The View, from China

**OhOh** · 19-11-2023, 05:49 PM

NOVEMBER 18, 2023 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

No serious effort to reset US-China relations at San Francisco summit

"The signal from the summit meeting between presidents Joe Biden and Xi Jinping in San Francisco on Wednesday is that a rocky year in the US-China relationship had a makeover in atmospherics. Serious differences remain and there is the also the challenge of navigating the two high-stakes presidential elections in 2024 — in Taiwan in January and in the US in November.

Both Washington and Beijing gave a positive account of the summit and were eager to display successful diplomacy. For Biden, there is great urgency to claim foreign policy success when the proxy war in Ukraine has been practically lost and another war just commenced in the Middle East. War, after all, is failure of diplomacy.

After the Summit, Biden hyped up saying his talks with Xi “were some of the most constructive and productive discussions we’ve had…we’ve made some important progress, I believe… And in the months ahead, we’re going to continue to preserve and pursue high-level diplomacy with the PRC in both directions to keep the lines of communication open, including between President Xi and me. He and I agreed that either one of us could pick up the phone, call directly, and we’d be heard immediately.” Biden ended his press conference calling Xi a dictator, but added the final remark, “Anyway, we made progress.”

The Chinese readout ended with an extraordinary summing up: “The meeting was positive, comprehensive and constructive. It has charted the course for improving and developing China-U.S. relations. And San Francisco should be a new starting point for stabilising China-U.S. relations. They [Xi and Biden] instructed their teams to build on the understandings reached in Bali and to timely follow up on and implement the new vision agreed on at San Francisco. The two heads of state agreed to continue their regular contact.”

The readout highlighted that Biden “warmly received” Xi, hosted a luncheon in his honour, and “escorted him to his limousine to bid farewell.” It said the two presidents had “a candid and in-depth exchange of views on strategic and overarching issues critical to the direction of China-U.S. relations and on major issues affecting world peace and development.”

The White House readout said, in turn, “The two leaders held a candid and constructive discussion on a range of bilateral and global issues including areas of potential cooperation and exchanged views on areas of difference.”

Although it was too much to expect a breakthrough in the relationship, the four-hour long talks produced some results — the two sides agreed to work together to control flows of narcotic drugs, resume military-to-military communications, cooperate on risks posed by artificial intelligence, and expand exchanges in education, business, and culture and increase the number of flights between their countries. Something is better than nothing. There was no joint statement issued after the summit.

Then, there is the vexed question, which neither side would dare discuss publicly — namely, China has begun to sell its vast holdings of US Treasury bonds. The damage a Chinese selloff could do to financial markets, to Washington’s finances, and to the economy generally needs no explanation. For decades, the US was a major consumer but since Americans were running a trade deficit, they needed to borrow to support the purchase of Chinese imports and Beijing advanced that loan indirectly through its purchases of US Treasury bonds. But the matrix has changed.

As it is, the demand for US bonds is not high, by any means — in fact, one of the most enthusiastic buyers of US bonds is the US Federal Reserve. This has been compared to something like having your own bakery and buying up most of your unsold bread at the end of the day so that a negative opinion of your sales does not form. The fact that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen appeared in the front and centre of US-China relations is a signpost.

At San Francisco summit, neither side gave away anything at all. Xi asserted that no matter what US does, reunification of Taiwan is “inevitable.” Xi proposed “peaceful co-existence”, the chosen way of life between the Soviet Union and America, but Biden insisted that “the United States and China are in competition” and that the US “will always stand up for its interests, its values, and its allies and partners.”

If Beijing hoped for a return to the “Bali spirit,” Washington won’t even acknowledge any such thing. The US apparently has no recollection of Biden giving any such “five noes” assurances. The White House readout of the San Francisco meeting does not mention these assurances, either. Clearly, there are substantial gaps in strategic perception and mutual understanding. And there is reason to doubt whether any real negotiations took place at all during the 4 hours of conversation.

A close study of the two readouts — and the media reports later — gives the impression that primarily, Biden was grandstanding before his domestic political audience while Xi spoke with an eye on the global audience.

Biden demonstrated his readiness to hang tough on China and avoid any substantial or unilateral concessions, aside displaying that his vast experience in international diplomacy serves America’s interests optimally today and his agility of mind and attention span at 80 to withstand the rigours of personal diplomacy is not to be doubted.

For Xi, there was no such subjective consideration. He soared high, like Shelley’s skylark, springing from the earth “like a cloud of fire… like an unbodied joy whose race is just begun.” Xi’s was the voice of reason and cooperation that stood in sharp contrast with Biden’s confrontational approach. Xi exhorted that Washington and Beijing must “join hands to meet global challenges and promote global security and prosperity” rather than “cling to the zero-sum mentality” and thereby “drive the world toward turmoil and division.”

The western narrative is in shambles. Xi didn’t appear to be in a politically and diplomatically weak position, as China grapples with economic problems. Evidently, it isn’t the case, either, that he needed a “successful” summit more than Biden did. On the contrary, the San Francisco summit conveyed the resonant message that China has arrived as a global power.

However, although the summit didn’t appear to have made serious effort to reset the relationship by addressing each other’s vital interests and core concerns, it is a good thing that communication links have been reopened, which will be useful for managing the relationship and building “guardrails” around it and a “floor” under it.

Meanwhile, there is a sliver of hope that on the single most explosive issue potentially — Taiwan — fortuitous circumstances may calm the choppy waters. No doubt, the Taiwan election will be of pivotal importance for the US-China relationship, for, if the two main opposition parties, the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who have finally decided to join hands, field a joint candidate in the January 13 election, it will be a formidable ticket assured of an easy victory.

That, of course, will impact the delicate dynamics of the Taiwan question, given the clear willingness of the KMT and TPP to jointly improve cross-strait dialogues after the election that offers the prospect of something of a welcome respite for the Washington-Beijing-Taipei triangle.

The big question remains: Did Biden succeed in affirming that notwithstanding the defeat in Ukraine war and the forever war just beginning in the Middle East, the US is in “a position of strength” in the relationship with China? Framed differently, is China paying heed to US entreaties to roll back its relations with Russia and Iran? The indications are to the contrary."

No serious effort to reset US-China relations at San Francisco summit - Indian Punchline

Any views from our knowledgeable posters on the island of Taiwan, on the possibility if:

"the two main opposition parties, the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who have finally decided to join hands, field a joint candidate in the January 13 election"

that they may be successful?

**harrybarracuda** · 19-11-2023, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

NOVEMBER 18, 2023 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

No serious effort to reset US-China relations at San Francisco summit

Why would there be?

The chinkies are pathological liars.

**VocalNeal** · 19-11-2023, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

The chinkies are pathological liars.

I'm not sure that is correct but I do remember reading somewhere that the Chinese believe only a fool tells the truth.

**helge** · 19-11-2023, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by VocalNeal

I'm not sure that is correct but I do remember reading somewhere that the Chinese believe only a fool tells the truth.

Is that to be believed ?

**Norton** · 20-11-2023, 04:16 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

However, although the summit didn’t appear to have made serious effort to reset the relationship by addressing each other’s vital interests and core concerns, it is a good thing that communication links have been reopened, which will be useful for managing the relationship and building “guardrails” around it and a “floor” under it.

This is a very significant first step to mend years of the deterioration of what was once a strong coperative relationship between the US and China. Still several issues to address and establish a mutually beneficial relationship which is in the interest of both nations but a must do.

China needs the US and the US needs China in so many ways that benefit it's citizens so get on with it Misters Xi and Joe.

**Norton** · 20-11-2023, 04:47 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

Any views from our knowledgeable posters on the island of Taiwan, on the possibility if:

"the two main opposition parties, the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who have finally decided to join hands, field a joint candidate in the January 13 election"

that they may be successful?

Both Chinas always have wanted good relationships particular to the mutually beneficial areas of their economies. Taiwan no matter what party leads their government has no desire to be governed by the mainland so Xi has to soften the rhetoric about Taiwan becoming a province of the PRC and the ROC has to come up with a way to keep their political independence while increasing acoss straits relationships.

All will require a US/PRC/ROC agreed to end game to make it happen. So get on with it ffs!

**helge** · 20-11-2023, 04:56 AM

Originally Posted by Norton

All will require a US/PRC/ROC agreed to end game to make it happen.

Not that I disagree, but could you give your reasons, why the US has to be included in a "deal" ?

**harrybarracuda** · 20-11-2023, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by Norton

Both Chinas always have wanted good relationships particular to the mutually beneficial areas of their economies. Taiwan no matter what party leads their government has no desire to be governed by the mainland so Xi has to soften the rhetoric about Taiwan becoming a province of the PRC and the ROC has to come up with a way to keep their political independence while increasing acoss straits relationships.

All will require a US/PRC/ROC agreed to end game to make it happen. So get on with it ffs!

The chinkies are primarily worried that an independent Taiwan is another nail in the coffin of their stupid claims to other peoples' territory.

**OhOh** · 20-11-2023, 02:39 PM

^^^, ^^^^

Thank you for your posts.

**Norton** · 20-11-2023, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by helge

Not that I disagree, but could you give your reasons, why the US has to be included in a "deal" ?

Originally Posted by Norton

Xi has to soften the rhetoric about Taiwan becoming a province

It will take steady relationship improvement between the US and China to make the above happen so cross straits relationship will improve in pace with US China improvement. The US has to work with Taiwan to get them to back off on their rhetoric as well.

Normalization of relationships after decades of mistrust is going to be a tough slog but it is the only way to do what makes sense for all 3 parties.

**harrybarracuda** · 20-11-2023, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by Norton

The US has to work with Taiwan to get them to back off on their rhetoric as well.

WTF?

What, they have to stop saying "Please stop threatening to invade us you chinky bastards"?

**helge** · 20-11-2023, 08:37 PM

Originally Posted by Norton

Normalization of relationships after decades of mistrust is going to be a tough slog but it is the only way to do what makes sense for all 3 parties.

If Xi feels his position, internally in China or from the US, threatened, he'll start Saber Rattling.

It makes total sense for Taiwan to get an agreement with China. With de facto independence and part of China in name only.

The US ?

Hmm; Wouldn't it be a first if they tried to settle a conflict without the "settlement" being to their and only their benefit ?

(By 'their' I do not mean you and other decent americans)

I'm afraid that it doesn't "make sense".

Mainland China and the US do no longer have, what made them buddies some decades back:

The Big Ugly Soviet Bear

I'm with you though

**david44** · 20-11-2023, 08:57 PM

USA has a decade to finish china via nukes virus or more likely debt trap and get Chinese youth hooked on US stuff from media to fentynyl

By 2035 when most here are brown bread China may call the shots

Helge may wish to know the US having disposed of UK then with Lafayette regained DC bought half the East with Louisiana purchase then Alaska from Russian Czar, I believe the Danish West Indies too, except Water Island?

If theyd had any sense would have saved teh Innuit handouts and sold Gronland to Trump for a handjob

The Danish West Indies (Danish: Dansk Vestindien) or Danish Antilles or Danish Virgin Islands were a Danish colony in the Caribbean, consisting of the islands of Saint Thomas with 32 square miles (83 km2); Saint John (Danish: St. Jan) with 19 square miles (49 km2); and Saint Croix with 84 square miles (220 km2). The islands have belonged to the United States since they were purchased in 1917. Water Island was part of the Danish West Indies until 1905, when the Danish state sold it to the East Asiatic Company, a private shipping company.

**helge** · 20-11-2023, 09:06 PM

.....

Let it all out, Rubba

Water Island

Van'l øse Ø ?

**Robbie** · 20-11-2023, 10:35 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Why would there be?

The chinkies are pathological liars.

And the Yanks are all saints

**Norton** · 21-11-2023, 04:17 AM

Originally Posted by helge

Hmm; Wouldn't it be a first if they tried to settle a conflict without the "settlement" being to their and only their benefit ?

Past time. If the US does not recognize the world has evolved beyond it being the single most powerful nation to what is now clearly a multipower situation and make appropriate adjustments to it's foriegn policy the US is in for a grim future.

Personally if I had the power to change things it would be to stop being the worlds cop and become to a degree isoltionist re military power and use the very significant soft power the US has.

I don't have the power and know US foriegn policy will not change no matter who is elected so will have to sit back and watch the insanity.

**helge** · 21-11-2023, 04:26 AM

Originally Posted by Norton

I don't have the power and know US foriegn policy will not change no matter who is elected so will have to sit back and watch the insanity.

Room for two ?

I'll bring the cold beer

**Norton** · 21-11-2023, 04:31 AM

Originally Posted by helge

I'll bring the cold beer

This would be good.

**helge** · 21-11-2023, 04:36 AM

In Roi Et ?

Finnish beer ?

Wtf

**OhOh** · 29-11-2023, 08:25 AM

GT Voice: West can't merely seek climate actions from developing world

By Global Times

Published: Nov 28, 2023 12:57 AM

"As the 28th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP28) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Dubai draws closer, Western efforts to exert pressure on others and pass the buck appear to be ramping up.

Wopke Hoekstra, EU commissioner for climate action, said China and other big developing nations must pay into a fund to rescue poor countries stricken by the climate disaster, as there was no longer any reason to exclude big emerging economies with high greenhouse gas emissions levels from the obligation to provide aid to the poorest and most vulnerable countries, The Guardian reported on Sunday.

If these comments represent the West's main stance at the upcoming climate summit, then there's reason to fear that global climate change may face an alarming future. It means that the West will continue to point a finger at developing countries from a moral high ground, instead of focusing on its own responsibilities and honoring its commitments.

When countries joined the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, the international community reached a consensus that developed and developing countries should bear common but differentiated responsibilities for reducing emissions, as climate change is mainly the result of an accumulation of greenhouse gas emissions generated by developed countries during the long industrialization process.

This is the fundamental reason why the West pledged funding and technology assistance to help developing countries meet their climate change challenges.

But the reality is that Western economies, which should bear greater responsibility for the climate crisis, have failed to live up to their promises and reflect on their actions that conflict with climate change efforts. Instead, they have targeted emerging economies including China in a brazen attempt to coerce developing countries into giving up development.

The picture of global climate change is far from optimistic given the current progress. Through the end of September, the daily global average temperature exceeded 1.5 degrees Celsius above mid-19th century levels on 86 days this year, ABC News reported, citing UN Environment Programme's Emissions Gap Report 2023. The report called for countries with greater capacity and responsibility for emissions to take more ambitious action and support developing nations as they pursue low-emissions development growth.

Similar calls have been made many times and have so far failed to impress or prompt the West to fully deliver on its climate promises. For instance, developed nations have pledged $100 billion in annual funding to help developing countries reduce emissions and manage the impacts of climate change. More than a decade later, they have not yet met the goal.

Whether or not the West can deliver on the promise, the scale of the promised aid is far less than the damage done to the environment. Given the dire climate consequences the West has caused, it is in no position to teach others on climate issues. Climate change needs efforts by all countries. If developed economies only intend to pay lip service and shift the burden of reducing emissions to other economies to slow down their development, then there will be no real cooperation but more conflicts of interest.

When it comes to climate change, China's attitude has always been clear and consistent. The pursuit of green development is our own demand, and how we will achieve our goal will not be affected by outside pressure or challenges.

China is already the world's important developer, user and investor of renewable energy. China's total installed capacity of hydro, wind and solar power has been on the rise, with some types of renewable energy generation now the world's largest. This is the most compelling proof of China's efforts toward its emission reduction goals.

Last but not least, whether the upcoming meeting in Dubai can achieve tangible results will depend on whether countries can reach a strong alliance on pushing for renewable energy cooperation, which needs to move beyond geopolitical divides. Given the severe situation, the world needs more actual climate actions than geopolitical power plays."

GT Voice: West can't merely seek climate actions from developing world - Global Times

**harrybarracuda** · 29-11-2023, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

China's total installed capacity of hydro, wind and solar power has been on the rise, with some types of renewable energy generation now the world's largest.

Also:

In 2022, China's coal consumption grew by 4.6 percent to a new all-time high of 4.5 billion metric tons–nearly 9 times higher than the United States, and it is expected to be higher yet this year.

So...

This is the most compelling proof of China's efforts toward its emission reduction goals.

No, it's actually compelling proof that the chinkies are a bunch of lying bastards.

**helge** · 29-11-2023, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

No, it's actually compelling proof that the chinkies are a bunch of lying bastards.

Could be that they use "clean coal" like the aussies

Baaaaa

**harrybarracuda** · 29-11-2023, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by helge

Could be that they use "clean coal" like the aussies

Baaaaa

What, is it made of sheep or something?

**helge** · 29-11-2023, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

What, is it made of sheep or something?

If sheep roamed the world some 100 milion years ago, that's a possibility

**bsnub** · 29-11-2023, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Norton

Past time. If the US does not recognize the world has evolved beyond it being the single most powerful nation to what is now clearly a multipower situation and make appropriate adjustments to it's foriegn policy the US is in for a grim future.

That could not be farther from reality. The world has not evolved and it is not a multipower situation. Who? China? Nope. Russia? Definitely nope. The US is still the lone superpower, and building a fence around the US is the worst thing it could do. If you want to talk about a grim future, that would be it. When you say that you sound like a MAGA lemming and I know you are better than that.

The last thing the US should do right now is to stand down.

Thread: The View, from China

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions