Detained for months: Why China is blocking a US official from leaving
Though his name hasn't been made public, reports suggest the Commerce Department worker had travelled to see family months ago. The Washington Post on Sunday reported that the issue arose when Chinese authorities found he hadn't listed his US government employment on his visa application. The New York Times added that questioning focused more on his past military service than his current patent office role.The New York Times further reported that the man disclosed to Chinese authorities that he had held an entry-level position at a nuclear institute in China, pursued graduate studies in engineering at a university in Puerto Rico, and had worked on Black Hawk helicopter maintenance during his time in the US Army. The case became so sensitive that a senior US diplomat and a diplomatic security officer travelled to Chengdu to meet with him. During the May 1 visit, the diplomat noted the Commerce employee was under 'heavy surveillance.'Beijing has long used exit bans against both Chinese and foreign nationals — sometimes tied to legal disputes, regulatory enforcement and criminal investigations. Analysts say the tactic is at times used to crack down on local dissent and also as diplomatic leverage in disputes with other nations.This case isn't isolated. Chenyue Mao, a US citizen and Wells Fargo banker, has also been blocked from leaving China. China's foreign ministry said Monday she was cooperating in a criminal case. Wells Fargo has since suspended all employee travel to China.China's move to restrict the American employee comes at a delicate moment for US-China relations, as President Trump wages an aggressive trade war against Beijing. During a visit to Malaysia earlier this month, Marco Rubio remarked that 'the odds are high' Trump and Xi will meet later this year.- EndsWith inputs from ReutersMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
27 minutes ago
- Mint
The AI boom's hidden risk to the economy
In the past two weeks one big tech company after another reported blowout earnings amid a wholesale embrace of artificial intelligence. Look a little closer, and a more unsettling side to the AI boom emerges. All the spending on chips, data centers and other AI infrastructure is draining American corporations of cash. This underscores the hidden risks from the AI boom. No one doubts its potential to raise growth and productivity in the long run. But financing that boom is straining the companies and capital markets. Since the first quarter of 2023, investment in information processing equipment has expanded 23%, after inflation, while total gross domestic product has expanded just 6%. In the first half of the year, information processing investment contributed more than half the sluggish 1.2% overall growth rate. In effect, AI spending propped up the economy while consumer spending stagnated. Much of that investment consists of the graphics-processing units, memory chips, servers, and networking gear to train and run the large language models at the heart of the boom. And all that computing power needs buildings, land and power generation. This is transforming big tech's business models. For years, investors loved those models because they were 'asset-light." They earned their profits on intangible assets such as intellectual property, software, and digital platforms with 'network effects." Users flocked to Facebook, Google, the iPhone, and Windows because other users did. Adding revenue required little in the way of more buildings and equipment, making them cash-generating machines. This can be seen in a metric called free cash flow, roughly defined as cash flow from operations minus capital expenditures. It excludes things such as noncash impairment charges that can distort net income. This is arguably the purest measure of a business's underlying cash-generating potential. Amazon, for example, tells investors: 'Our financial focus is on long-term, sustainable growth in free cash flow." From 2016 through 2023, free cash flow and net earnings of Alphabet, Amazon, Meta and Microsoft grew roughly in tandem. But since 2023, the two have diverged. The four companies' combined net income is up 73%, to $91 billion, in the second quarter from two years earlier, while free cash flow is down 30% to $40 billion, according to FactSet data. Apple, a relative piker on capital spending, has also seen free cash flow lag behind. For all of AI's obvious economic potential, the financial return remains a question mark. OpenAI and Anthropic, the two leading stand-alone developers of large language models, though growing fast, are losing money. Much of big tech companies' latest profits reflect their established franchises: ad spending for Meta and Alphabet, the iPhone for Apple. As to when their AI hardware will pay off, they counsel patience. Meta, parent of Facebook, reported a 36% rise in earnings for the second quarter, but a 22% drop in free cash flow. It said capital expenditure in 2025 would be roughly double last year's, with 'similarly significant" growth in 2026. Meta has said much of its AI-related capital spending supports core businesses, such as ads and content, and is already paying off. The balance goes toward generative AI such as its Llama model. 'We are early in the life cycle" of the latter investments, Chief Financial Officer Susan Li told analysts, and 'we don't expect that we are going to be realizing significant revenue from any of those things in the near term." Amazon began tapering its build-out of fulfillment centers in 2022, allowing free cash flow to turn positive. But in the last year, it has ramped up investment in Amazon Web Services, which hosts data and runs AI models for outside clients, and free cash flow is down by two-thirds from the previous year. Meta is among the major tech companies making big AI-related capital expenditures. For now, investors are pricing big tech as if their asset-heavy business will be as profitable as their asset-light models. So far, 'we don't have any evidence of that," said Jason Thomas, head of research at Carlyle Group. 'The variable people miss out on is the time horizon. All this capital spending may prove productive beyond their wildest dreams, but beyond the relevant time horizon for their shareholders," he added. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the nascent internet boom had investors throwing cash at startup web companies and broadband telecommunications carriers. They were right the internet would drive a productivity boom, but wrong about the financial payoff. Many of those companies couldn't earn enough to cover their expenses and went bust. In broadband, excess capacity caused pricing to plunge. The resulting slump in capital spending helped cause a mild recession in 2001. A dot-com-style bust looks far-fetched now. AI's big spenders are mature and profitable companies, and the demand for computing power exceeds the supply. But if their revenue and profit assumptions prove too optimistic, their current pace of capital spending will be hard to sustain. Amazon Web Services is spending $11 billion on a data center campus near South Bend, Ind. After the global financial crisis of 2007-09, big tech was both a beneficiary of low interest rates, and a cause. Between that crisis and Covid, these companies were generating five to eight times as much cash from operations as they invested, and that spare cash was recycled back into the financial system, Thomas, of Carlyle Group, estimates. It helped hold down long-term interest rates amid high federal deficits, as did inflation below the Federal Reserve's 2% target and the Fed buying bonds. Low interest rates, in turn, made investors value these companies' future profits even more highly. Today, government deficits are even larger, inflation is above 2% and the Fed has been shrinking its bondholdings. Meanwhile, corporations face steep investment needs to exploit AI and reshore production to avoid tariffs. Thomas estimates that since 2020, their cumulative free cash flow has been 78% lower, relative to GDP, than in the equivalent period following 2009. All this suggests that interest rates need to be substantially higher in the years ahead than in the years before the pandemic. That is another risk to the economy and these companies that investors may not fully appreciate. Write to Greg Ip at
Indian Express
27 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Who is Dmitry Medvedev, the former Russian President making headlines again?
Once hailed as a modernising reformer, Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's former president and current deputy head of the Security Council, has reemerged as one of the Kremlin's most provocative voices, escalating tensions with the West through increasingly aggressive statements. This week, Medvedev's threats prompted US President Donald Trump to take a dramatic step: repositioning two US nuclear submarines to unspecified regions. 'Based on the highly provocative statements,' Trump said on Friday, according to The Moscow Times, 'I have ordered two nuclear submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that.' In a Telegram post on Thursday, Medvedev made ominous references to Russia's Cold War-era 'Dead Hand' nuclear launch system, warning Trump to 'picture The Walking Dead,' a popular post-apocalyptic TV show. His latest remarks came after Trump threatened to impose new sanctions unless Russia agreed to a ceasefire in Ukraine , a demand the Kremlin has all but dismissed. Medvedev responded by accusing Washington of pushing the two nuclear-armed nations toward conflict. These are not isolated incidents. In June, following US airstrikes on nuclear-linked sites in Iran, Medvedev raised the idea that 'a number of countries' were ready to supply Tehran with nuclear warheads. Trump, angered by what he saw as casual nuclear bluffing, warned publicly against such escalations. Once seen as a technocrat open to global engagement, Medvedev, a trained lawyer with no KGB background, now operates as a loyal attack dog for the Kremlin. Medvedev's recent behaviour stands in stark contrast to the man who, as president from 2008 to 2012, once stood beside Barack Obama and spoke of joint global leadership, reported CNN. 'The solution of many world problems depends on the joint will of the United States and Russia,' he said at the time. According to CNN, Medvedev's presidency was widely viewed as a placeholder for Vladimir Putin, who returned to the post in 2012. Medvedev later admitted, 'They often tell me, 'You're a liberal.' I can tell you frankly: I have never had liberal convictions.' Following his demotion to prime minister and then deputy chair of the Security Council, Medvedev now regularly delivers hardline outbursts on social media. Medvedev's pivot has been especially sharp in the wake of Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. He has dismissed Ukrainian leaders as 'cockroaches breeding in a jar,' as per CNN, attacked Western officials as 'bastards and degenerates,' and mocked US politics. In a speech earlier this year, he showed a graphic depicting Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as Muppets, using the moment to call for the 'destruction of the Kyiv neo-Nazi regime.' However, not everyone is taking Medvedev's threats at face value. Commenting on this week's flare-up, Anatol Lieven of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft called both Medvedev's remarks and Trump's response 'pure theatrics.' 'Having refrained from the use of nuclear weapons over the past three years, Russia is obviously not going to launch them in response to a new round of US sanctions,' he said, as per CNN. (With inputs from The Moscow Times, CNN)
The Print
27 minutes ago
- The Print
Our take on Trump tariffs, Prajwal Revanna conviction & Malegaon blasts—in 50 words
This week, Trump announced a 25 per cent tariff on India, a special court acquitted all seven accused in the Malegaon blasts case, and Prajwal Revanna was convicted in a rape case. Read our 50-word editorials on them and much more. 1 August Prajwal Revanna's conviction shows what can happen if police and courts work effectively
