Hope the meetings will be produce tangible results rather than trading insults and political jargons.
For Washington, it is important to set realistic goals when dealing with China. Trying to remake China into a liberal democracy is unrealistic. It must deal with China as it is rather than trying to transform it according to its own ideologies. Also, Washington really needs to rebuild its domestic infrastructure (crumbling freeways, airline oligopolies with terrible services, overpriced and obsolete passenger rail services, failing grids, etc.) and political economy (extreme wealth gap, minorities living in drug/gang-infested ghettos, systemic racism, supply chain security, unconstrained corporations operating with little oversight from federal regulators, etc.) before it could gain additional leverage over Beijing. Negotiating with Beijing from the position of strength requires fixing domestic political economic issues first. Ultimately there is nothing right or wrong. It is President Biden and his team's duty to preserve America's primacy, and such primacy involve maintaining significant edges in the high-tech sector over those of competitors.
For Beijing, CCP leaders need to remember that hegemons never give up their positions without a fierce struggle, be it in the high-tech sector or geopolitics. CCP leaders needs to be very patient, as the next 5-10 years could be the most ideal time frame for Washington to wage more "hegemonic wars" in order to preserve its leadership because Chinese military and economic power is unlike to surpass those of the U.S. and Allies until after 2030. Therefore, Washington and its Allies would be incentivized to hammer China hard before China becomes too powerful, so Beijing should expect more U.S.-led sabotages of China's high-tech sector through sanctions, critical components denials, outright cyber attacks, etc. Such "hegemonic war" has arguably already started with Trump's tech war and economic sanctions. We can only hope such "hegemonic war" does not escalate into kinetic strikes that lead to massive casualties on both sides. On the other hand, thank God we have nuclear weapons today. Nuclear weapons really deters both the rising and the status quo power from waging kinetic wars.
For Beijing, CCP leaders need to remember that hegemons never give up their positions without a fierce struggle, be it in the high-tech sector or geopolitics. CCP leaders needs to be very patient, as the next 5-10 years could be the most ideal time frame for Washington to wage more "hegemonic wars" in order to preserve its leadership because Chinese military and economic power is unlike to surpass those of the U.S. and Allies until after 2030. Therefore, Washington and its Allies would be incentivized to hammer China hard before China becomes too powerful, so Beijing should expect more U.S.-led sabotages of China's high-tech sector through sanctions, critical components denials, outright cyber attacks, etc. Such "hegemonic war" has arguably already started with Trump's tech war and economic sanctions. We can only hope such "hegemonic war" does not escalate into kinetic strikes that lead to massive casualties on both sides. On the other hand, thank God we have nuclear weapons today. Nuclear weapons really deters both the rising and the status quo power from waging kinetic wars.
Let me also point out that China's stance of "non-interference" is extremely extremely important if it wants to ascend as easy as possible. When a new superpower rises, the rest of the world naturally worries about the world order and its internal affairs, even more so when the new superpower has a different political system.
So, China having a non-interference policy on internal affairs makes its ascendancy much easier as the rest of the world wont have too much to worry. China must also set clear red lines about how it handles foreign policy so the rest of the world can predict. Yes, predictability is a major thing in international relations because noone wants to deal with a crazy country which changes its policies and can turn from ally to enemy without reason (Trump is a a good example to avoid).
You can see this in the "One-China" policy and with the Australia situation. The Australian sanctions at first were misunderstood in some countries due to no clear reasons described. This was addressed by the 14 demands where China explained in clear language the reasons of the sanction. In my opinion this was a point to the whole world actually. From ASEAN to EU to even USA in lesser degree, everyone now knows where the red lines are
So, China having a non-interference policy on internal affairs makes its ascendancy much easier as the rest of the world wont have too much to worry. China must also set clear red lines about how it handles foreign policy so the rest of the world can predict. Yes, predictability is a major thing in international relations because noone wants to deal with a crazy country which changes its policies and can turn from ally to enemy without reason (Trump is a a good example to avoid).
You can see this in the "One-China" policy and with the Australia situation. The Australian sanctions at first were misunderstood in some countries due to no clear reasons described. This was addressed by the 14 demands where China explained in clear language the reasons of the sanction. In my opinion this was a point to the whole world actually. From ASEAN to EU to even USA in lesser degree, everyone now knows where the red lines are
escobar
Brigadier
Pointless meeting
China has 4x the population and isn’t allowed to have 1/4 of the nukes of the US?
fukem
China should have atleast 1000
Unless the admiral knows that China already has 1000 warheads?
it seems China has run out of luck of being contained, and the US has missed the best time for the containment. the hawks in the Bush administration initiated the containment, it was interrupted by the 9.11. after the failure of the anti-terror campaign, Obama at first just wanted to reverse the Bush course, he was only persuaded by the establishment to pivot to Asia in his last two years. even Trump wasted his first two years. over all it's not bad for China. a "pointless meeting" is a meeting, by 2025 China should be in a reasonable shape to deal with any kind containment.
Yes i believe that the period of 2020-2030 is the most dangerous period the world will experience. If China manages to pass this period and maintain its current growth then i can see tensions lowering with the US and eventually the US will have to face the reality and accept a multipolar world.
However China will face a lot of landmines at this period. The US will watch like a hawk to see if China trips somewhere and if it.doesnt then US itself will trip China. Thats why i think Xi is getting a 3rd term as a president as he recognises the risks and the country needs an experienced hand to navigate the storm.
In addition i fully expect Xi to show no mercy on internal matters, divisions and resistance to certain reforms.
Hong Kong is getting done now with changing the electoral laws. Expect more arrests, and.more pressure on the judiciary
Xinjiang, i am not blind to what is happening there, i expect cultural assimilation/genocide of Uyghurs to continue, maybe in 3-5 years they can stop as by then this would have lasted for 15 years which should.be enough. And before the white knights come and defend China, i know the reason why Xi does it as well as the rest of the world. Xi wants a strong unified country to compete with US, he doesnt want internal crises flaring up every month. Hopefully Xi can maybe decide to end this program as soon as possible so the people there can finally be free.
I also see a 50-50 chance of.more aggression on the South China Sea by China in order to solidify more gains so.it can have better footing there. Not sure it will happen though, the international environment is tougher for China now so he might decide against it, we will see.
While I recognize that the rise of the United States involved numerous unspoken crimes committed against Native Americans, Chinese railroad construction crews, and other minorities, do you think such kind of persecutions were necessary and acceptable for the rise of new empires? In other words, is "cultural assimilation/genocide" of Uighurs inevitable for the rise of China? If so, then why should outside folks be supportive to Xi's administration and its goals if what it is doing is similar to what WASP, Germans, Belgiums, the French, Japanese and the Turks have done to their minorities and colonial subjects?
These talks should be more productive than the disastrous meeting with Pompeo in Hawaii last year where Pompeo tried to get the Chinese to find dirt on Biden.
Regardless, any talks should be predicated on the release of Meng as an act of good faith.