Discussing Biden's Potential China Policy

Mr T said:

No need to be aggressive. I was thinking about the "Kissinger consensus", if you like, which was how the State Department worked for decades when dealing with Taiwan. Or even just the softly-softly approach of the Obama years.

But surely China's foreign relations need to take account of the fact that many countries around the world are multi-party democracies where governments and policy changes, so it's not practical or logical to interact with them as if they were a one-party state like China. If Xi is President-for-life then it's fairly easy to say "you did X, our future position is therefore Y". But to say to Biden "Trump did A, our future position is therefore B irrespective of what you do" takes away any possibility to improve relations. That could work with a small country like New Zealand who could be pressured into adopting a submissive foreign policy posture, but it's unlikely Biden will just do what Beijing wants on all the important issues simply because of Trump.

2021 is a single opportunity for China to reset relations with the US, even if it may not be possible on all fronts. One of the attacks made on Biden was that he would be soft on China. It's probably not true but he will probably be less confrontational so it would be worth engaging in an honest fashion. That is an opportunity for China. But to effectively respond with Trump-style aggressive diplomacy (if that's what some people here are suggesting) would be make him less likely to make concessions to China.

Click to expand...

It is more the case that it is an opportunity for the US to reset relations with China, after the turmoil that Trump created.

Mr T said:

No need to be aggressive. I was thinking about the "Kissinger consensus", if you like, which was how the State Department worked for decades when dealing with Taiwan. Or even just the softly-softly approach of the Obama years.

But surely China's foreign relations need to take account of the fact that many countries around the world are multi-party democracies where governments and policy changes, so it's not practical or logical to interact with them as if they were a one-party state like China. If Xi is President-for-life then it's fairly easy to say "you did X, our future position is therefore Y". But to say to Biden "Trump did A, our future position is therefore B irrespective of what you do" takes away any possibility to improve relations. That could work with a small country like New Zealand who could be pressured into adopting a submissive foreign policy posture, but it's unlikely Biden will just do what Beijing wants on all the important issues simply because of Trump.

2021 is a single opportunity for China to reset relations with the US, even if it may not be possible on all fronts. One of the attacks made on Biden was that he would be soft on China. It's probably not true but he will probably be less confrontational so it would be worth engaging in an honest fashion. That is an opportunity for China. But to effectively respond with Trump-style aggressive diplomacy (if that's what some people here are suggesting) would be make him less likely to make concessions to China.

Click to expand...

An article quoting the Chair of the Defence Select Committee in the British Parliament.

It's completely delusional about the UK+USA isolating China+EU.
In terms of economics, a China+EU combination is roughly twice the size of UK+USA.

---

In addition, China has recently signed agreements with the EU, RCEP along with the Belt and Road Initiative.

That is basically the entire world except the USA and UK.
Even Australia, New Zealand and Japan signed up to RCEP with China.

So in reality, it is the USA and UK which are isolated.

AndrewS said:

An article quoting the Chair of the Defence Select Committee in the British Parliament.

It's completely delusional about the UK+USA isolating China+EU.
In terms of economics, a China+EU combination is roughly twice the size of UK+USA.

---

China has recently signed agreements with the EU, RCEP along with the Belt and Road Initiative.

That is basically the entire world except the USA and UK.
Even Australia, New Zealand and Japan signed up to RCEP with China.

So in reality, it is the USA and UK which are isolated.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

British people still think they're a superpower on the same level as US and China so its understandable.

silentlurker said:

British people still think they're a superpower on the same level as US and China so its understandable.

Click to expand...

Lol, that's nonsense. The UK hasn't thought it was a superpower since the end of the British Empire and certainly since the Suez Crisis.

AndrewS said:

An article quoting the Chair of the Defence Select Committee in the British Parliament.

Click to expand...

Andrew, are you really using the Express as a reliable source? It's no better than the Daily Mail, New York Post or the Global Times. They have articles every day about World War III and how war between China and the US/Taiwan is imminent.

It's a garbage headline as nowhere do they quote Tobias Ellwood as saying the EU was or would be isolated. Rather he says (in his opinion) the EU signing the investment deal with China would be unhelpful in terms of having a coordinated approach to relations with Beijing.

By the way, how did you get on contacting the City of London about the UK's immigration law changes to facilitate migration from Hong Kong? Did they not return your calls, or did they say that they were comfortable with the changes and didn't fear retaliation from Beijing?

Mr T said:

Lol, that's nonsense. The UK hasn't thought it was a superpower since the end of the British Empire and certainly since the Suez Crisis.


Andrew, are you really using the Express as a reliable source? It's no better than the Daily Mail, New York Post or the Global Times. They have articles every day about World War III and how war between China and the US/Taiwan is imminent.

It's a garbage headline as nowhere do they quote Tobias Ellwood as saying the EU was or would be isolated. Rather he says (in his opinion) the EU signing the investment deal with China would be unhelpful in terms of having a coordinated approach to relations with Beijing.

By the way, how did you get on contacting the City of London about the UK's immigration law changes to facilitate migration from Hong Kong? Did they not return your calls, or did they say that they were comfortable with the changes and didn't fear retaliation from Beijing?

Click to expand...

Side note. WTF UK has so much rubbish publications (Express, Daily Fail,Sun)?
I think only the guardian that's a little bit better.

caudaceus said:

Side note. WTF UK has so much rubbish publications (Express, Daily Fail,Sun)?

Click to expand...

First, freedom of the press. It's no job of the government to regulate the quality of news articles. If they want to report on footballers' diets that's up to them.

Second, they're tabloids. They exist in most countries including China.

Third, the UK still has quality publications. You mentioned The Guardian. Then there's the Financial Times, Economist and The Times, not to think about regional newspapers.

Folks, you heard it right. He is now repeating what he was saying the other day. That is in a multiparty system, a country's foreign policy can and should be able to change at will. But if China made promise 100 years ago, he and the West demands China kept to those promise.

Anyone remember how he argued strongly how China lack principle etc. Because it didn't kept it's 'promise' on Hong Kong.

Only as recently as today, he charged China of breaking it's promised to Obama on SCS. But is ok for the West to break it's promises because it changed government!

So, in foreign relationship. China or any single party countries should ever sign any treaties, or have any agreement with these multi-party states, because they are allowed to change as new party becomes the government.

It makes one wonder how any foreign relationship can be forged with a view of changing every 4 to 5 years. The mind boggles to think what sort of planet does he live on.

Mr T said:

But surely China's foreign relations need to take account of the fact that many countries around the world are multi-party democracies where governments and policy changes, so it's not practical or logical to interact with them as if they were a one-party state like China. If Xi is President-for-life then it's fairly easy to say "you did X, our future position is therefore Y". But to say to Biden "Trump did A, our future position is therefore B irrespective of what you do" takes away any possibility to improve relations

Click to expand...

Stop re-writing history and mind bending to suit your narratives. Yes it's true the UK had a rude awakening from the U.S. and others during Suez crisis. But no it didn't stop the U.K. thinking it's a superpower since then. It acts all the time as it were still a superpower and bullies all the smaller powers when it can get away with.

It bullied the Argentines. It manipulate all the African countries under it's influence.
It participate, in fact the first to back up any U.S. led wars. It even try to poke China in the eye (with U.S. backing) on numerous occasions.

This is why on 1960s, someone said of the U.K. 'she has lost an empire and still haven't found a role for itself'. It's true then, and still ture today.

Mr T said:

Lol, that's nonsense. The UK hasn't thought it was a superpower since the end of the British Empire and certainly since the Suez Crisis

Click to expand...

Again I'm writing for the benefit of other members here to counteract the BS that's coming out of your head. Because you are too cowardly to debate.

Mr T said:

Lol, that's nonsense. The UK hasn't thought it was a superpower since the end of the British Empire and certainly since the Suez Crisis.


Andrew, are you really using the Express as a reliable source? It's no better than the Daily Mail, New York Post or the Global Times. They have articles every day about World War III and how war between China and the US/Taiwan is imminent.

It's a garbage headline as nowhere do they quote Tobias Ellwood as saying the EU was or would be isolated. Rather he says (in his opinion) the EU signing the investment deal with China would be unhelpful in terms of having a coordinated approach to relations with Beijing.

By the way, how did you get on contacting the City of London about the UK's immigration law changes to facilitate migration from Hong Kong? Did they not return your calls, or did they say that they were comfortable with the changes and didn't fear retaliation from Beijing?

Click to expand...

Of course I know it's the Daily Express

But it's rabble-rousing tabloids like the Daily Express that helped deliver Boris Johnson and the lie that the UK being much richer in the wake of Brexit.

And why on earth do you think I would spend my time lobbying the City of London?

AndrewS said:

And why on earth do you think I would spend my time lobbying the City of London?

Click to expand...

He was referring to a debate sometime ago regarding someone said about requiring the city of London approval to take in the Hong Kong condoms scums.

Gee talk about holding on to something someone said a kong time ago. If that's the case. I can go on about him saying Chinese people lack critical thinking.

ansy1968 said:

Hi Mr T,

On the Chinese side yes, on the American side NO! As MACE mention the US had never negotiated with a weaker hand , so the stand off stay but not as aggressive as Trump China policy. But the thing is Mr T, China with the way Pompeo handle the Taiwan issue will never trust the American again EVER!!! The core of the US China relationship is the ONE CHINA POLICY with ambiguity out of the way , it may justify the CCP immediate reunification with Taiwan with the full backing of the people. That's what Trump had unleash without any idea of the repercussion it created.

Click to expand...

Oh come on guys, this guy is clearly a PsyOps guy in MI6. Just ignore him. I have no idea what he writes because I put him in my Ignore list a long time ago.

Mind you, his job description is to slowly brainwash you over multiple months and posts. Slowly but surely.

This is taken from the US Army website but it's no different from the British one, which our man belongs to:

PSYOP Soldiers typically operate in small, autonomous teams or with other Special Operations forces to develop relationships with a country’s civilian population, government figures and military and law enforcement agencies.

Experts in their field, they specialize in unconventional capabilities, cultural expertise, language proficiency, military deception and advanced communications techniques encompassing all forms of media.

You notice he never gets emotional? That's just cause he is conducting psychological warfare on all of us here at SDF.