On the eve of the change of government in the United States, Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Communist Party of China, wrote to former Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz, enticing him that China “will provide a broader space for the development of companies from all over the world, including Starbucks and other American companies, in China” and requesting, in part, that “I hope Starbucks Corporation will continue to play an active role in promoting U.S.-China economic and trade cooperation and the development of relations between the two countries.”
Previously, Schultz had sent Xi a copy of his new book published in China, “Starting Again: Reimagining the American Future. Upon receiving Xi’s letter, Schultz claimed, “I firmly believe that Starbucks’ best days in China are coming!”
Schultz, formerly CEO and Chairman of Starbucks, has retired as Chairman Emeritus. Starbucks began its footprint in China in 1999 and has now opened nearly 5,000 stores in 175 cities in China. It’s no surprise that Starbucks is as successful in China as it has been in other countries. But Starbucks’ success story in China is only one of the stories of American companies in China. More American companies have endured: market access restrictions, forced transfer of intellectual property rights, and even massive copying, plagiarism, and piracy, with huge and staggering losses in property rights.
Even Starbucks itself has had its share of unpleasant experiences in China, and in 2007, former CCTV host Rui Chenggang issued a diatribe against Starbucks for “eroding Chinese culture”: “Please get Starbucks out of the Forbidden City. Subsequently, the Forbidden City branch of Starbucks was indeed evicted by the Chinese Communist Party officials. Rui Chenggang, who privately pandered to foreigners but pretended to publicly defend traditional Chinese culture, made a big splash. Years later, Rui was sentenced to six years in prison for his involvement in a high-level power struggle in the Communist Party.
Xi Jinping’s letter to Schultz, in time for the change in the U.S. administration, plays on Chinese relations theory and has its own agenda: to use the CCP’s relationship with the U.S. business community to try to restart U.S.-China relations, ideally by returning them to the old pattern before Trump‘s administration, where the Democratic administration was expected to pursue appeasement and continue to let the CCP take advantage of the United States.
Last year, at a forum held by a Chinese Communist Party think tank, Schultz stated, “Russia is an enemy of the United States, but I have never seen China as an enemy of the United States; China is just a strong competitor.” Such perceptions and statements are typical of the American mindset of the Cold War era of the last century, which used to consider the Soviet Union or Russia as the greatest enemy. Today, with the rise of Communist China and the decline of Russia, such perceptions would inevitably seem backward and outdated, and not in tune with the pace of the times and world reality.
Xi Jinping wrote to wealthy American businessmen, hoping they would exert influence for better relations between China and the United States. But has Xi ever wondered how Xi would feel if the President of the United States wrote to a wealthy Chinese businessman, such as Jack Ma (the founder of Alibaba), in the hope that he would use his influence to adjust U.S.-China relations?
This reflects the essential difference between the U.S. and China: the U.S. is a pluralistic democracy that uses multiple voices and multiple avenues to stay connected to the world with flexibility. China, on the other hand, is a monolithic, authoritarian power with one voice and one way of dealing with the world, the official voice and the official way of dealing with the world.
Schultz claimed that he was “honored” to receive a letter from Xi Jinping, but did Schultz ever think: Fortunately he is a foreigner, an American entrepreneur, if he were a Chinese, a Chinese entrepreneur, would Xi Jinping have written to him and asked for his trust? I wonder how Schultz feels about the situation of Chinese businessmen, such as Jack Ma’s current “lost” situation.
In fact, Xi Jinping’s different attitude towards Chinese and foreign entrepreneurs can be considered to be a pandering to foreigners and holding foreigners to ransom. In fact, in the subconscious of the autocrat Xi Jinping, China or Chinese people are just his private property, and he can do whatever he wants with them. It is only for foreigners, who are beyond his reach, that he has to put on a smile and try to make use of them. Xi’s letter to Schultz, dated January 6, coincides with the events on Capitol Hill in the United States. The twisted intentions of Xi’s regime are thus evident.
Recent Comments