Xi has made it clear where he wants to take China. At the opening of the Communist Party congress last week, he repeated a goal to make China a modern socialist power by 2035, boosting per capita income to middle-income levels and modernizing the armed forces. Then by 2049, the 100th anniversary of the People’s Republic of China, he wants to ensure the nation “leads the world in terms of composite national strength and international influence.”Blockquote
He also signaled a shift of priorities from economic development toward security,
It’s not just about stealing patents, enslaving Uyghurs, and shutting down his economy anymore. Pretty soon this guy could be a serious menace.
I am a fan of “engaging” with China, just like we have. I support the policy as it has been for the past 20-30 years or whatever, but part of the reason for that involves breaking off engagement when the situation in China goes south.
Well . . . it’s going south.
Engagement does not mean “stand by China no matter what.”
I’m very excited for the chip manufacturing plants to be opening up here in the US. My son is ridiculously brilliant and I could easily see him entering the hardware engineering sector, which said sector could really use a boost in membership.
…and yet, OUR government pushed our manufacturing out of our country due to their pollution regulations but then allow goods produced in China that do not meet these same pollution standards to be brought here and sold here, thus enriching China at our expense. I really have to wonder if this is intentional? If so, why?
Are all of these mansions owned by politicians here in the US, purchased with this illicit money truly worth the damage you’re intentionally doing to this nation? This can be stopped and Trump was on the right track in returning our manufacturing.
Now stop…and reconsider all of the forces both internally as well as externally that were working against this! Now ask yourself if you’ll vote for this force today…and this force is on both sides of the aisle. Choose wisely for the good of the following generations that have to live with your decisions.
I disagree, and it was Nixon and Reagan who normalized relations with China.
US Cold War strategy included (in no small part) driving a wedge between Russia and China . . . well that and the Dr Seuss types who tried to convince us “There is really no difference. They just butter their toast on the bottom we butter ours on the top.”
Forty years ago – during the height of the Cold War – former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and Chinese Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping looked beyond their nations’ many differences and found common ground.
On Jan. 1, 1979, the two leaders normalized diplomatic relations between their countries, which had been estranged since the Communist Party established the People’s Republic of China in 1949 and the United States chose to back the Nationalists, who fled to Taiwan. In the years leading up to 1979, the U.S. imposed trade embargoes and forbade Americans from traveling to China; China, meanwhile, seized nearly $200 million in American assets and properties within its borders.
It was Carter who first normalized relations with China.
Yes, the US needs to become more self-sufficient and lessen its dependence on China. It also needs to back off its role as the world’s bully.
A basic problem is that most of the world sees domination by the US as a far greater threat than domination by China. BRICS has become an attractive alternative for the 85% of the world outside of NATO and its close allies. There are already plans to add Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Argentina, and Iran to BRICS.
Just over two weeks after Russian state media announced that Iran and Argentina filed their official applications to join BRICS, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt began the process of making the same move, the alliance President Purnima Anand said on July 14. BRICS Expansion: Five New Members in 2023? - Impakter
The sanctions war between the NATO and Russia has shown that any country that relies on the western financial system is subject to the whims of NATO. There is a huge incentive to develop alternative financial systems outside of western domination. The US and close allies are likely to become increasingly isolated if they continue down their current path.