All things: China

[Daehawk]

I still read this thread title when I see it as All things: Cheeiina.

[Hyena]

I still read this thread title when I see it as All things: Cheeiina.

"Jee-inah"

[Max Peck]

Amid strained US ties, China finds unlikely friend in Utah

China’s global campaign to win friends and influence policy has blossomed in a surprising place: Utah, a deeply religious and conservative state with few obvious ties to the world’s most powerful communist country.

An investigation by The Associated Press has found that China and its U.S.-based advocates spent years building relationships with the state’s officials and lawmakers. Those efforts have paid dividends at home and abroad, the AP found: Lawmakers delayed legislation Beijing didn’t like, nixed resolutions that conveyed displeasure with its actions and expressed support in ways that enhanced the Chinese government’s image.

Its work in Utah is emblematic of a broader effort by Beijing to secure allies at the local level as its relations with the U.S. and its western allies have turned acrimonious. U.S. officials say local leaders are at risk of being manipulated by China and have deemed the influence campaign a threat to national security.

Beijing’s success in Utah shows “how pervasive and persistent China has been in trying to influence America,” said Frank Montoya Jr., a retired FBI counterintelligence agent who lives in Utah.

“Utah is an important foothold,” he said. “If the Chinese can succeed in Salt Lake City, they can also make it in New York and elsewhere.”

Security experts say that China’s campaign is widespread and tailored to local communities. In Utah, the AP found, Beijing and pro-China advocates appealed to lawmakers’ affiliations with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, better known as the Mormon church, which is the state’s dominant religion and one that has long dreamed of expanding in China.

[Grifman]

[malchior]

It is hard not to tie this to the internal instability in the United States. On top of this, Charles Michel head of the European Council claimed that Macron's views are not his exclusively. He said many EU nations are thinking about moving towards believing in European strategic autonomy. They are FAR away from being able to do that. It is unclear how widespread that viewpoint is because most leaders are keeping quiet with Ukraine still in the midst of a war. However, it would have been pretty unthinkable to hear that out loud before Trump.

WaPo

More people are mad at French President Emmanuel Macron.

After weeks of protests over an unpopular pension overhaul plan at home, the French president now faces outrage from allies abroad over his chummy trip to China and remarks on the need for Europe to stand apart from the United States on Taiwan and other issues.

The visit and its aftermath have angered politicians and analysts on both sides of the Atlantic, highlighting gaps between the U.S. and French approaches to China, showcasing division within the European Union — and probably delighting Beijing.

The interview in question took place during a three-day visit to China that raised eyebrows for its surprisingly upbeat tone, considering that Beijing has yet to condemn Russia’s war in Ukraine.

As his presidential plane traveled from Beijing to the southern city of Guangzhou, where he was booked for tea with President Xi Jinping, Macron took questions from Politico and French daily Les Echos, including a question about Europe’s position on Taiwan.

“The question we Europeans are asking ourselves is the following: Is it in our interest to accelerate when it comes to Taiwan? No,” he said in the interview. “The worst thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the U.S. rhythm and a Chinese overreaction.”

Europe, Macron said, risks getting “caught up in crises that are not ours, which prevents it from building strategic autonomy.” He also said that Europe was at risk of becoming a “vassal” and that the continent should reduce its dependence on the “extraterritoriality of the U.S. dollar” — all Beijing talking points.

[malchior]

This has been wild today. Too much to see other than summarize it.

[malchior]

Foreign Policy explaining how divided the EU is over China with Macron apparently leading a group naively treating with China. In any case, it appears that China has won over significant levels of support in the EU and may very well drive a wedge in the post-WW2 order. Especially with the United States descending into chaos. The world is becoming much more dangerous.

Over the past two weeks, Chinese Communist Party Chairman Xi Jinping has been holding court for visiting European dignitaries. In late March, Spanish President Pedro Sánchez was the first European statesman to meet the Chinese leader after his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow. French President Emmanuel Macron followed last week together with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The only winner from these visits is Xi. Not only did he not make any concession on any issue vital to European interests, from Russia’s war to economic relations, his European visitors treated Xi to a display of European and transatlantic disunity serving the Chinese leader a major strategic objective on a silver platter and leaving Europe’s China policy in disarray.

...

It was not supposed to be this way. The plan of European leaders was a good one in theory. They wanted to take advantage of reopening after the end of China’s “zero covid” regime and personally press important concerns with Xi, in particular Russia’s war. Macron had invited von der Leyen to join him in Beijing to celebrate European unity and met her for a preparatory lunch in Paris before the trip. The French president clearly seemed to want to signal that he is a more committed European than German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who had embarked on a solo trip to Beijing in November 2022, after rejecting Macron’s offer to go together. Von der Leyen had done her part to signal a determined European approach.

On March 30 in Brussels, she gave the boldest speech of any senior European decision-maker yet on how to deal with Xi’s China. The very fact that the EU Commission president chose to invite Berlin-based Merics, Europe’s leading think tank on China that had been put under sanctions by the Chinese party state in 2021, sent a clear message to Beijing. The speech itself was even clearer. Von der Leyen depicts a China that is “more repressive at home and more assertive abroad” where security and control trump all other concerns and that is quick to use political and economic coercion trying to exploit the very dependencies of other countries on China that it systematically seeks to encourage. She described a country that Xi prepares for a long-term violent “struggle” with the United States and that has the “clear goal” of “systemic change of the international order with China at its center.”

To prove her point, von der Leyen added that the recent “show of friendship in Moscow” says “a thousand words about this new vision for an international order.” No other European leader had ever presented such an accurate dissection of Xi’s agenda. As a European response, von der Leyen outlined an ambitious “derisking” strategy that puts economic security at the center of the relationship with Beijing and includes an instrument for outbound investment screening in technologically sensitive areas. Just as in 2019 when it introduced the notion of China as a “systemic rival” the EU Commission had again pushed the boundaries of Europe’s China policy. But straight away the China’s EU Ambassador Fu Cong voiced doubts whether most member states were ready for von der Leyen’s agenda. For him, it sounded like “two people quarrelling with each other,” he told the New York Times, meaning “Europe has not formulated a coherent policy toward China."

Both Sánchez and Macron worked very hard during their China trips to prove Fu right. In a speech at the Boao Forum, China’s version of Davos, the Spanish president praised China for its belief in “a strong, transparent, and rules-based multilateral system,” directly contradicting what von der Leyen had said about Beijing’s vision for international order.

Given France’s status as a permament member of the United Nations and Europe’s second-most important economic power, Macron could have offset these remarks by clearly aligning himself von den der Leyen’s derisking agenda. The French president instead chose to do his utmost to pull the rug from under von der Leyen’s feet during their joint visit in Beijing. Instead of derisking, Macron firmly stuck to illusions of reciprocity in economic relations with China, as if he learned nothing from the previous instances that he had pursued this approach only to find Beijing did not deliver. On Russia, Macron did not manage to extract any commitments that substantively go beyond the statement against the use of nuclear weapons that Scholz got from Xi in November. That is not surprising given Xi’s determination to stand by Putin’s side to keep Russia as an ally in the struggle against the United States.

[Grifman]

[Victoria Raverna]

If Taiwan declares independence and China has to invade, that'll means war in Taiwan and bad for people in Taiwan including foreign workers that are in Taiwan. So it is better for Taiwan just keep the current status.

[Isgrimnur]

There is no “has to invade”. There is NEVER a “has to invade”.

[Victoria Raverna]

There is no “has to invade”. There is NEVER a “has to invade”.

From China viewpoint, they have to invade because to them Taiwan is part of China. US had the same experience when some states want to secede and war had to be fought for that.

Instead of provoking China, it is better to keep Taiwan's current status.

[malchior]

That is why the US has the policy it does towards Taiwan. The Chinese are lying about our policy in their threat making.

[Grifman]

This is just a start, but it is a hopeful one:



The last thing the US, China and the world needs is a war between the US and China.

[Kasey Chang]

I was watching the "uncle Roger" podcast by Nigel Ng and I learned some things I find... "hmmm..."

Apparently Nigel got canceled twice by China, but not for anything he'd "done", but merely for the people he associated with.

He did a video collab with Mike Chen, who's on both as himself, and "Strictly Dumpling" channels on YT. Mike Chen basically eats his way around Asia, like 7-Eleven Food, and so on. I find that content interesting, so I've watched more than a few episodes. Apparently, so did Nigel, as Nigel's "schtick" is being a comedian food critic.

Nigel got "cancelled" for that because, he didn't know it at the time, Mike Chen is pro-falungong. He never speaks of it in his YT videos, but if you look into Mike Chen's personal posts, it's there. His channels in China got reported and he had to release a statement basically apologize for that.

Then someone, probably pro-falungong, went after him from the West, calling him a CCP apologist, so he's basically roasted from both sides.

Messy indeed.

[Max Peck]

What could go wrong?

The US Navy, NATO, and NASA are using a shady Chinese company’s encryption chips

From TikTok to Huawei routers to DJI drones, rising tensions between China and the US have made Americans—and the US government—increasingly wary of Chinese-owned technologies. But thanks to the complexity of the hardware supply chain, encryption chips sold by the subsidiary of a company specifically flagged in warnings from the US Department of Commerce for its ties to the Chinese military have found their way into the storage hardware of military and intelligence networks across the West.

In July of 2021, the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security added the Hangzhou, China-based encryption chip manufacturer Hualan Microelectronics, also known as Sage Microelectronics, to its so-called “Entity List,” a vaguely named trade restrictions list that highlights companies “acting contrary to the foreign policy interests of the United States.” Specifically, the bureau noted that Hualan had been added to the list for “acquiring and ... attempting to acquire US-origin items in support of military modernization for [China's] People's Liberation Army.”

Yet nearly two years later, Hualan—and in particular its subsidiary known as Initio, a company originally headquartered in Taiwan that it acquired in 2016—still supplies encryption microcontroller chips to Western manufacturers of encrypted hard drives, including several that list as customers on their websites Western governments' aerospace, military, and intelligence agencies: NASA, NATO, and the US and UK militaries. Federal procurement records show that US government agencies from the Federal Aviation Administration to the Drug Enforcement Administration to the US Navy have bought encrypted hard drives that use the chips, too.

The disconnect between the Commerce Department’s warnings and Western government customers means that chips sold by Hualan’s subsidiary have ended up deep inside sensitive Western information networks, perhaps due to the ambiguity of their Initio branding and its Taiwanese origin prior to 2016. The chip vendor’s Chinese ownership has raised fears among security researchers and China-focused national security analysts that they could have a hidden backdoor that would allow China’s government to stealthily decrypt Western agencies’ secrets. And while no such backdoor has been found, security researchers warn that if one did exist, it would be virtually impossible to detect it.

[malchior]

Blinken is on the ground with China right now trying to patch things up and Biden is out there embarrassing a culture where face is very important. Biden sometimes has utterly incoherent foreign policy judgement.

[El Guapo]

Xi is a dictator, though. In fact, he's been working very hard to take power from the CCP generally and consolidate it in his own hands. Biden needs to be careful and listen to his foreign policy people, but I find it hard to fault him too much for speaking an obvious truth.

[Blackhawk]

Sometimes I wonder if it's just age weakening his speech filter.

[malchior]

Xi is a dictator, though. In fact, he's been working very hard to take power from the CCP generally and consolidate it in his own hands. Biden needs to be careful and listen to his foreign policy people, but I find it hard to fault him too much for speaking an obvious truth.

It isn't about speaking truth. It is the spectacle of sending your Secretary of State somewhere and then cutting his legs out from under him. He put Blinken in a terrible spot. It is bad leadership. It is bad foreign policy. He absolutely deserves to get burned for this gaffe. This is the sort of amateur hour shit we'd ascribe to Trump.

[El Guapo]

Xi is a dictator, though. In fact, he's been working very hard to take power from the CCP generally and consolidate it in his own hands. Biden needs to be careful and listen to his foreign policy people, but I find it hard to fault him too much for speaking an obvious truth.

It isn't about speaking truth. It is the spectacle of sending your Secretary of State somewhere and then cutting his legs out from under him. He put Blinken in a terrible spot. It is bad leadership. It is bad foreign policy. He absolutely deserves to get burned for this gaffe. This is the sort of amateur hour shit we'd ascribe to Trump.

Yeah, I get it. But like...Xi is a dictator, though. And to be honest I'm also kind of skeptical that this is actually going to impact U.S.-China relations in any meaningful way, since it doesn't change the institutions or self-interests of either country. Maybe China grabs this as an excuse to do something that it was going to do anyway, but beyond that, I doubt it.

[malchior]

But what does calling him a dictator get anyone? Nothing. The downside is it possibly hardens an adversary against us or makes it more difficult for them to cooperate or compete fairly with us. Why send Blinken at all if you are going to make it pointless?

Also this isn't something that happened in isolation. Biden has made significant foreign policy errors with his mouth. Honestly I just want a competent leader who doesn't constantly blurt out pointless facts counterproductively.

[YellowKing]

Yeah we get it, you hate Biden. But unfortunately we live in a world where the alternative is Trump.

[El Guapo]

But what does calling him a dictator get anyone? Nothing. The downside is it possibly hardens an adversary against us or makes it more difficult for them to cooperate or compete fairly with us. Why send Blinken at all if you are going to make it pointless?

Also this isn't something that happened in isolation. Biden has made significant foreign policy errors with his mouth. Honestly I just want a competent leader who doesn't constantly blurt out pointless facts counterproductively.

Like I said, I'm skeptical that this is going to make any substantive difference in U.S.-China relations, although I'm sure that China will continue to bluster about it. And there are some foreign policy costs that can come from being seen as too willing to cater to the sensitivities of dictators.

But all I'm saying is that I'm not inclined to knock someone too hard for speaking the truth.

[malchior]

But what does calling him a dictator get anyone? Nothing. The downside is it possibly hardens an adversary against us or makes it more difficult for them to cooperate or compete fairly with us. Why send Blinken at all if you are going to make it pointless?

Also this isn't something that happened in isolation. Biden has made significant foreign policy errors with his mouth. Honestly I just want a competent leader who doesn't constantly blurt out pointless facts counterproductively.

Like I said, I'm skeptical that this is going to make any substantive difference in U.S.-China relations, although I'm sure that China will continue to bluster about it.

I wouldn't be sure about that. They are our biggest trading partners and there are constant trade and political negotiations going on. These errors may and likely lead to real world concessions that impact real people. It's not like they're going to say outright what the damage is because it's all horse trading. We typically only see the end product of negotiations. In any case, further discussions are planned. We'll know if the rift is serious or not if they cancel future visits.

But all I'm saying is that I'm not inclined to knock someone too hard for speaking the truth.

It seems like we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I think it's important to speak truth when it is has impact and hold your tongue when it won't help and only hurts. This is the latter IMO. There are several stories this morning about other foreign leaders weighing in (example here) to defend Xi. That's unfortunate but this is the unfortunately how the game is played.

Yeah we get it, you hate Biden. But unfortunately we live in a world where the alternative is Trump.

I don't hate Biden. He is an ok President. Unfortunately the times called for a great President. Pointing out when he messes up and hoping it spurs change is literally how democracy works. Convincing others that he messed up is part of that as well.

[Isgrimnur]

Unfortunately the times called for a great President.

When was the last time we had one of those?

[malchior]

The scholars say LBJ with Obama nearly cracking top 10. So he was pretty close to great and probably would have been if the nation wasn't such a hot mess.

[Kurth]

But what does calling him a dictator get anyone? Nothing. The downside is it possibly hardens an adversary against us or makes it more difficult for them to cooperate or compete fairly with us. Why send Blinken at all if you are going to make it pointless?

Also this isn't something that happened in isolation. Biden has made significant foreign policy errors with his mouth. Honestly I just want a competent leader who doesn't constantly blurt out pointless facts counterproductively.

Like I said, I'm skeptical that this is going to make any substantive difference in U.S.-China relations, although I'm sure that China will continue to bluster about it. And there are some foreign policy costs that can come from being seen as too willing to cater to the sensitivities of dictators.

But all I'm saying is that I'm not inclined to knock someone too hard for speaking the truth.

A car salesman telling you the truth about the lemon you’re about to buy? Sure. A waitress telling you the truth that the daily special isn’t all that special? Absolutely. The leader of the free world talking about matters of incredible geo-political importance? Not so much.

It’s ridiculous that anyone would give Biden a pass because what he said about Xi being a dictator is, like, obviously true. That’s so besides the point that it shouldn’t even be raised.

This is diplomacy and geo-politics with a rival super power we are in a delicate and potentially deadly dance with. We need sound, thoughtful, well-executed strategy. We don’t need truth.

[Blackhawk]

I'm a big believer in the truth. I despise dishonesty, having been on the receiving end of far, far more than my fair share. On top of that, I'm often accused to being too honest and blunt (an unfortunate trait that sometimes comes with autism.)

And even I think that Biden did something idiotic. Was it the truth? Yeah. But Biden is the leader of a nation that's in the middle of negotiations with another nation. Even I know that that isn't the time to publicly mock the leader of the other nation, truth or not. He's the President, which makes him a diplomat, and that carries responsibilities. Those responsibilities are in conflict with acting an editorial writer for the NYT.

And as for 'telling it like it is', consequences be damned - isn't that the same thing that the MAGAs praised about Trump? I'm not sure that that's an example I want our leaders to follow going forward.

[GreenGoo]

And as for 'telling it like it is', consequences be damned - isn't that the same thing that the MAGAs praised about Trump? I'm not sure that that's an example I want our leaders to follow going forward.

I'll just point out that Drumpf never "told it like it was". He lied and hated and lied some more, and people loved him for it. At no point was he spewing hard truths.

[Blackhawk]

And as for 'telling it like it is', consequences be damned - isn't that the same thing that the MAGAs praised about Trump? I'm not sure that that's an example I want our leaders to follow going forward.

I'll just point out that Drumpf never "told it like it was". He lied and hated and lied some more, and people loved him for it. At no point was he spewing hard truths.

Maybe, but he had funny names for people.

[GreenGoo]

If you are 5, maybe.

One of drumpf's greatest sins is not just that he's a piece of crap, but that he's so bad at insulting people. When will an advisor explain to him that "poopy head" is a clever escalation for him?

[Kurth]

If you are 5, maybe.

One of drumpf's greatest sins is not just that he's a piece of crap, but that he's so bad at insulting people. When will an advisor explain to him that "poopy head" is a clever escalation for him?

There's no way that's one of Trump's greatest sins given everything that POS has done. That said, and I don't want to defend him in the least, you're flat out wrong that his crappy insults aren't an effective weapon he deploys to great effect. His ability to cut his opponents off at the knees with a stupid, belittling nickname that catches on is maybe his greatest skill.

[GreenGoo]

I have nothing but derision for drumpf's insults. I would crush him until he cried if we were to go at each other. And I know several family members that might be able to actually kill him with their words. He is the thinnest skinned man I have ever witnessed. He's also one of the slowest thinkers, and least creative. Honestly, I am flabbergasted that anyone views him in a positive light, ESPECIALLY about his ability to insult people. His game is weak sauce.

His insults might be effective, but that says more about his audience than his barbed wit.

[Blackhawk]

If you are 5, maybe.

One of drumpf's greatest sins is not just that he's a piece of crap, but that he's so bad at insulting people. When will an advisor explain to him that "poopy head" is a clever escalation for him?

For which I was mocking him.

[GreenGoo]

If you are 5, maybe.

One of drumpf's greatest sins is not just that he's a piece of crap, but that he's so bad at insulting people. When will an advisor explain to him that "poopy head" is a clever escalation for him?

For which I was mocking him.

[Kurth]

I have nothing but derision for drumpf's insults. I would crush him until he cried if we were to go at each other. And I know several family members that might be able to actually kill him with their words. He is the thinnest skinned man I have ever witnessed. He's also one of the slowest thinkers, and least creative. Honestly, I am flabbergasted that anyone views him in a positive light, ESPECIALLY about his ability to insult people. His game is weak sauce.

His insults might be effective, but that says more about his audience than his barbed wit.

Yeah, I don’t think we disagree on the question of whether or not Trump has a barbed wit. He most certainly does not.

It just seems like making fun of his stupid insults is missing the point. It’s not that he’s witty, but he’s damned effective. We can mock him all we want, but we’re not his audience. His “Ron DeSanctimonious” and “Sleepy Joe” and “Lyin’ Ted” and all the other ones don’t have to land with us, and they’re not designed to. But they sure as hell seem to land with his MAGAt audience, and they’re a critical part of why Trump has a vice grip on the GOP right now.

[GreenGoo]

Sure, but I mean...no one else does that because everyone else has a modicum of respect for other people, or at least hide their derision. Drumpf has no filters, but what he spews is puerile gibberish. I mean, sleepy joe? Lyin' Ted? Oh, he called a politician a liar? How crazily effective.

Again, drumpf is barely elementary school levels of...whatever you want to call what he does. That it works is the true sin, and it's not his sin. His sin is not being very good at it.

It's the presidential candidate version of libtards, or repugnicans, but not as clever. I would be fucking horrified and embarrassed if my political candidate issued direct personal attacks of such juvenile content. But apparently at least half of America has no shame. Like, literally no ability to be embarrassed (see any typical interview with drumpfites). How can so many people have no ability to be introspective?

edit: To be clear drumpf has plenty of "followers" in Canada as well. It's humanity that appalls me, not America.

[Kurth]

Sure, but I mean...no one else does that because everyone else has a modicum of respect for other people, or at least hide their derision. Drumpf has no filters, but what he spews is puerile gibberish. I mean, sleepy joe? Lyin' Ted? Oh, he called a politician a liar? How crazily effective.

Again, drumpf is barely elementary school levels of...whatever you want to call what he does. That it works is the true sin, and it's not his sin. His sin is not being very good at it.

It's the presidential candidate version of libtards, or repugnicans, but not as clever. I would be fucking horrified and embarrassed if my political candidate issued direct personal attacks of such juvenile content. But apparently at least half of America has no shame. Like, literally no ability to be embarrassed (see any typical interview with drumpfites). How can so many people have no ability to be introspective?

edit: To be clear drumpf has plenty of "followers" in Canada as well. It's humanity that appalls me, not America.

Again, I don’t want to quibble, but it still seems to me like you’re asserting that he’s not “crazily effective.” But he is. His dumb insults are incredibly effective. So much so, that all the other spineless GOP candidate wannabes are (with the exception of Christie and the newly arrived Hurd) scared to death to take him on. You’re just flat wrong to say he’s “not very good at it.”

In contrast, you’re spot on where you decry the millions of people who fall for Trump’s crap.

[coopasonic]

Sure, but I mean...no one else does that because everyone else has a modicum of respect for other people, or at least hide their derision. Drumpf has no filters, but what he spews is puerile gibberish. I mean, sleepy joe? Lyin' Ted? Oh, he called a politician a liar? How crazily effective.

Again, drumpf is barely elementary school levels of...whatever you want to call what he does. That it works is the true sin, and it's not his sin. His sin is not being very good at it.

It's the presidential candidate version of libtards, or repugnicans, but not as clever. I would be fucking horrified and embarrassed if my political candidate issued direct personal attacks of such juvenile content. But apparently at least half of America has no shame. Like, literally no ability to be embarrassed (see any typical interview with drumpfites). How can so many people have no ability to be introspective?

edit: To be clear drumpf has plenty of "followers" in Canada as well. It's humanity that appalls me, not America.

Again, I don’t want to quibble, but it still seems to me like you’re asserting that he’s not “crazily effective.” But he is. His dumb insults are incredibly effective. So much so, that all the other spineless GOP candidate wannabes are (with the exception of Christie and the newly arrived Hurd) scared to death to take him on. You’re just flat wrong to say he’s “not very good at it.”

In contrast, you’re spot on where you decry the millions of people who fall for Trump’s crap.

I think the space between you two is that you think maybe Trump insults are third grade level because that is what is effective, maybe he could do better but that isn't what his audience wants, and GreenGoo thinks maybe it is all he's capable of.

[GreenGoo]

You could replace drumpf with Nelson from Simpsons and do better in the polls.

edit: And get more thoughtful policies.