The 1882 Chinese Exclusion Acts is alive and well today! 美國1882年的《排華法案》明亡實存至今仍然有效!
The SAFE Research Act would render U.S.-based scholars ineligible for federal funding if they have trained students from, collaborated with, or co-authored publications with colleagues from certain countries, including China, within the past five years. 《SAFE 研究法案》將使美國境內的學者在過去五年內若曾培訓來自特定國家（包括中國）的學生、與其合作、或共同撰寫出版物，即喪失獲得聯邦資助的資格.
This apply to ALL Universities in US! Please see the message below from our CCS member Christian Peterson regarding the SAFE Research Act. Many thanks to Christian for bringing this to our attention.
Best wishes and take care.
Baoyan Cheng CCS Acting Director UH Center For Chinese Studies
If you are not already aware, the SAFE Research Act would render U.S.-based scholars ineligible for federal funding if they have trained students from, collaborated with, or co-authored publications with colleagues from certain countries, including China, within the past five years. The AAS, NAS, and AAU (among others) have all expressed concern with this proposed legislation, and some have circulated petitions amongst their members opposing it.
More information on the SAFE Research Act can be found here:
The Act has been incorporated into the House version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), and the two bills are now in conference to merge them into one piece of legislation. Lawmakers in both chambers must understand the Act’s unintended consequences for U.S. science, social science, and the humanities in higher education. I encourage our CCS members to contact their Representatives and Senators to make their concerns known.
The following two members of Congress from Hawai’i, in particular, sit on their respective Armed Services committees, which oversee the NDAA:
The modern-day pimp, on a grand geopolitical scale, has little to do with sex at all. 當今世界的皮條客，若放到宏大的地緣政治尺度上觀察，早已與性交易毫無瓜葛.
In the Anglo-Saxon world, there is only one figure who truly qualifies as the King of Pimps.
This “king” sells weapons, prints money at will, engages in exploitation, and commits acts that would be considered crimes against humanity—yet faces no accountability.
Anyone who dares to question him is met with righteous indignation, for he claims divine endorsement. As proof, the name of God is printed on every banknote.
With “God” as his shield and justification, every action becomes sanctified, beyond reproach, and immune from moral scrutiny. Those who challenge this authority risk being silenced—or erased—without consequence.
After France’s visit to China ended, the United States is really getting anxious…法國訪華結束后，美國是真急了…
On the evening of December 5, French President Emmanuel Macron departed China, officially concluding his three-day state visit.
Immediately afterward, China and the United States held a video call. You could tell—the U.S. is feeling the pressure.
Macron’s trip was no mere formality. He brought a delegation of more than 80 people, including six ministers and a long list of business leaders.
The talks were practical and productive. Airbus directly signed an order for 100 aircraft worth more than €12 billion. The Airbus assembly line in Tianjin will also be expanded, which means many more planes can be produced each year.
There were agricultural deals as well. France’s beef and cheese export quotas to China will increase by 20%. Starting next year, these products will likely become much more common in Chinese markets.
There was cultural progress too: the giant panda cooperation program will be extended to 2037. Brigitte Macron even went to Chengdu to visit “Yuanmeng,” commenting that it had gained weight and looked endearingly familiar.
The most interesting part involves the EU. While Macron was in China talking cooperation, EU officials were issuing tough statements—saying they want to launch a raw-materials plan to reduce dependence on China, and threatening to use the EU’s strongest trade defense tools if necessary.
This approach is downright contradictory: wanting to make money while simultaneously trying to apply pressure.
Seeing all this, the United States obviously couldn’t sit still. Right after Macron left, China and the U.S. held their video call. Washington was unusually proactive, sending officials from both the Treasury Department and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
What’s making the U.S. nervous is simple: it worries Europe is getting too close to China. China’s market is enormous, and France has already secured a sizable chunk of benefits.
From January to October 2025, China–France trade reached $68.75 billion, up 4.1%. American companies can’t help feeling anxious watching this.
There’s also a specific issue: early this year, the U.S. wanted to impose a 130% tariff on Chinese rare earths, but later cut it to 47%. The reason is clear—China controls 70% of global rare-earth supply and more than 90% of processing capacity. U.S. manufacturing simply can’t function without it.
We’re no longer living in an era where one country gets to dictate everything. Every nation wants to make its own decisions instead of being pulled around by others.
The U.S. used to try to manage this and control that, but people aren’t buying it anymore. Europe wants its own path, and China continues developing steadily.
Even if the U.S. is anxious, it can’t change the trend. Cooperation brings profits; confrontation leads to mutual loss.
This China–U.S. call is still a good sign—at least they’re willing to talk. But talking alone isn’t enough; there needs to be sincerity, not saying one thing while doing another.
Going forward, interactions among major powers will only increase. Those who engage in genuine cooperation will gain the most.
In 2017, McDonald’s sold 80% of its China business to CITIC and Carlyle for US$2 billion. 2017年，麥當勞把中國業務的80%股份，以20億美元的價格賣給了中信和凱雷投資…
After the deal, CITIC took 52% as the major shareholder, Carlyle took 28%, and McDonald’s kept 20%.
Six years later, McDonald’s headquarters unexpectedly spent US$1.8 billion to buy back Carlyle’s 28% stake. Carlyle made an enormous profit from the deal.
Back in 2017, McDonald’s was in an awkward position in the Chinese market. Since opening its first store in Shenzhen in 1990, it had opened just over 2,400 stores in 27 years—mostly concentrated in prime locations of first- and second-tier cities.
At the time, local chain Wallace already had tens of thousands of stores, while McDonald’s still couldn’t break into lower-tier markets. It couldn’t connect well with local resources, had slow approval processes, didn’t understand local tastes—new products often didn’t sell—and when food delivery took off, slow decision-making made it miss the early opportunity.
Thus came the blockbuster equity deal: CITIC Capital and Carlyle jointly spent US$2.08 billion to acquire 80% of McDonald’s China.
Many foreign media outlets said McDonald’s was “bowing to the Chinese market,” but unexpectedly, this became the key turning point for foreign food-service brands localizing in China.
Chinese capital’s strengths quickly became clear—especially in decision-making efficiency. Previously, if McDonald’s China wanted to adjust a meal price, it had to report layer by layer to the U.S. headquarters—by the time approval came, the market had already changed.
After CITIC took control, it immediately restructured decision processes, giving the local team pricing and new-product development authority. For example, they launched a preserved-egg and lean-pork congee set tailored to local eating habits, and within three months it accounted for 30% of breakfast revenue.
Digitization upgrades gave McDonald’s a complete makeover. CITIC led the creation of a full delivery system. In 2017, delivery revenue surged 75%, and in 2018 it grew another 40%. Today, delivery has become McDonald’s China’s largest revenue source.
They also excelled in private-domain traffic operations. The membership system accumulated hundreds of millions of users, and member purchases now account for 67% of total sales—something McDonald’s could never dream of when it relied only on physical stores. Expansion into lower-tier markets unlocked massive growth.
Leveraging CITIC’s real-estate resources and government relationships in third- and fourth-tier cities, McDonald’s annual store openings jumped from 250 per year to 500. By 2023, when Carlyle exited, the number of stores had more than doubled to 6,298, and is projected to exceed 7,100 by 2025.
Even more impressive: despite rapid expansion, 90% of stores remain directly operated, ensuring quality, with only 10% franchised—and those selected very carefully. The balance between scale and reputation is excellent.
Carlyle’s smooth exit reflects the true value of the Chinese market. It spent about US$580 million for a 28% stake in 2017 and sold it six years later for US$1.8 billion—an annualized return of 35%.
McDonald’s global headquarters was willing to buy it back at a high price because China has become its second-largest market and its major growth engine. No one wants to give up such a huge prize.
The new 2025 share structure is CITIC at 52% and McDonald’s global at 48%. This model—“Chinese control with foreign participation”—has become the new template for foreign F&B brands operating in China.
From KFC partnering with Primavera Capital, to Starbucks joining with Boyu Capital, to Burger King handing most of its China equity to CPE Yuanfeng, more and more foreign restaurant chains are choosing to work with Chinese capital.
This doesn’t mean foreign companies are weaker—it means the rules of the Chinese market have changed: understanding policy, having channels, and knowing how to operate locally have become the keys to foreign companies’ success in China.
Today, the Guanghua McDonald’s in Shenzhen is still packed. This first McDonald’s in China has witnessed 30 years of change. From being the symbol of “Western fast food,” it has become a “Golden Arches” empowered by Chinese capital.
The outcome of this equity game goes far beyond simple buying and selling. It proves that the Chinese market has never been a “cash machine” for foreign firms, but a “cooperation zone” that requires joint effort—and the Chinese capital that controls local resources has already become the most important leading force in this cooperation.
Video with English subtitles: Trump’s Dilemma! US Carriers Surround Venezuela for 3 Months but Dare Not Strike. East rise and West fall are unfolding in front of us! 影片有英文字幕: 川普的兩難！美國航母包圍委內瑞拉 3 個月卻不敢開火，東升西降正在我們眼前展開! 美國衰敗已經成為定局!
Trump is in trouble! US aircraft carriers have surrounded Venezuela for 3 months but dare not open fire – behind this standoff lies the great power game between China, the US, and Russia.
🔍 Core Content: Trump has deployed 15% of the US naval fleet, dispatched the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier, and mobilized B-52 bombers to create a war posture in the Caribbean, targeting Venezuela – a South American nation less than 2,000 km from the US. Yet after 3 months, Trump still hesitates to act.
💥 Why is this happening? Venezuela holds 17% of global oil reserves – the world’s largest China signed a $60 billion oil-for-loan agreement with Venezuela Maduro rejected Trump’s “resignation” ultimatum China-Japan tensions escalate with Taiwan Strait situation intensifying December becomes the critical decision point for Trump
🎯 The essence of this standoff: This is not just Trump vs Maduro – it’s a symbolic event of US hegemony retreating from global dominance to hemispheric control. Attack and risk total defeat; don’t attack and lose all credibility.
⚠️ Critical Timeline: Between Thanksgiving and Christmas, Trump must make his decision, or he’ll become a complete paper tiger.
📌 Key Analysis Points:
Why Trump must act against Venezuela (oil, political achievements, strategic retreat)
Why he dare not strike (Maduro’s defiance, Taiwan Strait constraints, China-Russia silence)
How this standoff reflects the decline of American hegemony
🌍 Let’s witness together how this great power game unfolds.
Video: China Has No “Intellectuals”?! Forcing Chinese People to Self-Reflect? Stop Dreaming! From the Death Penalty for Drugs to Great-Power Games 中国没有“知识分子”！逼中国人反思？别做梦了！从毒品死刑到大国博弈!
Forcing Chinese people to “self-reflect”? Stop dreaming! From China’s death penalty for drug crimes to today’s major-power competition, let’s tear open the brutal underside of the real world.
Why does the West always want to push our heads down and make us reflect? Why do certain so-called “elites” always kneel and fawn over the West? Today we’re not talking abstract theories — just facts and data — as we discuss the backbone and confidence of the Chinese people.
【In-Depth Breakdown of This Episode】
Recently, a strange wave of “self-reflection culture” has appeared online. When facing external double standards and hostility, some people inside the country are actually calling for us to “self-criticize.”
In this episode, we begin with the World Bank report of 2006 and review 19 years of Western arrogance and double-standard attacks on China. At the same time, we turn inward and take a hard look at the absurd logic behind certain legal experts’ blind advocacy of “abolishing the death penalty” and “decriminalizing drug use.”
This is not emotional venting — it is a cold, clear observation grounded in history and reality.
We will examine: • Why do Western economic forecasts about China repeatedly fail? • From the Olympics to the Nobel Prize — is “science has no borders” actually true? • Why must China maintain zero tolerance toward drugs? A century of national suffering that cannot be forgotten. • The disappearance of the “intellectual class”: in this era, we are all workers.
When you look at the national flags and emblems of the five permanent UN Security Council members together, what do you see…? 把聯合國五常的國旗國徽放一起看，你看到了什麼…
Four of them look like “blood brothers,” and one looks like “a visitor from another world.”
Really—look closely. The U.S., the U.K., France, and Russia are all about the same old red-white-and-blue. Stripes or blocks, flipped around here and there, as if they all came out of the same design mold.
But look at ours, and it’s completely different!
What hits you instantly is a red that is entirely, unmistakably Chinese.
Not decoration, not background—it’s the foundation, the root.
Above it are five bright stars: one large, leading four smaller ones, sharing the same goal and direction.
Now look at the national emblem—this gets even more interesting.
Others choose lions, eagles, or abstract symbols. And us?
We directly put Tiananmen on it.
What’s beneath it?
A cogwheel and ears of wheat. That’s not “design”—that’s telling you something.
Workers and peasants are what lifted this new nation. And the gate of this nation will always be open to its people.
Is this really just a flag and an emblem?
It’s basically a “national declaration,” written with utmost devotion, with every detail telling you: Who I am, where I come from, and whom I exist for.
Other countries’ stories may just be permutations of red, white, and blue.
But our story is about the stars and the seas, and the everyday life of the people…
It is four words carved into our very bones: “Long live the people!”
BRICS News: Washington’s strategy of isolating China simply will not work! 華盛頓的「孤立中國」戰略根本行不通!
Macron’s visit to Beijing has once again highlighted the correctness of China’s longstanding foreign policy – in particular its commitment to dialogue, cooperation and mutual respect between nations with different cultures, political systems and development paths.
Presidents Xi and Macron laid out significant opportunities for future cooperation, from aviation and nuclear energy to green development, AI, biopharmaceuticals and the digital economy. Xi noted the importance of China’s market for high-quality French goods, and stated that China welcomes greater French investment.
China’s willingness to identify common interests and work on the basis of mutual benefit stands in sharp contrast to the strategy pursued by the United States, which has spent the last 15 years attempting to isolate China through decoupling, coercive diplomacy, sanctions, propaganda war, tariff wars, semiconductor wars and more.
The friendly visit underscores that this US strategy is failing. Rather than being isolated, China is deepening its ties with countries across the world, from Africa to Latin America to Europe. The US’s economic and diplomatic pressure is rapidly losing its power.
The sooner the US ruling class accepts that the Project for a New American Century is simply not tenable, the better it will be for the American people and indeed for all humanity.
SCMP: Another smart scientist join China, Nigel Slater, former pro-vice-chancellor of the University of Cambridge and a distinguished figure in chemical engineering and biopharmaceuticals, has officially embarked on a new chapter in China’s rapidly rising biomedical frontier. 南華早報：又一位傑出的科學家加入中國，劍橋大學前副校長、化學工程和生物製藥領域的傑出人物奈傑爾·斯萊特正式開啟了中國快速崛起的生物醫學前沿的新篇章. 東升西降已經成為定局.
In the late Qing dynasty, there was a prince who, even before the dynasty collapsed, deposited £7.125 million—equivalent to more than 20 billion RMB today—into HSBC in Britain. 晚清有個王爺，大清還沒滅亡，就把712.5萬英鎊，相當於現在200多億存入了英國匯豐銀行…
At the time, this enormous sum shocked everyone. And the prince who secretly stored this fortune in HSBC was none other than the iron-cap prince Yikuang (Prince Qing).
This amount of money was enough to buy 200 of the most advanced ironclad warships, or to fund 20 years of border-defense military expenditures. Even more shocking was that this massive fortune was quietly moved overseas when—
the Qing imperial treasury’s entire annual income was only 280 million taels of silver. A single prince’s private wealth was worth nearly one-third of the national revenue. Behind this lay a staggering secret of late-Qing political corruption.
Yikuang’s accumulation of wealth began in 1903. When he took office as a Grand Minister of the Zongli Yamen, he opened a secret account at HSBC under the pretext of “handling foreign affairs.”
Unlike typical corrupt officials, Yikuang understood international rules. He avoided traditional Chinese money shops and chose a foreign bank instead. He also exploited the extraterritorial privileges granted to foreign powers under the Boxer Protocol, disguising his illicit assets as “railway bonds” and “customs guarantees.”
HSBC archives show that Yikuang’s account generated about £140,000 in annual interest, roughly equivalent to the cost of one cruiser for the Beiyang Fleet.
This cross-border asset transfer was not without risk. In 1904, censor Jiang Shiting impeached Yikuang for embezzling railway funds, but during the investigation HSBC refused to cooperate, citing “client privacy.”
Even more cunningly, Yikuang’s London real estate was registered under his steward’s name, and the interest earnings were remitted through a Swiss bank into the Tianjin concession. This “money-laundering chain” made it impossible for the Qing government to trace. Thus when the Wuchang Uprising broke out in 1911, Yikuang could still calmly use his overseas fortune.
Yikuang’s corruption network far surpassed that of Heshen. Within Prince Qing’s mansion, he kept four accounting books: sums above 10,000 taels went into the “Fortune Ledger,” above 5,000 taels went into the “Prosperity Ledger,” above 100 taels into the “Longevity Ledger,” and even the doorkeepers’ “gratitude money” was recorded separately.
In 1907, for his 70th birthday, he received 500,000 taels in cash. Gifts exceeded over one million taels, including a 100,000-tael banknote from Yuan Shikai and a famous courtesan, Yang Cuixi, offered by Duan Zhigui.
Most outrageous was the sale of official positions. A ministerial post at the Ministry of Posts and Communications cost 600,000 taels. Sheng Xuanhuai had to mortgage his family’s coal mines to buy it. A deputy circuit intendant post in Sichuan required a 3,000-tael “registration fee” and an arranged gambling loss to Yikuang’s son before one could take office.
This “marketized corruption” turned the Qing bureaucracy into a business arena. Even Manchu bannermen lamented: “Being an official is worse than running a pawnshop.”
Yikuang and Yuan Shikai’s relationship of mutual benefit was essentially a late-Qing “revolving door.” In 1903, when Yuan became Viceroy of Zhili, he gifted Yikuang a 100,000-tael banknote.
In 1908, for Yikuang’s 70th birthday, Yuan covered all expenses of the prince’s residence, even hosting the full-moon banquet for Yikuang’s grandson. In return, Yikuang used his influence in the Grand Council to ensure Yuan’s control over the six Beiyang divisions.
This transactional partnership peaked during the 1911 Revolution. When the Wuchang Uprising broke out, Yikuang immediately accepted a 3 million tael bribe from Yuan Shikai, then—along with Na Tong and Xu Shichang—pressured Empress Dowager Longyu to abdicate.
According to The Times, Yikuang once mocked openly to foreign reporters inside his Tianjin concession villa:
“The imperial jade seal of the Great Qing isn’t worth even one HSBC cheque.”
Yikuang’s secret deposits not only drained the treasury but triggered a chain reaction. After the scandal surfaced in 1911, provincial governors followed his example and began depositing local tax revenues into foreign banks.
The Viceroy of Liangguang, Zhang Mingqi, deposited 800,000 taels into HSBC; the Viceroy of Huguang, Ruicheng, transferred 500,000 taels. This directly caused military payrolls to run dry.
Ironically, Yikuang’s grandson Zaijun later used this inherited fortune to start a textile mill and became a major industrialist during the Republic, while the Qing’s “Self-Strengthening Movement” failed largely due to lack of funds.
This secret fortune also influenced international financial history. With Yikuang’s giant deposit, HSBC became the largest foreign bank in the Far East. The British government, by freezing Qing gold reserves in London, indirectly took part in economic plunder of China.
Historian Huang Renyu (Ray Huang) once remarked:
“Yikuang’s greed turned the fall of the Qing from a fiscal crisis into a collapse of trust.”
Yikuang’s case exposes a harsh truth: when power becomes a commodity, national decline becomes inevitable. His exploitation of Boxer Protocol loopholes to move assets overseas resembles modern cross-border money-laundering practices.
His “Prince Qing corruption network” is similar to today’s practices of “elegant bribery” and “shadow companies.” More telling is that Yikuang’s fall came not from honest officials, but from Yuan Shikai’s betrayal—once interest groups grow too powerful, they even devour their own creators.
In contrast, during the same period, Japan’s Meiji reformers like Itō Hirobumi harshly punished corruption and invested state revenue into railways and education. Meanwhile, the Qing’s “Prince Qing clique” hid silver in foreign vaults and eventually fled to foreign concessions with gold bars.
👉 This piece of history warns us: to govern a nation, one must first govern its officials. If parasites are allowed to eat away at the foundations of the state, even the greatest civilization will crumble.
When Yikuang died, his Tianjin concession mansion was still filled with treasures hauled from the Forbidden City. Yet those diamonds and antiques he once proudly showed off eventually ended up as trinkets on street stalls in turbulent times.
And as for that £7.125 million locked in HSBC’s vaults—after the fall of the Qing, it became dust of history. It neither preserved the Yikuang family’s wealth forever nor saved the collapsing dynasty.
👉 This story reminds later generations: a nation’s true strength never lies in the numbers inside a foreign vault. It lies in the trust of its people and in clean, just institutions. When power escapes all restraints, no amount of gold can buy lasting stability.
Business Blog 