5 ms·

> but I don't think they have the appetite to break the status quo this eagerly. Mainly they don't have the strength to break the status quo. Plus they don't w

> but I don't think they have the appetite to break the status quo this eagerly. Mainly they don't have the strength to break the status quo. Plus they don't want to jeopardise access to such a large market. It's a Faustian bargain they're beginning to regret. China is going to rise, this cannot and should not be prevented. But allowing them to rise at your own country's expense is folly. America gets this.

xxxpupugo 7y ago
Also US can weather itself the best if the status quo is broken, because it is currently on top. Other countries won't be so lucky. Trump's actions feel dramatic, but mainly on the magnitude and fast aggression. Something is due to happen and the world needs to adapt to that new normal.
- thawaway1837 7y ago
  Trumps actions seem dramatic because they are largely incoherent with no end goal in mind and based on his personal feelings. The US would have made far more progress against China if it had remained in the TPP.
simion314 7y ago
So you change the rules in the middle of the game so you don't lose, sounds right if you are the arbiter too
- leereeves 7y ago
  China never obeyed the rules, so the rest of the world has a choice: continue to play by the old rules at a disadvantage to a cheating China, accept the new rules China has been playing by, or isolate China until they start playing by the old rules.
  - rat9988 7y ago
    Which rules didn't china obey?
    - leereeves 7y ago
      Broadly speaking (for a detailed list see the US Trade Representative's report[1]) they failed to allow access to their markets or respect the rights of foreign companies. They've shown that a nationalist nation can exploit the globalist system to its own profit, raising doubts about globalism itself and leading to the resurgence of nationalism. 1: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2018-USTR-Report-to-Congress-on-China%27s-WTO-Compliance.pdf https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2018-USTR-Report-to-Con...
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - RavlaAlvar 7y ago
      Promise they made when joining WTO
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
  - dirtyid 7y ago
    You should look up WTO statistics sometimes. Who has substantially more complaints from the global trade community [1]? Who imposes the highest number of protectionism policies [2]? Hint: it's not China. There's no reason to believe USTR reporting, or much government reporting when it comes to geopolitics to be unbiased. Especially under this administration. During a tradewar no less. This isn't about obeying the rules. It's about the reigning cheater stacking the deck against an upcoming cheater while pretending their own hands are clean. China's ascension to WTO was inevitable despite US being one of the last hold outs [3]. An emerging great power and the largest exporter responsible for driving substantial global growth should get a say in the rules. That's just common sense. China maybe revisionist but it also has't been in a large shooting war in 40 years, that's a good direction to revise towards. [1] https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2016/09/28/20161001_trade.jpg https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user330... [2] https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/styles/pubs_2x/public/wp-content/uploads/usa_protectionism.png https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/styles/pubs_2x/pub... [3] https://thebulwark.com/a-failure-to-adjust/ https://thebulwark.com/a-failure-to-adjust/
jacquesm 7y ago
It's far simpler than that. In order to look good domestically Trump needs a foe, and China conveniently provides that foe. They're a credible threat, they are not his Russian buddies and the US is to a large extent dependent on them. On top of that I suspect that when the last stone is overturned we will find a bunch of ways in which the US president and his cronies profited from the wild gyrations of the stock market as a result of the trade war.
- narag 7y ago
  No matter who's in charge in each moment, the West should try to convince China that it must transition to a political system like ours if they want to keep dealing with us. Allowing China to maintain its tyrannic regime is extremely dangerous for everybody in the long run. The change doesn't need to be abrupt and it's possible to make some assurances for people currently in power. Not that it worked so well with Russia, I know.
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    The only way such change can be enforced without a war is from inside.
    - filoleg 7y ago
      I mean, isn’t that exactly the whole point of sanctions, to make people on the inside to feel the effects and do something about it from within?
      - jacquesm 7y ago
        That's the theory. The practice is the rulers will use the sanctions to prove to their people that the outside world is mean and evil and their only hope lies in their dear leaders.
    - narag 7y ago
      "Enforced" is not the word I was looking for. More like showing the ruling class that it's in their own interest to gradually apply some changes. There are many obstacles for such a strategy. But even if there isn't a clear path, there needs to be some factors in place for somebody inside to invent that path. If nothing is ever done, nothing will change.

xxxpupugo 7y ago

Also US can weather itself the best if the status quo is broken, because it is currently on top. Other countries won't be so lucky. Trump's actions feel dramatic, but mainly on the magnitude and fast aggression. Something is due to happen and the world needs to adapt to that new normal.

thawaway1837 7y ago
Trumps actions seem dramatic because they are largely incoherent with no end goal in mind and based on his personal feelings. The US would have made far more progress against China if it had remained in the TPP.

simion314 7y ago

So you change the rules in the middle of the game so you don't lose, sounds right if you are the arbiter too

leereeves 7y ago
China never obeyed the rules, so the rest of the world has a choice: continue to play by the old rules at a disadvantage to a cheating China, accept the new rules China has been playing by, or isolate China until they start playing by the old rules.
- rat9988 7y ago
  Which rules didn't china obey?
  - leereeves 7y ago
    Broadly speaking (for a detailed list see the US Trade Representative's report[1]) they failed to allow access to their markets or respect the rights of foreign companies. They've shown that a nationalist nation can exploit the globalist system to its own profit, raising doubts about globalism itself and leading to the resurgence of nationalism. 1: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2018-USTR-Report-to-Congress-on-China%27s-WTO-Compliance.pdf https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2018-USTR-Report-to-Con...
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - RavlaAlvar 7y ago
    Promise they made when joining WTO
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- dirtyid 7y ago
  You should look up WTO statistics sometimes. Who has substantially more complaints from the global trade community [1]? Who imposes the highest number of protectionism policies [2]? Hint: it's not China. There's no reason to believe USTR reporting, or much government reporting when it comes to geopolitics to be unbiased. Especially under this administration. During a tradewar no less. This isn't about obeying the rules. It's about the reigning cheater stacking the deck against an upcoming cheater while pretending their own hands are clean. China's ascension to WTO was inevitable despite US being one of the last hold outs [3]. An emerging great power and the largest exporter responsible for driving substantial global growth should get a say in the rules. That's just common sense. China maybe revisionist but it also has't been in a large shooting war in 40 years, that's a good direction to revise towards. [1] https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2016/09/28/20161001_trade.jpg https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user330... [2] https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/styles/pubs_2x/public/wp-content/uploads/usa_protectionism.png https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/styles/pubs_2x/pub... [3] https://thebulwark.com/a-failure-to-adjust/ https://thebulwark.com/a-failure-to-adjust/

jacquesm 7y ago

It's far simpler than that. In order to look good domestically Trump needs a foe, and China conveniently provides that foe. They're a credible threat, they are not his Russian buddies and the US is to a large extent dependent on them. On top of that I suspect that when the last stone is overturned we will find a bunch of ways in which the US president and his cronies profited from the wild gyrations of the stock market as a result of the trade war.

narag 7y ago
No matter who's in charge in each moment, the West should try to convince China that it must transition to a political system like ours if they want to keep dealing with us. Allowing China to maintain its tyrannic regime is extremely dangerous for everybody in the long run. The change doesn't need to be abrupt and it's possible to make some assurances for people currently in power. Not that it worked so well with Russia, I know.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  The only way such change can be enforced without a war is from inside.
  - filoleg 7y ago
    I mean, isn’t that exactly the whole point of sanctions, to make people on the inside to feel the effects and do something about it from within?
    - jacquesm 7y ago
      That's the theory. The practice is the rulers will use the sanctions to prove to their people that the outside world is mean and evil and their only hope lies in their dear leaders.
  - narag 7y ago
    "Enforced" is not the word I was looking for. More like showing the ruling class that it's in their own interest to gradually apply some changes. There are many obstacles for such a strategy. But even if there isn't a clear path, there needs to be some factors in place for somebody inside to invent that path. If nothing is ever done, nothing will change.