Trade War with China


Status
Not open for further replies.

Peter2018

Junior Member
Registered Member
Josh, I think you need to read and follow some other threads which have already discussed the rare earth situation and Huawei's plans to survive in depth. You're basically bringing up those already discussed topics for discussion again here.

Regarding rare earths: https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/can-the-us-derail-2025.t8530/page-2

It's not a coordination problem; China's government is fast-acting for sure. They hold a meeting in ZhongnNanHai with CCP officials, and it's done. It's that this is a little too big a weapon to use. It's kinda like a nuke; to ban rare earths would cause incredible global disruption and turn everyone against China just as China got the moral high-ground over the US over the Huawei incident. This might still be resorted to if China were really crunched by the trade war/tech ban, to crunch the US similarly but when China is ready and it's got a fine plan ahead, it doesn't have to resort to this. No country would ever use a nuclear weapon against someone who they can defeat by conventional forces and that's why China's leaving the rare earth ban at home.

Also, since China's talking about it, it looks a little more like a head-fake rather than a real move as a real move should be kept silent until the last moment of announcement to inflict as much damage as possible. Here, it can cause some fear and panic in the US; they might start pitching their resources hurriedly into rare earth production, which won't really materialize for about 2 years, then they realize they've wasted their investment for nothing as China keeps underselling them and they have to close shop again or continue to government-subsidize operations that aren't really needed.

It's certainly not about war. China's not Afghanistan; you can't beat down nuclear China for its rare earths like you can beat down Afghanistan to rob its oil. Plus, after a Chinese ban, the US wouldn't be 100% cut off; they would just experience ugly shortages and have to invest huge amounts of money to go around looking for little bits of product. It would badly hamper them but it wouldn't grind the US industries to an absolute halt. The war option like how the US oil embargo pushed Japan to attack is not a usable tactic in a world of MAD.
China should just conserve rare earths for its own use over next few centuries, rather than exporting them now.
 

Josh Luo

Senior Member
Registered Member
You can see the hawks are trying to pick a war with Iran to reassert dominance and remind the world who's the boss.
I feel the Trump Administration's strategy is pretty much what a status quo power would always do. Make everyone insecure and accept your rule by forcing them to choose your side (in order to isolate the rising power) when you still possess an edge in material power to do so. Of course, no one cares about morality and rules of engagement under such a scenario. The Art of War by Sun Tzu and Mearsheimerian rules are what matter now. Games on!
 
I feel the Trump Administration's strategy is pretty much what a status quo power would always do. Make everyone insecure and accept your rule by forcing them to choose your side (in order to isolate the rising power) when you still possess an edge in material power to do so. Of course, no one cares about morality and rules of engagement under such a scenario. The Art of War by Sun Tzu and Mearsheimerian rules are what matter now. Games on!
Yes, that is correct, but with a small yet important addition: this is how superpowers behave when they are scared for their futures and watching their dominance unravel. A confident and strong superpower speaks gently but resolutely; the world follows its leadership by will and its lead is reinforced by policies of generous reward that the superpower is happy to give out. When this stops being the case, when the world becomes hard to convince and the carrot seems less and less effective, the unsettled superpower starts to speak louder and angrier, substituting "I believe that the correct choice is obvious and I wish everyone the best however they choose," with, "You must choose me; I insist! I am your friend and they are your enemy!" It starts to replace rewards with threats, going from, "Together, we can form a cohesive network of data-sharing for the global good," to "If you don't fall in line, we will cut you out of the circle!" This is where we are right now. As we near the death bell on a superpower's reign, the rhetoric will only grow increasingly unpleasant, desperate, and full of erratic foulness.
 

Josh Luo

Senior Member
Registered Member
Yes, that is correct, but with a small yet important addition: this is how superpowers behave when they are scared for their futures and watching their dominance unravel. A confident and strong superpower speaks gently but resolutely; the world follows its leadership by will and its lead is reinforced by policies of generous reward that the superpower is happy to give out. When this stops being the case, when the world becomes hard to convince and the carrot seems less and less effective, the unsettled superpower starts to speak louder and angrier, substituting "I believe that the correct choice is obvious and I wish everyone the best however they choose," with, "You must choose me; I insist! I am your friend and they are your enemy!" It starts to replace rewards with threats, going from, "Together, we can form a cohesive network of data-sharing for the global good," to "If you don't fall in line, we will cut you out of the circle!" This is where we are right now. As we near the death bell on a superpower's reign, the rhetoric will only grow increasingly unpleasant, desperate, and full of erratic foulness.
Agree with you, but there is still a high chance that the U.S. could reverse its so-called "relative decline," especially if the latter were successful in "murdering" China and its state-led economic institutions.
 

AndrewS

Captain
Registered Member
Agree with you, but there is still a high chance that the U.S. could reverse its so-called "relative decline," especially if the latter were successful in "murdering" China and its state-led economic institutions.
Uh no, the US can't reverse its relative decline.

The US is already hi-tech and wealthy, and realistically can grow a maximum of 2.5% per year on average. In 12 years time, the economy would increase by 34%
In comparison, China is still only a middle-income country. If China sustains a further growth slowdown to 6% growth per year, the economy will DOUBLE in the same 12 years.

And going forward, we'll likely see India sustaining high growth (6%) and end up with a larger economy than the US in the coming decades/
The average rate of non-US growth is overall significantly higher (4%?) than what the US can achieve.

So there is no way that the US can prevent its relative decline in the coming years.

But it will be a difficult adjustment for the US to acknowledge that it is just another country in the world.
 
Last edited:
Agree with you, but there is still a high chance that the U.S. could reverse its so-called "relative decline," especially if the latter were successful in "murdering" China and its state-led economic institutions.
"IF"

- Spartans (350BC), in response to King Philip II of Macedon when he threatened, "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."
 

xiabonan

Junior Member
Spanish cities to get 5G service from Huawei, amid US blacklist of Chinese tech giant

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"
MADRID (DPA) - Chinese telecoms giant Huawei is set to roll out its 5G service in several Spanish cities on Saturday (June 15), making it one of the first European countries with the ultrafast mobile phone network.

Vodafone Espana will bring the network to 15 cities on Saturday in cooperation with the Chinese company, which is blacklisted by the United States, chief executive Antonio Coimbra announced earlier this week.

In addition, Sweden's Ericsson will be providing the hardware for the data network."

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top