Discussing Biden's Potential China Policy

[voyager1]

I got perm banned from /r/Sino for being against the China-Russia formal alliance. Which is totally ridiculous given I'm one of the biggest pro-China posters there. Overzealous power-tripping mods for you.

The current China-Russia relationship is great, forming an alliance only drags China into Eastern Europe/Middle East mess, and Russia's singular carrier can't even reach South China Sea or Taiwan straits to be any help.

Yes I am not in favour of a formal China-Russia alliance either. They are doing too many shenanigans in the world and they will drag China down. Their political system is not fleshed out, their economy is basically a gas/oil dependent and for other too many reasons to list out.

I think what they have now is the best of the worlds. They have each other's back on their "core" issues , and they can keep an independent (but mostly aligned) foreign policy

 

[bajingan]

I got perm banned from /r/Sino for being against the China-Russia formal alliance. Which is totally ridiculous given I'm one of the biggest pro-China posters there. Overzealous power-tripping mods for you.

The current China-Russia relationship is great, forming an alliance only drags China into Eastern Europe/Middle East mess, and Russia's singular carrier can't even reach South China Sea or Taiwan straits to be any help.

Like i said before in this thread, its up to europe to decide whether or not there will be hard China russia alliance
If europe stays neutral there won't be any, if europe goes full retard with the usa, i can guarantee you there will be formal China russia alliance
I think naval combat is not the primary purpose of military alliance with russia
Its more in the strategic nuclear realm, in the near future integrated NORAD style ews between China and russia will comes online which will help China minimum nuclear deterrent posture greatly

In the scenario in which europe goes all in with the us against China
I can envisage the scenario in which China and russia could come to an agreement to station forces in both countries
For example russia could allow China to open a military base in kaliningrad to help countering nato baltic states
In return China could allow russia to open an airbase in Qingdao to help countering japan
This will be mutually beneficial arrangements

 

[AndrewS]

Chinese vaccine exports will be interesting over the next few months, given that everyone else is hoarding vaccines.

China literally has zero new cases every day, plus a huge amount of the production capacity coming online.
So China could continue with large-scale exports.

And I reckon we will see more production deals like with Brazil, Serbia and UAE.
These countries get a guaranteed long-term supply whilst the Chinese companies get a guaranteed long-term customer.

---

Before June, China vaccinations may peak at 15 million per day
That implies production capacity of:

450 million doses per month
5400 million doses per year

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[horse]

I got perm banned from /r/Sino for being against the China-Russia formal alliance. Which is totally ridiculous given I'm one of the biggest pro-China posters there. Overzealous power-tripping mods for you.

The current China-Russia relationship is great, forming an alliance only drags China into Eastern Europe/Middle East mess, and Russia's singular carrier can't even reach South China Sea or Taiwan straits to be any help.

Wow! I only glance at that Reddit thing once or twice before, I never go there. I thought no one could get banned from there?! Guess I was wrong.

Just my 2 cents, that what seems to be the football game here is Team Alliances versus Team Power Centers.

Who is going to win? The Alliances or Power Centers?

But this is not a football game. This is not a head on head clash. This is not cowboys and Indians.

Actually, I do not even know what it is. I don't know.

Consider this. England. They left the EU. Why? Brexit was going to make them an independent power center from the EU.

That seems to be the problem with the Team Alliance. They want to be a power center more, than being part of the team.

It is like what they say in sports. There is no "I" in the word "team."

Look at the QUAD. Indian has always wanted to be it own superpower. They don't need the QUAD. That only holds them down.

The Alliance system, balance of power, like what Kissinger wrote about, that is in decline those ideas. because Europe is in decline, as those ideas come from Europe.

Maybe that is the reason why alliances seems totally ineffective counter to Russia or China at the moment. Heck, those alliances cannot even stop Turkey from a couple of mini-adventures.

Maybe that is why I think the alliances are not worth much today. But, I don't know.

 

[weig2000]

Americans see China inevitably heading towards being an equivalent if not greater power which after decades of nearly unopposed hegemony understandably worries some people.

I do think fighting it is dumb. IMO they should be working with countries instead of antagonizing them. The world would be a better place if they were sharing knowledge and competing fairly.

What the US has been doing, particularly wrt China, is self-defeating and accelerating its decline. It was certainly true under Trump, but it's also become clear that Bidden continues down the same path. It was thought that the change of the guard at White House would have given the US an opportunity/excuse to change policy, but it could not. Bidden might be a decent guy, but the vested interest, the deeply-entrenched political structure and American exceptionalism in the US have essentially made the US system inflexible and unable to face the reality.

Think another way, if the US establishment has recognized that China's rise is inevitable (how much evidence does one still need to be convinced otherwise?), it probably should swallow the pride and accept China as a near peer - it would at least back off from interfering with China's core interest including Taiwan. China at this point is far from a full-fledged superpower, and has no intention or capability to replace the US. The US would instead enlist China's help both in upholding the current international order, which the US still leads but will have to share some power, and in helping investing in US infrastructure and manufacturing. With the US acceptance and concession, China at this point would be more than happy to help.

Instead, having realized that the US is hell-bent on containing and destablizing it, China is now pursuing its counter strategy: building alliance/partnerships with Russia, Iran, and like-minded nations; promoting RMB and digital yuan thus undermining the dollar hegemony; investing heavily to develop its own tech industry to hedge and decouple; accelerating and expanding military modernization. All of these, the US won't be able to slow down, let alone stop. And all of these would diminish US power permanently once accomplished.

 

[ansy1968]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

@KYli bro the logic is perplexing, you treat China with disrespect surely there will be pushback.

 

[solarz]

What the US has been doing, particularly wrt China, is self-defeating and accelerating its decline. It was certainly true under Trump, but it's also become clear that Bidden continues down the same path. It was thought that the change of the guard at White House would have given the US an opportunity/excuse to change policy, but it could not. Bidden might be a decent guy, but the vested interest, the deeply-entrenched political structure and American exceptionalism in the US have essentially made the US system inflexible and unable to face the reality.

Think another way, if the US establishment has recognized that China's rise is inevitable (how much evidence does one still need to be convinced otherwise?), it probably should swallow the pride and accept China as a near peer - it would at least back off from interfering with China's core interest including Taiwan. China at this point is far from a full-fledged superpower, and has no intention or capability to replace the US. The US would instead enlist China's help both in upholding the current international order, which the US still leads but will have to share some power, and in helping investing in US infrastructure and manufacturing. With the US acceptance and concession, China at this point would be more than happy to help.

Instead, having realized that the US is hell-bent on containing and destablizing it, China is now pursuing its counter strategy: building alliance/partnerships with Russia, Iran, and like-minded nations; promoting RMB and digital yuan thus undermining the dollar hegemony; investing heavily to develop its own tech industry to hedge and decouple; accelerating and expanding military modernization. All of these, the US won't be able to slow down, let alone stop. And all of these would diminish US power permanently once accomplished.

Well, you have to understand who's in charge in the US. It's not the President, nor the Congress. It's not even the individual billionaires like Bezos and Musk.

Think of the US as a feudal kingdom, with the POTUS as the High King, and the billionaires as the Dukes, Counts, and Barons. Their fiefdoms are their respective corporations.

Just as a feudal High King cannot wage war without the armies of its vassals, the President of the US cannot undertake any endeavour without the resources of its corporations. Why can't the US implement universal health care? Because the medical industry and the health insurance industry don't want end a good thing (for them). Why can't there be meaningful gun control? Because the guns are a huge business, and the gun lobby has plenty of cash. Why is the US constantly seeking to bomb some third world country? Because otherwise, MIC corporations like Lockheed Martin can't meet their sales targets.

Anytime the American High King, whoever he or she is, wants to do something, anything, they have to contend with the powerful interests of their Dukes and Barons.

So why is the US hellbent on making China an enemy? Because China Inc is eating Corporate America's lunch. China is getting resources through honest trade where America was used to getting it through economic and military blackmail. Domestic Chinese brands are pushing Western brands out of a 1.4-billion-people market, and maybe even the 7-billion-people market as Chinese brands gain international recognition. What was the first salvo of this new type of war? Yup, 5G, the hottest commodity on Earth right now.

China is a direct threat to the interests of America's aristocracy. This is corporate warfare on steroids.

 

[ansy1968]

Well, you have to understand who's in charge in the US. It's not the President, nor the Congress. It's not even the individual billionaires like Bezos and Musk.

Think of the US as a feudal kingdom, with the POTUS as the High King, and the billionaires as the Dukes, Counts, and Barons. Their fiefdoms are their respective corporations.

Just as a feudal High King cannot wage war without the armies of its vassals, the President of the US cannot undertake any endeavour without the resources of its corporations. Why can't the US implement universal health care? Because the medical industry and the health insurance industry don't want end a good thing (for them). Why can't there be meaningful gun control? Because the guns are a huge business, and the gun lobby has plenty of cash. Why is the US constantly seeking to bomb some third world country? Because otherwise, MIC corporations like Lockheed Martin can't meet their sales targets.

Anytime the American High King, whoever he or she is, wants to do something, anything, they have to contend with the powerful interests of their Dukes and Barons.

So why is the US hellbent on making China an enemy? Because China Inc is eating Corporate America's lunch. China is getting resources through honest trade where America was used to getting it through economic and military blackmail. Domestic Chinese brands are pushing Western brands out of a 1.4-billion-people market, and maybe even the 7-billion-people market as Chinese brands gain international recognition. What was the first salvo of this new type of war? Yup, 5G, the hottest commodity on Earth right now.

China is a direct threat to the interests of America's aristocracy. This is corporate warfare on steroids.

@solarz great summary as always bro and the CCP let them have a piece of the pie in the huge Chinese market, so what is their option? kill the golden goose or maintain the status quo. This is the reason why the US foreign policy is so cluster fxxk, the CCP is true master of the art of war.

 

[weig2000]

Well, you have to understand who's in charge in the US. It's not the President, nor the Congress. It's not even the individual billionaires like Bezos and Musk.

Think of the US as a feudal kingdom, with the POTUS as the High King, and the billionaires as the Dukes, Counts, and Barons. Their fiefdoms are their respective corporations.

Just as a feudal High King cannot wage war without the armies of its vassals, the President of the US cannot undertake any endeavour without the resources of its corporations. Why can't the US implement universal health care? Because the medical industry and the health insurance industry don't want end a good thing (for them). Why can't there be meaningful gun control? Because the guns are a huge business, and the gun lobby has plenty of cash. Why is the US constantly seeking to bomb some third world country? Because otherwise, MIC corporations like Lockheed Martin can't meet their sales targets.

Anytime the American High King, whoever he or she is, wants to do something, anything, they have to contend with the powerful interests of their Dukes and Barons.

So why is the US hellbent on making China an enemy? Because China Inc is eating Corporate America's lunch. China is getting resources through honest trade where America was used to getting it through economic and military blackmail. Domestic Chinese brands are pushing Western brands out of a 1.4-billion-people market, and maybe even the 7-billion-people market as Chinese brands gain international recognition. What was the first salvo of this new type of war? Yup, 5G, the hottest commodity on Earth right now.

China is a direct threat to the interests of America's aristocracy. This is corporate warfare on steroids.

While the analogy is quite interesting and there is some truth to it, it can not explain the US's hell bent on containing and destablizing China entirely because the corporate interest. More big corporate industries benefit from access to China market and supply chain, first and foremost of them, the tech industry and Wall Street. Trump, who started the China hostility, and Pompeo, Ron Vara, Steve Bannon and such are not strongly supported by the corporate interest. Steven Mnuchin was the foot-dagger on getting-tough on China trade policy, and Gary Cohn, who was Trump's economic adviser resigned after disagreeing with Trump's trade policy.

The people who want to contain and confront China are often the military-industrial complex type, the neocons, the liberals, Congress. They would rather sacrifice corporate interest or profits to defend the empire and sustain the hegemony.

 

[weig2000]

Just watched this video from Alexander Mercouris, who is a RT commentator. Some of his points echo mine in post #2795. Recommended.