5 ms·

The diplomatic messaging from the CCP became extremely aggressive a couple of years ago. The outcome of this bullying was essentially to wake up the world to th

The diplomatic messaging from the CCP became extremely aggressive a couple of years ago. The outcome of this bullying was essentially to wake up the world to the threat that China had become. This period of Chinese open hostility towards the world essentially made many countries into enemies or at least adversaries of China. A new arms race began, and many countries started to economically decouple from China or pull out entirely. Recently China seemed to realize its “wolf warrior” aggressive stance towards the world simply was leading to well armed and prepared adversaries, so the CCP stopped being so aggressive in its diplomatic stance. The most disturbing part of all this is that at least here in Australia, much of society seems to have bought the new narrative that China was never a threat and indeed it was our own government at the time (now voted out) that caused the degraded relationship with China. People seem to believe that China has gone back to being non threatening, non aggressive. They seem happy to believe that China’s clearly stated intent to control the world is no longer its goal. It looks to me like China had a short period where it showed its true hand, and realizing its error, had gone back to hiding its true ambitions behind a friendly smile. This will lull countries like Australia into a false sense of security and does not bode well for the future, in which China has realized it must carry out its plans with surprise rather than telegraphing hostility early. Our politicians are all too willing to back down and stop becoming prepared. It’s extremely unfortunate that in Australia there are many people who equate being defensively ready with warmongering. I’m no hawk but I sure do believe we should defend our sovereignty and be ready well in advance to do so. We are far, far from able to defend ourselves right now.

ProjectArcturis 4y ago
I'm surprised to hear that about Australian public opinion. In the US, we have a rare bipartisan agreement that China is our largest strategic enemy. Biden was able to do radical things like ban export of advanced chips to China, a move which has generally been approved by both sides of the aisle.
- andrewstuart 4y ago
  Ironically, it was Australia via former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who alerted the USA to the true nature of the relationship with China. This happened when Turnbull urged the USA to ban installation of 5G by CCP controlled telecommunications companies. Australia alerting the world in this way is one of the reasons China became enraged with Australia and imposed a massive trade war against us. There are, unfortunately, many people who when presented with modern reality, say things like “we need to stop being a slave to U.S interests”. Many people I believe simply haven’t followed international affairs closely enough to realize what is actually happening, and they carry through 1970s “we are not a US colony” thinking to the present. I find it startling when people haven’t seen what is happening on our doorstep. I for one am extremely glad of the US alliance and if anything want closer defence connections. We are going to need it. It’s extremely concerning that the new Australian government has been working extremely hard to reestablish friendly and close relationship with China. This will come at a heavy price I fear.
- ashwagary 4y ago
  >Im surprised to hear that about Australian public opinion. Dissenting voices in Australia seem far more aware of the profit motive behind potentially unneeded militarization. I believe this is due to less complicated accounting of government spending when compared to countries like the US. >The diplomatic messaging from the CCP became extremely aggressive a couple of years ago. The outcome of this bullying was essentially to wake up the world to the threat that China had become. It's clear the Chinese hear western propaganda and respond to it, shouldn't be surprising. Everything from the blame for covid (which recent signs point to being a US lab creation) to western thought leaders openly discussing nuking a billion relatively peaceful people and not being condemned for it. This naturally results in a re-adjustment in approach to engagement. >This period of Chinese open hostility towards the world essentially made many countries into enemies or at least adversaries of China. This statement doesn't ring true. They havent been hostile to the world, just to factions within a few western countries that make up a small minority of the planet's population. I doubt any recovering nation that's been invaded by these same western countries and is planning to survive the next few centuries would take further threats of mass murder and invasion lightly.
  - ProjectArcturis 4y ago
    Your post contains many factual errors. I'm not sure there's a true statement in it at all.
    - ashwagary 4y ago
      I disagree. What do you think is erroneous specifically?
      - ProjectArcturis 4y ago
        >which recent signs point to being a US lab creation >western thought leaders openly discussing nuking a billion relatively peaceful people and not being condemned for it >They havent been hostile to the world, just to factions within a few western countries
ralusek 4y ago
China's tactical missteps with their political posturing, their security bill in Hong Kong, and the major blunder of COVID, were all pure providence for western civilization. Anybody who was paying any attention was pulling their hair out watching the world sleepwalk into a completely new global hegemony, and it was just by a series of jarring red flags that the rest of the world seemingly woke up to the dragon. I'm not saying that the dragon is no longer a problem, either, I'm just saying that the world is at least suddenly treating it accordingly.
- seanmcdirmid 4y ago
  China became increasingly aggressive after the 2008 Olympics, and that accelerated in 2012 when Xi Jinping became president. Before 2008, the feeling in china (among expats and Chinese returnees) was that it would gradually liberalize more, rather than go in the opposite direction like they actually did. No one is making that mistake now.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
dirtyid 4y ago
That's a very western reading consistent with the customary MSM/wonk talking points. If west thinks something PRC is doing is counter-productive, it probably means it's working. Wolf warrior has been a relative success, and has not stopped, what you're seeing is countries previously aggressive to PRC dialing down tensions, and PRC reciprocating. Wolf warrior tit for tat dynamic is very much still in play. First, "wolf warrior" is a manufactured western label for PRC being diplomatically assertive in response to assertive western moves against PRC interests. PRC's assertiveness has relative success in deterring regional countries from signing up against PRC containment. Washington hopium prior to Trump era pivot envisioned massing US hardware all over the first island chain, then PRC diplomats showing a little fang and third parties in region decided signing up was suicide. Current arrangement of QUAD/AUKUS would have been given a barely passing if not failing grade relative to prior aspirational blob proposals since involve the already forgone partners while India is not committed to the security dimension. It's hard to overstate how bad US+co posture around PRC is currently with respect to earlier proposals relative to the amount of US diplomatic effort through two adminstrations. It's prime how it started, how it's going meme. Really apart from getting new bomber and missile basing in western Australia, PRC assertiveness has prevented backyard security environment from degrading to point that would stop/reverse trend of PLA dominating region over time. Reality is PRC has already established relative military supremacy within first island chain that PRC assertiveness can convince unaligned parties (most) in region PRC cooperation is better than containment. It was simply prudent for PRC to unleash wolf warrior to counter Trump/Biden's China hawk team (US wolf warrior) because PLA military is already modernized enough to compel everyone in region to hedge. Other considerations, no more new EU sanctions after PRC finally decided to counter sanction EU officials. No more PRC elites getting kidnapped post Meng/Huawei after PRC counter kidnapped Canadian Michaels. There's more coordinated transatlantic tech/industrial containment policies, but IMO that was always forgone with how much US controlled the tech stack, but US had to unilaterally implement these sanctions with softpower costs, just like how 3/5th of 5VEYS didn't ban Huawei gear until US made it impossible with sanctions that made long term hardware supply issue. Even JP boosting to defense 2%, in lieu of adopting basing concepts that would actually assist US in PRC containment (AGILE basing). Mainly because JP fucked up so bad that now they're in crosshairs of THREE nuclear powers (PRC, NKR, RU). And that doubling unlikely not even get properly funded and if did, nor will it stretch far on US platforms with how much Yen has crashed. Also good luck on AU getting nuke boats in next 30 years. The TLDR Wolf warrior essentially elevated PRC to become nearly sanction and extradition proof by anyone except US, including LIO countries who drunk the Uyghur genocide narrative. That's Hague Invasion Act tier privileges solidifying PRC's rising power status. Even USSR didn't have those perks. Like PRC diplomats just beat the shit out of HK protesters in UK and basically nothing. Ultimately, despite assertiveness being perceived as counterproductive by western, wolf warrior has revealed how much others will put on the line against PRC containment. And so far, including developments post RU/UKR it's been more words/theatre than action. It's not about making friends or peeling away entrenched US allies with aligned interests - that was never feasible. Constraining ostensible US containment arrangements and making them toothless was as good as it was ever going to get. And that it did, spectacularly. Your example of AU simmering down to more cordial relations under new gov is reflection of that. AU short/medium term interests still US aligned, but AU politicians just learned sensibly that they can't out wolf-warrior PRC for domestic politics.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

ProjectArcturis 4y ago

I'm surprised to hear that about Australian public opinion. In the US, we have a rare bipartisan agreement that China is our largest strategic enemy. Biden was able to do radical things like ban export of advanced chips to China, a move which has generally been approved by both sides of the aisle.

andrewstuart 4y ago
Ironically, it was Australia via former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who alerted the USA to the true nature of the relationship with China. This happened when Turnbull urged the USA to ban installation of 5G by CCP controlled telecommunications companies. Australia alerting the world in this way is one of the reasons China became enraged with Australia and imposed a massive trade war against us. There are, unfortunately, many people who when presented with modern reality, say things like “we need to stop being a slave to U.S interests”. Many people I believe simply haven’t followed international affairs closely enough to realize what is actually happening, and they carry through 1970s “we are not a US colony” thinking to the present. I find it startling when people haven’t seen what is happening on our doorstep. I for one am extremely glad of the US alliance and if anything want closer defence connections. We are going to need it. It’s extremely concerning that the new Australian government has been working extremely hard to reestablish friendly and close relationship with China. This will come at a heavy price I fear.
ashwagary 4y ago
>Im surprised to hear that about Australian public opinion. Dissenting voices in Australia seem far more aware of the profit motive behind potentially unneeded militarization. I believe this is due to less complicated accounting of government spending when compared to countries like the US. >The diplomatic messaging from the CCP became extremely aggressive a couple of years ago. The outcome of this bullying was essentially to wake up the world to the threat that China had become. It's clear the Chinese hear western propaganda and respond to it, shouldn't be surprising. Everything from the blame for covid (which recent signs point to being a US lab creation) to western thought leaders openly discussing nuking a billion relatively peaceful people and not being condemned for it. This naturally results in a re-adjustment in approach to engagement. >This period of Chinese open hostility towards the world essentially made many countries into enemies or at least adversaries of China. This statement doesn't ring true. They havent been hostile to the world, just to factions within a few western countries that make up a small minority of the planet's population. I doubt any recovering nation that's been invaded by these same western countries and is planning to survive the next few centuries would take further threats of mass murder and invasion lightly.
- ProjectArcturis 4y ago
  Your post contains many factual errors. I'm not sure there's a true statement in it at all.
  - ashwagary 4y ago
    I disagree. What do you think is erroneous specifically?
    - ProjectArcturis 4y ago
      >which recent signs point to being a US lab creation >western thought leaders openly discussing nuking a billion relatively peaceful people and not being condemned for it >They havent been hostile to the world, just to factions within a few western countries

ralusek 4y ago

China's tactical missteps with their political posturing, their security bill in Hong Kong, and the major blunder of COVID, were all pure providence for western civilization. Anybody who was paying any attention was pulling their hair out watching the world sleepwalk into a completely new global hegemony, and it was just by a series of jarring red flags that the rest of the world seemingly woke up to the dragon. I'm not saying that the dragon is no longer a problem, either, I'm just saying that the world is at least suddenly treating it accordingly.

seanmcdirmid 4y ago
China became increasingly aggressive after the 2008 Olympics, and that accelerated in 2012 when Xi Jinping became president. Before 2008, the feeling in china (among expats and Chinese returnees) was that it would gradually liberalize more, rather than go in the opposite direction like they actually did. No one is making that mistake now.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

dirtyid 4y ago

That's a very western reading consistent with the customary MSM/wonk talking points. If west thinks something PRC is doing is counter-productive, it probably means it's working. Wolf warrior has been a relative success, and has not stopped, what you're seeing is countries previously aggressive to PRC dialing down tensions, and PRC reciprocating. Wolf warrior tit for tat dynamic is very much still in play. First, "wolf warrior" is a manufactured western label for PRC being diplomatically assertive in response to assertive western moves against PRC interests. PRC's assertiveness has relative success in deterring regional countries from signing up against PRC containment. Washington hopium prior to Trump era pivot envisioned massing US hardware all over the first island chain, then PRC diplomats showing a little fang and third parties in region decided signing up was suicide. Current arrangement of QUAD/AUKUS would have been given a barely passing if not failing grade relative to prior aspirational blob proposals since involve the already forgone partners while India is not committed to the security dimension. It's hard to overstate how bad US+co posture around PRC is currently with respect to earlier proposals relative to the amount of US diplomatic effort through two adminstrations. It's prime how it started, how it's going meme. Really apart from getting new bomber and missile basing in western Australia, PRC assertiveness has prevented backyard security environment from degrading to point that would stop/reverse trend of PLA dominating region over time. Reality is PRC has already established relative military supremacy within first island chain that PRC assertiveness can convince unaligned parties (most) in region PRC cooperation is better than containment. It was simply prudent for PRC to unleash wolf warrior to counter Trump/Biden's China hawk team (US wolf warrior) because PLA military is already modernized enough to compel everyone in region to hedge. Other considerations, no more new EU sanctions after PRC finally decided to counter sanction EU officials. No more PRC elites getting kidnapped post Meng/Huawei after PRC counter kidnapped Canadian Michaels. There's more coordinated transatlantic tech/industrial containment policies, but IMO that was always forgone with how much US controlled the tech stack, but US had to unilaterally implement these sanctions with softpower costs, just like how 3/5th of 5VEYS didn't ban Huawei gear until US made it impossible with sanctions that made long term hardware supply issue. Even JP boosting to defense 2%, in lieu of adopting basing concepts that would actually assist US in PRC containment (AGILE basing). Mainly because JP fucked up so bad that now they're in crosshairs of THREE nuclear powers (PRC, NKR, RU). And that doubling unlikely not even get properly funded and if did, nor will it stretch far on US platforms with how much Yen has crashed. Also good luck on AU getting nuke boats in next 30 years. The TLDR Wolf warrior essentially elevated PRC to become nearly sanction and extradition proof by anyone except US, including LIO countries who drunk the Uyghur genocide narrative. That's Hague Invasion Act tier privileges solidifying PRC's rising power status. Even USSR didn't have those perks. Like PRC diplomats just beat the shit out of HK protesters in UK and basically nothing. Ultimately, despite assertiveness being perceived as counterproductive by western, wolf warrior has revealed how much others will put on the line against PRC containment. And so far, including developments post RU/UKR it's been more words/theatre than action. It's not about making friends or peeling away entrenched US allies with aligned interests - that was never feasible. Constraining ostensible US containment arrangements and making them toothless was as good as it was ever going to get. And that it did, spectacularly. Your example of AU simmering down to more cordial relations under new gov is reflection of that. AU short/medium term interests still US aligned, but AU politicians just learned sensibly that they can't out wolf-warrior PRC for domestic politics.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]