Discussing Biden's Potential China Policy

AndrewS said:

My view is that it is a Pottinger piece, because the Longer Telegram is very ideological.

Click to expand...

I think it's probably Pottinger due to his cowardice (in an on the record article, he admitted to advocating privately in the White House for COVID-19 measures like wearing masks but said nothing when Trump publicly wouldn't do anything) and general incompetence.

kaiser Kuo is an atlanticist lapdog, and it begs the questions; why would Rudd want to be anonymous? He is respected in Chinese foreign ministry circles.

@escobar

I wouldn't pay too much attention to the formatting. It's the first thing to go if you're looking to hide who is the author.

What matters is the content, and on that front, I don't think it is Kevin Rudd.

The paper is fundamentally about USA staying number one.
But Kevin Rudd is on record as decrying that belief. Rudd-Allison interview quote below:

Rudd: What I find now in the literature in both the United States and Beijing is that you’ve got two giant cheer squads. One in the United States is urging America, “Go, go, go! USA, USA, USA! And here is how you can ultimately stop those Chinese from taking over
the world.” But I’ve got to say to my Chinese friends that it’s basically the same in China. You see a whole bunch of people, with various levels of bias from across the Chinese policy establishment, talking about how China can ultimately prevail in this contest, in this great strategic competition, against America. What I’ve tried to do in the book is identify a third way on how these two mature states, which between them have much historical wisdom, could navigate a peaceful but nonetheless competitive future between them. I argue this can be done through what I call “managed strategic competition.”

Source

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

So my suspicion is that this is attempt by hardliners to discredit Rudd.
After all, Rudd is part the hard-headed engagement camp, and doesn't believe in American Exceptionalism.

Foreign Affairs article by Kevin Rudd below.

It talks about climate change, so that probably rules out Bolton.

Okay, I too will play this guessing game, of who wrote that Longer Telegram.

Not that I think that it has any useful advice in it for the Americans, but that is the whole point.

Someone in this forum, sorry forget who, said they thought it was no other than our friends Pompeo or Navarro who wrote it.

That I believe is the correct answer.

The Longer Telegram is just an extension of the current policies pursued by the Trump administration, and Biden administration.

But those anti-China policies largely failed. If you count how many cell phones Huawei sold, then it succeeded for a few quarters at any rate. Big WOW!

Trump, Pompeo, Navarro, will be remembered for their failed China policies. That is their legacy. If this Longer Telegram convinces the Biden administration to continue on these failed policies, then they still have a chance (in case something changes), and won't look as bad in the history books.

The Longer Telegram probably was just a cover my ass job for the history books, perhaps even commissioned by President Trump himself, ordering one of his minions to write it.

Instead of playing this guessing game, I want to point out what an insult it is that whichever mental midget wrote this "Longer Telegram" has the temerity to compare himself to George Kennan.

It reads like the 'greatest anti-china hits' collection from r/geopoltics and reddit in general. I can imagine those guys frothing at the mouth as they re-read gordo's 2001 hit 'coming collapse of china' for the 20th time.

OMG! China's future hangs on what foreigners say between one another... Of course the West's entire strategy on China is believing they control China's fate and why they can't exercise it is because of infighting among them. It's the US needs no one while every else needs the US logic where Trump failed. And you know why they believe that? It's because it puts them in the position of power even though the facts don't support it. If you want an indicator which path they will go for, it's always the one that makes them look superior. Ever hear of how they say a "China expert" is an oxymoron? It's because every person who claims to be a China expert always gets it wrong. They fear the unknown because they don't control it. That's why they will always gravitate towards any solution that gives them control. It's a part of their culture. The last I heard they have always charged China is a communist dictatorship. Now they saying Xi is returning China to a communist dictatorship. The only difference is it's Xi now. They always have to spin old accusations as new or else they look like a crazy person repeating the same paranoia over and over again because whatever they claim never turns out to be true. Look at how now there's claim China is about to invade Taiwan. I'm still waiting for the Chinese invasion of Taiwan that they said was going to happen because the US and the West was preoccupied fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. See they got that wrong so they have to spin it into a new updated invasion plan that's going to happen. Oh Kevin Rudd is the only one holding back the tide of Westerners that want to see a military attack on China...? Now supposedly that Kevin Rudd wrote this, the West can get their war with China they've always wanted...? What's holding them back is fear. They fear that the only means to stop China is returning back to the monster that rampaged the countryside that the world experienced and doesn't forget. That's the monkey they can't get off their backs. And today the world has nukes. They don't want the rest of the world to have nukes because there's the danger they will be irresponsible with them. Yeah like countries will easily nuke the monster when they see it coming again.

What's really going on is they're trying to scare and intimidate China into submission. All this stuff they say is happening when it's a bluff. They all weren't allied together beforehand that have to come up with to make it out to be new like the D-10 top 10 democracies to go up against China? Or how about the Asian NATO? You mean they weren't going to ally together to fight Chinese aggression before but now they have treaty that says so? As they say China is winning everyday the West and allies do nothing. So why would China act militarily when it's already winning without war? It's because they want war to stop China from advancing... from doing better than them. If they said that, they would know the world would see the monster that rampaged the countryside. It's not a crime when they're freely able to do what they tell China and others not to do.

daifo said:

It reads like the 'greatest anti-china hits' collection from r/geopoltics and reddit in general.

Click to expand...

Where can I buy the album?

It is possibly Kiron Skinner ?