Editor's note: Wamika Kapur is a fellow at international think tank Global Policy Insights and an Indian PhD scholar of international relations at South Korea's Yonsei University. The article reflects the author's opinions, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

Chinese social media app TikTok, a platform where videos go viral, has itself been viral in the news circles since President Trump signed an executive order requiring ByteDance, TikTok's parent company, to sell its U.S. business holding within 90 days along with the destruction of all U.S. user data.

In this race, before the Trump administration bans the app, the business and tech circles have been abuzz trying to predict who will purchase the TikTok service in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, with Microsoft, Walmart and Oracle as the top contenders. Amid this, Kevin Mayer, CEO of TikTok and COO of ByteDance, resigned after just four months. TikTok has also sued the U.S. government accusing the current administration of depriving the company of due process.

However, watchers of U.S.-China relations have been asking one question – what will China do?

According to the New York Times, China's Commerce Ministry and its Science and Technology Ministry have implemented new rules on artificial intelligence technology exports that will specifically focus on the technologies it considers sensitive, for example, "technology based on data analysis for personalized information recommendation services." This means that ByteDance may have to obtain a license from the government to proceed with TikTok's sale to an American company.

As discussed in my interview on CGTN's "The Link," there are multiple reasons this issue is of huge significance to China.

America and China are in the middle of a geo-techno war for global influence and a fight for who will control modernity.

TikTok is China's first social media app to gain global influence, with two billion downloads globally in April, in a world dominated by Western apps like Snapchat and Facebook's Instagram.

The sale of TikTok's Western operations, while being a commercial decision, would solely be a consequence of American bullying and a loss of face for China. On a larger scale, it will severely damage China's soft power by reinforcing the perception that Chinese tech comes with security risks.

Collectively, imposing export controls will escalate tensions between the countries, push them toward more protectionism and even lead to a "splinternet" scenario with two separate online ecosystems. Banning apps, instead of reducing risk, is likely to build up distrust among countries and companies.

Many, including myself, argue that America's moves against Chinese apps and companies like Huawei and ZTE have had multiple motivations.

America, a techno hegemon, is using bullying tactics to preserve its position as the world leader in technology by killing innovation in other parts. These companies have enough domestic popularity in China that their operations cannot be terminated.

The secondary aim is, if you can't kill the competition, you must control it. This can be seen in the form of domestic bans, accusations of national security risks and lobbying allies to form a united front against Chinese tech aimed at preventing them from having a global presence.

Considering that these companies are private companies, by the logic of simple business prudence, they were supposed to cave to American pressure. Apart from a few statements by Chinese officials condemning American actions, China has been relatively inactive until now. However, these export rules give Chinese companies more time to resist American pressure and cater to domestic sentiment against selling to America.

Apart from being a political hotpot, the issue has been mired with legal conundrums of its conception.

First, America, a democracy, is going against the two fundamental principles of a democracy: freedom of speech and the free market. Second, on an international level, these bans are against the World Trade Organization (WTO) principles of free competition, its trade and competition policy, and domestically, its anti-trust laws. The WTO has often advised against using "national security" as an excuse for protectionism. Third, TikTok has sued the U.S. government over the lack of due process, stating that the administration "failed to follow due process and act in good faith, neither providing evidence that TikTok was an actual threat, nor justification for its punitive actions."

If there was an issue with the app, the company should have been made aware of such issues allowing for rectification before the executive order using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act for the regulation of economic transactions in a national emergency. This furthers the argument that it's a completely political move with absolutely no proof of a national security threat.

Trump has publicly claimed credit for the potential future sale and demanded that proper economic benefits from the sale must go to the United States Treasury. In response, China needs to take a stance on U.S. extortion and abuse of the commercial process. Instead of catering to reactive politics, China must lead its narrative on the global presence of Chinese tech companies.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)