No matter the political climate, U.S.-born Chinese people are often not recognized as “real” Americans.
by Leslie K. Wang

The brutal, random attack on a 65-year-old Filipino woman on the streets of New York City has drawn strong condemnation, not only for its sheer violence but because security guards nearby watched without intervening. The assailant, later apprehended, yelled “You don’t belong here!,” along with racial slurs, in the March 29 attack. 

Unfortunately, this was just the latest addition to a long list of incidents targeting those assumed to be Chinese in the wake of COVID-19, which former President Donald Trump and others blamed on China, using racially charged terms like “China virus” and “Kung flu.”

Hate crimes against Asian Americans skyrocketed by 150% in major U.S. cities last year. Asian Americans are being treated as foreigners and blamed for causing the Coronavirus. As an Asian American, I have been called racial slurs on the streets several times. Others I know have been told, “Go back to your own country!”

Some do, or at least make an attempt. I have spoken to many American-born Chinese professionals who, like me, have at some point relocated to China, lured by exciting economic opportunities and a deep yearning for racial belonging which they have not found in the United States. 

But even in China, they still feel as though they do not belong. They may find that they are expected to speak perfect Mandarin and express more loyalty to China than the United States, as is summed up by a question they are often asked: “If China and the United States went to war, which country would you support?”

In searching for racial acceptance in their ancestral homeland, some U.S.-born Chinese people feel as though their American identities are completely erased. As one person I spoke to explained, “People here definitely see you as Chinese first, not American.” In essence, moving abroad provides no escape from stereotypes that classify them as Chinese.

Compared to other immigrant groups, many Chinese Americans occupy a privileged status in regard to income, education and integration into mainstream society. However, they grow up without a clear sense of where they fit within the U.S. racial system, which tends to be defined by Black-white relations.

Viewed as racially and culturally “other,” Chinese Americans are slotted into two limiting stereotypes: either economically successful “model minorities” whose strong work ethic and family values are deemed superior to other racial or ethnic groups or “forever foreigners” suspected of bearing disease or being loyal to China’s communist regime.  

No matter the political climate, U.S.-born Chinese people are often not recognized as “real” Americans. 
The current wave of hate crimes against Asian Americans is part of a long history of anti-Asian exclusion fueled by a simplistic view of race that reduces identity and belonging down to physical appearance. 

Once we begin to consider the fight against anti-Asian racism as a key part of dismantling white supremacy, the sooner that Asian Americans can find a sense of belonging in their own country. For now, many feel caught between two countries, with no real home.

• This column was produced for The Progressive magazine and distributed by Tribune News Service.  Leslie K. Wang is an associate professor of Sociology at the University of Massachusetts Boston and a second generation Chinese American whose parents emigrated from Taiwan.  She is the author of “Chasing the American Dream Abroad: Chinese Americans in the Ancestral Homeland.”

 

The US-China trade war has been on the headlines of world media for more than two years. The 45th US President Donald Trump in keeping his campaign promises first signed two executive orders, one on tightening trade tariffs and the other on reviewing US trade deficits and causes (3-31-2017) then ordered the Section 301 probe into IP theft (8/14/2017). The U.S. started tariffs on Washing machine and solar panels (1/22/2018) and 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum products (3/8/2018) which triggered the US-China tariff war leading to 25% tariff on 128 US products and mutual threat of adding 25% tariff on $50B products to each other (April 2-4/2018). Then the trade war escalated, 10% on $200B Chinese goods (7/10/2018), increasing to 25% (8/1/2018), both sides released lists of $16B goods subject to 25% tariff (8/7/2018) in effect on 8/23/2018.

Since then to present, the trade war and trade talks began to grab headlines, impacting stock markets, and entering into a tug of war phase with 90 day halt to new tariff (12/1/2018). Trump later extended March 1 deadline and Trump-Xi conversed on the phone (6/18/19) agreeing rekindling trade talk before their G-20 Summit in Japan, resulting both sides giving concessions. From August 2018 to today, the trade war is obviously intertwined with many other issues between the U.S. and China. So far, there were tariffs on $550B Chinese goods and $185B US goods, with trade talks showing little real progress albeit concessions, exclusions, rollbacks and agreeable points in principle were raised. The US Commerce put 28 Chinese companies on its ‘entity list’ banning US companies selling to them. China won the WTO case allowing China to sanction $36B US goods. The U.S. releases new regulatory guidelines for its telecommunication networks procedure to protect US networks from national security threats openly targeting Chinese telecommunication companies, Huawei and ZTE. Then the U.S. Congress passed the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act, which was signed by Trump, all happening in the last two months with unavoidable impact to trade talk, intentional or not.

It is understandable how technology competition is related to trade conflict between the U.S. and China, since technology IP transfer and market access have a direct relationship with trade. However, Hong Kong as a free trade city should not become a pawn in the trade war, if we would recognize that Hong Kong’s role had been so beneficial to the West since the colonial days and equally beneficial to China since the end of WW II. Destroying Hong Kong stability makes no sense to the US-China trade disputes. The dispute between the U.S. and China is really on the definition of ‘market economy’. The U.S. defines market economy as an economic system in which production and prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses, although the U.S. Government would like to set all the regulations and rules of trading and investments including anti-trust laws for the world, benefiting the U.S. enterprises for sure. Whereas, China defines market economy as an economic system in which the government sets economic development plan, five year and long term, for the nation to follow and expects State and private enterprises all to compete in the domestic and world market, of course benefiting all Chinese citizens as a national goal.

The above different views on economic development and market economy should be practiced as a fair play under the World Trade Organization (WTO) guidelines and any multilateral or bilateral trade agreement. However, the U.S. is charging China for unfair practice and China is charging the U.S. for domination of trade and investment rules to monopolize world markets. The U.S. considers the Chinese State Owned Enterprises (SOE) engaging unfair competition with government financial support whereas China views the world-wide enterprises (American owned NGO) engaging predatory practice to monopolize foreign markets if foreign country fails to protect its market. The current US-China trade talks are basically stuck on that the U.S. demands China to reform her domestic trade and investment laws to allow foreign entities to enter China’s market freely while China insists on keeping her reform in steps to protect her market from foreign domination. The IP property dispute especially the patent protection issue is really a mute argument since China has become the world’s highest new patent owner with fast innovations in many design fields. It is to China’s benefit to have stronger IP protection for her own good. However, she would not accept any language like IP theft since all developed countries including the U.S. had engaged in technology transfer in shady ways in their development phase.

The dilemma of trade dispute between the U.S. and China perhaps can be resolved if we use the two free trade cities, Singapore and Hong Kong, as two cases to examine “the market economy” and economic policies. Singapore’s economy has been accepted as market economy by the West. Singapore has had a growing economy in terms of GDP since the 1960’s. In fact, China has diligently studied Singapore’s economy and her economic development model. Although, the West has accepted Singapore as an ally and treated her as a trading partner, Singapore’s economic system and its policies are essentially guided by a one-party dominated government (authoritarian). So is China with two caveats: one, China’s leader selected within the Chinese Communist Party might serve longer than two terms (ten years) if his performance passed mustard (Singapore’s leader Lee Xian Long has been elected as the premier for 15 years so far by the same dominating People’s Action Party) and two, China’s market is huge and fast expanding (population, territory and size of economy are much bigger than Singapore). Singapore’s needs in imports and her market protection are very different from China’s. The West can easily overlook Singapore's small domestic market but not China's. However, it is unreasonable to expect China to adapt the same economic development model (although many policies are similar) as Singapore does.

Hong Kong has always been accepted as a free trade city and market economy by the West as well, in fact being a strong competitor to Singapore. Since the return of Hong Kong to China, China has kept her promise to let Hong Kong people to govern Hong Kong. China has also diligently studied Hong Kong’s economy and its economic development model and policies. China felt confident enough to leave Hong Kong absolutely alone to manage its economy, even currency, and focus on Mainland’s economic development. In the past two decades, in China’s economic development planning, China has deliberately made sure that Hong Kong’s economy will not be impacted negatively by China’s aggressive development. Hong Kong enjoyed several decades of growth, although not as fast as Mainland China in terms of GDP and less evenly distributed across her social strata. (Wealth gap exists in China as well but not as severe.) Thus, it is no surprise that China is continuing searching and modifying a unique economic development model that is suitable for China.

China’s success in sustaining a high economic growth and the weakness in the U.S. economy for the last decade do cause the U.S. to be concerned. However, the two great nations have their own unique economic development problems, very different from each other, small countries and free trade cities. The big nations cannot emulate the success of free trade cities nor demand each other to comply to one definition of market economy or to accept any one economic development model. The rational thing for the U.S. and China to do is stopping their trade war and focusing on their own economic development issues, accepting competition and cooperation as necessary facts of life. Prolonged trade war leads to real war, and real war leads to mutual annihilation!

 
Abstract

“China Threat” has been touted long and often by politicians that seems to make it a true gospel. Have you ever wondered whether or not 'China Threat' is really true? What may be the real China threat? This article attempts to answer these questions and clarify why politicians especially during presidential elections like to focus on foreign threats rather than on solutions to our domestic problems. 

________________________________________________________________________________________
 
There is a real “China Threat”, however, which can be easily observed and understood by a few examples. Again, this threat is self-inflicted in my opinion. The examples are clearly observable in the U.S.-China trade war. The U.S. initiated the trade war starting from applying tariffs on hundreds to thousands of Chinese imports. The tariffs were added on the consumer prices hurting mostly the lower income American citizens. That hurt was translated to threat then even to hate by politicians. But wiping China out of the world trading system is not a solution but adding more hurt and threat to Americans. In retaliation, China countered with tariffs on American goods, that hurt American exporters and China importers both. Needless to say, it is not a good solution. Then the U.S. extended the trade war to technology sanctions and more tariffs. That again is hurting both nations’ tech industries and economies, slowing down China’s rise in technology industry perhaps but bleeds the U.S. hi-tech industries as well. (Hi-tech products need a large market to thrive) This hurt is also translated to threat then hate by politicians even leading to war plots involving alliances. This is exemplified by policy statements made by Pompeo and hostile rhetoric by Rubio and Ted Cruz the like. China either did not like to escalate the sanction war or realize that it will hurt both and not helping anyone. She chose to sanction the individuals who promoted the hurt-threat to US-China relations while in-power but now out of power, an interesting move we shall understand later. 
 
China announced a sanction list of 28 U.S. individuals and their immediate families to be prohibited in doing businesses in China, Hong Kong and Macau. I must say, this action is a real “China Threat” to the individuals (it really hurts financially at least) but not the U.S. industries. Pompeo is on the top of the China sanction list. China announced this at the juncture when Pompeo is relinquished his official duty as the Secretary of State to take on a private job to plot his political future. This announcement of forbidding him and his wife to do business in China has little to do with ordinary American citizens or the U.S. government but it hurts Pompeo badly (finally picking up a $80,000 job at Hudson Institute versus being denied $10,000,000 CEO job hurts and hurts badly). Pompeo would surely feel what a real China threat is like now, no corporation would write off China market to support Pompeo’s political ambition built on “China Threat”. Another example is former U.S. U.N. Ambassador, Kelly Craft who is also on the sanction list for her anti-China deeds, such as dishonoring a one-China principle the U.S and 100+ more nations pledged. Craft’s husband, Joseph Craft III, CEO of Alliances Resources Partners, allegedly has very significant businesses in China which would be affected by this sanction. According to an unverified source on the Internet the China sanctions may have a collective impact of $3 billion dollars of personal interests to the 28 individuals and their close families.
 
The Trump Administration played every card to provoke China including lies and twisting facts. For example, Pelosi is calling Hong Kong’s riots (crashing her legislators’ building) as a beautiful scenery of democracy but calling our protestors (storming into our Capitol building) as mobs and insurrectionists. (An obvious double standard) The U.S. is selling offensive weapons to Taiwan clearly encouraging Taiwan’s independence movement (no one in the right mind would think that it is in the interest of our national security or world peace). Pompeo’s criticizing China’s domestic policies dealing with her Muslim religious extremists’ terrorism using extremely hurtful terms like “concentration camps” and “genocide”. The purpose of providing compulsive 15 year free education to Muslim children so they would not be forced into extremists’ religious studies is not a ‘concentration camp’ idea nor there is ever a genocide happening to the 12% Uighur in Xinjiang. (In fact, Han people (80%) often complained that the Uighurs got more benefits from the government than they did.) Minority issues exist in our country as well, we would not accept any foreign criticism or do anything in response, but yet we expect Chinese people to accept our accusation and protest against their government. What for? If not an interference.
 
China sanction came after the U.S. sanction against some Chinese (and Hong Kong) officials forbidding their travel to the U.S. might seem to be just a symbolic retaliation, but in reality it hurts these individuals on their pocket books perhaps also their political careers. Although Pompeo may claim the China sanction is his badge of honor (Anti-China or Anti-Communism), but realistically it hurts his pocket book. One wonders whether he will be able to write a million dollar book at the Hudson Institute reflecting on why some people Americans call him the worst U.S. Secretary of State in history and some world citizens call him the biggest liar and cheater in politics. China did not put any on-duty U.S. official such as Pelosi on the sanction list is probably out of their adherence to never interfering with any country's domestic affairs. However, China’s sanction list is a real threat never the less. In my opinion, this China sanction may be a real threat, at least, to young politicians currently on-duty or not, who must care about their post-government career in the private sector later in life. Since in the business world people are used to competition. China does present a competition to the world, but any competent business executive would not be afraid of competition and give up the China market. So 'China threat' is never real to U.S. corporations or the U.S. if we don't give up competition. However, China sanctions against individuals are real threats! 



​