14 replies to this topic

[Yuli Ban]

It's fast becoming obvious that we've stumbled into a new Cold War with China. The trade war was only the opening act.

Funny as hell, I think this is precisely what China needs to push themselves over the brink and achieve true superpower status. They couldn't do it through just a 'peaceful' rise.

 

The US-China Cold War Has Begun

Vice President Pence’s speech to the Hudson Institute Thursday has been widely portrayed in the global press as an official declaration that the world’s two largest economies are engaged in a “New Cold War.” It’s hard to read it any other way.

The origin of the term “Cold War” is generally credited to George Orwell, who used it in a trenchant 1945 essay pondering the geo-strategic implications of the atomic bomb. The existence of a weapon so destructive, Orwell predicted, would put an end to overt shooting wars between great powers, and replace them instead with endless below-the-brink hostilities: espionage, subterfuge, influence-peddling, propaganda, and proxy wars. Conflict would stop short of direct combat—but drag on across many fronts without resolution; the bomb’s legacy, he warned, would be a “peace that is no peace.”

That proved a prescient description of the rivalry between the US and the Soviet Union from 1945 until the collapse of the Berlin Wall—and, in recent months, has become an apt characterization of the Sino-American relationship.

In his Hudson Institute address, Pence detailed a litany of Chinese offenses: meddling in domestic US elections; doling out unfair subsidies to state-owned companies; forcing US companies to surrender technology as the price of competing in the Chinese market; mounting cyber-attacks on US companies and government agencies; recklessly confronting the US naval forces in the South China Sea; bullying Taiwan; and trampling the rights of its own citizens.

China’s goal, Pence charged, was to thwart a second term for Donald Trump, “push the United States of America from the Western Pacific and attempt to prevent us from coming to the aid of our allies.”

Pence’s speech came two days after a Chinese warship sailed within 45 yards of a US destroyer in waters near one of the disputed islets China claims in the Spratly archipelago.

[Yuli Ban]

Beijing’s challenge to US warship in South China Sea ‘deliberate and calculated’, observers say

China was making a clear and deliberate statement that it will not tolerate challenges to its sovereignty when it sent a destroyer to “confront” a US warship in the South China Sea on Sunday, military and diplomatic analysts said. 
The incident happened when a Chinese Luyang-class destroyer sailed within 41 metres (135 feet) of the USS Decatur in an operation described by Washington as “unsafe and unprofessional” and by Beijing as a necessary defence of its territory.

[Yuli Ban]

Are we truly prepared for a war with Russia or China?

It would be terrible if the United States got into a major war, but it would be much worse if it lost one.
Despite growing threats from Russia and China, American experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq have created weariness in the American public and have focused the country on counterterrorism and counterinsurgency instead of major power warfare.
To deter, and if necessary defeat, Russian and Chinese aggression, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) would likely need a strategy to overcome these obstacles. 
The National Defense Strategy (NDS) seeks to focus the DOD’s efforts on “major power competition” with Russia and China. Recent Russian and Chinese actions indicate a willingness to challenge the international order and the United States’ position in it.
To prevent further adventurism, DOD could better prepare itself by investing in new technologies, developing new ways of employing them and by placing forces where they can quickly be brought to bear. More fundamentally, both the American public and DOD could face a major reorientation to be able to focus on major war.
DOD may not be able to secure the necessary resources or be given the leeway to change how it does business or to redirect its investments without broader public acceptance that the chance of warfare with Russia and China is likely enough to merit additional preparation.
Recent behavior and underlying drivers give reason for concern. For example, both the Putin and Xi governments are worried about their perceived legitimacy and their economic prospects and could engage in foreign adventures to distract from problems at home.

[Yuli Ban]

The U.S. and Russia Are Shrinking Their Nuclear Arsenals—But China Isn't

The number of nuclear weapons worldwide dipped slightly in 2017, with the world’s nine nuclear powers collectively downsizing by 500 weapons.
The United States and Russia entered 2018 with fewer weapons, while China, India, and Pakistan gave their modest arsenals a slight boost. The world’s newest nuclear power, North Korea, is still a mystery with an unknown quantity of nuclear weapons.

The US and Russia individually destroyed more nukes than China has in total, though.

[TranscendingGod]

We're no where near what would be called a "Cold War" if "Cold War" is referring to the state of affairs between the Soviet Union and the United States during the communist reign. There is no impetus for one as of now. 

[Alislaws]

 

Beijing’s challenge to US warship in South China Sea ‘deliberate and calculated’, observers say

China was making a clear and deliberate statement that it will not tolerate challenges to its sovereignty when it sent a destroyer to “confront” a US warship in the South China Sea on Sunday, military and diplomatic analysts said. 
The incident happened when a Chinese Luyang-class destroyer sailed within 41 metres (135 feet) of the USS Decatur in an operation described by Washington as “unsafe and unprofessional” and by Beijing as a necessary defence of its territory.

 

I like how the Chinese asserting control of what is almost their own coastline is an example of "Chinese aggression". 

 

This would be like China getting upset that the USA is trying to assert control of the Caribbean sea. 

 

We're no where near what would be called a "Cold War" if "Cold War" is referring to the state of affairs between the Soviet Union and the United States during the communist reign. There is no impetus for one as of now. 

 

At least this thread is more multipurpose than the "trade war" thread. It can contain china/us trade news and a whole range of things unrelated to trade, And I suspect there will be much more news to come as friction between these powers continues, so still nice to have it, even if the name might be a bit dramatic (for now)

[Outlook]

Pakistan-Indian cold war

Saudi-Iranian cold war

Sino-American cold war

EU-Russian cold war

[Erowind]

It's not a cold war till travel bans appear. As far as I'm concerned this is mostly media spectacle. I think calling this a cold war is a stretch right now, the Chinese aren't culturally alien like the Soviets were. I mean, yes they're vastly different, but economically they're rapidly shifting towards full capitalism. Niether side is prepared to enact Autarky and be independent, a true cold war would kill both economies right now. Maybe in 10-20 years the Chinese could be self sufficient enough to pull that trigger and rely on the new trade routes they're building, but they're not there yet. And the US certainly won't be independent enough to cut trade anytime within the next 30 years with the current political climate.

[10 year march]

https://mobile.twitt...227671095541760

China, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, Syria and Venezuela are condeming US sanctions during corona virus writing a letter to the UN. They can be assumed to be China's allies or at least the US's enemy's in the new cold war.

[10 year march]

Can you change the title from a discussions to and discussions

[10 year march]

Chinese social imperialism is coming to Australia

https://www.smh.com....326-p54e3z.html

[Yuli Ban]

Can you change the title from a discussions to and discussions

I decided to merge it with the existing US/China cold war thread. But as others have said, there is no cold war at the moment.

[caltrek]

Whether it deserves to be called a cold war or not there are definie tensions present.  I have actually not read the full article presented below (using Word tells me the entire article is 2,443 word in length).  I did read enough to appreciate that it fits nicely into the theme of this thread.

How Huwaii is Dividing Western Nations

 

https://techcrunch.c...estern-nations/

 

Introduction:

 

(TechCrunch) The relationship between the United Kingdom and Australia is not usually a flashpoint in international relations. After all, the two allies share a common language, ancestry, and monarch. So what caused a dustup recently that saw a senior Australian parliamentarian rebuke the British foreign secretary, and for a group of Australian MPs to then cancel a trip to London in protest?

 

The answer is fears over Huawei, the Chinese telecom giant at the center of the 5G next-generation wireless debate. Australian officials were miffed when the British government recommended that the company be allowed to play a limited role in the U.K.’s 5G deployment despite calling it a “high risk” supplier due to its close ties to the Chinese government (the company’s founder, Ren Zhengfei, served for many years as an engineer in the People’s Liberation Army). The Australian government, a fellow member of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance (which includes the two countries plus the United States, Canada, and New Zealand), disagreed back in 2017 when it barred Huawei on national security grounds.

 

Now, two close allies are at cross purposes about the very future of the internet. What’s at stake is not just who equips the future of telecom infrastructure, but the very values that the internet itself holds.

 

Two countries, ocean(s) apart

 

It’s not just Australia and Britain that find themselves separated by an ocean (or two). In America, Huawei has become the Trump Administration’s favorite company to hate. In a speech at this year’s Munich Security Conference, Defense Secretary Mark Esper called the company “today’s poster child” for “nefarious activity” while another White House official compared the company to “the Mafia.”  It should come as no surprise that the company is the target of trade restrictions, a criminal action against its CFO, and a concerted diplomatic campaign. 

 

America’s concerns are twofold. First, that critical infrastructure provided by a Chinese company with such close ties to the country’s central leadership is an unacceptable security risk. Second, that arresting Huawei’s increasing dominance risks surrendering any chance for American leadership in 5G technology.

[caltrek]

I normally don't like citing folks from the Hoover Institute as I generally find their politics far more conservative than my own.  Still, in the Real Clear Politics article presented below by a fellow at the Hoover Institution, a lot of good points are made.

 

Has the U.S.-China Cold War Now Begun?

 

https://www.realclea...tm_source=polls

 

Introduction:

(Real Clear Politics) Among the biggest victims of the coronavirus pandemic is the fiction of amicable U.S.-China relations. Those ties have been worsening for years, even before President Trump decided to call out Beijing’s predatory behavior starting in 2017. With the crisis now pitting America and China openly against each other, it seems impossible to salvage the old working ties. Washington now faces an unambiguously adversarial relationship with the Chinese Communist Party, one in which global ideological blocs may be drawn. Losing this new cold war would be a grievous blow to global transparency and liberal order. It would also threaten a significant reduction of American power and influence abroad. 

 

Even just a few months ago, it appeared that traditional engagement between the United States and China might survive. The trade agreement was the most visible sign that elites in both countries wanted to return to some level of normalcy. Outstanding issues such as Huawei and 5G were slouching towards a state of permanent irresolution, the imprisonment of a million Uighurs was largely forgotten, and cultural and student exchanges were escaping any serious interruption. A stalemate in the South China Sea was also emerging, with the Trump administration dramatically increasing the number of freedom-of-navigation operations, but with the Chinese dug into their new military bases. All that has been swept away by the coronavirus crisis.

 

What China Did and Did Not Do 

 

It is important both politically and morally to retain clarity about what has happened. Arguments that Washington and Beijing must work together to defeat the pandemic are foundering on the rocks of the Chinese government’s freely-chosen actions. CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping decided early on that concealing the truth about the outbreak, both at home and abroad, was a national priority. This put his country on a collision course with Washington and the world.  

 

Although the article mentions Trump's insistence on using the term "China virus," more could have been written explaining why that is a bad idea. It should be seen not only as a rhetorical attack on China, but also as a sign of disdain for the scientific community that otherwise reached a consensus that Covid19 or at least novel coronavirus is preferable.  One more sign of Trump's contempt for science. 

[10 year march]

This seems to signal the start of the new cold war and may be remembered in history as the declaration of the new cold war

 

https://www.whitehou...obal-ambitions/