Literally every tech company stands up for good causes like BLM and LGBTQ+ rights; but the true measure of courage is when there are consequences involved with taking a stand.
Well, in the countries where it is good PR to do so. They tend not to show the same face worldwide, in countries where it would not be good PR.
And that moral stand is over the sovereignty of a country?
Even though the US government, with vastly more resources at its disposal and more ability to withstand the consequences of Chinese anger, does not make this stand?
And even if they did, that ethos does not give them carte blanch to pick and choose which laws they will adhere to.
Edit: The USA also agrees that there is one China, at least officially, though it’s not like the US doesn’t like to change its mind frequently. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Communiqué
[1] https://www.newsweek.com/taiwan-china-politics-identity-inde...
In the 60's and early 70's the GDR dropped this idea and worked towards being recognized as its own souvereign state, and insisted that there are two German states (the GDR and the FRG).
This eventually resulted in the "Basic Treaty" from 1972, and the GDR joining the UNO in 1973 (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Treaty,_1972, or the much more detailed entry in the German Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grundlagenvertrag)
The situation is akin to someone held hostage at gunpoint telling you they’re fine.
Or is it because companies generally tend to follow the law of wherever they operate?
This is not great news for Taiwan. Besides empty assurances, I am now certain that Taiwan is largely on its own.
No nuclear armed nation is going to fight another nuclear armed major power.