Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

We're living in a golden age. All you need is gold. -- D. W. Robertson.


interests / soc.culture.china / Re: not conducive to

SubjectAuthor
* not conducive toOleg Smirnov
+* Re: not conducive toltlee1
|`- Re: not conducive toltlee1
`- Re: not conducive toltlee1

1
not conducive to

<t5onk5$tae$1@os.motzarella.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=9376&group=soc.culture.china#9376

 copy link   Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!os.motzarella.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: os3...@netc.eu (Oleg Smirnov)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: not conducive to
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 20:00:49 +0300
Organization: ...
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <t5onk5$tae$1@os.motzarella.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 17:07:17 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: os.motzarella.org; posting-host="1a0c5684cdcd6e533b562862e49f4fa5";
logging-data="30030"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18ggUEcV4p4AnEzz2syMWC5"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NkXs0y6Ej5zLZdKcmQp6/ZG4Qmc=
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
 by: Oleg Smirnov - Sat, 14 May 2022 17:00 UTC

| <https://tinyurl.com/yyndnv3w> scmp.com
|
| China has not benefited from the war in Ukraine, which is going to
| undermine the international legal framework .. Yan Xuetong, dean of
| the Institute of International Relations at Tsinghua University,
| said the war has accelerated the reverse of globalisation, which is
| not conducive to China's trade ..

China is a big and diverse formation, and interests of misc groups
within this formation may differ. Since the mid-1980s, developments in
China proceeded with involvement of American and other Western
investments. For the recent decades, many Chinese big companies have
grown due to market cooperation with American, other Western companies,
which contributed to personal careers and wealth of the people engaged
in these businesses. It's natural that such people are interested in
preserving or prolonging the mode and situation that served beneficial
for them before.

In other words, certain pro-Atlanticist lobby naturally exists within
China. These guys may be refraining from openly / loudly criticizing
the China's government and CPC, but it still leaves enough room for
reasoning against or in favor of certain policies. It also may well be
combined with China-centric patriotic-nationalist narratives, given
that the China's national interest allows a multi-dimensional variety
of interpretations.

One could also notice that the SCMP outlet traditionally provides a
platform for these pro-Atlanticist lobby folks where they can express
their vision and reasoning (some other China's outlets do as well).

The fact is that continuation of the China-West economic cooperation
mode in a way as 'harmonious' as it was before (in the 2000s-2010s) is
becoming hardly possible nowadays. It would be unfair to blame Russia
for that. Rather the opposite, the Soviet-West and then Russia-West
contradictions for quite a long time served as a lighting-conductor
for China, since Russia attracted to itself much of the evil
Atlanticist energies, deflecting them from China. It contributed to
prolongation of the China-West economic 'harmony'. However, the nature
of the contemporary Atlanticism is so that it can not tolerate
something big and independent which is not under Atlanticist control.
So when they started noticing that China has grown too big, behaves
too independently, they started changing policies toward China (while
continuing their habitual obsession with Russia too).

When Trump had started his economic crusade against China, many still
sought to interpet it as an American particularly right-wing freakery.
There were hopes for Biden among some Chinese, some especially "wise"
commentators interpreted the election of Biden as "Chinese win over
Russia" (given that the American "liberal left" desperately tried to
symbolically attach Trump to Russia). While the post-Trump America's
government has somehow softened rhetorics towards China, it has not
changed the Trump's policy in substance (has not removed the Trump's
tariffs on Chinese goods etc). Right now, American surveys show that
85% of the Americans see China as a threat (little lesser negative in
comparison to how they see Russia) <https://tinyurl.com/y3hnengu>.
That's greater than at the time of Trump iirc. Such a large percentage
means that not only the American right-wingers hate China (because of
their racism etc), but "left liberal" American media also indoctinate
the regular Americans with negative attitudes towards China.

It indicates that in the US, there's a bipartisan consensus on
"containing China", and their media work to ensure that some policies
intended to harm China would be supported by the American voters.

With regard to "international legal framework", a honest observer may
notice that this framework had been undermined many times before. In
the post-Cold War period, it first had happened in the Yugoslavia case.
Then there were those Atlanticist unilateral intrusions in the Middle
East. The fact "leading scholar" didn't note it, naturally means these
deeds did not impact China much, so they can be overlooked. Still, any
precedental violation makes next violations more probable.

In the recent world history there were examples when the Atlanticism
- up to some moment - respected some independent "regimes", recognized
their governments legal/legitimate, dealt with them well economically.
There was time when Lybia's Muammar Gaddafi was a distinguished guest
in the European capitals, with all due honors as it should be when you
host a respected foreign leader. But one day they got an opportunity to
dump Gaddafi, and they squashed him mercilessly (which brought nothing
good neither to the regular Lybians nor to the regular Europeans).
Then, Ukraine's Yanukovich. European observers depicted the day he
had become elected president as a triumph of democracy in the Ukraine
<https://www.osce.org/node/51888>. However, when he showed himself to
be independent, he was labeled as tyrant, and the coup against him had
been organized (which brought nothing good to the regular Ukrainians).

Similary, the Atlanticism may respect China at present, but they won't
miss any opportunity to harm China, if only they got such an occasion.
The fans of "international legal framework" should look at things more
broadly and realistically: the Atlanticism would try to contain Chinese
developments anyway, regardless of any Russian action. The only way to
somehow change it is "to persuade" the Atlanticist policy makers that
they need to respect not only themselves.

Any conflicts always suck up resources for a non-productive spending,
which makes all conflicting parties relatively weaker against the non-
conflicting rest. Thus the Ukraine-related conflict will make all the
parties - Russia, Europe and the US - relatively weaker against the
rest of the world. In the longer-term perspective, it benefits China
(also, from this perspective, it would be beneficial for both China
and India to settle their territorial disputes in some peaceful way).
In the short-term, the impact on trade may be somewhat discomfortable
indeed. And such trends started earlier, and regardless of Russia.

Re: not conducive to

<b27b8d7a-cc32-43d3-a764-2e307d9c5821n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=9377&group=soc.culture.china#9377

 copy link   Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5aaa:0:b0:45a:a137:49d3 with SMTP id u10-20020ad45aaa000000b0045aa13749d3mr9731169qvg.61.1652564908791;
Sat, 14 May 2022 14:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:5488:b0:ed:e5b4:5e60 with SMTP id
f8-20020a056870548800b000ede5b45e60mr5516958oan.238.1652564908487; Sat, 14
May 2022 14:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 14:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t5onk5$tae$1@os.motzarella.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=174.99.33.53; posting-account=sQgtagoAAAB2Cf4qBTW8cwfp7bDiKK3s
NNTP-Posting-Host: 174.99.33.53
References: <t5onk5$tae$1@os.motzarella.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <b27b8d7a-cc32-43d3-a764-2e307d9c5821n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: not conducive to
From: ltl...@hotmail.com (ltlee1)
Injection-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 21:48:28 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 7688
 by: ltlee1 - Sat, 14 May 2022 21:48 UTC

On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 1:07:20 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> | <https://tinyurl.com/yyndnv3w> scmp.com
> |
> | China has not benefited from the war in Ukraine, which is going to
> | undermine the international legal framework .. Yan Xuetong, dean of
> | the Institute of International Relations at Tsinghua University,
> | said the war has accelerated the reverse of globalisation, which is
> | not conducive to China's trade ..
>
> China is a big and diverse formation, and interests of misc groups
> within this formation may differ. Since the mid-1980s, developments in
> China proceeded with involvement of American and other Western
> investments. For the recent decades, many Chinese big companies have
> grown due to market cooperation with American, other Western companies,
> which contributed to personal careers and wealth of the people engaged
> in these businesses. It's natural that such people are interested in
> preserving or prolonging the mode and situation that served beneficial
> for them before.
>
> In other words, certain pro-Atlanticist lobby naturally exists within
> China. These guys may be refraining from openly / loudly criticizing
> the China's government and CPC, but it still leaves enough room for
> reasoning against or in favor of certain policies. It also may well be
> combined with China-centric patriotic-nationalist narratives, given
> that the China's national interest allows a multi-dimensional variety
> of interpretations.
>
> One could also notice that the SCMP outlet traditionally provides a
> platform for these pro-Atlanticist lobby folks where they can express
> their vision and reasoning (some other China's outlets do as well).
>
> The fact is that continuation of the China-West economic cooperation
> mode in a way as 'harmonious' as it was before (in the 2000s-2010s) is
> becoming hardly possible nowadays. It would be unfair to blame Russia
> for that. Rather the opposite, the Soviet-West and then Russia-West
> contradictions for quite a long time served as a lighting-conductor
> for China, since Russia attracted to itself much of the evil
> Atlanticist energies, deflecting them from China. It contributed to
> prolongation of the China-West economic 'harmony'. However, the nature
> of the contemporary Atlanticism is so that it can not tolerate
> something big and independent which is not under Atlanticist control.
> So when they started noticing that China has grown too big, behaves
> too independently, they started changing policies toward China (while
> continuing their habitual obsession with Russia too).
>
> When Trump had started his economic crusade against China, many still
> sought to interpet it as an American particularly right-wing freakery.
> There were hopes for Biden among some Chinese, some especially "wise"
> commentators interpreted the election of Biden as "Chinese win over
> Russia" (given that the American "liberal left" desperately tried to
> symbolically attach Trump to Russia). While the post-Trump America's
> government has somehow softened rhetorics towards China, it has not
> changed the Trump's policy in substance (has not removed the Trump's
> tariffs on Chinese goods etc). Right now, American surveys show that
> 85% of the Americans see China as a threat (little lesser negative in
> comparison to how they see Russia) <https://tinyurl.com/y3hnengu>.
> That's greater than at the time of Trump iirc. Such a large percentage
> means that not only the American right-wingers hate China (because of
> their racism etc), but "left liberal" American media also indoctinate
> the regular Americans with negative attitudes towards China.
>
> It indicates that in the US, there's a bipartisan consensus on
> "containing China", and their media work to ensure that some policies
> intended to harm China would be supported by the American voters.
>
> With regard to "international legal framework", a honest observer may
> notice that this framework had been undermined many times before. In
> the post-Cold War period, it first had happened in the Yugoslavia case.
> Then there were those Atlanticist unilateral intrusions in the Middle
> East. The fact "leading scholar" didn't note it, naturally means these
> deeds did not impact China much, so they can be overlooked. Still, any
> precedental violation makes next violations more probable.
>
> In the recent world history there were examples when the Atlanticism
> - up to some moment - respected some independent "regimes", recognized
> their governments legal/legitimate, dealt with them well economically.
> There was time when Lybia's Muammar Gaddafi was a distinguished guest
> in the European capitals, with all due honors as it should be when you
> host a respected foreign leader. But one day they got an opportunity to
> dump Gaddafi, and they squashed him mercilessly (which brought nothing
> good neither to the regular Lybians nor to the regular Europeans).
> Then, Ukraine's Yanukovich. European observers depicted the day he
> had become elected president as a triumph of democracy in the Ukraine
> <https://www.osce.org/node/51888>. However, when he showed himself to
> be independent, he was labeled as tyrant, and the coup against him had
> been organized (which brought nothing good to the regular Ukrainians).
>
> Similary, the Atlanticism may respect China at present, but they won't
> miss any opportunity to harm China, if only they got such an occasion.
> The fans of "international legal framework" should look at things more
> broadly and realistically: the Atlanticism would try to contain Chinese
> developments anyway, regardless of any Russian action. The only way to
> somehow change it is "to persuade" the Atlanticist policy makers that
> they need to respect not only themselves.
>
> Any conflicts always suck up resources for a non-productive spending,
> which makes all conflicting parties relatively weaker against the non-
> conflicting rest. Thus the Ukraine-related conflict will make all the
> parties - Russia, Europe and the US - relatively weaker against the
> rest of the world. In the longer-term perspective, it benefits China
> (also, from this perspective, it would be beneficial for both China
> and India to settle their territorial disputes in some peaceful way).
> In the short-term, the impact on trade may be somewhat discomfortable
> indeed. And such trends started earlier, and regardless of Russia.

Re: not conducive to

<5c775a43-d83b-4c50-a9f2-ff9d7d0ab4a2n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=9378&group=soc.culture.china#9378

 copy link   Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5d8b:0:b0:2f3:df07:d752 with SMTP id d11-20020ac85d8b000000b002f3df07d752mr10071505qtx.528.1652566080682;
Sat, 14 May 2022 15:08:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6871:54c:b0:f1:7201:237c with SMTP id
t12-20020a056871054c00b000f17201237cmr2985921oal.224.1652566080330; Sat, 14
May 2022 15:08:00 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 15:08:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t5onk5$tae$1@os.motzarella.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=174.99.33.53; posting-account=sQgtagoAAAB2Cf4qBTW8cwfp7bDiKK3s
NNTP-Posting-Host: 174.99.33.53
References: <t5onk5$tae$1@os.motzarella.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5c775a43-d83b-4c50-a9f2-ff9d7d0ab4a2n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: not conducive to
From: ltl...@hotmail.com (ltlee1)
Injection-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 22:08:00 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 8314
 by: ltlee1 - Sat, 14 May 2022 22:08 UTC

On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 1:07:20 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> | <https://tinyurl.com/yyndnv3w> scmp.com
> |
> | China has not benefited from the war in Ukraine, which is going to
> | undermine the international legal framework .. Yan Xuetong, dean of
> | the Institute of International Relations at Tsinghua University,
> | said the war has accelerated the reverse of globalisation, which is
> | not conducive to China's trade ..
>
> China is a big and diverse formation, and interests of misc groups
> within this formation may differ. Since the mid-1980s, developments in
> China proceeded with involvement of American and other Western
> investments. For the recent decades, many Chinese big companies have
> grown due to market cooperation with American, other Western companies,
> which contributed to personal careers and wealth of the people engaged
> in these businesses. It's natural that such people are interested in
> preserving or prolonging the mode and situation that served beneficial
> for them before.
>
> In other words, certain pro-Atlanticist lobby naturally exists within
> China. These guys may be refraining from openly / loudly criticizing
> the China's government and CPC, but it still leaves enough room for
> reasoning against or in favor of certain policies. It also may well be
> combined with China-centric patriotic-nationalist narratives, given
> that the China's national interest allows a multi-dimensional variety
> of interpretations.
>
> One could also notice that the SCMP outlet traditionally provides a
> platform for these pro-Atlanticist lobby folks where they can express
> their vision and reasoning (some other China's outlets do as well).
>
> The fact is that continuation of the China-West economic cooperation
> mode in a way as 'harmonious' as it was before (in the 2000s-2010s) is
> becoming hardly possible nowadays. It would be unfair to blame Russia
> for that. Rather the opposite, the Soviet-West and then Russia-West
> contradictions for quite a long time served as a lighting-conductor
> for China, since Russia attracted to itself much of the evil
> Atlanticist energies, deflecting them from China. It contributed to
> prolongation of the China-West economic 'harmony'. However, the nature
> of the contemporary Atlanticism is so that it can not tolerate
> something big and independent which is not under Atlanticist control.
> So when they started noticing that China has grown too big, behaves
> too independently, they started changing policies toward China (while
> continuing their habitual obsession with Russia too).
>
> When Trump had started his economic crusade against China, many still
> sought to interpet it as an American particularly right-wing freakery.
> There were hopes for Biden among some Chinese, some especially "wise"
> commentators interpreted the election of Biden as "Chinese win over
> Russia" (given that the American "liberal left" desperately tried to
> symbolically attach Trump to Russia). While the post-Trump America's
> government has somehow softened rhetorics towards China, it has not
> changed the Trump's policy in substance (has not removed the Trump's
> tariffs on Chinese goods etc). Right now, American surveys show that
> 85% of the Americans see China as a threat (little lesser negative in
> comparison to how they see Russia) <https://tinyurl.com/y3hnengu>.
> That's greater than at the time of Trump iirc. Such a large percentage
> means that not only the American right-wingers hate China (because of
> their racism etc), but "left liberal" American media also indoctinate
> the regular Americans with negative attitudes towards China.
>
> It indicates that in the US, there's a bipartisan consensus on
> "containing China", and their media work to ensure that some policies
> intended to harm China would be supported by the American voters.
>
> With regard to "international legal framework", a honest observer may
> notice that this framework had been undermined many times before. In
> the post-Cold War period, it first had happened in the Yugoslavia case.
> Then there were those Atlanticist unilateral intrusions in the Middle
> East. The fact "leading scholar" didn't note it, naturally means these
> deeds did not impact China much, so they can be overlooked. Still, any
> precedental violation makes next violations more probable.
>
> In the recent world history there were examples when the Atlanticism
> - up to some moment - respected some independent "regimes", recognized
> their governments legal/legitimate, dealt with them well economically.
> There was time when Lybia's Muammar Gaddafi was a distinguished guest
> in the European capitals, with all due honors as it should be when you
> host a respected foreign leader. But one day they got an opportunity to
> dump Gaddafi, and they squashed him mercilessly (which brought nothing
> good neither to the regular Lybians nor to the regular Europeans).
> Then, Ukraine's Yanukovich. European observers depicted the day he
> had become elected president as a triumph of democracy in the Ukraine
> <https://www.osce.org/node/51888>. However, when he showed himself to
> be independent, he was labeled as tyrant, and the coup against him had
> been organized (which brought nothing good to the regular Ukrainians).
>
> Similary, the Atlanticism may respect China at present, but they won't
> miss any opportunity to harm China, if only they got such an occasion.
> The fans of "international legal framework" should look at things more
> broadly and realistically: the Atlanticism would try to contain Chinese
> developments anyway, regardless of any Russian action. The only way to
> somehow change it is "to persuade" the Atlanticist policy makers that
> they need to respect not only themselves.
>
> Any conflicts always suck up resources for a non-productive spending,
> which makes all conflicting parties relatively weaker against the non-
> conflicting rest. Thus the Ukraine-related conflict will make all the
> parties - Russia, Europe and the US - relatively weaker against the
> rest of the world. In the longer-term perspective, it benefits China
> (also, from this perspective, it would be beneficial for both China
> and India to settle their territorial disputes in some peaceful way).
> In the short-term, the impact on trade may be somewhat discomfortable
> indeed. And such trends started earlier, and regardless of Russia.

1. Don't know much about Yan.
I read one of his book. But I forgot what his book is about. However, I did
find anything unexpected. He is quite Chinese as far as I understand. He
also had a discussion with G John Ikenbery (available from youtube).
Check him out if you want.

2. Don't understand your point.
I understand Putin/Russia's point of view and why he/it has to carry out the
special operation. Nevertheless, strictly from CHINESE point of view, many
would consider such operation does not necessarily maximize not China's
benefit. Expression their view would not make them an Atlanticist.

Re: not conducive to

<bbb6e8c1-3c08-4b9f-b441-2b1f09db8ea2n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=9379&group=soc.culture.china#9379

 copy link   Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2886:b0:699:bab7:ae78 with SMTP id j6-20020a05620a288600b00699bab7ae78mr8333144qkp.618.1652586052299;
Sat, 14 May 2022 20:40:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:8a0b:b0:f1:8e74:261f with SMTP id
p11-20020a0568708a0b00b000f18e74261fmr1001449oaq.276.1652586052005; Sat, 14
May 2022 20:40:52 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 20:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <b27b8d7a-cc32-43d3-a764-2e307d9c5821n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=174.99.33.53; posting-account=sQgtagoAAAB2Cf4qBTW8cwfp7bDiKK3s
NNTP-Posting-Host: 174.99.33.53
References: <t5onk5$tae$1@os.motzarella.org> <b27b8d7a-cc32-43d3-a764-2e307d9c5821n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bbb6e8c1-3c08-4b9f-b441-2b1f09db8ea2n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: not conducive to
From: ltl...@hotmail.com (ltlee1)
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 03:40:52 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 by: ltlee1 - Sun, 15 May 2022 03:40 UTC

On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 5:48:29 PM UTC-4, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 1:07:20 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> > | <https://tinyurl.com/yyndnv3w> scmp.com
> > |
> > | China has not benefited from the war in Ukraine, which is going to
> > | undermine the international legal framework .. Yan Xuetong, dean of
> > | the Institute of International Relations at Tsinghua University,
> > | said the war has accelerated the reverse of globalisation, which is
> > | not conducive to China's trade ..
> >
> > China is a big and diverse formation, and interests of misc groups
> > within this formation may differ. Since the mid-1980s, developments in
> > China proceeded with involvement of American and other Western
> > investments. For the recent decades, many Chinese big companies have
> > grown due to market cooperation with American, other Western companies,
> > which contributed to personal careers and wealth of the people engaged
> > in these businesses. It's natural that such people are interested in
> > preserving or prolonging the mode and situation that served beneficial
> > for them before.
> >
> > In other words, certain pro-Atlanticist lobby naturally exists within
> > China. These guys may be refraining from openly / loudly criticizing
> > the China's government and CPC, but it still leaves enough room for
> > reasoning against or in favor of certain policies. It also may well be
> > combined with China-centric patriotic-nationalist narratives, given
> > that the China's national interest allows a multi-dimensional variety
> > of interpretations.
> >
> > One could also notice that the SCMP outlet traditionally provides a
> > platform for these pro-Atlanticist lobby folks where they can express
> > their vision and reasoning (some other China's outlets do as well).
> >
> > The fact is that continuation of the China-West economic cooperation
> > mode in a way as 'harmonious' as it was before (in the 2000s-2010s) is
> > becoming hardly possible nowadays. It would be unfair to blame Russia
> > for that. Rather the opposite, the Soviet-West and then Russia-West
> > contradictions for quite a long time served as a lighting-conductor
> > for China, since Russia attracted to itself much of the evil
> > Atlanticist energies, deflecting them from China. It contributed to
> > prolongation of the China-West economic 'harmony'. However, the nature
> > of the contemporary Atlanticism is so that it can not tolerate
> > something big and independent which is not under Atlanticist control.
> > So when they started noticing that China has grown too big, behaves
> > too independently, they started changing policies toward China (while
> > continuing their habitual obsession with Russia too).
> >
> > When Trump had started his economic crusade against China, many still
> > sought to interpet it as an American particularly right-wing freakery.
> > There were hopes for Biden among some Chinese, some especially "wise"
> > commentators interpreted the election of Biden as "Chinese win over
> > Russia" (given that the American "liberal left" desperately tried to
> > symbolically attach Trump to Russia). While the post-Trump America's
> > government has somehow softened rhetorics towards China, it has not
> > changed the Trump's policy in substance (has not removed the Trump's
> > tariffs on Chinese goods etc). Right now, American surveys show that
> > 85% of the Americans see China as a threat (little lesser negative in
> > comparison to how they see Russia) <https://tinyurl.com/y3hnengu>.
> > That's greater than at the time of Trump iirc. Such a large percentage
> > means that not only the American right-wingers hate China (because of
> > their racism etc), but "left liberal" American media also indoctinate
> > the regular Americans with negative attitudes towards China.
> >
> > It indicates that in the US, there's a bipartisan consensus on
> > "containing China", and their media work to ensure that some policies
> > intended to harm China would be supported by the American voters.
> >
> > With regard to "international legal framework", a honest observer may
> > notice that this framework had been undermined many times before. In
> > the post-Cold War period, it first had happened in the Yugoslavia case.
> > Then there were those Atlanticist unilateral intrusions in the Middle
> > East. The fact "leading scholar" didn't note it, naturally means these
> > deeds did not impact China much, so they can be overlooked. Still, any
> > precedental violation makes next violations more probable.
> >
> > In the recent world history there were examples when the Atlanticism
> > - up to some moment - respected some independent "regimes", recognized
> > their governments legal/legitimate, dealt with them well economically.
> > There was time when Lybia's Muammar Gaddafi was a distinguished guest
> > in the European capitals, with all due honors as it should be when you
> > host a respected foreign leader. But one day they got an opportunity to
> > dump Gaddafi, and they squashed him mercilessly (which brought nothing
> > good neither to the regular Lybians nor to the regular Europeans).
> > Then, Ukraine's Yanukovich. European observers depicted the day he
> > had become elected president as a triumph of democracy in the Ukraine
> > <https://www.osce.org/node/51888>. However, when he showed himself to
> > be independent, he was labeled as tyrant, and the coup against him had
> > been organized (which brought nothing good to the regular Ukrainians).
> >
> > Similary, the Atlanticism may respect China at present, but they won't
> > miss any opportunity to harm China, if only they got such an occasion.
> > The fans of "international legal framework" should look at things more
> > broadly and realistically: the Atlanticism would try to contain Chinese
> > developments anyway, regardless of any Russian action. The only way to
> > somehow change it is "to persuade" the Atlanticist policy makers that
> > they need to respect not only themselves.
> >
> > Any conflicts always suck up resources for a non-productive spending,
> > which makes all conflicting parties relatively weaker against the non-
> > conflicting rest. Thus the Ukraine-related conflict will make all the
> > parties - Russia, Europe and the US - relatively weaker against the
> > rest of the world. In the longer-term perspective, it benefits China
> > (also, from this perspective, it would be beneficial for both China
> > and India to settle their territorial disputes in some peaceful way).
> > In the short-term, the impact on trade may be somewhat discomfortable
> > indeed. And such trends started earlier, and regardless of Russia.

1. Don't know much about Yan.
I read one of his book. But I forget what his book was about. However, I did
not find anything unexpected. He is quite Chinese as far as I understand. He
also had a discussion with G John Ikenbery (available from youtube).
Check him out if you want.

2. Don't understand your point.
I understand Putin/Russia's point of view and why he/it had to carry out the
special operation. Nevertheless, strictly from a CHINESE point of view, many
would consider such operation not beneficial to China. Expressing their view
per se would not make them Atlanticists.

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor