No.So we essentially want the same thing, but clothed in different terms.
No, not the only way (and not the way China would do)."Foster and out people in power" which will either be by coup or by direct arms, it's also what I'm talking about.
They can choose to do so."that want self determination and not to grovel".
But if that self determination is that they want to treat China and her interests unfairly, you'd surely not cheer for it?
Wouldn't be smart, and the consequences likely would mean they either pay up for doing so, or change their attitude / interests.
(In other words, action in real life will have consequences).
Your original proposal pretty much suggested doing so though.And they don't need to grovel because China is not a racist society, so they don't need the grovelling, but in the no grovelling clause it includes no western or other imperialist worship. Which de facto means not deviating the mutually beneficial relationship with China.
It's not the same?"Essentially, you people don't know how to manage yourself, so some I approve of can come and be your boss and boss you around)"
But don't you also think that when you explain the necessity of promoting self determination and backbone against the west in their populations and leaders? If these people knew how to manage themselves, there would be no need to change anything about the status quo at all. We should let Japanese keep praising in Yasukuni. Let Philippines and Korea keep operating brothels for US army. Let most of their population keep eating pagpag while elites rant against "communists" in SEA.
Giving suggestions / tips / advice is not the same as actively going in and giving orders / determine things for others.
They can choose to not go for self determination, but then they gotta face all the consequences of doing so.
Your original comment pretty much said to outright colonize those countries.What you say is of course what the public narrative should be. I'm just being off mask.
To clarify I've never once said that when China takes influence over these areas they should treat anyone unjustly. China should spread to them their positive values so all countries in the network can improve development together. But first China needs to take that influence. And you don't get it with isolationism and appealing to reason. You need aggressive expansion strategies.
That's quite different from "China takes influence over these areas".
As for that (increasing influence), I do agree. But I think it's already happening, and that it likely would not need the "aggressive expansion strategies" you think of.