Live data from Hacker News

Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

asia.nikkei.com

421–430 of 473 posts

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#421
post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in all fairness, it is a powerful way to change the topic while also getting people to sow doubt in a major source of your criticism in the first place, in political contexts. Plus it comes across as a bit of a juvenile debate tactic, IMO. I certainly became a bit of a "whataboutist" when I was younger and coming to terms of realizing that the U.S. is not "the land of the free" and that they, too, can lie. But…

I understand what you're saying, but let's see the other side: I -- like many others in tech and even in HN -- don't live in the US, and don't have any obligations towards the democratic system they have over there, or their government, just like the US has been historically a mixed bag towards us Latin Americans, often undermining our own democratic institutions when they weren't aligned with Washington or various A…

I suppose it is a bit of a "mind your own damn business" thing of me to have said it that way, but for what it's worth (and as embarrassing as it may be, considering it's various low ratings compared to it's "middle power" brethren) the US is still barely hanging on to the torch for anti-authoriarian poster child duties, and is easily the biggest obstacle for some other large powers that appear to have an even less stellar track record.

That being said, there might also be some soft spots considering how practically duct taped together this country has been since, always. It's...a unique situation, all things considered.

To be honest though, it still doesn't feel too productive unless the audience still holds an overly optimistic assessment of the whatabout, and even then, it's a bit...Lacking. I'm not sure, it feels like I'm lowering the standards expected overall if I'm simply comparing levels of shitiness relative to other levels of shitiness.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#422

I have a friend working for a company whose biggest clients are in the Emirates. One of said client is the government, and it is asking them to buy some very specific equipment, knowing fully well this equipment is only sold in Israel. However, the Emirates cannot trade with Israel, and refuse to pay for any equipment labelled as coming from this country. Calling one of the officials, they asked for a solution. They…

Tell your friend to tread carefully with requests like this. My yearly "Business Conduct Training" (required by my employer) explicitly lists things like this as against company policy, a fireable offence, not to mention potentially illegal (circumventing embargoes, trade restrictions or sanctions).

He should be careful, but presumably it depends upon which way the trade is going.

I don't believe Israel had any issue with Emirates. It was Emirates blocking Israel (side note: this seems to have changed recently).

So, as long as you cover yourself with Emirates, you can execute that trade and not get hung up.

If, however, Israel were the one embargoing the export, you would get yourself in really deep shit.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#423
post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell your friend to tread carefully with requests like this. My yearly "Business Conduct Training" (required by my employer) explicitly lists things like this as against company policy, a fireable offence, not to mention potentially illegal (circumventing embargoes, trade restrictions or sanctions).

He should be careful, but presumably it depends upon which way the trade is going. I don't believe Israel had any issue with Emirates. It was Emirates blocking Israel (side note: this seems to have changed recently). So, as long as you cover yourself with Emirates, you can execute that trade and not get hung up. If, however, Israel were the one embargoing the export, you would get yourself in really deep shit.

No post body was provided.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#424
post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. But many countries have their "weak" spots. Let Nancy Pelosi go to Catalonia on a military jet, without Spain's approval. It would be a major scandal. Or hell, if Xi Jinping got around US government on a submarine, and appeared in Texas to support its independence. All independence is based on having some autonomy (trivial) and no one other calling your bluff.

No, actually. I do not think many people would care if Xi made some speech in texas. Mostly that sounds just funny. He can go ahead and do that.

It was a fantastical example, but I doubt US would look kindly to sedition.

US doesn't look kindly to someone endangering their energy supplies. Let alone territorial integrity

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#425
post #17

Trade is really a matter for the government, and the US (sadly) adheres to the One China Policy. This just reflects the official policy, and having the companies pick this fight instead of the country is hypocritical.

I don't see how it is sad. The One China Policy is simultaneously amicable with the PRC and ROC constitutions. They both claim One China and the United States acknowledges that there is One China, but the United States makes no claims no preference for either government in resolving the Taiwanese straight conflict as it is a civil war.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#426
post #17

Trade is really a matter for the government, and the US (sadly) adheres to the One China Policy. This just reflects the official policy, and having the companies pick this fight instead of the country is hypocritical.

I don't see how it is sad. The One China Policy is simultaneously amicable with the PRC and ROC constitutions. They both claim One China and the United States acknowledges that there is One China, but the United States makes no claims no preference for either government in resolving the Taiwanese straight conflict as it is a civil war.

What you're missing is that "One China" is now a mere diplomatic fiction. The only reason the US and Taiwan insist on it is to avoid unnecessary escalation with China. But, as a matter of fact, Taiwan is a completely independent, sovereign and autonomous state, over which China has absolutely no legal or practical control.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#427
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone knows Taiwan is its own country, the US et all merely engage in the "one china" pretense to keep the PRC happy.

Yes, but the own country on the island of Taiwan is called the "Republic of China".

Because it would be a provocation to war to change the name to Taiwan. Politicians in Taiwan have tried to change the name and always chickened out because it’s a dumb reason to trigger an invasion.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#428
post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A buffer state can still have sovereignty. For example, North Korea is a buffer state between Chinese/Russia and South Korea / Japan, America. This is more about geopolitical realities than territory and culture claimed by ethnic groups. If you are thinking of _vassal_ states, historically, Imperial China had some. A more complicated example, Qing-dynasty, Manchurian-controlled China tried to treat the kingdom of Kor…

> North Korea That is inhabited by the same Koreans that live in the south and only exists for geopolitcal reasons. Just like east and west Germany. Ukraine exists because Ukranian people exist. Belgium is more of a buffer state than Ukraine (no, I'm not Ukranian, far from it)

It is not about nationality, or ethnicity, or anything else about people living there, except international recognition of the territory and the amount of sovereignty it has.

It is about geopolitical situation, where states A and C happen to have state B between them. When relations between A and C go real sour, then B becomes a buffer state between them (unless B is powerful enough to kick asses of both A and C, should anything escalate). The buffer state’s role in geopolitics is to get invaded first on the way, cause an international outrage, and hopefully defuse the tensions before A gets to “C proper” territory, or at least stall the invasion.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#429
post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it is sad. The One China Policy is simultaneously amicable with the PRC and ROC constitutions. They both claim One China and the United States acknowledges that there is One China, but the United States makes no claims no preference for either government in resolving the Taiwanese straight conflict as it is a civil war.

What you're missing is that "One China" is now a mere diplomatic fiction. The only reason the US and Taiwan insist on it is to avoid unnecessary escalation with China. But, as a matter of fact, Taiwan is a completely independent, sovereign and autonomous state, over which China has absolutely no legal or practical control.

And that is fiction which has held the peace for 70 years

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#430
post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You should educate yourself about the fact that PRC Taiwan and USA all legally recognize one China policy. China is not PRC, PRC is at best the only internationally recognized government of China. Even so there is still only one China. > Of cuz, because of US are exceptional, US does not abide by the international law, so Pelosi visited Taiwan as a high level official from US. One China Policy isn't a law, at least…

Looks great, a well rounded analysis of the situation. But, it misses the critical historical heritage for the event and the actual international laws at the time of the end of WWII. The situation is more like the China domestic war was not ending, and US intervened China's unification out of the strategic goal of contain communism. PRC of cuz had been the Vanguard of political insurgency across the east Asia. One Ch…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN