1. The following are excerpts from an April 11, 2019 news report headlined "US puts 37 China companies, schools on red-flag ‘unverified’ list".

The US Commerce Department said on Wednesday that is adding 37 Chinese companies and schools to a red-flag list of ‘unverified’ entities that US companies should treat with caution, according to a notice in the Federal Register....

Being put on an ‘unverified’ list means that US suppliers to the unverified companies and schools can no longer use license exceptions to, for example, sell products to repair goods that were sold previously but instead will have to get a new license, said Wolf, now at the law firm Akin Gump.

“Even though it’s not an embargo, because of the hassle sometimes suppliers will treat it as an embargo. It has a practical effect that’s greater than the legal effect,” said Wolf....

2. It is noted that not only Chinese firms but a number of Chinese institutions of higher learning are targeted by the latest US move that is practically an embargo. On the surface, education has nothing to do with Sino-US trade frictions. However, when we look "under the surface", we find that education has played a big role in China's economic development.

Despite US efforts at thwarting its development, China has been progressing in leaps and bounds over the years, particularly in the areas of artificial intelligence, 5G and space exploration. All these are due to the importance attached by the Chinese on education which has produced a huge pool of skilled labour and scientists for China's modernization.

Thanks to Confucius, the Chinese have been attaching great importance to education as far back as 2,500 years ago. Confucius believed that knowledge and education was an important part of life and encouraged strongly the sharing of this knowledge amongst his students and peers (Confucius, 551-479 BCE).

“If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees. If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children.” ― Confucius.

The US move brings to mind its demand for vague "structural changes" in China. Vague because it is difficult to open one's mouth to tell others do something stupid. "Structural changes" are risky. For instance, if you make "structural changes" to your house, you may bring it down in the end.

How many UNSPEAKABLE "structural changes" does the US want China to make?