Mention of and dealing with China is a political hot potato in the US.
When thinking of the long-term, I still believe that being engaged and “in the room” ends up being more powerful and effective than issuing ultimatums or cutting country relations based on differences in views and ideals. Even if it's a country like China, and this is important especially because it is China.
Apple is a design company focused on selling tools that can improve people's lives. Apple is willing to navigate volatile political landscapes, which may include dialling back certain public comments and statements, and if such actions result in more people benefiting from Apple's toolmaking mission, then so be it.
For one, I think we all know that any talk of bringing manufacturing back to the US is a fever dream. At most, we may see Apple shifting production from China to other developing nations like Vietnam (which ironically enough, remains underdeveloped today due to the nonsense that resulted from the Vietnam war). But this is also probably because manufacturing in China has been slowly becoming more expensive, due to China developing itself.
Second, I believe Tim Cook has the political savvy to handle both China and US, and my gut feel is that he is using both countries to balance each other out. I have reason to believe that China cannot come down too hard on Apple despite their ties with the US because Apple is (still) responsible for employing a significant number of their populace, and the last thing China wants is social instability caused by an increase in unemployment rates.
At the same time, my sensing is that the US has its hands full dealing with social media tech giants (especially Republicans who feel that they are being "unfairly" censored by Facebook and Twitter). Apple is also held up as a shining example of US innovation and entrepreneurship, so I don't see (a very divided) Congress coming down too hard on Apple either. Apple is simply not a priority for them.
And personally, I agree with Tim Cook's stance, for the simple reason that I feel it's still better to engage than to disengage. I don't think there is anything wrong with Apple taking a more active political stance in the US, or advocating for certain legislation. At the same time, this sort of behaviour would not be acceptable in other countries, and I accept that Apple follows the laws in each country that they operate in respectively. I would expect nothing less from any company who wishes to operate in my country.
Some people here will argue that Apple shouldn’t do business in any country that has laws or views that go against Apple’s stated beliefs. In such a world, Apple would only operate in a handful of countries. In my view, everyone loses in that situation, not least because they lose access to Apple products in their countries.
Others think Apple should use its position to basically force governments to change its ways or else. Let’s call this for what it is – people think Apple should use its power to usher in political change in various countries. It's ridiculous to think that such a notion would even be considered acceptable.
Apple did what it needed to do to secure the supply chain needed to produce sufficient supply to meet dramatically increasing demand for its products over the years, and the world is better off for it.
