Trump To Block Chinese Telecom Giant From Entering US Market

As Trump's trade war with China escalates, and is set to go live this Friday when $34 billion in Chinese exports are hit with a 25% tariff, exhausted traders and concerned investors are wondering where the next surprise from the Trump administration will come from: after all, after backing off on ZTE (to get China's blessing on the North Korea summit) Trump then promptly pivoted and nearly blocked all Chinese investments in the US, prompting a furious response from Beijing. Meanwhile, the White House somehow threatened to impose over $600 billion in tariffs on Chinese imports even.

Meanwhile, as part of the verbal escalations, the White House has proposed nearly $800 billion in tariffs on Chinese imports, which would cripple the global economy and unleash a global depression if fully implemented.

And now according to Bloomberg, on Monday Trump is going back to the Huawei/ZTE playbook, after on the Trump administration moved against letting another Chinese telecom giant, China Mobile, enter the U.S. telecommunications market, saying the state-owned enterprise would pose national security risks.

According to a filing distributed on Monday by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (a branch of the Commerce Department), the Federal Communications Commission should deny China Mobile’s application, submitted in 2011. China Mobile said it wanted to offer international voice traffic between the U.S. and foreign countries, but didn’t intend to offer mobile service within the U.S., according to the NTIA filing.

Like in the case of ZTE and Huawei, the NTIA filing said that the US intelligence community and other officials found that China Mobile’s application “would pose unacceptable national security and law enforcement risks."

China Mobile, owned by China Mobile Communications Corp., “is wholly owned by a sovereign state, the People’s Republic of China,” the agency said in the filing.

Of course, China Mobile is also something else: it was the world’s largest mobile phone operator in 2011, with more than 649 million subscribers, according to filing (and is probably that 7 years later).

In April, Trump blocked Chinese telecom gear maker ZTE Corp.’s access to U.S. suppliers in April, saying the company violated a 2017 sanctions settlement related to trading with Iran and North Korea and then lied about the violations. Last month, the U.S. reached a deal to allow ZTE to get back in business after the Chinese telecommunications company pays a record fine and agrees to management changes.

Now, following yet another targeted attack at a prominent Chinese company, it is only a matter of time before China responds in kind, and considering the size and prominence of China Mobile, one wonders how long until China takes aim at none other than the world's largest company, Apple.

The full NTIA filing is below:

Comments

Giant Meteor SMG Mon, 07/02/2018 - 20:45 Permalink

No problem as far as I'm concerned. Like most of the rest of you I'm really enjoying the show. I mean you can't buy this kind of entertainment ..

I hold no illusions, one way, or the other ..

In the immortal words and paraphrasing ole G Dubya Shrub, this sucker could go down ..

In reply to by SMG

HopefulCynical DingleBarryObummer Mon, 07/02/2018 - 22:42 Permalink

China. Is. NOT. Our. Friend.

Never has been. Never will be.

China and Japan have been mortal enemies for centuries, because each of them sees their people as the pinnacle of the human genome.

And BOTH of them see themselves as superior to the rest of us. On that one point, they do agree.

Gee...who else does that sound like? Can't quite put a finger on it...somebody help me out, here...

In reply to by DingleBarryObummer

Arising Mon, 07/02/2018 - 20:32 Permalink

The greatest capitalist nation on earth resorting to protectionism, sanctions and tariffs to maintain the competitive edge. Shame really.

Would be nice to see them focus on promoting their industries and making them more competitive.

CashMcCall DingleBarryObummer Mon, 07/02/2018 - 22:02 Permalink

Absolute hogwash. The taxing system in the USA prior to the 16th Amendment was based on apportionment. Unfortunately for the warmongers, they needed more money so they moved off the apportionment standard to taxing income which heretofore was unconstitutional before the 16th Amendment. They also gave corporations personage. Previously Corps were flow through tax entities like Partnerships today, in which ALL PROFITS went to shareholders along with depreciation. After the 16th Amendment Government became 35% partners with businesses without any stock ownership. The great long road of Socialism had arrived. 

Your notion that the US Gov prior to the 16th Amendment was funded by tariffs is crap. This is all part of the Trumptard liturgy, trying to justify something that is so stupid, Trump Tariffs, that you invent a history and make false claims.

The story of Tariffs is very simple. They lead to recession, in the case of Smooth Hawley they led from a recession to a 15 year depression. 12,000 products were tariffed including steel. Two years later, 20 new global steel producers were taking US market share. Tariffs on farm products failed to anticipate the Dust Bowl. 

And remember to you tariff lovers Trumptards, the money goes to the Government, not to the industries that are supposedly in need of Socialist protection because they can't compete. Trumptards are the intellectual bottom rung. 

 

In reply to by DingleBarryObummer

Slaytheist CashMcCall Mon, 07/02/2018 - 22:55 Permalink

I met Smooth Hawley, he was a cool guy. ;)  Crash was 1929, Smoot was 1930.  I would say the former of those two was more causal, and the later almost irrelevant.  It's a taxing scheme, more than not.  We have no VAT here in the US.  Nonetheless, it's not the same scenario today, where the tariffs come first.  At least officially.

To be honest, I don't think the tariffs will be relevant this time either.  It not really about the tariffs.  It's a bargaining chip, or a mechanism to devalue internationally, without facing inflationary pressure domestically, which might prove catastrophic for this over-hyped economy.  In that context, it's perfectly sound.  Or he's a shill for our destruction.  Can't say as I know, but I'm hopeful. 

In reply to by CashMcCall

Duc888 Arising Mon, 07/02/2018 - 20:47 Permalink

Hey clown, the last 6 Presidents fucking eviscerated our industries.  Wake the fuck up.  Our country used to be 100% funded by tariffs before the Fed + the Slave tax.

As Trump is clearly demonstrating it is NOT a fucking trade war... but a strong arm tactic (legit) to bring others to the bargaining table and negotiate BETTER terms.

In reply to by Arising

DingleBarryObummer Duc888 Mon, 07/02/2018 - 20:49 Permalink

Fvck deals and negotiations.  Your mental state is operating in a public-image fantasy:

1.  It's probably already too late to get back the manufacturing base.  There's still a shot, but we need to throw the "hail Mary pass" (heavy tariffs on China)... NOW.

2.  Xi will smile and nod like a goof, and turn around and do whatever he wants.  The Chicoms will not follow through on anything they agree to.  They are very proud, perhaps to a fault, and they do not respect Trump or America; at all.  They have spent decades laboring and planning to build their manufacturing base / trade surplus, and they have big plans to replace American global Hegemony.  They are not just going to fold.  They are just trying to stall until Trump is out of office.  Hardball is necessary.

3. Negotiations are just kicking the can down the road for the inevitable one of two scenarios: either we wage a serious trade war (And just a reminder: Trump himself said we will incur some short term pain for long term gain), or the Chinese (over time) replace the US as global leader and richer country.

From @roddy6667

    "This kind of negotiating works in business when you are working against other sleazy individuals and corporate entities you will never see again. All that matters is how much money you take off the table and walk away with.

    In international diplomacy things are different. Countries are there year after year, century after century. Sleazy, one-shot tactics only leave a bad taste in everybody's mouth and contribute to America's reputation for breaking every treaty it ever signed."

In reply to by Duc888

Space_Cowboy DingleBarryObummer Mon, 07/02/2018 - 21:56 Permalink

1.  It's probably already too late to get back the manufacturing base.  There's still a shot, but we need to throw the "hail Mary pass" (heavy tariffs on China)... NOW.

That "hail Mary pass" will also most likely include factory-based AI and automation going into the long-term.  TPTB already have been toying with this concept for a while behind the scenes finding better ways to make more profits for themselves. 

Actually, I think the US could become damn near self-sufficient if this kind of plan was implemented by the "good guys", but it would have to benefit the American public directly, not just those at the top %0.01.  I'll believe that when I see, if I see it ever.

Then there will be the question of the still unemployed, and techno-socialists calling for Universal Basic Income behind this wave of the future, and again as most people on here would ask, "Where is that money coming from?".

Some fool will yell out "Cryptos", but the problem with that is that any sovereign government token will more than likely be centralized; and it's not that difficult for a paid off blockchain developer team to add on special smart contracts, and add to the token supply quietly, a la the US Federal Reserve method of printing money out thin air, except this time they can trace you in the new "cashless economy".

Technology is that oh so loved double-edged sword the masses welcome with open arms, and don't mind being stabbed by for the sake of convenience.

Regarding China, they do have hordes of scientists and engineers working for the CCP; however, it comes as no surprise that they have been caught again and again stealing US advanced technology, or just buying it outright after Western companies have to commit to "joint operations" if they want to access the Chinese market thanks to prior US administrations' China friendly policies.

It's not secret the globalists wanted to China to leap-frog ahead, and might have even transferred technology over to them from the US.  "The best adversary money can buy" operation as usual.

I'm glad we finally have a President from the looks of it, is actually standing up for true national interests, not the globalist empire, and playing hardball with the Chicoms, because they've been getting a free pass for far too long; and yes to a certain degree they were allowed to rise.

Take note of the Rockefellers placing one of their own over there:

https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=7…

http://nicholasrockefeller.net/

If anyone remembers the late, great Aaron Russo, this is the guy, Nicholas Rockefeller, he stated he had long conversations with regarding what TPTB do behind the scenes when they were trying to recruit him.  There's a reason he made the "Mad as Hell" documentary, because he was ahead of his time and saw the writing on the wall like the late Bill Cooper.

 

Mad as Hell

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgaoS6AUCzk

 

Aaron Russo on the Rockefellers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gwcQjDhZtI

In reply to by DingleBarryObummer

deepfriedbrain DingleBarryObummer Tue, 07/03/2018 - 08:21 Permalink

Stay on huff pro imbecile. 

 Of course we will change every motherfucking deal bc it was negotiated with corrupt ‘diplomats - actually written by us CoC) that did not maintain a fiduciary responsiblity for the US. 

Or what?  Where are ANY one of these countries going to sell their shit?  Europe? China? Africa? South America?  

All the countries combined don’t have a market like the US & each countries domestic market isn’t big enough for the shot that they make..bc they hv set their economy up on exports to the US. F em. 

In reply to by DingleBarryObummer

A Sentinel Arising Mon, 07/02/2018 - 20:55 Permalink

Look. I took the finance and economics classes, at the Wharton school no less— I mention that because they are(or were absolutely unapologetic capitalists: you don’t find that pretty much anywhere else.

But here’s the point: in macro, they stood by Keynes (although they did teach Friedman and even a little stockman, who remains my economic theory hero.) 

What conclusion did Keynes thinking lead to? That ALL barriers to trade, all tariffs, subsidies are bad, that you’re better off not retaliating 

and here’s the kickers you guys will appreciate

• the best thing for an economy is absolutely free movement of capital and labor (no borders)

• that a sophisticated economy would shed low-brow unskilled industry (the kind involving physical work and making stuff, and would migrate to a “service economy.”

in that final point they have a point: now that everything has been exported we are increasingly geared to serve — as slaves.

The point is that this stuff is deeply engrained. And don’t scoff at Wharton too much. Macro is a bit fast and loose. And At least in the 80’s there were no classes seriously advocating Marx - that requires a serious shortage of ability to think. Even then, Marxism classes were growing everywhere else. 

 

In reply to by Arising