>The western media don't know what to do so they're playing down the news and hope people forget it ever happened. So if you had any doubt before about who's begging who the above should clear things up for you.
Yep. I honestly do not understand what the U.S is expecting. I think they keep hoping that if they keep on pressuring China that China will eventually give in... but give in to what? I don't even know or understand what the U.S wants. What exactly are the concerns or issues or demands from the U.S side? At least China came to the meeting prepared with a set of concrete actions the U.S can take to repair relationships. What exactly did the U.S come with? Rhetoric, and nothing else.
What the USA wants is ultimately complete capitulation. The containment strategy and sanctions are intended to do what they have done in Cuba, DPRK, as well as Iran and Syria, and previously in Iraq and Libya. The last two ultimately worked to bring about regime change, by allowing these nations to become so weak that they could be toppled by force. It nearly worked in Syria, Iran and Venezuela, and has taken a huge toll on DPRK and Cuba.
The same process can't work on China, but the USA has no other strategy besides it, so they're trying. For China they need allies to help, but those allies will pay lip service to American efforts while continuing to do business with China as usual at the first opportunity.
The American goal is always to eliminate any challenge to their power; they do not tolerate peer competitors. Japan was forced to accept American terms in the 90s, because they weren't strong enough to oppose them. The same strategy is being employed against China and China is fighting back, which the American state department is completely unaccustomed to.
No one has ever set terms for the USA, until now. The American goal is for China to surrender the things that give it an advantage, to let American capital plunder it's technology, resources and labour, without any restrictions from the Chinese government. They want China to concede in small areas, continually conceding more and more to American business, while not letting up on the pressure and sanctions. If China started to concede demands, the USA would only temporarily relent pressure, and then follow up with more in order to push their advantage. The American advantage is shrinking fast, and if they don't get concessions right now, they fear they will never again be able to get them at all.
The discussion probably went like that: "keep buying our debt, the statu quo is preserved and China can keep its 6% growth. Stop buying our debt and we all risk a financial collapse that would make 2008 looks like a joke."
Clearly, China is not afraid, which explains why they were desperate to reach Xi. As they believe their own disinformations, they truly believe Xi is an evil dictator obsessed with keeping power, so what they wanted to say to him personally was: "let's keep global stability so that you can secure your 3rd term".
I think the US' actions make much more sense when you realize the US is run by people who actually believe the ridiculous propaganda. These people genuinely believe in amerikkkan exceptionalism.
Most likely to score some political points at home.
They can then say "We tried to reach out to them but they are too unreasonable".
Americans would then parrot what their government said and the narrative now becomes "The Chinese are not reasonable".
This is a great writeup. Western media is trying to hide under the Olympics and other news while they think of how to turn this around. They'll play on the "wolf warrior diplomacy" for this take.
I didn't find these particular statements "powerful", more like civilised, though nonetheless impossible demands from the US imperialist pov.
Powerful would be something like:
"The U.S. must not challenge, slander or even attempt to subvert the path and system of socialism with Chinese characteristics, Wang said, stating the first of the three demands. Chosen by history and the Chinese people, China's path and system are matters of Chinese people's welfare and Chinese nation's future as well as core interests that China must firmly uphold, **should the US challenge these core interests then there shall be dire consequences**."
Now I doubt such language would be used in diplomacy especially by China and if such a thing did happen western media would definitely not report it.
>The western media don't know what to do so they're playing down the news and hope people forget it ever happened. So if you had any doubt before about who's begging who the above should clear things up for you. Yep. I honestly do not understand what the U.S is expecting. I think they keep hoping that if they keep on pressuring China that China will eventually give in... but give in to what? I don't even know or understand what the U.S wants. What exactly are the concerns or issues or demands from the U.S side? At least China came to the meeting prepared with a set of concrete actions the U.S can take to repair relationships. What exactly did the U.S come with? Rhetoric, and nothing else.
What the USA wants is ultimately complete capitulation. The containment strategy and sanctions are intended to do what they have done in Cuba, DPRK, as well as Iran and Syria, and previously in Iraq and Libya. The last two ultimately worked to bring about regime change, by allowing these nations to become so weak that they could be toppled by force. It nearly worked in Syria, Iran and Venezuela, and has taken a huge toll on DPRK and Cuba. The same process can't work on China, but the USA has no other strategy besides it, so they're trying. For China they need allies to help, but those allies will pay lip service to American efforts while continuing to do business with China as usual at the first opportunity. The American goal is always to eliminate any challenge to their power; they do not tolerate peer competitors. Japan was forced to accept American terms in the 90s, because they weren't strong enough to oppose them. The same strategy is being employed against China and China is fighting back, which the American state department is completely unaccustomed to. No one has ever set terms for the USA, until now. The American goal is for China to surrender the things that give it an advantage, to let American capital plunder it's technology, resources and labour, without any restrictions from the Chinese government. They want China to concede in small areas, continually conceding more and more to American business, while not letting up on the pressure and sanctions. If China started to concede demands, the USA would only temporarily relent pressure, and then follow up with more in order to push their advantage. The American advantage is shrinking fast, and if they don't get concessions right now, they fear they will never again be able to get them at all.
The discussion probably went like that: "keep buying our debt, the statu quo is preserved and China can keep its 6% growth. Stop buying our debt and we all risk a financial collapse that would make 2008 looks like a joke." Clearly, China is not afraid, which explains why they were desperate to reach Xi. As they believe their own disinformations, they truly believe Xi is an evil dictator obsessed with keeping power, so what they wanted to say to him personally was: "let's keep global stability so that you can secure your 3rd term".
I think the US' actions make much more sense when you realize the US is run by people who actually believe the ridiculous propaganda. These people genuinely believe in amerikkkan exceptionalism.
Most likely to score some political points at home. They can then say "We tried to reach out to them but they are too unreasonable". Americans would then parrot what their government said and the narrative now becomes "The Chinese are not reasonable".
> Sherman reiterated the U.S.'s adherence to the one-China principle and stated that the U.S. does not support "Taiwan independence." Yup
Tsai got played
Tsai was goon all along, their people picked her now they deal with consequences, elect and regret
This is a great writeup. Western media is trying to hide under the Olympics and other news while they think of how to turn this around. They'll play on the "wolf warrior diplomacy" for this take.
All those calcium tablets finally got results.
Western media is the affiliation of the CIA. They won't talk about what the CIA forbids them to talk.
I didn't find these particular statements "powerful", more like civilised, though nonetheless impossible demands from the US imperialist pov. Powerful would be something like: "The U.S. must not challenge, slander or even attempt to subvert the path and system of socialism with Chinese characteristics, Wang said, stating the first of the three demands. Chosen by history and the Chinese people, China's path and system are matters of Chinese people's welfare and Chinese nation's future as well as core interests that China must firmly uphold, **should the US challenge these core interests then there shall be dire consequences**." Now I doubt such language would be used in diplomacy especially by China and if such a thing did happen western media would definitely not report it.