Miscellaneous News

[Deleted member 23272]

There are countries that recognize Ukraine's sovereignty over Crimea, and now, there are countries that recognize Russia's sovereignty over Crimea.

You mean all 15 of them? Of that 15 I remind you countries like China, Iran, Indonesia, Mexico, and Kazakhstan are not included.

Nevermind the Ambassador's words for now, because I doubt it'll have greater ramifications and its been discussed enough. The rest of your post is essentially, there is no "international law" might is right. Granted yes, realpolitik is what it is, any country with enough nukes and guns can technically do as it pleases. That is not however, the message China has been spreading in its diplomatic campaign in the past two months.

America's invasion of Iraq was a violation of international law and China is not framing itself as the country that goes, "it is what it is America has the dollar and lots of guns." China is positioning itself as a country that not only opposes such violations of international law, but can actually back it up by using its resources to promote international cooperation, territorial integrity, and multilateralism. Which as a country and as a global power, gives it legitimacy and soft power especially amongst the global south that are tired of being bullied by the Western hegemony. You might disagree and think China should be more like America, but I think the party's stance when it come to foreign policy has been crystal clear and should be respected.

 

[birdlikefood]

The original speech of the ambassador to France does not violate any international law, nor does it contradict China's diplomatic principles today. The important principle of respecting national sovereignty and territorial integrity established in the Charter of the United Nations is the cornerstone of modern international law and international relations.

The ambassador's statement: "From the point of view of international law, even the republics of the former Soviet Union have no valid status, because there is no international agreement to implement their sovereign state status". This sentence is not so much an expression of opinion as a factual statement. However, the media will hype this statement as a factual statement as an expression of the attitude of the ambassador or even the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs in order to achieve its purpose.

The view that the ambassador's speech will cause trouble for China's Taiwan policy is even more untenable. Taiwan's territorial sovereignty belongs to one China, which has never been disputed in history and in the reality of international politics. "One China" only encounters challenges within the island of Taiwan, and there are no problems internationally. The Taiwan referendum is to fundamentally change the status quo of China's sovereignty and establish a new sovereign state.

This is fundamentally different from the Ukraine issue.

You can criticize Mr. Ambassador for needing more mature language confrontation experience and skills, but you cannot criticize him for being stupid.

 

[Chevalier]

It’s obvious that abiding by UN rules, wording and laws according to the Anglo led west is pointless given the alacrity that the anglos will abandon those laws if they are out at a disadvantage eg WTO, the American obsession with “guardrails“.
No, the only laws that the Anglo led west truly respects is Vae Victus, woe to the conquered. The anglos believe in a Hobbesian world and behave accordingly, in history and in present in practice.

Take the latest US trying to force South Korea not to sell chips to China since their own Anglo companies are being sanctioned by China, and yet when Australia suffered Chinese sanctions, it was America who was stealing Australian market share.

Vae Victus, that is all the anglos and their minions believe in. As Putin said, the anglos “have no principles”.

 

[Overbom]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Argentina seeks BRICS entry with China and Brazil meetings​

Ambassador Sabino Vaca Narvaja held meetings with BRICS Bank President Dilma Rousseff and Foreign Minister Qin Gang in Shanghai

 

[tonyget]

Did Chinese ambassador to France just said that ex-Soviet nations are not sovereign countries？This will deteriorate China and Central Asia countries relations

 

[BlackWindMnt]

Did Chinese ambassador to France just said that ex-Soviet nations are not sovereign countries？This will deteriorate China and Central Asia countries relations

It was mostly in the context of Crimea and baltics if im not mistaken.

 

[tonyget]

It was mostly in the context of Crimea and baltics if im not mistaken.

He used the word "ex-Soviet nations"，which include Central Asia countries

 

[MortyandRick]

He used the word "ex-Soviet nations"，which include Central Asia countries

Dude just read up on the last 5-6 pages discussing this topic ad nauseam. No need to bring this up for fresh discussion and waste time and useless pages

 

[Biscuits]

Did Chinese ambassador to France just said that ex-Soviet nations are not sovereign countries？This will deteriorate China and Central Asia countries relations

Yet none of the central Asian are complaining. Clearly they have a brain and can see where things are going.

 

[Eventine]

I don't know why the ambassador said what he has said. And I am not going to speculating the reason. However, when EU top officials are already threatened to sanction China for Taiwan, why should China play nice. Too many people want China to act like a saint with impeccable perfection but give leeway to other countries to insult and demonize China.

When the US already sanctioned China from right to left from top to bottom. When EU broke diplomatic protocol by visiting Taiwan. And telling China that it is none of China's business. But somehow a few inflammatory words from an ambassador is such a big deal. Grow some skin please, China's interests have been trampled for the last few years. Now, you still care about EU nations' sensitive feeling. When did they care about China.

The problem is the Chinese belief that they can separate the EU from the US, which they largely cannot. See, Chinese strategists think in terms of rational interests, believing others to be like themselves in wanting to advance their position in the great game. They think the problem is the US, and only the US, when in fact, it hasn't played out that way.

But the US's vassals are largely content where they are. Macron is one man - he certainly doesn't represent all of France, much less the EU. Europeans will play nice with China where there is business to be done, and they'll throw in the occasional put down against the Americans - because American arrogance really is irritating - but at a base, fundamental level, Europeans identify with the West and its values. This is a cultural fact.

For this reason, no European politician can get away with pivoting to China even if it's in their best interest to do so. Their public will eat them alive for preferring "oriental tyrants" to their own. It's just not possible for European leaders to team up with China, or even stay neutral in a conflict between China and the US. Their public will demand that they defend Western values.

Since China's modern values are fundamentally incompatible with that of the West's, there's not much to realized, ultimately, in courting Europeans. Europeans will never respect or love the PRC. Not unless it became a Western democracy like them. Such being impossible, the best that China can get out of Europe is a recognition of their own weakness, because Europeans are pretty much screwed, economically. So to the extent that China can work with Europe, it will be because Europe has no choice but to continue to do business.

But never take that as an indication that Europe will therefore bow to Chinese political demands. The Europeans, despite their weakness, are too proud for that; and they'd gladly sacrifice their own interests to rage, one last time, against the dying of the light.