![\"\"](\"https:\/\/chryscommdotcom.files.wordpress.com\/2018\/04\/ccr_firesteindavid_web-e1536114798862.jpg?w=1000\")
Firestein<\/a>\u2018s credentials in U.S.-China relations are wide and deep \u2014 the State Department, EastWest Institute, and now, president and CEO of the George H.W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations \u2014 in addition to his role in academia launching the LBJ School of Public Affairs\u2019 China Public Policy Center.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cChina\u2019s rising authoritarianism colors U.S. views in a profound way.\u201d<\/p>David Firestein<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The Uighur minority and the telecom giant Huawei are the poster children of American perceptions of China, prompting national security concerns that have underpinned both the administration\u2019s trade narrative and domestic regulatory actions. On the heels of watching China use facial recognition software<\/a> to persecute the Uighur and other Muslim minorities, San Francisco banned the technology. Last week those same concerns spread to Washington, bubbling up at the House Committee on Oversight and Reform<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Blacklisted by the administration, Huawei typifies China\u2019s state-supportedhybrid economy<\/a>. The telecom giant sits on a deepening Maginot Line<\/a> between the Internet of the East and that of the West, drawing a line between American interests and increasingly, everyone else\u2019s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIn public and private statements, American intelligence officials and telecommunications executives and experts have begun to concede that the United Sates will be operating in a world where Huawei and other Chinese telecom companies most likely control 40 percent to 60 percent of the networks over which business, diplomats, spies and citizens do business.\u201d<\/p>David Sanger, The New York Times<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n There\u2019s a silver lining for Big Tech<\/a>. Nothing unites like a common enemy, and China has provided Qualcomm, Facebook, Google et. al. with a new \u201cAmerica First\u201d narrative to relieve regulatory threats.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cChina is vastly more closed to us than we are to them,\u201d Firestein said. \u201cWhen someone from China gets off a plane in San Francisco, they have immediate access to their email through WhatsApp. But an American landing in Beijing can\u2019t access their Gmail.\u201d<\/p>David Firestein<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n For an administration determined to deliver on its \u201cAmerica First\u201d campaign promises, protecting America from China is a top priority. Vice President Mike Pence\u2019s watermark speech<\/a> at the Hudson Institute frames the U.S. response to Chinese \u201ceconomic aggression.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n With China, all silk roads lead to intellectual property. In the absence of any Chinese quid pro quo to American openness, in 2018<\/a> the administration has expanded its powers to protect domestic technology from foreign investment. The Treasury Department\u2019s Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) began to block mergers and acquisitions considered a threat to national security. The Export Control Reform Act (ECRA) and the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA) are charged with protecting tech sectors that map with its \u201cMade in China 2025\u201d strategy \u2014 advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence, self-driving vehicles, semiconductors and telecommunications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Unintended consequences abound. The ban on Huawei network technology hits rural areas the hardest because the small network providers have to swap out cheaper Huawei equipment for more expensive offerings. And faced with its American supply chain being cut off, China will accelerate its build-your-own strategy, a trend that is already impacting U.S. tech companies\u2019 stock prices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Which brings us to where Firestein breaks rank. A trade strategy based almost exclusively on punitive tariffs has penalized American producers by eliminating lucrative markets, disrupted supply chains and cost consumers at check out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe United States is adopting \u201cworst of breed\u201d practices that are destructive to the economy \u2026 Our trade deficit with China is the largest good and services deficit dating back to 1776.\u201d<\/p>David Firestein<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Nowhere is the cost of the trade war more obvious than in the agricultural sector. Last week at a \u201chats on\u201d event, President Trump announced a $16 billion farm aid package<\/a> in a robbing Peter to pay Paul strategy to offset farmers\u2019 losses with taxpayers\u2019 dollars.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In fact, tariffs can make industries less competitive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It breeds a kind of laziness here,\u201d said Simon Lester, director of the Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute. Tariffs are taxes on outside goods, so they inherently protect some U.S. businesses from foreign competition. \u201cYou don\u2019t have to compete with the best in the world you can just relax you don\u2019t have to work that hard and face any competition,\u201d he says.<\/p>Marketplace,<\/a> May 27, 2019<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Despite the national security narrative, the relationship between China and the United States is not about military might. Certainly, the U.S. technology industry is rooted in federal defense funding, and the Department of Defense continues to fund innovation. But this is a 21st century struggle not a 20th century one. China\u2019s goals are economic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cMilitary interests are a function of power. China is building its military to define its power \u2026 But let me assure you, China has no interest in becoming the world\u2019s policeman.\u201d<\/p>David Firestein<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The conversation closed with a reminder that relationships grease the wheels that make the world go round. Firestein brought up a flash point<\/a> from his first few weeks in Austin when two U.S. Congressmen, a U.S. Senator, numerous professors and the University of Texas student newspaper protested an offer from the Confucius Institute<\/a> to make a donation to the CPPC. Firestein noted, however, that the United States has similar practices, and that in the end:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cRelationship matters. We have to get it in sync.\u201d<\/p>David Firestein<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\nPerceptions of growing authoritarianism<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The missing quid pro quo<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Applying worst-of-breed practices<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/ei.marketwatch.com\/Multimedia\/2019\/05\/06\/Photos\/NS\/MW-HI924_us_chi_20190506112401_NS.jpg?uuid=fa17164c-7012-11e9-8938-9c8e992d421e\")
![\"Trump](\"https:\/\/www.nydailynews.com\/resizer\/L59c2uPKGEDVqNkrddtcw_Kp2kE=\/800x0\/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com\/public\/DEYUI57D3BEIHK3PSOL4ZLCZUI.jpg\")
Relationships ma<\/em>ke the world go round<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
What does the future look like?<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n