Blinken’s meeting with Xi capped two days of talks with senior Chinese officials. Leah Millis / AFP
New York Times: Blinken Visit Reveals Chasm in How U.S. and China Perceive Rivalry
An austere greeting on the airport tarmac in Beijing sans a red carpet. A stone-faced handshake from China’s top foreign policy official. A seat looking up at the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, perched at the head of a long table.
To international audiences, the optics of Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken’s two-day visit to Beijing barely raised any eyebrows. Foreign ministers are rarely, if ever, met with much fanfare at the airport. And an audience with a head of state alone is a sign of great importance and respect.
But to nationalist-leaning audiences in China, especially on social media, the scenes tell a different story. To them, the Mr. Blinken arrived only after months of pleading for an invitation. And during his visit, he was schooled on respecting China’s interests and played supplicant to Mr. Xi. Chinese social media users gleefully noted that Mr. Blinken arrived on Father’s Day, the implication being — using the parlance of the internet — that Mr. Xi was America’s daddy.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: First things first. This weekend's U.S. - China talks were a complete failure.
US Secretary of State Blinken went into the talks with his focus on managing current U.S. - China relations while developing a process for closer ties (i.e. setting up a military crisis hotline being one of them). The Chinese government did not buy into Blinken's proposal.
The Chinese are focused on US actions to assemble alliances and measures in Asia that will isolate and/or "box in" China. Quoting the above article's comment from Chinese President Xi .... Surrounding China with security partners and cutting off its access to advanced technology is not healthy competition, but an invitation for conflict.
As to where is all of this going?
The U.S. foreign policy establishment is making the same mistake with China that they did with Russia.
There was a belief in 2021 that the West could manage Russia and disregard their national security concerns and the ongoing war in the Donbas region of Ukraine. We now know where that policy of management (unlike the Cold War policy of containment) has ended.
Ditto with China today.
There is a belief in Washington that they can manage China while disregarding their national security concerns over Taiwan. There is also a belief in Washington that they contain China's economic development, while disregarding Beijing concerns that economic growth is vital to maintain internal peace and stability.
Sighhh .... like Russia, I predict that this American foreign policy to manage China will also end in disaster.
11 comments:
You had no problem with this policy when Trump was in charge and ended a policy of placating china. It very much seems to be a case of whoever is in charge at the time, with you.
You've gone more prochina ever since they got closer to Russia.
Unraveling?
How about planned controlled demolition?
WNU wrote that he was told in the 1980s that China had good neighbor and bad neighbor policy. Those are not the exact words and using those as a search term I cannot fund the quote.
Basically, China was going to be a good neighbor for a few decades until it got strong. Afterwards it would transition to bad neighbor policy and throw its weight around.
For the sake of argument, if that is a true quote, what some Chinese official told WNU in the 1980s, how come Blinken does not know it?
How come Blinken is operating in the manner that he is if that quote is true?
US relations with the rest of the world are unravelling. Let's see what US relations with Germany are like a year from now after a long cold German winter with no cheap gas coming through the Nordstream pipelines.
Secure:
1) free from or not exposed to danger or harm; safe.
2) dependable; firm; not liable to fail, yield, become displaced, etc., as a support or a fastening:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/secure
se·cu·ri·ty
1. Freedom from risk or danger; safety.
2. Freedom from doubt, anxiety, or fear; confidence.
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/security
Who was talking about attacking China in the last 40 years?
- Vietnam?
- One of the Koreas?
- The Phillipines?
- Canada?
- Japan?
- Russia?
- US?
Who?
Having Taiwan would protect the Chinese coast more from conventional seaborne attack. However, invading Taiwan to achieve that operational depth would make china less secure not more.
The borders of Ukraine were decide during a time of peace in the early 1990s and without the threat of force.
The borders of Taiwan were decide by war.
Less than 50% of people in Donbas are ethnic Russians, which is why WNU mendaciously uses the words "Russian speakers".
Russia should have petitioned the UN for a plebiscite. It did not. It went straight for guns.
I have said that Crimea should be part of Russia. There are more Russians there than Ukrainians, but not convincing so, when you add other ethnicities. Maybe there should have been a plebiscite there. WNU never asks what the ethnic Tatars think of Crimea.
Russia negotiated form a position of weakness in the early 1990s. So again I think maybe the question of Crimea should be revisited. Now it never will because Putin went straight for guns except for that incident with Viktor Yanukovych
"In November 2013, a series of events began that led to his ousting as president. Amid economic pressure from Russia, Yanukovych suddenly changed his mind and withdrew from signing an association agreement with the EU, instead accepting a Russian trade deal and loan bailout. "
That's right chummy and it wasn't suddenly. The Russians offered the better deal. Then what happened?
US agencies and their fellow travelers orchestrated a coup against the duly elected Ukie government and now we are in the mess we are today.
The best part of the deal making was the Russians restricted Ukrainians imports to put the squeeze on. That was August 2013.
Maybe they did maybe they didn't, but the Russians should have offered the Ukrainians a sweetheart deal on oil. right now India and china are getting sweet deals. If Russia had offered deals to Ukraine, maybe they could have got farther.
Much farther with a carrot. Makes me think Putin is a retard. Or just a greedy SOB.
Are you unaware that Ukraine was getting basically free energy from Russia since the end of the Soviet Union? That is one of the main reasons why EU membership was a problem for russia. They would have had to renegotiate all these open trade deals between the two countries, and probably stop paying the majority of ukraines energy bill every single year.
"Are you unaware that Ukraine was getting basically free energy"
That is why Ukraine got behind in payments for the oil. Sure. whatever.
"Are you unaware that Ukraine was getting basically free energy"
"Ukraine, which imports nearly all its gas from Russia, pays about $400 per 1,000 cubic meters, slightly higher than the average price paid by European customers. Naftogaz said"
You (1:44) fucking liar.
Congratulations on quoting the prices after relations broke down, simpleton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_disputes
Until 2005 Ukraine was charged $50 per 1,000 cm
Do you have any idea why Pascal Lamy, the director general of the WTO would be quoted saying: "all Post-Soviet states should pay market prices for their energy needs in order to improve the efficiency of their economies." Perhaps because all post soviet satellites received heavily subsidized gas? Why yes, that does make sense, doesn't it? Do you think selling Ukraine energy at 1/8th of it's market value wasn't free enough? Even after the prices were forced upward over the decade, it had never approached market value until recently.
Instead of cherry picking bad faith arguments that suit your shit worldviews go do some research on the structure of post soviet states.
Lot of time between 2005 and 2013.
The article I cited gave the relationship between what Europe paid and and what Ukraine paid. There is a ratio there.
$50 per 1,000 cm means what? It could be anything. It could be cheap, it could be expensive. You need to relate it what others in the region were paying.
You still the dumbass troll you will always be.
Post a Comment