@Oldschool they're crazy if they think the west will assist and recognized them, For me its domestic politics and China is a convenience excuse to blame.
China's Westward One Belt One Road Strategy
- Thread starter tidalwave
- Start date
There's oil from Pakistan to xinjiang.
But huge cost of transport that either from xinjiang or east coast to South west. Yunnan, chengdu, gizhou.
The Yunnan oil refinery already setup and pipeline in myanmar already laid.
Huge investment already made.
Now,. It's all about defending that investment.
Myanmar is dirt poor country. No one really interest in them if not for one reason
Only reason US and the west has tremendous interests in Myanmar is block China access to Indian ocean
Myanmar is one part of China's BRI project but it isn't as strategic as many others that offer ports and greater access to adjacent markets or stepping stone to supplies and markets further away. It is just a neighbour with traditionally good relations with China. It's expected that the Americans/Anglos will attack all that are involved with genuine intentions of making projects work. From Lebanon's port to Myanmar, it doesn't matter if they attack to destroy or send in their "terrorists".
The one good thing for China here is it is becoming obvious that China did not support the coup and does not benefit from it.
exactly what I said, CIA funding, play book and script.
the protestors copy and paste some of the tactics and actions of the HK rioters. there must be a master mind behind the scene.
China just needs to sit tight and let the antics of the rioters play out for all to see that China has no hands in the coup.
I agree with the China policy of non interference as opposed to western interventions and adventurism , a strategy of China designed eventually to gain friends and influence neutral onlookers. it is a long term strategy, one that calls for enduring patience and self restraint.
China plays Go, is here to help and build, while the west plays Chess, is inclined to bomb and destroy in the name of democracy and human rights.
it is a no-brainer to predict who is going to win in the long run, and the west knows it, even more acutely so after this COVID fiasco.
Hence China just needs to be patient, and not goaded into over-reaction in Myanmar.
There is always two sides to a coin.
By adopting passive stance, others will hit you more thinking you are an easy targets. But passive stance allows you conserve energy and observe more.
Active interference presents deterence.
Disadvantage is possible wasteful of resources and energy.
I think one needs to find the right combo at the right time
Last edited:
US and the West are shit stirrers, to say the least [eg HK] . They want Myanmar to be destabalised to create problems for both the goverments of China and Myanmar, because Myanmar is strategic important neighbour of China.
fully understand your argument.
Quick fix looks attractive, but always has collateral damage and unintentional side effects and ramifications.
OTOH, patience can be painful but will prevail in the long run.
20 years ago nobody in his or her right mind would dare to predict the sorry state in which US finds itself now. declining power and influence, failing economy, dwindling prospect, divided society, black-white conflict, and massive federal pay outs by printing money etc etc. a result of 30 years of wars, invasions, and seemingly clever quick fixes which turn out to be shooting one's own feet.
while 30 years of peaceful development, patient self restraint, and non interference policy has brought China where it is today.
I am not saying that China should stay forever this way, its foreign policy may one day be forced to become more assertive and aggressive, but I believe the time is not now, certainly not with a just cause. Punching the Myanmar military is like a picnic in the park, as far as the PLA is concerned, but what for ? Is it worth it to be seen and judged to be a big bully to secure the oil pipeline in Myanmar ?? All the years of China cultivating a benign and benevolent image, and support from other developing countries gone with one stroke.
Perhaps one day, when the rest of the world is sick and tired of western hypocrisy and exploitation / meddling in their internal affairs and destabilizing their countries, and calls for China to be the world leader, then and then should China step out and accept the challenge.
Battle of control of Shan states between China and Myanmar is eerily similar to between Manchu empire and old Myanmar kingdom. There is general dislike from general Burmese toward Chinese as similar to Vietnamese toward Chinese because in history they were able repell invading Manchu forces and avoid sinicized.
Manchu could take down Myanmar kingdom if it had strike a deal with Siam or Thailand kingdom and allow it's imperial troop to go through Thailand and go to the flat coastal of Myanmar in South instead of going through the thick forrest.
If Manchu able to take down Myanmar kingdom, and ruled it, modern China would have myanmar as province much like yunnan.. China would have access to India ocean. Its current strategic vulnerability regarding to SCS would completely solved.
Manchu could take down Myanmar kingdom if it had strike a deal with Siam or Thailand kingdom and allow it's imperial troop to go through Thailand and go to the flat coastal of Myanmar in South instead of going through the thick forrest.
If Manchu able to take down Myanmar kingdom, and ruled it, modern China would have myanmar as province much like yunnan.. China would have access to India ocean. Its current strategic vulnerability regarding to SCS would completely solved.
Last edited: