Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The West should absolutely continue to supply arms to the Ukrainians. It is a cheap investment to degrade the incompetent & corrupt Russian military until it is no longer a threat to anybody.
The failure of Putin’s gangster state is a sight to behold.
China along with India are probably the only two countries able to influence Putin in a major way. I do agree with the need for a different approach. The current approach is doing nothing more than making defense industry richer while ramping up inflation for everyone else. Unfortunately, many politicians must create and or maintain the "tough guy” image. Softer approaches don't win votes.
Yes. To tread cautiously with China. Especially the West was unprepared for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, they will be equally unprepared if China invades Taiwan.
In addition the EU members are seeking a different approach with China:
Quote:
“The US definitely wants to isolate Beijing, expecting Europe to join Washington’s anti-China alliance. But as we are clearly witnessing in the Ukraine conflict, Europe has paid the heaviest price for Washington’s Russia policy,” says Bulent Guven, a Turkish-German political scientist.
According to Guven, the energy-rich US is not facing any shortage of gas or oil unlike its European partners which are struggling to meet their requirements, leading to public discontent.
The Netherlands has already lifted some sanctions on Russia to ease pressure over its economy and has indicated that it will reach out to China as well.
“The Netherlands will not copy the American measures one-to-one,” said Dutch Foreign Trade Minister Liesje Schreinemacher in an interview this month, referring to Washington’s export controls on China.
French leader Emmanuel Macron has also signalled that he will visit China in the beginning of the new year in a bid to recalibrate Paris-Beijing ties, showing another crack in the Western camp against Beijing.
“I am convinced China can play, on our side, a more important mediating role in the coming months, to prevent in particular a stronger return of ground offensives in early February,” said Macron, referring to the Ukraine conflict. Macron’s statement is another indication of increasing differences over the West’s China policy.
Germany German Chancellor Olaf Scholz recently visited China and met the Chinese president, he was critisied by some anti Chinese politicans in the West. He doing it, as Germany is experiencing an recession and needs to secure its markets in China, so it can help Germany recover from its recession.
Raffaello Pantucci, a senior associate fellow at Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), a British think-tank, also believes that Scholz’s China visit marks a return to “the approach that Europe had to China previously.” A lot of other people and countries are also returning to their previous positions in regard to China, he tells TRT World.
While European states continue to call out issues like Taiwan and Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, they also aim to bring their economic relations with China back to pre-pandemic levels, moving forward, according to Pantucci. https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/eu...us-split-62860
Yes. To tread cautiously with China. Especially the West was unprepared for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, they will be equally unprepared if China invades Taiwan.
In addition the EU members are seeking a different approach with China:
Europe probably wouldn’t be doing that if the U.S. was more receptive to a free trade agreement with them. However, that doesn’t seem to be in the cards.
Well Sunak does not seem the anti china hawk compared to what he posted in twitter a few months ago:
Quote:
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has said China poses a “systemic” challenge to UK values and interests as his government condemned Beijing after a BBC journalist was beaten while covering Shanghai protests.
In his first major foreign policy speech, Sunak said the so-called “golden era” of UK relations with China was “over, along with the naive idea that trade would automatically lead to social and political reform”.
The United Kingdom would “need to evolve our approach to China” as a result, he said in his speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet in London, adding that Beijing was “consciously competing for global influence using all the levers of state power”.
“Let’s be clear, the so-called ‘golden era’ is over, along with the naive idea that trade would lead to social and political reform,” Sunak said, a reference to former Finance Minister George Osborne’s description of Sino-British ties in 2015.
His government will prioritise deepening trade and security ties with Indo-Pacific allies, he said, adding that “economics and security are indivisible” in the region.
Some in Sunak’s Conservative Party have been critical of the prime minister, regarding him as less hawkish on China than his predecessor Liz Truss.
While running for the top job against Liz Truss, he promised to get tough on China if he won, calling the Asian superpower the “number one threat” to domestic and global security.
However, a planned meeting between Sunak and China’s President Xi Jinping at this month’s G20 summit in Bali fell through, and last week London banned Chinese-made security cameras from sensitive government buildings.
“We recognise China poses a systemic challenge to our values and interests, a challenge that grows more acute as it moves towards even greater authoritarianism,” he said, referring to the BBC statement that one of its journalists had been assaulted by Chinese police.
“Of course, we cannot simply ignore China’s significance in world affairs — to global economic stability or issues like climate change. The US, Canada, Australia, Japan and many others understand this too.”
Like it or not China is a major player in world affairs and one needs to act wisely with dealing with China.
ASEAN may or may not be the heart of his administration's Indo-Pacific strategy,
he must have noticed that all three host countries of ASEAN, G20 and APEC have addressed Xi as "elder brother".
Nov 18, 2022
APEC summit: France's Macron rejects 'confrontation' in Asia
President Emmanuel Macron on Friday urged an end to "confrontation" as he outlined his vision for France's engagement with the Asia-Pacific region. FRANCE 24's James Andre talk to us about the importance of the APEC summit and Macron's strategy.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,175 posts, read 13,455,286 times
Reputation: 19472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greysholic
The EU is a useless sack of ****. No one expects anything from them lol.
I also don't think Britain has much appetite for another US led war, following the US led wars on terror and withdrawal from Afghanistan.
I think Macron is the most vocally supportive of China, and possible the most least supportive of US foreign policy.
Whilst Germany generally just tries to stay out of US led foreign policy and is quite isolationist, with most of it's efforts been in relation to home defence and economic growth.
Interesting no one mentioned the interpretation of the Treat of San Francisco in April of 1952. Whether Taiwan belongs to Beijing or not. Apparently the case had never truely looked after since, it was really a chaotic time when it was written. The island had since been haphazardly adminstratored under martial law by the retreating ROC nationalists who lost their national status globally to the CCP. Martial law was lifted in 1984 but admistration remains the same despite all the talks to be independent. No Allied country officially took over Taiwan under that treaty after Japanese surrendered it as a military island, It would be interesting how it would be like if it were to remain under Japanese civil rule though as opposed to military rule. Apparently I heard somewhere it should had been under US occupation if Beijing didn't get custody over it. I be curious what will happen if it was ruled Beijing always had custody over Taiwan. Or that some other country had custody all these years i.e US. I bet many Taiwan residents who paid large amounts for US immigration green cards would want an explanation.
Ironically despite US's one China policy US recognizes Passports from Taiwan ROC as separate from the PRC thus giving them Visa waiver status which they don't extend the previlege to Hong Kong or Macau PRC passport holders even though many other countries do waive visas for HK/Macau while requiring Visa for mainland passport holders.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
