Chinese Economics Thread

[Nobonita Barua]

If a Republican is in office there will be US intervention for sure. Biden would probably realize WW3 is a bad idea and focus the US on shoring up Japan and South Korea. He's China's best chance by far.

Last time there was a republican in office. As fast as he was killing 80 year old Iranian grandpas or ordering to destroy Iranian boats, didn't seem interested poking around Kim Jong Un. Wonder why is that.

Would very much love to see they "intervene". Guam & Hawaii has been in wrong hand for long time.

 

[j17wang]

Biden wont reverse a single thing. He already faces allegation of being a Chinese mole with the whole Hunter Biden thing. Infact i expect him to be more tough on China to shed off this image that's being projected.

I expect the chip ban to soon cover every Chinese company and we may well see US sanctions entering the financial sphere including China being cut off from SWIFT.

Things will only go downhill from here and War will be imminent.

Its time China bans all rare earth exports, as well as PPE and active pharmaceutical ingredients if Biden doesn't lift the ban in the first 1-2 weeks.

 

[Petrolicious88]

A sales ban is highly possible based on so called “data security and national security” reasons.

The difference is that oil exists in a lot of places, like Siberia, the Middle East, Indonesia, Venezuela, etc. etc.

Whereas semiconductors manufacturing equipment (produced by APM, Lam, KLA-Tencor, Cymer, Cadence, and Synposys) only exists on the mainland US and Netherlands. China is not going to get that by conquest. There are no shortcuts. The only valuable piece of the semiconductor supply chain is in Taiwan. IMO if China wants Taiwan it should use the four year window 2020-24 while Biden is in office to go for it. After that, it will be too late. IMO though it's pointless as TW people's hearts and minds must be won in the long run and that will never happen. Might as well offer an EU-style deal to Taiwan instead.

“Winning the hearts and minds of TW people” is exactly what’s needed. Unfortunately the only way to get Taiwan is if the Taiwanese people wants reunification.

And the only way to get that is if there is democratic reform in China. And that’s not going to happen.

Military conquest is too costly. Also the US has no choice but to militarily defend Taiwan. If it doesn’t, it looses credibility in the entire Asia Pacific. It can then forget about Asia.

 

[manqiangrexue]

“Winning the hearts and minds of TW people” is exactly what’s needed. Unfortunately the only way to get Taiwan is if the Taiwanese people wants reunification.

Historically speaking, that's incorrect. Force conquers territory; "winning the hearts and minds" can come after.

And the only way to get that is if there is democratic reform in China. And that’s not going to happen.

Correct

Military conquest is too costly. Also the US has no choice but to militarily defend Taiwan. If it doesn’t, it looses credibility in the entire Asia Pacific. It can then forget about Asia.

The US didn't defend Ukraine even though it was obligated to. The US doesn't "defend" any islands in the SCS. For every conflict the US gets into and stays out of, the picture is increasingly clear: the US will only pick limited fights where it does not face a powerful, or even nuclear nation. America employs strategic ambiguity over the ROC for a reason: it will not confront a strong China; it will only fight if it thinks it can achieve an easy victory. As China grows more and more, American credibility in Asia will erode; it's not up to the US. Force determines credibility and influence.

 

[supercat]

EU and China revive hopes of investment deal this year
Long-delayed accord on market access would represent a diplomatic coup for both powers

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China and the EU are rushing to meet a year-end deadline to seal a long-awaited investment agreement, in a sign of the bloc’s push to build strategic ties with Beijing, even as it revives relations with the US.

The likelihood of the accord being settled soon is rising despite the disruption caused by the coronavirus crisis, officials from both sides have told the Financial Times. A shift by Beijing in the important area of market access has given the process additional momentum, EU officials said.

The EU has long yearned for an agreement to allow its companies wider entry to the Chinese market, and the two sides agreed last year that it should be concluded by the end of 2020. Securing a deal would be a diplomatic coup for both powers. It would come weeks before the inauguration of US president-elect Joe Biden, which has the potential to foster improved transatlantic trade ties after tensions with the Trump administration.

More:

China-EU Investment Treaty Talks in ‘Final Phase,’ Foreign Ministry Says

What’s new: Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said during a press conference on Friday that bilateral investment treaty talks between China and the EU had entered the “final phase.”

The two sides have conducted 10 rounds of talks and made “important progress,” Wang said.

The spokesperson said that “as long as the two sides take note of each other’s concerns and meet half way, the negotiation target set by the two sides’ leaders will be achieved.”

Why it matters: Wang’s remarks came as doubts grow over whether China and the EU can conclude the negotiations within the year.

Chinese and European leaders agreed on a year-end deadline at a virtual summit in September between President Xi Jinping and German Chancellor Angela Merkel; Charles Michel, president of the European Council; and Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, in which the EU side pointed out outstanding issues in the negotiations such as market access barriers and sustainable development.

In a phone conversation with Merkel last month, Xi vowed to push forward the conclusion of the investment agreement.

Negotiations on the China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment began in 2014. If concluded, it would be then be subject to EU member states’ ratification.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment, if signed, together with the RCEP, will signify the total failure of Trump administration's China-containment strategy.

 

[supercat]

Not much, Australia only represented 2% of China coal consumption. 60% of that goes to steel mills. It is absurd to think a mere less than 1% supply couldn't be offset by domestic supply. Brutal winter in some part of China, power plants are offline for maintenance, emission target in zhejiang, and a surge of exports demand for some exports oriented area are cited as the reasons why electrical shortages in a few provinces.

That's why I argue against relying solely on wind, solar, and nuclear. Until power storage can be built cheaply and efficiently, coal, gas, and oil power plants are needed to meet a demand surge like hot summer or brutal winter.

It's not like China has no alternative.

Russia may benefit from trade rift between China and Australia

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Petrolicious88]

Historically speaking, that's incorrect. Force conquers territory; "winning the hearts and minds" can come after.

Correct

The US didn't defend Ukraine even though it was obligated to. The US doesn't "defend" any islands in the SCS. For every conflict the US gets into and stays out of, the picture is increasingly clear: the US will only pick limited fights where it does not face a powerful, or even nuclear nation. America employs strategic ambiguity over the ROC for a reason: it will not confront a strong China; it will only fight if it thinks it can achieve an easy victory. As China grows more and more, American credibility in Asia will erode; it's not up to the US. Force determines credibility and influence.

Ukraine is not Taiwan. It doesn’t produce semiconductors and it’s not located in Asia. US will absolutely defend Taiwan. If it doesn’t, it risks loosing Korea, Japan, Philippines, Vietnam and pretty much all of Asia to Chinese influence.

China will not use nukes unless mainland China is attacked. The US knows this. Nobody will use nukes in this potential conflict.

Lastly, the Pentagon is actively reorienting its strategies to mitigate Chinese advantages in missiles and long range weapons. Still doesn’t mean the US can just dominate China. But you can bet that they are preparing for a possible future conflict with China.

So, unless China is willing to go to war with the US, the only way to get Taiwan is if the Taiwanese people wants it. And that’s not going to happen unless political reform happens in China itself.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Ukraine is not Taiwan. It doesn’t produce semiconductors and it’s not located in Asia. US will absolutely defend Taiwan.

Ukraine managed Soviet nuclear stock and produces jet engines. TSMC can't do jack without ASML. There is no difference except that America doesn't even recognize the ROC and is not contractually obligated to defend it like it was Ukraine.

If it doesn’t, it risks loosing Korea, Japan, Philippines, Vietnam and pretty much all of Asia to Chinese influence.

It's not up to the US. With growing Chinese influence and military power, waning American influence in Asia has nothing to do with the ROC. It's just about exiting gracefully.

China will not use nukes unless mainland China is attacked. The US knows this. Nobody will use nukes in this potential conflict.

The US doesn't know this and I don't know this. Chinese generals have declared that China will go to nuclear war over the ROC. It's the US that has strategic ambiguity, meaning it won't step in unless it deems the fight easy. No one has ever used strategic ambiguity before when dead serious about something.

And actually, all this talk of nuclear war is way way premature, even in the context of a conflict over the ROC. The most likely scenario is that the PRC dominates the fight with its conventional forces and the US has trouble even entering the fight without taking severe losses. Then it will be up to the US if it wants to escalate to nuclear and likely trigger MAD, or do what it always does, which is make a diplomatic tantrum and threaten sanctions. There is no example of America getting into any physical fight with a nuclear power even as small as North Korea and it's ridiculous to see Taiwan as anyone's red line other than China's.

Lastly, the Pentagon is actively reorienting its strategies to mitigate Chinese advantages in missiles and long range weapons. Still doesn’t mean the US can just dominate China. But you can bet that they are preparing for a possible future conflict with China.

Well, China is too. Large nations prepare for war against rivals. That would be true regardless of the ROC.

So, unless China is willing to go to war with the US, the only way to get Taiwan is if the Taiwanese people wants it. And that’s not going to happen unless political reform happens in China itself.

China's willing to go to war; you just need to read. But the US, not so much. Since Chinese power is rising and American power waning, China wants to wait till the point where it can just make its demands and American military involvement isn't even believable anymore so there is no risk of miscalculation leading to unneeded bloodshed between the two Chinese sides.

 

[horse]

So, unless China is willing to go to war with the US, the only way to get Taiwan is if the Taiwanese people wants it. And that’s not going to happen unless political reform happens in China itself.

Your post will probably get a lot of responses because that is not the strategy it would appear.

It was what Lee Kwan Yui said to Jiang Zemin, I thnk I remember. He told him leave Taiwan as it is, and absorb it. Jiang did not want anything to do with that according to Lee when he suggested his thoughts. However, time has proved that was what was followed, that strategy of absorption.

Another pillar of the absorption strategy, would be isolation.

Take the RCEP for example. Is Taiwan part of it?

No. Taiwan is not a part of the RCEP. It has been cut off and isolated.

But the reality is Taiwan is part of the RCEP, indirectly. A Taiwan company sets up an operation inside China, and vola! They are part of RCEP.

It is no secret that Taiwan companies rushed into the mainland, 20 or 30 years ago. That is 20 or 30 years ago.

It is no secret that engineering talent has seen migration across the strait.

In terms of economic, military, technology, and ideology, everything is being absorbed by time, except for the last part.

I believe that is the truth. Since Mao and the Chiang family, mainland China and Taiwan has only gotten closer, except for the ideology.

Once someone says in Taiwan, that the economic, military, technology, the gap is something they must have a different view or conversation about it, then the ideology may not stand.

The ideology was suppose to make the economic, military, technology, to be better, to allow Taiwan to stay ahead of mainland China, and build a better society.

If the ideology did not produce that ... then ...

That is how I think the Chinese Communist Party sees the problem of the Taiwan issue.

Hostility is not in the cards.

 

[Petrolicious88]

Your post will probably get a lot of responses because that is not the strategy it would appear.

It was what Lee Kwan Yui said to Zhang Zemin, I thnk I remember. He told him leave Taiwan as it is, and absorb it. Zhang did not want anything to do with that according to Lee when he suggested his thoughts. However, time has proved that was what was followed, that strategy of absorption.

Another pillar of the absorption strategy, would be isolation.

Take the RCEP for example. Is Taiwan part of it?

No. Taiwan is not a part of the RCEP. It has been cut off and isolated.

But the reality is Taiwan is part of the RCEP, indirectly. A Taiwan company sets up an operation inside China, and vola! They are part of RCEP.

It is no secret that Taiwan companies rushed into the mainland, 20 or 30 years ago. That is 20 or 30 years agao.

It is no secret that engineering talent has seen migration across the strait.

In terms of economic, military, technology, and ideology, everything is being absorbed by time except for the last part.

Once someone says in Taiwan, that the economic, military, technology, the gap is something they must have a different view about, then the ideology may not stand.

The ideology was suppose to make the economic, military, technology, to be better, to allow Taiwan to stay ahead of mainland China, and build a better society.

If the ideology did not produce that ... then ...

That is how I think the Chinese Communist Party sees the problem of the Taiwan issue.

Hostility is not in the cards.

Agree. Getting Taiwan through forced invasion is not what China wants. It doesn’t do China any good to get Taiwan this way.

Unfortunately, time is not on China’s side. Younger generation of Taiwanese kids are just as nationalistic and have nothing to do with Mainland China.

Isolation is clearly not working. US is making it harder. We are not closer to reunification. And with each generation, the two “countries” are growing further apart.