News in the Far East

**Montmorency** · 11-30-2022, 02:48

Frankly, it doesn't make sense to materially (as opposed to morally) support extranational protesters just because they agree with you on something. Moderate-sized protests on a variety of issues routinely roil Chinese towns without anyone noticing, and there have been multiple waves of large anti-quarantine protests during the pandemic that had similarly localized motivations and aspirations. There's just no true mass movement that unites the Chinese core. Looking for ways to sustain given protests would do nothing against the government while harming long-term relations, regardless of the situation in Ukraine.

Since you mention Hong Kong, that the US bloc did little of anything during calmer times over the repression of a clear majority of a peripheral part of China, should indicate the impossibility of salutary measures on behalf of an indeterminate subset of the mainland (who are nowhere near as put upon as Uighurs anyway).

(By the by, it doesn't escape my notice that every time unrest flares up in Iran, the usual suspects heartily support Iranian protesters transitioning to insurgency against the IRGC in between calling for brutal crackdowns on American protesters who aren't even within an order of magnitude in violence of action.)

As for Chinese economics, it relies on agglomeration economies, which make it hard not to do business in China for many types of manufacturing. Every supply and value chain runs in and through China, an efficiency multiplier the CCP has carefully cultivated over decades. The TPP and derivatives were meant to reduplicate that agglomeration across a politicized bloc, but without the political pressure of American membership the logic of markets will disinvest only slowly.

**spmetla** · 11-30-2022, 19:47

Frankly, it doesn't make sense to materially (as opposed to morally) support extranational protesters just because they agree with you on something.

Agreed, it can also be counter-productive. Overt US support for Iranian or Chinese protests would probably feed into the current 'foreign instigated' line used by the state to crush these protests.

Since you mention Hong Kong, that the US bloc did little of anything during calmer times over the repression of a clear majority of a peripheral part of China, should indicate the impossibility of salutary measures on behalf of an indeterminate subset of the mainland (who are nowhere near as put upon as Uighurs anyway).

Measures certainly aren't impossible, just tie the response to protests to other things. Trump and Co. didn't do anything as he didn't want to upset his negotiating for a trade deal with China which certainly doesn't look worth having lost some of our moral support. Just as China adds less overt requirements when doing trade deals, negotiating factory/industry partnerships etc... those could be tied to the crack down.
For one I'd say the US and EU should at the very least look at these protests and say "we need to ensure that Chinese citizens abroad are safely able to express themselves" and then shut down and arrest/expel those overseas 'police stations' created by the PRC. Make it clear that Chinese investments in key industries will not be allowed or will be held up indefinitely pending 'concerns' over the treatment of protesters. Start doing the same with PRC athletes over concerns over their human rights, there's no shortage of ways to weigh in without meddling directly.

In short work to isolate the PRC abroad in the major economies at the same time they have domestic problems.

(By the by, it doesn't escape my notice that every time unrest flares up in Iran, the usual suspects heartily support Iranian protesters transitioning to insurgency against the IRGC in between calling for brutal crackdowns on American protesters who aren't even within an order of magnitude in violence of action.)

No shortage of hypocrites in the US. I don't support Iranian protests going fully violent as it'd more likely just lead to a draw out civil war Syrian style than a change in government.

As for Chinese economics, it relies on agglomeration economies, which make it hard not to do business in China for many types of manufacturing. Every supply and value chain runs in and through China, an efficiency multiplier the CCP has carefully cultivated over decades. The TPP and derivatives were meant to reduplicate that agglomeration across a politicized bloc, but without the political pressure of American membership the logic of markets will disinvest only slowly.

Well, yes and no. For the past three years due to COVID problems there's be endless supply chain problems due directly to overdependence on Chinese trade and manufacturing. China has proved to be an unreliable partner in trade, protection of intellectual property, and human rights.
Revisiting TPP should certainly be done by the US, unfortunately the Dems are just horrible at how to sell it domestically. It should be marketed to the US public as an anti-PRC policy not just a globalism/free-trade policy. The high-minded ideals are important, but the average-joe doesn't seem to care too much about that but does seem to have strong but poorly formed opinions on all our 'jobs' going to China.
A deliberate US policy to build trade ties to de-couple from China would take time, better to ramp up the efforts sooner than later, especially as tensions continue over Taiwan and the South China Sea. People will better support strong actions against China if it doesn't affect them too much in the supermarket or gas station.

**Montmorency** · 12-01-2022, 00:02

We did just slap heavy sanctions on the pivotal Chinese semiconductor industry, heavy enough to lock us into future conflict arguably. But it was primarily about our long-term power struggle and maybe secondarily about low-key Chinese support for Russia; the feelings of Chinese citizens won't play a role in future such measures one way or another, I expect.

Those Chinese police stations... I have a strong suspicion that these ostentatious appendages in basically every single Western country were not at all under the radar, they were just part of a mutual accommodation within certain boundaries. The old 'gentlemen's agreements' are breaking down, right? The US has been charging a lot of people - mostly Chinese citizens - with espionage on behalf of China in the past year, when in the past they might have been quietly deported. We should assume our own operatives in China, and Russia, have been having a rough time of it as well.

People will better support strong actions against China if it doesn't affect them too much in the supermarket or gas station.

Global, and American, popular hostility toward China is at an all-time high since the Cold War, but price shocks are baked in. Elevated inflation worldwide will be a side effect in any decoupling with China as long as that takes to culminate, if not longer.

What we ought to be doing is selling trade blocs built around rising environmental and labor standards, including populist intent to improve standards of living in aligned middle or low-income countries (which ultimately benefits American workers too anyway). The current group of left-leaning governments in Latin America might be especially open to a legitimate offer. But it's a very difficult sell to the American Congress and business "community." Trump's NAFTA 2.0 was almost toeing the line on this where it hit upon raised wage targets for some Mexican factory workers, one of the very few genuine improvements in the agreement. I think Mexican unions have gained some leverage recently by appealing to the USMCA Rapid Response Mechanism.

**Furunculus** · 12-08-2022, 09:53

Japan now describing China as a 'systemic challenge', aligning its diplomatic language with the UK mere hours before Japan/UK/Italy due to announce their Project Tempest collaboration to create a 6th Gen long range fighter jet.