Discussing Biden's Potential China Policy


Hendrik_2000

Brigadier
Everybody know the absurdity of technical restriction eventually it will boomerang but did anybody listen?
Yukon Huang

GLOBALink | U.S. export restrictions on Chinese tech companies hurt both sides: economist​

430 views
•Mar 4, 2021
U.S. export restrictions on Chinese tech companies, citing national security concerns, hurt both U.S. companies and Chinese businesses, said a renowned economist, calling for an international agreement on technology flow across countries.

 

SpicySichuan

Senior Member
Registered Member
Yes, Biden has repeatedly mentioned approaching China from position of strength. This is a classic John Foster Dulles and other realists' approach. You compete, confront, and sabotage the other side if you don't have absolute advantage over them. You only seek cooperation once the other side loses the game, so you have all the leverages in subsequent negotiations. In other words, cooperate is only possible if I get to set the rules and discourse. Otherwise, it will be forever competition and periodic confrontations.
 

HybridHypothesis

Junior Member
Registered Member
Everybody know the absurdity of technical restriction eventually it will boomerang but did anybody listen?
Yukon Huang

GLOBALink | U.S. export restrictions on Chinese tech companies hurt both sides: economist​

430 views
•Mar 4, 2021
U.S. export restrictions on Chinese tech companies, citing national security concerns, hurt both U.S. companies and Chinese businesses, said a renowned economist, calling for an international agreement on technology flow across countries.

why would anyone listen? politics trumps economics. whining about XYZ company making a little less than before wont change anything.

the only question is what China is going to do about it?
 

horse

Junior Member
Registered Member
why would anyone listen? politics trumps economics. whining about XYZ company making a little less than before wont change anything.

the only question is what China is going to do about it?
Economics always wins over politics, there is no doubt. Economics is about the people. Politics is about special interests.

What China will do to counter the United States for the trade war and tech war the Biden administration inherited from the previous regime, is not much.

There is no debate here, it is too obvious who got the better of who in the last round. Only one side sounds so butt hurt.

This next round, there will be no more trade war escalation. But this time the tech war is all or nothing for the United States, with them putting their own semiconductor industry on the line.

This next round will be decided inside China, the development of the IC on the mainland. It is kind of odd. When this struggle will go on for the next few years, Chinese economic growth still will be double at least of the American growth rate. So the tech war has nothing to do with growth rates and increasing living standards, lol!

So what is it all about this tech war?

Just my opinion, but this is not a symmetrical fight.

The Chinese Communist Party will view IC as another point on the checklist of things to do. The United States will view the IC war in far more stark terms of their own sustainability on world leadership. The problem for the United States, is most of the world's IC industries are not on American shores. Eventually, they can be replaced, via natural market forces or by government decree, such as President Trump's rule.

:)
 

Bellum_Romanum

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This guy is a real piece of work
No different than this real piece of s..t self-hating Chinese haijan.

Check his past and bold analysis on the state of economies between India and China.

"Walk into any Wal-Mart and you won’t be surprised to see the made goods — everything from shoes and garments to toys and electronics. But the ubiquitous “Made in China” label obscures an important point: Few of these products are made by indigenous Chinese companies. In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find a single homegrown Chinese firm that operates on a global scale and markets its own products abroad."

And this particular gem:

"Last year, the Forbes 200, an annual ranking of the world’s best small companies, included 13 Indian firms but just four from mainland China."

The rest of the Gordon Chiang like analysis can be read here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

escobar

Brigadier
Alarmism Undermines American Strategy
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
China is the second most powerful country in the world and the most formidable competitor the United States has faced in decades. Yet at the same time, and in spite of its many visible defects, the United States remains the stronger power in the U.S.-Chinese relationship—and it has good reason to think it can stay that way. For all the obstacles facing the United States, those facing China are considerably greater.
Concentrating on China’s strengths without accounting for its vulnerabilities creates anxiety. Anxiety breeds insecurity. Insecurity leads to overreaction, and overreaction produces bad decisions that undermine the United States’ own competitiveness. Seeing China clearly is the first step toward getting China policy right.
 

bajingan

Junior Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A good article on why cold war with the us is unavoidable no matter who is in power
the us will do everything to stymie China technological rise because of "national security" reason
Such as this

"That may call for a mix of export controls and investment restrictions. It may necessitate the blacklisting of certain Chinese entities. It may require tightening loopholes in those restrictions by working with like-minded allies. And it may require measures to prevent U.S. firms and domestic research and development from being chased from the market by Beijing’s market distorting practices. Ultimately, the goal should be to raise the costs to Beijing enough to persuade it to abandon its beggar-thy-neighbor technology policies
There really are no solutions, just tradeoffs. More transparency would ensure greater awareness of the costs of those tradeoffs and would encourage policies that are more precise and more effective"

At this point China should have no more illusions about the us intentions towards it
I think at China should abandon its hope to "win-win" cooperation with the us
Its obvious now that america is perfectly willing to hurt itself to land a bigger blows to China
 

gadgetcool5

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A good article on why cold war with the us is unavoidable no matter who is in power
the us will do everything to stymie China technological rise because of "national security" reason
Such as this

"That may call for a mix of export controls and investment restrictions. It may necessitate the blacklisting of certain Chinese entities. It may require tightening loopholes in those restrictions by working with like-minded allies. And it may require measures to prevent U.S. firms and domestic research and development from being chased from the market by Beijing’s market distorting practices. Ultimately, the goal should be to raise the costs to Beijing enough to persuade it to abandon its beggar-thy-neighbor technology policies
There really are no solutions, just tradeoffs. More transparency would ensure greater awareness of the costs of those tradeoffs and would encourage policies that are more precise and more effective"

At this point China should have no more illusions about the us intentions towards it
I think at China should abandon its hope to "win-win" cooperation with the us
Its obvious now that america is perfectly willing to hurt itself to land a bigger blows to China

This is actually a sad example of why the U.S. originally wanted to be friends with China and cultivated its rise, or at the very least that China had friends in the U.S. The author Ikenson is a well known expert in the U.S. and he has been arguing China friendly policies for decades. He even helped lobby the U.S. to let China into the WTO. In the 2000s he wrote articles arguing that the U.S. shouldn't do a trade war with China and that trade was good. In the 2010s he argued that the U.S. shouldn't cite China for currency manipulation. He always argued the pro-China position in those days no matter what the debate was in the U.S.

Here is his article from 2006 about a visit to China. Very heartwarming:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The fact that he has turned into a hawk now is a sad example of how China due to its more hardline turn under Xi Jinping made America more hostile to it. It was NOT inevitable at all. Like I said, I have lived in the U.S. for 30 years and Americans are a nice, kindhearted people. They are just disappointed that China turned hardline after Xi, instead of giving its people more rights and freedoms.
 

Top