Recently, Elon Musk’s Tesla made Tom Zhu, its Vice President for Greater China, the highest-ranking executive in the company after Musk himself. That’s a potential problem for national security.
At first glance, Zhu appears to be an extremely hardworking and committed company man. However, he is still subject to the country’s Military Civil Fusion laws, which mandate that private sector companies must hand over their work, data, and secrets at any time upon request of the Chinese Communist Party. And since Musk’s other company SpaceX works closely with Tesla, the Pentagon has every reason for concern.
There are many reasons Americans should be worried over this issue. Musk’s relationship with the Chinese Communist Party, which has put him in the crosshairs of Washington, D.C. decision-makers, is a problem that’s shared by a number of America’s tech leaders. Aggregated, the threat they pose to U.S.’s national security is a massive one that’s worthy of policymakers’ attention.
Apple, for example, is no better than Musk when it comes to China.
Tim Cook signed a five-year, $275 billion deal for Apple to “do its part to develop China's economy and technological prowess through investments, business deals, and worker training,”.
Doug Guthrie, a former employee of Apple in China, made clear in an NPR “Morning Edition” interview that, “There’s a deep partnership between companies like Apple and the Chinese government, and you’ve got to do what they want.” Guthrie is right, and from banning the AirDrop feature that the Chinese once used to get around CCP censorship to flirting with making deals with Chinese chip makers, Apple has without question been complying with this tyrannical regime’s interests.
Moreover, according to a recent analysis from Horizon Advisory, Amazon continues to maintain an active e-commerce relationship in China despite assuring America that it closed much of its business operations in the country.
Of the 1,050 companies on its list of suppliers who make Amazon Basics-branded products, nearly half were based in China, while just 101 were U.S.-based. America’s national security could have been affected as a result because, according to the report, “Amazon accessed the proprietary information of its own sellers — many based in the U.S. — in a way that may have informed Amazon’s approach to competing with products through its private label brand,” suggesting “that Amazon’s information practices could support the gathering of data on U.S. suppliers to launch competing products manufactured by private label suppliers in China.”
Must these companies with respective market caps of $456 billion, $2.26 trillion, and $998.69 billion continue working with a regime that’s counterproductive to our interests?
No. They can do the right thing. And if they refuse to, the White House could step in.
American politicians should not sit idly by as these people continue to jeopardize the safety and security of the American public; they can and should stop them in their tracks before it’s too late.