I don't know about FDD in particular. They certainly have their own agenda. Wikipedia suggests neoconservative thought and proponents of hawkish US foreign poli

I don't know about FDD in particular. They certainly have their own agenda. Wikipedia suggests neoconservative thought and proponents of hawkish US foreign policy [1]. So it's not surprising them supporting the publication. FDD may be the landing page but the authors were the actual reason I thought this could be interesting to other people. I've read some of their publications before, skimmed through the report itself and realized that they aggregated a set of issues they have previously discussed in more than one paper. There are actually not many new facts if you read Sinocism [2], Axios China [3] or Sinoskop [4] from time to time. Generally interested, what standards need to be fulfilled that you think a source provides 'trustworthy analysis'? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Defense_of_Democracies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Defense_of_Demo... [2] https://sinocism.com/ https://sinocism.com/ [3] https://www.axios.com/world/china/ https://www.axios.com/world/china/ [4] https://www.sinoskop.de/blog/ https://www.sinoskop.de/blog/ [GERMAN]