Editor’s note for Tuesday, November 10, 2020

A note from the editor of today's The China Project Access newsletter.

editor's note for Access newsletter

My thoughts today:

Itโ€™s a week after the surprise suspensionย of Alibaba affiliate Ant Groupโ€™s dual listing on Hong Kong and Shanghai stock markets, which was to have been the worldโ€™s largest IPO. As we noted in our report: โ€œTencent can expect scrutiny, too.โ€

Today brings news that Chinese regulators are taking the countryโ€™s entire tech sector to task, with newly drafted antitrust regulations that will probably bring scrutiny to Tencent, Meituan, JD.com, and also to Ant Group parent company Alibaba and many other tech companies. The government probably has popular support โ€” the suspension of Ant Groupโ€™s IPO was cheered by many Chinese people on social media, some of whom described the company as a โ€œloan shark.โ€

Canada-China relations, as you know, are not copacetic right now. This is the result of some remarkably rapid changes โ€” the two countries formalized diplomatic ties in 1970, and relations have generally been good since then. Many of the factors that have led to tensions have really been beyond Canadaโ€™s control, such as the Mรจng WวŽnzhลu ๅญŸๆ™š่ˆŸ affairย (Canada arrested her, but it was under treaty obligation). ย 

To reflect on the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Canada and China, the Canadian International Council is publishing a series of articles on the relationship. Hereโ€™s the third in the series, on Human Rights, by Pitman B. Potter, who recommends โ€œselective engagementโ€ which โ€œoffers a useful alternative to relational discourses that either subordinate frank discussion on Chinaโ€™s abuses of human rights and rule of law to the broad imperative of maintaining friendly relations or else reject the possibility of positive relations altogether.โ€

Finally, a correction:ย In our recent storyย on Chinaโ€™s new COVID-19 entry bans on citizens of certain countries, we originally stated that Chinaโ€™s travel ban in March barred โ€œeven permanent residency holders from entering.โ€ This is incorrect, as the ban applied to those holding temporary residence permits, but did not affect those with a Permanent Resident Certificate.

Our word of the dayย is Antitrust guidelines for the [internet] platform economy: ๅ…ณไบŽๅนณๅฐ็ปๆตŽ้ข†ๅŸŸ็š„ๅๅž„ๆ–ญๆŒ‡ๅ— guฤnyรบ pรญngtรกi jฤซngjรฌ lวngyรน de fวŽn lว’ngduร n zhวnรกn.

โ€”Jeremy Goldkorn, Editor-in-Chief