• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.

CHINA and the US Conflicts of Interest: Reports and Discussions.

J. Abizeid

Well-Known Member
First 'Made in China' passenger jet unveiled - Al Jazeera English


First 'Made in China' passenger jet unveiled
The C919 can seat up to 168 passengers and is meant to compete with single-aisle jets by Airbus and Boeing.


A state-owned manufacturer on Monday unveiled the first plane produced by a Chinese initiative to compete in the market for large passenger jetliners.

China is one of the biggest aviation markets but relies on Boeing and Airbus aircraft. The multibillion-dollar effort to create the homegrown C919 jetliner is aimed at clawing back some of the commercial benefits that flow to foreign suppliers.

The Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China showed off the first of the twin-engine planes in a ceremony attended by some 4,000 government officials and other guests at a hangar near Shanghai's Pudong International Airport.



The first twin-engine 158-seater C919 passenger plane made by The Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China (COMAC) was presented during a ceremony at the company's hangar near the Pudong International Airport in Shanghai, China on Monday, Nov. 2, 2015. [AP Photo]


China has spent seven years and a huge amount of money to develop the 158-seat jet to boost its aviation industry, posing a challenge to Airbus and Boeing. [EPA/Stringer]


The C919 passenger plane is the first plane produced by a Chinese government initiative to compete in the market for large passenger jetliners. [AP Photo]


The ceremony was attended by several hundred dignitaries and factory workers who built the first C919 passenger jet plane at the state-owned Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China Ltd. [EPA/Stringer]


The ruling Communist Party wants to claw back some of the commercial benefits that flow to foreign suppliers as China's aviation market is growing fast but relies on Boeing and Airbus aircraft. [EPA/Stringer]


"China's air transport industry cannot completely rely on imports. A great nation must have its own large commercial aircraft," said the country's civil aviation chief Li Jiaxiang. [EPA/Stringer]


COMAC chairman Jin Zhuanglong said the aircraft, which has a range of up to 5,555 kilometres, will make its first test flight in 2016. [AP Photo]


The company already has orders for 517 of its C919 planes, according to a COMAC statement, almost all of them from domestic buyers. [EPA/Stringer]
 

vegojimbo

Legendary Member
Where is the hypocrisy? I didn't say that the US does not bully others... my post was clear... Neither Russia or China are morally superior than the US. It is directed to those who are happy with China's bullying it's neighbors but shames the US if it did. I'm the one who is pointing out the hypocrisy of others here.
You were so ecstatic in your post to point out that USA will put China in its place which means you have no problem with the bullying done by the US. In that case, you should not have had any problem with China's actions unless you were practicing double standards and wait for it...hypocrisy. Got it?

Now, the China Sea is a disputed area, you clearly taking the sides of the opponents of China and making the latter an aggressor show that you're not objective about the situation. First, since it's a territorial dispute about areas of influence, there is no clear victim and bad guy here. Second, the US has done worse in regards to its territorial influence. look at Costa Rica and Panama, not to mention Cuba.

Anyway, the main bully here is none other than the US. Having one of its ship enter the 12 miles radius of a chinese base shows US lack of respect for other nations, its arrogance, and simply an unequivocal manifestation of how a bully thinks and acts. Now the US cares about some 12 miles of international waters some tens of thousands of miles away from American shores? Give me a break. That constitutes a matter of national security to the US? Bullcrap. Bullying and arrogance at its best.
I recall an incident a few years back when a russian submarine got about 50 miles close to the East Coast of the US. The US administration called foul and the US media made it look like Russia was preparing for an invasion. Heck, even the russian ambassador in the US was summoned. And that's some 40 miles off US territorial waters.
Having said that, I always look at politics as politics as everyone is seeking their own interests. This is the case of all independent nations, on top the strongest ones. Some wants us to believe that Russia and China are mother Teresa fighting Lucifer US.
Although Russia and China are no saints, compared to the US in regards to international politics, they are novices at best.
 

JB81

Legendary Member
You were so ecstatic in your post to point out that USA will put China in its place which means you have no problem with the bullying done by the US. In that case, you should not have had any problem with China's actions unless you were practicing double standards and wait for it...hypocrisy. Got it?

Now, the China Sea is a disputed area, you clearly taking the sides of the opponents of China and making the latter an aggressor show that you're not objective about the situation. First, since it's a territorial dispute about areas of influence, there is no clear victim and bad guy here. Second, the US has done worse in regards to its territorial influence. look at Costa Rica and Panama, not to mention Cuba.

Anyway, the main bully here is none other than the US. Having one of its ship enter the 12 miles radius of a chinese base shows US lack of respect for other nations, its arrogance, and simply an unequivocal manifestation of how a bully thinks and acts. Now the US cares about some 12 miles of international waters some tens of thousands of miles away from American shores? Give me a break. That constitutes a matter of national security to the US? Bullcrap. Bullying and arrogance at its best.
I recall an incident a few years back when a russian submarine got about 50 miles close to the East Coast of the US. The US administration called foul and the US media made it look like Russia was preparing for an invasion. Heck, even the russian ambassador in the US was summoned. And that's some 40 miles off US territorial waters.

Although Russia and China are no saints, compared to the US in regards to international politics, they are novices at best.

Well, when you give excuses of China's aggression in disputed areas as if the sea is a no man's land, the same could be said about the US ships as there is no clear victim.

Your approach to disputed areas cannot be equal to legitimate borders. The US and any nation can call foul when crossing their boundaries, but in the US ships case, as you said there is no clear victim. The US can claim it is a Japanese sea, and Japan showed no objections for the US trespassing...

Russia and China are novice because they still weak comparing to the US. Wait until the US declines more and their ascending to power, ra7 y7itto Amerca bjawbeton.

Already, they have shown acts of aggression and bullying while still being the underdog
 

JB81

Legendary Member
US to operate 'wherever' law allows in South China Sea

AFP
15 hrs ago





Harris is the commander of the US Pacific Command and his public declaration in the Chinese capital is a mark of US resolve over the strategically vital waterway, where Beijing has built up rocks and reefs into artificial islands with facilities for military use.

Beijing claims sovereignty over almost the whole of the sea on the basis of a segmented line that first appeared on Chinese maps in the 1940s.

Harris described the claim as "ambiguous" and based on "the so-called 9-dash line".

Washington has repeatedly said it does not recognise Chinese claims to territorial waters around the artificial islands.

The USS Lassen guided missile destroyer sailed within 12 nautical miles of at least one of the land formations in the disputed Spratly Islands last week.

Washington says it takes no position on sovereignty disputes in the region and that the sail-by was intended to protect freedom of navigation under international law, which it sees as potentially threatened by China's activities.

The USS Lassen's mission was part of the US's "routine freedom of navigation operations", Harris said, intended to "prevent the decomposition of international laws and norms".

"We’ve been conducting freedom of navigation operations all over the world for decades, so no one should be surprised by them," he said.

- 'Frontline forces' -

Harris's comments come as part of a continued dialogue between Beijing and Washington over the contentious South China Sea.

He tempered his comments with conciliatory remarks, praising US-China ties and pointing out that Chinese and American ships were visiting ports in each other's countries.

"Some pundits predict a coming clash between our nations. I do not ascribe to this pessimistic view," Harris said, according to a copy of his speech.

"While we certainly disagree on some topics -- the most public being China’s claims in the South China Sea and our activities there -- there are many areas where we have common ground."

Two days after the USS Lassen sailing, the chief of US naval operations spoke with his Chinese counterpart via video.

US officials said the call between Admiral John Richardson and Admiral Wu Shengli, who commands the Chinese navy, was "professional and productive".

But China's official Xinhua news agency paraphrased Wu as warning his counterpart: "If the US continues to carry out these kinds of dangerous, provocative acts, there could be a serious situation between frontline forces from both sides on the sea and in the air, or even a minor incident that could spark conflict."

Beijing's response to the USS Lassen sailing appears to have been carefully calibrated, with authorities expressing outrage, summoning US ambassador Max Baucus to protest, and saying they monitored and warned away the vessel -- but without physically intervening.

China's position on the islands is leading many countries in the region "to want to intensify their security cooperation with the United States", US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter said Sunday in South Korea.

The Pentagon chief was in Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday for meetings with regional partners as part of America's ongoing strategic "rebalance" toward the Asia-Pacific region.

A key theme of the trip is likely to be Beijing's island-building in the South China Sea and its wide-ranging sovereignty claims.

The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have overlapping claims.
...........................................................................................

Exactly my point. China is not allowed to complain over disputed area especially when they intentionally defies their neighbors claims because they are the big guy there.

If China wants flex its muscles over its neighbors, than they shouldn't nag about others reply when showing force too.
 

nonsense

Legendary Member
November 16, 2015
Reality Check On China

by Mel Gurtov



Will the real China please stand up? In the US media, most stories about China raise questions that amount to threat-mongering. How can China’s “aggressiveness” in the South China Sea be stopped? Is China forming a new alliance with Putin’s Russia? Has China hacked its way into the most sensitive US industrial and military secrets? Is China on the verge of displacing the West from Africa and even Latin America? Are the Chinese about to become a military rival of the US in terms of naval and air power?

At the same time, we now see pictures of an historic meeting of the Chinese and Taiwanese presidents in Singapore, and of a trilateral get-together among Chinese, Japanese, and South Korean finance ministers in Peru to consider a free-trade agreement. The images of China that emerge from these diverse stories are clearly quite opposite.

China without question has a powerful new-found presence in world affairs. It is now one of the world’s great trading nations, and it has become the top trade partner with countries such as South Korea and Japan, whose trade once was dominated by the US. China provides loans and grants to numerous developing countries, where its currency is slowly becoming a rival to the US dollar. In fact, according to one recent report, “The China Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of China now provide more loans to the [Asia-Pacific] region than the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank combined.”

But the Chinese leadership’s most important accomplishments may be in China. It has become the world’s foremost example of poverty reduction. It is a leader in solar and hydro energy technology. President Xi Jinping has taken aim at official corruption in the party and army, though not in his own family and inner circle.

Abroad, besides the diplomatic initiatives with Taiwan and Japan mentioned above, China has become the most active major power in Africa, dispensing loans and making investments that have contributed to public health, local employment in manufacturing, and transportation. The Chinese military is becoming an important part of UN peacekeeping operations, for the first time including those that involve combat. China’s voice at international conferences on climate change is influential, and its agreement with the Obama administration on reducing carbon emissions will be noteworthy if both sides follow through. Its influence in North Korea may be critical to any prospect of reaching a new agreement with Kim Jong-un on nuclear weapons.

China’s growing international impact is not (yet) equivalent to leadership. On some of the major international issues, such as the Middle East conflicts, the refugee crisis, military spending, human rights (religious, ethnic, political), development assistance that promotes human security and civil society, and Iran’s nuclear program, China follows the lead of others and has little to say, much less proposing pathbreaking ideas and practices.

The so-called China Model may be attractive to some developing-country leaders because aid is not conditioned on the austerity or structural adjustment demands of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. But the essence of the model is support of the strong state, that is, centralized authority, and the quid pro quo of China’s aid and investment often is free rein for Chinese companies to extract valuable resources, notably minerals, food, and tropical forests. Little wonder that nongovernmental organizations, such as unions, environmental groups, and small business, are among the strongest critics of Chinese development assistance in (for example) Brazil, Peru, Sri Lanka, Niger, and Kazakhstan. We hear the charge of Chinese “neocolonialism” with increasing frequency.

The real China lies within—the one that, like any other large and dynamic country, has a wealth of problems as well as problems of wealth. An insecure leadership worries about challenges to its authority, hence is busy arresting lawyers, journalists, and activists while concentrating power around Xi Jinping. Environmental protection is weak: water quality is declining, forests are being destroyed, deserts are expanding, fires and floods are increasing, and threats to public health are multiplying, casting doubt on the much-touted GNP figures. Economic growth claims are further questionable because of weaknesses in the banking sector, state enterprises, and stock markets. The rich-poor gap and protests by workers and ethnic minorities reveal the limits of growth to quell popular dissatisfactions. Employment is a major challenge because of limited opportunities for university graduates and mounting numbers of rural migrants. China has just abandoned its one-child policy in urban areas, but that may be too little, too late to affect its ability to cope with a rapidly aging society and demands for skilled labor in coastal industries.

If we try to put all this together, what kind of China emerges?

China’s rise has not occasioned a new grand strategy or even a clear direction. What may appear to be aggressive Chinese moves abroad may have a less ominous context, including defensive reactions to others. For example, in the South China Sea, China’s land reclamation and port and airport construction in islands under its control, and its refusal to submit the territorial dispute to international arbitration, deserve criticism. But the US has helped raise the level of tension in those waters by announcing a “pivot” of US military power to Asia in 2011, conducting military surveillance flights and cruises close to Chinese territory, gaining military access points in the Philippines and Vietnam, sending ships on “show the flag” missions on the pretext of upholding freedom of the seas, and failing after all these years to sign and ratify the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. So there is plenty of blame to go around, on that issue as on others.

The world today is extraordinarily insecure, and appears to me to be on the precipice of enormous upheaval. US-Russia relations have all the look of another Cold War. The refugee crisis in Europe has created the basis for a deadly right-wing reaction (Germany 1933, a European said the other day) as well as an uncontrollable humanitarian situation. The US has military forces in three Middle East countries on missions impossible. And we may already be beyond the tipping point in global warming. The last thing Americans, Chinese, and everyone else needs is blindness to the necessity (and opportunities) for cooperative engagement, and instead the tendency to see every move by the other as threatening.

When China’s President Xi Jinping asks for a “new type of great-power relationship” with the US, he wants recognition from Washington of China’s equal status, in keeping with his emphasis on strengthening the nation, overcoming past humiliations, and thus fulfilling the “China dream.” His historic meeting in Singapore with Taiwan’s president on November 6 may be interpreted not simply as a clever way to influence Taiwan’s upcoming elections or as a component of smile diplomacy, but as a message to the US and others that China can take care of its “core interests” peacefully and without foreign interference. The South China Sea dispute would fit that frame of reference. The current and future US president should evaluate Chinese actions with Xi Jinping’s notion in mind, even as it reserves the right to criticize. US-China differences will persist for some time, but they need not become the basis for dangerous miscalculations.

Mel Gurtov is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Portland State University, Editor-in-Chief of Asian Perspective, an international affairs quarterly and blogs at In the Human Interest.
 

Republican

Legendary Member
The New Silk Roads and the Rise of the ‘Chinese Dream’
by Pepe Escobar

Beijing is advancing a Chinese-led globalization that will challenge U.S. hegemony both regionally and globally.

Earlier last week, the first Chinese commercial train, with 32 containers, arrived in Tehran after a less than 14-day journey from the massive warehouse of Yiwu in Zhejiang, eastern China, crossing Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan.

This is a 10,400 km-long trip. Crucially, it’s also no less than 30 days shorter compared to the sea route from Shanghai to Bandar Abbas. And we’re not even talking about high-speed rail yet – which in a few years will be installed all along from eastern China to Iran and onward to Turkey and, crucially, Western Europe, enabling 500-plus container trains to crisscross Eurasia in a flash.

When Mohsen Pour Seyed Aghaei, president of Iran Railways, remarked that, “countries along the Silk Road are striving to revive the ancient network of trade routes,” he was barely touching the surface in what is an earth-shattering process.

Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Iran only last month – the first global leader to do so after nuclear sanctions were lifted. Then the heirs to the former Silk Road powers – imperial Persia and imperial China – duly signed agreements to boost bilateral trade to $600 billion over the next decade.

And that is just the beginning.

Trade Wars and Air/Sea Battles

To frame the earth-shattering process in a strategic perspective, from the Chinese point of view, it’s enlightening to revert to a very important speech delivered last summer by General Qiao Liang at the University of Defense, China’s top military school. It’s as if Liang’s formulations would be coming from the mouth of the dragon – Xi – himself.

Beijing’s leadership assesses that the U.S. won’t get into a war against China within the next 10 years. Pay attention to the time frame: 2025 is when Xi expects China to have turned into a “moderately prosperous” society as part of the renewed Chinese Dream. And Xi for his part would have fulfilled his mandate – arguably basking in glory once enjoyed only by the Little Helmsman Deng Xiaoping.

The secret for the next 10 years, as General Liang framed it, is for China to overhaul its economy (a work in progress) and internationalize the yuan. That also implies striking an Asian-wide free trade pact – which is obviously not the Chinese-deprived American TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership), but the Chinese-driven RCEP.

General Liang directly connects the internationalization of the yuan to something way beyond the New Silk Roads, or One Belt, One Road, according to the official Chinese denomination. He talks in terms of a Northeast Asia free trade agreement, but in fact what’s in play, and what China aims at, is the trans-Asia free trade agreement.

As a consequence, a “ripple effect” will divide the world:

“If only a third of the global money is in the hands of the dollar, how can the U.S. currency maintain its leadership? Could a hollowed out United States, left without monetary leadership, still be a global leader?”

So the decline of the U.S. dollar is the key issue, according to the Beijing leadership, of China’s “recent troubles” under which loom “the shadow of the United States.”

Enter the U.S. “pivot to Asia.” Beijing clearly interprets its goal as “to balance out the momentum of China’s rising power today.” And that leads to the discussion of the former AirSea Battle concept (it has now “evolved” into another mongrel), which General Liang qualifies as an “intractable dilemma” for the U.S.

“The strategy primarily reflects the fact that the U.S. military today is weakening,” said Liang. “U.S. troops used to think that it could use airstrikes and the Navy against China. Now the U.S. finds neither the Air Force nor the Navy by themselves can gain advantages against China.”

Only this previous paragraph would be enough to put in perspective the whole, tumultuous cat and mouse game of Chinese advances and American bullying across the South China Sea. Beijing is very much aware that Washington cannot “offset some advantages the Chinese military has established, such as the ability to destroy space systems or attack aircraft carriers. The United States must then come up with 10 years of development and a more advanced combat system to offset China’s advantages. This means that Americans may schedule a war for 10 years later.”

Have War, Will Plan

So, no major war up to 2025, which leaves Xi and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership free to advance like a juggernaut. Observers who follow the moves in Beijing in real time qualify it as “breathtaking “ or “a sight to behold.” The Beltway remains mostly clueless.

At the onset of the Chinese Year of the Monkey, the CCP under Xi’s orders released a sensational cartoon hip hop video that went mega-viral. Talk about Chinese soft power; that’s how Xi’s platform for his 10-year term, up to 2023, was announced to the masses.

Enter the Four Comprehensives: 1) to develop a “moderately prosperous society” (translated into a GDP per capita of US$10,000); 2) Keep deepening reforms (especially of the economic model); 3) Govern by the rule of law (that’s tricky; but essentially means the law as interpreted by the CCP); 4) Eliminate corruption from the CCP (a long work in progress).

None of this, of course, implies following a Western model; on the contrary, it shows off Beijing counteracting Western soft power on every domain.

And then, inevitably, all roads, sooner or later, lead to One Belt, One Road. And yet General Liang sees it as way beyond a globalization process, “the truly American globalization,” which he qualifies as “the globalization of dollars.” He – and the Beijing leadership – do not see the China-driven One Belt, One Road as “an integration into the global economic system. To say that the dollar will continue its globalization and integration is a misunderstanding. As a rising great power, One Belt, One Road is the initial stage of China globalization.”

Radically ambitious does not even begin to describe it. So as much as One Belt, One Road is the external vector of the Chinese Dream, bent on integrating the whole of Eurasia on a trade and commerce “win-win” basis, it is also “by far the best strategy China can put forward. It is a hedge strategy against the eastward move of the U.S.”

There we have it – mirroring what I have been writing since One Belt, One Road was launched. This is China’s “hedge strategy of turning its back to the U.S. eastward shift: You push in one direction; I go in the opposite direction. Didn’t you pressure me to it? I go west, neither to avoid you nor because I am afraid, but to very cleverly defuse the pressure you gave me on the east.” Welcome to China pivoting West.

Feel Free to Encircle Yourself

General Liang, predictably, prefers to concentrate on the military, not commercial aspects. And he could not spell it out more clearly.

“Given that China’s sea power is still weak, the first choice of One Belt, One Road should be to compete on land,” he said. Liang frames the top terrain of competition as the “belt” – overland New Silk Road routes; and that leads to worrying, still unanswered questions about the Chinese army “expeditionary capabilities.”

General Liang does not expand on this competition – arguably with the U.S. – along the New Silk Road belt. What he believes to be certain though, is “that in choosing China as its rival, America chose the wrong opponent and the wrong direction. Because in the future, the real challenge to the United States is not China; it is the United States itself, and the United States will bury itself.”

And how will that happen? Because of financial capitalism; it’s as if Gen. Liang has been reading Michael Hudson and Paul Craig Roberts (as he certainly does). He notes how “through the virtual economy, the United States has already eaten up all the profits of capitalism.”

And what about that “burial”? Well, it will be orchestrated by “the Internet, big data, and the cloud” as they are “pushed to the extreme” and will “gain a life of their own and oppose the government of the U.S.”

Who would have thought it? It’s as if the Chinese don’t even have to play go anymore. They just need to let the adversary encircle itself.

 

HannaTheCrusader

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Un couple de Chinois, a été condamné à la prison ferme par un tribunal de la région musulmane du Xinjiang, dans l’est de la Chine pour port de barbe et port de niqab, rapporte un journal chinois.

L’homme a été condamné à 6 ans de prison pour s’être laissé pousser la barbe et pour avoir ignoré à plusieurs reprises les mises en garde des autorités. Sa femme portant le niqab a été condamnée à 2 ans de prison.

Issus de la minorité musulmane de Xinjiang, le couple a été condamné pour trouble à l’ordre public.

Cette condamnation s’inscrit dans la vaste campagne contre la barbe et le port du voile, menée par les autorités du Xinjiang depuis plus d’un an.

«Tout un groupe de contrevenants aux règlements contre le port de la barbe, du voile et de la burqa» ont été poursuivis et condamnés depuis le début de l’année, rapporte en outre le Quotidien de la Jeunesse.
 

Republican

Legendary Member
China officially opens its first overseas military base in Djibouti

With a ceremony on Tuesday, China officially opened its first overseas military base -- though it would prefer that you not call it that.

Instead, the base, located on the coast of Djibouti along the strategically significant Gulf of Aden not far from the Suez Canal, is referred to by Chinese state media as a "logistics support base" from which China will project its humanitarian, rather than military, power, helping to supply and coordinate peacekeeping and charitable missions in Africa.
(...)

China officially opens its first overseas military base in Djibouti: Shanghaiist
 

Viral

Active Member

Huawei CEO says 5G tech is like ‘nuclear bomb’ for US, cautions against ‘new Cold War’


Huawei CEO says 5G tech is like ‘nuclear bomb’ for US, cautions against ‘new Cold War’


Huawei CEO Ren Zhengfei has blasted Donald Trump’s fixation on 5G competition with China, likening the technology to a “nuclear bomb” for the US president. Zhengfei also promised to support a “no-spy agreement” with Germany.
“Unfortunately, the US sees 5G technology as a strategic weapon,” Zhengfei said in an interview with German Wirtschaftswoche and Handelsblatt newspapers.
“For them it is a kind of nuclear bomb,” he added.
Speaking to the German news outlets, the CEO said his company will not install surveillance ‘backdoors’ on its 5G equipment in the country. Berlin had been hesitant to allow Huawei to participate in its upcoming 5G rollout, citing security concerns, but the country’s chief telecoms regulator said on Monday that no equipment suppliers “should or may” be excluded.
Meanwhile, Zhengfei said he would urge the Chinese government to sign a ‘no-spy agreement’ with Germany, and commit to abiding by the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Washington has put diplomatic pressure on Germany to shut Huawei out, after multiple US intelligence agencies warned that the company could be gathering information for Beijing. Zhengfei called these allegations “fairy tales,” and demanded the US “provide facts and evidence to support their allegations.”
President Trump for his part views the race to 5G as a strategic battle, telling reporters on Friday that the US “cannot allow any other country to out-compete the United States in this powerful industry of the future.”
In addition to stripping back regulations on US telecoms firms, Trump has also pressed other European allies to shun Chinese technology. While some, like Germany, France, and the UK, have tightened their regulatory standards, others like Italy, Croatia, and Hungary have moved to welcome Huawei.
If the West does not want a new Cold War, it must remain open and accept the rise of other countries.
According to the CEO: “We should focus again on economic development and create peace.”
 

Viral

Active Member

Trade war with China: US will make sure it causes major ruckus before losing the fight

Trade war with China: US will make sure it causes major ruckus before losing the fight


There are suggestions that the US and China may now sign a trade agreement in May. However, it seems unlikely that this will be the great victory over China that Trump promised, as recent events indicate.
Just a month ago, the European Union (EU) appeared to have jumped aboard the anti-Chinese bandwagon of the Trump administration, when it labelled Beijing a “systemic rival” over what it viewed as unfair trade practices. It also stated that it was rolling out its own strategy to counter China’s influence. While the EU is likely to want to pushback against China and counter it wherever necessary, recent developments do indicate that there is very little the EU and the US can do to scale back China’s influence without resorting to outright war, and are looking to cooperate and engage with China instead.
One such example is Italy’s recent decision to join China’s so-called Silk Road project by signing a memorandum of understanding. Italy is a G7 member, and the first G7 nation to endorse China’s Belt and Road ambitions. At the same time, Chinese and Italian firms signed 10 deals worth up to approximately $5.6 billion in the energy, steel and gas pipeline sectors. Fears from the other major players about the strengthening relationship between Italy and China were shrugged off by the Italian side, who said that opposition to its move was motivated by “jealousy.”
Another notable example is the newly signed EU-China joint statement which agreed that the two sides would “establish a political mechanism to continuously monitor the progress in the negotiations and to report to leaders by the end of the year on the progress made.” The joint statement is the next step on the pathway to the creation of an EU-China Comprehensive Investment Agreement by 2020 which is aimed at improving market access and eliminating practices that discriminate against foreign investors. Just this week, China’s ambassador to the EU, Zhang Ming, said that the EU should avoid using discriminatory practices, already concerned about the screening process currently in place.
Despite the EU’s original characterization of China as a “systemic rival,” the EU and China have essentially pledged to strengthen their trade relationship and work more closely towards opening up China’s economy to foreign investors. European Council President Donald Tusk called the joint statement a “breakthrough.” China, for its part, has issued encouraging statements of its own to keep the EU on side, stating that it would “respect European standards” and not seek to divide the EU bloc.
In reality, China knows that the Eastern European states referred to above are integral to the Silk Road project, without the inclusion of which it could never really hope to bring its ambitious initiative to fruition.
The so-called Beijing-led “16+1”, which involves 16 post-socialist states including eleven other EU members and five countries which are currently undergoing accession to the EU, is another interesting development to keep an eye on as the years go by. These smaller states are giving the EU greater say over ongoing deals with China in order to mitigate the concerns that major European powers have about Beijing’s expanding influence. According to some sources in this year’s negotiations on the 16+1 joint statement, each completed draft was seen by EU officials in Brussels prior to signing.
Even major players such as France have struggled to resist the opportunities that China presents. At the end of last month, Chinese President Xi Jinping visited France and met with Emmanuel Macron, signing several deals worth billions of euros. Prior to the visit, Xi wrote an op-ed in the conservative outlet Le Figaro compelling French companies to join its Silk Road project.
Instead, much of the major opposition to the gravitational pull of China’s Silk Road project comes from Germany.
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said recently: “In a world with giants like China, Russia or our partners in the United States, we can only survive if we are united as the EU… if some countries believe they can do clever business with the Chinese, then they will be surprised when they wake up and find themselves dependent.
Of course, the real perpetrator of the anti-Chinese trade perspective remains the Trump administration. But even its position on this appears to be slowly but surely falling apart. Just recently, US negotiators allegedly decided not to fixate on demands for China to curb industrial subsidies as a condition for its trade deal due to strong opposition from Beijing.
The reason China apparently pushed back is because industrial subsidies are connected directly to the Chinese government’s industrial policy. As Reuters explains, Beijing grants subsidies and tax breaks to state-owned firms and to other sectors that the government views as strategically important for Chinese development.
Here’s the thing though: if Washington stuck to its position on this issue, it would hit Beijing exactly where it hurts. So, if it isn’t prepared to go through with it and truly challenge the Chinese government in its most vulnerable areas, then what is the point? Why act tough on China and then, when it comes to crunchtime, do the complete opposite?
According to Reuters’ sources, it all comes down to Washington’s desire to secure a deal within the upcoming months. Therefore, US negotiators are focussing more on areas which are considered more achievable.
At the end of the day, the Trump administration is more interested in creating a new deal that it can flaunt as its own, but it won’t actually be a document that has any teeth or demonstrate any significant victory over China. As Fortune explains, “it’s tough to see what the Chinese side will agree to beyond promises to buy more US goods, given that it denies allegations of misbehaviour that include forcing foreign companies to hand over their technology.”
One source also told Reuters: “Whatever deal we get, it’s going to be better than what we’ve had, and it’s not going to be sufficient for some people. But that’s politics.
Right now, indications seem to suggest that the US and China will have a deal signed by late May. After approximately nine months of a trade war which has essentially gotten no one anywhere and has in some cases hit US companies harder than Washington would like to admit, perhaps the whole notion of a trade war with China being a viable pathway forward will eventually disappear. The Interim Economic Outlook published in March by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) showed that the global economy had taken a pretty hard hit due to Trump’s trade war; and seems unlikely to recover quickly even if a trade agreement is reached in the not-so-distant future.
Tying it all together, the OECD report warned that new restrictions in specific trade-sensitive sectors such as cars and car parts “would hit Europe particularly, where motor vehicle exports represent around one-tenth of total EU merchandise exports to the United States and there are significant supply-chain linkages that spread the impact widely across countries and sectors.
President and CEO of the Atlantic Council Frederick Kempe wrote an op-ed for CNBC in which he essentially asks the US and the EU to come together to influence China’s ascent on the global stage. According to Kempe, China’s rise to power requires either an engagement or a containment strategy, yet the EU and the US have offered neither, which has produced the worst of all worlds.
Op-eds like Kempe’s start to make a lot more sense when viewed in the light of recent developments which show that the issue is not that the US and the EU have not deployed a containment strategy; rather, the blunt truth is that such a containment strategy was doomed to fail from the outset.
Whether the trade war falls flat on its face or escalates into something far more sinister, the fight between the US and China is much larger than the maintenance of Donald Trump’s ego. As Fortune put it, the “fight is also about who gets to set the rules for the global economy of the future.”
You can bet therefore, that Washington will do everything in its power to ensure that this is not a fight it loses without causing a major ruckus first.
 

Viral

Active Member

All roads lead to China: 17 Arab countries join Beijing’s new Silk Road


All roads lead to China: 17 Arab countries join Beijing’s new Silk Road


Beijing has inked cooperation deals on its multi-trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) with 17 Arab countries, state-run Xinhua News Agency reported, citing the results of a joint Sino-Arab forum.
The second China-Arab Forum on Reform and Development, which was held in Shanghai on Tuesday, attracted more than a hundred businessmen, politicians, and academics from China and Arab states, including Egypt, Lebanon, Djibouti, and Oman. This year’s meeting, dubbed ‘Build the Belt and Road, Share Development and Prosperity’, was dedicated to boosting the project.
Arab countries have shown great interest in cooperation with Beijing. Apart from joining the Belt and Road Initiative, 12 Arab states established strategic partnerships, including comprehensive ones, with China.
“The Arab representatives said the BRI cooperation with China brings immense opportunities to Arab countries to advance reform and accelerate growth,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lu Kang told journalists at a news conference on Wednesday.
The Sino-Arab cooperation on the project is to receive another “strong impetus” as many Arab state leaders are expected to attend the second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, which will be held in Beijing later this month, according to the diplomat
China is the second-largest trading partner for the Arab world with $190 billion trade turnover as of 2017, according to the assistant secretary general of the Arab League, Khalil Thawadi, as quoted by the Jordan Times. The official noted that 21 Arab states signed memoranda of understanding on the new Silk Road in 2018.
China’s ambitious global trade infrastructure project is expanding globally. This week, Switzerland showed its intention to sign up for the BRI. In March, Italy faced criticism from its European allies as it officially became the first G7 nation to join the initiative, and shortly afterwards, Luxembourg signed a memorandum of understanding on participation in the project. Memoranda of understanding were also signed by Greece and Portugal in August and December last year respectively.
 

Viral

Active Member

Switzerland backs China’s new Silk Road as Western allies twiddle their thumbs

Switzerland backs China’s new Silk Road as Western allies twiddle their thumbs


Switzerland has become the fourth European country to join China’s ambitious global trade infrastructure project, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
The Swiss Finance Ministry announced that President Ueli Maurer is planning to sign a deal on cooperation with China under the new Silk Road project during his visit to Beijing later this month.
Maurer, who is also finance minister, will pay an eight-day visit to China on April 22 with the Swiss delegation expected to attend the second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation that will take place in the Chinese capital
According to the Swiss Finance Ministry, the potential deal will strengthen trade and economic ties between the countries, promoting investment into minor infrastructure enterprises under the broader project led by China.
“The aim of the memorandum is for both parties to intensify cooperation on trade, investment and project financing in third markets along the routes of the BRI, based on a catalogue of basic principles for cooperation and in line with international standards and legislation in the countries concerned,” the body said, providing no details
Switzerland is going to become the fourth Schengen-area state to sign up to the BRI. In March, Italy agreed to officially support cooperation with China in the framework of the multibillion-dollar project. Rome faced strong disapproval from France, Germany, and the US. Last year, Portugal and Greece signed a memorandum on cooperation with China under the Silk Road project.
 

Viral

Active Member

Italy joining China’s new Silk Road raises eyebrows in Washington


Italy joining China’s new Silk Road raises eyebrows in Washington


Italy is planning to formally back China’s multi-trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It would become the first G7 nation to join the ambitious project which promises to significantly boost global trade.
Rome is preparing to sign a memorandum of understanding to officially support the project, championed by Chinese President Xi Jinping, by the end of March, according to Michele Geraci, undersecretary in Italy’s Ministry of Economic Development as quoted by FT.
“The negotiation is not over yet, but it is possible that it will be concluded in time for Xi’s visit,” Geraci told the media.
“We want to make sure that ‘Made in Italy’ products can have more success in terms of export volume to China, which is the fastest-growing market in the world.”
The Chinese leader is expected to pay an official visit to Italy on March 22. After that Xi Jinping will reportedly head to France and ultimately the US for further negotiations to resolve the current trade stand-off between Beijing and Washington.
Italy’s move has not been received well in Washington. The project, known as the new Silk Road, will not help Italy economically and may significantly damage the country’s international image, according to the White House.
“We are skeptical that the Italian government’s endorsement will bring any sustained economic benefits to the Italian people, and it may end up harming Italy’s global reputation in the long run,” National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis told the media.
The Belt and Road Initiative is expected to provide effective connectivity and boost China’s cooperation with more than 80 countries in Southeast and Central Asia, the Middle East, Europe and Africa via various infrastructure projects on the lines of the old Silk Road. The project promises to significantly boost global trade, cutting trading costs by half for the countries involved.
 

Viral

Active Member

Germany wants Europe to join China's new Silk Road after criticizing Italy for doing the same

Germany wants Europe to join China's new Silk Road after criticizing Italy for doing the same


The Chinese “Belt and Road” initiative is an important project, which European states would be glad to join, according to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who stressed that cooperation should be based on reciprocity from Beijing.
“We, as Europeans, want to play an active part and that must lead to certain reciprocity and we are still wrangling over that a bit,” Merkel said, as quoted by Reuters.
The comment comes shortly after talks with French President Emmanuel Macron, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and Chinese President Xi Jinping, who is currently paying a state visit to France.
The Chinese president came to France after his three-day visit to Italy. On Saturday, Rome and Beijing signed the memorandum of understanding on Italy’s joining of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. The move had not been received well by European nations, particularly France and Germany. French President Emmanuel Macron had called for a more consolidated approach toward China among European allies, at the same time as Paris was signing multi-billion-euro contracts with Beijing.
The Belt and Road Initiative is expected to provide effective connectivity and boost China’s cooperation with more than 152 countries in Southeast and Central Asia, the Middle East, Europe, Latin America and Africa via various infrastructure projects, along the lines of the old Silk Road.
The project, proposed by Xi in 2013, promises to significantly boost global trade, cutting trading costs by half for the countries involved. China has heavily invested into the ambitious enterprise with a reported $900 billion having been spent on projects in partner countries. Most of the investment projects of the Belt and Road initiative have reportedly benefitted China’s state-owned corporations.
 

Dynamite Joe

Well-Known Member

Italy joining China’s new Silk Road raises eyebrows in Washington

Italy joining China’s new Silk Road raises eyebrows in Washington


Italy is planning to formally back China’s multi-trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It would become the first G7 nation to join the ambitious project which promises to significantly boost global trade.
Rome is preparing to sign a memorandum of understanding to officially support the project, championed by Chinese President Xi Jinping, by the end of March, according to Michele Geraci, undersecretary in Italy’s Ministry of Economic Development as quoted by FT.
“The negotiation is not over yet, but it is possible that it will be concluded in time for Xi’s visit,” Geraci told the media.
“We want to make sure that ‘Made in Italy’ products can have more success in terms of export volume to China, which is the fastest-growing market in the world.”
The Chinese leader is expected to pay an official visit to Italy on March 22. After that Xi Jinping will reportedly head to France and ultimately the US for further negotiations to resolve the current trade stand-off between Beijing and Washington.
Italy’s move has not been received well in Washington. The project, known as the new Silk Road, will not help Italy economically and may significantly damage the country’s international image, according to the White House.
“We are skeptical that the Italian government’s endorsement will bring any sustained economic benefits to the Italian people, and it may end up harming Italy’s global reputation in the long run,” National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis told the media.
The Belt and Road Initiative is expected to provide effective connectivity and boost China’s cooperation with more than 80 countries in Southeast and Central Asia, the Middle East, Europe and Africa via various infrastructure projects on the lines of the old Silk Road. The project promises to significantly boost global trade, cutting trading costs by half for the countries involved.

Right direction for Italy. Their economy has been in the dumps since the financial crisis 10 years ago. It's a no brainer, Belt & Road will significantly enhance their trade volume with the biggest market in the world. Not sure why Washington would object to that, frankly they need to mind their own business... Moreover, Chinese investment in Italian infrastructure free of political conditions or dictates should be more than welcome. To my knowledge, all ports and airports are for sale in Italy. Anyway, this is not the first time Italy engages with China under the Belt & Road framework. In fact, Italy has participated in major B&R projects since the implementation of the Silk Road initiative in 2013.
 
Top