The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewAndrew Anglin Archive
Russia Says They’re Not Worried About Chinese Missiles
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Being afraid of “Chinese aggression” is nonsensical.

Chinese people will not even confront you at a store if you get angry about something. If you start yelling, the manager will try to distract you so he can slip out the back.

Asians are the single most non-confrontational group of people on earth. They are basically the opposite of the blacks.

RT:

The first purported test of a Chinese missile that can fly faster than the speed of sound might be causing consternation in the West but, as a close partner of Beijing, Russia has no reason to be concerned, the Kremlin has said.

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, said recent reports the advanced nuclear-capable weapon had been test-fired in August were nothing for Moscow to worry about. Asked whether Russian officials see such a development as a threat, the Kremlin official said that “no, it isn’t being seen that way.”

“We have allied relations with China,” Peskov went on. “China is developing its armed forces and its weapons systems, but it isn’t going beyond the framework of any international agreements,” he added.

Last week, Britain’s Financial Times reported that the launch of a hypersonic rocket earlier this year “took US intelligence by surprise.” The missile reportedly entered into orbit and circled the globe before landing several miles away from its intended target. Despite that, the report claims, Pentagon analysts were taken aback by how advanced the system was.

The US elite is shocked that they’re losing their position as global leader, but I don’t understand what they thought was going to happen when they got to the place where their head military guy is talking about how the major threat is the population itself.

Maybe instead of “I want to understand white rage” he should have been saying “I want to understand Chinese missile capabilities,” huh?

That might have sort of maybe made a little bit more sense.

RT:

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has claimed the US is hyping up talk of China’s hypersonic technology after a recent missile test so it can justify its own military expansion and further its hegemony.

Speaking on Tuesday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said Beijing firmly opposed the US continuously exaggerating the “China threat theory.” He stated that Beijing’s only interest was self-defense, and claimed it would not engage in a nuclear arms race with any country.

“China’s development of necessary military capabilities is entirely to safeguard its legitimate national security interests. The growth of China’s power is the growth of peaceful forces,” he said, adding that no country would have to fight Chinese forces if they did not threaten Beijing’s sovereignty.

Wang claimed the recent hysteria over a Chinese hypersonic rocket launch was merely the US trying to find another excuse to expand its military power and seek an absolute security advantage.

At some point, the US is going to hit a very hard ceiling on its ability to develop anything.

White men have been run out of the workplace. Not just at universities, but at defense companies.

If you’re a rocket engineer, why would you allow yourself to be subjected to this kind of abuse?

How long before you say “yeah, you know what – whites are too evil to build warmachines for this military. Bring in the blacks to do it. I’m gonna take my evil white ass fishing, maybe get into crypto trading.”

Aside from the anti-white stuff, you also have the fact that the highest IQ groups are the ones most resistant to these vax mandates.

The US is going to end up in a situation where they have completely destroyed the people most capable of doing anything. They’re going to be left hoping that race and sex are just social constructs as they’re left with nothing but brown people and women, trying to compete with the Chinese.

Look:

The White House’s snarky response to a question about the Chinese hypersonic missile was: “we welcome the competition.”

Well, good luck, cunt.

I’m a high IQ white male, and I want nothing to do with any of this dumb bullshit. It’s not going to be long before we’ve all taken that position.

I would love to be working for my country, fighting the enemies of my country. But my country hardly even exists anymore, and the enemies of my country are running it.

(Republished from The Daily Stormer by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 115 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. “I’m a high IQ white male, and I want nothing to do with any of this dumb bullshit. It’s not going to be long before we’ve all taken that position.”

    I second this motion. Let it collapse.

  2. Gabe Ruth says:

    China should ask why it’s cool that USG still has its boot up the South’s ass politically but they have to accept a USG client with pretensions of sovereignty in their back yard.

  3. I empathize with you Mr. Anglin. Though I don’t know who the reporter was – It is completely silly to ask Russia if they were “worried”. Considering Putin said Russia and China were collaborating on an early warning system – and Russia has hyper-sonics already – it doesn’t take a “woke” CIA analyst to figure it out…

    • Replies: @anon
  4. Anon[414] • Disclaimer says:

    The idea that the Chinese are non-confrontational is retarded to the utmost, and manifests a complete misunderstanding of the Chinese, especially today. Anglin hasn’t been around the Chinese.

  5. The USA that I loved is long gone replaced by an abomination. So the sooner SJW schl0m0 buzzards & their pathetic petulant perpetual victim pets get their globo- H0m0 governed cesspool that’s is the USA annihilated the better. I’m sure I’ll be dead when it happens so adios America.

    • Agree: Alfred
  6. Since nobody else seems capable or willing to explain China’s missile test, please allow me.

    A nation-state does not simply show its strategic hand without careful consideration. The only rational explanation I can determine is that China wanted to warn any remaining rational actors in the West that they will not be able to accomplish any significant conventional warfare goals and that any fantasies of pulling off a first strike should be laid to rest.

    It is the USA and its masters that are behaving irrationally on the world stage.

  7. bye bye says:

    The important thing is that Israel is doing just fine. The United States isn’t exactly run by patriots. Hell, it isn’t even run by Americans.

  8. Lin says:

    **First of all, it’s a flight test of an experimental reusable spacecraft, not that of a ‘hypersonic weapon’
    http://en.people.cn/n3/2021/1019/c90000-9908566.html
    ** ‘Hypersonic’ means speed at mach 5 or above. Mach 5 is no big deal–let mean repeat: no BIG deal; even short range ballistic missiles reach mach 5. ICBMs typically reach over mach 20. The so called hypersonic missiles in vogue recently referred to gliders.
    …………………………
    The american MIC hype up that chinese test just for more Money, Money….

    • Replies: @Showmethereal
  9. Daemon says:
    @Anon

    Point on the doll where the chinaman touched you…

  10. @American Citizen

    I guess the thought never crossed your mind that this piece of news is more psy op designed to demoralize white American males?. And either you are one of the demoralized or you are a plant meant to further demoralize?

    Note: the description matches that of a hypersonic missile which has been around since 1959. France, India, Germany and Japan also have hypersonic missiles.

  11. “Asians are the single most non-confrontational group of people on earth. They are basically the opposite of the blacks.”

    Anglin is a smarmy excuse for a cultural relativist. He knows little, and understands nothing about Orientals. Yeah, their societies are built around saving face and avoiding confrontation. But the flip side of that is always hold-a-grudge-and-take-revenge-by-slipping-it-into-their-back-when-they-least-expect-it. Grow up buddy. You have such great insights on everything but China. Just grow the hell up.

    • Agree: 36 ulster
    • Replies: @36 ulster
  12. d dan says:

    “China tests a hypersonic missile, capable of flying through the earth’s thermosphere”

    Even though China denies this is a military weapon, I believe and hope it is dual uses.

    American should actually welcome China’s progress on this – it allows them to target Washington DC directly and bypass most American population, i.e. Peace.

    Nobel Peace Prize for Xi.

    • LOL: dogbumbreath
    • Replies: @36 ulster
  13. nsa says:
    @Anon

    “….complete misunderstanding of the Chinese….”
    Yu velly stupid conflontational big nose lound eye watch too much kiddie poln. Chinee Big Wang missile blow yu up long time. Yu get job as white houseboy with velly lich Chinee family yu velly happy long time not get blown up.

  14. @Wayne Lusvardi

    No hypersonic missiles have not been around that long. And no so far only Russia and China have workable types. Russia has 3 types and prior to this China had 1. These missiles are just about speed.

  15. @Lin

    The difference with ballistic missiles is they are easier to detect because of the arc they uze. Hypersonics fly comparatively lower and are more maneuverable. That is why the US is worried that Russia and China and maybe even North Korea are well ahead. There is currently no system that can intercept them. Of course there probably will be down the line – but the nations that develop will most likely be the first to also come up with a defense against them – which will lead them ahead further…

    • Agree: Commentator Mike
  16. BuelahMan says:

    This dumb ass never ate at the Chinese restaurant in my hometown. These Chinese folks will cut your head off if you are three grams of food over weight in your to-go box.

    • Replies: @dogbumbreath
  17. BCB232 says:

    “White men have been run out of the workplace. Not just at universities, but at defense companies.”

    I have worked for one of the defense giants (hint: above) since 1996 (technically 2001, I worked for a sub-contractor before then).

    I am in meetings all the time with engineers and it’s usually entirely or nearly entirely white males. The few “Latinos” are essentially Spaniards.

    I was in two engineering meetings yesterday. One was ALL white males. The other was white males (two “Latinos”) and one (cute) white girl.

  18. BCB232 says:

    Lin above is correct. It’s not the speed that’s new, it’s the specific trajectories, maneuverability, altitude, etc.

  19. raga10 says:

    Oh well, if Russian official says they are not worried then they obviously are not worried, since everybody knows Russian officials speak truth and nothing but the truth! Case closed then.

    • Replies: @dogbumbreath
  20. BCB232 says:

    Russia might not be worried because they might sincerely believe they have no fundamental geopolitical conflict with the Chinese. They probably don’t care much about Taiwan and the South China Sea and my guess is the Chinese don’t want to conquer Russia.

    And the Russians have their nuclear arsenal so they have MAD deterrence against a country they have no existential conflict with.

    • Replies: @mike99588
  21. mike99588 says:

    Everyone should realize that this Sino wonder missile now exceeds the performance of the B71 that was developed 60 years ago but deployed as the SR71 rather than de-stabilize and alarm the world …

  22. @Wayne Lusvardi

    Anyone disagreeing with the state of things in Gringostan are not necessarily olants for then enemy. This kind of thinking is most often unwarranted.

  23. Gordo says:

    I would love to be working for my country, fighting the enemies of my country. But my country hardly even exists anymore, and the enemies of my country are running it.

    So what is the answer Andrew?

  24. Currahee says:

    Re. Chinese rocketry superiority: when will the Chicoms reveal the identities of the black female Hidden Figures behind their expertise?

  25. What is most likely happening is the Chinese are playing with Skip.

    Like skipping a rock across a pond they can skip a hypersonic missile above the atmosphere. This probably accounts for why it missed its target.

    The process has a lot of tweakable variables that engineers like to play with. It also allows for multiple waves of missiles one coming behind the next, getting the constantly changing atmospheric information from the the leading missiles and redistributing targets on the fly.

    The Russians have been working on similar swarming missiles with one missile going high for recon purposes and transmitting the information to the rest of the swarm flying low.

  26. mike99588 says:
    @BCB232

    Russia has an intrinsic conflict with CCP China that has no respect for other countries’ boundaries other than convenience. Putin simply has lots and lots of nukes. Putin doesn’t have to worry about China’s nukes, rather it is CCP’s mouths to fill.

    Putin presently has to worry about CIA/DS/Zio US since they muzzled then kicked out Trump, who would have done a deal to reduce the alienation.

    But Putin knows China’s plays a long game, that CCP is already nibbling at Russia’s long time trade sphere, and eyes both the Arctic Ocean and all that vast emptiness including Siberia.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  27. BorisMay says:

    Ladakh comes to mind Mr Anglin, where you will find, should you care to look, Chinese aggression in spades.
    Then, of course, is the Chinese occupation of Tibet. But this is history, albeit recent history, so might be outside the range of Mr Anglin’s vision.
    On top of that there was the Chinese civil war, where a certain Moa Tse Tong, financed by a certain Rothschild bank, eventually kicked out the Nationalists in to Taiwan. (I think Mr Anglin was recently writing about this wasn’t he?)
    Then there was the Korean War where the Chinese helped the North Koreans kick the US’s arse.
    I suggest, Mr Anglin, that you know nothing about either the Chinese as a people or China as a state, just like all (typically ignorant) Americans who like to think they are super intelligent high IQ types.
    Please, Mr Anglin, stick to the areas of life you know about like wiping your own backside and nasal mining. You are totally out of your depth on international affairs.

    • Troll: d dan
  28. 36 ulster says:
    @Monotonous Languor

    As noted, I agree with your assessment of Anglin’s view on Les Orientaux and his often-juvenile take on things, but I absolutely identify with the last two lines of his essay. We ARE enduring a hostile, seditious regime and a society beset by incompetence, hysteria and madness.

  29. 36 ulster says:
    @d dan

    However, its accuracy leaves something to be desired–24 miles from target. But if it were to strike Loudun County, VA, another worthwhile objective…

  30. @BorisMay

    Tibet was part of China long before the United States formed as a country. Stop the folly.
    And aggression in Ladakh??? More folly. China released the videos showing what happened with the Indian aggression – which is why Modi was kept quiet since. Doesn’t stop the US psyops or the fake news like WION – but facts are facts. At least Modi had the integrity to state that no Chinese crossed the border.

    I’m sure Mr. Anglin knows what happened in the Korean War. I think that is his point – the US doesn’t know how to mind it’s business and should focus on American affairs.

    • Agree: dogbumbreath
  31. @mike99588

    Nah…. Putin and Lavrov would like at someone like you as a clown. China is going to the Arctic in coordination with Russia. “Nibbling at Russia’s long time trade sphere”??? Again – more clown comments. What do you think Russia and China helped created the BRICS organization??? Why do you think the Russian and Chinese founded SCO is now moving from security to also economic cooperation??? Siberia?? Not that clownish argument again… If you had any knowledge you would know China has never had anything to do with Siberia. The Mongols have their own country now… You are confusing them (though more Mongols choose to live in China than in Mongolia itself). China’s dispute with Russia was in Outer Manchuria – which is now part of the Russian Far East. The Chinese provinces can’t even keep people living there because they want to move south. Clowning analysis. That border was settled in the 1990’s. It’s over. Put it to bed. Russia got it’s port at Vladi – and China actually is happy about it because Russia has a point of it’s sword at Japan – which means less headache for China. If you had any clue – you would know both Russia and China were just doing drills in the Sea of Japan from that nearby area. Go educate yourself on that.
    Where do you get your news??? You should get your money back.

    • Replies: @mike99588
    , @mike99588
  32. Dutch Boy says:
    @Anon

    The last time I checked, the Mongols and Japanese are Asian and both have had some confrontations with others at one time or another.

  33. With the war on terror over, and the US desperately in need of an enemy, the Chinese are probably correct.

  34. @Wayne Lusvardi

    White American males aren’t demoralized, they’re biding their time.

  35. Everything will change when China and Russia demonstrate their ability to hit multiple targets inside the US “homeland” with conventional warheads. Multiple as in thousands. While holding in reserve delivery ability of thousands of nukes.

    The China controlled US corporations will order the Washington politicians to surrender. They will. Kaliber missiles hitting Denver or Chicago will trigger succession movements nationwide. Especially among all the rich shit libs who slung Russia gate bs for five years. They’ll be the first to surrender. Run. Hide.

  36. @BuelahMan

    This dumb ass never ate at the Chinese restaurant in my hometown. These Chinese folks will cut your head off if you are three grams of food over weight in your to-go box.

    Did you ever think these examples are why they couldn’t make it in the motherland thus had to emigrate? It’s safe to conclude those who leave don’t fit in. You are aware overseas Chinese are not considered Chinese when back in the motherland.

    • Replies: @BuelahMan
  37. @raga10

    Oh well, if Russian official says they are not worried then they obviously are not worried, since everybody knows Russian officials speak truth and nothing but the truth! Case closed then.

    It’s not the Chinese that promised NATO would not move an inch East towards Russia if the Iron Curtain dissolved is it?

    • Agree: Showmethereal
    • Replies: @raga10
  38. anon[271] • Disclaimer says:
    @showmethereal

    The bond between China and Russia appears to be strong—but there are cracks beneath the surface. It is an asymmetrical relationship, one that pairs an ascendant, confident, and self-regarding China with a stagnant and insecure Russia. That asymmetry gives Biden an opening: to put distance between the two countries, his administration should exploit Russia’s own misgivings about its status as China’s junior partner. By helping Russia redress the vulnerabilities that its relations with China put in stark relief—in effect, helping Russia help itself—Biden can encourage Moscow to drift away from Beijing. Splitting Russia from China would check both countries’ ambitions, making it easier for the United States and its democratic partners to defend their liberal values and institutions and to shape a peaceful international system in an increasingly multipolar and ideologically diverse world.

    The two countries are not natural partners; historically, they have been competitors, and the sources of their long-running rivalry are hardly gone for good. The Kremlin is acutely sensitive to power realities, and it knows full well that a sluggish Russia of some 150 million people is no match for a dynamic China of nearly one and a half billion people. China’s economy is roughly ten times as large as that of Russia, and China is in an entirely different league when it comes to innovation and technology. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has made deep inroads into Russia’s traditional sphere of influence in Central Asia, and the Kremlin is justifiably worried that China also has designs on the Arctic region.

    That Russia still cleaves to China despite such asymmetries is a potent sign of Moscow’s disaffection from the West. Yet the imbalance will only grow over time and will become an ever-larger source of discomfort for the Kremlin. Washington needs to capitalize on that discomfort and convince Russia that it would be better off geopolitically and economically if it hedged against China and tilted toward the West.

  39. Weaver says:
    @Wayne Lusvardi

    Demoralize white males? How should we react? The US should bring its military back to the US, defend America. If China begins a nuclear exchange, then the US should be ready to attack within 5 minutes. The US should also be sure it can’t unintentionally begin a nuclear exchange.

    Currently, Biden likely could not retaliate within 5 minutes. That puts America in danger. There really is no other concern. “Defending Taiwan” or whatever bs is totally unrelated, does not help the US.

    This website is dominated by opaque insinuations. No one is actually saying anything. What do you want American whites to do?

  40. Weaver says:
    @anon

    It’s asymmetrical for more reasons than that. China will eventually want parts of Russia’s territory. Russia either needs a massive baby boom or massive white immigration into it. But those whites will still need to have children. Children are a major part of modern power struggles. I don’t understand why no one can have children.

    Russia intends to take the North Korean (and in a sense, Swiss) approach of developing a military, making Russia too costly to conquer. Maybe that will work. But the US, and perhaps China as well, will try to influence just who sits on top of Russia. If China, or another power, ever becomes able to take down Russia without cost, down it will go.

    Likely, the battle for who runs Russia is most important, as well the battle for who runs the US and China. Each polity aims to influence the others. China is at an advantage, because China is “closed”, more difficult to influence. So, if China can maintain control of its massive territory, which won’t be easy as it is constantly changing, then China would seem dominant, currently. China needs to find a uniting purpose. China needs to more fully embrace nationalism and really needs a bit more religion. China doesn’t like Christianity, but Christianity seems to like China. China needs to develop a state religion, possibly including a state Christian church among other religions or possibly embracing another.

    China’s risk is it’s still developing, in a sense. It’s still deciding how to apply its history and current power to the present situation. Who is China? – is still being decided. A Chinese might reply that, oh, he knows his identity. But he does not. They don’t know themselves. Maybe no nation knows itself perfectly, but China knows itself less well than others, presently.

  41. raga10 says:
    @dogbumbreath

    It’s not the Chinese that promised NATO would not move an inch East towards Russia if the Iron Curtain dissolved is it?

    What’s that got to do with the price of fish?

    Russians lie all the time. All politicians lie all the time, it’s in their job description. The only way Russians are not concerned about China’s development of hypersonic missiles is if they know their own hypersonic missiles are nowhere near ready for real deployment… which is actually a very real possibility.

    If that’s the case then Chinese are not ready either, since Chinese can only produce what they can steal – and in this case it would have to be from Russia, because the US is way behind in this particular race.

    • Replies: @Deep Thought
    , @d dan
  42. Being afraid of “Chinese aggression” is nonsensical.

    “Chinese people will not even confront you at a store if you get angry about something. If you start yelling, the manager will try to distract you so he can slip out the back.

    Asians are the single most non-confrontational group of people on earth. They are basically the opposite of the blacks.”

    Nah. The Indian Army would disagree.

    “After finding the Chinese soldiers still in the area they had agreed to vacate, the Indians asked them to leave, sparking an argument. The Chinese group moved away, but returned shortly afterward with hundreds more soldiers.

    The Chinese pelted the Indian soldiers with stones and beat them with clubs embedded with nails and wrapped in barbed wire. Indians retaliated with iron rods and batons.”

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/spiked-clubs-and-fists-at-14-000-feet-the-deadly-india-china-clash-11592418242

    • Replies: @Deep Thought
  43. mike99588 says:
    @showmethereal

    Xi said he wanted Vladivostok back a year or so ago. Putin wasn’t amused. Did you miss that?

    You sound like d dan’s 50 cent tag team mate.

    • Replies: @Showmethereal
    , @d dan
  44. mike99588 says:
    @showmethereal

    Russia’s alliance is business based and unhappiness with our DeepState.

    Putin knows Xi and CCP would use Russians for soup bones and grab their land and EEZ if they could.

    • Troll: Showmethereal
  45. @BorisMay

    Ladakh comes to mind Mr Anglin

    Ladakh:

    https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/chinese-troops-did-not-enter-our-territory-says-pm-modi-at-all-party-meeting-on-ladakh-standoff/story-QGgGUyL3sVRYB7mp3Y8bBI.html

    the Chinese occupation of Tibet.

    Principle of Reciprocity:

    https://www.unz.com/aanglin/yahoo-news-informs-the-stupid-peasants-why-the-us-needs-to-go-to-war-to-protect-taiwan/#comment-4961601

    Occupations actually occurred elsewhere:

    https://www.unz.com/pescobar/sinophobia-lies-and-hybrid-war/#comment-4192007

    On top of that there was the Chinese civil war

    The Chinese civil war is none of your business. It is strictly a CHINESE business.

    Then there was the Korean War where the Chinese helped the North Koreans kick the US’s arse.

    The Korean War started as a Korean civil war! That’s what happens when you poke your dirty fingers into other people’s business.

    stick to the areas of life you know about like wiping your own backside and nasal mining

    What do you use to wipe your own backside? Toilet paper is a CHINESE invention! When are you going to switch to using your left-hand instead?

  46. Erebus says:

    Russia Says They’re Not Worried About Chinese Missiles

    They’re not worried because they know that the Chinese know that Russian retaliation would be overwhelming.

    In financial value terms, China has a lot more to lose than Russia and it would lose almost all of its value in the first return salvo. In political terms, there wouldn’t be a China. The Russians don’t have anything to worry about because they hold the hammer.

    • Replies: @Deep Thought
  47. @anon

    Let me ask a question… What on earth does Biden have to offer Putin? Go watch CNBC’s interview with Putin last week at the energy meeting. He is not interested. Other writers who know Russia can tell you what is happening on the ground in Russia – but please tell me historically when was their ever some great affinity among Europeans??? I mean the EU is an attempt and NATO is an attempt – but how well are those going? It is the western mindset to want to form bloc’s to dominate others. Putin has shown he is not interested because he knows there is plenty of hypocrisy.
    When were China and Russia rivals??? Except for when under Mongol rule – when did anyone with anything to do with China attempt to invade Russia and Europe? Yet Europeans were all fighting each other all the time. China’s issues with the west only happened when the west showed up at its door.
    After China the next huge growth market is ASEAN. Russia is well aware of this. How will Russia get to ASEAN with a contentious relationship with China? Why on earth would Putin want to play the US divide and rule game??? So he can be reminded that he is an Eastern European when the next 5 Eyes deal happens that stabs France in the back??? There is that western solidarity again. It is a joke. The spirit of Cecil Rhodes is still at work in the earth and Putin is well aware of it. A strong and powerful China doesnt dictate to Russia… But even a wobbly and disjointed NATO and EU try to tell Russia what to do. So please tell me what they have to offer Russia…

    • Replies: @anonymous
  48. @mike99588

    You have to be one of the most ignorant posters on this site. Where did you read that garbage that Xi wanted Vladi last year (in fact if you had any sense you would know when ultra nationalists in China do try to say such on the internet they are often removed from the internet). You must be confused with Japan openly stating they wanted the Kuril Islands back. Put told Abe and his successor no way. Duh – thats why Russia and China just finished their join naval drills in the Sea of Japan and sailed through the tiny Straits between Japanese islands with a 10 ship flotilla. Those are facts. Not the garbage you are peddling. I even gave you the pro western sources below.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/japan-protest-russia-over-pms-visit-disputed-island-2021-07-26/

    https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Chinese-Russian-warships-jointly-pass-Japan-chokepoint-for-1st-time

  49. @PiltdownMan

    Nah. The Indian Army would disagree.

    The Indian army:

    In yester-century

    We unilaterally drew borders that even the British, a more powerful nation, took care not to. Having drawn them, we transgressed them with bravado not matched with military and political capability, paying a heavy price not only in lives but also in morale and national shame for an adventure that could have been avoided and settled on the table.

    We need to educate our people that it was our fault, be transparent, not withhold facts and build up a consensus. Those who swear of “not letting go even an inch of territory” should be given guns and sent to the border.

    https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/et-commentary/chinese-checkers-on-border-board-will-india-make-the-winning-move/articleshow/13939408.cms

    This century

    ‘China did not enter our territory, no posts taken’: PM at all-party meet on Ladakh clash

    https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/chinese-troops-did-not-enter-our-territory-says-pm-modi-at-all-party-meeting-on-ladakh-standoff/story-QGgGUyL3sVRYB7mp3Y8bBI.html

    • Thanks: Showmethereal
  50. @Erebus

    The Russians don’t have anything to worry about because they hold the hammer.

    There is some truth in what you are saying. But then murrika is holding 2 hammers– the nuclear and the conventional– today with respect to China. Yet, it is murrika that is shitting in its pant about this “China threat.” Murrika is not alone. Brezhnev’s USSR once held 2 hammers– like today’s murrika does. But a backward China of Mao’s scared the shit out of him too. One wonders why!

    Me think that Putin could feel even more comfortable with China if Russia loses the nuclear hammer– in addition to the conventional hammer that he no longer has. But then, murrika will IMMEDIATELY regime-change him if Russia does not have a nuclear hammer to respond to that threat! 😀

    • Replies: @Erebus
  51. BuelahMan says:
    @dogbumbreath

    Right. Because the Chinese aren’t chopping anything in China:



    Video Link

  52. @Forgotton_name

    There’s a lot of puff every time North Korea tests a missile. Japan and the US say NK is threatening/ showing/ displaying/ warning/ and so on. I see it as a test, a missile test, they want to see whether it works properly. Oh yeah, and NK always points its missile tests toward Japan! As if there is any other direction they could go.

  53. anonymous[229] • Disclaimer says:
    @Showmethereal

    When were China and Russia rivals??? Except for when under Mongol rule – when did anyone with anything to do with China attempt to invade Russia and Europe?

    You’re obviously new to China-related issues and probably unfamiliar with Chinese history and culture. Allow me to explain. China and Russia have long competed over territory and status. The land border between the two countries currently runs more than 2,600 miles, and their disputes over territory, influence in the border regions, and trade go back centuries. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, China held the upper hand and generally prevailed. The tables turned in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, with Russia and other European powers resorting to a mix of military predation and coercive diplomacy to wrest control of territory from China and impose exploitative terms of trade.

    The coming to power of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 1949 cleared the way for a historically unprecedented period of strategic cooperation between China and the Soviet Union. Building on their shared commitment to communism, the two countries concluded a formal alliance in 1950. Thousands of Soviet scientists and engineers moved to China, sharing industrial and military technology and even helping the Chinese develop a nuclear weapons program. During the Korean War, the Soviets provided China with supplies, military advisers, and air cover. Bilateral trade mounted quickly, representing 50 percent of China’s foreign commerce by the end of the decade. Chinese leader Mao Zedong asserted that the two countries had “a close and brotherly relationship.” Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev called China’s communist revolution “the most outstanding event in world history.”

    But the alliance soon eroded as quickly as it had come together. Mao and Khrushchev began to part ways in 1958. Their falling-out stemmed in part from ideological differences. Mao sought to mobilize the peasantry, stoking revolutionary fervor and social upheaval at home and abroad. Khrushchev, in contrast, supported ideological moderation, industrialized socialism, and political stability at home and abroad. The two countries began to compete for leadership of the communist bloc, with Mao remarking that Khrushchev “is afraid that the Communist parties . . . of the world will not believe in them, but us.”

    Such differences were magnified by China’s discomfort with power asymmetries that decidedly favored the Soviet Union. In a 1957 speech, Mao accused the Soviet Union of “big-power chauvinism.” The following year, he complained to the Soviet ambassador in Beijing that “you think you are in a position to control us.” In Mao’s estimation, the Russians considered China “a backward nation.” Khrushchev, for his part, blamed Mao for the split. After Chinese and Indian troops exchanged fire across their contested border in 1959, Khrushchev commented that Beijing was “craving for war like a cock for a fight.” At at a gathering of party heads from the communist bloc, he derided Mao as “an ultra-leftist, an ultra-dogmatist.”

    This rupture between the two leaders resulted in the unraveling of Chinese-Soviet collaboration. In 1960, the Soviets withdrew their military experts from China and broke off strategic cooperation. In the two years that followed, bilateral trade plummeted by some 40 percent. The border was remilitarized, and fighting that erupted in 1969 almost triggered a full-scale war. In the early 1970s, Nixon capitalized on and exacerbated the rift by reaching out to China, a process that culminated in the normalization of U.S.-Chinese relations in 1979. It would not be until after the collapse of the Soviet Union that relations between Moscow and Beijing would recover.

    The power gap between China and Russia is particularly hard for the Kremlin to swallow; looking like Xi’s sidekick does not play well at home for Putin, whose political brand rests on his bid to restore Russia to great-power status. But the disparity between the two countries is glaring and growing. Trade with China accounts for more than 15 percent of all of Russia’s foreign trade, whereas trade with Russia represents around one percent of China’s foreign commerce. And this imbalance is mounting as China’s high-tech sector advances. In Russia’s Far East, some six million Russians live across the border from roughly 110 million Chinese in the three provinces of Manchuria, and the region is becoming increasingly dependent on Chinese goods, services, and labor. Dmitri Trenin, a prominent Russian analyst, has gone so far as to speculate about a potential “Chinese takeover” of the region.

    • Agree: nokangaroos, raga10
    • Replies: @Showmethereal
    , @antibeast
  54. @raga10

    Russians lie all the time

    This is “whataboutism” you (plural form– for your (singular this time) benefit) often accuse the Chinese of!!!

    What is the English word the describes such behaviour? I think it starts with a “H”.

    • Replies: @raga10
  55. KenH says:

    The U.S. likely has a diversity clown car designing its hypersonic missiles, so they won’t work if and when we’ll need them. And the woke U.S. govt is more likely to use them on red states than any foreign adversary.

  56. Erebus says:
    @Deep Thought

    But then murrika is holding 2 hammers– the nuclear and the conventional– today with respect to China.

    It does? I see only one, nukes.

    China is already more than capable of defending itself conventionally, and economically they’re well ahead pulling steadily away so the spread is widening daily. OTOH, I’d agree that China wouldn’t be able to defend its overseas assets such as in Africa. Projecting power in distant theatres is simply not in its cards.

    However, the US couldn’t answer a conventional Chinese attack on the US homeland with this article’s subject weapon except with nuclear weapons. China would lose a nuke exchange with the US for the same reasons they would with Russia. It’s simply too rich now. Strikes on Beijing and Shanghai would be a far greater financial/economic loss than NYC, Washington, LA and Chicago put together with a half dozen lesser cities, and the US has a lot of nukes that China simply can’t defend against.

    Me think that Putin could feel even more comfortable with China if Russia loses the nuclear hammer– in addition to the conventional hammer that he no longer has.

    Why would he “feel even more comfortable” losing the nuclear hammer? I don’t get it.

    As for losing the conventional hammer, I wouldn’t be too quick about ceding the point. Russia has a lot of conventional power, and its military leadership is probably 2nd to nobody’s. It’s hard to imagine China pulling off what Russia did in Syria. All in all, I suspect Russia’s ability to defend Eastern Siberia conventionally would prove adequate.

    More speculatively, I also see Russian-Japanese and Russian-Korean “understandings” developing as the US (inevitably) withdraws from the W. Pacific theatre. All 3 parties have an interest in making sure China remains on its best behaviour. Others do as well, of course, but those 3 are rich and powerful enough to present compelling arguments if Beijing wanders off its “peaceful development” path.

  57. d dan says:
    @mike99588

    “Xi said he wanted Vladivostok back a year or so ago. Putin wasn’t amused. Did you miss that?”

    I CHALLENGE you to prove that. Don’t be shy, provide the link.

    You can NOT, because you LIE. A pathological liar, as PROVEN again and again and again,….

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  58. d dan says:
    @raga10

    Here comes the clueless container raga10 again.

    “… if Russian official says they are not worried then they obviously… Case closed then…” – raga10

    “Russians lie all the time.” – raga10

    The case is far from closed. Firstly, you didn’t prove Russia lie, let alone they lie “all the time”. Secondly, even if it is true that Russia lies “all the time”, it does not prove that Russia lie THIS time. The most habitual liar in the world, like you people, don’t lie 100% of the time. It is just logically impossible for anyone to lie in every sentence – it is a logical paradox.

    “Chinese can only produce what they can steal…” – raga10

    When Chinese was producing civilization-changing inventions like compass, gun powder, paper-making, …, you people probably was still staying in the cave. I can talk more but will stop, because it is good for you to continue believing your way.

    You don’t like Russia and China because they are the only few countries that can stand up to America bully. They demonstrate it with words and actions. It makes people from spineless countries like you shameful, so you need to constantly put them down.

    When America submarine hit an unknown object in South China Sea, instead of questioning the competency and legitimacy of America behavior, you speculate it is the fault of Chinese “poor quality” and their lost container. When asked about if there was any alternative theory, you still insisted it is Chinese-this Chinese-that.

    You claim that you want to reduce world population, but when challenged, you admitted you only want to reduce population for “others”, not yours.

    You claim that you don’t want Chinese products, but when asked about your cell phone and laptop, you said you’d keep those products because you want to make me “happy”.

    So now, you claim Russia lies “all the time” because that is you projecting yourself onto others. You are such pathetic and insecure person who feel the CONSTANT need to put down others to prove the worthiness of your existence. But still always talking with sense of superiority, enlightenment, …

    Miserable and hopeless people from a miserable and hopeless culture.

  59. @anonymous

    I am very familiar. I answered the question myself… The west (which was Russia was considered part of) showed up at China’s door. That was the crux of the problem. China doesnt treat Russia as junior partner. This is not the 1800’s nor 1960’s when Mao was expected to play junior partner. So there is a lot of wheel spinning for nothing. You left out the most important part. I asked what does the west have to offer Russia because some vague white solidarity talk???? No answer.
    Putin is smart enough to see the shift back to Asia… He is smart enough to partner with the most important Asian nation. What are Brussels and Washington going to give him??? The Tsar fell for the “yellow peril” but Putin isnt.

    How much sway does this Dimitri Tenin have with Putin…? Analysts are a dime a dozen. I can find a Chinese analyst that would say China should sell out Russia and be friends with the US. That doesnt mean that analyst has any sway. Chinese leaders would pay not attention to that leader because they know the US divide and rule game. They know the US only befriended China under Nixon to stick it to the Soviets. They resolve never to play that game again – which is why they signed a friendship treaty with Russia after the Soviet fall. Fool me once… You should be familiar with the rest of that saying. Nations like people are supposed to grow and mature and learn from mistakes. Those that do not learn end up in the same folly.

  60. @Erebus

    Well i am not sure where you get your speculation. The region worries more about Japanese imperialism than Chinese… They know history and who did what to who.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  61. @Anon

    “the idea that the Chinese are non-confrontational is retarded”

    No one who’s seen a Chinese lady bawling out one of her restaurant staff for some error could accept that they are naturally non-confrontational – I’ve seen more than once pretty unbelievable behaviour towards underlings which they’re quite happy to do in front of roundeyes.

  62. @anon

    “China’s economy is roughly ten times as large as that of Russia, and China is in an entirely different league when it comes to innovation and technology… Washington needs to …. convince Russia that it would be better off geopolitically and economically if it hedged against China and tilted toward the West.”

    America’s economy was and is way bigger than Russia’s, yet Russia has weapons systems good enough to make the US think twice about attacking her or her troops in places like Syria.

    As for your second point, Russia tilted towards the West in the 1990s and was looted, dismembered and impoverished for its trouble. I’m sure Washington would love to convince Russia to do that again, but what’s in it for Russia?

    • Agree: mulga mumblebrain
    • Replies: @showmethereal
  63. raga10 says:
    @Deep Thought

    Russians lie all the time

    This is “whataboutism” you (plural form– for your (singular this time) benefit) often accuse the Chinese of!!!

    How is that whataboutism? What Russians say is literally the subject of this article – it is based around the statement by Russian press secretary.

    Whataboutism was indeed present here, but it was used by the poster I was replying to: he was trying to turn attention to NATO in response to my post about Russia.

    • Replies: @Deep Thought
  64. raga10 says:
    @d dan

    Secondly, even if it is true that Russia lies “all the time”, it does not prove that Russia lie THIS time. The most habitual liar in the world, like you people, don’t lie 100% of the time. It is just logically impossible for anyone to lie in every sentence – it is a logical paradox.

    Speaking of logical paradoxes, if they lied all the time that WOULD actually prove they lied this time as well. Logic is not your strongest point though, we know it. Your strongest point is your dedication to your cause, which does not require a shred of common sense.

    But of course my “they lie all the time” was a figure of speech, you dimwit troll.

    It is quite common for various countries to paper over their differences in their official statements, while they attempt to stab each other in the back behind the courtains. In fact that was often the case in Soviet-Chinese relationship, until they actually came to real blows (instigated by China, BTW – that’s the agreement in the West, anyhow. I have no doubt your party spins their version of events)

    • Replies: @d dan
    , @Deep Thought
  65. anon[100] • Disclaimer says:
    @d dan

    Firstly, you didn’t prove Russia lie, let alone they lie “all the time”.

    Do you know who really lied? Horst Wessel.

  66. d dan says:
    @raga10

    ” if they lied all the time that WOULD actually prove they lied this time as well. ”

    No, it doesn’t. If you won “all the time” does not prove you will win this time or next time. It only prove you are LIKELY or possibly to win this time. Human behavior does not obey scientific law – you can only claim general likelihood, not certainty.

    ““they lie all the time” was a figure of speech…”

    Of course I understand that. As I said before, my first objection is that you have NOT proved Russia lie, let alone they lie often enough to qualify with this figure of speech.

    “It is quite common for various countries to paper over their differences in their official statements…”

    At least you are now belatedly trying to offer “evidence” or argument to support your “Russia lie” claim. But this is still insufficient for your sweeping “case closed” conclusion.

    You offer all sort of topsy-turvy “argument “, and hardly understand my points, but still talk with such sense of superiority.

  67. @American Citizen

    You have no choice. It is not a matter of ‘let it collapse’. The USA is in full irreversible, collapse. If humanity survives, a very unlikely prospect, it will take the USA decades, perhaps fifty years, to recover, if it does not explode into fragments. Karma is a bitch.

  68. raga10 says:

    If you won “all the time” does not prove you will win this time or next time. It only prove you are LIKELY or possibly to win this time. Human behavior does not obey scientific law – you can only claim general likelihood, not certainty.

    Sure, but it was you who tried to bring formal logic into this argument. Strictly logically, “all the time” means all times, past, present and future. You dug that hole for yourself.

    In any case, you’re (as usual) misrepresenting my argument. My point was not about whether Russians are really prone to lying, but that they would be crazy not to worry about their neighbour and occasional opponent developing advanced capability. Of course they are concerned if another country catches up with them, but they don’t want to admit it – especially at this time when they are supposedly on friendly terms.

  69. @d dan

    You understand raga well-a real shit.

  70. @d dan

    When it comes to China the Yankee Doodle psychopaths go barking mad, and vicious lying is par for the course. Being a pipsqueak bombardier in a rapidly collapsing global bully-boy and thug for all reasons, is a difficult situation for narcissistic dullards. I expect scum like him to take humanity down with them.

  71. Erebus says:
    @Showmethereal

    The region worries more about Japanese imperialism than Chinese…

    Well, that’s simply not my experience. Outside China itself, over several decades I’ve never heard anyone worry about Japan (or Korea), but I’ve long lost count of the number of times I’ve heard concerns about China’s rise. That goes right across SE Asia, from the Philippines to Malaysia and as I’ve heard it most often expressed by diaspora Chinese, it can’t be attributed to racism.

    They know history and who did what to who.

    If they know their history from before the late 19th century, then they’ll know that there were alternating periods of conflict and peace between Korea, Japan, and China, and that it was China that expanded during that period while Korea and Japan stayed roughly the same size throughout.

    That included China attempting 2 full-scale invasions of Japan during the Yuan dynasty, using the Korean territories and manpower which it had conquered earlier. The 2nd, even larger invasion attempt included a large contingent of manpower and ships from the recently acquired Southern Song. It should be noted that the Japanese executed all captured invaders except the Southern Chinese, who they viewed as having been forced to participate against their will.

    To make a very long and complicated story short, the largest if not only expansionary Oriental power in E Asia until modern times was China.

    • Replies: @Showmethereal
  72. @Obstinate Cymric

    “As for your second point, Russia tilted towards the West in the 1990s and was looted, dismembered and impoverished for its trouble. I’m sure Washington would love to convince Russia to do that again, but what’s in it for Russia?”

    Yeah – I guess people like that “anon” who make statements like that think Russia is like Lithuania or some other weak country. But hey – the US did get Australia to do what he describes. Though the US turns around and sells to China all the products that China now stopped buying from Australia. Some “allies”…. They insult Putin’s intelligence. I hope Putin is grooming someone like himself – or like you said Russia would be ripe for exploitation like in Yeltsin days.

  73. @American Citizen

    Start by paying as little into the system as possible. Work for cash, barter goods/services, write off/claim as much as you can to get a refund, do whatever you can to starve the beast. Our tax dollars are being used to remove statues, give reparations, finance CRT, fund garbage colleges, etc. Stop paying into this crap and see how quickly the ship rights itself.

  74. Yee says:

    Erebus,

    China would lose a nuke exchange with the US for the same reasons they would with Russia. It’s simply too rich now. Strikes on Beijing and Shanghai would be a far greater financial/economic loss than NYC, Washington, LA and Chicago

    Russia would make sure both countries be destroyed if there was a nuclear war between USA and China… Who could blame them for seizing the opportunity to become the sole superpower in the world?

    I also see Russian-Japanese and Russian-Korean “understandings” developing as the US (inevitably) withdraws from the W. Pacific theatre.

    Why would Russia copy a already failed strategy of the US?

    In any case, Russia is not worried about China because of simple geography… Russia’s core region is in Europe, thousands of miles away from China. Russia is practically in the same place as the US mainland – China would not be insane enough to attack a far away country unless in retaliation.

    • Replies: @Alexandros
  75. @raga10

    But of course my “they lie all the time” was a figure of speech

    If your “they lie all the time” was in fact “a figure of speech”, you are admitting that they do NOT “lie all the time” literally. Then you, in turn, admit that it is possible for them NOT to lie once or twice… d dan got YOUR (singular) actual meaning!

    Are you sure that your logic is water-tight?

    • Replies: @raga10
  76. @raga10

    raga10 says:
    October 21, 2021 at 3:40 am GMT • 1.0 days ago • 100 Words ↑

    @dogbumbreath

    It’s not the Chinese that promised NATO would not move an inch East towards Russia if the Iron Curtain dissolved is it?

    Russians lie all the time…

    dogbumbreath said it was NATO that lied to the Russians and your response was “Russians lie all the time.” How is it not “whataboutism?”

    • Agree: Showmethereal
  77. raga10 says:
    @Deep Thought

    Are you sure that your logic is water-tight?

    Yes, I am sure of my logic. I am also growing increasingly convinced that neither of you actually understands what is being said – you just latch onto whatever word or at most sentence you’re able to comprehend, while completely missing the message.

    I’d suggest both of you should stick to Chinese-speaking forums, where you’ll be hopefully able to grasp all nuances.

    • Replies: @Deep Thought
  78. @Erebus

    @Deep Thought

    But then murrika is holding 2 hammers– the nuclear and the conventional– today with respect to China.

    It does? I see only one, nukes.

    I see 2. The other is naval power. Any major conflicts between the US and China in the next few decades is likely to be fought by the navies (including naval airpower). The US naval power is still way ahead of China’s.

    Russia has a lot of conventional power, and its military leadership is probably 2nd to nobody’s. It’s hard to imagine China pulling off what Russia did in Syria.

    Yes, but the USSR’s conventional land power with respect to China’s was once OVEWHELMING. Mao expected to lose the outer provinces quickly if Brezhnev sent his mechanized armies against China. I am not saying that Russia’s armies are weaker than China’s today but that China’s should be a match for it when battles are fought close to China’s borders.

    • Replies: @Showmethereal
  79. @Erebus

    Not racism – just westernized propaganda about communism coming to take over. It is a pretty good propaganda program. You are talking about people with western colonial minds – not those with Asian minds. In fact some of my own relatives in the diaspora shared that mind. After living under British colonialism they were very confused. But those who actually know history are not the same.

    Mongols ruled the Yuan dynasty… Everyone who knows history and not the westernized version understands the difference. Just like they know every time China expanded it was because of outsiders attacking. It is not China’s fault it eventually absorbed all of its former attackers – including Tibetans and Manchurians.
    They understand what the Great Wall was about. Koreans are not scared of Chinese they are scared of Japanese who invaded them more than once. Only the ones who absorb western propaganda believe China is a threat.
    As to South East Asia… The Chinese diaspora has been there for centuries. If China wanted to take all those countries it could have eaily done so during the Ming Dyansty. It didnt. Former PM of Malaysia noted that himself when westerners interviewed him asking him if he wanted western navies in the SCS. He said the west should mind its business and that was why. But Matahir is of Asiatic mind and not one of the former western colonists. Kind of liek the difference between Duterte and the western synchophants in the Philippines. Filipinos who really know history fear Japanese and westerners. The brainwashed ones are afraid of China.

    Even the people of Okinawa (which should be Ryuku)… Deep down the honest ones will tell you they fear Japanese (which they never considered themselves) rather than China – their former patron.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Erebus
  80. @Deep Thought

    US Naval power is only superior far out into the Pacific Ocean or in the Atlantic. It also still has the advantage in the Indian Ocean. China isnt going to fight the US way out in the Pacific or Atlantic. It would only fight the US to defend itself within the 2nd Island chain – or to protect its shipping in the Indian Ocean (and that would only be secondarily). China has more advanced anti ship missiles than the US does now… So the US would only hold a naval advantage in the Indian Ocean because it has more long range nuclear subs. But anywhere close to China – the US has no more advantage. That is why it has to keep trying to recruit “friends and allies” to the regions to do drills… Which Russia also sees as a threat to itself – and which is why Russia and China just had a joint naval drill in the Sea of Japan where they practiced minesweeping and joint firing against aircraft and joint submarine hunting. As military analysts pointed out – those types of drills basically what NATO does – meaning navies that plan to fight together.

  81. @raga10

    I don’t see a single sentence of yours in this post, that argues about the point(s) being argued.

    • Replies: @raga10
  82. @Yee

    Who could blame them for seizing the opportunity to become the sole superpower in the world?

    They barely have the economic strength to retain regional status. The Scandinavian countries could go toe to toe with Russia. Germany dwarfes them.

    Their main advantage is self sufficiency and space. Good for defense, not so much for power projection.

  83. Yee says:

    Alexandros,

    The Scandinavian countries could go toe to toe with Russia. Germany dwarfes them.

    Not sure about Scandinavian countries, but Germany would be as happy as Russia to see both USA and China destroyed…

    • Agree: nokangaroos
  84. raga10 says:
    @Deep Thought

    I don’t see a single sentence of yours in this post, that argues about the point(s) being argued.

    Yes, but I am starting to see something… This certain lack of comprehension and mental dexterity that you, “denk” and “d dan” all display now and then, that I assumed was just you being Chinese… but there could be another explanation. I called you bots on occasions – could it be that I was actually right all along? Damn, you’re pretty good for a piece of software, but you still fail the Turing Test. I’m looking forward to talking to your updated versions, that will probably have new monikers starting with the letter E.

    • Replies: @Deep Thought
  85. SafeNow says:

    The Russian defense minister is fluent in 9 languages, including Mandarin and Japanese. I am guessing that the Russians are smart enough to figure this out. Btw, I have played online chess against hundreds of Russians, and they tend toward what chess players call “quiet moves.” I do not know whether this can be extrapolated to their leaders, but I suspect it can.

  86. anon[271] • Disclaimer says:
    @Showmethereal

    Your post is full of bluster. China is remarkably lacking in real, dependable allies. In the Pacific alone, the United States can count Japan, Taiwan, Australia, South Korea, New Zealand and The Philippines as close allies—and maintains cordial relations with others including Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia.

    China’s list of allies in the Pacific, on the other hand, is a short one. Russia. And even that is questionable. Globally, China’s allies include Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Venezuela and the countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization—Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. All are despotic or near-despotic states, many are unstable and many have long records of human rights abuses.

    Beijing embraces its worst neighbors in part to keep them in check. This worked with Pakistan, but failed with North Korea. In Myanmar, China cozied up with the oppressive military regime only for it to suddenly open up and seek ties with the West and Japan. China’s net gain was years of condemnation for supporting the junta—which is to say, a net loss.

    Where China has really failed, however, is in simply getting along with nearby countries. Before the recent confrontation with The Philippines over the Ayungin Shoal, relations between Manila and Beijing had never been better. The same went for much of Southeast Asia before China declared sovereignty over 90 percent of the South China Sea. Even relations with Japan, China’s historical enemy, were cordial if staid.

    Sometime around 2010, Beijing decided to stop playing nice. China began pushing long-dormant territorial claims—and tried its hardest to split the alliance between Japan and the U.S. China’s relations with pretty much every country in East and Southeast Asia have chilled.

    It’s hard to say what China really hoped to gain. Was China trying to “Finlandize” smaller Asian states—that is, intimidate them into expressing neutrality in order to deny them to the Americans? Maybe China wanted those disputed territories but it’s more likely that China fundamentally has a problem with treating other countries as equals.Whatever the case, China’s recent actions have left it largely friendless. Today its most important relationships with other countries are strictly economic in nature.

    This has obvious implications for China’s military posture. While the U.S. Navy can sail across the Pacific and call on practically dozens of ports, China’s warships can sail just outside its territorial waters and, other than the Russian port of Vladivostok, have nowhere to go. This places China at an enormous strategic disadvantage. Beijing has no allies to provide bases, share burdens, pool intelligence or lend moral support.

  87. @anon

    Your post is full of bluster. China is remarkably lacking in real, dependable allies. In the Pacific alone, the United States can count Japan, Taiwan, Australia, South Korea, New Zealand and The Philippines as close allies—and maintains cordial relations with others including Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia.

    Reminds me of the Korean War, in which murrika had the support of more than 10 “allies”. China had only USSR– “And even that was/is questionable.”

    The REAL difference is that China was fighting a DEFENSIVE war, while murrika and its “door-mat” (Duterte’s words) states were/will be fighting an imperialistic war of aggression.

    Fighting China on its doorsteps will again turn out to be a war the murrikans prefer to forget!

  88. Erebus says:
    @Showmethereal

    You are talking about people with western colonial minds – not those with Asian minds.

    Your original point was that “The region worries more about Japanese imperialism than Chinese… “ Presumably the “region” is SE Asia.

    Based on my experience across SE Asia, I answered that the region fears Chinese imperialism more. Whether that’s because they’re “brainwashed” or of “western mind” isn’t really on point. They’re Asians living, working, doing business in Asia and with the world. Some I’ve talked to could be called “prominent”, even “elite”, but their opinions weren’t significantly different at bottom than the ordinary middle-class people I know.

    Theirs are the “Asian minds” that are driving Asia forward today. They’re not 18/19/20thC Asians, they’re 21stC Asians. If that’s who you’re talking about being “brainwashed” with “western colonial minds”, I’d say you’ve missed the mark. They are as much the product of the last (say) 100 yrs as we all are, but their observations & arguments belie a nuanced understanding of the geo-politics/economics their situation(s).

    Like all of us, they see that the world is at a tipping point. They’re concerned about (a) the fact that a waning, unreliable US is focussing on the Western Pacific for its last stand, and (b) that the ultimate outcome of that conflict might be the replacement of one form of colonialism for another. None think that the replacement (if it comes) will be Japanese. It’s on the same trajectory as the rest of the West.

  89. @anon

    Your comment has nothing to do with what you replied to… It’s a waste of time going it all over again… But those are not US allies – they are vassals.
    In any event – go look up UN issues and who gets support from whom. I will just address one sentence directly:

    “This places China at an enormous strategic disadvantage. Beijing has no allies to provide bases, share burdens, pool intelligence or lend moral support.”

    That is simply dumb. Why would China need to get other countries to give them any of that stuff??? China is in it’s own yard. Simpletons like you can’t figure out why the US couldn’t get rid of the Taliban. You have no clue why Vietnam failed and no clue why the US and allies ended up back down at the 38th parallel. The US is good fighting overseas after other countries have tired themselves out fighting each other – such as in WW1 and 2. Or – invading weak countries – but again – not being able to subdue the enemy because with their inferior technology – they can simply take potshots and wait out the US – who can’t take too many casualties.

    In any event that has nothing to do with who fears whose imperialism. The issues in the East and South China Seas exist because of US imperialism. Japan stole the islands in both places from China. The signed treaties and recognized declarations after WW2 is clear and open fact for everyone to see and read. All governments in the region know that even if they play dumb now in fear of the US.

  90. @Erebus

    I am talking the entire region from the Russian Far East down to Indonesia. Speaking of the latter – it was just exposed again from declassified UK documents that – as we know the CIA and US State Dept. – fed false information through the media and government which resulted in the deaths of over 500k in the 1960’s under the pretext of “communist China” working to turn their country into a communist state.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/17/revealed-how-uk-spies-incited-mass-of-indonesias-communists

    Only those who still believe and listen to western propaganda believe that. The ones that know real history – worry about Japan – not China. Again even my own ethnic Chinese relatives in the region believed the propaganda… But then they all remember the brutality of the Japanese.
    And yes there is a big difference between the easily programmed average person on the street who consumes western garbage.
    Even Vietnam – who as the west loves to say all hate China – when Kamala Harris went there and to Singapore to try to get them to join the anti China crusade – Vietnam pre-empted her the day before she got to Vietnam stating in a public press conference with the Chinese FM – they will never join such a coalition. Vietnam has agreed to start buying weapons from Japan – but you think their government trusts Japan?

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
    , @Erebus
  91. @Anon

    Chinese can be confrontational, but I suspect that it is a matter of individual behaviour, and most Chinese, certainly their Government, will confront an attacker, like the USA, because they aren’t gutless, but will not initiate conflict. Unlike the West, where aggression is religion. A war between China and the USA, without nukes, would be a non-contest.

  92. @showmethereal

    The death-toll in Indonesia was more like two million.As since WW2, Moslem fundamentalists acted as death-squads, and the US has copious pre-prepared death-lists which the fascist butcher Suharto, a real ‘our son-of-a-bitch’, acted upon, whereupon Austfailian Federal regimes kissed his arse until 1998. Then under the pretext of ‘humanitarian intervention’ they stole half of East Timor’s hydrocarbon resources.

  93. @Erebus

    You’re full of it. I seriously doubt that you have ever ventured anywhere but Peoria, Illinois. Where in SE Asia have you allegedly traveled?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  94. antibeast says:
    @anonymous

    You’re trying to paint a history of Russia and China that doesn’t exist except in your twisted mind. Below are two maps of Russia: 20th century Russian Empire and 21st century Russia today:

    Comparing the two maps above, one can see that Russian expansion eastward from the 16th to the 19th century involved acquiring territories which are not at all related to China or Chinese, except the Russian Far East. This is proven by the linguistic diversity of those acquired territories in the Caucasus, Central Asia, Siberia and the Russian Far East.

    The Russian Far East was first acquired by the Qing Dynasty in the Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689 which was then ‘ceded’ back to Russia in the Treaty of Aigun in 1859 and Treaty of Peking in 1860, as shown in the map below:

    Those two incidents were the only time China had any border dispute with Russia which was resolved with the 1991 Sino-Soviet Border Agreement followed by the 2004 Sino-Russia Border Agreement. Here’s the Wikipedia entry below:

    In 1991, China and USSR signed the 1991 Sino-Soviet Border Agreement, which intended to start the process of resolving the border disputes held in abeyance since the 1960s. However, just a few months later the USSR was dissolved, and four former Soviet republics — Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan — inherited various sections of the former Sino–Soviet border.

    It took more than a decade for Russia and China to fully resolve the border issues and to demarcate the border. On May 29, 1994, during Russian Prime Minister Chernomyrdin’s visit to Beijing, an “Agreement on the Sino-Russian Border Management System intended to facilitate border trade and hinder criminal activity” was signed. On September 3, a demarcation agreement was signed for the short (55 kilometres (34 mi)) western section of the binational border; the demarcation of this section was completed in 1998.

    In November 1997, at a meeting in Beijing, Russian President Boris Yeltsin and General Secretary and Chinese President Jiang Zemin signed an agreement for the demarcation of the much longer (over 4,000 kilometres (2,500 mi)) eastern section of the border, in accordance with the provisions of the 1991 Sino-Soviet agreement.

    The last unresolved territorial issue between the two countries was settled by the 2004 Complementary Agreement between the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation on the Eastern Section of the China–Russia Boundary. Pursuant to that agreement, Russia transferred to China a part of Abagaitu Islet, the entire Yinlong (Tarabarov) Island, about half of Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island, and some adjacent river islets. The transfer has been ratified by both the Chinese National People’s Congress and the Russian State Duma in 2005, thus ending the decades-long border dispute. The official transfer ceremony was held on-site on October 14, 2008.

    China does not have any claims on the other parts of the Russian Empire which were ceded to various Eastern European and Central Asia countries, many of which still host large populations of ethnic Russians, after the dissolution of the USSR. The Russians don’t have anything to complain about China which lost a huge chunk of its territories to the Russian Empire after the Qing ‘ceded’ the Amur territories to the Russian Far East, none of which host any significant populations of ethnic Chinese.

    Beyond a few border skirmishes, nothing much have happened since then.

    The other times when the USSR and China did clash was during the Republican Era when the USSR either supported or opposed both the sides of the Chinese Civil War between the KMT and CCP. The Sino-Soviet split was caused by Mao’s opposition to Khrushchev’s policy of détente with the West while Deng’s support of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan had to do with his opposition to Soviet Imperialism in Central Asia. But that USSR-China rivalry are relics of the Cold War which ended with Deng patching up his differences with the USSR before its dissolution in 1991.

    How are those Cold War relics relevant to the Sino-Russia relations today?

  95. Erebus says:
    @showmethereal

    The ones that know real history – worry about Japan – not China.

    Well, that sounds like nothing more than “The ones who agree with me worry about Japan, not China.”

    I don’t see an argument in there. I suspect you’ve little experience of the region.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  96. antibeast says:
    @anon

    Your post reminds me of what Mahathir said about the difference between the West and China: “For thousands of years, China came, saw and traded with us. But then the West came, saw and conquered us”.

    So no, Asians do not fear the rise of China which has sparked panic in the USA. What they fear (and hate) is the genocidal savagery of the USA Empire which has caused nothing but death and destruction amongst Muslim countries in the past two decades of the 21st century. Nor have they forgiven the genocidal savagery of the USA Empire in the Philippines, Korea and Vietnam during the 20th century.

    The idea that Asian countries will side with the USA Empire against China which is destined to become the most powerful Asian country in world history is a White Man’s fantasy born of desperation. The fact is that the genocidal savagery of the USA Empire has aroused the spirit of pan-Asianism amongst Asian countries, accompanied by the rise of anti-Americanism in all of Asia. China doesn’t need to do much except wait out the inevitable collapse of the USA Empire which is now being torn apart by its own internal contradictions.

    You stupid gringos are better off going back to your trailer parks to rape your dogs as you’re no longer allowed to lynch niggers.

    • Replies: @Deep Thought
  97. @antibeast

    … China which has sparked panic in the USA.

    China indeed terrorizes the US of A:

    … It is also consistent with the arguments of the most honest kind of “China hawk,” who argues that the real problem with Beijing is not that it wants to dominate the world, but that it might stop the U.S. from doing so in a unipolar manner.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/china-real-threat-america-ruling-ideology/5733887

    • Replies: @antibeast
  98. antibeast says:
    @Deep Thought

    China is already quite integrated economically with the rest of Asia, as shown in the diagram below:

    With the RCEP set to come online, China’s foreign trade with ASEAN + Japan + South Korea will continue growing, having eclipsed both the EU and the USA in 2020. Add in the BRI which is now integrating North Asia, Central Asia, South Asia and West Asia to East and Southeast Asia, that will see Asia turning into the world’s largest economic bloc, surpassing the EU and the USMCA. Here’s a graph showing Asia with half of the world’s GDP by 2050:

    While China will account for much of Asia’s GDP by 2050, other Asian countries such as India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc. will account for the rest. Furthermore, most of Asia will have GDP per capita exceeding \$10K which will turn them into ‘middle-income’ countries with sizeable populations of ‘middle-class’ consumers by 2050.

  99. Yee says:

    antibeast,

    Asians do not fear the rise of China which has sparked panic in the USA. What they fear (and hate) is the genocidal savagery of the USA Empire which has caused nothing but death and destruction amongst Muslim countries in the past two decades of the 21st century.

    The US can get you to fear and hate anyone they want you to. Don’t underestimate their expertise at manipulating the masses.

    Take a look at Hongkong if you have any doubt of the capabilities of the US. The level of racism towards Chinese is enough to put of a lot of Hongkongers in prison for a long time were it displayed by Whites towards Blacks…

    The US can get Chinese to hate Chinese this much, manipulating the Southeast Asians is just a piece of cake.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  100. @Erebus

    I suspect you only speak to people in your echo chamber who tell the white knight what he wants to hear… But I could be wrong and mulga could be right – that maybe you never set foot in the region.

  101. antibeast says:
    @Yee

    HK is a unique case as it was the last Western colony in Asia. The difference between HKers and Southeast Asians is that HK never went through an anti-Western phase unlike most of Asia. HKers never had any political history of their own and have grown up confused about their national identity. And many of them actually hold Western passports from the USA, Canada, UK and Australia.

    By contrast, Asian countries had achieve political independence in the decades following WWII, following decades of fighting for their national liberation from Western Colonialism. No Asian would behave like the HKers in their servility to their British colonial masters. That’s true even for the most pro-Western Asians like Singaporeans or Filipinos.

    Lastly, the problem is not so much the rise of China but the rise of Asia which the Yanks don’t want to happen and would do anything to disrupt. And that explains why the Yanks want to use Australia as their military base to subjugate Southeast Asia including the largest Muslim country in the world, Indonesia. Asians can see right through the Yanks, no matter how much the latter scream and holler about the threat of China. In their view, the USA Empire poses the real threat to Asia, not China.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  102. antibeast says:
    @antibeast

    China threat?

    Here’s a video of the statement issued by Indonesia’s Foreign Minister in a meeting with his Malaysian counterpart, regarding the AUKUS deal:

    Evidently, they are alarmed at AUKUS which they think threatens regional stability in Southeast Asia.

    What China threat?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  103. Erebus says:
    @mulga mumblebrain

    Where in SE Asia have you allegedly traveled?

    and SMTR’s

    …mulga could be right – that maybe you never set foot in the region.

    There are 2 UR authors/commenters that I’ve met here in SE Asia. They would, perhaps allay your doubts if I cared enough about your doubts to ask them to. Suffice to say that the list of SE Asian countries I haven’t visited is 1/3 of those I have. In fact, it’s exactly the same length as those I’ve lived and worked in.

    As it is, for further corroboration you’ll have to look to my comment history (contents and posting times) to come to your own conclusions.

    I’m currently in SE Asia where I’ve been on & off for more than 2 decades, with the same residential address I’ve had for almost a decade. The “off” parts were spent in S. America, M. East and Africa. As I expect the restrictions imposed by the coupsters to tighten and finally to outlive me, I’ve resigned myself to remaining here until my lights go out.

    As for your own experiences of SE Asia, and esp China, that your nose has ever been pressed against a dusty, distant window is apparent. Very little of what you see through it from that distance is a true representation of what’s on the ground. I’m on the record on UR as having told Godfree Roberts so about China. He’s visited China many times in the past, and lives but a few hundred kms from the border, but even from there the physical and temporal distance distorts his view of the current China.

    PS: Haven’t set foot in Peoria (afaik), though I’ve been to Chicago several times.

    PPS: No, SMTR, if it’s an echo chamber that’s only because they tended to be business, professional & political people. They had no reason to please me. The opposite in fact, as I’ve found myself downplaying China’s diplomatic blunders in the SCS.
    If/when the conversation turned to international business & geopolitics, China was always mentioned. Japan rarely was, and never as a threat. China is the 800lb gorilla in the room. Japan isn’t and won’t be. Its star has been waning for a couple of decades and the notion that Russia and China would allow it to go on Imperialist adventures is simply delusional. My interlocutors understand that. Yours apparently don’t.

    Look, geo-politics is about power, and nothing besides. That being so, the discussion should never be about intent, and always about capacity. Geo-politically speaking, what one or another party intends/wants to do, is always secondary to what they have the power to do. Intents and wants can change at the drop of a hat. Changing capacity takes generations.

    Japan will not have the capacity to go on Imperialist adventures in the foreseeable future, whatever it intends. Meanwhile, China has sufficient power now to lean hard on its neighbours. Depending on how long it takes the US to stumble out of its delusions of grandeur, it will soon have the capacity to lean even harder. Nobody besides India really expects it to go on Imperialist adventures, but that’s not the threat. Power is not just military power. As Putin recently said: “China doesn’t need to use force to retake Taiwan”. Power is the ability to get your allies and adversaries to do what you want. That, and that alone makes China the 800lb gorilla. Not who murdered how many, how brutally or where they did it 90 yrs ago, or who didn’t. That’s for people who think emotionally, and there’s nothing emotional about geo-politics.

    The American gorilla has been losing weight, but its power is still substantial. The US murdered millions of Vietnamese within living memory and a few 100,000 Filipinos 70 yrs before that. Both featured American atrocities. Nevertheless, American warships have been welcomed in Vietnamese ports on official visits (along with FR & UK vessels) for years and the US retains a base in the Philippines. Why? Because they fear Japan? I doubt it. Because they’ve been bamboozled by American tales of “freedom & democracy”? I doubt that even more. Quite simply, they’ve run the calculus of power and decided to dilute China’s ability to force them to do what China wants by attaching themselves to a power greater than themselves. Whatever Vietnamese and Filipino govts may say in public, their actions belie what they think geo-politically.

    That is what my interlocutors are saying when they talk about China. They worry that China will force them to do things they don’t want to do. They don’t talk about Japan that way because Japan has no capacity to make anybody do anything.

  104. haha says:
    @anon

    Your advice to Russia to “tilt towards the West” will no doubt be heeded by the Russian Government promptly. They will begin to hand over their large companies, their gas and natural resources to American corporations and beg to join NATO. What universe do you live in? Are you plain naive or naive and stupid?

    • Replies: @Showmethereal
  105. Yee says:

    Erebus,

    if it’s an echo chamber that’s only because they tended to be business, professional & political people.

    The so called “elite” class in the 3rd world are the most brainwashed people by the US, in my observation… It’s certainly the case in China.

    Because they have the privilege to receive the full dose of US propaganda, same treatment as the general American public.

  106. Erebus says:

    The so called “elite” class in the 3rd world are the most brainwashed people by the US, in my observation…

    How they perceive the world and what they think of the future is what counts. Whether they came to that view through “brainwashing” or their life experience as a whole is irrelevant.

    They’re the ones driving the bus, and what/how they think determines that future. That’s the reality they see and so that’s the reality they express and act on. That is what my comments are based on, and not on some sort of psychoanalysis of how they came to think that way.

    It’s certainly the case in China.

    Not my experience at all, but my contacts don’t go beyond local levels politically. It would surprise me to learn that upper level politicians (say provincial level and up) are the “most brainwashed”, but I’ve been surprised before. At the mayoral and prefectural levels they certainly aren’t.

    OTOH, professionals (engineers, chemists, accountants, etc) think America is in decline if they think of it at all, and China is on the rise. They’re as apolitical a professional elite as I’ve encountered, though I do notice a more strident tone as America upgrades its rhetoric re: Taiwan. At any rate, what the Chinese people think doesn’t impact a discussion about whether the region is more concerned about China or Japan.

  107. Erebus says:
    @antibeast

    Evidently, they are alarmed at AUKUS which they think threatens regional stability in Southeast Asia.

    You have to know what the word “stability” means in the context of official-speak. Geo-politically, Stability = Status Quo. A stable balance of power.

    If/when the possibility arises that the status quo will change, that’s “instability”. The current balance of power is at an equilibrium between China’s economic might and America’s military might in the region. Neither can dislodge the other from their area of dominance. AUSUK changes that equilibrium. That’s “destabilizing”.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  108. @haha

    From what I read – there are a group of “leaders” in Russia who do want to sell themselves to the west. Putin just wont let in hapoen. Same as with Xi and what he has to deal with in China.

  109. antibeast says:
    @Erebus

    That video of the Indonesian FM raising his country’s concern with AUKUS disproves the so-called ‘China Threat’ in Southeast Asia as claimed by you on this thread. Quite the contrary, Southeast Asians now view the new AUKUS deal as a threat to THEIR regional stability because those US military bases and nuclear submarines in Australia could be used against THEM, which has nothing to do with the so-called ‘China Threat’, but with the fact that the USA Empire has been waging a genocidal ‘War on Terror’ against Muslim countries for the last 20 years. Next thing you know, the usual suspects — Al-Qaeda and ISIS — could show up in Southeast Asia which would justify US/Australian military interventions in the region.

    China is integrating the whole of Southeast Asia with its BRI as shown by this video of the China-Laos High-Speed Rail launched recently:

    The USA can’t compete against China’s BRI as the Yanks don’t have what it takes to build such projects in Asia or even back in America. The only thing the Yanks are good at is to destabilize every region in the world. And THAT is what Southeast Asians are now worried about, not some imaginary ‘China Threat’.

    By the way, I view your anecdotal accounts of the alleged ‘China Threat’ in Southeast Asia to be sophomoric at best, hypocritical at worst. Notwithstanding the personal views expressed by Southeast Asians, you seem oblivious to the OFFICIAL views expressed by Southeast Asian nations regarding the new AUKUS deal which poses the real threat to them.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  110. Erebus says:
    @antibeast

    By the way, I view your anecdotal accounts of the alleged ‘China Threat’ in Southeast Asia to be sophomoric at best, hypocritical at worst

    The discussion was centred around Showmethereal’s claim that:

    “The region worries more about Japanese imperialism than Chinese…”

    My contention is that it doesn’t, and that ordinary business/professional people see China as the greater threat. If you think SE Asians see Japan as the greater threat, then you should at least state why you think so before trying to change the scope of the discussion to include one of your pet topics.

    … you seem oblivious to the OFFICIAL views expressed by Southeast Asian nations regarding the new AUKUS deal…

    Not “oblivious” at all. That AUSUK recently made the situation much more complicated is true, but wasn’t included in SMTR’s claim so I didn’t address it. In any case, we don’t know yet what AUSUK will amount to. Frankly, I think it’ll never really materialize in the same way the Quad didn’t.

    That you thought the discussion was about something other than what it was is not the only thing you’ve misunderstood. You seem to have also misunderstood the video you linked. Specifically, the Indonesian Minister’s statement regarding the negotiations to settle maritime border disputes between the 2 countries makes my point. In her official statement, she said:

    In addition, we also discussed efforts to negotiate maritime boundaries between the two countries, of course, in accordance with international law. Efforts to resolve these negotiations will provide an important message for all parties regarding the principle of resolving issues through peaceful means and in accordance with international law, in this case UNCLOS, 1982.

    Given that China has thumbed its nose at UNCLOS’ decisions in the past, who do you think her statement was directed at? Why do you think she brought the topic up in her statement? Why do you think she phrased the two countries’ position in such diplomatically blunt terms?

    In sum, AUSUK is destabilizing, but is itself unstable. In my view, the threat it presents is likely to be transitory as at least 2 of the countries involved are headed for societal and economic dislocation. China ain’t going anywhere.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  111. antibeast says:
    @Erebus

    My contention is that it doesn’t, and that ordinary business/professional people see China as the greater threat. If you think SE Asians see Japan as the greater threat, then you should at least state why you think so before trying to change the scope of the discussion to include one of your pet topics.

    Showmethereal wanted to push his ‘Japanese Threat’ hypothesis in contradistinction to your ‘China Treat’ theory. I don’t believe in either as I have made it clear that Southeast Asians OFFICIALLY have rejected US overtures to join its anti-Chinese bloc. My view is that Japan is only a threat if the USA wants to use the Japanese as sepoys against China, just like the British used Indians against Germany during WWI and WWII.

    Given that China has thumbed its nose at UNCLOS’ decisions in the past, who do you think her statement was directed at? Why do you think she brought the topic up in her statement? Why do you think she phrased the two countries’ position in such diplomatically blunt terms?

    Let me give you a background to the territorial disputes in the SCS:

    1. Indonesia does NOT have a sovereign claim to the Spratly Islands in the SCS;
    2. Malaysia does have a sovereign claim to the Spratly Islands in the SCS but they’re contingent on its possession of Sabah which is itself claimed by the Philippines;
    3. The Philippines was the sole claimant who filed the arbitration case before the PCA whose ruling was rejected by ALL other parties to the territorial disputes in the SCS;
    4. The PCA is not a UN body nor does it have any jurisdiction on UNCLOS matters, being an ARBITRAL body, in contrast to the ITLOS which is the sole JUDICIAL body authorized by the UNCLOS to adjudicate on MARITIME cases;
    5. The USA pressured the late Philippine President Aquino to file the ARBITRATION case before the PCA which ruled against the ALL the claimants in the SCS by designating ALL the features in the SCS as ‘rocks’ instead of ‘islands’;
    6. NONE of the legal parties to the SCS dispute consented to ARBITRATION before the PCA which makes its ruling legally binding only on the sole participant, the Philippines;
    7. The PCA ruling was supposed to have provoked China into a military conflict with the Philippines which would have justified the re-establishment of US military bases in the Philippines, banned under the Philippine Constitution;
    8. But after Duterte came into office, he shelved the PCA ruling and evicted the US military from the Philippines;
    9. Before building the airfields in the few islands under its control in the SCS, China had already agreed with the other legal parties to the SCS dispute to abide by the CoC (Code of Conduct) which Aquino discarded under pressure from the USA;
    10. All these Yankee machinations have come to naught as Duterte has refused to host US military bases under the pretext of ‘defending’ Filipinos from ‘Communist China’.

    Now, either you honestly don’t know any of the above facts which makes your views ‘sophomoric’ or you’re deliberately obfuscating the issues by using the ‘China Threat’ as a red herring. Duterte’s refusal to host US military bases on Philippine soil and the official statements from the Indonesian FM which you’re reframing as an veiled warning against the imaginary ‘China Threat’ makes me think you’re just playing dumb here.

    Here’s a video of the joint China-Indonesia naval exercise held a few months ago:

    Now, if you still don’t believe me but hold dear your ‘China Threat’ theory, here’s a news article about the War Crimes Tribunal held in Kuala Lumpur back in 2011:

    https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2011/11/28/kuala-lumpur-tribunal-bush-and-blair-guilty

    In Kuala Lumpur, after two years of investigation by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCC), a tribunal (the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, or KLWCT) consisting of five judges with judicial and academic backgrounds reached a unanimous verdict that found George W Bush and Tony Blair guilty of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and genocide as a result of their roles in the Iraq War.

    In sum, AUSUK is destabilizing, but is itself unstable. In my view, the threat it presents is likely to be transitory as at least 2 of the countries involved are headed for societal and economic dislocation. China ain’t going anywhere.

    Methinks you’re either confused or just making things up. The way you dismiss the OFFICIAL views of Southeast Asians which consider the new AUKUS deal as a threat to THEIR regional stability is telling. And yet you keep promoting your ‘China Threat’ theory based on your PERSONAL interactions with Southeast Asians who were just playing ‘dumb’ by telling you what you wanted to hear. That is just confirmation bias, nothing more or less.

    Any more questions?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  112. Erebus says:
    @antibeast

    Duterte’s refusal to host US military bases on Philippine soil…

    … was based on the fact that it required a change in the Filipino Constitution which forbids foreign forces on its soil. Nevertheless, Duterte revived the 1998 Visiting Forces Pact, thus allowing large scale USM combat exercises on Philippines territory and USN warships in Filipino waters on a “temporary” basis, which seems to extend to years in some cases.

    IOW, he reversed his position on the VFA that he’d been threatening to cancel. That may possibly be due to numerous polls showing that the Filipino public distrusts China deeply and he is, after all a politician. His daughter is contemplating a run at the Presidency (with him as VP) and a pro-China platform is a guaranteed vote loser.

    … the official statements from the Indonesian FM which you’re reframing as an veiled warning against the imaginary ‘China Threat’ makes me think you’re just playing dumb here.

    I wasn’t “re-framing” them. Nor was I playing dumb. Here is what one of the the 3rd clause in Indonesia’s May, 2020 submission to the UN says…

    3. Indonesia reiterates that the Nine-Dash Line map implying historic rights claim clearly lacks international legal basis and is tantamount to upset UNCLOS 1982. This view has also been confirmed by the Award of 12 July 2016 by the Tribunal that any historic rights that the People’s Republic of China may have had to the living and non-living resources were superseded by the limits of the maritime zones provided for by UNCLOS 1982.

    There is nothing unclear about Indonesia’s position that needs “re-framing”. Clearly, the minister was simply stating Indonesia’s official position, and because it was a joint statement, Malaysia’s position as well.

    Whatever your laundry list of “background facts” may say, the reality is that China’s refusal to abide by the decision is supported by only one State that’s geographically close to the SCS, namely Taiwan. Of course, Taiwan’s support is unsurprising insofar as its own claims would be rendered illegitimate if the decision stood.

    Why do you think all other SE Asian nations have either supported the decision to varying degrees, or have remained silent? In all, only 8 nations support China on this matter, and all except Taiwan have no dog in the fight (geographically speaking).

    • Replies: @antibeast
  113. antibeast says:
    @Erebus

    … was based on the fact that it required a change in the Filipino Constitution which forbids foreign forces on its soil. Nevertheless, Duterte revived the 1998 Visiting Forces Pact, thus allowing large scale USM combat exercises on Philippines territory and USN warships in Filipino waters on a “temporary” basis, which seems to extend to years in some cases.

    No, I am not talking about the VFA but the EDCA:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Defense_Cooperation_Agreement

    The Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) is an agreement between the United States and the Philippines intended to bolster the U.S.–Philippine alliance. The agreement allows the United States to rotate troops into the Philippines for extended stays and allows the United States to build and operate facilities on Philippine bases, for both American and Philippine forces.[1] The US is not allowed to establish any permanent military bases. It also gives Philippine personnel access to American ships and planes

    The EDCA was signed in 2014 which allowed the USA to ‘build and operate facilities on Philippine bases’, which would have violated the Philippine Constitution. Duterte canceled this pact but not the VFA although he has threatened to do so unless the USA pays the Philippines.

    IOW, he reversed his position on the VFA that he’d been threatening to cancel. That may possibly be due to numerous polls showing that the Filipino public distrusts China deeply and he is, after all a politician. His daughter is contemplating a run at the Presidency (with him as VP) and a pro-China platform is a guaranteed vote loser.

    No, Duterte reversed his position on the VFA because he wanted to extract financial concessions from Trump who praised him for cancelling the EDCA. By the way, do you know the US-led West has been orchestrating a global campaign to ‘demonize’ Duterte since he came to office? And that the ISIS suddenly showed up in Mindanao where he hailed from? Not everything has to do with the ‘China Threat’ which you seem to imply is the cause of his vacillation on the VFA issue. More likely, Duterte resorted to appeasing the USA just to get the Yanks off his back.

    I wasn’t “re-framing” them. Nor was I playing dumb. Here is what one of the the 3rd clause in Indonesia’s May, 2020 submission to the UN says…

    Here you go again, trying to frame everything as a ‘China Threat’ issue. Indonesia is not even a claimant in the SCS dispute which makes their position on China’s ‘9-dash-line’ claim irrelevant. What is relevant is the position of Taiwan whose ’11-dash-liine’ mirrors China’s ‘9-dash-line’ claim, as you’ve correctly pointed out. But China has submitted his own clarifications to UNCLOS, clearly spelling out that its ‘historic rights’ under the ‘9-dash-line’ claim consists of territorial claims to the offshore islands in the SCS and their maritime domains under UNCLOS. Nothing in China’s submissions to UNCLOS claims the waters within the ‘9-dash-line’ claim as its territorial waters or its maritime domain which would violate the letter and spirit of UNCLOS.

    You conveniently left out the fact that the USA instigated the PCA lawsuit in order to invalidate ALL the territorial claims of the legal parties to the SCS dispute while insisting that Indonesia’s position is somehow relevant to the case. After all, the USA has been attempting to get the Philippines to host US military bases since Obama’s Pivot to Asia which ended in failure as Duterte cancelled the EDCA. And what did Trump do? He thanked Duterte for saving the USA the cost of maintaining those US military bases in the Philippines.

    Why do you think all other SE Asian nations have either supported the decision to varying degrees, or have remained silent? In all, only 8 nations support China on this matter, and all except Taiwan have no dog in the fight (geographically speaking).

    Again, you’re trying to use the SCS dispute as a meme to promote your ‘China Threat’ theory which is absurd because Taiwan occupies the largest island while Vietnam occupies the most number of offshore islands/features in the Spratly Islands. China is a latecomer to the SCS dispute, having started to reclaim the few islands/features there only AFTER Aquino began provoking China by filing the lawsuit before the PCA, thereby violating the CoC agreed upon by all the parties to the SCS dispute.

    The PCA ruling is a dead horse as Duterte has shelved its case against China which refused to accept the ruling. The main goal of the PCA ruling was to invalidate ALL territorial claims to those offshore islands/features which were classified as mere ‘rocks’. In other words, the Philippines under Aquino shot its own foot by invalidating its own claims based on Marcos’s Presidential Decree creating the Kalayaan Island Group. UNCLOS itself is irrelevant to the territorial disputes in the SCS as the PCA ruling acknowledged. What the PCA ruling did is to pretend that none of the offshore islands/features qualify as ‘islands’ but are mere ‘rocks’ which do not entitle them to any maritime rights under UNCLOS.

    I will end our discussion here as it is obvious that you have an agenda here, constantly trying to beat up the dead horse of the PCA ruling in order to spin your ‘China Threat’ theory while dismissing the new AUKUS deal which poses the real threat to Southeast Asia.

  114. Erebus says:

    Ho hum. You missed the point early and often. You’re still missing it. Wandering in the bushes shouting irrelevancies won’t help you see the point.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Anglin Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Becker update V1.3.2
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World