6 ms·

Once the situation was out they did everything properly to fix it at home, and then even contributed to the science work on the virus (just not on the lab origi

Once the situation was out they did everything properly to fix it at home, and then even contributed to the science work on the virus (just not on the lab origin hypothesis, but all other work on the virus structure, illness mechanisms, potential vaccines or medications, yes). All the geopolitical tensions around China, both Koreas, and Japan, are just about losing or not losing face. Most of the time they would largely benefit just negociating and accepting to lose some useless islands and so on, but no because "they don't bow to the foe". Also I work in Asia and I meet this "keeping the face" behavior everywhere and all the time. So to understand relations with China you'd better factor in these characteritics into your analysis rather than sweeping them under the carpet.

fragileone 5y ago
I'm not sure what your point is here. That the Wuhan lab shouldn't be called out for likely causing a global pandemic? It's being done in a very fair and non-aggressive manner. I don't really see what other approach could be said to take into account this stereotype more.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- henearkr 5y ago
  To keep it simple: are there benefits of calling them out? Are you really just in search of scientific truth, and is this science useful in this context of present and maybe future crisis? My point is that actually it (the calling out) is done aggressively, and it was especially when Trump was president. And maybe China is afraid to be shamed and discredited on the international scene, which would delight geopolitical enemies like US, or having to repay colossal sums of money to the world. And thus they would be refusing even the possibility of a lab leak. If China was given a more relaxed treatment (but is it even possible? isn't the world out to find scapegoats and make them feel shame or get them to pay?), maybe they would have more willingly investigated the origins of the virus, even probably as a simple consequence of their other ongoing scientific investigations on covid. I may seem unduly focused on the concept of shame in this comment, but this is precisely why it is an Asian problem. It is not obvious for Westerners that shame or discredit would be that much important. The money problem only adds to it. But what's even more important here to figure out a solution, is that the investigations about the virus origin will likely not help at all to solve the crisis. Solutions are more in studying the variants, preventing the spread, and developping vaccines and antivirals.
  - themacguffinman 5y ago
    Developing effective preventive solutions require that you understand the problem. If the problem is a lab leak, then policies that address insufficient lab safety standards are warranted. Frankly, the Chinese government should feel ashamed and discredited if it was a lab leak under its responsibility. Any US involvement in the lab leak should be investigated and uncovered as well. China would have no qualms pointing fingers at the US if the roles were reversed, and they'd be right to do so. Being sensitive to shame has never been a reasonable excuse for covering up the truth. Coddling China is not only unjust, it damages our ability to prevent this from happening again.
    - henearkr 5y ago
      This is also one thing that I dispute: knowing the origin will not make the world better, because a lab leak is theoretically impossible anyway, given the lab safety standards. So I doubt that knowing the leak would change the outcome in the future or prevent the mistakes. It is also highly plausible that China has already taken steps, internally. Like, the Wuhan lab is closed now. So, in the light of this fact, too, calling out China will not make them do more than they already did to address the issue. If the problem is the lack of enforcement of security (maybe because of deeper lingering problems, like the fact that local authorities are too much autonomous, behave like little tyrants themselves, etc), then adding even more security policy will not do anything. If the answer is to change the whole way China is administered, this will just not happen (unfortunately).
      - themacguffinman 5y ago
        > because a lab leak is theoretically impossible anyway, given the lab safety standards It's obviously not impossible because we're seeing evidence that it is possibly a lab leak, that's the whole point of the Vanity Fair article. This reasoning works backwards from a theory where a lab leak is "theoretically impossible" but obviously if a fair and impartial investigation revealed that it was a lab leak, then logically that theory is wrong. If theories about lab safety are wrong, that's very important information. > It is also highly plausible that China has already taken steps, internally. Like, the Wuhan lab is closed now. That doesn't help other labs overseas. Other countries also perform bio-research in labs and any safety discoveries can prevent similarly bad outcomes internationally as well. If a fair and impartial investigation reveals that foreign labs are susceptible to the same lab leak that caused this pandemic, that's really valuable and essential information in preventing the next pandemic. Whether or not the origin is a direct consequence of Chinese government carelessness or whether it's an accident that could happen to other labs or whether it's not a lab leak at all, we need to know the truth. > If the answer is to change the whole way China is administered, this will just not happen (unfortunately). Not with that attitude. If your only response to bullies and bad actors is absolutely nothing, of course they won't change, they have no reason to change. The international community should impose punishments for China's bad behavior and non-cooperation.
redis_mlc 5y ago
> Once the situation was out they did everything properly to fix it at home, and then even contributed to the science work on the virus No, you misunderstand what actually happened: - The release (upload to the Internet) of the molecular structure was unauthorized - the West was lucky to get it at all - CCP work on a vaccine started before they admitted it was airborne - those "useless islands" define economic zones for fish and gas - none are useless - domestic flights from Wuhan were blocked, while international flights continued, including SFO and LAX You simply don't know what you're talking about - you're a useful idiot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
themacguffinman 5y ago
I find this to be a shallow "just-so" take on geopolitics. Many of the disputed islands have strategic economic & military value in their territory. There's a lot of googlable analysis on how these islands are valued but it honestly seems a little laughable to suggest that China or the other Asian countries will just accept losing some "useless islands". Given the secretive nature of CCP behavior I don't think I can prove that their dispute isn't driven by "keeping the face" playground psychology, but more practical & sensible motivations are apparent and I can meta-comment that it seems very unlikely that this dispute would confound experienced diplomats for this long if it was as simple as keeping face. If you look for critical analysis of many high-stakes geopolitical disputes you can usually find a very practical and utilitarian motivation behind it. An explanation that relies on popular stereotypes is basically the opposite of that.
- henearkr 5y ago
  I mean, just compare the advantage of (I'm taking the point of vue of Japan here): - being friend with all your neighbors and having a couple less islands, to which you could go in vacations just fine anyway, or - having your islands but being enemy with everybody, spoiling your gross product on arms race and exercises, creating an atmosphere of hate for your resident foreigners, hindering international commerce, voting laws to reinforce government coertion... They could negociate to buy the rare earth or any other useful resources around these islands, if they belonged to a foreign but friendly neighbor.
  - themacguffinman 5y ago
    Your perspective on the pros and cons in this dispute are very personal and don't involve a lot of geopolitical factors. The ability to go to a few islands for holiday is not a significant geopolitical benefit. Creating an atmosphere of hate for your resident foreigners is not a serious geopolitical disadvantage (citizens of both China and USA are hated in many places yet they both remain powerful and wealthy countries). Countries don't threaten expensive and risky military action because they are worried about a lack of friendly holiday destinations. The discovery of important resources like natural gas and fish near eg. the Senkaku Islands seems more on the mark but is also more serious than "you can just buy these useful resources". Obviously a substantial amount of resources will cost a lot of resources to buy if you don't own it, but also resource ownership fuels domestic economic growth that supports the happiness of your citizens and strengthens your ability to defend and sponsor your interests in future conflicts. Either way, settling this conflict by surrendering these islands will not on their own establish friendly relations between China and its neighbors. China is in deeper economic competition with countries like Japan beyond these islands. More conflict will need to be resolved before you can claim that settling the island dispute will result in a foreign but friendly neighbor.

fragileone 5y ago

I'm not sure what your point is here. That the Wuhan lab shouldn't be called out for likely causing a global pandemic? It's being done in a very fair and non-aggressive manner. I don't really see what other approach could be said to take into account this stereotype more.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
henearkr 5y ago
To keep it simple: are there benefits of calling them out? Are you really just in search of scientific truth, and is this science useful in this context of present and maybe future crisis? My point is that actually it (the calling out) is done aggressively, and it was especially when Trump was president. And maybe China is afraid to be shamed and discredited on the international scene, which would delight geopolitical enemies like US, or having to repay colossal sums of money to the world. And thus they would be refusing even the possibility of a lab leak. If China was given a more relaxed treatment (but is it even possible? isn't the world out to find scapegoats and make them feel shame or get them to pay?), maybe they would have more willingly investigated the origins of the virus, even probably as a simple consequence of their other ongoing scientific investigations on covid. I may seem unduly focused on the concept of shame in this comment, but this is precisely why it is an Asian problem. It is not obvious for Westerners that shame or discredit would be that much important. The money problem only adds to it. But what's even more important here to figure out a solution, is that the investigations about the virus origin will likely not help at all to solve the crisis. Solutions are more in studying the variants, preventing the spread, and developping vaccines and antivirals.
- themacguffinman 5y ago
  Developing effective preventive solutions require that you understand the problem. If the problem is a lab leak, then policies that address insufficient lab safety standards are warranted. Frankly, the Chinese government should feel ashamed and discredited if it was a lab leak under its responsibility. Any US involvement in the lab leak should be investigated and uncovered as well. China would have no qualms pointing fingers at the US if the roles were reversed, and they'd be right to do so. Being sensitive to shame has never been a reasonable excuse for covering up the truth. Coddling China is not only unjust, it damages our ability to prevent this from happening again.
  - henearkr 5y ago
    This is also one thing that I dispute: knowing the origin will not make the world better, because a lab leak is theoretically impossible anyway, given the lab safety standards. So I doubt that knowing the leak would change the outcome in the future or prevent the mistakes. It is also highly plausible that China has already taken steps, internally. Like, the Wuhan lab is closed now. So, in the light of this fact, too, calling out China will not make them do more than they already did to address the issue. If the problem is the lack of enforcement of security (maybe because of deeper lingering problems, like the fact that local authorities are too much autonomous, behave like little tyrants themselves, etc), then adding even more security policy will not do anything. If the answer is to change the whole way China is administered, this will just not happen (unfortunately).
    - themacguffinman 5y ago
      > because a lab leak is theoretically impossible anyway, given the lab safety standards It's obviously not impossible because we're seeing evidence that it is possibly a lab leak, that's the whole point of the Vanity Fair article. This reasoning works backwards from a theory where a lab leak is "theoretically impossible" but obviously if a fair and impartial investigation revealed that it was a lab leak, then logically that theory is wrong. If theories about lab safety are wrong, that's very important information. > It is also highly plausible that China has already taken steps, internally. Like, the Wuhan lab is closed now. That doesn't help other labs overseas. Other countries also perform bio-research in labs and any safety discoveries can prevent similarly bad outcomes internationally as well. If a fair and impartial investigation reveals that foreign labs are susceptible to the same lab leak that caused this pandemic, that's really valuable and essential information in preventing the next pandemic. Whether or not the origin is a direct consequence of Chinese government carelessness or whether it's an accident that could happen to other labs or whether it's not a lab leak at all, we need to know the truth. > If the answer is to change the whole way China is administered, this will just not happen (unfortunately). Not with that attitude. If your only response to bullies and bad actors is absolutely nothing, of course they won't change, they have no reason to change. The international community should impose punishments for China's bad behavior and non-cooperation.

redis_mlc 5y ago

> Once the situation was out they did everything properly to fix it at home, and then even contributed to the science work on the virus No, you misunderstand what actually happened: - The release (upload to the Internet) of the molecular structure was unauthorized - the West was lucky to get it at all - CCP work on a vaccine started before they admitted it was airborne - those "useless islands" define economic zones for fish and gas - none are useless - domestic flights from Wuhan were blocked, while international flights continued, including SFO and LAX You simply don't know what you're talking about - you're a useful idiot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

themacguffinman 5y ago

I find this to be a shallow "just-so" take on geopolitics. Many of the disputed islands have strategic economic & military value in their territory. There's a lot of googlable analysis on how these islands are valued but it honestly seems a little laughable to suggest that China or the other Asian countries will just accept losing some "useless islands". Given the secretive nature of CCP behavior I don't think I can prove that their dispute isn't driven by "keeping the face" playground psychology, but more practical & sensible motivations are apparent and I can meta-comment that it seems very unlikely that this dispute would confound experienced diplomats for this long if it was as simple as keeping face. If you look for critical analysis of many high-stakes geopolitical disputes you can usually find a very practical and utilitarian motivation behind it. An explanation that relies on popular stereotypes is basically the opposite of that.

henearkr 5y ago
I mean, just compare the advantage of (I'm taking the point of vue of Japan here): - being friend with all your neighbors and having a couple less islands, to which you could go in vacations just fine anyway, or - having your islands but being enemy with everybody, spoiling your gross product on arms race and exercises, creating an atmosphere of hate for your resident foreigners, hindering international commerce, voting laws to reinforce government coertion... They could negociate to buy the rare earth or any other useful resources around these islands, if they belonged to a foreign but friendly neighbor.
- themacguffinman 5y ago
  Your perspective on the pros and cons in this dispute are very personal and don't involve a lot of geopolitical factors. The ability to go to a few islands for holiday is not a significant geopolitical benefit. Creating an atmosphere of hate for your resident foreigners is not a serious geopolitical disadvantage (citizens of both China and USA are hated in many places yet they both remain powerful and wealthy countries). Countries don't threaten expensive and risky military action because they are worried about a lack of friendly holiday destinations. The discovery of important resources like natural gas and fish near eg. the Senkaku Islands seems more on the mark but is also more serious than "you can just buy these useful resources". Obviously a substantial amount of resources will cost a lot of resources to buy if you don't own it, but also resource ownership fuels domestic economic growth that supports the happiness of your citizens and strengthens your ability to defend and sponsor your interests in future conflicts. Either way, settling this conflict by surrendering these islands will not on their own establish friendly relations between China and its neighbors. China is in deeper economic competition with countries like Japan beyond these islands. More conflict will need to be resolved before you can claim that settling the island dispute will result in a foreign but friendly neighbor.