The big deal: Putin intends to dismantle the world order

[JayH]

There is considerable real evidence of the Russian intentions, the question is will the west wake up soon enough to reign in the Russians?
No doubt that Trump's attempts to cosy up to Putin & Russia ( whatever his motivation or reasons are) has empowered and encouraged Russia . Exactly the result is yet to be seen.


Trump, Putin and the New Cold War

The conflict is back. But this time, only one side is fighting.

When President Donald Trump met Angela Merkel last March for the first time, the German chancellor had Russia on her mind. Allegations about the Russian intervention on Trump’s behalf in the U.S. presidential election were swirling around Washington—and Trump had done nothing to allay the concerns of Russia’s neighbors that he planned to forge ahead with a new opening to Vladimir Putin, the Kremlin strongman he has so openly admired. He had never really backed away from his public bashing of NATO, either. The American security pact with Europe had survived for seven decades, since its creation in the aftermath of World War II as a counterbalance to the Soviet Union. But Merkel and many others now wondered if NATO could outlast the twin assaults of a Russian leader who had long viewed it as enemy No. 1 and an American president who publicly branded it as “obsolete.”


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/22/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-cold-war-216157

[JayH]

None of this should surprise most  here.
Since Russian troops began seizing government buildings in Crimea four years ago, the international community has become accustomed to encountering new acts of Russian aggression on an almost daily basis. Whether it is masked men in eastern Ukraine, a chemical weapons attack in the English countryside, or an attempted coup in the Balkans, the process is more or less the same—faced by a fresh round of accusations, the Kremlin denies everything and declares, “You can’t prove it was us.”

From Crimea to Salisbury: Time to Acknowledge Putin’s Global Hybrid War

This is how Putin’s Russia wages war, by attacking in a myriad of different directions while carefully maintaining a semblance of plausible deniability that leaves its victims partially paralyzed and unable to respond effectively to an enemy they cannot conclusively unmask. Few doubt that Russia is behind each new act of aggression, but it is often difficult to differentiate between Putin’s many proxies and the hand of the Kremlin itself. The result is a slow boil conflict in which Russia is able to punch well above its weight against an array of ostensibly more powerful opponents who fail to recognize they are engaged in hostilities at all.

One of the reasons Putin’s strategy of plausible deniability is so effective is because virtually nobody in the West seems to appreciate the scale of Russian hostility toward the post-Cold War world or the Kremlin’s readiness to resort to acts of aggression. They cannot comprehend why any rational nation would seek to dismantle the international security system, and remain trapped by the post-history delusion that Great Powers do not attack one another anymore.

http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/from-crimea-to-salisbury-time-to-acknowledge-putin-s-global-hybrid-war

[JayH]

Some very simple reasons why Russia needs to be seen for what it is.
"But there also are two practical — and deeply alarming — reasons why Putin ordered that nerve-agent drive-by now. First, he was sending a message to any potential double agents that Russia would kill them — and their families — no matter where they might find refuge or how long it might take.

The second reason, though, is the one that should jerk us awake: Putin was warning the likes of Paul Manafort and others associated with the Trump campaign that they need to keep their mouths shut about their Russian ties — or face the consequences.

The West is still letting Putin run wild


If anyone needed further proof of Vladimir Putin’s malevolence, the last 10 days provided chilling examples. His agents attacked a Russian defector and his daughter with nerve agent on British soil, leaving them in critical condition. Then Putin claimed that “Jews” might have been behind the meddling in US elections.

His warplanes continued slaughtering civilians in Syria, too, but no one cares about that.

Over the weekend, Putin flashed his Russian-nationalist side, the bigoted-strongman persona that appeals to the Alt-Right here and to neo-fascists in Europe. Smirking, he suggested that the cyber-attacks on the 2016 US elections might have been staged by Ukrainians, (Muslim) Tatars, or “Jews, just with Russian citizenship.”

http://nypost.com/2018/03/12/the-west-is-still-letting-putin-run-wild/

[JayH]

Given the comments in other threads today that  more appropriate to this thread --
Over 30 Russians have met mysterious deaths in the UK in recent times.


Russia’s been waging war on the West for years. We just haven’t noticed.

The war arguably began in 2008 when Russia invaded Georgia, a pro-Western country that sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan and was anxious to join NATO. Rather than punishing Vladimir Putin for his aggression, the Obama administration later responded with a “reset” of relations. Putin was emboldened to aggress again: In 2014, his “little green men” — uniformed Russian soldiers with their insignia removed — invaded Ukraine. He annexed Crimea and turned eastern Ukraine into a Russian proxy state. This time the United States and Europe did respond with sanctions — but not strongly enough to dissuade him.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/russias-been-waging-war-on-the-west-for-at-least-a-decade-we-just-havent-noticed/2018/03/15/83926c78-2875-11e8-bc72-077aa4dab9ef_story.html?utm_term=.43a62dc11560

[southernX]

jay

imo the west has noticed it over that whole time

but its not been worthwhile them acting , as it was mainly in non important places ito , so they put it in the too hard basket and stayed weak and allowed the problem to grow , hoping it would stop or go away

it hasnt and it wont imo

SX

[JayH]

There are people who do "get" what Russia is doing and what is required to counter it .
The problem is that the net affect of some of the chaos Putin has managed to wreak on the western world is currently paying him incredible dividends .
Promoting Brexit in the UK has created political turmoil in the UK government,getting Trump elected in the US,numerous extremists in EU parliaments etc  has all tied the hands of western governments -- more concerned with their own survival and not looking at serious big picture issues.



From Crimea to Salisbury: Time to Acknowledge Putin’s Global Hybrid War

This is how Putin’s Russia wages war, by attacking in a myriad of different directions while carefully maintaining a semblance of plausible deniability that leaves its victims partially paralyzed and unable to respond effectively to an enemy they cannot conclusively unmask. Few doubt that Russia is behind each new act of aggression, but it is often difficult to differentiate between Putin’s many proxies and the hand of the Kremlin itself. The result is a slow boil conflict in which Russia is able to punch well above its weight against an array of ostensibly more powerful opponents who fail to recognize they are engaged in hostilities at all.

One of the reasons Putin’s strategy of plausible deniability is so effective is because virtually nobody in the West seems to appreciate the scale of Russian hostility toward the post-Cold War world or the Kremlin’s readiness to resort to acts of aggression. They cannot comprehend why any rational nation would seek to dismantle the international security system, and remain trapped by the post-history delusion that Great Powers do not attack one another anymore.

http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/from-crimea-to-salisbury-time-to-acknowledge-putin-s-global-hybrid-war

[Boethius]

but its not been worthwhile them acting , as it was mainly in non important places ito , so they put it in the too hard basket and stayed weak and allowed the problem to grow , hoping it would stop or go away

it hasnt and it wont imo

SX

The Russians, and the Chinese, have used our weakness, namely, avarice, against us very effectively. I don’t think things will change because human nature hasn’t changed

[kynrazor]

The Russians, and the Chinese, have used our weakness, namely, avarice, against us very effectively. I don’t think things will change because human nature hasn’t changed

I think it's very unfair to group the Chinese together with the Russians Boe. I believe the USA and the Chinese have had a mutually beneficial relationship, way better than the alternative eg. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) nuclear scenario IMO. Both countries have exploited each others' weaknesses, akin to a Symbiotic relationship in the form of mutually beneficial trade as a result of the foreign policies set in motion by Henry Kissinger.

If you haven't come across the book before, I encourage you to read "On China", a book written by the former United States Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger. He's one of the most famous diplomats of the 20th century, and is well known for the role he played in Sino-American relations during the Nixon administration particularly when President Nixon first made his visit to China in 1972 when China was only starting to open up to capitalism.

It was originally his plan (with Nixon's approval) to set in motion the growing economic trade between the USA and China in order to safeguard both nations from future wars via economics, by making it so that both countries will stand to lose more than can be gained in the event of a War. And USA has benefited from the trade immensely in the form of handsome profits and cheaper products and lower inflation and so has China by inevitably gaining the technological know-how from the U.S as they learn to produce things better and better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_China

If you think the Chinese are not afflicted by avarice, think again. If you've ever visited present-day China, especially the urbanised parts of the country where the majority of the population now reside, you'll notice all people care about is having money. Way before the grooms are even considered as suitable future husbands, you can be sure that a serious assessment has been had on their future earning potential. The majority of Chinese in China are simply addicted to pieces of paper called money.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caishen

Heck there's even a God of Wealth for people to worship. For every single Chinese New Year celebration, you may even hear an old song chanting away "God of Wealth is here! God of Wealth is here!"

What Putin did was frankly extremely illogical in the long-term. Throwing away all the hard-earned political capital earned throughout the Soviet Union & Russian Federation's history by going on expensive foreign adventures in Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere and disrupting other nations' trade, all for the sake of keeping his power grip (iron fist?) on Russia at the expense of the citizenry and now shutting down international trade instead of opening up further. Not much different from the Russian Empire I figure.

As such, I do not see how Putin's government has made effective use of the Americans' avarice. In fact, I have only seen the opposite?? Eg. sanctions? and counter-sanctions??

[Trenchcoat]

Well Kyn I think money/trade has certainly helped to focus Chinese attention away from aggression and more onto trade industrial growth. I'm not saying it has been a period without some territorial expansive moves from China but China has been looking a lot less of a threat in the last decade or two than as it was being vied back in the 90s. Back then China was focused a lot on its military and while this has grown its increasingly aggressive stance back then has shifted more onto trade/economic matters as its economy boomed.

Main problem with China now is that like Russia it seems to be moving towards dictatorship once again and could increasingly become more hostile as a result.

As you know doubt know the shortage of women in China is far more acute than here as a result of its previous 1 child policy. So I'm guessing it makes sense for family of the woman concerned to be picky when it comes to the economic fortunes of a potential husband. I saw a TV program on this type of subject a numbers of years back now and there where this group of guys intently all after the odd few girls at a social gathering, crazy.

Anyway, how is all of this stuff with Russia/Putin/Nerve Gas affecting your search Kyn? Might it become a concern with meeting your girl you're interested in in Moscow? I'm assuming it a topic best not ventured into much with her unless she likes talking about that sort off stuff of course.


My main thoughts on Russia is that either the EU/Nato should have got the former Soviet Republics on board much sooner in the day, and perhaps still should do or the EU should have offered membership to Russia along with the other FSU Republics bordering Europe to try to bring them onside and feeling less encircled. This could still happen and I think would be a good thing, but I think the EU are again to set in their ways and rigid in thinking to recognise the opportunity. They tend to stick to the notion of a nation being in alignment with their economic outlook before they will even consider membership. They fail to realise though that this is to the detriment of the organisation itself. To be honest the EU would suit these eastern bloc countries more than the UK and western Europe where it is rather not needed in the form it is in and more of a hindrance to many western European nations ability to direct their own nation in the direction it wishes to proceed in. I think once again a great opportunity has been lost over many years by the EU's inability to act quickly, intelligently and think on its feet.

[BillyB]

I think it's very unfair to group the Chinese together with the Russians Boe. I believe the USA and the Chinese have had a mutually beneficial relationship, way better than the alternative eg. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) nuclear scenario IMO.

China is not satisfied with economic prosperity. They need more. Because of MAD, Russian and China know the West is less inclined to do anything about their aggressive behavior thus enabling to go after what they want.

[Boethius]

I think it's very unfair to group the Chinese together with the Russians Boe. I believe the USA and the Chinese have had a mutually beneficial relationship, way better than the alternative eg. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) nuclear scenario IMO. Both countries have exploited each others' weaknesses, akin to a Symbiotic relationship in the form of mutually beneficial trade as a result of the foreign policies set in motion by Henry Kissinger.

If you haven't come across the book before, I encourage you to read "On China", a book written by the former United States Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger. He's one of the most famous diplomats of the 20th century, and is well known for the role he played in Sino-American relations during the Nixon administration particularly when President Nixon first made his visit to China in 1972 when China was only starting to open up to capitalism.

It was originally his plan (with Nixon's approval) to set in motion the growing economic trade between the USA and China in order to safeguard both nations from future wars via economics, by making it so that both countries will stand to lose more than can be gained in the event of a War. And USA has benefited from the trade immensely in the form of handsome profits and cheaper products and lower inflation and so has China by inevitably gaining the technological know-how from the U.S as they learn to produce things better and better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_China

If you think the Chinese are not afflicted by avarice, think again. If you've ever visited present-day China, especially the urbanised parts of the country where the majority of the population now reside, you'll notice all people care about is having money. Way before the grooms are even considered as suitable future husbands, you can be sure that a serious assessment has been had on their future earning potential. The majority of Chinese in China are simply addicted to pieces of paper called money.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caishen

Heck there's even a God of Wealth for people to worship. For every single Chinese New Year celebration, you may even hear an old song chanting away "God of Wealth is here! God of Wealth is here!"

What Putin did was frankly extremely illogical in the long-term. Throwing away all the hard-earned political capital earned throughout the Soviet Union & Russian Federation's history by going on expensive foreign adventures in Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere and disrupting other nations' trade, all for the sake of keeping his power grip (iron fist?) on Russia at the expense of the citizenry and now shutting down international trade instead of opening up further. Not much different from the Russian Empire I figure.

As such, I do not see how Putin's government has made effective use of the Americans' avarice. In fact, I have only seen the opposite?? Eg. sanctions? and counter-sanctions??

I certainly know who Henry Kissinger is!


Were you aware that Canada started trading with China in the 1960's?  And that Pierre Trudeau opened negotiations, leading Canada to have diplomatic relations with China in 1970?


The reason the US wanted diplomatic relations with China was to gain leverage over the USSR.  There was no private trade in communist China at that time, and would not be until after the death of Mao.


China refuses to honour patent and trademark infringements, and it is very difficult for Western companies to register their intellectual property rights in China.  Western companies there routinely are told to provide intellectual property, which the Chinese then basically steal for their own purposes.  Small businesses established by Westerners are often taken over by Chinese partners, with little legal recourse to the Western partner. 


How, other than keeping the cost of goods low, does moving manufacturing to China from the West benefit the West? 

[DaveNY]

Putin will never dismantle the world order, China will not allow it. China might dismantle the world order and Russia might play some small part but China will lead the way.

China's economy is far stronger than Russia's. China's military while well behind that of the US is as strong as Russia's and getting stronger. Simply put, China has far more money to spend on its military than Russia.

Look at the BRICS nations. Russia is #4 in economic strength in a group of 5 countries with China as #1. For the foreseeable future in the BRICS China will lead and the other nations, including Russia, will follow as directed by China. Unless Russia wants to go it alone Russia has little choice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS

[kynrazor]

Anyway, how is all of this stuff with Russia/Putin/Nerve Gas affecting your search Kyn? Might it become a concern with meeting your girl you're interested in in Moscow? I'm assuming it a topic best not ventured into much with her unless she likes talking about that sort off stuff of course.

Haha no worry Trench. I find there's a big disconnect between the ruling elite in Russia and the common people who's just trying to make ends meet to scrape by. So long as I don't get involved with a woman whose daddy is one of Putin's aides, I should be all good even if we happen to break-up as I'm pretty sure I won't get assassinated with Radiation, Gassed etc etc for revenge.

The majority of FSU women should be fine. Even the women I've talked to online from the Far East Siberia to Moscow all seem to be aware Putin will probably win the election again, apparently uncontested. No idea how any of this has affected them. Their most important priority is finding their own happiness and so too are strange humans like us From Great Britain

Well Kyn I think money/trade has certainly helped to focus Chinese attention away from aggression and more onto trade industrial growth. I'm not saying it has been a period without some territorial expansive moves from China but China has been looking a lot less of a threat in the last decade or two than as it was being vied back in the 90s. Back then China was focused a lot on its military and while this has grown its increasingly aggressive stance back then has shifted more onto trade/economic matters as its economy boomed.

Main problem with China now is that like Russia it seems to be moving towards dictatorship once again and could increasingly become more hostile as a result.

My main thoughts on Russia is that either the EU/Nato should have got the former Soviet Republics on board much sooner in the day, and perhaps still should do or the EU should have offered membership to Russia along with the other FSU Republics bordering Europe to try to bring them onside and feeling less encircled. This could still happen and I think would be a good thing, but I think the EU are again to set in their ways and rigid in thinking to recognise the opportunity. They tend to stick to the notion of a nation being in alignment with their economic outlook before they will even consider membership. They fail to realise though that this is to the detriment of the organisation itself. To be honest the EU would suit these eastern bloc countries more than the UK and western Europe where it is rather not needed in the form it is in and more of a hindrance to many western European nations ability to direct their own nation in the direction it wishes to proceed in. I think once again a great opportunity has been lost over many years by the EU's inability to act quickly, intelligently and think on its feet.

  When has China ever ceased being a dictatorship Trench? Even after Chairman Deng was gone after Chairman Mao, Chairman Deng's plans for the large-scale elimination of poverty is still being closely followed and executed by present-day Chairman Xi Jinping. So in a sense, it's still Chairman Deng (maybe also Chairman Mao as it is still the communist party) who's ruling China even today. If Chairman Xi has been behind schedule on the economic plans set in motion by Chairman Deng 40 years ago, other members of the party in power can still impeach Chairman Xi collectively. I think the article describes the situation way better than I can.

http://www.atimes.com/fear-mongering-xis-term-limit-removal/

Instead of imagining one individual ruling over China, I think a better analogy is to imagine a "collective superbrain" (without the Schizophrenic tendencies of the U.S a.k.a Republicans vs Democrats) ruling over China. A superbrain that is ultra-clear about their long-term goals and how they intend to get there. Of course no system of governance is perfect and I won't be surprised if there are many unintended flaws (eg. corruption) but so far it's been working alright.

I do not know what to think of the EU to be honest. Until all countries in the EU decide to integrate culturally as well as economically, immigration issues will forever be a hot topic. Yet, you can't have a viable long-term integration without both because a common currency (EUR) requires one central bank (ECB) which needs to be controlled ideally by one central government.

Just look at India, a very ad-hoc collective of lands of a country left to their own devices after Independence by the former British Empire. People are still squabbling over thousand-year-old feuds! And speaking in dozens of different languages (save for English which has pretty much kept India together).

All these has impacted the ease of doing business in India.

[JayH]

Putin will never dismantle the world order, China will not allow it.

I would unequivocally disagree.
Today -it has little to do with China . For the future -that is a different case and China would most likely be the major beneficiary. For all the criticism of China -- they do things for the long term and work to those goals from many different directions.China embarked on a 25 year plan in about 2005  and are currently well ahead of schedule -even despite some recent slow downs and setbacks.

Russia - and specifically Putin is beating to his own drum. To address a point made in the thread about the "why" Russia has acted how they have . Stating it simply -- apart from Putin's idealistic views of recreating the Soviet state that he NEVER forgave the west and in particular the USA for the break up of his beloved Soviet Union.
The fact that he could punish the west  -- by creating mayhem by using  fundamental western beliefs to get the west shooting itself in both feet!!
The threat that Russia now presents to the west will dismantle order and stability -- as we have already seen.  Just look at the long list of countries Russia is currently promoting and backing discord in . The list grows longer by the day-- with active Russian military involvement spreading further west a matter of fact.
Putin has capitalised on the namby pamby approach of western governments -- and reaped the rewards for the discord created in western countries.
It has the potential to create spotfires in numerous countries with armed conflicts .

If the west sits on it's collective backsides much longer it will face a situation as critical as WW2 before it wakes up !

[BC]

I do not know what to think of the EU to be honest. Until all countries in the EU decide to integrate culturally as well as economically, immigration issues will forever be a hot topic. Yet, you can't have a viable long-term integration without both because a common currency (EUR) requires one central bank (ECB) which needs to be controlled ideally by one central government.

Chances for cultural integration of EU is practically nil.  All want to maintain a semblance of their nation's history. Language plays a great role. Although there are some with resentments regarding immigration it's quite peaceful, mostly driven by those at the bottom tiers.  The big difference between the US and EU is that in the US many more exist at the bottom tiers of the economy and feel more at risk with immigration.  This due difference due mainly to the social net structures EU has in place.  Health insurance, housing, and other support benefits.  Yes, wages are lower than in the US but the underlying social structures raise the bar and living standards considerably.

The 5-star movement in Italy is a bit overstated in the west.  I don't see it as 'Trumpist' at all, still far to the left of the US 'right' political spectrum. As far as immigration is concerned it's more about leveling the playing field and current EU regulations that place the onus of handling immigration applications and initial living support in the first country where immigrants set foot instead of sharing the weight between all countries.  Let's say 1000 folks take a boat to Italy, all 1000 are supported while their immigration status is decided in Italy.  The 5-star movement wants to take those 1000 immigrants and divide them between all countries in EU.  They would file their immigration papers in all countries and receive support from the individual countries they were 'assigned' to.  The movement allows citizens a larger role in law and decisionmaking.  Stuff like electronic ballots and even a web-based platform where everyone can participate and vote for the directions the movement should take.  Want a new law?  Sign on and propose it. Quite novel, but new political territory that might just catch on.  It's not that different from soliciting your congressperson, except that they more or less have to follow the wishes of the constituents and not their own agenda.  We'll see as time goes by how this works out or not.

[kynrazor]

Chances for cultural integration of EU is practically nil.

Thanks BC. Very interesting thoughts. I agree I think it's practically nil. Perhaps in another few thousand years, who knows?

China is not satisfied with economic prosperity. They need more. Because of MAD, Russian and China know the West is less inclined to do anything about their aggressive behavior thus enabling to go after what they want.

I don't know if China will become an expansionist power hellbent on controlling the world. What I do know is they want WIN-WIN solutions and the economy remains the top priority, in line with the Common Chinese obsession to make lots and lots of money.

If they (Common Chinese) have money, what more would they want? Property in New York? Buy it with cash savings, done. The last thing on their mind is going to War with the rest of the world and plunging themselves into misery again.

Even if we assume China has been really aggressive, what do you expect the West to do? Sanction China and destroy easy profits for their own corporations and countries? Impose tariffs to protect local manufacturers who refuse to adapt to the changing times?

Isn't America an advocate for Free Trade and American Ingenuity? Both things which China admire.

Actually, I think America really has also been very smart about trade. IF the U.S government one day decides to default on their debt, the U.S debt bonds bought by China (trillions of dollars worth) will altogether become worthless in a flash. And the Chinese would have ended up working so hard for nothing, with all their foreign U.S currency surplus all these years vanishing into thin air should the U.S decide not to honour them.

Were you aware that Canada started trading with China in the 1960's?  And that Pierre Trudeau opened negotiations, leading Canada to have diplomatic relations with China in 1970?

Even if the USSR have not existed, would Canada have behaved differently? For Canada, it's opening up such a huge market to sell their stuff, though the trade relations never really quite reached their full potential due to strained relations over the issue of Taiwan. For China, it's only natural to want to make more powerful friends and gain more influence.

The reason the US wanted diplomatic relations with China was to gain leverage over the USSR.  There was no private trade in communist China at that time, and would not be until after the death of Mao.

And did making friends with China destroy the USSR outright? If the motivation of the U.S was simply to contain Soviet aggression, then the U.S wouldn't have needed to establish relations with China. By the 1970s, China's Communist Party have gone their separate ways from the Soviet Union ever since Nikita Khruschev came to power in the Soviet Union.

It'll be a mistake to think that without the U.S, China would have been swallowed up by the USSR. In fact, the USSR never stood much of a chance to conquer China, even if they've tried. And vice versa. China would've contained the Soviets alone because they needed to, with or without the U.S on their side.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict#Chinese_and_Soviet_government_views_of_a_potential_confrontation

Where was the U.S in the 1960s? I wager the U.S was perhaps too happy to just sit and watch the USSR and China bloody their noses. Like you said, it was ultimately avarice and the irresistible humongous Chinese market that was enough to make every businessman drool that changed all that.

China refuses to honour patent and trademark infringements, and it is very difficult for Western companies to register their intellectual property rights in China.  Western companies there routinely are told to provide intellectual property, which the Chinese then basically steal for their own purposes.  Small businesses established by Westerners are often taken over by Chinese partners, with little legal recourse to the Western partner.

I'm not completely bought on the story. The Chinese have been complaining about the opposite from their side. Mentioning how more often than not, western companies use long drawn-out legal battles (lawsuits) to bankrupt companies who step on their own turf (eg. Apple vs Samsung anyone?) in order to destroy newcomers in this globalised competitive market today.

Actually, I'll argue that we're seeing increasing signs that China has more interest in protecting Intellectual Property Rights than at anytime in its history.

http://yaogen.se/2017/02/17/has-china-become-more-innovative

China is now leading the world as the number one nation in the number of patents being filed for, and the number of patents granted.

Everything in China is really growing by leaps and bounds, and there are still so many poor people in China today. Even now, at such a relatively unevenly developed state, they have the sheer numbers in terms of engineers, scientists, mathematicians etc etc etc. Can you just imagine the unlocked human potential when everyone will have a standard of living as good as the USA?

So much profit still to be made for the U.S? I don't know why people living in the U.S are seriously complaining. Maybe it's because most of their tax dollars have been spent on building up the military and not enough on their own infrastructure. I don't know.

How, other than keeping the cost of goods low, does moving manufacturing to China from the West benefit the West?

It's a globalised world now. It's what made America so strong today.

Why worry? Did America overtaking Great Britain as the world's largest economy destroy Great Britain's economy? As far as I'm concerned, Brits have been doing bloody well relative to the rest of the world even after both World Wars.

Might I add that Intellectual Property Rights in America was very weak to begin with. The Industrial titans like Andrew Carnegie, John Rockefeller, Thomas Edison, J.P Morgan etc etc all used whatever hook and crook they could leverage on, to get what they wanted.

[Boethius]

Even if the USSR have not existed, would Canada have behaved differently? For Canada, it's opening up such a huge market to sell their stuff, though the trade relations never really quite reached their full potential due to strained relations over the issue of Taiwan. For China, it's only natural to want to make more powerful friends and gain more influence.

Canada had excellent relations with the USSR in Trudeau's time as well.  I don't think Trudeau was looking for trade relations, other than perhaps to sell wheat, as China didn't really produce anything then.


Pierre Trudeau also developed excellent relations with Cuba, so much so that after he retired, he used to visit Fidel Castro routinely.  They used to have a lot of philosophical discussions, though Trudeau disagreed with Castro on the ability to change human behaviour.  Such was their friendship, that when Trudeau died, Castro attended his funeral.

And did making friends with China destroy the USSR outright? If the motivation of the U.S was simply to contain Soviet aggression, then the U.S wouldn't have needed to establish relations with China. By the 1970s, China's Communist Party have gone their separate ways from the Soviet Union ever since Nikita Khruschev came to power in the Soviet Union.

It was as a counterbalance, it had nothing to do with power.

It'll be a mistake to think that without the U.S, China would have been swallowed up by the USSR. In fact, the USSR never stood much of a chance to conquer China, even if they've tried. And vice versa. China would've contained the Soviets alone because they needed to, with or without the U.S on their side.

I don't think anyone ever thought that, at least, not Nixon.  Or Canada for that matter.  Probably not Soviet leaders either.

Where was the U.S in the 1960s? I wager the U.S was perhaps too happy to just sit and watch the USSR and China bloody their noses. Like you said, it was ultimately avarice and the irresistible humongous Chinese market that was enough to make every businessman drool that changed all that.

No, I reiterate, Nixon was not thinking of markets.  China was a closed market at that time.  Although it initiated some market reforms in the late 1970's, it wasn't open to the average Western businessman at that time.

I'm not completely bought on the story. The Chinese have been complaining about the opposite from their side. Mentioning how more often than not, western companies use long drawn-out legal battles (lawsuits) to bankrupt companies who step on their own turf (eg. Apple vs Samsung anyone?) in order to destroy newcomers in this globalised competitive market today.

Samsung did breach Apple's patents.  Why should China steal existing patents for their markets?  It isn't about bankrupting companies, it's about protecting proprietary information.

Actually, I'll argue that we're seeing increasing signs that China has more interest in protecting Intellectual Property Rights than at anytime in its history.

China routinely steals Western intellectual property for their domestic market. 

China is now leading the world as the number one nation in the number of patents being filed for, and the number of patents granted.

Anyone can file a patent for anything.  The bigger question is, how many of those patents have made their way to market in meaningful ways?

Everything in China is really growing by leaps and bounds, and there are still so many poor people in China today. Even now, at such a relatively unevenly developed state, they have the sheer numbers in terms of engineers, scientists, mathematicians etc etc etc. Can you just imagine the unlocked human potential when everyone will have a standard of living as good as the USA?

I hope they will have a great standard of living, but from what I have seen of their "intellectuals" here, their intellectuals are second rate - no innovation.  They are good at regurgitation, not imagination.  Perhaps their best and brightest remain in China.  But, keep in mind, that, like the USSR, they decimated their intellectual classes. 

So much profit still to be made for the U.S? I don't know why people living in the U.S are seriously complaining. Maybe it's because most of their tax dollars have been spent on building up the military and not enough on their own infrastructure. I don't know.

I'm not saying profit must be made by the West, in general, at the expense of other nations.  Just that the West put profit above everything else.


I don't know if military spending is a bad thing.  A significant amount of innovation, of products we now use everyday, were developed initially for military applications, and the military is usually a decade or so ahead of the public in terms of what it uses.  Computers were virtually unknown when the better half was in the navy, but were on every Soviet ship - and that's at a time when Soviet stores used abaci!

Why worry? Did America overtaking Great Britain as the world's largest economy destroy Great Britain's economy? As far as I'm concerned, Brits have been doing bloody well relative to the rest of the world even after both World Wars.

I don't worry about economics.  I worry about the fate of democracy in a world where oligarchy is surging.

Might I add that Intellectual Property Rights in America was very weak to begin with. The Industrial titans like Andrew Carnegie, John Rockefeller, Thomas Edison, J.P Morgan etc etc all used whatever hook and crook they could leverage on, to get what they wanted.

What happened a century or so ago in the business world does not have much relevance to economic systems of today.  At the time of those robber barons, workers had virtually no rights.

[BillyB]

I don't know if China will become an expansionist power hellbent on controlling the world.

America is in their way. Remove the obstacle called America, China would be taking more than just a few islands in the China Sea. For starters, they want Taiwan, who America sworn to protect. History has shown there are always leaders of nations, kingdoms, and empires who exist that want more than they have. Remember history. Understand human nature. We're selfish.

[kynrazor]

It was as a counterbalance, it had nothing to do with power.

I don't think anyone ever thought that, at least, not Nixon.  Or Canada for that matter.  Probably not Soviet leaders either.

No, I reiterate, Nixon was not thinking of markets.  China was a closed market at that time.  Although it initiated some market reforms in the late 1970's, it wasn't open to the average Western businessman at that time.

Yes I'm very sure Nixon was, or at least his shrewd diplomat Henry Kissinger. Nixon's groundbreaking visit in 1972 was the first move in a series of events that inevitably led to the opening up of China and the normalizing of relations between the U.S and China in 1979 without which trade between the U.S and China wouldn't have flourished to what it is today.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/what-if-richard-nixon-had-never-gone-china-18297

Samsung did breach Apple's patents.  Why should China steal existing patents for their markets?  It isn't about bankrupting companies, it's about protecting proprietary information.

China routinely steals Western intellectual property for their domestic market. 

Anyone can file a patent for anything.  The bigger question is, how many of those patents have made their way to market in meaningful ways? 

Indeed, anyone can file a patent, but not all are granted.

http://www.androidcentral.com/apple-wins-120-million-samsung-slide-unlock-patent-lawsuit

As for Apple, fighting over a patent for "slide to unlock" feature in the software  Seems a blatant use of patents to make life difficult for other companies as the lawsuit went on for 7 years. Seriously, I'm not even sure why such "features" can be patented.

I hope they will have a great standard of living, but from what I have seen of their "intellectuals" here, their intellectuals are second rate - no innovation.  They are good at regurgitation, not imagination.  Perhaps their best and brightest remain in China.  But, keep in mind, that, like the USSR, they decimated their intellectual classes.

It's very true Boe. All the above you pointed out are still present issues but things are changing fast as China opens more and more of itself up. The best and brightest may remain in China but the rich ones tend to continue to migrate by the tens of thousands to other more affluent societies like the U.S, Canada and Australia, taking with them their millions of dollars.

I'm not saying profit must be made by the West, in general, at the expense of other nations.  Just that the West put profit above everything else.

So too are the Chinese in China now. Even I as a Brit of Chinese ethnic stock is shaking my head at their insane obsession with money. Can't go back now can't we? The West taught them capitalism and now everyone in China wants to live the good life like the Americans, no matter the environmental damage.

I don't know if military spending is a bad thing.  A significant amount of innovation, of products we now use everyday, were developed initially for military applications, and the military is usually a decade or so ahead of the public in terms of what it uses.  Computers were virtually unknown when the better half was in the navy, but were on every Soviet ship - and that's at a time when Soviet stores used abaci!

I don't know too. But I do wonder if these innovations would've been made even without military assistance eg. NASA (though even NASA itself received substantial funds from the military eg. via black programs to make very cool stuff like Spy Satellites ).  Not making this up, it was certainly a fascinating read!

I don't worry about economics.  I worry about the fate of democracy in a world where oligarchy is surging.

What happened a century or so ago in the business world does not have much relevance to economic systems of today.  At the time of those robber barons, workers had virtually no rights.

Feels like the old America is present-day China, where workers too have virtually no rights and filled with a growing "oligarchy" rich elite class.

If that's the case, I'm very sure China would eventually turn into more or less the same present-day America, bar a very big in-country political disaster.

In which case, why the cause to worry? 

[DaveNY]

I would unequivocally disagree.
Today -it has little to do with China . For the future -that is a different case and China would most likely be the major beneficiary. For all the criticism of China -- they do things for the long term and work to those goals from many different directions.China embarked on a 25 year plan in about 2005  and are currently well ahead of schedule -even despite some recent slow downs and setbacks.

Russia - and specifically Putin is beating to his own drum. To address a point made in the thread about the "why" Russia has acted how they have . Stating it simply -- apart from Putin's idealistic views of recreating the Soviet state that he NEVER forgave the west and in particular the USA for the break up of his beloved Soviet Union.
The fact that he could punish the west  -- by creating mayhem by using  fundamental western beliefs to get the west shooting itself in both feet!!
The threat that Russia now presents to the west will dismantle order and stability -- as we have already seen.  Just look at the long list of countries Russia is currently promoting and backing discord in . The list grows longer by the day-- with active Russian military involvement spreading further west a matter of fact.
Putin has capitalised on the namby pamby approach of western governments -- and reaped the rewards for the discord created in western countries.
It has the potential to create spotfires in numerous countries with armed conflicts .

If the west sits on it's collective backsides much longer it will face a situation as critical as WW2 before it wakes up !

Jay I'm not saying Putin can't meddle in places like the eastern Ukraine or annexing Crimea or meddling in the Baltic states. China probably doesn't care much about those areas and may even be encouraging Putin to act because it distracts the west from China's ventures in areas like the South China Sea.

What I'm saying is for the big things like going to war or toppling a western back NATO ally those are areas where Putin is going to have to be careful and make sure he isn't upsetting something China is already planning. Because like it or not China is Russia's only source of fund for large projects since Russia can no longer access funds from Europe or America. If China cuts Putin off financially all those military and large infrastructure projects Putin has planned are going to be put on hold for many years.

[ML]

Haha no worry Trench. I find there's a big disconnect between the ruling elite in Russia and the common people who's just trying to make ends meet to scrape by. So long as I don't get involved with a woman whose daddy is one of Putin's aides, I should be all good even if we happen to break-up as I'm pretty sure I won't get assassinated with Radiation, Gassed etc etc for revenge.

You are completely missing the point.
Of course, no big chance of getting radiated, gassed, etc.
But nothing to do with whether a particular gal is at all connected to Putin.

The Russian women (and men) are intensely loyal to anything Russian.
They will defend anything done by Russians, even the most despicable of acts.

At any point in your relationship, you could bring up some totally despicable act committed by Russians or Russian government . . . doesn't matter if a government headed by Putin or any person X, Y, Z and doesn't matter if the gal even likes or approves of that particular leader.

The RW would either:  deny it happened (doesn't matter the overwhelming evidence), or just tell you point blank that it was appropriate and justified.  If it's Russian . . . then it is by default correct.

You will have to decide if you could live with such a personality and mind set; and you already know the answer to that.

There are, of course, several men here who can live comfortably with such a mind set.

[Boethius]

Although I agree with you generally ML, it’s not universal. OlgaH, for example, who used to post here, was very anti Putin, and that’s going back per. Her mother was afraid she’d be arrested on her return.

 

[ML]

Although I agree with you generally ML, it’s not universal. OlgaH, for example, who used to post here, was very anti Putin, and that’s going back per. Her mother was afraid she’d be arrested on her return.

But I think most all Russian people could be anti Putin or anti any particular leader . . . and still defend actions taken by Russia to the death.

During periods of relative calm 1990s to 2014 or so, this was not much of an issue, thus no problems for most RW-WM.

[kynrazor]

You are completely missing the point.
Of course, no big chance of getting radiated, gassed, etc.
But nothing to do with whether a particular gal is at all connected to Putin.

The Russian women (and men) are intensely loyal to anything Russian.
They will defend anything done by Russians, even the most despicable of acts.

At any point in your relationship, you could bring up some totally despicable act committed by Russians or Russian government . . . doesn't matter if a government headed by Putin or any person X, Y, Z and doesn't matter if the gal even likes or approves of that particular leader.

The RW would either:  deny it happened (doesn't matter the overwhelming evidence), or just tell you point blank that it was appropriate and justified.  If it's Russian . . . then it is by default correct.

You will have to decide if you could live with such a personality and mind set; and you already know the answer to that.

There are, of course, several men here who can live comfortably with such a mind set.

I'm aware of the fallout risks associated with taking home a "Putin administration" sympathizer as wife, especially considering the fact that I'm quite a critic myself. It is quite likely that cultural, ideological or even political disagreements alone may even be enough to tip the balance in any marriage, leading to divorce down the road.

Hence I have always made it a point to discuss with my girl anything I can think of under the sun to see where we stand on numerous issues. Anything that may be important like religion to something as trivial as the colour of our bedsheets. Also eg. Where we shall like to live, how we shall live, who we shall live with, even how children will be raised and what languages shall be spoken mostly in the house etc etc

I believe that alone would more than suffice to minimise the chances of conflict after marriage due to the above issues to a negligible level such that the chances of me marrying a "putin sympathizer" would be slim to none.

Unless... the wife is a Russian sleeper agent spying from my home. Then I give up

[Boethius]

None of that stuff matters, kyn.  You never know a person until you live with him/her.