We had a president who was breaking China economically. They unleashed Corona and the democrats and Never Trumpers were ecstatic to have another toold to batter Trump out of office. China Joe and the Biden family criminal enterprise is never going to confront China. They are got and are getting too much money (Hunter’s paintings) from the ChiComs. Lets not mention the underage honeypots the Chicoms put on Hunter.
I count that Carter Center opinion as information ops; comforting in ways that can be calming but on reflection, you know it is Tsun zu talking. I read it this weekend and noticed a couple of times he seemed to fumble his reasoning justification but am not really sure if that means he got lost in translation or his editor changed it. I did not read the second opinion but it seemed like more of what you would expect.
As you point out Sal, we'll soon find out what China will or won't do to help Putin out of the ditch. I don't think they'll do much and probably wouldn't feel so bad if Putin is replaced since his ambition is putting a lot at risk for China and it has not worked. My greatest curiosity though is, if China knew that the invasion was going to happen, what were their branches and sequels? Did they try to talk Putin out of it? Just as the Chinese studied the first Persian Gulf war, they will take a long look at how a determined force using western technology was so successful. You can bet taking out SATCOM is even higher on their targeting list.
Yeah, saw that. See https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/some-interesting-analysis-from-china - specific disavowal from Carter Center: "The [above] article was submitted by the author to the Chinese-language edition of the US-China Perception Monitor. The article was not commissioned by the US-China Perception Monitor, nor is the author affiliated with the Carter Center or the US-China Perception Monitor." and in a critique posted and not censored - as was Hu's article:
"To Readers, and Review of Professor Hu Wei's "Possible Outcomes of the Russo-Ukrainian War and China's Choices”
Dr. Chen - Echoes of Thucydides 2022-03-12 20:02
Yesterday, I reposted Mr. Hu Wei's article, which triggered extensive discussion. When it exceeded 40,000 readers and nearly 400 comments, it triggered WeChat's "meltdown" mechanism. Later, I saw that other public numbers had also republished the article and had 100,000+ readers, so I knew the reason was the readers' messages (after writing this article, I found that all the messages posted on the numbers had been deleted).
Due to the limitation of the number of selected messages, I have to have some choice, is relatively rational on the matter, both for and against, but the majority of opponents (and many personal attacks, words are too hard to hear). Mr. Hu also read the readers' comments, and the force against "cutting with Russia" was more than he expected. After some hesitation, I'd like to take this opportunity to say a few words.
The company's main business is to provide a wide range of products and services to the market. I do research in the market, which is a main line of understanding market fluctuations, so you must pay close attention. Considering the sensitivity of the topic, I have also opened this shadow number to be the first to share documents, reports or articles in the field of US-China relations. (The number of followers of this number is smaller, but the open rate, clicks and dissemination are stronger, perhaps because the articles cannot be read unless they are read in time! I would also like to thank readers for their support.)
Where to start? Long training in economics has guided the author to understand some phenomena from a micro basis, that is, human behavior. So, we chose to start with Trump and his staff team. We collected almost all the materials we could find in the English-speaking world, and systematically sorted out the U.S. policy toward China, centering on people and extending the functions of their departments. Each staffer and department wrote 20-30,000-word in-depth features on China policy. The market generally writes about people in a slapdash manner and narratives in a heavy-handed manner. We wrote in the opposite way, but it left some impression on some of our peers' predecessors. Later, and for well-known reasons, the author shifted the focus to U.S. politics and economic issues.
Also because of the Sino-US relationship issue, in a WeChat group, Mr. Hu added my WeChat. Mr. Hu often writes insider articles, which also allows our team to express some views on the issue of China-US relations. ..." source: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/WCcXCEGZdsqL30VvZ1MCaA translated from Chinese by DeepL translator…
and since I don’t know enough Chinese to fix the odd parts, i.e. “EU is not a piece of iron, not with the United States a nostril out of breath”, I’m just going to let them stand as is, the rest is pretty understandable. It’s pretty controversial, Hu Wei doesn’t appear to have the official position he claims - he’s not listed at http://english.counsellor.gov.cn/ - but he does appear to have enough of a position somewhere to create the furore he has created as witness the above critique.
So Hu's article could be a leak, followed by a Semi-Official Denial, or something else.
I'd be careful with Aleksandr Dugin - he's definitely deceptive, his English "Fourth Political Theory" is by no means a straight translation of his original work in Russian... which Western readers might find off-putting, to say the least: "Foundations of Geopolitics is by far Dugin’s most important work. Dugin himself describes it as an “indispensable guide for all those who make decisions in the most important spheres of Russian political life – for politicians, entrepreneurs, economists, bankers, diplomats, analysts, political scientists, and so on.” In FoG, Dugin outlines his ‘Neo-Eurasianist’ geopolitical strategy, which includes a multitude of instructions on how to subvert, manipulate, and conquer various countries in order to create a Eurasianist empire.
As Dugin said, the book is highly influential among Russian elites, including the military, who used it as a textbook in their Academy of the General Staff. It was co-drafted by Colonel-General Leonid Ivashov, head of the International Department of the Russian Ministry of Defence. After writing FoG, Dugin was hired as a guest lecturer by the military, to explain his geopolitical Neo-Eurasianist theory to Russian officers and the likes. Seleznyov, a former Russian State Duma speaker and a buddy of Dugin, urged that FoG should be incorporated into the Russian school curriculum.
The most important thing about FoG is that it is, essentially, straight-to-the-point and completely “mask-off,” which you’ll see when we get into the contents of the book in the following sections. Fourth Political Theory, on the other hand, couldn’t be more different. You may have seen 4PT being praised by various nationalists in the West, as it has been heavily marketed to Westerners by Arktos Media (which publishes and translates Dugin’s work for Western consumption) and other “New Right” or “Alt-Right” influencers. 4PT is not designed for Russian consumption, but to be read by hapless Western nationalists. Dugin’s aim with 4PT is to ideologically subvert nationalists in the West, making them more malleable and likely to assist (passively or actively) him in achieving the political goals he laid out in Foundations of Geopolitics." https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/heres-a-little-article-by-aleksandr
My (not-entirely, but sort-of, serious) theory is that a weak Russia will, sooner or later, be an inviting target for China. If you believe, as some do, that the Chinese economy is an unsustainable bubble, the Communists might have to resort to a war to maintain power. And while Taiwan is their #1 objective, there's a lot of risk in that scenario. Why not seize Vladivostok and Greater Manchuria from the "Sick Man of Eurasia" in a year or two?
Up near the top of my who-I-wouldn't-want-to-be list in the case of a Russian breakup would be Mongolia. The likelihood of them being in the way of "Siberia Has Always Been Part of Greater China" is pretty darn high.
Sure, Taiwan is the hot button, but there are a lot more resources to stripmine up in Siberia than on that little heavily defended island.
The human rights oriented Pax Americana order is what’s coming to an end. Free speech-free thinking is, as usual in history, being suppressed by strongman/ parties. But now democracies are doing so.
The problem with a "negotiated solution" is that there is no possibility for one that doesn't qualify as total defeat for one side or the other.
If Putin gets to dismember Ukraine and force it to be "neutral", than at a later point Russia will invade and conquer whatever it doesn't get this time.
So the only "deal" that works for Ukraine is "Russia gets completely kicked out, and we join NATO."
Which is a total loss for Putin.
And I simply don't believe that Russia can hold Ukraine even if it does capture Kiev.
Ukrainian Partisans trained in Poland and Hungary, armed with Javelins and Stingers, and sneaking in to kill some Russians / Quislings, then bug out, can drain Russia dry.
Russia doesn't have a winning strategy at this point, only a "I hope the other guy will give up" strategy, and the massive civilian casualties they're causing make it highly unlikely that the Ukrainians will all be wiling to give up, rather than want to just get revenge.
They lost the day that Z said "I don't want a ride out, I want ammunition to fight". Now all that remains is to figure out the cost
We had a president who was breaking China economically. They unleashed Corona and the democrats and Never Trumpers were ecstatic to have another toold to batter Trump out of office. China Joe and the Biden family criminal enterprise is never going to confront China. They are got and are getting too much money (Hunter’s paintings) from the ChiComs. Lets not mention the underage honeypots the Chicoms put on Hunter.
No one in this admin will confront China. Fact
I count that Carter Center opinion as information ops; comforting in ways that can be calming but on reflection, you know it is Tsun zu talking. I read it this weekend and noticed a couple of times he seemed to fumble his reasoning justification but am not really sure if that means he got lost in translation or his editor changed it. I did not read the second opinion but it seemed like more of what you would expect.
As you point out Sal, we'll soon find out what China will or won't do to help Putin out of the ditch. I don't think they'll do much and probably wouldn't feel so bad if Putin is replaced since his ambition is putting a lot at risk for China and it has not worked. My greatest curiosity though is, if China knew that the invasion was going to happen, what were their branches and sequels? Did they try to talk Putin out of it? Just as the Chinese studied the first Persian Gulf war, they will take a long look at how a determined force using western technology was so successful. You can bet taking out SATCOM is even higher on their targeting list.
Yeah, saw that. See https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/some-interesting-analysis-from-china - specific disavowal from Carter Center: "The [above] article was submitted by the author to the Chinese-language edition of the US-China Perception Monitor. The article was not commissioned by the US-China Perception Monitor, nor is the author affiliated with the Carter Center or the US-China Perception Monitor." and in a critique posted and not censored - as was Hu's article:
"To Readers, and Review of Professor Hu Wei's "Possible Outcomes of the Russo-Ukrainian War and China's Choices”
Dr. Chen - Echoes of Thucydides 2022-03-12 20:02
Yesterday, I reposted Mr. Hu Wei's article, which triggered extensive discussion. When it exceeded 40,000 readers and nearly 400 comments, it triggered WeChat's "meltdown" mechanism. Later, I saw that other public numbers had also republished the article and had 100,000+ readers, so I knew the reason was the readers' messages (after writing this article, I found that all the messages posted on the numbers had been deleted).
Due to the limitation of the number of selected messages, I have to have some choice, is relatively rational on the matter, both for and against, but the majority of opponents (and many personal attacks, words are too hard to hear). Mr. Hu also read the readers' comments, and the force against "cutting with Russia" was more than he expected. After some hesitation, I'd like to take this opportunity to say a few words.
The company's main business is to provide a wide range of products and services to the market. I do research in the market, which is a main line of understanding market fluctuations, so you must pay close attention. Considering the sensitivity of the topic, I have also opened this shadow number to be the first to share documents, reports or articles in the field of US-China relations. (The number of followers of this number is smaller, but the open rate, clicks and dissemination are stronger, perhaps because the articles cannot be read unless they are read in time! I would also like to thank readers for their support.)
Where to start? Long training in economics has guided the author to understand some phenomena from a micro basis, that is, human behavior. So, we chose to start with Trump and his staff team. We collected almost all the materials we could find in the English-speaking world, and systematically sorted out the U.S. policy toward China, centering on people and extending the functions of their departments. Each staffer and department wrote 20-30,000-word in-depth features on China policy. The market generally writes about people in a slapdash manner and narratives in a heavy-handed manner. We wrote in the opposite way, but it left some impression on some of our peers' predecessors. Later, and for well-known reasons, the author shifted the focus to U.S. politics and economic issues.
Also because of the Sino-US relationship issue, in a WeChat group, Mr. Hu added my WeChat. Mr. Hu often writes insider articles, which also allows our team to express some views on the issue of China-US relations. ..." source: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/WCcXCEGZdsqL30VvZ1MCaA translated from Chinese by DeepL translator…
and since I don’t know enough Chinese to fix the odd parts, i.e. “EU is not a piece of iron, not with the United States a nostril out of breath”, I’m just going to let them stand as is, the rest is pretty understandable. It’s pretty controversial, Hu Wei doesn’t appear to have the official position he claims - he’s not listed at http://english.counsellor.gov.cn/ - but he does appear to have enough of a position somewhere to create the furore he has created as witness the above critique.
So Hu's article could be a leak, followed by a Semi-Official Denial, or something else.
I'd be careful with Aleksandr Dugin - he's definitely deceptive, his English "Fourth Political Theory" is by no means a straight translation of his original work in Russian... which Western readers might find off-putting, to say the least: "Foundations of Geopolitics is by far Dugin’s most important work. Dugin himself describes it as an “indispensable guide for all those who make decisions in the most important spheres of Russian political life – for politicians, entrepreneurs, economists, bankers, diplomats, analysts, political scientists, and so on.” In FoG, Dugin outlines his ‘Neo-Eurasianist’ geopolitical strategy, which includes a multitude of instructions on how to subvert, manipulate, and conquer various countries in order to create a Eurasianist empire.
As Dugin said, the book is highly influential among Russian elites, including the military, who used it as a textbook in their Academy of the General Staff. It was co-drafted by Colonel-General Leonid Ivashov, head of the International Department of the Russian Ministry of Defence. After writing FoG, Dugin was hired as a guest lecturer by the military, to explain his geopolitical Neo-Eurasianist theory to Russian officers and the likes. Seleznyov, a former Russian State Duma speaker and a buddy of Dugin, urged that FoG should be incorporated into the Russian school curriculum.
The most important thing about FoG is that it is, essentially, straight-to-the-point and completely “mask-off,” which you’ll see when we get into the contents of the book in the following sections. Fourth Political Theory, on the other hand, couldn’t be more different. You may have seen 4PT being praised by various nationalists in the West, as it has been heavily marketed to Westerners by Arktos Media (which publishes and translates Dugin’s work for Western consumption) and other “New Right” or “Alt-Right” influencers. 4PT is not designed for Russian consumption, but to be read by hapless Western nationalists. Dugin’s aim with 4PT is to ideologically subvert nationalists in the West, making them more malleable and likely to assist (passively or actively) him in achieving the political goals he laid out in Foundations of Geopolitics." https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/heres-a-little-article-by-aleksandr
My (not-entirely, but sort-of, serious) theory is that a weak Russia will, sooner or later, be an inviting target for China. If you believe, as some do, that the Chinese economy is an unsustainable bubble, the Communists might have to resort to a war to maintain power. And while Taiwan is their #1 objective, there's a lot of risk in that scenario. Why not seize Vladivostok and Greater Manchuria from the "Sick Man of Eurasia" in a year or two?
Up near the top of my who-I-wouldn't-want-to-be list in the case of a Russian breakup would be Mongolia. The likelihood of them being in the way of "Siberia Has Always Been Part of Greater China" is pretty darn high.
Sure, Taiwan is the hot button, but there are a lot more resources to stripmine up in Siberia than on that little heavily defended island.
German social cohesion depends on German mfg. German mfg depends on German chem. German chem depends on natural gas (Haber-Bosch process).
"For those keeping an eye on the big picture, the question is how this AFFECTS China."
The human rights oriented Pax Americana order is what’s coming to an end. Free speech-free thinking is, as usual in history, being suppressed by strongman/ parties. But now democracies are doing so.
IMO, China is the big loser in this because watching Ukraine hold off Russia tells the people and gov't of Taiwan that they can do the same vs China
Which means any Chinese invasion plans must be built on the premise that Taiwan WILL fight, and fight hard.
Which makes any proposed invasion a lot more expensive, which means a lot less likely
The problem with a "negotiated solution" is that there is no possibility for one that doesn't qualify as total defeat for one side or the other.
If Putin gets to dismember Ukraine and force it to be "neutral", than at a later point Russia will invade and conquer whatever it doesn't get this time.
So the only "deal" that works for Ukraine is "Russia gets completely kicked out, and we join NATO."
Which is a total loss for Putin.
And I simply don't believe that Russia can hold Ukraine even if it does capture Kiev.
Ukrainian Partisans trained in Poland and Hungary, armed with Javelins and Stingers, and sneaking in to kill some Russians / Quislings, then bug out, can drain Russia dry.
Russia doesn't have a winning strategy at this point, only a "I hope the other guy will give up" strategy, and the massive civilian casualties they're causing make it highly unlikely that the Ukrainians will all be wiling to give up, rather than want to just get revenge.
They lost the day that Z said "I don't want a ride out, I want ammunition to fight". Now all that remains is to figure out the cost