Proscription Lists, the Sovereignty of Terror, and Revolutionary Pathways Forward in the Digitalized Age--A Thought Experiment

 

Pix credit here

 

A thought experiment:  

Modernity has bequeathed its progeny a recipe for proper revolution. No revolution properly so called can merit the name without an equally proper terror--whether so-called (in France in 1794) or rectification (in 1940s China and thereafter) or purges (in a Soviet system that became more Stalinist than properly Soviet). And so on. No Terror, however denominated--can be properly organized without its proscription lists. And no proscription list, properly so called, may fulfill its purpose without consuming some or all of its authors or executors or overseers. 

Proscription set the standard for orderliness in revolutionary regimes and can be most famously traced traced back to the regime of Sulla during the last unstable period of the Roman Republic. It reminds one, a little, of the way that the proscription list emerged in the later Roman Republic during the leadership of Sulla:

Pix credit here

Sulla now began to make blood flow, and he filled the city with deaths without number or limit; many persons were murdered on grounds of private enmity, who had never had anything to do with Sulla, but he consented to their death to please his adherents. At last a young man, Caius Metellus, had the boldness to ask Sulla in the Senate-house, when there would be an end to these miseries, and how far he would proceed before they could hope to see them stop. "We are not deprecating," he said, "your vengeance against those whom you have determined to put out of the way, but we entreat you to relieve from uncertainty those whom you have determined to spare." Sulla replied, that he had not yet determined whom he would spare. "Tell us then," said Metellus, "whom you intend to punish." Sulla said that he would. (Plutarch, Life of Sulla, ¶ 31).

 Terror is exceeding French, and in contrast to the practical Romans, who focused on systems and system efficiency, in its French form much more larded with ideological presumptions that argued compulsion and inevitability all the while avoiding the fundamental moral questions, though it insisted on calling itself a most enlightened product of the marriage of the moral and the political (as that later term could be understood  at the time of the beheading of the ancien regime: Maximilian Robespierre, Rapport sur les principes de morale politique dans l'administration intérieure de la République [On the Moral and Political Principles of Domestic Policy]--Text and Reflections on Modernity. Its modern manifestations learned their lessons well from these and in the 20tjh century one tended to see a sort of marriage between ideology, mortality, and implementation all bound up in the process of rectification and purging, sometimes with extraordinarily brutal effects that could not otherwise be ignored altogether (see eg Pol Pot and the campaigns against enemies of the revolution).

The current phase of our liberal democratic revolution, noticeable after 2020, has already seen its traditional forms of proscriptions. Some were largely unsuccessful (see, e.g., here and here, though not for lack of trying, e.g., here). Some are ongoing when the unsuccessful target of proscription turned the tables. See, e.g.,  The Proscription List Grows: President Trump Issues Directive--"Addressing Risks From WilmerHale Presidential Actions, Executive Orders" (March 27, 2025), also here. 

But all of that presupposes the triumph of the age of humanity. Technology now adds a layer of difference that reshapes the older patterns of revolut6ion-terror-prosciption. What happens, however, when one de-centers the human and moves to the digital age?  Perhaps nothing provides a more sobering lesson than the slow strangling progress that is the revelations that are the Epstein files. Today the Daily Mail posted a quite interesting proscription list in the form of an article: Full list of hundreds of celebrities and politicians in Pam Bondi's Epstein files letter.

All of the Epstein files have been released, according to Attorney General Pam Bondi. Millions of emails, photos, and documents relating to the harrowing case against predator Jeffrey Epstein have been made publicly available, Bondi said. A definitive list of 305 high-profile individuals, including celebrities and politicians, have been published by the Department of Justice as part of Bondi's required update sent to Congress on February 14.

 It moves proscription, and Terror, from the political, to the socio/cultural, and from the visible structures of power to those structures that appear to have undermined them. In that context, truth and justification leave the stage--the essence of proscription under conditions of Terror require certainty (a list--or accusation)--but nothing else. Still a fig leaf is always useful:

Being named in the Epstein files does not assume any guilt or wrongdoing to Epstein's heinous child sex crimes. While many of the names on the new list have long been associated with Epstein, including Ghislaine Maxwell and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, this is the first time a definitive long list has been shared by Bondi and the administration.  It includes singers, actors, businessmen and entrepreneurs, dead and alive, who were mentioned in the files at least once.(Full list of hundreds of celebrities and politicians in Pam Bondi's Epstein files letter.)

Pix credit here

That is what makes proscription terrifying--its supra-morality and embrace of indiscriminate sacrifice in the name of something "higher" or more relevant to those who. for the moment, control the guillotine that may, in time, come for them. Its purpose is not justice, fine granularity attuned to the individual; its purpose is elimination--the elimination of those structures of power and the bodies that were its placeholders to be replaced by another waiting in the wings. Not better necessarily, though it will be sold that way, but different. In that sense the 20th century terms ring truer, purging, rectification. 

And in the age of digitized knowledge; in this age of democratic transparency and mass sentiment; in this age of dialectic markets for every commodity imaginable; in this age of images and virtual realities. In this age of the signal and the flow--of idea, meaning, emotion--and in this age of the morality of representation, and the representation that are images and imagining, then in that age the Epstein sage represents a new and global first rectification, first purge and first taste of what a digitized terror may well take form. The Epstein saga, the explosion of the disclosures of that demimonde of power and power relations sealed with sacrifice and undertaken above the structured expectations of order from which or against which it was possible to operate, a demimonde that might perhaps suggest that the cognitive cages of our realities were actually inverted, might suggest the way that 21st century revolution, terror and proscription will work--though not its ending. 

In Bondi's letter on Saturday, she explained that all of the files relating to the law have been released, which have been categorized into nine different sections.The categories spelled out by the Justice Department are: Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, flight logs or travel records, individuals named in connection with Epstein's criminal activities, details on corporate, nonprofit, academic or governmental entities with ties to Epstein, immunity deals involving Epstein and his associates, internal DOJ communications, all communications relating to the destruction of evidence relating to Epstein, and finally, documentation of Epstein's detention and death. Bondi then explained what has been withheld during the Epstein files release. The letter stated: 'The only category of records withheld were those records where permitted withholdings under Section 2(c) and privileged materials were not segregable from material responsive under Section 2(a).Full list of hundreds of celebrities and politicians in Pam Bondi's Epstein files letter.)

But of course, the problem with the best planned revolution, with the most well managed terror, with the most usefully crafted proscription list is that  once put into play control may be illusory, the process may consume its authors, and the end product may be entirely unexpected. Yet modern trajectories of these pathways have tended to lack their Danton.

Pix credit here

 Perhaps the Epstein saga is yet another blip--a momentary revelation of the intertwining of human relations in a complex world--all will be forgiven and perhaps forgotten; officially. Yet this can go in quite  another way. And there is nothing likle scandal to produce the sort of opportunity that can topple governance orders. 

 

El triunfo de lo transaccional y el problema de la racionalización de la Tierra Firme Española del Caribe en la epoca contemporanea: EE. UU. y México regatean sobre el futuro de Cuba

Crédito de imagen aquí

ENGLISH LANGUAGE VERSION HERE

¿Cómo se puede reiniciar los tropos discursivos tradicionales de la soberanía y el sistema estatal, profundamente arraigados en la cultura de los Estados y conmemorados inicialmente en la Convención de Montevideo de 1933, y basados ​​en la protección de los asuntos internos de los Estados por otros, la igualdad soberana, la integridad territorial y la autodeterminación? ¿Cómo se puede emprender este tipo de reinicio en un contexto en el que los tropos discursivos de la soberanía se han disipado por la globalización: todos, las empresas multinacionales (económicas y sociales, Apple Inc. y Amnistía Internacional), tal vez ahora tengan distintos "derechos" a la autodeterminación, si no al territorio? ¿Cómo se puede hacer ese reinicio cuando esos viejos tropos discursivos pueden ahora ser desplazados de manera decisiva por el discurso de la transformación de las premisas ordenadoras de lo global, de una que prioriza las instituciones, la gestión y el orden burocrático dentro de sistemas jerárquicamente organizados a una que se inserta en un ethos de discurso transaccional y los valores que ese discurso representa?

Crédito de imagin aquí

Esas son, sin duda, una pregunta bastante larga. También se entiende mejor como un desafío (para los Estados y otros) a medida que la contradicción principal de las relaciones internacionales pasa de estar basada en la perfección de los Estados, su sistema y su lenguaje/valores (a través de tropos imbuidos del Estado de Derecho) a una en la que los comerciantes, en lugar de los burócratas, podrían sentirse más cómodos. Esto se complica porque incluso los términos antiguos adquieren ambigüedad en el contexto cubano contemporáneo (¿autodeterminación, incluyendo la diáspora cubana?, por ejemplo).

Crédito de imagen aquí

Esta es una contradicción que México enfrenta ahora; una contradicción forjada a la sombra de sus siempre delicadas y sólidas relaciones con Estados Unidos, y ahora formulada dentro de esa "crisis de regalos que no cesa de dar" que es Cuba. Cuba siempre ha ocupado un lugar preponderante en la política exterior de Estados Unidos y México. Y, en ocasiones, sus respectivas acciones en Cuba y en torno a ella han servido como una forma indirecta de involucrarse en algunas de las áreas más divisivas de sus relaciones bilaterales (mucho más amplias). Tanto para Estados Unidos como para México, Cuba se entiende a veces más como la encarnación de un ideal, de una lucha ideológica y de un experimento que moldea lo mejor y lo peor de... El Estado, el sistema estatal y sus peculiaridades, en un contexto que, irónicamente, reproduce en cierto modo el conflicto fundamental entre los imperios inglés y español de los siglos XVII-XIX, pero ahora reformulado, modernizado y contextualizado entre Estados Unidos y México, representando el patrimonio heredado de imperios difuntos, del control y las disputas dentro de la Tierra Firme Española especialmente del Caribe. Pero Cuba no es el problema, es el objeto, cuyo uso anima una "conversación" mucho más importante; no es tanto Cuba lo importante, sino la idea de Cuba y su utilidad para moldear las relaciones entre grandes potencias, cuyas consecuencias se sentirán a lo largo de lesa Tierra Firme del Caribe Español, pero especialmente dentro de Cuba, la joya de su corona caribeña.

David Marcial Pérez resumió acertadamente el desafío y sus trampas para México:

Cuba se ha convertido en una de las principales prioridades de política exterior del gobierno mexicano. Desde el aumento Ante la presión estadounidense que ha llevado a la isla a una situación crítica, la presidenta mexicana, Claudia Sheinbaum, se ha pronunciado casi a diario para denunciar la restricción económica impuesta por el presidente estadounidense Donald Trump y reafirmar el apoyo de México a La Habana.

Más allá del delicado equilibrio con Washington, el apoyo a Cuba también resuena profundamente en Morena, el partido gobernante de México, donde se nutre de una larga tradición de afinidad política que se remonta a los antiguos gobiernos liderados por el Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) y que se reavivó bajo la administración anterior. Ninguna otra crisis regional, ni siquiera la acción militar estadounidense contra Venezuela, ha provocado una respuesta tan firme y persistente del gobierno mexicano. (Aquí)

 

Crédito de la imagen aquí (El País, "Ante el colapso económico, una Cuba acorralada se ve obligada a dialogar con Estados Unidos"). 

 

 Para la presidenta de México, Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo, probablemente una de las figuras políticas más capaces de la región y también alguien que está demostrando ser hábil para mediar entre el institucionalismo de viejo estilo, el regionalismo latinoamericano (como la manifestación contemporánea de las brasas de los oníricos paisajes imperiales españoles, no reinventados para adaptarse a los gustos modernos) y el transaccionalismo estadounidense, Cuba ha representado un desafío y una oportunidad. El desafío de la presidenta Sheinbaum puede incluir la necesidad de equilibrar los apegos tradicionales a la "idea" de Cuba (o al menos al gobierno revolucionario cubano y lo que podría representar en la política mexicana) con las realidades de la estabilidad regional ante un nuevo enfoque de Estados Unidos, uno que los estadounidenses ahora están dispuestos a poner en práctica, y uno que, si bien es indiferente a las sutilezas territoriales del "espacio" cubano (y venezolano), está bastante interesado en supervisar los espacios territoriales, las plataformas dentro y a través de las cuales ambos estados podrían estar abiertos al tipo de comercio e inversión, y en los términos y bajo las reglas que satisfagan los intereses de Estados Unidos (y quizás, en cierta medida, los de las empresas mexicanas también, aunque no necesariamente los de su antigua política).

El asunto ha alcanzado un punto crítico a medida que Estados Unidos se ha esforzado más por "reformar" una Cuba que se ha mostrado reacia a reformarse a sí misma a pesar de las súplicas de décadas de sus amigos y sus propias élites. La táctica es antigua: el asedio. Pero el asedio se ha vuelto más complejo en la era posterior a 1945: Gaza ha demostrado ser el modelo (a menos que, por supuesto, las normas del derecho internacional sean exclusivas para los judíos, pero eso no puede ser), y uno que distingue entre presionar (y asesinar, expulsar o neutralizar de alguna otra forma) a funcionarios institucionales y un trato de base a la población civil. Pero incluso ese cálculo es complicado en Cuba, donde, incluso a diferencia de Gaza, el propio aparato estatal parecía contentarse con institucionalizar la gobernanza de un Estado de Miseria en pos de sus propios objetivos (véase la discusión aquí en inglés). 

 Por otro lado, esto representa un beneficio para México que ahora no requiere casi nada más que una muestra de caridad para apaciguar la conciencia y cumplir con su deber ideológico y político interno. En todo esto, por supuesto, Cuba misma desempeña un papel secundario: un objeto de intervención estratégica en una dialéctica de larga data entre México y Estados Unidos, en la que es (y siempre es) un objeto colateral. Sin embargo, incluso los asedios modernos pueden ser efectivos. Véase, por ejemplo, Aerolíneas cortan vuelos a Cuba mientras el bloqueo de combustible estadounidense deja los aeropuertos sin combustible para aviones; Cunde el pánico entre los canadienses varados en Cuba; Rusia repatriará a ciudadanos varados en Cuba en medio de la crisis del combustible; Apagones continuos, escasez hospitalaria: Cómo el bloqueo petrolero estadounidense está impactando a Cuba.

Y así, México busca suministrar petróleo a Cuba, al menos una cantidad ostentosa, pero en ese momento cualquier cosa es mejor que nada; Estados Unidos se opone; y México suspende el suministro. Pero el petróleo es un producto con alta volatilidad en el panorama político estadounidense, y eso tiene sentido. La ayuda humanitaria, por otro lado, es diferente (de nuevo, Gaza como modelo: los seres humanos pueden aprender y aplicar ese aprendizaje de todo tipo de situaciones; todo lo que hay que hacer es estar dispuesto a articular y transponer el "aprendizaje"). Tanto México como Estados Unidos pueden proporcionarla, aunque a través de diferentes canales y con distintos efectos: el primero al pueblo, el segundo a través del Estado (por ejemplo, Cumpliendo nuestro compromiso: Asistencia estadounidense en caso de desastre al pueblo cubano; "Aviones y barcos fletados por el Departamento de Estado para entregar asistencia. Por lo tanto, trabajaremos con Catholic Relief Services y con Cáritas para brindar esa asistencia sobre el terreno" Aquí).

Durante su conferencia matutina, la mandataria explicó que México ha planteado tanto al Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos como a la embajada estadounidense en territorio mexicano su disposición a contribuir a un acercamiento, siempre bajo el principio de respeto a la soberanía de Cuba y la autodeterminación de los pueblos. (Cibercuba)

Estados Unidos desea un acuerdo transaccional con Cuba (sea cual sea su forma de gobierno, pero sujeto a las limitaciones de la legislación estadounidense). En ese caso, México servirá de mediador, una voz de la razón que represente al lado latino de las Américas, mientras ambos consideran maneras en que Cuba pueda volver a encajar en esas fronteras del viejo imperio que, en sus rescoldos, conserva cierto prestigio. Informes recientes publicados en Facebook (que, para quienes no lo conozcan, Estados Unidos no es sólo una herramienta para mantener conectados a los abuelos) sugieren las estrategias, bastante interesantes, de la presidenta Sheinbaum ante estos desafíos:

foto crédito acquí

La presidenta de México, Claudia Sheinbaum, insistió este jueves 12 de febrero en que su Gobierno está dispuesto a facilitar el "diálogo" entre Estados Unidos y Cuba, en medio de las tensiones por las sanciones anunciadas por Washington a los países que suministran petróleo a la isla y la aguda crisis económica que atraviesa el país caribeño.

"Ya lo hemos hecho. Depende de los dos países. Nosotros, tanto al Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos como a través de la embajada (de Cuba) en México, hemos planteado que México ponga todo de su parte para poder generar un diálogo que permita en el marco de la soberanía de Cuba", afirmó la mandataria durante su conferencia de prensa matutina. El gobernante mexicano subrayó que esta postura responde a los principios tradicionales de la política exterior mexicana. “Porque eso es muy importante, porque es además nuestro principio, la autodeterminación de los pueblos. Generar las condiciones para un diálogo pacífico y que además Cuba, sin que ningún país tenga la sanción, pueda recibir petróleo y sus derivados para su funcionamiento cotidiano”, sostuvo. México ha mantenido en las últimas semanas un papel activo frente a la crisis cubana, con envíos de ayuda humanitaria y posicionamientos diplomáticos ante las sanciones de Washington.


Precisamente este jueves, dos buques de la Marina mexicana arribaron a La Habana con alimentos y productos básicos en medio de la crisis energética que sufre la isla, agravada por restricciones y tensiones en torno al suministro de petróleo. Asimismo, el Gobierno mexicano ha confirmado que continuará enviando asistencia humanitaria y coordinando esfuerzos con organizaciones civiles para mitigar los efectos de los apagones y la situación económica en Cuba, que se ha deteriorado por el embargo estadounidense y la escasez de combustible. En este contexto, Sheinbaum reiteró que México busca un papel constructivo en la región. "Como lo he dicho, nosotros estamos enviando distinta ayuda, distinto apoyo, ya el día de hoy llegan los barcos. En cuanto regresen vamos a enviar más apoyo de distinto tipo", aseveró. (web de Panorama)

Crédito de la imagen aquí

La pelota está en la cancha de Estados Unidos. O actúa con decisión o vuelve al patrón de esfuerzos tibios estadounidenses, interrumpidos por largos períodos de letargo acompañados de elementos teatrales para entretener a sus masas y a las élites, sin ánimo de hacer mucho más que mantener el statu quo. Sería una lástima. Cuba debería poder reformarse. Ciertamente, sus propias élites internas han trazado varias maneras en que esto podría lograrse, incluso preservando la esencia del modelo político-económico actual, al igual que los cubanos en la diáspora (mis pensamientos al respecto aquí ("Fundamentos Legales-Institucionales para la Reconstrucción en una Cuba Post-Revolucionaria: Un Ejercicio Conceptual", Comentarios preparados para ser entregados en la Conferencia Anual de 2025 de la Asociación para el Estudio de la Economía Cubana, Miami, Florida, 25 de octubre de 2025)). Pero la esclerosis soviética todavía puede resultar fatal para las élites que, a su manera, continúan viviendo en una burbuja de su propia creación (considerada más teóricamente en el breve ensayo Ciudades Prohibidas; situación actual aquí). Pero aquí Cuba puede seguir siendo su peor enemigo; consideremos esta pequeña disimulación a la luz de las declaraciones de México:

“Todo parece indicar que el Secretario de Estado le ha hecho creer al presidente Trump el cuento de las negociaciones”, dijo Gómez, quien añadió que se trataría de “una manipulación descarada” y de la fabricación de un “pretexto peligroso”. . . Las declaraciones forman parte de la narrativa oficial del régimen, que niega la existencia de negociaciones formales con Washington mientras acusa a sectores del gobierno estadounidense de promover una escalada contra la isla. (Oficialismo cubano desmiente rumores y dice que Rubio manipuló a Trump con “cuento” de negociaciones)

El cambio de régimen podría llegar a Cuba, pero en este momento la causa es tanto la falta de voluntad de la elite para reformarse a sí misma como el entusiasmo de los extranjeros por reformar a Cuba a su propio gusto. Parece que lo único que sigue funcionando bien dentro de la nomenclatura es su aparato de propaganda, alimentado y potenciado por una red global de simpatizantes (p. ej., aquí; aquí). Es una lástima, pero también una señal de los peligros que Cuba se ha creado desde que abandonó sus propias políticas reformistas marxistas-leninistas tras el VII Congreso del Partido. En este punto, las opciones para los líderes cubanos son uniformemente desagradables, pero se están volviendo cada vez más incontrolables. Quizás la alternativa menos disruptiva sería un retorno al gobierno revolucionario anterior a 1976 (dirigido por los militares) con el mandato de reformar y ofrecer un sistema gubernamental modernizado, quizás un sistema socialista orientado al mercado; quizás un sistema que incluya un espacio para el liderazgo del Partido Comunista (pero ciertamente no en su forma actual), y lo más doloroso de todo: una apertura de sus mercados internos a los extranjeros, ciertamente controlada hasta cierto punto, pero ya es demasiado tarde para el sistema más modulado de apertura gradual mediante la expansión de las revistas económicas espaciales. El gran reinicio, por supuesto, también sería difícil: la legitimación de la economía informal y el uso de esas estructuras y normas como base para la reforma económica y legal del sector de consumo. Y subyacente a todo esto se encuentra una rectificación ardua de la Nomenclatura y las normas para la participación de la diáspora en la reconstrucción de la República sin tomar el control. Estas serán las tareas más difíciles de todas; ojalá alguien en algún lugar del mundo de los funcionarios haya estado pensando en esto...

 

The Triumph of the Transactional and the Problem of Rationalizing the Spanish Main --The U.S. and Mexico Haggle Over Cuba's Future

 

Pix credit here

How does one reboot the now traditional discursive tropes of sovereignty and the state system, one deeply embedded in the culture of States and memorialized initially in the Montevideo Convention of 1933, and one grounded in the protection of the internal affairs by states by others, sovereign equality, territorial integrity, and self-determination; how does one engage in this sort of reboot in a context where the discursive tropes of sovereignty, have been dissipated by globalization--everyone, multinational enterprises (economic and societal, Apple Inc., and Amnesty Int'l), perhaps now have varying "rights" to auto-determination, if not territory; how does one do that rebooting where those old discursive tropes may now be perhaps dispositively displaced by the discourse of the transformation of the ordering premises of the global from one foregrounding institutions, management, and bureaucratic ordering within hierarchically arranged systems, to one embedded within an ethos of transactional discourse and the values that discourse represents?

Pix credit here

These are, indeed, a longish set of questions. They are perhaps also better understood as a challenge (for states and others) as the primary contradiction of international relations shifts from one grounded in the perfection of States, their system and their language/values (through Rule of Law infused tropes, to one in which merchants rather than bureaucrats might be more comfortable. It is made more difficult because even the old terms acquire ambiguity in the contemporary Cuban context (auto-determination including the Cuban diaspora?; for example).

That is a contradiction that Mexico faces now; one fashioned in the shadow of its always delicate and robust relations with the United States, and now one formulated within that "gift that keeps on giving crisis that is Cuba. Cuba has always loomed large in the foreign policy of the United States and of Mexico. And at times their respective actions in and around Cuba has served as an indirect way of engaging in some of the more divisive areas of their (much larger) bilateral relations. Both for the United States and Mexico Cuba is sometimes understood more as the incarnation of an ideal, of an ideological struggle, and of an experiment shaping the best and worst of the state, the state system and its peculiarities, in a context in which, ironically, in some ways reproduces the fundamental conflict between the English and Spanish Empires of the 17th-19th centuries, but now recast, modernized, and contextualized  between the United States and Mexico, representing patrimony bequeathed to the children of dead empires, of the control and contests within he Spanish Main. But Cuba is not the issue, it is the object, the use of which animates a far more important "conversation;" it is not so much Cuba that is important, but the idea of Cuba and its utility in shaping the relations between larger powers, the consequences of which will be felt all along the Spanish Main but especially the Caribbean jewel in its imperial crown. 

Pix credit here (El País, "Facing Economic Collapse, a Cornered Cuba is Forced into Dialogue With the United States)

 

David Marcial Pérez nicely summed up the challenge and its traps for Mexico:

Cuba has become one of the Mexican government’s top foreign‑policy priorities. Since the increase in U.S. pressure that has pushed the island into a critical situation, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has spoken out almost daily to denounce the economic squeeze imposed under U.S. President Donald Trump and to reaffirm Mexico’s support for Havana.

Beyond the delicate balancing act with Washington, backing Cuba also resonates deeply inside Morena, Mexico’s ruling party, where it taps into a long tradition of political affinity dating back to the old governments led by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and revived under the previous administration. No other regional crisis — not even the U.S. military action against Venezuela — has prompted such a firm and persistent response from the Mexican government.

For Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo, probably one of the ablest political figures of the region and also one who is proving adept at mediating between old style institutionalism, Latin American regionalism (as the contemporary manifestation of the embers of Spanish Imperial dreamscapes not rebooted to suit modern tastes), and US transactionalism, Cuba has presented a challenge and an opportunity.  President Sheinbaum's challenge may include the need to balance traditional attachments to the "idea" of Cuban (or at least of Cuban revolutionary governance and what it might stand for in Mexican politics) against  the realities of regional stability in the face of a new approach of the United States, one that the Americans are ow willing to operationalize, and one which, while it is indifferent to the territorial niceties of Cuban (and Venezuelan) "space"  it is quite interested in overseeing the territorial spaces, the platforms within and through which both states might be open to the sort of trade and investment, and on the terms and under the rules that satisfy U.S. interests (and perhaps, to some extent, those of Mexico's enterprises as well, though not necessarily of its ancient politics). 

The issue has reached a critical point as the Americans have moved more vigorously to "reform" a Cuba that has been unwilling to reform itself despite the decades old pleas of its friends and its own elites. The tactics are ancient--siege. But siege has become more complicated in the post 1945 era--Gaza has proved to be the template (unless of course the rules of international law are unique for Jews, but that cannot be), and one that distinguishes between pressuring (and killing, extracting, or neutralizing in some other form) institutional officials and baseline treatment of the civilian population. But even that calculus is complicated in Cuba where, even unlike Gaza, the State apparatus itself appeared to be content to institutionalize the governance of a State of Misery in the pursuit of its own aims (see discussion here).  

On the other hand that is a benefit to Mexico requiring almost nothing now than a show of charity to appease the conscience and undertake one's ideologically and internally politically necessary duty. In all of this, of course, Cuba itself plays a secondary role--an object of strategic intervention in a long running dialectic between Mexico and the US in which it is (and is always) a collateral object. Yet even modern day seiges can be effective. See, e.g.,  Airlines Cut Cuba Flights As U.S. Fuel Blockade Leaves Airports Without Jet Fuel; Panic Spreads Among Canadians Stranded in Cuba; Russia to repatriate citizens stranded in Cuba amid fuel crisis; Rolling Blackouts, Hospital Shortages: How the U.S. Oil Blockade Is Impacting Cuba. 

And so Mexico seeks to supply petroleum to Cuba, at least a showy amount, but at its point anything is better than nothing; the United States objects; and the Mexican's pause delivery.  But petroleum is a highly charged commodity within the political starscapes of the U.S. and that makes sense. Humanitarian aid, on the other hand is different (again, Gaza as a template--human find it possible to learn and apply that leaning from all sorts of situations, all one has to do is be willing to articulate and transpose the "learning). That both Mexico and the US can provide, though through different channels and for different effect--the former to the people, the later through the State (eg Delivering on Our Commitment: U.S. Disaster Assistance to the Cuban People; "State Department-chartered aircraft and boats to deliver assistance. And so we’ll be working with Catholic Relief Services and with Caritas to deliver that assistance on the ground" here).

Durante su conferencia matutina, la mandataria explicó que México ha planteado tanto al Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos como a la embajada estadounidense en territorio mexicano su disposición a contribuir a un acercamiento, siempre bajo el principio de respeto a la soberanía de Cuba y la autodeterminación de los pueblos. [During her morning press conference, the president explained that Mexico has expressed to both the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Embassy in Mexico its willingness to contribute to a rapprochement, always under the principle of respect for Cuba's sovereignty and the self-determination of peoples. (Cibercuba)] (Cibercuba)

The United States wants a transactional arrangement with Cuba (whatever its form of governance but subject to the constraints of US legislation) then Mexico will serve as a mediator, a voice of reason representing the Latin side of the Americas as both consider ways in which Cuba can again fit into those borderlands of old empire that in its embers retains a certain cachet. Recent reporting posted to Facebook (which for those outside the United States is not just a tool to keep grandparents connected) suggest the strategies, quite interesting, of President Sheinbaum in the face of these challenges:

Pix credit here

La presidenta de México, Claudia Sheinbaum, insistió este jueves 12 de febrero en que su Gobierno está dispuesto a facilitar el "diálogo" entre Estados Unidos y Cuba, en medio de las tensiones por las sanciones anunciadas por Washington a los países que suministren petróleo a la isla y la aguda crisis económica que atraviesa el país caribeño.

“Ya lo hemos hecho. Depende de los dos países. Nosotros, tanto al Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos como a través de la embajada (de Cuba) en México, hemos planteado que México pone todo de su parte para poder generar un diálogo que permita en el marco de la soberanía de Cuba”, afirmó la mandataria durante su conferencia de prensa matutina.
La gobernante mexicana subrayó que esta postura responde a los principios tradicionales de la política exterior mexicana. “Porque eso es muy importante, porque es además nuestro principio, la autodeterminación de los pueblos. Generar las condiciones para un diálogo pacífico y que además Cuba, sin que ningún país tenga la sanción, pueda recibir petróleo y sus derivados para su funcionamiento cotidiano”, sostuvo. México ha mantenido en las últimas semanas un papel activo frente a la crisis cubana, con envíos de ayuda humanitaria y posicionamientos diplomáticos ante las sanciones de Washington.

Precisamente este jueves, dos buques de la Marina mexicana arribaron a La Habana con alimentos y productos básicos en medio de la crisis energética que sufre la isla, agravada por restricciones y tensiones en torno al suministro de petróleo. Asimismo, el Gobierno mexicano ha confirmado que continuará enviando asistencia humanitaria y coordinando esfuerzos con organizaciones civiles para mitigar los efectos de los apagones y la situación económica en Cuba, que se ha deteriorado por el embargo estadounidense y la escasez de combustible.En este contexto, Sheinbaum reiteró que México busca un papel constructivo en la región. “Como lo he dicho, nosotros estamos enviando distinta ayuda, distinto apoyo, ya el día de hoy llegan los barcos. En cuanto regresen vamos a enviar más apoyo de distinto tipo”, aseveró. (Panorama's web)

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum insisted this Thursday, February 12, that her government is willing to facilitate dialogue between the United States and Cuba, amid tensions over sanctions announced by Washington against countries that supply oil to the island and the severe economic crisis facing the Caribbean nation.

“We have already done so. It depends on both countries. We, both to the U.S. State Department and through the Cuban Embassy in Mexico, have stated that Mexico is doing everything possible to foster a dialogue that respects Cuba's sovereignty,” the president affirmed during her morning press conference.

The Mexican leader emphasized that this stance reflects the traditional principles of Mexican foreign policy. “Because that is very important, because it is also one of our principles: the self-determination of peoples. To create the conditions for peaceful dialogue so that Cuba, without any country being sanctioned, can receive oil and its derivatives for its daily operations,” she maintained. In recent weeks, Mexico has maintained an active role in the Cuban crisis, sending humanitarian aid and taking diplomatic stances against Washington's sanctions.

Just this Thursday, two Mexican Navy ships arrived in Havana with food and basic supplies amid the island's energy crisis, exacerbated by restrictions and tensions surrounding oil supplies. The Mexican government has also confirmed that it will continue sending humanitarian assistance and coordinating efforts with civil organizations to mitigate the effects of the blackouts and the economic situation in Cuba, which has deteriorated due to the US embargo and fuel shortages. In this context, Sheinbaum reiterated that Mexico seeks a constructive role in the region. "As I've said, we are sending different kinds of aid, different kinds of support. The ships are arriving today. As soon as they return, we will send more support of different types," she stated.

 

Pix credit here

The ball is in the court of the U.S. It either acts decisovely or it returns to the pattern of American half-hearted efforts punctuated by long periods of lethargy accompanied by theatircal elements to entertain its masses and the elites with no real stomach for doing much but reserve the status quo. That would be a pity. Cuba ought to be able to reform itself. Certainly its own internal elites have charted any number of ways in which that could be done, even while preserving the essence of the current political-economic model, as have Cubans in the diaspora (my thoughts on that here ("Legal-Institutional Foundations for Reconstruction in a Post-Revolutionary Cuba: A Conceptual Exercise," Remarks prepared for delivery at the 2025 Annual Conference of the Association for the Study of the Cuban Economy, Miami, Florida, 25 October 2025)). But Soviet sclerosis may yet prove fatal to the elites who, in their own way, continue to live in a bubble of their own making (considered more theoretically in the short essay Forbidden Cities; current situation here). But here Cuba may remain its own worst enemy--consider this little bit of dissimulation in light of the statements from Mexico: 

“Todo parece indicar que el Secretario de Estado le ha hecho creer al presidente Trump el cuento de las negociaciones”, dijo Gómez, quien añadió que se trataría de “una manipulación descarada” y de la fabricación de un “pretexto peligroso”. . . Las declaraciones forman parte de la narrativa oficial del régimen, que niega la existencia de negociaciones formales con Washington mientras acusa a sectores del gobierno estadounidense de promover una escalada contra la isla. (Oficialismo cubano desmiente rumores y dice que Rubio manipuló a Trump con “cuento” de negociaciones)

Regime change might come to Cuba, but at this point the cause of that is as much the elite's unwillingness to reform itself as it is the eagerness of outsiders to reform Cuba to its own liking. It appears that the only thing that continues to work well within the nomenklatura is its propaganda apparatus fueled by and leveraged through a global network of supporters (eg here; here). That is a pity but also a sign of the dangers that Cuba has created for itsef since it abandoned its own Marxist Leninist reform  policies after the 7th Party Congress.  At this point the choices for the Cuban leadership are uniformly unpalatable but increasing out of their control. Perhaps the least disruptive alternative would be a reboot--a return to the revolutionary government before 1976 (run by the military) with a mandate to reform and offer up a modernized governmental system--perhaps a markets oriented socialist system; perhaps a system that includes a space for leadership by the Communist Party (but certainly not in its current form), and most painful of all--an opening of its internal markets to foreigners--certainly controlled to come extent but it is too late for the more modulated system of gradual opening through expanding spacial economic zines. The big reboot, of course would also be hard--the legitimization of the informal economy and the use of those structures and rules as the basis for economic and legal reform of the consumer sector. And underlying all of this is a hard rectification of the Nomenklatura and the rules for the engagement of the diaspora in the reconstruction of the Republic without taking it over. These will be the hardest tasks of all; hopefully someone somewhere in the lands of officials have been thinking about this. . . . . . . It is in this context that perhaps between the US and Mexico the problem of Cuba can be stabilized--having waited too long, having sought refuge in the past, Cuba will now be propelled into a future for which its elites are unprepared; and those who are unprepared ought to prepare to become irrelevant. 

黎智英是中国公民 [Jimmy Lai is a Chinese Citizen] (China Foreign Ministry)-- and Restated Framework: "Hong Kong: Safeguarding China’s National Security Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems": The State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China

Pix credit here (China Dailñy 2019)

The trial, conviction, and sentencing of Jimmy Lai in Hong Kong is important for a number of reasons beyond the personal, though that ought to be a central consideration. Those series of events were public performances in the sense perhaps that Foucault tried to explain their characteristics in 18th century France. They inscribe a ruling narrative on the body of a person significant enough to project not just the narrative but its principles, teaching, premises and, in the case of China, its fundamental political line, both to its internal population and against its external peers, competitors, enemies and opponents. That was made clear in the sentencing and as the gloss that Chinese authorities quite consciously and publicly provided not just to home audiences but also projected into areas of foreign relations and the ideological battlefields that they represent, one in which the United States, particularly, as taken a vigorous oppositional stance as narrative, as performance, as politics, and as economics.

This short reflection provides the performative text from the Chinese side--remarks made at a Foreign Ministry Press Conference and a State Council paper restating the Chinese post-2020 position on and in Hong Kong. Links to the US position are also provided.

法新社记者：香港特区法院今天宣布黎智英犯有危害国家安全的罪行，对其判处20年监禁。黎是英国公民，英国首相斯塔默近期访华期间提及此案，此前美国总统特朗普也要求中方释放他。外交部对此有何评论？

林剑：黎智英是一系列反中乱港事件的主要策划者和参与者，其行为严重冲击“一国两制”原则底线，严重危害国家安全，严重损害香港繁荣稳定和市民福祉，理应受到法律严惩。香港是法治社会，特区司法机关依法履职尽责，维护法律权威，捍卫国家安全，合情合理合法，不容置喙。中央政府坚定支持特区依法维护国家安全、惩治危害国家安全的犯罪行为。实践已经证明，香港国安法实施得越好，香港社会就越稳定、越安全，香港广大居民的权利和自由就越能得到保障，香港“金字招牌”才能越擦越亮，“一国两制”实践才能行稳致远。黎智英是中国公民。有关司法案件纯属香港特区内部事务，我们敦促有关国家尊重中国主权，尊重香港法治，不得就特区司法案件审理发表不负责任的言论，不得以任何形式干预香港司法、干涉中国内政。

AFP Reporter: The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) court today sentenced Jimmy Lai to 20 years in prison for endangering national security. Lai is a British citizen, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently raised the case during his visit to China. US President Donald Trump also previously demanded his release. What is the Foreign Ministry's comment on this?

Lin Jian: Jimmy Lai is a key planner and participant in a series of anti-China and pro-chaos events in Hong Kong. His actions severely undermine the bottom line of the "One Country, Two Systems" principle, seriously endanger national security, and severely damage Hong Kong's prosperity, stability, and the well-being of its citizens. He should be severely punished by law. Hong Kong is a society governed by the rule of law. The HKSAR's judiciary is fulfilling its duties in accordance with the law, upholding the authority of the law, and safeguarding national security. This is reasonable, justifiable, and lawful, and brooks no dissent. The Central Government firmly supports the HKSAR in safeguarding national security and punishing crimes that endanger national security in accordance with the law. Practice has proven that the better the Hong Kong National Security Law is implemented, the more stable and secure Hong Kong society will be, the more the rights and freedoms of the vast majority of Hong Kong residents will be protected, the brighter Hong Kong's reputation will shine, and the more steadily and effectively the "One Country, Two Systems" practice will proceed. Jimmy Lai is a Chinese citizen. The judicial cases in question are purely internal affairs of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. We urge relevant countries to respect China's sovereignty and the rule of law in Hong Kong, and not to make irresponsible remarks about the handling of judicial cases in the SAR, nor to interfere in Hong Kong's judiciary or China's internal affairs in any form.2026年2月9日外交部发言人林剑主持例行记者会 [Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian held a regular press conference on February 9, 2026.]

I have been considering the recent sentencing of Jimmy Lai for violation of the Hong Kong National Security Law. The conviction was in December 2025; concerning occurred in February 2026. My focus was on conseqeunce, and in this case the reaction of the US authorities, and specifically the Congressional-Executive Commission on China (Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC) Issues Statement on the Sentencing of Jimmy Lai and Full Text of the Hong Kong High Court Sentencing Judgment ).

Yet the reaction on the part of the Chinese authorities is perhaps equally if not more telling of the consequence of Jimmy Lai and his transformation from a human story to the symbolic representation of the battle for normative control of the idea of Hong Kong that had been fought first on the streets in 20'19, and then within the more abstracted halls of institutions in China, the UN and the US (my take in Hong Kong Between 'One Country' and 'Two Systems'; purchase softback here).

My friend and colleague in Hong Kong, Pui-yin Lo, suggested two quite interesting sources of the C hnese reaction and their framing of the verdict and the general relation of the national security law to the question of Hong Kong. The first was highlighted in the comments of Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian held a regular press conference on February 9, 2026 [2026年2月9日外交部发言人林剑主持例行记者会], the critical text of which is quoted above. The second was in the much lengthier State COuncil paper of February 2026, Hong Kong: Safeguarding China’s National  Security Under the Framework of
One Country, Two Systems.

The first situated  the issue of Jimmy Lai within the core of China's internal affairs. As such it was a matter that was not of concern to foreigners. It was also grounded in the emerging nature and practice of national security in the context of people's democratic dictatorship, which ion its core distinguishes between patriots and reactionary or unpatriotic citizens. That was true enough with respect to projections of power inward. But of course it says nothing of the power of foreign states to react to internal affairs decisions within China as they choose--and that may include consideration of the nature and basis of their relations with Chins. But then China is also quite practiced in this difference in its own foreign relations.  None of this is new bit it is important to note its vigorous reaffirmation int his particular context.

The State Council Paper requires more thought.  . . . and careful reading. It breaks no new ground bit refines and restates the narrative of Hong Kong that emerged from the turmoil of 2019--a actually starting in 2014 with the Umbrella movement. For that reason alone it is worth reading carefully. The most interesting evolution is the situating of Hong Kong more closely within the national efforts at new era socialist modernization and its emphasis on high quality production--and with it the focus on foregrounding national security not just in economics but in development generally. To those ends Hong Kong as a specific function, but one within China rather than aside it or beyond. It follows that the general principles of people's democratic dictatorship also become relevant. The issue then is the meeting point of two [economic] system within one country--coordinated and aligned but not identical. That remains a work in progress. 

2026年2月9日外交部发言人林剑主持例行记者会 [Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian held a regular press conference on February 9, 2026.] (in the original Chinese and in English), along with the Chinese State Council Information Office  Hong Kong: Safeguarding China’s National  Security Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems n (10 February 2026). 

 

Panel on Health, Corporate Governance, and Climate Change 11 February 2026

Delighted to pass this along for those interested.  Great speakers:

 

 

Panel on Health, Corporate Governance, and Climate Change

The panel will explore the intersection of health, corporate governance, and climate change-examining how the medical field addresses the human health impacts of climate change and the responsibilities corporations hold in this context.

CHAIR
Leah Vosko, York University

PANELISTS
Hassan Ahmad, Osgoode Hall Law School
Selina Lee-Andersen, McCarthy Tetrault LLP
Peter Menikefs, University of Toronto
Uchechukwu Ngwaba, Toronto Metropolitan University
Myles Sergeant, McMaster University

 Date: 

Time: 2:30 pm - 4:00 pm

Location: Room 2027, Osgoode Hall Law School

REGISTER

 

Tugrul Keskin: Brief Reflections on ByteDance’s release of the AI video generation model Seedance 2.0, with my very brief additional Thoughts

 

 

My friend and colleague, the remarkable Tugrul Keskin has recently produced a very short reflection that is worth some consideration. With his permission I repost here:

The attached video of ByteDance’s (https://www.bytedance.com/en/) AI video generation model Seedance 2.0 (https://openart.ai/video/i2v/seedance-v1) signals a transformation that extends beyond a routine technological upgrade. Rather than merely exemplifying “technology with Chinese characteristics,” it points to the emergence of a new movie industry with Chinese characteristics, increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence. When viewed through Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer’s concept of the culture industry, this development reflects an advanced phase of the rationalization and standardization of cultural production—now mediated by algorithms rather than traditional studios.

Walter Benjamin’s notion of art in the age of mechanical reproduction offers a complementary lens. AI-generated video further diminishes the uniqueness and “aura” of cultural artifacts by making high-quality visual production infinitely reproducible, editable, and scalable. As the video demonstrates, AI-driven filmmaking reorganizes creative labor and aesthetic processes within global technological systems that transcend national boundaries, even as they are embedded in China–US competition over AI leadership. Together, these perspectives suggest that contemporary AI innovations are accelerating long-term structural changes in the global political economy of culture. The broader implications—particularly for labor, authorship, and cultural value—are likely to become visible earlier than previously anticipated, potentially well before 2030.

 

 In one sense the movement toward tech art represents a manifestation, in the sphere of cultural production, of innovation in the service of collective power. It fits nicely into China's 3rd Plenum high quality productivity within socialist modernization initiatives, but also those of the United States and Europe with respect to tech based dominance of production in all spheres of human activity. In this sense, one can understand Seedance 2.0 as the competitor and analogue to Open AI's Sora 2. Both efforts , and those lesser known efforts either being developed in the global informal sector or by "middle powers" as the Canadian Prime Minister calls them (see here), suggest that one has passed the point of no return in the production of producers of objects in all spheres of human consumption. 

That opens the question raised, in another era of mechanical reproduction, by Benjamin--but perhaps changes its trajectories. Two brief points here. First Benjamin was worried about reproduction--the mimetic quality of something that was deliberately meant to copy to produce again something that had been undertaken before and then produced again. That touches not just on the mimetic, but also on the temporal--reproduction is a means of overcoming time by recapturing the essence of a thing or event in time  in the present. It is also spatial in the sense that, at least with respect to reproduced objects--it is meant to have it occupy more than one space at a time. Yet the essence of the "problem" in the cultural sphere is the mimesis itself ("The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of
authenticity." Banjamin, p. 3) which can never be the same as the original. 

But what happens when one moves from reproduction to displacement? That is Keskin's central point. Keskin focuses on the uniqueness of cultural actions/performances/artifacts, and thus the intimate connection with the essence of Benjamin's almost a century old worry/critique. That focus draws attention to the premise--which had been so fundamental to avoid conscious attention until recently--of the intimate connection between human production and the essential humanity of culture. One moves from human structures of cultural production built around (the sometimes constraining and always annoying) human institutions of power leaching onto and managing both production and the cognition of the value of production, to one in which what drives and produces cultural objects are coded programs that may be increasingly self-reflexive, even if the structures of power remain (somewhat) human. Thus the reference to a movie industry with Chinese characteristics (the same insight may apply to movie industries elsewhere with distinctive political-economic models). 

Yet even with Seedance 2.0 and Sora 2, etc., the human remains in the loop--these are producers of culture (movies in this case) with human characteristics that are directed and the authority for the distribution of which remains firmly entrenched in human authority organs. The effects, though, as Keskin correctly notes, will be significant. While the human may well remain in the center, the role of humanity in the production of cultural objects will change, and perhaps dramatically changing the forms of production, its economics, and of course, its consequential power relationships. Much has been written about this, but it is especially important, and powerful, in cultures which have invested significant resources in the mechanics of celebrity and celebrity culture, as well as in its management--with national characteristics. Yet it may be important to note that like all things, there is no binary here--one encounters, at least at the beginning, a sort of hybridity that my itself produce cultural innovation (see, e.g., Movies you didn’t know used AI!).

Keskin is correct in this view, and in the process invites one to reflect further. Is it possible to distinguish between reproduced cultural objects and cultural objects that displace the human not at the center but as the direct source of creation? One the one hand, it may be worth distinguishing between mechanical reproduction and AI or tech based production that displaces the human as the direct creator of the cultural object/performance etc. Indeed, one may understand  these new technologies as cultural production n two levels--first at the level of the coding of the structures of production (its mechanics) and two in the form of the cultural objects produced from within it. Two thoughts may follow from that. The first is that  what displacement produces is a distance between the creation and its human input. That is that Seedance and Sora 2 are still means of human cultural production, but now that production is in direct int he sense that its mechanics are not directly the product of human intervention. The second is that one now has to consider that it means for humans to engage in cultural production--and certainly in the production of "art". If displacement makes the resulting production inhuman then one might be required to consider the relationship of tech based mechanisms, including self reflexive and auto generating intelligence to the human (see here). 

The broader implications, as Keskin correctly notes, remains.  Like the printing press, or the plow, etc., but perhaps at a faster rate, these tech based transformations will produce substantial changes in the organizaiton and undertaking, in the valuation, of human activity within their collectives. It will also put pressure on political-economic models to manage their theoretics to suit the times, or to become irrelevant. People ave been debating this for decades--but perhaps it may be time to shift the analytics from its framing in and through the Industrial Revolution of the 18th through 20th century, and understand that the current focus on innovation may require some adjustment to the way in which the human approaches their relationship to themselves, their tools, and the objects around which they understand themselves as themselves and in relation to the world. . . . Or, as Benjamin suggested as the essence of reproduction, to choose to reproduce culture and cultural reproduction itself as and at some ideal point sometime back in time. That has also been done before; and often within the great cultural civilizations.  Nonetheless its success, as Benjamin suggested, is to to travel back to the original but in the replication to create something new in its shadow That has all the makings of a silver rather than a golden age. 

 

Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC) Issues Statement on the Sentencing of Jimmy Lai and Full Text of the Hong Kong High Court Sentencing Judgment

 

The Congressional-Executive Commission on China was created by the U.S. Congress in 2000 "with the legislative mandate to monitor human rights and the development of the rule of law in China, and to submit an annual report to the President and the Congress. The Commission consists of nine Senators, nine Members of the House of Representatives, and five senior Administration officials appointed by the President." (CECC About). The CECC FAQs provide useful information about the CECC. See CECC Frequently Asked Questions. They have developed positions on a number of issues.

CECC tends to serve as an excellent barometer of the thinking of political and academic elites in the United States about issues touching on China and the official American line developed in connection with those issues. As such it is an important source of information about the way official and academic sectors think about China. As one can imagine many of the positions of the CECC are critical of current Chinese policies and institutions (for some analysis see CECC).

CECC periodically publishes Statements of relevance to its mission. These include statements of actions that would be undertaken through Congress in light of the subject of the Statement. 

Pix credit here

CECC has been following the legal proceedings against Jimmy Lai for some time. CECC has been particularly interested in the prosecution of Jimmy Lai under Hong Kong's National Security Law. Links to the several interventions respecting Jimmy Lai by CECC can be found below. See also the related Press Release:  Chairs’ Statement Condemning Jimmy Lai’s Conviction. Hong Kong Courts recently sentenced Mr. Lai after his conviction (Hong Kong Court Sentences Jimmy Lai to 20 Years: The media tycoon, a Chinese-born British citizen, had been a persistent critic of Beijing. The sentence is the harshest penalty so far under a national security law). For the text of the sentencing judgment see here (China Daily): Full text: High Court judgment sentencing Jimmy Lai.

In he wake of the determination of sentence by the Hong Kong courts, the CECC released its Statement: Chairs Condemn Sentencing, Seek Medical Parole for Jimmy Lai. Two elements if the statement stand out. The first was the call to have Mr. Lauireleased for medical reasons: "We call on the Hong Kong authorities to grant Jimmy Lai medical parole and release him immediately and unconditionally. After years of arbitrary detention and worsening health due to harsh prison conditions, he should not spend one more night behind bars." The second and perhaps more consequential element was to align the condemnation of the sentence to legislative efforts in the US with effects on the US-Hong King relationship:  

In light of today’s event, we urge our Congressional colleagues to advance bipartisan legislation swiftly—including the Hong Kong Judicial Sanctions Act (S.1755), HKETO Certification Act (S.3655 / H.R.2661), and the Jimmy Lai Way Act (H.R. 2522)—to hold officials accountable for unjust prosecutions and detentions, and to ensure Hong Kong’s U.S. trade offices are not falsely promoting a version of judicial independence and free speech protections that no longer exist. 

The full text of the Statement appears below along with the China Daily version of the sentencing judgment. 

 

Just Published Voñ 39 Issue 2 International Journal for the Semiotics of Law

 

We’re delighted to announce that Volume 39, Issue 2 of the International Journal for the Semiotics of Law is now available!

This issue brings together a rich and diverse collection of articles that contribute new insights, thoughtful analysis, and timely discussions in the field. The contributions reflect the breadth and depth of current scholarship, addressing important theoretical questions while also engaging with pressing contemporary concerns. We hope this issue will stimulate further dialogue and inspire ongoing research.

We would like to extend our sincere thanks to all authors for their excellent submissions, to the reviewers for their careful and constructive evaluations, and to everyone involved in the editorial and production process. Their commitment and expertise have made this issue possible.

You can explore the full Table of Contents (ToC) here:
https://link.springer.com/journal/11196/volumes-and-issues/39-2

The links follow below. 

Of particular interest may be the quite interesting open access essay:  Pierangelo Blandino, Metaphorical Correspondences Between Law and Data

Abstract: This study proposes a new lens for thinking about data law by combining legal semiotics with metaphor. It begins by questioning how legal systems represent data which can be referred to as an entity that is inherently shifting, relational, and abstract. Hence, metaphor is used not just for illustration, but as a method for rethinking legal meaning itself. Drawing from classical exegetic traditions and contemporary legal theory, the paper shows how interpretive flexibility can help navigate emerging challenges, particularly in contexts like that of blockchain technology. Here, legal concepts often fall short, given the transnational, decentralised nature of digital transactions. By resorting to devices like Broekman’s concept of conversion and the logic of differential calculus, the paper suggests ways legal meaning can adapt without losing coherence. In doing so, it offers a framework for transposing traditional legal principles into the infosphere; one that protects rights and preserves dignity, while acknowledging the fluid, interconnected nature of data in rapidly evolving social and technological landscapes.

 It is particular interesting for its use of semiotic approaches to bring data and data environments back into law; perhaps it might be as useful to thinking about using semiotics to further propel law and legal environments into data, into what Jan Broekman and I have suggested, though from slightly different perspectives, as rethinking law not as command, but as coded analytics and privileged pathways  supporting judgments that are favored and thus directing  what Broekman calls the flow and I call the signal (here, see also here).