The new U.S.-China agreement is a "forced friendship. What awaits the world ?

[Wind_FURY]

Like it or not, China has begun to change its rhetoric and OFFICIAL POSITION in a big way.
Brussels, Belgium. China's representative to the European Union said that Beijing has nothing against Ukraine's desire to restore its territorial integrity to its 1991 borders, including Crimea, the peninsula annexed by Russia in 2014.
In a recent interview with Al Jazeera and two other media outlets, when asked about Fu Kong's support for Kiev's goals, including the return of other Ukrainian regions now occupied by Russia, the senior Chinese diplomat said: "I don't see why not.

Judging by China's sharply changed rhetoric, Putin is already a downed pilot for Beijing ....

Probably because China has recognized the fact that its economy's growth can't be sustained without the U.S. and its allies. Economic prosperity for them should also mean economic prosperity for the West because who are among the largest consumers of Chinese exports? THE WEST! China's domestic demand definitely can't support their economy.

China is getting desperate and they need the West to pivot to QE, but it will continue to tighten as long as inflation is high, unemployment is low, and as long as markets don't crash.

[Majestic-milf]

Today the world heard:  "The U.S. does not support Taiwan's independence and has no intention of engaging in conflict with China."

U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said this during a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing.

This is me smiling at Taiwan when they thought they had gotten a strong ally in the US. I can't imagine them (US) going to something close to war with China because deep down they need these guys to survive and Xi Jingping knows it.
Imagine the lame excuse being given for their reason to renege; refusing to support any unilateral changes to the status quo. I mean, this is just plain cowardly behavior because you supply arms to them yet avoid any official diplomatic contact.

[sana54210]

Like it or not, China has begun to change its rhetoric and OFFICIAL POSITION in a big way.
Brussels, Belgium. China's representative to the European Union said that Beijing has nothing against Ukraine's desire to restore its territorial integrity to its 1991 borders, including Crimea, the peninsula annexed by Russia in 2014.
In a recent interview with Al Jazeera and two other media outlets, when asked about Fu Kong's support for Kiev's goals, including the return of other Ukrainian regions now occupied by Russia, the senior Chinese diplomat said: "I don't see why not.

Judging by China's sharply changed rhetoric, Putin is already a downed pilot for Beijing ....

Probably because China has recognized the fact that its economy's growth can't be sustained without the U.S. and its allies. Economic prosperity for them should also mean economic prosperity for the West because who are among the largest consumers of Chinese exports? THE WEST! China's domestic demand definitely can't support their economy.

China is getting desperate and they need the West to pivot to QE, but it will continue to tighten as long as inflation is high, unemployment is low, and as long as markets don't crash.

China is not getting "desperate" china is just facing what happens when you grow more than you should and learning what to do with that. Look at USA for example, they have huge debt, what is it now something like 30 trillion or something? That's insane and of course that's not going to be easy to handle and we are talking about bigger amount of money than they could ever pay, and yet they are living life like nothing happened.

China wasn't this big 20 years ago, and they were much bigger 10 years ago but wasn't this big anyway, they grew and grew and grew basically, which meant that they went from a poor nation of rice famers to an industrial monopoly and that resulted with them not knowing what to do, but I bet they will find a way eventually.

[DrBeer]

Today the world heard:  "The U.S. does not support Taiwan's independence and has no intention of engaging in conflict with China."

U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said this during a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing.

This is me smiling at Taiwan when they thought they had gotten a strong ally in the US. I can't imagine them (US) going to something close to war with China because deep down they need these guys to survive and Xi Jingping knows it.
Imagine the lame excuse being given for their reason to renege; refusing to support any unilateral changes to the status quo. I mean, this is just plain cowardly behavior because you supply arms to them yet avoid any official diplomatic contact.

My opinion is that neither China nor the United States needs a new global conflict. But this does not mean that the U.S. has "bent over" to China. I have confidence that although Taiwan has become somewhat of a hostage to the current, complicated, international situation, but... The terms of Taiwan's "return" will be exclusively according to China's rules. My opinion is that there will be an agreement on sufficiently broad autonomy for Taiwan.
I have written more than once that in my opinion it will be a "showcase peace treaty" with the Chinese CCP presenting it as "China's great victory over Western hegemony", but there will be "nuances" that will not be publicly talked about. This includes China's concessions not to support Russia as an international terrorist. The world is already tired of cataclysms - KOVID, the light version of the third world war, etc. Again, let me remind you that China needs Taiwan as a working leading manufacturer of microelectronics, and any forceful solution to this "issue" will lead to the total destruction of Taiwan's unique economic sector.

[panganib999]

After so many years, the US used Taiwan as a chess piece to oppose China, and I was surprised by this news. But I don't think they are bargaining with each other, and there will be another pawn in place. Instead, why don't we think in a different way? If the US continues to wage war with China on all fronts, the US will not benefit, the one who suffers the most is no longer China.
As for Taiwan, a distant water cannot put out the fire near it, whether the US continues to support Taiwan or not, it can't be stopped if China really wants to unify Taiwan. Even the US and EU are facing many difficulties in the Ukraine battlefield, so I don't think China will be afraid of the US to use anything to bargain.

Point taken, but to retract previous support regardless of whatever they have going on right now with China is something that I've never seen before. Plus this looks like an uneasy alliance to me considering these two countries are acting tough despite their current economic situations, and the best move to not rile the other's anger is to just show support. In any case I don't see this "alliance" if you can even call it that as something that will stay for a long time, I'll give it until the war between Russia and Ukraine ends, and these two countries will be back to throwing shit at each others like two silverback gorillas in a zoo.

As for Taiwan, well I guess they just have to deal with it lmao.

[icalical]

With the current US economic situation that is expected, covid hit American Economic pretty hard, it is still recovering, engaging in any military conflict will slow their economic recovery and it also requires a lot of fund. Even if China finally invade Taiwan, the best US could do is just the same as what they could do in the Ukraine, giving sanction. And even though there will be some bad economic effect for U.S tech manufacturer, they are also one of the biggest Chip producer, direct competition with Taiwan, so US will get some of the Taiwan consumer if Taiwan stop producing. For the rest of the world, War is always a bad thing. China is the both huge consumer and producer for the world, we will have shortage in many items.

[YUriy1991]

The world is already tired of cataclysms - KOVID, the light version of the third world war, etc. Again, let me remind you that China needs Taiwan as a working leading manufacturer of microelectronics, and any forceful solution to this "issue" will lead to the total destruction of Taiwan's unique economic sector.

Yes. I see it that way as well. Visually disrupting a sector of the Taiwanese economy in such a powerful way could have quite an impactful global impact, causing potential loss of expertise, disruptions in supply chains, and economic instability. The US maybe  take a nuanced approach to staying engaged with China on a variety of issues, including Taiwan with the aim of safeguarding its broader interests and maintaining stability in the region. One side, Yes. as you said above the US should not be involved in a conflict with China, that does not mean that Taiwan is completely abandoned.

I think it's good to first understand the motivation behind their actions and their special interests.

[Wind_FURY]

Today the world heard:  "The U.S. does not support Taiwan's independence and has no intention of engaging in conflict with China."

U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said this during a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing.

This is me smiling at Taiwan when they thought they had gotten a strong ally in the US. I can't imagine them (US) going to something close to war with China because deep down they need these guys to survive and Xi Jingping knows it.
Imagine the lame excuse being given for their reason to renege; refusing to support any unilateral changes to the status quo. I mean, this is just plain cowardly behavior because you supply arms to them yet avoid any official diplomatic contact.

My opinion is that neither China nor the United States needs a new global conflict. But this does not mean that the U.S. has "bent over" to China. I have confidence that although Taiwan has become somewhat of a hostage to the current, complicated, international situation, but... The terms of Taiwan's "return" will be exclusively according to China's rules. My opinion is that there will be an agreement on sufficiently broad autonomy for Taiwan.
I have written more than once that in my opinion it will be a "showcase peace treaty" with the Chinese CCP presenting it as "China's great victory over Western hegemony", but there will be "nuances" that will not be publicly talked about. This includes China's concessions not to support Russia as an international terrorist. The world is already tired of cataclysms - KOVID, the light version of the third world war, etc. Again, let me remind you that China needs Taiwan as a working leading manufacturer of microelectronics, and any forceful solution to this "issue" will lead to the total destruction of Taiwan's unique economic sector.

If you ask me, I believe it will be China who will start bending over. China's economy is currently in a worse than expected state after the COVID-19 restrictions were lifted. Some economists/analysts mistakenly projected that the Chinese people will start spending most of their savings in goods and services after lockdowns, BUT they were obviously very wrong. They later found out that Chinese consumers are not like American consumers because Asians have more tendencies to save than the people living in the United States.

I already posted about the possble recession coming in the U.S. and Europe because of QT, which will hurt China more because the U.S. and its allies are the biggest importers of Chinese goods.

[Flexystar]

Like it or not, China has begun to change its rhetoric and OFFICIAL POSITION in a big way.
Brussels, Belgium. China's representative to the European Union said that Beijing has nothing against Ukraine's desire to restore its territorial integrity to its 1991 borders, including Crimea, the peninsula annexed by Russia in 2014.
In a recent interview with Al Jazeera and two other media outlets, when asked about Fu Kong's support for Kiev's goals, including the return of other Ukrainian regions now occupied by Russia, the senior Chinese diplomat said: "I don't see why not.

Judging by China's sharply changed rhetoric, Putin is already a downed pilot for Beijing ....

Probably because China has recognized the fact that its economy's growth can't be sustained without the U.S. and its allies. Economic prosperity for them should also mean economic prosperity for the West because who are among the largest consumers of Chinese exports? THE WEST! China's domestic demand definitely can't support their economy.

China is getting desperate and they need the West to pivot to QE, but it will continue to tighten as long as inflation is high, unemployment is low, and as long as markets don't crash.

I am not sure if China has such intentions or not because the way they are acting against America or were acting against America last year, I believe this is not the right way to think about it. As mentioned in former post Putin is also another factor that can create conflict in this friendship for sure. I mean it will either create conflict between Russia China relations, OR may be China America relation. How can they be allies together if one is enemy of the other and their friend is moving towards the enemy isn't good in the diplomatic relationship in the future.

This type of agreements were never good in the past so I am not sure if they would be in the future too?

They will depend on each other for the supply chain of various things but they won't have country-country relations for the good.

[DrBeer]

Today the world heard:  "The U.S. does not support Taiwan's independence and has no intention of engaging in conflict with China."

U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said this during a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing.

This is me smiling at Taiwan when they thought they had gotten a strong ally in the US. I can't imagine them (US) going to something close to war with China because deep down they need these guys to survive and Xi Jingping knows it.
Imagine the lame excuse being given for their reason to renege; refusing to support any unilateral changes to the status quo. I mean, this is just plain cowardly behavior because you supply arms to them yet avoid any official diplomatic contact.

My opinion is that neither China nor the United States needs a new global conflict. But this does not mean that the U.S. has "bent over" to China. I have confidence that although Taiwan has become somewhat of a hostage to the current, complicated, international situation, but... The terms of Taiwan's "return" will be exclusively according to China's rules. My opinion is that there will be an agreement on sufficiently broad autonomy for Taiwan.
I have written more than once that in my opinion it will be a "showcase peace treaty" with the Chinese CCP presenting it as "China's great victory over Western hegemony", but there will be "nuances" that will not be publicly talked about. This includes China's concessions not to support Russia as an international terrorist. The world is already tired of cataclysms - KOVID, the light version of the third world war, etc. Again, let me remind you that China needs Taiwan as a working leading manufacturer of microelectronics, and any forceful solution to this "issue" will lead to the total destruction of Taiwan's unique economic sector.

If you ask me, I believe it will be China who will start bending over. China's economy is currently in a worse than expected state after the COVID-19 restrictions were lifted. Some economists/analysts mistakenly projected that the Chinese people will start spending most of their savings in goods and services after lockdowns, BUT they were obviously very wrong. They later found out that Chinese consumers are not like American consumers because Asians have more tendencies to save than the people living in the United States.

I already posted about the possble recession coming in the U.S. and Europe because of QT, which will hurt China more because the U.S. and its allies are the biggest importers of Chinese goods.

I absolutely agree with you. The reason is the really difficult situation of the Chinese economy. And while "for the public" there is a "war with the West," at the government level China is well aware that confrontation and mutual restrictions will cause China to lose. The West has learned to adapt and is ready for some "inconveniences" associated with the transition processes, but they are well aware that China will have to go "to bow" to the Western world - without this market China's economy will fall even more.
Let's just say that China benefits from partnership with the West and does not benefit from severing ties. The West can live without China.

Take for example their new "scarecrow" - restrictions on the supply of rare earth metals germanium and gallium. But today they were told by TSMC that there will be no problem with chip production. I started to look into the issue - it turns out that China is not an exclusive supplier, it's just the cheapest supplier. And these metals are mined in other countries:
Gallium - Japan, South Korea, Ukraine
Germanium - Canada, Belgium, USA

[kryptqnick]

US and China are big political rivals because they are both superpowers but with very different political ideals. The ideal for the USA is a strong democracy that values and protects individual freedom and diversity. The ideal for China is a state of perfectly organized society of docile people who are under total control of the government. But of course, nobody needs a war, so after tensions rise, there's a cooling-off period. Still, I don't think it means the USA would allow China to militarily retake Taiwan if it comes to that. As for the power dynamics, I think they are co-dependent on one another, which also makes it important to both to reach compromise. And while it can be morally questionable, it's good for the global economy.

[Ozero]

US and China are big political rivals because they are both superpowers but with very different political ideals. The ideal for the USA is a strong democracy that values and protects individual freedom and diversity. The ideal for China is a state of perfectly organized society of docile people who are under total control of the government. But of course, nobody needs a war, so after tensions rise, there's a cooling-off period. Still, I don't think it means the USA would allow China to militarily retake Taiwan if it comes to that. As for the power dynamics, I think they are co-dependent on one another, which also makes it important to both to reach compromise. And while it can be morally questionable, it's good for the global economy.

All right. Based on the fact that in recent months relations between the United States and China began to deteriorate sharply, including over Taiwan, up to the threat of a full-scale war between these large states, the current agreement between them, even if it is not very strong, is very a wise decision. Both the United States and China realize that if it comes to war, both countries will weaken, and this will play into the hands of many other not-so-democratic states. Moreover, the United States is now helping Ukraine in protecting its territory from Russian aggression, and there are other big problems that need to be addressed, and a possible war with China would interfere with other urgent issues. In the future, the United States and China may find common ground against the background of the upcoming changes that are expected in the fate of Russia.

[DrBeer]

US and China are big political rivals because they are both superpowers but with very different political ideals. The ideal for the USA is a strong democracy that values and protects individual freedom and diversity. The ideal for China is a state of perfectly organized society of docile people who are under total control of the government. But of course, nobody needs a war, so after tensions rise, there's a cooling-off period. Still, I don't think it means the USA would allow China to militarily retake Taiwan if it comes to that. As for the power dynamics, I think they are co-dependent on one another, which also makes it important to both to reach compromise. And while it can be morally questionable, it's good for the global economy.

As practice shows, the "great adversaries" are more likely to be highly dependent on each other than to want to destroy each other. Especially in such an interdependent world as today's. The deepest integration of all spheres of economy, technology, finance... With such dependence, the U.S. and China are symbiotic rather than "natural enemies". That said, the U.S. can live without China, as can the rest of the developed West. At most, prices will go up slightly. But China - without Western markets, technology... They will also survive, but it will be "life in reverse" - a slide back to China in the 1980s. The question is, what are the sensible players doing?

[Cryptomultiplier]

A forced friendship might be the better option, if it is what that would save the world from WW3. More countries should even do that so as to encourage world peace, rather than add to the wars ongoing both between Russia -Ukraine and also other parts of Africa, not even mentioning trade wars and policies meant to hurt the country.

As long both contract parties are matured enough to deliver on the terms of agreement and be liable to the penalties if found guilty of going against the rules of the game, am okay with it being a forced friendship.

[DrBeer]

I think the move by China to try to limit the supply of gallium and germanium to the market, specifically to U.S. companies, is very stupid. Japan is already willing to supply the necessary quantities of gallium and Canada the necessary quantities of germanium.
The bottom line is:
- China has shown its stupidity.
- The U.S. has once again demonstrated that the West does not depend on China.
- The U.S. has an official reason to introduce new "counter-sanctions" against China, which will really bring real problems for China. Which will have an extremely negative impact on China's economy.

A light version of "shooting yourself in the foot".

[be.open]

I think the move by China to try to limit the supply of gallium and germanium to the market, specifically to U.S. companies, is very stupid. Japan is already willing to supply the necessary quantities of gallium and Canada the necessary quantities of germanium.
The bottom line is:
- China has shown its stupidity.
- The U.S. has once again demonstrated that the West does not depend on China.
- The U.S. has an official reason to introduce new "counter-sanctions" against China, which will really bring real problems for China. Which will have an extremely negative impact on China's economy.

A light version of "shooting yourself in the foot".

Prooflink?

To my knowledge, China controls about 80% of the gallium market. Japan and South Korea left the gallium supply market in 2016, Ukraine in 2019. In general, this is a very unstable and difficult market for a number of reasons, gallium is a by-product in the production of aluminum and it requires, first of all, a large amount of cheap energy for its production.

[harapan]

China is not getting "desperate" china is just facing what happens when you grow more than you should and learning what to do with that. Look at USA for example, they have huge debt, what is it now something like 30 trillion or something? That's insane and of course that's not going to be easy to handle and we are talking about bigger amount of money than they could ever pay, and yet they are living life like nothing happened.

China wasn't this big 20 years ago, and they were much bigger 10 years ago but wasn't this big anyway, they grew and grew and grew basically, which meant that they went from a poor nation of rice famers to an industrial monopoly and that resulted with them not knowing what to do, but I bet they will find a way eventually.

I don't believe it's what to do with it that's it's the problem. They didn't become a big economy overnight. They worked for it, they invested, they took risks. It took them time to become where they are today and they have learnt how to handle their business.
They believe in something and they are working towards it.
20 years is enough time to learn how to handle been a global power. But I do not agree that they've only had 20 years or less. China is an ancient country, so all that history isn't new.

No country wants to have losses, both the US and China are trying to better grir countries so they would make decisions that favour them. If they went a different route and it didn't work out, they will go a different route.

[DrBeer]

I think the move by China to try to limit the supply of gallium and germanium to the market, specifically to U.S. companies, is very stupid. Japan is already willing to supply the necessary quantities of gallium and Canada the necessary quantities of germanium.
The bottom line is:
- China has shown its stupidity.
- The U.S. has once again demonstrated that the West does not depend on China.
- The U.S. has an official reason to introduce new "counter-sanctions" against China, which will really bring real problems for China. Which will have an extremely negative impact on China's economy.

A light version of "shooting yourself in the foot".

Prooflink?

To my knowledge, China controls about 80% of the gallium market. Japan and South Korea left the gallium supply market in 2016, Ukraine in 2019. In general, this is a very unstable and difficult market for a number of reasons, gallium is a by-product in the production of aluminum and it requires, first of all, a large amount of cheap energy for its production.

We have already discussed the issue of China's rare earth metals, and at the same time gallium and germanium. And you are well aware that what you say is, to put it mildly, distorted information
Ok, for everyone, I will once again bring the data about this metal.

The key "problem" of gallium is that there are no deposits of pure metal in nature. It is always presented as compounds with low metal content, and very "evenly" distributed. Today, the richest source of gallium is the mineral germanite, an ore composed of copper sulfide that can contain 0.5-0.7% gallium, mined in southwest Africa. These are the Tsumeb (Namibia) and Kipushi (Zaire) mines .... It's a strange name for China, isn't it ?

Gallium is also widely distributed in small amounts along with zinc obscurants, in aluminum alumina, feldspars, hard coal and ores: iron, manganese and chromium.
The largest deposits of gallium, amenable to economic extraction, are in China, Germany, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, South Korea and Russia  
That was all about primary mining.

But there is also secondary mining - Canada, Slovakia, Japan, Germany and the USA are the leaders there.

At the same time, there are more nuances: gallium can be replaced in the manufacture of semiconductors by indium, and in the technology of production of thin film solar cells - silicon-based technologies, some forms of thin film cadmium selenide or copper indium selenide based photovoltaic cells among others.

So the reality is quite different - China was by far the most massive and cheapest supplier of this metal, but there is no question of exclusivity. Now other suppliers will increase production, and consumers will simply switch to them.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Once upon a time US was the most powerful country as compare with rest of world. But now inflation is hitting US hard. Prices for food, gas and basic necessities are out of control. Americans people are already suffering form such and such situation.  They are not that much  super power anymore that's why they can't afford war anymore. It's hard seeing Taiwan being left out in this forced friendship between China and the US and in other hand  I don't see the US  are able to scaring China anymore.

[justdimin]

We have already discussed the issue of China's rare earth metals, and at the same time gallium and germanium. And you are well aware that what you say is, to put it mildly, distorted information
Ok, for everyone, I will once again bring the data about this metal.

The key "problem" of gallium is that there are no deposits of pure metal in nature. It is always presented as compounds with low metal content, and very "evenly" distributed. Today, the richest source of gallium is the mineral germanite, an ore composed of copper sulfide that can contain 0.5-0.7% gallium, mined in southwest Africa. These are the Tsumeb (Namibia) and Kipushi (Zaire) mines .... It's a strange name for China, isn't it ?

Gallium is also widely distributed in small amounts along with zinc obscurants, in aluminum alumina, feldspars, hard coal and ores: iron, manganese and chromium.
The largest deposits of gallium, amenable to economic extraction, are in China, Germany, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, South Korea and Russia  
That was all about primary mining.

But there is also secondary mining - Canada, Slovakia, Japan, Germany and the USA are the leaders there.

At the same time, there are more nuances: gallium can be replaced in the manufacture of semiconductors by indium, and in the technology of production of thin film solar cells - silicon-based technologies, some forms of thin film cadmium selenide or copper indium selenide based photovoltaic cells among others.

So the reality is quite different - China was by far the most massive and cheapest supplier of this metal, but there is no question of exclusivity. Now other suppliers will increase production, and consumers will simply switch to them.

Whenever I see your name, I know that it will 100% be a post that supports USA or attacks one of its enemies, you have not written anything that is out of that in many months to be fair and you weren't like this. You have became full on uncle sam in the past few months, interesting to see.

Just because China sold it cheap, doesn't mean they will continue to do so, just because other places can, doesn't mean they can continue to do so. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Sure other nations may have some, but they do not have as much as China, and not like the demand for this will go to zero neither, hence China could limit it, and let it end in other places, and jack up the price, it is not unlikely. Why is this so hard to see?