What's new

What happens now with China's industrial ambitions?

How do you think China will react ?

  • Back off from the aggressive moves on multiple fronts for now and bid their time?

    Votes: 2 20.0%
  • Realize they need developed nations as partners, and work towards consensus building?

    Votes: 3 30.0%
  • Stick to the current aggressive strategy and a win- at- all cost approach?

    Votes: 7 70.0%

  • Total voters
    10

rent4country

BANNED
Joined
Jul 31, 2020
Messages
1,638
Reaction score
-12
Country
United States
Location
United States
China was on its way to being the sole high-tech product provider to the world's wealthiest nations - BUT then the Xi doctrine happened.
How China chooses to react is the most significant crucial global event to watch


The Xi doctrine focused on a single goal, period (easily verifiable, no shockers here)

...at a high-level it is about an all-out, multi-faceted, aggressive move to position China as he sees its place on the world stage i.e. assuming the mantle of the sole leading superpower of tomorrow. BUT very different in ambition!

The building blocks are designed to achieve a sustained superpower role, by creating deep dependencies on China through surreptitious investment schemes for 100s of small partner nations. And the demand for absolute loyalty to all of China's interests at all times or risk being blacked out economically. Don't be fooled with humble words to the contrary, let their actions speak for themselves.

Execution of the doctrine began with convincing the CCP to bestow Xi a lifetime Head of the country role.

Below are some keys to achieving their goals
  • Get 'Tech-rich' quick scheme by a complete disregard of existing IP laws and acquiring the high-value technology through both legal loopholes (acquisitions of foreign companies and forcing them to hand over their advanced technologies), OR by stealing via industrial espionage.
China did not have to invest its own billions in R&D and time BUT got access to the advanced tech for free to relatively low cost. Countries understand military espionage is part of the game, but economic espionage is considered a significant violation and attack on its economy​
  • Establish dominance over crucial access points of the world economic supply chain through force, or bribes concealed as economic infrastructure incentives to authoritarian or corrupt governments. China has earned an infamous reputation of introduced untenable loans as a land-grabbing scheme.
  • A complete subjugation and control of his people, to be in lockstep with its cultural goals. See China's new policies on HK, or the extended rollout of mass cultural reeducation, ethnic cleansing, and reconversion of its Uyghur population.
Where do we see as pushback?
We see the pushback from the world's developed and wealthier nations. Ironically, coming from those China needs to achieve its tech dominance. Still in its early stages of pushback, BUT interestingly these nations have actioned their attack towards hurting China's high tech industries.

How China has reacted so far is VERY interesting.
On one end, they have been pretty muted on reacting to the push back on industries. Few things like jailing some Canadians and throwing verbal threats out. Seemingly more focused on the expansion (India, S. China sea, odd new rumors around wanting to garb land from other nations)

HOWEVER - lately it is has been interesting to observe its reaction to Tick Tok and the US demand. The CCP is threatening to cannibalize a Chinese company by threatening to kick them out of China, should it sell to the US. This is a BFD - China is threatening to hasten the demise of its OWN Chinese private company.

Had the roles been reversed and an American company was threatened by China to sell or leave. The decision would be left to the company to make.
 
Last edited:
. .
1, Entrepreneurs from other countries are not stupid. If China stole their IP, they could sue China. No one could stop them. If China forced them to deliver their technologies to China, they could leave China. No one could stop them.
2, Those countries who borrowed money from China are not stupid either. They know what they will pay and what they will gain from every Chinese projects before they sign contracts. It only needs simple math.
3, Chinese people are not stupid. Each year 120 million Chinese go abroad. They don't live in a closed society like North Korea. They still support CCP.
 
Last edited:
. .
For smaller developing nation it doesnt matter to them as they were being expolited by west earlier. Now if they have a hope for development by breaking the chain in form China then they will achieve it.
 
. . . .
For smaller developing nation it doesnt matter to them as they were being expolited by west earlier. Now if they have a hope for development by breaking the chain in form China then they will achieve it.

Let's test your theory because we have a real case here where a country has been close to both US and China.

How much in loans did the US give Pakistan, and at what rate? How much of it did Pakistan have to pay back?
How much Aid or Military subsidy did the US give you, and how much aid has china provided Pakistan?

Can you give me an example of any small country exploited by the US over development?
 
.
Let's test your theory because we have a real case here where a country has been close to both US and China.

How much in loans did the US give Pakistan, and at what rate? How much of it did Pakistan have to pay back?
How much Aid or Military subsidy did the US give you, and how much aid has china provided Pakistan?

Can you give me an example of any small country exploited by the US over development?

Who controlled the IMF? US not only give loan through IMF but also keep on arm twisting us by dictating even economic policies through IMF.

With respect to aid, it was not a free lunch. USA gave us reimbursement for using our land for USA war on Afghanistan otherwise, you guys even withheld our amount paid in advance for F16s.

China is giving us loans in terms for development and manufacturing whereas you gave us loan to finance trade deficit. The Chinese loans are giving us manufacturing power which can be used in eliminating the trade deficit (the reason we took loan).

No one knows the future but on the face of it USA, keep countries in a debt trap much worse than China. China debt is focused on manufacturing ability whereas USA loans are focused on consumption hence they never address the cause only keep on treating the symptoms to keep the dependency.
 
.
Who controlled the IMF? US not only give loan through IMF but also keep on arm twisting us by dictating even economic policies through IMF.

With respect to aid, it was not a free lunch. USA gave us reimbursement for using our land for USA war on Afghanistan otherwise, you guys even withheld our amount paid in advance for F16s.

China is giving us loans in terms for development and manufacturing whereas you gave us loan to finance trade deficit. The Chinese loans are giving us manufacturing power which can be used in eliminating the trade deficit (the reason we took loan).

No one knows the future but on the face of it USA, keep countries in a debt trap much worse than China. China debt is focused on manufacturing ability whereas USA loans are focused on consumption hence they never address the cause only keep on treating the symptoms to keep the dependency.

How much in loans did the US give Pakistan, and at what rate? How much of it did Pakistan have to pay back?
How much Aid or Military subsidy did the US give you, and how much aid has china provided Pakistan?
 
. .
so this is basically a fantasy since it doesn't contain any citable information.

It is an amalgamation of several articles, foreign policy discussions, intelligent agencies reports, Chinese defectors feedback, and China think tank expert opinions.

I get you are not used to being allowed to express in such ways, but what citable information do you seek? what is it you want to refute?
 
.
It is an amalgamation of several articles, foreign policy discussions, intelligent agencies reports, Chinese defectors feedback, and China think tank expert opinions. I get you are not used to being allowed to express in such ways, but what citable information do you seek?

The Xi doctrine focused on a single goal, period (easily verifiable, no shockers here)

Simplest one. You state it's easily verifiable that this is Xi's doctrine. I assume that means that he authorized it and conceptualized it, if not wrote it. You state that there is easy verification of this fact.

So where is it? What is the actual text of this policy, and the proof that Xi authored it, conceptualized it or even authorized this policy? Since it's easily verifiable, you should be able to provide this evidence.
 
.
The Xi doctrine focused on a single goal, period (easily verifiable, no shockers here)

Simplest one. You state it's easily verifiable that this is Xi's doctrine. I assume that means that he authorized it and conceptualized it, if not wrote it. You state that there is easy verification of this fact.

So where is it? What is the actual text of this policy, and the proof that Xi authored it, conceptualized it or even authorized this policy? Since it's easily verifiable, you should be able to provide this evidence.

So now you have learned to better express yourself, thank you.

Doctrine does not have to be a neatly written manifesto. Btw, I said its focus is verifiable. All aspects that I listed.

What part of the doctrine do you dispute? That he sees China as a being the sole superpower? OR that the Chinese government authorizes economic espionage, or acquires American companies with the sole purpose to get a hand on sensitive tech they could not get access to previously?

Happy to bring you up to speed on what's going in the world with China in this aspect.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom