What's new

The Great Game Changer: Belt and Road Intiative (BRI; OBOR)

China is not collapsing. And you are not Gordon Chang. China is not where U.S. Is at now. But it's the one with potential. India,however, will split into many smaller countries like how it historically exists.
tnx for the joke in the last:yahoo::yahoo:
 
. . .
Just trying to keep the thread alive. I tried hard to make it look like I care.

In fact you are reasonable to talk. Good to exchange ideas. Hope you were not mocking and pretending all this time.

Paranoid troll spotted.

Maybe that reflects a national psyche, bro. We got to understand them and develop policies accordingly.

Maybe there is a miscommunication between our respective countries.
 
.
In fact you are reasonable to talk. Good to exchange ideas. Hope you were not mocking and pretending all this time.



Maybe that reflects a national psyche, bro. We got to understand them and develop policies accordingly.

Maybe there is a miscommunication between our respective countries.
Alright this is not going to work for me. See you in other threads.
 
.
Thank you for your very comprehensive analysis. It is a privilege for me to engage in such constructive and intellectual discourse.

There is a problem here. Actions speak louder than words. I agree with you that China did not make any bold statements about the Crimera issue or Ukraine problem in general, but counteracted against the US sanctions agains Russia which was implemented just because of the Ukraine problem. Hence China taken away the tool to "punish" Russia from USA's hands. Let me ask you something, if you were a US policy maker, would you go on punishing Russia in that conjecture? Or would you pick on the country that keeps Russia "alive" in your next problem with them?

I agree with these observations. It is definitely correct that China stood by Russia through economic action although, verbally it maintained the usual rhetoric. Military is of course out of question. Certainly, actions speak louder than words, and, in that, US decision makers must have written off China as one of bear-friendly. But from international law perspective, China has never been obliged to assist the US sanctions against Russia. For that, they need to pass a resolution at the UNSC. In that sense, US-EU move to punish Russia is still a unilateral action, not multilateral or international.

China is important for Russia, but it is not the only important country, by the way. Therefore, it would still be difficult for the US to single out China as the sole savior of Russia -- even if we admit Russia does need a savior.



In 2014:

1. China Total trade with China reached $52 billion - 11% of all Russian trade. This is 4.6% higher than last year. China and Russia have set themselves a target of $200 billion annually by 2020. They are expected to beat that easily after announcing deals this year worth over a trillion dollars.

2. Netherlands
Total trade with Netherlands reached $45 billion representing 9.6% of all Russian trade. This is 0.1% lower than last year. Historically Netherlands has been Russia's largest European trading partner due to a very strong bilateral investment treaty.

3. Germany
Total trade with Germany reached $41 billion representing 8.7% of all Russian trade. This is 0.2% lower than last year. German companies such as Siemens are very large exporters as machinery is the most important German export component to Russia.

4. Italy
Total trade with Italy reached $30 billion representing 6.4% of all Russian trade. This is 2.2% lower than last year. Italian-Russian trade relations have historically been very good. Should South Stream come to fruition trade will rise further.


Well US needs enemies. Every year the military should provide "legitimate" reasons to get that 700 billion $ from US tax payers. There are so many defence contractors, and their lobby is one of the strongest in the US because they are working directly with the government. You know where this is going right? I sometimes even think that, some of the technologies that US claims that is "stolen" from their servers were actually "handed over" to certain parties. That wing of US government certainly wants and enemy in order to legitimize every spent penny on trillion dollar projects.( I never say this to undermine the hardwork of thousands of Chinese engineers on defence projects. Don't get me wrong, China is working miracles in military and in economy/technology. )

That's a very interesting observation which brings a whole new dimension to the debate. It would not be impossible entirely. What I agree 100% is that the US has constantly been in search of an enemy and China appears to be the next one although I am not sure how they would be able to justify the losses from such potential confrontation given that even the war on terror and a limited number of human loss on part of the US created such strong anti-war movements.

Sorry but you're wrong on this one. Let's go back to 90's. Everyone in Washington was talking about the ME. Of course there was the occasional "China Rising" publicity but the main topic was the ME. In 2000's Russia started to grasp some public attention. But starting from 2010's it became a standart question in US public that "What will we do with China?". I mean, there are primaries right now and every presidential candidate was asked about how would they deal with China if they were elected. I don't recall such a phenomenon in 90's.

Don't you think this is an expected historical phenomenon? The China of 1990s was a lot different from the China of 2010. Accordingly, US official viewpoint has also changed. I believe that those decision makers, too, are susceptible to historical developments. This, however, does not rule out the fact that the lack of Middle East in early and mid-Obama presidency has been recently replaced by a stronger re-focus on the region. I believe these policy postures are ever changing. I agree that China looms large and they will squeeze every drop of juice from China threat theory, but, that is in a sense unavoidable whether China stands by Russia or entirely abondanes it.

China is rising up, I don't have daoubt about that. With that power China makes bold actions. That's also great. However just to be sure that those bold actions are made in the situations that were not staged in an office in Washington. China can very well be an actor of a social engineering policy in US. As you know such things evolve into mass hysteria pretty quick in US public opinion. Even a desert nation which has not even a national identity (Iraq) was shown as the next big "enemy" to US public. Afterwards here comes the people from Lockheed Martin justifies the "barely" working F-35 project, and bills a trillion dollars to US tax payers.

That's also an interesting observation. There must be a certain action-reaction pattern in inter-state relations. All I can say here is that just as US moves (pre-planned/staged or not) create certain reaction on part of China, the vice versa might be true, as well. It then all comes down to the ability of strategy-making.

Yeah there is an economic balance between East and West. But I was talking about political balance. Conjecture after the Sino-Soviet split and today are not the same. And the paradigm shift is visible. China's policy is aligning more and more with the East as China makes those bold moves.

I see China's policy to be less US-centric and more Eurasia-centric over the years. It is not really entirely an Asian/Eastern shift. And Europe is not a monolithic entity. There are eastern areas that are still pretty much under Russia's influence. And there is Africa and Latin America. I certainly agree that China is decoupling from the US-led hardcore Western alliance, but, its face is turned toward a larger landmass than the East.

I didn't mean that. I just meant an organized Chinese diaspora in US, fostered by Chinese multinational companies which operates in US like Huawei. Chinese diaspora can build it's own lobby, they wouldn't need to hire jewish lobby.

I agree on that. Especially in terms of economic and cultural interests, China's private industries and institutions need to better marketing and PR in the US to win certain members of the Congress or governors and mayors. These people are there to ensure their position and Chinese entities can take advantage of the monied-politics of the US. That's probably something that China lacks miserably.

A great power like China utilizes every possible resource in it's hand to face with it's adversary in a position that only favors itself. Disrupt the US public opinion and US is not functional. Tell people that there is no reason to fight with China and people would be protesting their own governments to stop. It happened in Vietnam. Why need war, if you can take over peacefully? You should read Sun Tzu.

I agree. I guess I misunderstood the entire "influencing US opinion" argument of yours. I definitely concur that China needs to utilize more secondary power in the form of institutions and companies. Certain steps are being taken and China's diaspora is being engaged more successfully these days. I guess, in that regard, Turkey itself, which has a huge diaspora, can offer some lessons to China. In the face of intense propaganda and demonization, China needs to utilize every available tools to change perceptions and winning battles with minimum cost.

Relationship with Russia are not among equals. China has the upper hand. Because China has the future.

I would say that future is always a tricky beast. China might be seen to have the upper hand. Still, Russia cannot be underestimated.

By among equals, I did not mean "equals in real power," but equals "in terms of their relationship." The Western concept of alliance is often the stronger having the last say in any grouping. When it comes to China, it is a bit different. Inequality in size/scale/capacity does not always translate into inequality in social relationship. The charter of the AIIB or the SCO's decision making proves. This is actually the Asian way of consensus-based action. That's why China and Russia do not pursue a NATO-like hard alliance. They should, in my opinion, and China must be the final decision maker, but, I think neither leadership thinks the time is ripe for that.
 
.
EU is not that united, they should collapse in the near future while India will forever be behind. In short there are only three powers, USA, China and Russia. The team with the two powers in it will simply win hence good news for China and Russia.


US is already crumbling. :coffee:
correct that EU is not that united. You take away Germany, than EU is fairly weak. France, UK is pissed off with southern Euro countries pushing illegal aliens into their territory.

Yeah, having Russia to act as cannon fodder... Uhm... I mean ''ally'' against China and have both Russia and China destroy each other, was and still is the wet dream of many Americans like the late Tom Clancy.

I would never forget the ridiculous scenario in ''The Bear and The Dragon'' in which China, after a series of equally ridiculous precedents, started an all-out war with Russia by invading Siberia! After which Tom Clancy's 'MURICA comes to rescue the ''helpless'' Russians by admitting Russia into NATO, and while just only US naval and air bombings seem to make the situation desperate enough for China to (attempt to) start an all-out nuclear war against BOTH Russia and the US! Meanwhile, a single CIA-run website with CNN coverage of the war and some drone footage, manages to spur a Chinese student revolution, in which some ''reformist'' eventually takes over, arrest the politburo, and pave the way for China to ''democracy''. Oh and get this jewel in this entire story... A NATO Apache helicopter manages to shoot down one of the Chinese ICBMs in mid-flight! :woot:
people buy this shit in America. if you want to be rich, write anti China fairytales. it's a 3 trillion per year industry.
 
.
Ongoing China-Russia Joint Naval Drills
By Liu Rong (People's Daily Online) 22:27, August 25, 2015


Photo shows the Chinese Navy fleet taking part in the China-Russia Joint Sea-2015 (II)drill.

The drills, code named Joint Sea-2015 (II), are being held on Aug. 20-28 in the Peter the Great Gulf, waters off the Clerk Cape, and the Sea of Japan.

Themed "Joint maritime transportation protection and joint landing missions", the drill focuses on joint air defense, joint anti-submarine and anti-ship missions, joint defense,joint landing missions and so on.

During the exercises, the two navies will also open their warships for each other to visit and hold various sport and cultural activities as well.

China and Russia are continuing the active phase of their naval drills in the Sea of Japan and the Peter the Great Gulf.

The ’Joint Sea 2015 II’ drills involve 22 vessels, 20 aircraft, 40 armored vehicles and 500 marines from both countries.





This is the second China-Russia naval exercise this year.

The last China-Russia naval drills, Joint Sea-2015 (I), were held in the Mediterranean Sea in May.



FOREIGN201508252226000597954228398.jpg
 
.
Hand in hand to ensure peace and stability within our hemisphere is always a welcome act.
 
.
Thank you for your very comprehensive analysis. It is a privilege for me to engage in such constructive and intellectual discourse.



I agree with these observations. It is definitely correct that China stood by Russia through economic action although, verbally it maintained the usual rhetoric. Military is of course out of question. Certainly, actions speak louder than words, and, in that, US decision makers must have written off China as one of bear-friendly. But from international law perspective, China has never been obliged to assist the US sanctions against Russia. For that, they need to pass a resolution at the UNSC. In that sense, US-EU move to punish Russia is still a unilateral action, not multilateral or international.

China is important for Russia, but it is not the only important country, by the way. Therefore, it would still be difficult for the US to single out China as the sole savior of Russia -- even if we admit Russia does need a savior.



In 2014:

1. China Total trade with China reached $52 billion - 11% of all Russian trade. This is 4.6% higher than last year. China and Russia have set themselves a target of $200 billion annually by 2020. They are expected to beat that easily after announcing deals this year worth over a trillion dollars.

2. Netherlands
Total trade with Netherlands reached $45 billion representing 9.6% of all Russian trade. This is 0.1% lower than last year. Historically Netherlands has been Russia's largest European trading partner due to a very strong bilateral investment treaty.

3. Germany
Total trade with Germany reached $41 billion representing 8.7% of all Russian trade. This is 0.2% lower than last year. German companies such as Siemens are very large exporters as machinery is the most important German export component to Russia.

4. Italy
Total trade with Italy reached $30 billion representing 6.4% of all Russian trade. This is 2.2% lower than last year. Italian-Russian trade relations have historically been very good. Should South Stream come to fruition trade will rise further.




That's a very interesting observation which brings a whole new dimension to the debate. It would not be impossible entirely. What I agree 100% is that the US has constantly been in search of an enemy and China appears to be the next one although I am not sure how they would be able to justify the losses from such potential confrontation given that even the war on terror and a limited number of human loss on part of the US created such strong anti-war movements.



Don't you think this is an expected historical phenomenon? The China of 1990s was a lot different from the China of 2010. Accordingly, US official viewpoint has also changed. I believe that those decision makers, too, are susceptible to historical developments. This, however, does not rule out the fact that the lack of Middle East in early and mid-Obama presidency has been recently replaced by a stronger re-focus on the region. I believe these policy postures are ever changing. I agree that China looms large and they will squeeze every drop of juice from China threat theory, but, that is in a sense unavoidable whether China stands by Russia or entirely abondanes it.



That's also an interesting observation. There must be a certain action-reaction pattern in inter-state relations. All I can say here is that just as US moves (pre-planned/staged or not) create certain reaction on part of China, the vice versa might be true, as well. It then all comes down to the ability of strategy-making.



I see China's policy to be less US-centric and more Eurasia-centric over the years. It is not really entirely an Asian/Eastern shift. And Europe is not a monolithic entity. There are eastern areas that are still pretty much under Russia's influence. And there is Africa and Latin America. I certainly agree that China is decoupling from the US-led hardcore Western alliance, but, its face is turned toward a larger landmass than the East.



I agree on that. Especially in terms of economic and cultural interests, China's private industries and institutions need to better marketing and PR in the US to win certain members of the Congress or governors and mayors. These people are there to ensure their position and Chinese entities can take advantage of the monied-politics of the US. That's probably something that China lacks miserably.



I agree. I guess I misunderstood the entire "influencing US opinion" argument of yours. I definitely concur that China needs to utilize more secondary power in the form of institutions and companies. Certain steps are being taken and China's diaspora is being engaged more successfully these days. I guess, in that regard, Turkey itself, which has a huge diaspora, can offer some lessons to China. In the face of intense propaganda and demonization, China needs to utilize every available tools to change perceptions and winning battles with minimum cost.



I would say that future is always a tricky beast. China might be seen to have the upper hand. Still, Russia cannot be underestimated.

By among equals, I did not mean "equals in real power," but equals "in terms of their relationship." The Western concept of alliance is often the stronger having the last say in any grouping. When it comes to China, it is a bit different. Inequality in size/scale/capacity does not always translate into inequality in social relationship. The charter of the AIIB or the SCO's decision making proves. This is actually the Asian way of consensus-based action. That's why China and Russia do not pursue a NATO-like hard alliance. They should, in my opinion, and China must be the final decision maker, but, I think neither leadership thinks the time is ripe for that.

Hey thanks a lot for your analysis as well. It's a very nice read and we've reached on a common ground on most of the topics. The privilege is mine to engage in such an intellectual discourse.
 
. .
you obviously do not read economic analysis. The chinese debt trap was predicted as early as 2009 when it started assuming alarming proportion. When Cinda could not repay its loan on due, the CCB was forced by the Chinese gvt to extend the loan by 10 years! And that is a drop in the ocean.

Sure China has potential but they will realize it ONLY after a revolution that throws away current form of communist rule and let people use their brains.

As to India splitting, again you obviously forget that after so many decades, the country just elected a party with absolute majority. No coalition, no marriages of convenience etc. Does that sound like a country splitting or uniting? Frankly India is showing how democracy is done in spite of abject poverty. No wonder it makes certain people make foaming statements such as yours!

India is something China is striving NOT to become.

A country that has a caste system, rape epidemic, mass starvation, children dying of malnutrition, no sanitation should be considered a failed state. India is the country that comes closest to many failed states in Africa.
 
.
The joint military drills now being conducted by China and Russia mark the first time PLA Navy units have participated in military exercises in the Sea of Japan.




China, Russia make largest-ever joint landing

The People's Liberation Army's Navy units are participating in military exercises in the Sea of Japan for the first time, as China and Russia perform joint naval drills.

The two countries conducted an air-sea joint exercise Tuesday off Clerk Cape in the Peter the Great Gulf, the largest gulf in the Sea of Japan. At 10 a.m. a fleet headed to waters off the Clerk Cape.

2015082709482739198.jpg


Joint military drills between China and Russia mark the first time for the People's Liberation Army's Navy units to participate in military exercises in the Sea of Japan.

The mixed formation includes guided missile cruisers, destroyers and landing ships from both China and Russia.

Three shipboard helicopters and eight fighter jets and attackers, are conducting simulated strikes on the highlands in the landing area.

Two guided missile cruisers are also firing on the island.

After several rounds of attacks, a group of marines and armored vehicles reached the beach head from aircraft and ships.

The landing exercise was the Chinese navy’s first abroad.

"The exercise will improve our troops' capabilities of landing from the deep sea, and in strange sea areas and airspace. It will also improve our troops' capabilities for joint operations and landing with the Russian navy," said Li Xiangdong, deputy head, Landing Ship Detachment of South China Sea Fleet.

The drill was the second China-Russia naval exercise this year and its scale was much larger than the one in the Mediterranean Sea.

"The first drill this year did not have marines or naval air forces. This time, the tasks are more complicated, such as facing large-scale attacks from the sea and against opponents with high technology at sea," said Capt. Konstantin Sivkov, VP, Academy of Geopolitical Problems.

Data from the Russian Defense Ministry shows that 22 vessels, about 20 jets and helicopters, more than 500 marines, and 40 pieces of equipment were included in Tuesday's landing drill.

But as Russian Captain Sivkov said, the drill is not a simple show of naval strength and instead indicates the two countries' resolution in safeguarding regional peace and stability.
 
. .
how come it is a threat
may be american thinking they will take over alaska hahaha
 
.
Back
Top Bottom