Overnight, H&M in China has become the public enemy of the people, from the five cents, the official media to the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, are issuing a roar of anger: not allowed to eat Chinese rice, smash the Chinese bowl. The official media also named Nike, Adidas, Burberry and other international brands have also issued statements cutting with Xinjiang cotton, some brand spokesmen hastily announced the termination of contracts to avoid a new round of Boxer-style siege. The set-up of striking to buy international brands and boycotting celebrity artists is similar to the epic Sino-US trade war described by Chinese officials in 2018, but this year coincides with the 120th year since the signing of the Xinchao Treaty and the 100th year since the founding of the Chinese Communist Party, the political motives behind the CCP are clearer and stronger, and an epic sanctions war echoing the officials’ sanctions has been launched.
The “people’s war” of sanctions against international brands
H&M’s sudden reopening of old scores is obviously related to the China-EU sanctions war. The EU earlier announced sanctions against four officials and an official body in Xinjiang, the first since the June 4 incident, and China then retaliated by sanctioning 10 EU parliamentarians, academics and four parliamentary bodies and think-tank organizations. What is of concern is that China’s past sanctions against the United States have usually been reciprocal retaliation. On July 10 last year, the U.S. sanctioned four officials in Xinjiang, while China sanctioned three U.S. lawmakers and one official. On August 7 last year, the United States sanctioned 11 Chinese and Hong Kong officials, including Xia Baolong and Carrie Lam, while China sanctioned 11 U.S. lawmakers and the heads of human rights organizations.
China’s non-reciprocal sanctions against the European Union not only show the Chinese government’s mentality of fending off persimmon, but also highlight its political intentions. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying responded, “Today’s China is not Iraq, Libya, Syria, or the China of 120 years ago, and the days when foreign powers could open China’s doors with a few cannons are gone.” Hua Chunying’s credulous remarks about countries such as Iraq are disrespectful and insulting to the weaker countries, and moreover, she is eager to show that today’s China is stronger than it was 120 years ago when the Treaty of Xinchao was signed.
However, what do sanctions against Chinese officials in Europe and the United States have to do with opening China’s doors? These are political sanctions, not trade sanctions, not a demand for China to open its markets. The Chinese Communist Party is best at stirring up nationalist sentiment internally and threatening European and American companies and governments with the Chinese market externally, in addition to sneering at the human rights situation in the United States and Europe. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs is invisible, claiming that Chinese public opinion cannot be deceived or disobeyed, and that it is no longer acceptable to “eat China’s rice while smashing China’s bowl. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs is invisible, claiming that it is the public opinion of China that cannot be deceived or disobeyed, and that it is no longer acceptable to “eat Chinese Food while smashing Chinese bowls. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce also shamefacedly asked the relevant enterprises to respect the laws of the market, correct the wrong practices, and avoid politicization of commercial issues.
“China’s soft cotton and hard people” smashed their own feet
Politicizing business issues is what the Chinese Communist Party is good at, and Chinese companies are good at using patriotism as a business opportunity. On the one hand, the official media and official websites make waves when they snipe at brands like H&M and Nike and their endorsing artists and stars, but avoid talking about whether China’s national men’s and women’s basketball teams, soccer teams and track and field teams should be released from their contracts with Nike, obviously bullying the soft and the hard. On the other hand, a number of Chinese clothing brands, whether originally related to Xinjiang cotton, are taking the opportunity to use patriotic cotton, to grab the share of foreign companies forced to withdraw, stimulating the share price soared.
This epic sanctions war focused on Xinjiang cotton, the official media propaganda as “China’s cotton is very soft, Chinese people are very hard”, its political intention is clear, is to promote China under the leadership of the Communist Party has stood up, rich, strong, no longer accept the 120 years ago the Treaty of Xinchao disgraceful to the country, which is to the Communist Party This is a tribute to the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party, but also to proclaim the great and glorious correctness of the Communist Party, especially Xi Jinping, and to maintain his position as the perpetual ruler.
Only this sanctions war could kill the China-EU Comprehensive Investment Agreement negotiations, which were completed late last year. The Chinese side, which pledged to abide by the rules of the International Labor Organization at the last moment of the negotiations in order to unite Europe against the U.S., has now confronted the EU and confronted European and American brands on the issue of cotton in Xinjiang involving forced labor, viciously smashing the bowls of some international brands, has it not at the same Time viciously smashed its own feet and become a stepping stone for Europe and the U.S. to strengthen their alliance?
Recent Comments