our sanctions, aim their missiles at us, rams our ship and planes. Let's not kid ourselves. In authoritarian states, all large companies are organs of the state, subject to the bidding of the government. Helping companies in China is no different than helping the Chinese government itself. ZTE is a prime example.
Do evangelicals know that China actively suppressed the Christian faith and all non state-organized religion in China? Doesn't Fox News cover this topic?
Re: (Score:2)