Foreign Policy

The U.S.-China Relationship Doesn't Have To Be 'Increasingly Adversarial'

Many U.S. complaints about China aren’t about actions that threaten U.S. security.

|

America's relationship with China can't be reduced to a single label, Secretary of State Antony Blinken told CNN's Dana Bash in an interview last week. Beijing is not merely a U.S. "adversary," Blinken said. "There are clearly and increasingly adversarial aspects to the relationship," he allowed, and there are "certainly competitive ones. There are also still some cooperative ones."

That nuanced thinking has been evident in a handful of recent remarks from Blinken about China, and it bodes well for the Biden administration's policy in this arena, which just a few weeks ago was couched in more extreme language. But Blinken's comments also evince an unjustified—and pessimistic—determinism grounded in a misguided perspective on China's military situation. The U.S.-China relationship is indeed multifaceted, and it does not have to become "increasingly adversarial."

Blinken didn't speak about Chinese military posturing on CNN, but he did address it in a speech at Brussels one day prior, where he named China first on the list of military threats facing the United States. "Beijing's military ambitions are growing by the year," Blinken said. That includes "efforts to threaten freedom of navigation, to militarize the South China Sea, to target countries throughout the Indo-Pacific with increasingly sophisticated military capabilities," he claimed, and "the challenges that once seemed half a world away are no longer remote."

It's true that Beijing's military might is not to be underestimated. Though its nuclear arsenal is still far smaller than those of the U.S. and Russia, by spending and many measures of conventional strength, China's military is second only to ours. Blinken is likewise correct that Beijing has expanded its maritime power over the past few decades, especially in the South China Sea, and seeks regional preeminence.

Yet this is not the cross-global threat to U.S. security that Blinken suggests, thanks in significant part to unalterable geographic realities. Consider the differences between U.S. and Chinese geography for defense. The United States spans our continent and borders only two neighbors, both close allies. We are insulated from three quarters of the world's nations by the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, the world's greatest natural "moat."

China, by contrast, is surrounded. It borders four nuclear states—Russia, North Korea, Pakistan, and India—and must pass through multiple island chains to reach open ocean. Many of China's regional neighbors have robust militaries of their own, and their military spending rapidly adds up to outmatch Beijing's, whose own spending is substantially directed toward domestic authoritarianism and defense. Some of these neighbors (e.g. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia) are longstanding U.S. partners, but they need no direction from Washington to counterbalance Chinese ambitions.

All this means the United States is neither directly threatened by, nor the only obstacle to, the Chinese regional ambitions Blinken described. "China's is a force hemmed in by geography in a way traditional great naval powers have not been and is also embedded in a region with other powerful states who have their own important maritime capabilities with the wherewithal to further expand them in the years ahead," as Defense Priorities fellow Mike Sweeney has observed. Indeed, "the extent of effort by China to enhance its maritime capabilities is also striking in what it has not achieved," Sweeney notes. "It is little closer to controlling the East, South, and Yellow Seas to the exclusion of other naval forces; nor does it possess the means at this time to decisively invade, occupy, and garrison Taiwan."

Underestimating Chinese power would distort U.S. defense strategy, but overestimating it will produce distortion, too, and that is Washington's characteristic temptation. Believing a military threat from Beijing to be greater and more imminent than it is produces the deterministic thinking Blinken demonstrated when he spoke of the U.S.-China relationship becoming "increasingly adversarial." There is no inherent requirement that this antagonistic dynamic expand. The Thucydides Trap thesis, which postulates that rising and extant great powers must come to blows, is not a law of nature.

It is still possible to steer U.S. engagement with China away from its more adversarial elements—particularly where military conflict is conceivable, as a U.S.-China war would be unthinkably horrific—and toward the cooperative and economically competitive aspects of the relationship to which Blinken also alluded. On one point, at least, the Biden administration is already on the right track: Instead of attempting to "punish" Beijing for the COVID-19 pandemic, for which there is simply no good option, Blinken said the administration is taking a forward-facing approach to "do everything possible to prevent another pandemic."

More broadly, moving away from an adversarial stance means more—and more realistic—diplomacy and cooperation for mutual advantage. It should also mean rejecting calls for risky U.S. military buildup in China's near abroad, as well as Washington's ineffective yet reckless habit of overusing sanctions. China's rise to be a regional power is likely inevitable, but the slide toward an adversarial relationship can and should be reversed.

NEXT: Education Department To Suspend Payments, Refund Garnished Wages and Tax Returns for Student Loan Borrowers in Default

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. That nuanced thinking has been evident in a handful of recent remarks from Blinken about the Nazis, and it bodes well for the Biden administration’s policy in this arena, which just a few weeks ago was couched in more extreme language. But Blinken’s comments also evince an unjustified—and pessimistic—determinism grounded in a misguided perspective on the Nazis’s military situation. The U.S.-Nazi relationship is indeed multifaceted, and it does not have to become “increasingly adversarial.”

    1. “Peace in our.. you know, the thing!”

      1. JOIN PART TIME JOB FOR USA Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are vv c much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..VISIT HERE

    2. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since FVT getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour.I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail…. Visit Here

      1. THE GREAT JOBS OF USA BOYS GIRLS AND OLDERS I must give my thanks to Ashley, who posted here last week comment About system she uses to earn onlin℮… I’ve got my yuio first check total of $550, pretty cool. i Am so excited, this is the first time i Actually earned something. i am going to work even harder new And i can’t wait for next week payment.go to home tab for more detail… READ MORE

    3. “The U.S.-Nazi relationship is indeed multifaceted, and it does not have to become “increasingly adversarial.”

      The Nazis were irrelevant. They were just a tool of Hitler who ran the show. The Nazis were his toadies, the most useful of useful idiots. Hitler wanted war right from the start. That’s what makes the Chinese different. They’d prefer to watch from the sidelines as the US devours itself in civil conflict. Even if it takes a few more generations to do its terrifying work.

      1. I am making over $9k a month working part time. I stored being attentive to different human beings inform me how much money they are able to make on line so I decided to lok into it.ert well, it turned into all actual and has completely modified my life.

        That is what I do…. Money Star

    4. The China takes are always the best “Libertarian Moments” from Reason.

      #LibertariansForExportingOurGenocidalSlaveryAndOrganHarvesting

  2. Secretary of State Antony Blinken

    After Fauci, I can’t trust anyone named Anthony.

    1. What about Anthony Weiner? You can trust him.

      1. He’s himself a vault. The problem is he doesn’t seem to know how to put a password on his phone or his laptop.

  3. I’m sorry, but the magazine that got pissed about us pulling troops out of Syria doesn’t get to use that headline.

    1. Between Reason’s opposition to killing Soleimani, selling weapons to anti-Iranian interest in the ME, and China’s pact with Iran, their statement would seem to read that sticking your head in the sand or giving up and dying would be preferable to being adversarial.

      1. Being adversarial with China is going to lose. It’s said that the Japanese discovered that in order to conquer China, they first had to conquer the world. America’s best hope is that China’s middle and lower class start to demand a bigger role in running things. There could also be turmoil in the communist party, another swing of the pendulum like the cultural revolution or the gang of four.

        As for Reason, they seem to believe that the rest of the world runs or should run on American business practices. Exercise caution when reading.

        1. China is dependent on Pax Americana keeping their export/import shipping lanes open.

          All we have to do to sink China is nothing.

          1. Their bluewater stuff is getting good enough that they can take over that mission in the face of any of their likely opponents, except the USN. JSDF and Indian Navy, in their respective home waters too. Maybe the UK/Russian undersea assets, for an outside straight.

            Logistics replenishment is likely their Achilles heel at the moment, but they’re building a network of foreign regional bases to address that. Besides, many of their new transportation routes—New Silk Road, etc—are going to be on land. All of the Eurasian ones will be go through West China. Where the Uighurs are (were).

          2. “All we have to do to sink China is nothing.”

            Very ‘Zen’ way of looking at things. You surprise me Comrade byebyedandavis.

        2. China’s middle and lower class start to demand a bigger role in running things

          So you’re saying that they would need to be adversarial with China? Do you think they’d be more or less successful if they were outside China’s explicit dominion? If the former, explain the Uighyrs.

          Dumbass.

          1. China’s middle and lower class is China. If anyone is going to successfully challenge the powerful of China, it will be them.

            1. China’s middle and lower class is China. If anyone is going to successfully challenge the powerful of China, it will be them.

              Please rectify these two statements. Is there only one China or two?

              Once rectified, please answer the other question(s) I asked (implied): Would you assert that the Uighyrs are more successfully opposing China because they’re in China?

              1. Change in China is not going to come from Uighurs, Tibetans, Hmong, Yao, Manchus, Koreans, Yi, Lahu, Akha, or any other of the fine ethnic minority groups that make China their home. It will come from middle and lower class Han people – the people who eat with chopsticks and use that weird ideographic writing system. They make up more than 90% of the population.

                There is one entity called the People’s Republic of China which is widely recognized throughout the world and has a seat on the security council of the UN. Another entity is called the Republic of China, though you are probably know it as ‘Taiwan.’ Taiwan is recognized by a few nations in central america such as Guatemala, and a few Pacific Island nations such as Nauru. Both China lay claim to the same territory, though Taiwan includes the whole of Mongolia (inner and outer) as part of China while the People’s Republic only claims the inner bit. I know it’s all rather confusing but I’d be pleased to answer any more of your questions.

  4. I want an increasingly adversarial relationship with Russia. Their attack on our 2016 election must be understood in the context of earlier atrocities like Pearl Harbor and 9 / 11.

    #LibertariansForGettingToughWithRussia

    1. You forgot to mention all the election fraud in 2018 that denied Abrams the governorship and in 2020 that got Biden elected. If you’re going full tilt nut-bar conspiracy, why stop? Don’t forget the rainbow lizard people that only dogs can see.

  5. which US are you talking about? the regular goys born and raised here or these psychotic international jews who have infected and taken over the country from the top, and are being thrown under the bus by the chinese right now?

    1. Troll, with distinct anti Semitic palaver and likely mental illness.
      Flag, refresh, curl up and die Jew hater.

      [if you are trying to be sarcastic, have to say you suck at it]

      1. Reads like de espresso

        1. Dare I say it, but Misek’s a lot clearer in his writing than this Nazi punk, and I usually can’t stand Misek.

          Fuck off, Nazi Punk.

  6. We will be going to war with those Chinese Commie bastards sooner or later. I’d rather sooner while we can still stomp the living shit out of them. If any other pissant country had loosed a virus that killed over 500K Americans, the troops would already be there.

    Make no mistake. China wants to see America destroyed. Not because of our power, but because of our beliefs and ideas. The idea that liberty matters. The idea that the conscience of an individual is sacrosanct. The belief that our rights are God-given, not government granted.

    This author has her head in the sand.

    1. It’s almost like communism is a totalitarian political model.

      1. I recall from college polisci class [decades ago] the notion that viewing communist countries as inherently evil was faulty due to “dualistic thinking.” I called bullshit on it then, and I call bullshit on it now.

        1. Interesting that they chose ‘dualistic thinking’ rather than ‘false dichotomy’. Like they really don’t care that there’s a plethora of other options that you’re minimizing or ignoring, the problem is that being afforded two options, you chose wrong.

        2. The New Left were Maoist simps and proceeded to infect Gen-Xers on down with that nonsense. Nixon started the national sell-out process to China that the Clintons accelerated.

          Look where we’re at now. No democratic liberalization of China, despite all those globalist promises. A country that is pretty damn close to being on our level militarily. An aggressive colonization program through its Belt-And-Road initiative that allows them to import their excess population AND take ownership of foreign lands if the countries can’t pay back the construction loans. A cyberwarfare division that is, to be frank, kicking our ass. The Tech Trust insinuating their data harvesting and information control measures to silence undesireables. Corporate America promoting the Woke Cultural Revolution that is almost EXACTLY like the original. Ironically, their greatest growth has come following the suppression of a bunch of uppity college students and young people a generation ago and fully embracing ethno-nationalistic chauvinism.

          1. Since I am GenX, it pisses me off mightily to see the naivete of many in my generation.

            1. Aren’t we supposed to be cynical as fuck?

              1. That was always a pose.

              2. “Whatever” 🙂

        3. Well, the countries aren’t inherently evil, just the system of government.

        4. North Korea is awful; China is pretty bad as well, but Vietnam? I’d give them a better report card right now that Burma, Indonesia, not to mention Pakistan. It just seems to me that they have become more Vietnamese than Communist. The Communist label doesn’t always tell you everything you need to know.

      2. LOL….so true.

    2. Keerist what a hyperventilating obsessive you are. You have no clue what China’s goals are or why they want to see us destroyed (if that is what they want). Your entire second paragraph rant could simply substitute dozens of past or wannabe enemies where the one word ‘China’ is written. Muslims, Cuba, USSR, Japan, Germany, Grenada, Panama, Brazil, Vatican, Iran, North Korea, Vietnam, etc.

      The whole world is out to get us. The whole world has always been out to get us. We have always been at war with the world.

      1. Uh….no. They are communists who are unalterably dedicated to destroying our individual, liberty centered way of life. The war is already underway, in case you had not noticed.

      2. Here’s the Jeffy we know and love. Driving the bulldozer to bury the 200,000,000 bodies generated by the Communist machine in the last century.

        LeBron James still isn’t going to be your friend.

    3. “Make no mistake. China wants to see America destroyed. Not because of our power, but because of our beliefs and ideas. The idea that liberty matters. The idea that the conscience of an individual is sacrosanct. The belief that our rights are God-given, not government granted.”

      Five years ago it was Islam. Even parrots can learn new lines.

      1. It is possible to have more than one group hate you.

        1. Indeed. The more the merrier.

    4. #CCPChemicalWarfare Fentanyl
      #CCPBiologicalWarfare Covid

      I think they have to nuke us before we do anything.

      1. 10 quatloos says our media and government’ll find a way to make it our fault, when even that happens. They’ll claim the Chinese were helping get rid of white supremacist Trumpalos, or that the US started it, the big meanies. Or they’ll take the author of this piece’s words at face value:

        Instead of attempting to “punish” Beijing for the COVID-19 pandemic, for which there is simply no good option…
        …the administration is taking a forward-facing approach to “do everything possible to prevent another pandemic.”

        The same logic will be used to excuse any aggression by China.

  7. “China’s rise to be a regional power is likely inevitable, but the slide toward an adversarial relationship can and should be reversed.”

    Just replace that with Japan and see how that sentence tastes.

    Ah well looks like we’ll be repeating the 20th century experiment.

    1. So what are you saying? Should we go to war with China today? Should we have gone to war with Japan in 1930?

    2. “Ah well looks like we’ll be repeating the 20th century experiment.”

      Maybe. But you might want to check out who’s wearing the “upstart industrial powerhouse” and the “militaristic tradition, but deeply economically flawed” hats this go-around. This country has changed a lot from the country that ground the Nazis and Bushido-ites into the dirt. Hell, it’s changed a bunch from the country that won the Cold War.

      The article is a joke. She can’t even bring herself to chastise the Chinese for this bug.

    3. China will also look at this and see what the results were for Japan. China knows that the battle for influence is not with armies but with economics.

  8. The problem with economic cooperation with China is that, when China gets rich, they also get more commie, build aircraft carriers and jets, and get more belligerent. As of right now, they don’t have the naval capacity to beat the US, but we don’t need to help them correct that problem.

    There are more important considerations than cheap iPhones. If China achieves real blue water navy capability, the whole world is screwed.

    1. In three years, those Commie bastards have deployed two aircraft carriers. Several more coming on line in the next 5 years. They are going to move on Taiwan.

      1. Fortunately for us, their carriers are not anywhere near capable of taking on a US carrier. Yet. If they manage to develop a competitive navy, they become a serious threat to global trade.

        The naivete of this article, and people in general who think China thinks and acts on Western terms is ridiculous. We can’t break Chinese communism through free trade.

      2. Perhaps the gen x does not remember the Cold War. I do.

        You know when it was won?

        In 1989 Boris Yeltsin visited the United States. While driving through he stopped at an ordinary grocery store in Texas. He was amazed at the selection of items stocked for purchase.

        “Even the Politburo doesn’t have this choice. Not even Mr. Gorbachev,” he said.

        It was over then.

        As P. J. O’Rourke put it.

        “In the end we beat them with Levi 501 jeans. Seventy-two years of Communist indoctrination and propaganda was drowned out by a three-ounce Sony Walkman. A huge totalitarian system… has been brought to its knees because nobody wants to wear Bulgarian shoes… Now they’re lunch, and we’re number one on the planet.”

        Rolling Stone 1989.

        1. Doesn’t really work when authoritarian hellhole is the one manufacturing all our goods. The life of the average chinese citizen is shitastic, but their government is threading a pretty good needle with giving them knockoffs of everything the rest of the world has.

          Plus, see cuba if you think every communist hellhole is going to go the way of Russia.

    2. Reason: Because enriching totalitarian slave states is the path to Libertopia.

    3. They are more totalitarian but not so much actual communist. The days of Mao are long gone. Marx would not recognize it.

      China is an empire run by a central ruling authority. Thing is the people have never known anything else. So this is normal. What is happening in Hong Kong is they know different and are striving to keep what they have.

      To keep power they are clamping down more on the people and industries. They are committing more abuses. This may backfire on them at some point.

  9. ome of these neighbors (e.g. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia) are longstanding U.S. partners, but they need no direction from Washington to counterbalance Chinese ambitions.

    I believe Japan does.

  10. “China’s is a force hemmed in by geography in a way traditional great naval powers have not been and is also embedded in a region with other powerful states who have their own important maritime capabilities with the wherewithal to further expand them in the years ahead,” as Defense Priorities fellow Mike Sweeney has observed.

    Lot of talk here about how China is hemmed in by artificial social constructs that shouldn’t exist anyway.

    1. Yeah but Americans are more free to identify as Montana class Battleships than at any other point in history so, no worries.

    2. The Himalayas and Gobi Desert are social constructs?

      1. The Rio Grande apparently is, so why not?

  11. I watched a documentary on Chinese youth camps last night. The Chinese are having serious issues because most of the kids grew up as an only child due to the single child allowance. They have a bunch of ultra coddled, over-entitled, little snowflakes that think that the world revolves around them. Weird, huh? I thought that the US was leading the way on that front.

    1. Yup. Imagine a group of spoiled children. Now imagine them settling into the leadership positions of a country that has a gigantic chip on their shoulder from about 200 years of being the West’s bitch. Think of those leaders getting told, “No,” by the elements of US governance not already bought off.

      How do we think these conversations will go? I’m sure they’ll stop once they only put the tip in.

      1. Actually that might save us. Those kids aren’t going to be competent rulers. Monarchies always suffered from having one good king then his fuck up offspring. If China is going to do that on a national level, they are absolutely screwed.

  12. Sobriety ever at the rudder, machines remain more powerful than infallible.

    As Thomas Jefferson was remembered, “Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.”

  13. On the one hand, China is a significant threat on a number of fronts.

    On the other hand, Washington is much greater threat on all the fronts and they’re looking for a scapegoat — Iraq 3.0. Don’t fall for it.

    1. “Make no mistake. China wants to see America destroyed. Not because of our power, but because of our beliefs and ideas. The idea that liberty matters. The idea that the conscience of an individual is sacrosanct. The belief that our rights are God-given, not government granted.”

      Reason commenters are as deranged as Sean Hannity in 2002.

      1. Uh huh….try living under totalitarianism.

        1. I haven’t been enjoying it very much.

      2. We only think that, because that’s what the CCP has been saying for decades

        1. And even if they aren’t saying it directly, they’re tacitly backing nations like N. Korea and Iran, who’ve been saying it for decades.

          The idea that China just wants benevolent and peaceful trade/coexistence is beyond dumb. Unless you believe in some absurd sense of American Exceptionalism, there’s no reason to assume China wouldn’t treat Americans any different than they treat(ed) Tibetans, Taiwanese, Uighyrs, Hong Kong, their own political dissdents, etc., etc., etc. Even if you point out that the US treats it’s media terribly and has a horrible record of intervention (giving the false equivocation more credit than it deserves,) the progressive idea should be to change things up for the better not worse or more of the same.

          1. there’s no reason to assume China wouldn’t treat Americans any different than they treat(ed) Tibetans, Taiwanese, Uighyrs, Hong Kong, their own political dissdents, etc., etc., etc.

            There’s no reason to assume the US would treat China any different than Sioux Indians, the Confederacy, Muslim immigrants, Puerto Rico, or the 1/6 rioters etc. etc. etc.

            You see how insane that sounds?

            1. Yeah, comparing 1850s America to 1980s China is insane. The West aggressively colonized occupied lands in the 1800s, why shouldn’t China get to do the same with populations more than 10X as large in the 1900s-2000s? Talk about racing to the bottom. Are you simping for the PRC?

              The funniest thing is, it’s not like there’s zero history in this country with regard to open hostility to the Chinese people. Incidents and animosity that would/should actually give pause or trigger introspection into broad anti-Chinese sentiments, but PRC simps don’t actually give two shits about the Chinese people as much as they want to look past the comparatively moutainous number of dead bodies that can be laid directly at the Chinese government’s feet. They don’t give a shit about whether anybody actually lives or dies, let alone lives free. As long as their post-modern, morally relativistic adoration of the PRC is indulged.

              Who cares if more Uighyrs are enslaved today in China than were marginalized in the United States ever, who cares that the US pretty openly and at all levels denounces those historical practices, has instituted laws, and expends large amounts of capital to prevent even the auspices of them, what matters is that what China is doing today is the moral equivalent of what the US did to American Taishanese in the 1800s, and is therefore justified. Fuck that noisy bullshit.

              1. Yeah, comparing 1850s America to 1980s China is insane.

                Those were rough analogues to your list. ROC has been independent-ish of the PRC since it’s founding in 1949, which is 1.5 generations before the 80’s.

                The point was that the blatant political persecution of the 1/6 rioters tell us nothing about whether the US government wants to nuke China, just as reasserting territorial control over Hong Kong says absolutely nothing about the CCP’s blood lust for Americans.

                Who cares if more Uighyrs are enslaved today in China

                This is made up bullshit. You’re falling for Curveball again.

                what matters is that what China is doing today is the moral equivalent of what the US did to American Taishanese in the 1800s, and is therefore justified. Fuck that noisy bullshit.

                You’re hysterical, arguing with voices in your head.

                1. Those were rough analogues to your list.

                  I know. Rough analogies the way stepping in a bear trap is roughly analogous to stepping on a landmine.

                  Your problem is that I’m not falling for your curveball. The ~1.5M deaths during the American Civil War in the mid-19th doesn’t in any way justify or excuse the ~2M deaths during the Chinese Civil War, much less the ~20M deaths during the great famine in the mid-20th Century.

                  Are there Chinese citizens being “asked” to leave sporting events because of their “free US Capitol” message? Are they being asked to do so indirectly at the behest of the US government?

                  You’re simping for the PRC, trying to paint your bruised apples to moldy oranges comparison as apples to apples. The best case/least political assumption is that you’re just doing it to maintain your post-modern, nihilist “all the fruit will rot eventually anyway” worldview. Again, fuck that noise.

                  1. Your first mistake is thinking the modern CCP is ideologically Maoist. The actual governing model is basically fascist. The leaders are thugs who want to stay in power, which they do by ensuring continuous economic growth and not starting nuclear wars for no reason.

                    You’re simping for the PRC, trying to paint your bruised apples to moldy oranges comparison as apples to apples. The best case/least political assumption is that you’re just doing it to maintain your post-modern, nihilist “all the fruit will rot eventually anyway” worldview.

                    My first comment: “On the one hand, China is a significant threat on a number of fronts.

                    On the other hand, Washington is much greater threat on all the fronts and they’re looking for a scapegoat — Iraq 3.0. Don’t fall for it.”

                    You’re just like the retards before Iraq doing the “Saddam gassed his own people” bit. Yea, what does that have to do with 9/11? Well similarly, China is high IQ foreign civilization that’s a long term threat. The fact that Washington is pumping out propaganda non-stop instead of banning Chinese companies and raising tariffs should tell you what this is really about.

                    1. Your first mistake is thinking the modern CCP is ideologically Maoist. The actual governing model is basically fascist.

                      Which is the same argument made by True “Pure socialism has never been tried” Believers and “Hitler was right-wing, Stalins was left” idiots everywhere.

                      You’re just like the retards before Iraq doing the “Saddam gassed his own people” bit.

                      Show me where I asserted China has done something that they didn’t do. Quit arguing with the voices in your head. You yourself called them fascist thugs in the context of “America/Americans shouldn’t be adversarial with fascist thugs.”

                    2. Which is the same argument made by True “Pure socialism has never been tried” Believers and “Hitler was right-wing, Stalins was left” idiots everywhere.

                      No, Mao was in fact Mao-ist. It was tried, and it was a disaster. Which is why they don’t do it anymore.

                      “You’re just like the retards before Iraq doing the “Saddam gassed his own people” bit.”

                      Show me where I asserted China has done something that they didn’t do.

                      Huh? Saddam really did gas his own people.

                      You yourself called them fascist thugs in the context of “America/Americans shouldn’t be adversarial with fascist thugs.”

                      Like I said — Iraq 3.0. But the Adrian Zenz shit is somehow even dumber and more obvious than Curveball and Chalabi.

                    3. Like I said — Iraq 3.0. But the Adrian Zenz shit is somehow even dumber and more obvious than Curveball and Chalabi.

                      Being clear, I wasn’t and am not calling for a hot war. I think a war may be inevitable but I don’t think it’s in our (or their) interest to precipitate it. The core issue is that there’s no real distinction between non-adversarial and placation.

                      However, there is a distinction to be made between placating a nation that tolerates political unrest and persecutes insurgents through overt legal means (or in our current case largely fails to) and not placating one that dosen’t. The US, nor anyone else, should be placating what’s being done to the Uighyrs any more than they should’ve been placating what the US did to the Souix, but if you had to prioritize and pick your battles in the euphemistic sense, the Uighyrs are far more numerously, directly, and effectively prosecuted and far less belligerent or ‘deserving’ of persecution than the Souix were and at a point in history when the world is far more able to tolerate and accommodate the Uighyrs than it was the Souix.

                      My point is/was, China is playing the part of the Soviet Union in Cold War 2.0 and there’s no reason to assume that placating them would be any different than placating the Soviets.

  14. All this means the United States is neither directly threatened by, nor the only obstacle to, the Chinese regional ambitions Blinken described

    Well the problem is that the FIRST priority and issue is – what are the ambitions of the US in that above region? Whatever that region is.

    If we don’t have the balls to overtly define and defend OUR regional ambitions, then it doesn’t matter one whit what China’s ambitions are. Is it the US that has a particular stake in the Paracels? Spratlys? Taiwan? Guam? And exactly what fucking stake before people start dragging the US into a conflict that is created merely because we CAN create a conflict about it or because we think someone else wants a conflict? Or refuse to defend something that is worth overtly defending simply because we want to worry about someone else’s priorities more than ours.

    Just even re the Spratlys – I suspect that China is filling a vacuum. When the Philippines-US relationship was close, the Chinese did nothing. Now that that relationship is fracturing apart, the Chinese are stepping into the vacuum. But the FIRST issue here is the relationship between the Philippines and the US.

  15. I see no reason why the USA and China can’t be on perfectly cordial terms once they overthrow the CCP.

    -jcr

    1. “I see no reason why the USA and China can’t be on perfectly cordial terms”

      They may well enjoy cordial terms with each other. Will they be on cordial terms with you, though? Careful what you wish for.

    2. Instead, the CCP and our Establishment overthrew the USA.

  16. As bad as I think the CCP is, I’m actually more concerned about woke American Democrats (W.A.D.s). Although I wouldn’t be surprised if some of their wacky, racial, devisive ideas are being created by CCP/Russians who know the woke would eat it up on FB.

  17. The earth is round and the world is constantly changing. Don’t look at today’s world from the perspective of the past. Sometimes you have to admit that China is doing very well in 2020.

    1. Agreed.

    2. As I said before elsewhere, I can’t think of anything more explicitly “white privilege” than saying “Ignore whatever atrocities may’ve occurred in the past.” and expecting it to stick.

  18. China’s government brutally annexed Tibet. More recently, they have completed their vicious crackdown on Hong Kong, and their social credit system is a weapon to terrorize their own people into cowering silence. Right now they are now engaged in the genocide of the Uyghurs. And then there’s their environmental track record.

    What’s the reasonable and nuanced view of the CCP? I guess that’s a question for Hollywood and Google.

  19. China’s military may be second only to our but it is a distance second. While we tie ourselves up being the worlds policeman, China is providing real assistance to nations and in doing so building influence. China is also building a infrastructure and economy for the future. We are arguing over Dr. Seuss books. China sees our future like Russia today, a nuclear power with a third world economy.

    We need to think of China like a runner see his competitors. He not thinking how to slow them down, he thinking how they make him run faster.

    1. China is also building a infrastructure and economy for the future.

      It has yet to prove anything even remotely resembling paying off. They may be more shrewd than the West about demanding returns in exchange for dumping piles of cash on the third world, but that remains to be seen. A large part of the reason why The West was largely unsuccessful in their cash dumps was because of the corrupt socialist dictatorships in the regions. Pumping cash into regions of the world that achieve prosperity as they liberalize may work to endear the Chinese, but not the CCP, to the world.

      Screeching that the term “Chinese Virus” is a racial slander doesn’t win you any favors among the people, especially when the people who use the term rather overtly refer to the government-run facilities that released the virus and the widely-documented coverup the Chinese government perpetrated.

      1. The people who say “Chinese Virus” are irrelevant. China doesn’t tailor her policies to please these people, and never will. China has more important fish to fry.

  20. Meanwhile I would worry more about Russia right now. Seems they are up to something. Ukraine I suppose.

    1. I’m worried about the flowers in my garden. I really should give them more water.

  21. I see no reason why the USA and China can’t be on perfectly

Please to post comments