What did you think of the paper? did you read the document in full? I have yet to read the document from the link you provided but I am curious enough what's your preliminary assessment on the content and concept discuss on the paper.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
It's pretty general, mostly about sticking to UN and other new multilateral frameworks. Makes no mention about Ukraine, so I'm not sure how everything is related.
Skimmed through the whole paper to sift and search through anything that relates to the Russia-Ukraine conflict but there was no reference to that conflict whatsoever. I will still read the whole document in it's entirety just out of intellectual curiosity, and respect to the efforts made by the relevant people that wrote and prepare the document even if it does come across as general and vanilla.
Well, this is just lying and trolling rolled together. Could be a parody of Falun Gong accounts. That bad. The good thing is comments are based. These Christian republican conservative political figures are so weird. Wasn't lying a sin in their religion?
Word doc so I didn't download. Assuming the link Temstar posted is the Chinese version of the same text, point 4 - 坚持重视各国合理安全关切 ... 一国安全不应以损害他国安全为代价 - repeats the point Russia made about 'indivisible security' before they started their SMO. See from a Malaysian newspaper coz don't wanna give westoid presstitute outlets their clicks:
More likely it's simply failing infrastructure and companies getting away with awful practices through lobbying. The US is trying to work old infrastructure decades past its intended service life, while companies screw their workers and generally either disregard regulations or outright have it rewritten in their favour.
A fair and as objective article on the recent balloon crisis as one can get from an American historian and recent author of the book: Agents of Subversion: The Fate of John T. Downey and the CIA’s Covert War in China.
Thanks to @Lethe for mentioning this article and book on his post at Book thread.
excerpt from the article:
In some ways, the United States and China have been here before, and it wasn’t pretty. From the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 until then-U.S. President Richard Nixon’s trip to Beijing in 1972, the relationship between the two countries was overwhelmingly hostile and, almost by definition, mostly covert. The two governments refused to recognize each other and rarely allowed their diplomats to meet, and the United States maximized its military and technological advantage to spy on China—if not subvert it.
Yet despite their technical capabilities to keep an eye on China from above, Americans had a very poor understanding of what was actually going on in Mao’s China—from the halls of power to villages across the country. Ignorance of China left the United States vulnerable to colossal intelligence failures, like being blindsided by massive in Korea in 1950 or underestimating the depth of the (visible by 1960) and its impact on Chinese support for Hanoi during the Vietnam War. American ignorance was made worse by the McCarthyist purges of the government’s best China experts in the early 1950s on unfounded allegations of being communist sympathizers. And the biggest windfall by far in U.S. intelligence on China was when then-U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger simply started talking to his Chinese counterparts. The same was probably true for then-Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai and Chinese understanding of the Americans.
Today, covert aspects are once again threatening to become drivers of U.S.-China relations, similar to the period before normalization a half century ago. Room for political dialogue and civic engagement narrows as outrage over espionage and suspicion about “influence operations” intensifies. Paradoxically, strategic intelligence is likely to suffer on both sides in proportion to the increase in mutual surveillance.
One difference between now and the early Cold War is that China’s power and reach have expanded exponentially. Ironically, Beijing now faces the temptation to make use of the kind of global capabilities to spy on others that China has long complained the United States deployed. Americans should know their own history of surveillance and subversion to maintain a degree of humility while calling out Beijing for violations of sovereignty and lack of transparency. Chinese might study the same historical record for cautionary lessons about what happens when superpowers spy more than they ought to.
And then you get one comment coming from the self-righteous and never introspective of their arrogant ways:
BY JIMW:
The difference is that the United States is counted on to be the leading defenders of democracy and freedom by the free world, a costly responsibility that most Americans wish we could be free of. Whereas China is planning on or already is the leader of the autocracies of the world. While I agree that US foreign policy and CIA activities are not always perfect (and even misguided at times), neither is democracy (especially our version) nor mankind. If not for the present-day capabilities and dedication of our military and CIA, we would be at a loss to effectively execute our leadership responsibilities. As a frequent visitor to mainland China and Hong Kong over the last fifteen years, and with all due respect, I take exception to the idea that Americans should “maintain a degree of humility while calling out Beijing for violations of sovereignty and lack of transparency”. If so, how should Americans have reacted to China after they joined the WTO when they violated the spirit, and rules about forced technology transfers and state subsidies which they agreed to? Should we have maintained humility while calling out Beijing about that as well?