3 ms·
Other than the historical facts, this article is kind of a weird read. The author seems to be guilty of the same thing he's accusing the Chinese president, name
by aclsid 9y ago
Other than the historical facts, this article is kind of a weird read. The author seems to be guilty of the same thing he's accusing the Chinese president, namely using history to support their version of how this might play out.
- thablackbull 9y agoI get a similar impression that the article was a little odd - I think the author seems to be confusing the intent of the message coming from China's leadership. China is saying, here is a 'story' to help you understand what we're trying to do with the Belt & Road Initiative. In essence, the focus is not on the truth claims of history, but it is a guidepost of what they want to do in the future. The author on the other-hand seems to be saying, because the history is inaccurate, the corollary is that the Belt & Road initiative will not succeed (which is not a logically consistent argument).
- salqadri 9y agoAgreed. Definitely a very one-sided and biased presentation of even the "facts".
- MichaelMoser123 9y agoAlso its all a matter of interpretation: you can look at aid to central Asia and Africa as a long term investment. If these regions take off then that would be beneficial to China - it would create markets and natural allies. Creating a win win situation with foreign aid is also a bit novel (so far it was more an attempt get them into neocolonialist dependency, let's see if the Chinese do any better than that)