By Sikho Matiwane
In recent years, the United States has become a central player in the global debate over tech sovereignty, data security, and foreign influence. One of the most notable instances of this is the brief ban on the popular social media platform TikTok, followed by President Biden's decision to lift the ban temporarily, allowing TikTok to continue operations for 90 days—under specific conditions. The ban and its subsequent reversal have highlighted not only the complexities of international relations but also a double standard that the US frequently applies when balancing its own national interests with those of other countries. This double standard raises important questions about the US's approach to foreign investments, technology, and geopolitical influence.
The TikTok Dilemma: A Political Chess Game
In 2020, the Trump administration announced a national security threat over TikTok, citing concerns about the app's ownership by ByteDance, a Chinese company. As the app's popularity grew, particularly among younger American users, so did the suspicion that the Chinese government might be using the platform to collect data on US citizens. In response, President Trump moved to ban TikTok unless the company sold its US operations to an American company. Fast forward to 2023, under President Biden, the administration issued an ultimatum to TikTok: either sell at least 50% of the company to a US entity, or face being permanently banned. The proposed terms seemed to favour US corporate interests, requiring the company to sever its ties with China to continue its operations in one of the largest consumer markets in the world.
This decision not only raised concerns about the potential abuse of power by the US government but also mirrored a broader trend of American exceptionalism in global tech governance. The move was framed as an issue of national security, with no clear evidence of TikTok being directly involved in espionage. Yet, when the tables are turned, and foreign governments require a similar stake in American companies, the US finds itself at odds with the approach. This contradictory stance speaks volumes about the growing divide between American values of market freedom and the geopolitical agendas that drive its economic policies.
The Elon Musk and South Africa Debacle: A Case of Hypocrisy?
Elon Musk, the billionaire entrepreneur behind companies like Tesla and SpaceX, has become a prominent figure not only in the tech world but also in political discourse. Musk’s ventures have pushed the boundaries of space exploration, electric vehicles, and even the future of artificial intelligence. However, his business practices have not always aligned with the values of the countries in which he operates. One notable instance of this was Musk’s frustration with South Africa’s Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) policy, which requires foreign companies to have a minimum of 30% local ownership to operate in the country.
When Musk sought to bring SpaceX to South Africa, the government’s demands for South African ownership led to his public disappointment. He voiced his frustration, suggesting that these policies were unfair and restrictive. Musk’s reaction was a classic example of how the world’s wealthiest individuals and corporations often expect special treatment when it comes to their own business interests abroad. Musk’s insistence on operating his business without local ownership shows a stark contrast to his demands of foreign companies operating in the US or the growing trend of companies being forced to comply with US regulations under the guise of national security.
This raises an interesting point of comparison between Musk’s stance and the US government’s approach to foreign investments. Just as the US demanded that TikTok sell a significant portion of its ownership to an American company, Musk’s refusal to accept similar conditions in South Africa highlights a disturbing pattern of double standards. When the US is in control of a global enterprise or investment, it expects to impose its rules, often disregarding the sovereignty of other nations. Yet, when other countries attempt to implement policies that prioritise their own economic interests or national security, it is quickly dismissed as an obstacle to business.
The Global Implications of Double Standards
The world is increasingly interconnected, and global trade and politics cannot operate in a vacuum. The United States, as one of the world’s largest economies, has often been seen as the torchbearer for free markets and liberal policies. However, its actions in the realm of international trade and technology suggest a more protectionist and self-serving approach. The hypocrisy is evident: the US expects countries to adhere to American standards and regulations but rejects any similar requirements imposed on American companies abroad.
For example, China’s policies on data protection, foreign ownership restrictions, and state intervention in business are often criticised by the US as attempts to control the global economy. Yet, when the US imposes its own terms on foreign businesses, such as the demands placed on TikTok, it is justified under the guise of national security. The US government’s selective application of policies and its refusal to tolerate similar conditions elsewhere only serves to reinforce the perception that the US believes in a set of rules that apply to others but not to itself.
Moreover, such policies have far-reaching implications for global businesses. Foreign companies looking to invest in the US may find themselves caught between their home country’s regulations and the demands of US policymakers. This creates an uneven playing field, where American businesses can operate with more freedom, while international companies are subjected to political bargaining and scrutiny.
The Need for Global Consistency
The United States' approach to foreign business and technology needs to be reexamined for the sake of fairness and consistency. While national security concerns are valid, they should not be used as an excuse for economic protectionism or political leverage. If the US wants to maintain its status as a global leader, it must lead by example, embracing the same standards it imposes on others. It is essential for global economic policies to prioritise collaboration over division, fostering an environment where all nations can thrive without the looming shadow of double standards.
As we continue to navigate a complex and interconnected world, it’s crucial that global powers recognise the impact of their policies not just on their own citizens, but on the world at large. Only by holding ourselves accountable to the same standards we impose on others can we build a truly fair and equitable global economy.
* Sikho Matiwane is a seasoned entrepreneur and diplomatic commentator with a specialisation in international relations and geopolitics.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent.