It isn’t a neutral position though. It’s the US that wants to force companies to show their allegiance. Continuing to do business with PRC is what PRC prefers. US didn’t achieve their objective here while PRC did.
The PRC certainly would prefer Japan to block US companies boycotting them over what Uniqlo is doing now. A tie between A and B and just focusing on what result A wanted, and A wanting to win, does not mean B has defeated A.
The PRC would prefer Japan blocks US companies? Where is the indication that this is the case? It’s true that B has not defeated A in general, but what B has done was defeat an attempt by A on 1 Japanese company.
![[image] Japanese clothing brand takes rare position between siding with the US or China. It takes the neutral position.](https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/142df1ee-939d-4c2d-9505-eb95ef1c112b.jpeg){kind=link}
It isn’t a neutral position though. It’s the US that wants to force companies to show their allegiance. Continuing to do business with PRC is what PRC prefers. US didn’t achieve their objective here while PRC did.
The PRC certainly would prefer Japan to block US companies boycotting them over what Uniqlo is doing now. A tie between A and B and just focusing on what result A wanted, and A wanting to win, does not mean B has defeated A.
The PRC would prefer Japan blocks US companies? Where is the indication that this is the case? It’s true that B has not defeated A in general, but what B has done was defeat an attempt by A on 1 Japanese company.