The name and the nature of TikTok suggests something fleeting. But the enduring geopolitical impact of the fight between Beijing and Washington over the future of the video-sharing app, as well as other integral internet entities, may be more profound.
The fast-moving, quickly shifting story is worthy of, well, a ticktock — a journalistic term for a timeline-style chronicle of events. Especially the most significant one, which happened on Thursday, when President Donald Trump issued executive orders strictly crimping TikTok and an even more impactful app, WeChat, which is used by about 1.2 billion people, including the global Chinese diaspora that has a sizable presence in the U.S.
Citing national- and economic-security considerations, the orders would keep people in the U.S. or its jurisdictions from transactions with ByteDance, which owns TikTok, and Tencent, which owns WeChat, after 45 days. "The spread in the United States of mobile applications developed and owned by companies in the People's Republic of China (China) continues to threaten the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States," Trump wrote.
The president's pressure increases the likelihood that Beijing-based ByteDance would sell its U.S. operations to an American firm. Trump was apparently quite close to an outright ban — just as China's "Great Firewall" blocks Facebook, Google and several other Western sites — but backed off when fellow Republicans reportedly talked him out of it. The group included South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who tweeted: "Have an American company like Microsoft take over TikTok. Win-win. Keeps competition alive and data out of the hands of the Chinese Communist Party."
But far from laissez-faire, like previous presidents from his party, Trump directly interjected himself into the deal (but not artfully, belying his book title). On Monday, he called for a cut of the sale for the U.S. government for "making it possible for this deal to happen," raising the ire of the Chinese government and people at a time when the U.S. is pushing back against aggressive Chinese business practices.
Trump's threat, an editorial in the Communist Party-backed China Daily newspaper read, was "theft" and "bullying," and China has "plenty of ways to respond if the administration carries out its planned smash and grab."
Suggesting a cut "undermines the international trade and investment system based on transparent laws and reliable enforcement of those laws," Prof. Paul Vaaler, the John and Bruce Mooty Chair in Law and Governance at the University of Minnesota, said in an interview. "It's an arbitrary and capricious political partisan act on behalf of electoral advantage that undermines a system based on rule of law," Vaaler added.
The two driving dynamics of Trump's approach to the China technology front are "fear and opportunism," Ryan Hass, a fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution's Center for East Asian Policy Studies, said in an e-mail exchange. "The administration is concerned that Chinese authorities will have access to personal data of American citizens that Chinese tech companies collect. At the same time, they also saw an opportunity to kneecap China's first globally competitive technology firm, and they took it."