Miscellaneous News

D

Deleted member 23272

Guest
BoraTas said:
Currently a good chunk of them believe
1- They need to invade Mexico to stop Fentanyl flow
2- Thousands of Chinese enter the USA monthly illegally and they are spies.
3- Tiktok sends data to Chinese govt etc...
Click to expand...
Their poster child MTG outright advocates for the dissolution of the U.S. between Red and Blue states, and yet the government has labeled starving Central American families looking for work and immigrant Chinese researchers as the country's top security threats.
 
D

Deleted member 23272

Guest
Lots of people took issue with my comment so I'll just end it at this.

1. Regardless of whether the comments were warranted, all the former Soviet Republics had their independence formally recognized by Russia, so right off the bat the ambassador making those comments just makes him sound ignorant. (And really "some European officials acted like dicks, so they had it coming," is not exactly sound reasoning.")
2. Several comments still kept their focus on the effects on Europe, when it was already mentioned that Central Asia and the Caucuses would find such comments problematic. And even then, I think events in the past few months have made it clear that Europe is still on the fence with Cold War 2.0, so it wouldn't be prudent to treat it as a party in America's camp. Divide and rule, anyone?
3. People saying that if Central Asia and the Caucuses have issues with the comments, all China has to do is some simple damage control. Well, I'd rather not have China's officials in those countries be given the unsavory task of doing damage control to begin with.

In the end, yes its just an ambassador making these comments, so while bad its not on the same level as Wang Yi or Xi Jinping making those same comments. And its a PR fuckup, people usually forget about those pretty quickly. Still it does leave a bad taste in one's mouth, especially in the context of the incredibly succesful diplomatic blitz China has recently engaged in.
taxiya said:
You don't get that Xi Jinping doesn't take order from Washington, do you?
Click to expand...
No, but if you haven't noticed he's been spending the past two months painstakingly cultivating an image of a China devoted to multilateralism and respect for sovereignty, counter to the global vision that Washington imposes on the world. He's got bigger things to worry about at the moment and as stated earlier, the ambassador's comments is just a PR flub that'll likely have no lasting impact. But is it too far fetched to think that if the ambassador actually jeopordized the hardwork that Xi and the foreign policy establishment put in for the past two months, that they wouldn't hesitate to make an example of him?
 
K

KYli

Brigadier
I don't know why the ambassador said what he has said. And I am not going to speculating the reason. However, when EU top officials are already threatened to sanction China for Taiwan, why should China play nice. Too many people want China to act like a saint with impeccable perfection but give leeway to other countries to insult and demonize China.

When the US already sanctioned China from right to left from top to bottom. When EU broke diplomatic protocol by visiting Taiwan. And telling China that it is none of China's business. But somehow a few inflammatory words from an ambassador is such a big deal. Grow some skin please, China's interests have been trampled for the last few years. Now, you still care about EU nations' sensitive feeling. When did they care about China.
 
L

luminary

Senior Member
Registered Member
This might be a new experiment in China's evolving diplomacy. Have a diplomatic "misspeak" or "oversight" to signal to countries they need to get their game together and stop taking China for granted. I feel like this was also what they did to Iran, when they "accidentally" signed the GCC statement. The Iranian were stunned and it re-galvanized China-Iran relations.
 
Bellum_Romanum

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
Witchhunter12 said:
Lots of people took issue with my comment so I'll just end it at this.

1. Regardless of whether the comments were warranted, all the former Soviet Republics had their independence formally recognized by Russia, so right off the bat the ambassador making those comments just makes him sound ignorant. (And really "some European officials acted like dicks, so they had it coming," is not exactly sound reasoning.")
2. Several comments still kept their focus on the effects on Europe, when it was already mentioned that Central Asia and the Caucuses would find such comments problematic. And even then, I think events in the past few months have made it clear that Europe is still on the fence with Cold War 2.0, so it wouldn't be prudent to treat it as a party in America's camp. Divide and rule, anyone?
3. People saying that if Central Asia and the Caucuses have issues with the comments, all China has to do is some simple damage control. Well, I'd rather not have China's officials in those countries be given the unsavory task of doing damage control to begin with.

In the end, yes its just an ambassador making these comments, so while bad its not on the same level as Wang Yi or Xi Jinping making those same comments. And its a PR fuckup, people usually forget about those pretty quickly. Still it does leave a bad taste in one's mouth, especially in the context of the incredibly succesful diplomatic blitz China has recently engaged in.

No, but if you haven't noticed he's been spending the past two months painstakingly cultivating an image of a China devoted to multilateralism and respect for sovereignty, counter to the global vision that Washington imposes on the world. He's got bigger things to worry about at the moment and as stated earlier, the ambassador's comments is just a PR flub that'll likely have no lasting impact. But is it too far fetched to think that if the ambassador actually jeopordized the hardwork that Xi and the foreign policy establishment put in for the past two months, that they wouldn't hesitate to make an example of him?
Click to expand...
Again, I don't give a flying toss what those countries think. They will make decisions based on their own national interests full stop. China will not and has not threatened any of the countries mentioned in EU especially the chihuahuas in Eastern EU. As for the central Asian countries concern what are they exactly going to do? ask the U.S. and EU for help? by all means please proceed.

China can't and should not cater to the complains and tantrums of countries that only pay lip service to China because they want to either make money on China and off China while busy stabbing China at the back whenever and wherever chance it can get. This is just my strong opinion but China can't continue to be the political and diplomatic punching bag for EU countries and other countries in the world that is hoisted as their bogeyman and source of everything that ails their respective countries.

If they want China to be their friend and partner, China will fulfill that role to it's absolute best, but if you treat China as your enemy then China will and should become their worst nightmare. As former Marine Gen. Jim Mattis famously said: No better friend, No worse enemy.
 
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Witchhunter12 said:
Lots of people took issue with my comment so I'll just end it at this.

1. Regardless of whether the comments were warranted, all the former Soviet Republics had their independence formally recognized by Russia, so right off the bat the ambassador making those comments just makes him sound ignorant. (And really "some European officials acted like dicks, so they had it coming," is not exactly sound reasoning.")
2. Several comments still kept their focus on the effects on Europe, when it was already mentioned that Central Asia and the Caucuses would find such comments problematic. And even then, I think events in the past few months have made it clear that Europe is still on the fence with Cold War 2.0, so it wouldn't be prudent to treat it as a party in America's camp. Divide and rule, anyone?
3. People saying that if Central Asia and the Caucuses have issues with the comments, all China has to do is some simple damage control. Well, I'd rather not have China's officials in those countries be given the unsavory task of doing damage control to begin with.

In the end, yes its just an ambassador making these comments, so while bad its not on the same level as Wang Yi or Xi Jinping making those same comments. And its a PR fuckup, people usually forget about those pretty quickly. Still it does leave a bad taste in one's mouth, especially in the context of the incredibly succesful diplomatic blitz China has recently engaged in.

No, but if you haven't noticed he's been spending the past two months painstakingly cultivating an image of a China devoted to multilateralism and respect for sovereignty, counter to the global vision that Washington imposes on the world. He's got bigger things to worry about at the moment and as stated earlier, the ambassador's comments is just a PR flub that'll likely have no lasting impact. But is it too far fetched to think that if the ambassador actually jeopordized the hardwork that Xi and the foreign policy establishment put in for the past two months, that they wouldn't hesitate to make an example of him?
Click to expand...
they need China more than China needs them. If they think they don't, they're free to break relations with China. What, should China beg countries with 10 billion GDP and 5 million population for acceptance? They should've thought of relations with China before they fucking trampled the red line of territorial integrity. If Chinese territorial integrity isn't valuable to them, then why should their territorial integrity be valuable to China?

likewise, if EU thinks that EU's perimeter begins in Taiwan, then I guess China's perimeter begins in Donbass. That's just how it works. Nobody is obligated to be a saint after being spat on multiple times.
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
Witchhunter12 said:
Lots of people took issue with my comment so I'll just end it at this.

1. Regardless of whether the comments were warranted, all the former Soviet Republics had their independence formally recognized by Russia, so right off the bat the ambassador making those comments just makes him sound ignorant. (And really "some European officials acted like dicks, so they had it coming," is not exactly sound reasoning.")
2. Several comments still kept their focus on the effects on Europe, when it was already mentioned that Central Asia and the Caucuses would find such comments problematic. And even then, I think events in the past few months have made it clear that Europe is still on the fence with Cold War 2.0, so it wouldn't be prudent to treat it as a party in America's camp. Divide and rule, anyone?
3. People saying that if Central Asia and the Caucuses have issues with the comments, all China has to do is some simple damage control. Well, I'd rather not have China's officials in those countries be given the unsavory task of doing damage control to begin with.

In the end, yes its just an ambassador making these comments, so while bad its not on the same level as Wang Yi or Xi Jinping making those same comments. And its a PR fuckup, people usually forget about those pretty quickly. Still it does leave a bad taste in one's mouth, especially in the context of the incredibly succesful diplomatic blitz China has recently engaged in.

No, but if you haven't noticed he's been spending the past two months painstakingly cultivating an image of a China devoted to multilateralism and respect for sovereignty, counter to the global vision that Washington imposes on the world. He's got bigger things to worry about at the moment and as stated earlier, the ambassador's comments is just a PR flub that'll likely have no lasting impact. But is it too far fetched to think that if the ambassador actually jeopordized the hardwork that Xi and the foreign policy establishment put in for the past two months, that they wouldn't hesitate to make an example of him?
Click to expand...

Don't know why people are making a mountain out of a molehill out of this.

I mean yeah, I know why Western propagandists are doing that, but I don't know why people who are supporters of a strong China are doing so.

The ambassador was responding to questions about Crimea, which he pointed out that it was originally Russian. Then the interviewer claimed that under "International Law", Crimea belonged to Ukraine. Well no, that's bogus. There's no "International Law" that says Crimea belonged to Ukraine. There are countries that recognize Ukraine's sovereignty over Crimea, and now, there are countries that recognize Russia's sovereignty over Crimea. What Amb. Lu pointed out was this simple fact. Sovereignty is based on international *recognition*, there's no "law" that concretized the borders of ex-Soviet countries. Ukraine had Crimea, and now it doesn't, and pretty soon, it won't have the eastern half of Ukraine either.

If I was the ambassador, I would have asked the interviewer where was his precious international law when France invaded China in the 19th century.
 
D

Deleted member 23272

Guest
solarz said:
There are countries that recognize Ukraine's sovereignty over Crimea, and now, there are countries that recognize Russia's sovereignty over Crimea.
Click to expand...
You mean all 15 of them? Of that 15 I remind you countries like China, Iran, Indonesia, Mexico, and Kazakhstan are not included.

Nevermind the Ambassador's words for now, because I doubt it'll have greater ramifications and its been discussed enough. The rest of your post is essentially, there is no "international law" might is right. Granted yes, realpolitik is what it is, any country with enough nukes and guns can technically do as it pleases. That is not however, the message China has been spreading in its diplomatic campaign in the past two months.

America's invasion of Iraq was a violation of international law and China is not framing itself as the country that goes, "it is what it is America has the dollar and lots of guns." China is positioning itself as a country that not only opposes such violations of international law, but can actually back it up by using its resources to promote international cooperation, territorial integrity, and multilateralism. Which as a country and as a global power, gives it legitimacy and soft power especially amongst the global south that are tired of being bullied by the Western hegemony. You might disagree and think China should be more like America, but I think the party's stance when it come to foreign policy has been crystal clear and should be respected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top