Nonintervention itself is kind of irresponsible, China needs to rid of that.
I think you are confused with China being responsible as to what the West expect to it to act to preserve the Western order of thing.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
China needs to be a responsible power, that's to prevent western led regime change under SCO
- Thread starter tidalwave
- Start date
Nonintervention itself is kind of irresponsible, China needs to rid of that.
I think you are confused with China being responsible as to what the West expect to it to act to preserve the Western order of thing.
And I will complete your timeline with the following
-The Warsaw Pact caused the USSR to overextend and overstretch.
-The USSR collapsed due that overstretch, giving NATO and the US free reign
-NATO/US free reign caused it in turn to overextend and overstretch.
See the pattern here ? The idea that China has to ape and check every single thing that the US do is just as inane as the US trying to ape and check every single thing China does. Just because the US is trying to reshape this into a Cold War with China means that China and the rest of the world will play by the same rules.
The problem Russia has is that military power is the only way that it can project influence, which plays directly into the US playbook. China on the other hand has no military obligations and any potential disputes with other nations can draw upon its economy for leverage.
The issue with playing the "big brother" is that once you put on the mantle, it is every hard for one to take it off. One will be drawn into every single conflict, regardless of how insignificant or detached from national interests, and often having to invest significant effort into it. That is what Russia will be facing shortly in Syria, once the smoke clears on the Syrian rebels, Putin will be left juggling Turkish, Syrian, Iranian and Israelite interests in the region which are all in conflict with each other,
And the main problem with your "poisoning the well" tactic is that it also poisons the well for one's own side as well. Conspiring with Maduro's side to sabotage Venezuelan infrastructure and economy just to get back at the US is a petty and spiteful tactic which is ultimately fruitless because in the end the US aren't going to colonize Venezuela, and the only real people to suffer are the Venezuelans themselves. It is pretty arrogant and presumptuous to think that all of Venezuela would rather torch their own homes and economy than allow for regime change. Especially if the said political crisis has solid support on either side by the populous
And the issue with countering US intervention by offering assistance earlier is that the US will not need any humanitarian excuse for this crisis if they really want to, they have done the same in Libya and in Iraq. What makes you think that China can score any higher moral ground than the rest of the world that choose non-intervention on Venezuela.
For crying loud , China will be hurting itself if it doesn't do anything to collect the $20 billion Venezuela government still owning to China.
The new government which is sponsored by US could come in and could eat it's words and make China lose that $20 billion in loan.
Nonintervention will cost China dearly.
Once China send troops, Russia and Iran will also send troops. And central Asia may also too. All under SCO. China won't acting by itself.
Sending troops doesn't mean going to fight with US but rather to help stabilize the country against possible uprisings.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
Nope, the distinction here is quit clear. If China acts to preserve what is clearly in its own interests above that of the Venezuelan people which is to keep an embattled president whose popularity is in dispute in total disregard of proper procedures and norms it will be no better than what you claim the West is doing.Nonintervention itself is kind of irresponsible, China needs to rid of that.
I think you are confused with China being responsible as to what the West expect to it to act to preserve the Western order of thing.
The most arrogant and hubristic thinking that China could ever do is to think that it knows better than what the local populace of another nation does.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
So in that sentence you admit yourself why you did want China to intervene, not because of "responsibility" or "upholding international norms" or any of the high and mighty things you did image it to be. It is in the end, plain and simple all about greed and money. Yeah that is so "morally superior" to what you claim the US will do ?For crying loud , China will be hurting itself if it doesn't do anything to collect the $20 billion Venezuela government still owning to China.
The new government which is sponsored by US could come in and could eat it's words and make China lose that $20 billion in loan.
Nonintervention will cost China dearly.
Once China send troops, Russia and Iran will also send troops. And central Asia may also too. All under SCO. China won't acting by itself.
Sending troops doesn't mean going to fight with US but rather to help stabilize the country against possible uprisings.
The idea that the rest of SCO would design to send in troops after China, with whom they have no clear mutual defense treaty is as laughable as it is insane. Not to mention that half of the SCO's troops wouldn't even be able to afford to pay for the trip there, much less keep them stationed for any significant period of time. And that is not counting the fact that they will most likely find themselves in a similar foreign occupation not unlike that of the US. Or the possibility of armed conflict with the US in a very disadvantageous scenario.
To put that into perspective, in 2018 the Pentagon calculated that the cost of the Afghan occupation was costing the US 45 billion a year. You hear that right, billion not million, a year. That 20 billion dollars in loans to Venezuela is practically chicken feed compared to what China will have to pay for foreign intervention.
And quite frankly China should count itself lucky if it can come out of a crisis like Venezuela for only 20 billion short, the writing was on the wall for Maduro for the past 2 years. And yet China still thinks it was a good idea to continue to pump more money into Caracas is anyone's guess, but one thing is clear that it is hardly based on any economic consideration at that point.
It would be China's luck that it's foreign department is not staffed by people who think that propping up a friendly government is as easy as sending a few navy ships, dropping a few bombs or firing a few missiles, send a few soldiers marching down the street and the whole thing will piece itself together.
Last edited by a moderator:
So in that sentence you admit yourself why you did want China to intervene, not because of "responsibility" or "upholding international norms" or any of the high and mighty things you did image it to be. It is in the end, plain and simple all about greed and money. Yeah that is so "morally superior" to what you claim the US will do ?
The idea that the rest of SCO would design to send in troops after China, with whom they have no clear mutual defense treaty is as laughable as it is insane. Not to mention that half of the SCO's troops wouldn't even be able to afford to pay for the trip there, much less keep them stationed for any significant period of time. And that is not counting the fact that they will most likely find themselves in a similar foreign occupation not unlike that of the US. Or the possibility of armed conflict with the US in a very disadvantageous scenario.
To put that into perspective, in 2018 the Pentagon calculated that the cost of the Afghan occupation was costing the US 45 billion a year. You hear that right, billion not million, a year. That 20 billion dollars in loans to Venezuela is practically chicken feed compared to what China will have to pay for foreign intervention.
And quite frankly China should count itself lucky if it can come out of a crisis like Venezuela for only 20 billion short, the writing was on the wall for Maduro for the past 2 years. And yet China still thinks it was a good idea to continue to pump more money into Caracas is anyone's guess, but one thing is clear that it is hardly based on any economic consideration at that point.
It would be China's luck that it's foreign department is not staffed by people who think that propping up a friendly government is as easy as sending a few navy ships, dropping a few bombs or firing a few missiles, send a few soldiers marching down the street and the whole thing will piece itself together.
It's not about greed, simply to get back what others owned you. How can you say that's greed??
Get back what's yours is your rights, not greed.
Guiado propped by US, and if he in power , US will call the shot and China interests will be severely harmed and will lose big.
What China acting responsible is to deny US evil scheme, it knows China and Russia have substantial investment in Venezuela therefore, by propped up a new regime, it can wrestle away and control the Venezuela oil, and make China and Russia lose big.
China will act as the new balance.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
Considering how at worse China will lose a total of 20 billion, which is barely a blip on the radar in comparison to China's economy and scale of investment to the rest of the world. And how the US would in turn be saddled with bringing an economy that is wrecked to the point of non function due to mismanagement. Your idea of "big" is completely skewered. Not to mention that there are completely legitimate ways to recover investments from other countries that China can take, such as by taking action through the World Trading Organization/World Aberration Court or by repossessing Venezuelan assets located on Chinese territory. And here is a hint, intervening in a foreign country to prop up a embattled presidency in total violation of legal norms and against the wishes of the population just to reclaim a paltry sum hardly counts as "responsible action" no matter how one twists that defintion.It's not about greed, simply to get back what others owned you. How can you say that's greed??
Get back what's yours is your rights, not greed.
Guiado propped by US, and if he in power , US will call the shot and China interests will be severely harmed and will lose big.
Not to mention it was completely impossible for Maduro to repay that 20 billion back to China in the first place.
And finally again, reiterating my last post. The worst thing that China can do is to throw good money after bad, it is as though the slew of foreign intervention fiascoes that the US had done in the past 20 years not leave any lasting impressions on anyone.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
misquote
Considering how at worse China will lose a total of 20 billion, which is barely a blip on the radar in comparison to China's economy and scale of investment to the rest of the world. And how the US would in turn be saddled with bringing an economy that is wrecked to the point of non function due to mismanagement. Your idea of "big" is completely skewered. Not to mention that there are completely legitimate ways to recover investments from other countries that China can take, such as by taking action through the World Trading Organization/World Aberration Court or by repossessing Venezuelan assets located on Chinese territory. And here is a hint, intervening in a foreign country to prop up a embattled presidency in total violation of legal norms and against the wishes of the population just to reclaim a paltry sum hardly counts as "responsible action" no matter how one twists that defintion.
Not to mention it was completely impossible for Maduro to repay that 20 billion back to China in the first place.
And finally again, reiterating my last post. The worst thing that China can do is to throw good money after bad, it is as though the slew of foreign intervention fiascoes that the US had done in the past 20 years not leave any lasting impressions on anyone.
Well said
For crying loud , China will be hurting itself if it doesn't do anything to collect the $20 billion Venezuela government still owning to China.
The new government which is sponsored by US could come in and could eat it's words and make China lose that $20 billion in loan.
Nonintervention will cost China dearly.
Once China send troops, Russia and Iran will also send troops. And central Asia may also too. All under SCO. China won't acting by itself.
Sending troops doesn't mean going to fight with US but rather to help stabilize the country against possible uprisings.
Lol stealing the money would be suicide. It’s not attached to Maduro, it’s attached to the Venezuelan state. Guaido or Maduro, they’re gonna pay it.
Washington might give arms support, but Beijing holds all the keys to *any* form of prosperity Venezuela could achieve.
That’s why Guaido is trying to open diplomatic channel with China and promised that deals would remain in effect while marketing himself as less corrupt and more efficient than Maduro. He knows that if he can convince China that he’s better business than Maduro, then Maduro won’t stand a chance.
And conversely, if he was stupid enough to give a bad business vibe, he could never rule Venezuela even if he manages a coup.
Beijing would crush the country with sanctions and force infrastructure handovers. It would be a worse crisis for Venezuelans than under Maduro, and everyone will blame Guaido for it. His days would be numbered even if he’s on the throne.
Just because he’s illegitimate doesn’t mean he’s stupid.
From his statements up to now, it appears that he’s trying to give an even better deal in order to make Beijing overlook his legitimacy.
I could see Xi playing along. Maybe it’s not morally right but it’s what would lead to more money and less risks taken.
With this type of thinking, wait till Iran also have its regime change propped up by the West and then China will know the true meaning of that!Considering how at worse China will lose a total of 20 billion, which is barely a blip on the radar in comparison to China's economy and scale of investment to the rest of the world. And how the US would in turn be saddled with bringing an economy that is wrecked to the point of non function due to mismanagement. Your idea of "big" is completely skewered. Not to mention that there are completely legitimate ways to recover investments from other countries that China can take, such as by taking action through the World Trading Organization/World Aberration Court or by repossessing Venezuelan assets located on Chinese territory. And here is a hint, intervening in a foreign country to prop up a embattled presidency in total violation of legal norms and against the wishes of the population just to reclaim a paltry sum hardly counts as "responsible action" no matter how one twists that defintion.
Not to mention it was completely impossible for Maduro to repay that 20 billion back to China in the first place.
And finally again, reiterating my last post. The worst thing that China can do is to throw good money after bad, it is as though the slew of foreign intervention fiascoes that the US had done in the past 20 years not leave any lasting impressions on anyone.