Can't say that it really surprises me. What does surprise me is that the economist picked this up; generally their more 'internationally neutral' than blatantly pro-US.
At the other hand. A better question to ask to anyone from Europe is: if there are good universities in England, France and Germany, then why students from these 2 top universities in China are not going there?
Is it because language barrier? Is it the economic prospect of Europe not viewed as good as U.S.? Are immigration regulations more restricted in Europe when they finish school and decide to stay instead of going back to China? Or do universities in those countries not accept more foreign students than local students? Do in general those countries have problems with immigrants and those student feel unwanted or discriminated? Or do universities in those countries forge good relationships with the two universities in China?
U.S. is not perfect in every aspect. But I don't like the idea when anyone points out its advantages then he/she should be labeled as "blatantly pro-US".
For a highly trained (grad school+) immigrant, being limited to one small nation was a big limitation (this was before the common EU passport).
As far as preparation for world business, I can't see why any Chinese student would want to learn anything but English.
No idea how immigration status changes post-graduation. Universities were free (or if you prefer, included in everyone's taxes).
It's commentary.
No soup for you.