“The turmoil in the Middle East is both a challenge and a test for China,” Mr. Zhu wrote. China’s tempered response resembles that of its like-minded partner, Russia, which has done little more than issue statements of support for Iran, despite having received badly needed military aid from Tehran for its war in Ukraine. Both Beijing and Moscow were also seen as bystanders last year when their shared partner, the Assad regime, was overthrown in Syria. Their relative absence raises questions about the cohesiveness of what some in Washington have called the “Axis of Upheaval” — the quartet of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, which have drawn closer diplomatically and militarily around a common opposition to the U.S.-dominated world order.
I want to refute the statements of the bloodstained rag that speaks for the American imperialist, but there certainly does seem to be a deep undercurrent of dissatisfaction (at least on the western internet) with some of China’s inaction. It is difficult for me to even condemn this dissatisfaction. Regardless of the failures of the western left, one would at least expect the Chinese to take a much firmer stance to defend peace and stability in the middle east from the aggression of the American empire. The recent actions of the US undermine China’s own ability to trade, obtain oil and promote the BRI. And if there is a question of whether or not the Chinese will take firm stances in questions beyond mere commerce, then it is hard to see how countries can gain the confidence or ability to make moves against American hegemony.
I am certain however that the Chinese are making moves in the background. Their radar ships and railway link are probably being used to help Iran. It is also likely not a smart move to openly back Iran from a tactical standpoint. However, I believe it is a dangerous situation if the global south cannot openly demonstrate unity in the face of the imperialists, as this constrains the moves that can be made and encourages the imperial core to pick countries off one by one.
I think there has been a lot of projection that if the US wants to decouple from China, then China would wish the same too.
If you look carefully at all of China’s readouts, there has been no indication whatsoever that China is going to establish an alternative economic and financial framework. If anything, China has accused the US and Trump of protectionism and violating the sanctity of free market.
It is very clear that China is the one trying to save the marriage here, by convincing the US that it is still not too late to turn back to where things were. This is why China played the rare earth export card, to tell the US that it cannot simply walk out the door without consequences. In the end, they need each other to thrive. That’s the message sent.
Of course, just because one side is trying to save the marriage, doesn’t mean it won’t protect itself against further domestic (international) violence. And unfortunately many abusive relationships can go on for years and years despite the constant toxicity and hostility.
I think there has been a lot of projection that if the US wants to decouple from China, then China would wish the same too.
I agree with this.
If you look carefully at all of China’s readouts, there has been no indication whatsoever that China is going to establish an alternative economic and financial framework.
I doubt the present Chinese leadership has as radical of a leadership as commentators often believe them to have, but the sheer size of the Chinese market and industrial base means that even simply trying to integrate themselves into the world economy to an ever greater degree creates an economic alternative.
Furthermore, in regards to finances, sooner or later, the sheer and continous erraticness of the imperial core will force even the most liberal of Chinese leaders to create a financial alternative even if for no reason other than to protect the market economy.
doesn’t mean it won’t protect itself against further domestic (international) violence.
I want to refute the statements of the bloodstained rag that speaks for the American imperialist, but there certainly does seem to be a deep undercurrent of dissatisfaction (at least on the western internet) with some of China’s inaction. It is difficult for me to even condemn this dissatisfaction. Regardless of the failures of the western left, one would at least expect the Chinese to take a much firmer stance to defend peace and stability in the middle east from the aggression of the American empire. The recent actions of the US undermine China’s own ability to trade, obtain oil and promote the BRI. And if there is a question of whether or not the Chinese will take firm stances in questions beyond mere commerce, then it is hard to see how countries can gain the confidence or ability to make moves against American hegemony.
I am certain however that the Chinese are making moves in the background. Their radar ships and railway link are probably being used to help Iran. It is also likely not a smart move to openly back Iran from a tactical standpoint. However, I believe it is a dangerous situation if the global south cannot openly demonstrate unity in the face of the imperialists, as this constrains the moves that can be made and encourages the imperial core to pick countries off one by one.
I think there has been a lot of projection that if the US wants to decouple from China, then China would wish the same too.
If you look carefully at all of China’s readouts, there has been no indication whatsoever that China is going to establish an alternative economic and financial framework. If anything, China has accused the US and Trump of protectionism and violating the sanctity of free market.
It is very clear that China is the one trying to save the marriage here, by convincing the US that it is still not too late to turn back to where things were. This is why China played the rare earth export card, to tell the US that it cannot simply walk out the door without consequences. In the end, they need each other to thrive. That’s the message sent.
Of course, just because one side is trying to save the marriage, doesn’t mean it won’t protect itself against further domestic (international) violence. And unfortunately many abusive relationships can go on for years and years despite the constant toxicity and hostility.
I agree with this.
I doubt the present Chinese leadership has as radical of a leadership as commentators often believe them to have, but the sheer size of the Chinese market and industrial base means that even simply trying to integrate themselves into the world economy to an ever greater degree creates an economic alternative.
Furthermore, in regards to finances, sooner or later, the sheer and continous erraticness of the imperial core will force even the most liberal of Chinese leaders to create a financial alternative even if for no reason other than to protect the market economy.
True.