Trade War with China

Status
Not open for further replies.

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
it's time for china to enter in "preparing for world war mode" time to double every year the defense budget and initiate actions to disrupt american interests in all the world. Just like Soviet Union.

But let's play devil's advocate here.

Suppose China was to double military from 2% of GDP to 4%.
After all, the USA and Russia routinely spent 4% of GDP on the military over the past 10 years.

On a PPP basis, that means China's military spending jumps from $500B to $1000B, which is more than the USA.
So in the long-run, China could build a larger military than the USA which has currently 7000 cruise missiles, 10 carrier groups, and is planning on buying 2000 stealth fighters, etc etc

But then what?

Does China want to actually want to use that military and go to war?

The answer is no, because any conflict would involve the cities of mainland China and will be fought in China's coastal waters.
And China is the world's largest trading nation, importing vital commodities and exporting goods all over the world via ocean shipping, which will all be disrupted in any war.

In any case, if the USA and China both have a robust nuclear deterrent, then both sides would agree that an actual war between them can't ever happen.

So all that military spending would be completely pointless.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
But let's play devil's advocate here.

Suppose China was to double military from 2% of GDP to 4%.
After all, the USA and Russia routinely spent 4% of GDP on the military over the past 10 years.

On a PPP basis, that means China's military spending jumps from $500B to $1000B, which is more than the USA.
So in the long-run, China could build a larger military than the USA which has currently 7000 cruise missiles, 10 carrier groups, and is planning on buying 2000 stealth fighters, etc etc

But then what?

Does China want to actually want to use that military and go to war?

The answer is no, because any conflict would involve the cities of mainland China and will be fought in China's coastal waters.
And China is the world's largest trading nation, importing vital commodities and exporting goods all over the world via ocean shipping, which will all be disrupted in any war.

In any case, if the USA and China both have a robust nuclear deterrent, then both sides would agree that an actual war between them can't ever happen.

So all that military spending would be completely pointless.

No, not really. Nuclear deterrent is needed as a final guarantee but powerful conventional forces are also needed or other countries will commit small offenses against you with their conventional forces that your conventional forces are too weak to respond to and your nuclear forces are far too much overkill to use. Such small offenses like harassment of your merchant ships at sea, FONOPS through your territory attempting to whittle down your will to defend them inch-by-inch must be answered by your conventional military. Without a powerful conventional military, it is also impossible to build influence around the world; your investments in far away lands (other continents like Africa, etc...) can only be defended by conventional power, not threat of nuclear strike. Only when your conventional forces are supreme and backed by powerful nuclear forces will no one dare challenge you.

China must build the most powerful conventional military in the world, although I agree with you that a surge now is not necessarily the right time. The momentum favors Chinese growth so if nothing is drastically altered, China will overtake to become supreme in some time. Surge military building risks bringing alarm and instability to a system that favors China. IF China eventually decides that it needs to surge its military, it should be when this momentum is disturbed and/or when China is at a level where no country has the power to react meaningfully against it anymore.
 

Dizasta1

Senior Member
An advice for China and Russia

The next fifteen years will be crucial, as america's desperation increases in tempo to try and cling to its super power status, both militarily and economically. The geo-political atmosphere around the world will get increasingly suffocating for all countries. It is important to note, that america and britain will be brutal in their efforts to stifle Sino-Russian sphere of oxygen. Some of their tactics may differ, but most of them will be rehashed versions of the old. At this juncture it is pivotal for both China and Russia to be extremely accurate with their calculations and structure their strategy accordingly. In other words, instead of playing catch-up, make them play catch-up to you. Forcing the adversary to their terms is what the american-british sphere has been using for the better part of the previous century. It is time, to make them turn on their own dime.

Trade War

The current trade war that the american government is imposing on China, is deliberate, calculated and is in response to their waning influence and stature in the world. China should take caution here, because all that seems, is not. For starters, if the whole accusation of China stealing state secrets like weapons programs and technology are to be believed. Then it shouldn't be discounted that elements within the american structure, aided in this endeavor. Of course it doesn't mean there was any deficiency on part of efforts by China (if it were to be believed at all), rather concern on part of americans who actually believe that their country is their's and run by those loyal to their state. This part is particularly interesting, since throughout history there are slithers of a damning evidence that such is the case. The illusion is that american state, is whole, one and incubated enough to rely on its leadership. For the outsider, you should be constantly be aware, that this is and has not ever been the case with america.

For China, everything it is doing, is exactly what it must be doing to counter the american-british hegemony. What China crucially needs to do (along with its allies) is establish counter-weights to World Bank, IMF, International Trade Payment System, Global Trade Insurance and median reserve currency/currencies/swaps. Protecting China and its closest allies from the american-british interference. This would work to China's advantage, as countries that refuse american-british hegemony, will be automatically drawn to the alternative provided by China. An insulated sphere, will allow these states to flourish in trade not only with China, but also with other countries in the world. Europe, South America and Africa would be hard pressed to see the disadvantages of remaining in the american-british sphere. This would allow for the de-globalization of trade and offer more freedom to countries conducting actual FREE & FAIR TRADE.

INF Treaty and Space Force

Russia has been keeping a hawkeye on american military activities for the last two decades. Staying on the forefront of accurate and reliable intelligence gathering. And there have been some relatively disturbing revelations from its efforts. The "Aegis Ashore" ABM system, is not what it seems to be. On face value, the system is suppose to be a anti-ballistic missile defense system, to protect Europe and America from missiles that maybe fired by Iran and/or North Korea. Even if this were to be believed, the current inventory of the Iranian missile forces does not have any Iranian made missiles that could hit Western Europe. If the North Korean "BM-25" missile (19 sold to Iran) were to be taken into account, Iran doesn't have the nuclear warhead (yes, you've read that right, it's not MIRV) to threaten Europe with.

To understand Aegis Ashore system, the Russians have pointed out that the system is identical to the ones found on american destroyers out at sea. Which by definition means, the system is designed for both defensive and offensive use. That would include capability to launch Tomohawk Cruise missiles, whose range exceeds 2000 kms and that directly violates the INF treaty. Particularly when these Aegis Ashore ABM Systems are deployed in Romania and Poland which are very close to Russia. Hence in response, Russia deployed the Iskander-M missile complex, that is designed to bypass ABMs rendering them useless. It is important to know that Russia isn't the one which chose to threaten anyone, rather the opposite. And the american-british policy is ensuring that it's disruptive tactics are endangering the continent of Europe. For Europe ought to be thinking, "with such allies, who needs enemies!"

Trump's announcement for america to create a "Space Force," airily sounds similar to Regan's "Star Wars" program. Since the first time when mankind ventured into space, it was agreed, that this is one frontier that shall not be marred by weaponizing it. Freedom to explore space being the basic human right to pursue exploration and seek knowledge. Yet as we enter the year 2019, things seem to have turned for the worse, as america actively seeks to weaponize space. Shrouded in secrecy, american unmanned X-37B (operated by USAF), has been conducting space missions. The unmanned space vehicle has been entering space with payloads which are then deployed, conducting maneuvers and other experiments. The X-37A/Bs have reached 500 days of mission time in space so far.

In such light, both Russia and China should be taking appropriate measures, not discounting the real possibility that america is weaponizing space. In attempts to tip the balance back in its favor. With america's act, weaponization of space is now inevitable and will require both China and Russia to focus their attention to it.

Author - Mujahid Hosein (Analyst in Political Science)
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
I agree that China should continue with their current trade policies.
They do need a unified national debit card system. This should be trivial for them to do given the state of their electronics industry.
I know the Chinese like to use smartphone payment systems. But I see those as complementary rather than a replacement.

I also think they should expand their electronic transfer network to interoperate with other countries like Russia or Iran.

There is actually a decent chance that we will see the weaponization of space happen over the next two decades. Unlike what happened with Star Wars back in Reagan's time. This is due to the lower launch costs made possible with latest generation launchers like SpaceX's Falcon 9. The initial application, I think, will be unmanned orbital inspection and kill satellites. Or low orbit spysat satellite constellations. China needs to make a competitive reusable low-cost launch vehicle to compete with this.

China should also enhance their national natural gas grid linking the suppliers with their major industrial cities. They should try to reduce the amount of shipped natural gas and oil in lieu of pipeline networks. I also think they need make a program to develop their inner cities i.e. second-tier cities with 2 million or more people. This could be done by moving light industry and building street grade light rail there. Or alternatively electric buses. At the same time the agricultural sector should be modernized to improve their food production capacity and reduce farming pollution.

Incentives should be made to move population closer to the main nodes of the high-speed rail network and inter-modal transportation hubs should be improved.

Right now China imports a lot of food and other strategic resources from South America or Australasia. However there is a high enough risk that the USA might make moves to shutter them from these markets as an expansion of their actions towards Venezuela. The USA considers South America to be their own turf. However China should try to resist doing direct interventions in the Americas as much as possible while pursuing their own Monroe doctrine i.e. prevent the USA from establishing a larger footprint in Southeast Asia and attempt to diminish the USA's power and influence there.

If there is a lesson you can take in terms of rising naval powers vs established naval powers is: don't engage the established naval power in their own sphere of influence until you have naval supremacy. China has a limited naval history tradition to consider with regards to this. Right now they are emulating the ship building strategy of the USA in the Cold War period which is working great. However in terms of use of forces strategy it is like I said, they should avoid engaging the other main naval powers in their own zones of control. In Western history we do have an example, well at least two, of major land powers becoming naval powers. The Roman Empire vs Cartage and Spain vs the Muslims in North Africa.

In both cases these countries used the strategy of luring the enemy towards their own zone of influence to destroy their navy, did a fast ramp up of their naval ships, made use of their advantages in terms of land warfare to project that into sea warfare. Similarly to this we see the Russians use their preeminence in SAM system technology in the naval sphere although with kinda mixed results.
 
Last edited:
now I read
China-U.S. trade talks make important progress for current stage, says Chinese delegation
Xinhua| 2019-02-01 09:00:49
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The latest round of China-U.S. trade talks made important progress for the current stage, and the two sides had candid, specific and constructive discussions, the visiting Chinese delegation said here on Thursday.

Guided by the important consensus reached by the two countries' heads of state in Argentina, the two sides discussed the topics of trade balance, technology transfer, protection of intellectual property rights (IPR), non-tariff barriers, service sector, agriculture and enforcement mechanism, as well as certain issues of particular concern for the Chinese side.

The two-day talks in Washington, which started on Wednesday morning, were led by Chinese Vice Premier Liu He and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, with the participation of dozens of senior officials from both governments.

Liu and Lighthizer held candid, specific and constructive discussions in particular on such topics of common concern as trade balance, technology transfer, IPR protection and enforcement mechanism, as well as certain issues of particular concern for the Chinese side, according to the Chinese delegation.

Important progress has been made for the current stage, and the two sides also determined the timetable and roadmap for next-step consultations. Both sides attach great importance to the issue of IPR protection and technology transfer, and have agreed to further enhance cooperation in this regard.

The Chinese delegation said that creating a market environment of fair competition goes in line with the general direction of China's reform and opening-up, and therefore the Chinese side will actively address relevant U.S. concerns.

The two sides have agreed to take effective measures to promote a more balanced development of bilateral trade. The Chinese side will make active efforts to expand imports from the United States in the sectors of agriculture, energy, manufacturing and services, which will help China's pursuit of high-quality economic development and meet the people's demand for a better life.

The two sides also discussed some specific concerns of the Chinese side, and the U.S. side said it would seriously address these concerns.

Both sides believe that it is very important to establish an effective two-way enforcement mechanism, so as to ensure all measures agreed upon through consultations will be implemented. They have reached consensus in principle on the framework and basic elements of the enforcement mechanism, and will continue to hammer out more details.

The world has been watching the China-U.S. trade talks closely, with many hoping for some substantial, positive progress to be made.

The talks marked a significant step in the implementation of the important consensus reached by Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump during a working dinner in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on Dec. 1.

The two heads of state agreed back then that the two sides should try to reach a mutually beneficial and win-win agreement within 90 days to bring an early end to their months-long trade friction featuring massive tariffs on imports from each other.
 
now I read
Commentary: China, U.S. need to keep pushing trade talks forward
Xinhua| 2019-02-01 19:08:04
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China and the United States wrapped up a new round of trade negotiations here Thursday and took a step forward toward a final deal on their economic and trade disputes.

Over the past two days, the Chinese and U.S. trade teams, headed by Chinese Vice Premier Liu He and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer respectively, held candid, specific and constructive discussions, achieved important progress, and determined the timetable and roadmap for next-step consultations.

The hard-won progress is the result of both sides seriously implementing the key consensus reached between Chinese President Xi Jinping and his U.S. counterpart, Donald Trump, when the two leaders met in Buenos Aires, capital of Argentina, in December.

Since then, the two sides have been building up mutual trust and consensus at the negotiating table. That gives the rest of the world more reasons to be cautiously optimistic about a final settlement of China-U.S. trade and economic disputes through consultations on an equal footing.

During the talks in Washington, the two sides covered a wide range of issues of common concern, including trade balance, technology transfer, protection of intellectual property rights and a two-way enforcement mechanism, as well as other topics of particular concern to the Chinese side.

By tackling these sticking points directly, China and the United States have sent a positive message: as the two countries continue down the path of earnest and in-depth consultations, it is becoming increasingly possible for the world's top two economies to bridge their differences.

During the talks, Beijing has agreed to make active efforts to expand imports from the United States in such sectors as agriculture, energy, manufacturing and services.

With respect to legal reforms, China's Supreme People's Court inaugurated on Jan. 1 a national appeal court for intellectual property rights cases. The country has also been fast-tracking the legislation process of a unified foreign investment law that will ensure foreign companies fair treatment while operating in China.

These measures will fuel China's pursuit of high-quality economic development and meet the people's demand for a better life. In doing so, China is also sharing its development opportunities with the wider world.

The escalation in China-U.S. trade tensions over the past months has harmed the international trading system, damaged global supply chains and triggered volatility in financial and commodity markets worldwide -- all of which are proof that no one wins in a trade war.

Apparently, neither side wants a lose-lose scenario. Therefore, it is imperative for both to further push forward the consultations, which not only meet the interests of the peoples and businesses in both countries, but also accord with the common expectations of the international community.

In addition, advancing bilateral trade and economic talks also carries significant implications for maintaining global growth as well as stabilizing the financial market.

It is normal for trade frictions to occur between China and the United States, and differences are nothing to be afraid of as long as both parties can demonstrate good faith in trying to solve them.

At their Argentina summit on Dec. 1, Xi and Trump agreed that the two countries should try to reach a mutually beneficial agreement within 90 days.

Given that there is less than a month ahead of the March 1 deadline, Beijing and Washington ought to fully implement the two presidents' agreement, and properly manage their differences in trade and economic issues. Doing so will not only lead to a win-win prospect for the two countries, but also contribute to the common good for the world at large.
 

Zool

Junior Member
WW2 was a struggle between various powerful nations with winners and losers, not an " white americans saved the world thing". And remember that the first cries of all fascist regimes are always "others in the world are fucking us" just like americans are saying about China. And if not china it will be mexico, and if not mexico India and so on. Why? Because they are not white.

I don't see anyone saying "white americans saved the world thing". And I'm not sure how any of that fits into the US and China making moves to secure their position going forward as the top economy and technology innovator.

Also seeing a pattern now with this post from a couple of days ago:
West is not America, i'm italian and i don't like USA and their culture and i know quite well them (various travels and relatives there). Also americans are divided, you are talking about white america that is now a minority. China must operate like russia on a major scale to disrupt american politics and reset their system. If they want to emerge without a war they must act with intelligence to undermine rotten american politics act with intelligence like sun tzu said thousands of years ago.

I think people would do well to stop equating race(s) with nations and national rivalries. Its bottom barrel discussion that really has nothing to do with what is going on and at stake in these conflicts. Emotional drivel at best and identity baiting at worst. Leave it to the MSM to tear people apart on those lines and lets focus on facts, tactics and strategies instead of feelings.

@Deino or @siegecrossbow might want to clean some of this up when time permits.
 

Zool

Junior Member
I agree that China should continue with their current trade policies.
If there is a lesson you can take in terms of rising naval powers vs established naval powers is: don't engage the established naval power in their own sphere of influence until you have naval supremacy. China has a limited naval history tradition to consider with regards to this. Right now they are emulating the ship building strategy of the USA in the Cold War period which is working great. However in terms of use of forces strategy it is like I said, they should avoid engaging the other main naval powers in their own zones of control. In Western history we do have an example, well at least two, of major land powers becoming naval powers. The Roman Empire vs Cartage and Spain vs the Muslims in North Africa.

In both cases these countries used the strategy of luring the enemy towards their own zone of influence to destroy their navy, did a fast ramp up of their naval ships, made use of their advantages in terms of land warfare to project that into sea warfare. Similarly to this we see the Russians use their preeminence in SAM system technology in the naval sphere although with kinda mixed results.

The SCS and ECS have been USN zones of control for some time. Its only now that China is balancing this equation with its own naval buildup (numbers + capability) and the establishment of forward bases in the form of its island holdings. If a conflict happens, China needs it to stay as far away from the mainland as possible, because damage there means a hit to valuable industrial bases and population centers which are the support centers for war. Its the reason the US has so many forward bases of its own. And the reason Taiwan would be so valuable to China.

<Sorry for OT relating to Trade War>
 
now noticed the tweet
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!





President Xi Jinping said he is willing to keep in close touch with his US counterpart, Donald Trump, via various means as the relationship between China and the US is at a critically important stage. The message was delivered by Vice-Premier Liu He as he met with Trump Thursday.

DyYM_FiU8AEL9U2.jpg
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
If there is one thing about Trump, he likes to be Besties with authoritarian leaders.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top