These companies are after profit, so they chose to go to China to earn that profit. And for that profit, at some point in time, they must have deemed acceptable to give up something in exchange. Isn't this what trading is all about? Now somebody regrets they shouldn't have made certain choice, so they blame it on the other government? Be an adult.
Except it wasn't entirely their choice (to give up their IP).
Most of the companies when those joint ventures were setup were promised or told that their intellectual property was secure. It was then stolen and they were left with regret. Companies which refused to take that risk were compromised by Chinese actors and had their IP taken by force.
If you are talking about the military, hey, doesn't NSA spy on everybody on this planet? Or didn't Crypto AG spy on every client, even on the Germans, who are allies?
There is a marked difference between intelligence collection and economic espionage.
In the US, economic espionage is illegal and has been for some time, with legislation reinforcing that rule (such as the Economic Espionage act of 1996). If I as a private company engage in economic espionage I am liable to get prosecuted and may get time in prison. The same does not apply to companies in China, where economic espionage of a competitor is not only tolerated but encouraged.
The above linked suit was against individuals for economic espionage and not intelligence collection.
Stop moving the goalposts. First you asked for evidence they had to hand over trade secrets and IP and now you're saying "so that's just part of trading". You are not being an adult here with your argument.
These companies are after profit, so they chose to go to China to earn that profit. And for that profit, at some point in time, they must have deemed acceptable to give up something in exchange. Isn't this what trading is all about? Now somebody regrets they shouldn't have made certain choice, so they blame it on the other government? Be an adult.