Page 4 of 26 FirstFirst 12345678910111214 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 643

Thread: Eurasia Topics

  1. #76
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    Charity Polluted Farm Produce, is an unexceptional countries new USP.

    The once world leader in so many fields, is becoming known as a third world commodity supplier.

    As it's High Tech is being shown as overpriced and broken it is now dependent on selling to counties, who purchase at the "good will"/charity shops, GMO poisoned, farm produce.

    China buys more U.S. soybeans as trade talks kick off: traders

    CHICAGO (Reuters) - Chinese state-owned firms bought about 1.5 million tonnes of U.S. soybeans on Thursday for shipment in July and August, in their second major purchase of U.S. supplies this month, three traders with knowledge of the deals said.

    The purchases come as U.S. and Chinese officials meet in Beijing for negotiations aimed at ending a protracted trade war between the two economic giants that has slashed U.S. commodity exports to China, most notably soybeans.


    In a positive sign for the talks, U.S. officials told Reuters that China had made proposals on a range of issues that go further than before, including on forced technology transfer, a particularly large obstacle in talks thus far.


    Thursday’s soy purchases were mostly for shipment from the U.S. Gulf Coast, two of the traders said.


    They were also the latest in a string of goodwill U.S. commodity purchases by Chinese state-owned firms since December, when the United States and China agreed to a trade war detente as the two sides attempted to negotiate.


    Most recently, Chinese buyers booked about 1.7 million tonnes following U.S.-China trade talks in Washington, during which U.S. officials said Beijing vowed to buy an additional 10 million tonnes of the oilseed.


    Accelerated Chinese buying of U.S. soybeans helped to narrow the U.S. trade deficit by the most in 10 months in January, according to U.S. Commerce Department data on Wednesday.
    Still, U.S. soybean sales to the world’s top soybean importer were well behind their usual pace after Beijing slapped steep tariffs on U.S. shipments last summer, effectively halting purchases by China’s private crushers.


    Thursday’s deals bring China’s total purchases of the latest U.S. soybean crop to around 12.7 million tonnes, compared with more tan 28.5 million tonnes sold at the same point last year, to according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1R925C
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

  2. #77
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970

    A necessary revolution in discussing China’s Cultural Revolution

    An article by an Iranin living in France, Ramin Mazaheri, whose day job is as a reporter.

    A necessary revolution in discussing China’s Cultural Revolution: an 8-part series (1/8)

    Some snippets:

    "Perhaps the most important unresolved dichotomy in the West today is not the male-female divide but the urban-rural divide"

    "However, especially for developing countries, in places like India, Africa and Latin America, where rural farming is still often done in a manner similar to pre-21st century China, the incredible rural gains – economically, politically and culturally – which were the explicit goal of the CR are not just important but staggeringly inspirational. This article will quickly prove why that is not hyperbole, because the facts of these “incredible rural gains” will get a rare unveiling instead of another heaping of obfuscating capitalist-imperialist propaganda."

    "as a journalist I am 100% aware of my field’s failures in reporting on, from, or about rural areas. What’s worse, Western journalism has exacerbated their urban-rural divide by reporting from a starting point that rural areas are not morally equal to urban areas."

    "Clearly, the lens of “class” never even came into this Western mainstream journalist’s mind, and just bringing up the concept created shock and disbelief. This journalist is not atypical of his class. Furthermore, I am certain he (or she) did not go into China’s rural areas and dig out the truth of the CR because… I myself never go outside of Paris to do journalism for PressTV. The reality is that city journalists just don’t have the monetary resources, the time and often the inclination, and their editors do not care / can’t get more funding"

    "The CR’s educational reform, which became approved following changes to political culture, produced an explosion in rural economic development and rural human capital, and thus China’s economic boom actually came before Deng’s reforms in 1978. This contradicts the narrative that it was only after the introduction of (drastically regulated, and still-socialist) market-based reforms that China’s economy began to produce major wealth. Han’s book directly challenges what you always hear by pushing the start of China’s economic explosion back a decade earlier, i.e. with the very start of the CR."

    "I’d like to immediately give just a few of Han’s data-based examples, because they are so overwhelming that I think anyone who reads them will sit up with interest:

    1965 primary schools in Jimo County: 8 schools, 3,600 students. In 1976: 269 primary schools, 52,000 students. Increases of 3,400% and 1,400% respectively.
    1965 high schools in Jimo County: 2 high schools, 400 students. In 1976: 84 high schools, 13,200 students. Increases of 4,200% and 3,300% respectively.
    1965 government & village teachers for middle & high school in Jimo County: 315 total staff. In 1976: 4,230 total staff. Increase of 1,300%."

    "
    Thirdly, Han shows that the CR was a glorious affirmation and victory for the 2nd of the socialism’s twin pillars (the first being redistribution of wealth, the second being redistribution of socio-political power). After all, a collective & redistributive economy simply cannot function properly without democratic empowerment of the overall culture and the political culture in favor of the average person / worker"

    "
    For the Chinese, who officially disavow the CR – even if it is not disavowed in rural areas, the solution is more complicated than that but amounts to the same thing: disregard the official party line – the thinking of the establishment – on the CR and start looking at it honestly. Indeed, openly criticizing the Party line was perhaps the single-most important message of the Mao-backed CR!"

    The article is generally reviewing a Chinese author who has published a book on the affects of the Chinese Cultural Revolution from the perspective of the rural people. As we all know most history is focussed on the leaders, the Kings/Queens/landed gentry and government ministers actions, relationships and dealings.

    Being a reporter himself he freely admits that "news reporting" focuses on the urban facet. The numbers of readership, events and consequences lead publishers to spend their money where the greatest "interest/revenue" can be accrued.

    It is part 1 of 8 and may lead to some reconsidering the true affects of CCR and what may occur in the future in China.

    A necessary revolution in discussing China?s Cultural Revolution: an 8-part series (1/8) | The Vineyard of the Saker

  3. #78
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:25 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    29,774
    Jesus, what a whitewash.

  4. #79
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    66,794
    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    Jesus, what a whitewash.
    Ssssh at least he's posting the shit in this thread.

  5. #80
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    There is part two up at the same site if anyone is interested.

  6. #81
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:25 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    29,774
    Enough nonsense in part one to do me a lifetime thanks.
    Chinkies trying to rewrite history.

  7. #82
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    Enough nonsense in part one to do me a lifetime thanks. Chinkies trying to rewrite history.
    If you had actually read the first part you would have noted, that the official government and most of China's billions of citizens, actually still accept the official version. The author is bringing, to those that can actually read English and/or Chinese, that from the less privileged and reported on, position of the rural Chinese, many things improved, very dramatically.

    Maybe you may wish to read it again.

  8. #83
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:25 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    29,774
    What is the 'offical' version that the Chinese government and ' most of China's billions' (link?) accept?

  9. #84
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    66,794
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    If you had actually read the first part you would have noted, that the official government and most of China's billions of citizens, actually still accept the official version. The author is bringing, to those that can actually read English and/or Chinese, that from the less privileged and reported on, position of the rural Chinese, many things improved, very dramatically.

    Maybe you may wish to read it again.
    They have to say they do, lest they get carted off to them thar "re-education camps".

  10. #85
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    What is the 'offical' version that the Chinese government and ' most of China's billions' (link?) accept?
    As explained in part 1.

    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    They have to say they do, lest they get carted off to them thar "re-education camps".
    They conform to the prevailing wind, like most of the world's citizens. Otherwise "black facing" is accused of them, please keep up.

  11. #86
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    66,794
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    They conform to the prevailing wind, like most of the world's citizens. Otherwise "black facing" is accused of them, please keep up.
    Not in fucking chinastan they don't, say anything wrong and that's you fucked.

    Perhaps its fear that makes you lick the figurative chinky arsehole so vigorously all the time.

  12. #87
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Perhaps its fear that makes you lick the figurative chinky arsehole so vigorously all the time.
    Fear of what, providing a choice for many citizens around the world, private, commercial or government? I've found any Chinese people I've had dealings with around the world, Europe, North America, Asia, to be quite amiable to pleasant discussions.

    There are of course arseholes all around the world, I tend not to stay in their presence long enough for it to disturb me.

  13. #88
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    EU and China sign a Mandate of Trade Heaven

    Eurasia Topics-li-eu-heads-900x540-jpg

    Beijing promises an investment deal by next year, to curb industrial subsidies and the need for tech transfers, while the EU promises its own transport network

    Sparks did fly in Brussels, but in the end the European Union and China managed to come up with an important joint statement at their summit this week, signed by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and head of the European Council, Donald Tusk.

    In theory, there’s agreement on three quite sensitive fronts: a complex, wide-ranging EU-China investment deal to be signed “by the end of next year, or earlier”, according to Li; Beijing to increasingly commit to erasing industrial subsidies and the obligation of technological transfers; and a substantial opening-up of the Chinese market to EU companies.
    The EU is the largest combined market in the world and China’s top partner in trade, while China is the EU’s second largest trading partner. So, the EU-China summit on Tuesday was the real deal, unlike the endless Brexit soap opera.
    Departing from concentric circles of posturing, the EU did not even blast China as a “systemic rival” – following the recent report EU-China: A Strategic Outlook. And there were no accusations of “unfair” trade hurled at Beijing.

    Crucially, Brussels and Beijing seem to be finally engaging in building some sort of synergy between the New Silk Roads, or Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and something only Eurocrats know actually exists – the EU Connecting Europe and Asia project, which in theory should advance in conjunction with the Trans-European Transport Network – a rail, road and air connectivity drive.
    Diplomats in Brussels said off-the-record that the run-up towards this entente cordiale was as bumpy as a trail in the Tibetan plateau. EU negotiators did try to walk away from the table without even talking to their Chinese counterparts, over Beijing’s much promised, and always delayed “market reforms”.
    It’s as if the EU – in practice, the leading Franco-German duo – was trying to pull a Trump, employing hardcore pressure to extract concessions. It worked.

    Before the summit, while the war of the sherpas was raging, with revision piling upon revision, Zhang Ming, China’s ambassador to the EU and its leading negotiator, did his best to dismiss the notion of China as a “systemic rival”. “In Chinese culture, rivals are bound to seek superiority over the other side,” he was quoted as saying.

    Brussels demanded from the start that all rewrites to their agreement should be tacitly approved by the leadership in Beijing – which took no time to understand the powerful geoeconomic ramifications of a positive outlook, in contrast with the trade war still unresolved with the US. And that led to the breakthrough that finally made the EU swoon, a real-life timetable for those elusive Chinese “reforms”.
    The joint statement reads in fact like a rose garden: “The high level of ambition will be reflected in substantially improved market access [and] the elimination of discriminatory requirements and practices affecting foreign investors.” The devil, of course, is in the details.

    All the way to the 16+1


    From Beijing’s perspective, this spectacular trade and diplomatic victory smoothes the path towards the China and Central and Eastern Europe 16+1 summit in Dubrovnik on Friday. Of the European 16, no less than 11 are EU member states, while five are Western Balkans members.

    Even as Li emphasizes at every turn Beijing’s firm interest in EU unity, one has to marvel at the Sun Tzu maneuver at the heart of the Chinese approach. No wonder some EU players incessantly carp at China’s divide-and-rule tactics.

    Take for instance the Croatian angle. Croatia will sign a memorandum of understanding with Huawei, while the Croatian Railway Infrastructure and China Railway Eryuan Engineering Group will agree to set up a transportation corridor. Translation: smoother trade between Central Europe and ports in the Mediterranean, with China fast interlinking Greece, Italy and Croatia.
    Slowly but surely, EU decisions are fast becoming integrated with the 16+1. Brussels Eurocrats actually examined the draft of deals that will be signed at the 16+1 summit in Dubrovnik. Unlike France, for instance, most of the 16+1 are enthusiastic participants in BRI – which, not by accident, is the star of the show, especially after Italy signed a memorandum of understanding to join New Silk Road projects last month.

    Even as the EU lingers at designing what it still does not have – a comprehensive industrial policy – Beijing hits all the necessary buttons: free trade, multilateralism, globalization 2.0 – or even 3.0 or 4.0. Beijing essentially does not fear competing with EU firms.
    After all, Beijing’s drive is to configure national champions in virtually every industrial and post-industrial sector, including preeminence in 5G and AI. The crux of the Chinese strategy is not the US but a close relationship with Europe, where opportunities to acquire first-class technology and first-class education are immense. Not to mention that Europe is BRI’s privileged terminal.
    Perception is reality. There’s no doubt the Beijing leadership has understood that this EU-China agreement goes a long way to show, especially to its leaders, that they are dealing with a responsible emerging superpower. The contrast with the acrimony and intimidation tactics displayed throughout the US trade war could not be sharper.
    Remember the deluge

    At this stage, a flashback may be enlightening to put all that’s going on in perspective.

    All the major religions of the book – Judaism, Christianity and Islam – share the same fable, according to which Noah, after the Deluge, divided the earth between his three sons. Shem got “Asia”, the lands considered the oldest, Ham got Africa, and Japheth got Europe.

    It was only in the 18th century Europe that a noxious Christian equation went into full effect, articulating the curse of Ham, the color of a man’s skin, ethnic descent and slavery. That’s how the West justified racial slavery and the pillage of Africa – reduced to the status of a non-civilized space.
    At the same time, under European (the land of Japheth) guidance, America was promoted as a land of colonization, and Asia (the land of Shem), as a land of economic exploitation. Judeo-Christian European elites had to admit the ancient brilliance of those Asian civilizations – Mesopotamia, India, China – but in the end they no more than integrated Asia in a new Orientalist narrative.
    In parallel, based on the allegedly non-shameful character of Shem’s descendants, these elites forged a relatively common Semitic origin. And attributing Ham’s curse to a Muslim source, which for its part evoked Jewish sources, Christianity exonerated itself. The colonial, imperialist European project was on a roll.

    But now China is back, for real, and for good, after a short historical interval. And the Chinese know all there is to know about European colonialism. Don’t expect Eurocrats fingering color-coded folders to have such long memories. But they certainly don’t need to study Admiral Zheng He’s travels to see which way the wind is blowing."

    https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/04/ar...-trade-heaven/
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Eurasia Topics-li-eu-heads-900x540-jpg  

  14. #89
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    After threatening Speaker Nabih Berri, will the US be asked to leave Lebenon permanently?

    Eurasia Topics-250839-01-05-jpg

    The Emirati newspaper, “The National” – quoting sources with knowledgeof US plans – reports that the United States is considering sanctions against the Shia Lebanese Speaker Nabih Berri, along with a number of his financial supporters. Well-informed sources knowledgeable of the Speaker’s intentions said that “such a step – if it is serious and not just an empty threat – will lead to the forceful exit of all US forces from Lebanon, particularly those training and embedded with the Lebanese Army and other security forces. This step will also be taken against all US government-linked organisations by a clear decision of the Lebanese parliament as retaliation against aggressive decisions adopted by the US establishment”.

    The sources say that “Speaker Nabih Berri does not enjoy only the support of the AMAL movement or Hezbollah and their respective members of Parliament and Ministers, but he also enjoy the support of the majority of Lebanese MPs. It is they who have elected him over decades. Therefore, any US step against the Speaker or AMAL’s supporters in Lebanon or Africa or anywhere in the world with the aim to hit Berri indirectly will be met with the same retaliation in Lebanon against the US presence in the country. Berri has a wide circle of friends among Muslim speakers and the presidents of parliament in GCC and Muslim African countries, who are ready to stand with him against the US establishment. The reaction is expected to be harsher and more visible than the Arab states’ merely verbal condemnation of Israel annexation of the Golan Heights and Jerusalem”.

    “Berri is an emblematic Shia figure in Lebanon, well-known to European, American and Arab diplomats, politicians, and personalities. If the US establishment adopts measures against the Speaker, it will be faced with a parliamentary law which will open the country for Iran and Russia to establish military, intelligence and security collaboration with Lebanon and to establish static military bases in the country. The only US institutions that can be expected to remain in the country after such a move would be the Embassy and the University and nothing else”, said the source, indicating the seriousness and readiness of the Speaker to retaliate against any US decision in relation to him or his entourage.

    Such a step can only mean the US pushing Lebanon towards political turmoil and instability for years to come.
    But Lebanese President Michel Aoun went beyond Berri in supporting Hezbollah. It is true that the Speaker told his guest the US Secretary Mike Pompeo during last month’s visit to Lebanon that “he (Berri) is the father of the resistance and the one who initiated it against Israel”. Nevertheless, President Aoun went to Moscow to strike a military deal with Russia, professed full support for the Russian plan to see all Syrian refugees returning to Syria, and told Pompeo that he fully supports the Resistance (Hezbollah). Aoun ended all this by offering an exceptionally warm welcometo the Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza at the Baabda presidential palace, to the displeasure of the US establishment, currently engaged in a frenetic regime-change campaign against President Maduro.

    In fact, during Pompeo’s recent visit to Lebanon, the US official did not find any political party, even among his closest Lebanese allies, willing to stand against Hezbollah. Moreover, none of the Lebanese security forces’ leaders Pompeo met in Lebanon were ready to stand against Hezbollah, which has become part of the legislative, executive and security apparatus of the country.

    If the US threat to Berri is serious, it appears that the current US establishment is intent on shooting itself in the foot and ending its presence in the Levant. In this part of the world, the US is not looked at favourably. In Syria it is considered an occupation force. In Iraq, Iraqi officials are divided between those eager to see the last US soldier leave the country and others keen to maintain a regulated and limited military collaboration with the US establishment. Moreover, the recent “gifts” offered by President Trump to Israeli prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu – i.e. Jerusalem and the Golan Heights – antagonised the Arab population and the Palestinians who no longer consider the US a partner in any future peace talks.

    Yes, there are members of AMAL – Berri’s group – who hold US citizenship and enjoy good relationships with some US officials; these members are trying to ease the relationship. Simultaneously, the Speaker has already in place, at the ready, gradual measures to be implemented against the US in Lebanon, in the event that Washington is willing to implement its threat. This will become apparent if the threat is indeed a serious one; so far no US official has confirmed Washington’s intentions towards the Lebanese Speaker.

    Berri’s recent visits to Iraq, where he met with top officials and religious leaders led by Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Sistani, showed the extent of his contacts and connections. By visiting Iraq, the Lebanese Speaker sent a message to the US, showing his leadership of a Shia group that is not limited to Lebanon. Therefore, it is up to the US to measure its steps and refrain from sending menacing messages that it is actually unwilling to fulfil. If the threats are real, the US must prepare for the consequences. The ball – according to this source – is now in Trump’s court.


    https://ejmagnier.com/2019/04/08/aft...n-permanently/
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Eurasia Topics-250839-01-05-jpg  

  15. #90
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    US is losing the battle for world public opinion to China.

    Gallup carries out an annual international poll on approval of the leadership of major countries. This year’s poll, covering 134 countries, had a striking conclusion – China’s leadership has overtaken the US in approval not only globally but in every continent surveyed outside North America and possibly Australasia.

    This is clearly a dramatic shift in international public opinion in favour of China compared to the US. This article therefore analyses Gallup’s findings and their implications.

    Global result

    Gallup found globally that median approval of the job being done by China’s leadership across all countries surveyed was 34% – rising from 31% during the past two years. US approval was only 31%, Approval of Russia’s leadership rose to 30%, only marginally behind the US. Overall approval of the US leadership was 31% with disapproval of 40%.

    The highest international approval was for Germany, at 39% – although this was a decline from last year’s 41%. Germany, however, does not play the same overall major global geopolitical role as the US, China and Russia. Therefore, the primary focus here is on China, the US and Russia – Germany is then looked at in the context of Europe, in which it does play a key role.

    The survey showed that approval of China’s leadership was higher than the US in every continent except North America, due there only to the position of the US, and possibly Australasia – for which Gallup does not give separate data. There were, however, significant differences between developing and advanced economies, and between different continents. The pattern of these, in turn, gives a clear insight into what creates approval and disapproval of countries.

    Africa

    Starting first with developing countries, Africa is the continent in which China has the strongest approval for its leadership – 53% approving, 16% disapproving, and net approval of 37%. In Africa approval of the US is also relatively strong, although weaker than China, with 52% approving, 19% disapproving, and a net approval of 33% – Africa is the only continent in which more countries approve of the US leadership than disapprove. Russia also has a net positive rating in Africa, although it is significantly lower than either China or the US at 16%.

    Africa is unusual as it is the only continent in which China, the US, and Russia all have positive approval ratings. Africa clearly has high approval of outside major powers – with China occupying the number 1 position. The data is shown in Table 1.
    Economically, all 34 countries polled in Africa are developing economies – the overwhelming majority, 30 out of 34, being in Sub-Saharan Africa. The average per capita GDP of Sub-Saharan developing economies in 2017, the latest available figure, is $3,803 in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms, that is at comparable international prices, and $1,554 at current exchange rates.



    Table 1

    Asia and Australasia

    Table 2 shows that Asia (including Australasia) is the continent in which China has the second highest net approval rating – 34% approving, 33% disapproving. Russia also has a positive overall rating. However, the US has a net disapproval rating of -6%. The ratings for the US are highly polarised, with strong approval of the US in countries such as Israel, Myanmar, Mongolia and Vietnam and strong disapproval in countries such as Turkey, Australia, Iran and Indonesia – twenty countries in Asia had net disapproval of the leadership of the US and 14 had net approval. Gallup does not give separate data for approval of China and the US in Australasia, so it is possible that approval for the US leadership in Australasia is higher than China although this is not at all certain in light of the extremely strong disapproval of the US leadership – net approval of the US leadership is -43% and in New Zealand it is -50%.

    Of the 34 countries polled in the Asian and Australasian region 27 were developing economies and 7 were advanced economies. The developing economies were divided into two roughly equal groups – East Asia and the Pacific, with per capita GDP in 2017 of $13,576 in PPP terms, and $7,127 at current exchange rates, and South Asia with per capita GDP of $6,494 in PPP terms, and $1,840 at current exchange rates. An approximate average of the two regions would therefore be $10,035 in PPP terms and $4,483 at current exchange rates – i.e. significantly higher than sub-Saharan Africa.



    Table 2

    Latin and North America

    Africa and Asia are the only continents in which any of China, the US and Russia have net positive approval ratings. The difference in Latin America between the three major states is that, as Table 3 shows, there is only a mild net disapproval of both China (-3%) and Russia (-3%) but extremely strong disapproval of the US (-22%) – see Table 3. Only four relatively small countries in Latin America have net approval of the US (Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Paraguay, and Nicaragua) with 14 countries disapproving of the US leadership – including all the major Latin American countries such as Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, and Chile.

    Although data is not given by Gallup it may be safely assumed that approval of the US leadership is higher in the US than in China – although Canada, has extremely strong disapproval of the US leadership with 16% approving, 79% disapproving, and a net disapproval of 63%. Given US dominance of North America this makes it the only continent in which approval of the US leadership is clearly higher than China.

    Fifteen of the countries polled in the Americas were developing economies and five were advanced economies. The average per capita GDP of developing Latin American countries in 2017 was $13,620 in PPP terms and $8,313 at current exchange rates – i.e. significantly higher than developing economies in either Africa or Asia.



    Table 3

    Table 4 shows that Europe is striking for the fact that China, the US, and Russia all have net disapproval ratings – in contrast to Germany which, as Table 5 shows, has an extremely strong net favourable rating of 31%. As already noted, Germany’s approval is positive in all continents, but outside Europe, where it is an extremely powerful force, Germany does not have an equal geopolitical impact to China, the US or Russia.

    However, it is striking that there is much less disapproval of China in Europe than of either the US and Russia – China’s net approval rating is -16%, compared to the US -35%, and Russia’s -8%. This is a relatively favourable situation in terms of public opinion for China.

    Seven of the countries polled in Europe were developing economies and 29 were advanced economies. The average per capita GDP of European and Central Asia, which includes Russia, in 2017 was $32,616 in PPP terms and $23,416 at current exchange rates. These figures, which are primarily for advanced economies, are, of course, far higher than those of developing economies in Africa, Asia or Latin America.



    Table 4



    Table 5

    Conclusion

    Numerous conclusions follow from Gallup’s data. But among the most important are:


    • Approval of China is very clearly tied to the level of development of other economies compared to China. China’s per capita GDP in 2017 was $16,806 in PPP terms and $8,826 at current exchange rates – significantly higher than developing Africa or almost all developing Asia, approximately in line with Latin America, and significantly below Europe. Looking at the opinions shown in detailed studies of individual countries by Gallup, there are of course specific exceptional cases where other factors are dominant but in general countries with a lower per capita GDP than China, in Africa and Asia, have a favourable evaluation of China, countries in Latin America at approximately the same level of development have a very slightly unfavourable view of China, and there is a net unfavourable opinion from European countries with a higher per capita GDP. However, Europe is a good result within that overall framework, in that disapproval of China is significantly less in Europe than disapproval of the US and Russia.



    • Such a clear relation between levels of economic development compared to China, and favourable or unfavourable attitudes to China, indicates clearly that it is the factor of the level of economic development compared to China, not non-economic issues such as Parliamentary democracy, that determines attitudes to China. Put in blunt terms, if a region is less economically developed than China it has a favourable perception of China, if a region is more economically developed than China it has an unfavourable attitude to China. Economic factors, not Western democracy or internet regulation are decisive in attitude to China. Put in other terms, it confirms that the basis of ‘soft power’ is ‘hard power’ – in this case the level of economic development.



    • What is measured by Gallup is the population’s opinion, not the position of governments. For example, at present in Latin America, while popular opinion strongly disapproves of the leadership of the US, a number of Latin American countries have governments which are very pro-US – for example Brazil (where public opinion disapproves of the US leadership by a net -14%), Ecuador (disapproves of the US leadership by net -21%) and Argentina (disapproves of the US leadership by a net -46%). Therefore, public opinion is one pressure in the situation, but it is not the only one. It must be born in mind that ‘Western democracies’ governments very regularly ignore the views of the people in whose name they claim to govern.
      Finally, any attempt by the US media to say ‘international public opinion’ is against China is clearly false. Approval of China’s leadership has overtaken the US in all continents outside North America, with the possible, but not certain, exception of Australasia.

    Of course, much work still needs to be done by China. China’s current favourable rating is greatly aided by the widespread extreme international disapproval of the present leadership of the US. But there is no doubt as to the overall situation – at present China is winning the battle for world public opinion against the US.

    https://www.learningfromchina.net/us...nion-to-china/
    Last edited by OhOh; 11-04-2019 at 09:06 PM.

  16. #91
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    66,794
    FFS you dumb shit. They are comparing against Baldy Orange Cunto. Anyone's going to win that argument.


  17. #92
    Newbie
    SeventhSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Last Online
    21-06-2019 @ 10:41 PM
    Location
    Here, there, everywhere.
    Posts
    28
    Sorry OhNo, the world is turning against China. And at a very fast rate.

    Do try to keep up with the latest news (Global TImes and Xinhua don't count).

  18. #93
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    66,794
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    I've found any Chinese people I've had dealings with around the world, Europe, North America, Asia, to be quite amiable to pleasant discussions.
    Well of course they're nice to you, you're a fucking chinky brown noser.

  19. #94
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 08:58 AM
    Posts
    7,138
    Quote Originally Posted by SeventhSoul View Post
    the world is turning against China.
    Who is the "world"? Make some math...

  20. #95
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    Quote Originally Posted by SeventhSoul View Post
    the world is turning against China. And at a very fast rate.
    I'm sure any instances of your assertion, you can share with us, would be of interest.

  21. #96
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:25 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    29,774
    I wouldn't say turning against, more like waking up to.

  22. #97
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    Greece welcomed into China-CEEC mechanism, Li says

    Eurasia Topics-5cb0da95a3104842e4a85a69-jpg

    "Greece was accepted as a new member of the leaders' meeting between China and Central and Eastern European countries on Friday at the event in Dubrovnik, Croatia, co-chaired by Premier Li Keqiang and Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic.
    "We welcomed Greece to join the China-CEEC cooperation platform at the meeting," Li said at a news conference afterward. The meeting showed that participant countries safeguard multilateralism and the global trading system based on World Trade Organization rules, he said.

    Li announced that China will host leaders from the 17 countries as part of the mechanism next year, five years after Suzhou, Jiangsu province, hosted the group in 2015.
    The meetings on Thursday and Friday are all part of the 8th Summit of Central and Eastern European Countries & China.
    At the China-CEEC economy and trade forum before the leaders meeting, Li called for strengthening trade facilitation and expanding two-way opening-up of markets. China is willing to expand imports of goods from CEE nations, particularly agricultural products that cater to the demand of Chinese consumers, he said. Trade of farm goods, machinery and electric devices should be further boosted and logistics sped up between the trading partners, he said.

    Li said trade between China and the 16 CEE nations rose by 21 percent to a record high, despite a global trade slowdown. China is willing to strengthen cooperation with CEE nations in infrastructure based on market rules and following European Union rules and standards, he said.
    Li advocated the great potential for trade and economic cooperation between China and the 16 countries. China-CEEC cooperation is a helpful addition to China-EU ties, he said.
    Plenkovic said CEE countries' exports to China rose fivefold in the past few years, which helps reduce trade disparities with developed economies. He called on all CEE nations to take the opportunity to deepen economic and trade cooperation with China.
    Zhong Shan, minister of commerce, said over 1,000 people participated, the most since the event started nine years ago. "It demonstrates the increasing confidence in the forum and cooperation with China at large," he said.

    In recent years, China's trade with CEE nations has seen rapid growth. According to the Ministry of Commerce, China's imports from the countries have risen by 24.6 percent to $23 billion. Chinese companies have invested over $10 billion in CEE nations, which in turn have injected more than $1.5 billion into China, focusing on machinery, auto components, the chemical industry, financing and environmental protection.

    After the forum, Li and Plenkovic attended an exhibition of China-CEEC education cooperation and a dialogue mechanism to boost cooperation among small and medium-sized enterprises from both sides. Before leaving for Beijing, Li also had separate talks with the prime ministers of the other 15 CEE countries"

    Greece welcomed into China-CEEC mechanism, Li says - World - Chinadaily.com.cn
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Eurasia Topics-5cb0da95a3104842e4a85a69-jpg  

  23. #98
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    China’s Belt and Road Continues to Win Over Europe While Technocrats Scream and Howl

    Eurasia Topics-42557-jpg

    On April 10th, China’s Premier Li Keqiang celebrated the completion of the 1st phase of the 2.5 kilometer Chinese-built Pelgesac Bridge in Croatia across the Bay of Mali Ston alongside Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic. This ceremony marked a striking victory as the following day ushered in an important 16+1 Heads of State summit that saw Greece inducted as the newest member of a new alliance of Central and Eastern European nations who wish to cooperate with China. At this summit held on April 12, Greece’s Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras stated that this was “a very crucial moment for global and regional developments” and “we have to leave behind the crisis and find new models of regional and global cooperation.”

    Eurasia Topics-ec20041901-jpg

    Of course, Greece’s involvement in this alliance (now renamed the 17+1 CEEC) has broadened its geographical boundaries to the west and is especially important as Greece’s Port of Piraeus is a strategic east-west trade gate way for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) into Europe centered on the China-Europe Land-Sea Express Route. Greece is painfully aware that its survival depends upon China’s BRI, as the EU programs for austerity, privatization and bailouts have brought only death and despair with a collapse of youth employment, crime rate spikes and suicide. It is also not lost on anyone that this breakthrough follows hot on the heels of Italy’s joining of the Belt and Road Initiative on March 26 and also serves as a precursor to the second Belt and Road Summit which will take place in Beijing at the end of April, involving over 126 nations who have already signed MOUs with the BRI and thousands of international businesses.

    Eurasia Topics-ec20041902-jpg


    Ten additional BRI-connected agreements were signed between Croatia and China before the 17+1 Summit including the modernizing of rail lines (especially from Zagreb to the Adriatic port of Rijeka), telecommunications cooperation between Huawei and Croatian Telecom and major port, roads, harbors, education and cultural cooperation.

    The Belt and Road Initiative, as Tsipras aptly pointed out, is not just another set of infrastructure programs designed to counterbalance western hegemony, but is rather a “new model of regional and global cooperation” founded upon a principle of mutual development and long term thinking not seen in the west since the death of Franklin Roosevelt and the takeover of the Anglo-American Deep State that ensued.

    The fact that China formalized an economic and trade cooperation agreement with the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union in May 2018 is extremely relevant as it incorporated its five nation membership of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia and Kyrgyzstan directly into the BRI. Already China has invested $98 billion into the real economies of the EEU involving 168 BRI-connected projects.The new model of development which has increasingly won over central, and eastern Eurasian countries as well as Greece and Italy have provided a breath of fresh air for citizens everywhere who are looking with despair upon a Trans-Atlantic system which can do nothing but demand obedience to a defunct set of rules that commands only austerity, hyperinflationary banking practices and no long term investment into the real economy. Thus the technocratic mobilization against the BRI over the past days in response to this new paradigm can only be seen as an absurd attempt to save a system which has already failed.

    Eurasia Topics-ec20041903-jpg

    The Technocrats Defend their New World Disorder

    Two recent counter-operations against the BRI and the new win-win operating system it represents are worth mentioning. The first is found in the formation of a trilateral alliance between the American-based Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), Canada’s Finance and Development Agency (FinDev Canada) and fifteen members of the European Union announced on April 11. A second counter-operation was created several days earlier with the Canada-Germany-France-Japan “Alliance for Multilateralism” during the G7 meeting in France.

    OPIC Acting President and CEO David Bohigian (Center) signed a memorandum of understanding with FinDev Canada Managing Director Paul Lamontagne (right) and EDFI Chairman Nanno Kleiterp (left). While OPIC was founded in 1971, its use as a subversive force against the BRI was formalized on July 30, 2018 when it created a trilateral alliance with Japan and Australia in order to finance infrastructure in the Pacific basin. Added to this, a second trilateral alliance was created on April 11, 2019 when Canada’s Paul Lamontagne (head of FinDev Canada), the European Development Finance Institution’s Nanno Kleiterp and OPIC President David Bohigian signed a new agreement to create a parallel infrastructure financing mechanism. Taking aim at China, the press release stated that the alliance “will enhance transactional, operational, and policy-related cooperation among participants and underscores their commitment to providing a robust alternative to unsustainable state-led models.”

    At this signing Bohigian stated “we’re trying to hold up an example for the world of the way development finance should work” clearly attacking China’s “incompetent” concept of development finance and thus ignoring the fact that over 800 million people have directly been lifted out of poverty by China’s approach to investment. Bohigian was clearly hoping that the world would ignore the vast debt slavery and chaos spread by 50 years of IMF-World Bank dominance that has produced no real growth of nations. Although the American BUILD Act has increased US government funding to OPIC from $29 billion to $60 billion over one year, no serious integrated design for development has been presented and instead provides fodder for laughter at best.The other anti-BRI operation mentioned is the German-French-Japanese-Canadian “Alliance for Multilateralism” which saw Canada’s Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland stating at a press conference in France that “Canada has formally joined a German French coalition armed at saving the international world order from destruction by various world dictators and autocrats”. While Freeland didn’t mention Trump by name here, France’s ambassador to Canada Kareen Rispal was more candid stating “Mr. Trump doesn’t like to value multilateralism”. Citing his withdrawal from COP21, and criticism of the WTO, UN and NATO the envoy continued “it sends the wrong message to the world if we think that because Mr. Trump is not in favor of multilateralism, it doesn’t mean we- I mean countries like Canada, France and Germany and many others- are not still firm believers.”

    Eurasia Topics-ec20041904-jpg

    What exactly this “Alliance for Multilateralism” IS remains another question entirely, as no actual policy was put forth. After the smoke had cleared, it appears to be nothing more than a lemming-like club of hecklers yelling at Putin, Xi Jinping, Trump and other “bad people” who don’t wish to commit mass suicide under a Green New Deal and technocratic dictatorship.

    Commenting on these developments in an April 10 webcast from Germany, Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-Larouche made the following apt observation: “Geopolitics has to be thrown out of the window, and the New Silk Road is the way to industrialize Africa, to deal with the Middle East situation to get peace there, to establish a decent working situation between the United States, Russia and China: And that is for Europe what we should demand. And the best way to do that is that all of Europe would sign MOUs with the Belt and Road Initiative, then that would be the single most important thing to stabilize world peace and get the world into a different domain.”With Russia and China leading a new coalition of nations fighting to uphold the principles of sovereignty, self-development and long term credit generation under the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative, a great hope has presented itself as the Titanic that is the City of London and Wall Street continues to sink ever faster into the icy waters of history."

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/ne...ream-howl.html


    There does appear to be great uncertainty in the current western model.

    126 out of the worlds 200 countries, at this months BRICS meeting countries, does seem to be a reasonable sized bloc. Probably the greatest number of the worlds citizens under one organisation's banner, barring the UNGA.

    OPIC may well have an unproven, desirable, example of one possible way forward. Unfortunately it remains wedded to the western parasitic model which is appearing to be on it's last legs.

    Remember China had a successful Cultural Revolution. I suspect many western countries would not be able to adopt such upwards control from the local citizens. As opposed to the current;

    "We, the ruling class, the 0.01%, us toffs, know what's good for you ignorant scum. You may hold democratic votes as many times as you like. They will be ignored, until they mirror our own desires".
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Eurasia Topics-42557-jpg   Eurasia Topics-ec20041901-jpg   Eurasia Topics-ec20041902-jpg   Eurasia Topics-ec20041903-jpg   Eurasia Topics-ec20041904-jpg  

    Last edited by OhOh; 21-04-2019 at 10:55 PM.

  24. #99
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    66,794
    At this signing Bohigian stated “we’re trying to hold up an example for the world of the way development finance should work” clearly attacking China’s “incompetent” concept of development finance and thus ignoring the fact that over 800 million people have directly been lifted out of poverty by China’s approach to investment.
    Of course the chinkies don't count how many people they have put out of work with their "bait and steal" approach to development finance.

    Pay off some corrupt leader to borrow money, award the contract to the chinkies, so they can build everything with chinky labour that they've "lifted out of poverty" - and all at the expense of the host country, who ends up with massive debts that they pay by handing even more over to the chinkies.

    Not to mention them raping natural resources from all over the world and destroying local communities in the process.

    Fucking parasites.

  25. #100
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:52 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    19,970
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Of course the chinkies don't count how many people they have put out of work
    I think you'll find that the decision, to utilise Chinese based manufacturers, were taken by "western" management in the boardrooms of "western" capitalist companies. Much to their own personal corporate mangers profit.

    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    their "bait and steal" approach to development finance
    I'm pretty sure the decision makers who signed the contracts were "advised" by "western" financial advisors. Who usually demand high fees for their "sound,"western style", financial advice".

    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Not to mention them raping natural resources from all over the world and destroying local communities in the process.
    You are suggesting that the China model is identical to the western capitalist model. Surely you applaud such profitable, for the 0.001%, methods?

Page 4 of 26 FirstFirst 12345678910111214 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •