Liu Juti: Trump's WeChat ban caused a shocking fryer -type reaction in the American Chinese circle, but the two voices that supported and opposed the ban also torn the Chinese ethnic group.

Although I have issued a document last year, when Trump announced on August 6 for the state emergency state, the WeChat (WeChat International Edition) ban still caused a shocking frying reaction in the Chinese circle.However, the two voices supporting the ban and opposition ban have also torn the Chinese ethnic group.

Some Chinese collected group friends through WeChat, and formally submitted petitions to the White House on July 14, advocating that WeChat should not be prohibited.According to the White House petition rules, any claim that reaches 100,000 parties within 30 days will be examined and replied by the White House.As of August 21, this petition had 6,2478 signatures and did not meet the standard.

The Chinese who opposed the WeChat ban also organized a public fundraising of the WeChat User Federation (US WeChat Association).And the Minister of Commerce Ross tried to prevent the prohibition of the US, companies and groups from using WeChat President's US president.

However, the Chinese who supported the WeChat ban questioned the Chinese who selectively selectively defended their rights.Their doubt is why the big killing device that supports different sounds and restricts freedom of speech by using the name of freedom of speech?

Voice against sanctions on WeChat

The White House petition against sanctions pointed out: The main purpose of WeChat is to promote communication.Although Chinese in the United States can give up many existing leisure applications, they cannot give up the only application that contacted Chinese families.During this time the new crown virus was popular, WeChat played a more important role in helping the family to maintain contact.According to data from the School of International Education, more than 360,000 Chinese students are studying in the United States.Data from the US Census Agency show that as of 2018, there are approximately 4.5 million Chinese Americans in the United States.Therefore, if WeChat is prohibited, nearly 5 million people will be seriously affected.For the vast majority of them, this is the only effective way they maintain contact with their families.Therefore, WeChat should not be banned.

Trump's administrative order only mentioned that it was forbidden to trade with WeChat and its parent company Tencent after 45 days. The actual scope of the ban remains to be decided by the Ministry of Commerce.However, the lawsuit initiated by the US Micro Union will challenge the coverage of the presidential order, which violates the basic rights such as the first amendment to the freedom of speech, the terms of equal rights, procedural justice clauses, and religious freedom recovery law in the US Constitution.And because WeChat mainly uses groups in the United States, blocking WeChat will have a discriminatory impact on Chinese in the United States.

The United States Micro Union believes that the United States is a country in rule of law and a constitutional society.We are a group of lawyers who care about Chinese interests. We believe that fair courts are the most effective means to solve this problem.Our organization is completely based on US law, so we are unwilling to comment on political disputes between China and the United States.We do not represent the interests of any political party, government or Tencent Holdings, and we only represent ordinary WeChat users in the United States.

Trump quoted the international emergency economic power law and the national emergency law as his power basis in the administrative order.The International Emergency Economic Power Law promulgated in 1977 announced the special threat to the US national security, foreign policy or economic composition, and authorized relevant government departments (such as the Ministry of Commerce or the Ministry of Finance) to prohibit the use of specific products or services.Trump's administrative order said WeChat's data collection constitutes a national security threat.

However, technology media Techmedia believes that these applications are specified as few precedents that cause national emergencies, and the administrative order may be legally challenged.Although in the worst case, the U.S. government may force WeChat to block the server in the United States to make the service unable to work properly, but the technology media The Verge believes that there is no precedent for any software in the US judicial practice, and the White House will be preceded.It seems unlikely to perform this harsh online review.

In addition, there are US legal experts that the international emergency economic power law cannot prohibit personal communication that does not involve financial transactions. Therefore, I think that in court, whether the definition of personal communication and the payment function of WeChat, whether WeChat does not involve finance at all involved in financeThe problem of personal communication software of transactions will all become the theme of debate.However, the proceedings should wait until the specific provisions of the US Department of Commerce will progress.

The sound of supporting sanctions on WeChat

On March 24 last year, a petition of the White House was publicly requested to publicize the joint section to accuse WeChat's review system for information: Tencent carried out business in the United States, and has systematically reviewing public opinions, suppressing the freedom of speech of different political opinions, violating American citizens' freedom of speech.Rights hinder US democratic hellip; hellip; foreign companies operating in the United States must abide by US laws and regulations.Congress and president must stand on the standpoint of the United States and the United States, telling Tencent to either abide by our laws or leave the United States completely.

Although WeChat is a very famous super application in the United States. Most users are limited to Americans that Chinese and Chinese are connected with the Chinese. Based on convenient reasons, users have no willingness to use WeChat.The Department offered WeChat to leave the United States.But this does not hinder American media and Congress pay attention to WeChat's speech review mechanism.

However, after Trump's ban, some Chinese launched a White House petition that claimed to prohibit WeChat and Tiktok on August 9. Currently, 34939 joint signatures are signed.Regardless of whether this petition can reach 100,000 signature targets within 30 days, the lawsuit of WeChat will inevitably make the American media, the public, the government, and the Congress pay more attention to the user experience of overseas Chinese.Data review and collection.

Although Tencent has always adhered to Wechat's server overseas and overseas users are not subject to domestic regulatory mechanisms, a report released by the Citizenship Laboratory of the University of Toronto Security Research Group in May this year shows that WeChat is closely monitoring international by AI and artificial mechanisms to closely monitor the International InternationalUsers' activities, and use the monitoring data to train their censorship system to strengthen the control mechanism of controlling users in China.

American reporter David BULL; Gilbert solicited WeChat users through the Internet at the beginning of the year, hoping to understand their experience in WeChat deleting posts.On February 12, he published an article on VICE Media, showing how WeChat suppressed the discussion on the new crown epidemic in China. The interviewees were distributed in North Carolina, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Tellahua, New Jersey, Maryland, Houston, Pennsylvania, Atlanta, Indiana, Toronto, Canada, and Ottawa.Gilbert's conclusion is that as Chinese technology companies are global, China is also capable of reviewing communication outside the mainland.

Trump's WeChat ban quoted a research report released in March 2019, showing that the researchers found a Chinese database containing billions of WeChat information. Among them, the information came from Chinese users, but also from the United States, Taiwan, South Korea, and South Korea.Australia.As a result, the administrative order stated that WeChat also reviewed the content of political sensitivity to the Communist Party of China, and may also be used to benefit the false publicity activities of the Communist Party of China.

Josephine Bull, assistant professor of network security policy at the University of Tofz; Wolf believes that the U.S. government has been advocating the idea of opening up the global Internet for many years, so that users from all over the world can access the same content and services.If the U.S. government now believes that security data and the network can only come from their territory, which means that the United States has fundamentally not believed in the Internet that has no borders.

This argument has encountered refutation.Tim Wu, a professor of law at Columbia University, who advocates free and open the Internet, pointed out in a comment in the New York Times that although Trump is not suitable for the leader of the struggle on the soul of the Internet, the United States should no longer tolerate long -term long -termIn the past, China and the United States have an asymmetry of unfairness in the Internet, because the privileges of the open Internet should only be provided to fromCompanies that respect the open countries of the Internet.

Wu Xiuming, who is famous for his research on speech and information warfare, has half of the Chinese bloodlines. In 2002, he was famous for putting forward the word standing in the Internet and advocating the use of the Internet equally.Who controls the Internet with Jack Bull; Goldsmith to control the Internet?Phantom without border world (2006).

Wu Xiuming pointed out in an article in the New York Times that China is the pioneer of online nationalism and deepen the Internet as a tool for national power.From this perspective, economic growth, surveillance and ideological control are the most important functions of the Internet.

Wu Xiuming believes that the global Internet vision that prevailed in the 1990s and early 2000s is being challenged. At that time, the idealist believed that the establishment of a universal network, a digital worldism, would bring world peace and harmony, but now nowNo one is willing to pay for that fantasy.Therefore, Wu Xiuming believes that if you want to realize the open Internet that respects each other, countries with this value must begin to counter the forces that destroy the open Internet.

On August 15th, the World Daily published an article titled by WeChat to be banned by Chinese. Is it embarrassed?Chinese articles questioned that the Chinese group hired a lawyer to put a litigation ban on the US government.The author of this article believes that although the Chinese have the right to lawsuit, if this part of the Chinese are lonely, it will have a great negative impact on the image of the entire Chinese group, and the American mainstream society's perception of the Chinese is worse.

why?The author of this article believes that WeChat and its parent company Tencent not only reviews political sensitive content, but also is used for foreign propaganda. Anyone who has a little conscience to speak for public affairs has their own WeChat signal being banned, or even thorough thoroughlyThe experience of being sealed.WeChat not only suppresses different sounds and restricts freedom of speech, but also automatically captures a lot of information on its users.

Therefore, this article believes that although a large number of Chinese people are in the free world, they make their brains bring their own firewalls. In defending their rights in the United States, they dare not say that the US ban is just copying Chinese assignments. ThereforeThe prejudice of ethnic groups to Chinese descent deepen deepen, because they confirmed the Milan Bull; Kunderla's famous saying: Only when it is safe, it is brave, and it is generous when free.It is sincere when you are stupid!

It's not easy to ride the wall

Between these two views, even if some Chinese people want to maintain a neutral position, it is inevitable.

The New York Times Chinese website published a title of a crowded on the wall in the confrontation of the Sino -US confrontation on August 19th.The family and friends of the work criticized that his awareness of struggle was not strong, and friends who worked in the US government, media and think tanks asked him to support the United States' tough measures to China.

Huang George wrote: From the trade war to the media to the so -called lsquo; New Cold War RSquo;, from targeting Huawei to Tiktok and WeChat, from the suspension of green cards to the new rules for international student network visas, from the background universities of sanctions to sanctions to sanctionsMembers of the Political Bureau of China and the Confucius Institute, Sino -US relations have changed sharply in 2020. For many Chinese in the United States, whether it is emotional or actual life, it is a year of nervousness, anxiety, and difficulty.For me, recently a kind of lsquo; pig eight precept mirrors mdash; mdash; inside and out of the outside and outside, it is not stronger, mainly because when friends on both sides of China and the United States discuss political topics, they can obviously perceive the other party.The hostility of lsquo; ride on the wall.

In recent years, the United States has directly named the Chinese Organization for the Hagis Organization of the China Eagle.If Sino -US relations continue to deteriorate, the Chinese will face the same accusations and force them to choose the side station.

Although the fate of WeChat in the United States is unparalleled, it is certain that the lawsuit of the specific Chinese organization on the U.S. government will trigger many of the Chinese people who are dissatisfied with the review and data collection system of WeChat.The weaning love and hate will also cause a new round of doubts: why are Chinese Chinese who challenged the US administrative order that violates freedom of speech and remain silent for WeChat's violation of freedom of speech?

(Note: This article only represents the author's personal point of view. Responsible for the mailbox [email protected])