Depth of thinking and clarity of expression - tremendous. As you point out, given the extent of China's investment, the acid test is its response. And yeh, not much. Alot pivots on this "epic" event. Appreciate your use of facts and analysis, with dry extrapolation to the big picture. Beware of trolls.
Here's my BIG question for you: did/do Trump and/or his key national security advisors KNOW that this war against Iran was actually a move against China? is the administration's "all over the map" vague BS-ing about the war's rationale all a calculated smokescreen to make sure people don't know it's a war against China -- which if known would force
China is at the heart of U.S. national security policy under the Trump administration, as analysts like Niall Ferguson have been talking about for months. The Middle East, Greenland, Canada... There was a good article in Tablet on this last October (It's All About China), or take a look at Ferguson's two articles about Davos.
I’ve been asking the same question the last couple of days. Who is the actual architect of the chess moves that the US has made since Trump came into office?
What good would it bring to declare it to be a move to counter Beijing long-term plan in the West Pacific? Have you ever seen a chess master commenting or announcing anticipated repercussions of their current moves? It is often claimed that Russians are clever chess players and the Chinese are experts in the Go game but people usually forget that the most dreaded chess champion on record was an American player named Bobby Fisher.
This is great analysis, but I find myself unable to shake the sense that this ambiguous situation stands to benefit Beijing as much as it could also present a challenge. After observing the US military's actions and dwindling missile stockpile in real time, I can't imagine that Beijing wouldn't feel much more confident about making a move on Taiwan in the coming years.
If this war remains a war of attrition, it seems to me that Iran holds all the cards, even without their supreme leader. The US and its allies are much more desperate to negotiate and end this conflict than Iran is. To me, this is an utter embarrassment for the US military, revealing how shallow our capacity really is, which raises troubling questions about our ability to credibility claim hegemony.
China's energy is being cut off one by one while decades of relationship-building in the Middle East has been blown up. They are hardly brimming with confidence right now.
I agree. Losing Iran will have significant implications for China, especially for their access to energy, which is why I find the analysis in the piece compelling. Trump striking at Venezuela and Iran has put new and powerful pressure on both Russia and China.
Further, Russia and China have undermined their own relational credibility with their allies/BRICS-partners/Belt-and-Road recipients by responding to this war of aggression with words rather than military support. They've shown themselves unwilling to put their neck out for an ostensive ally. Countries who were aligned with them might begin to wonder whether they really are allies worth trusting.
i agree wholeheartedly on all of this but i have a lot of faith in our defense complex to make more of ‘em. but the stockpile thing is a very serious issue
I think US national security advisors may have already given up on Taiwan - I doubt the US will go to war for it. But, the US will work with rest of the world to enforce sanctions on China.
Iran was a direct threat to to Israel, and to other US allies in the region, and was also a sworn enemy of the US - and therefore invited this war upon itself. Taiwan is not a threat or enemy of China - so China attacking Taiwan would be less justified, and they may not want to do that anyways and prefer to wait a bit longer so the unifications happens voluntarily. If Taiwan falls, the only loss, albeit a big one, would be TSMC.
I don't believe that we would have gone to war for Taiwan, but my underlying assumption was that being unable to credibly posture that we could intervene if we wanted to only serves to reduce our negotiating leverage in that geopolitical situation.
What are the chances China indeed sees its weakness -- but also the US's momentary engagement, and decides now is the ideal (or least bad, from their POV) moment to invade Taiwan?
Zineb, just found you and your analysis a few days ago. Would be interested in hearing how Venezuela/Maduro, and the Panama Canal ports fit into your global analysis
All of this pressure is only on China because it rails to engage against the US. It could bring down the global economy by blockading Taiwan but it won't. Its policy of gradualism will be its downfall.
With Iran being decimated, what is the midterm and long-term capacity for the Houthis, Hezbollah and Hamas? It seems that the Iranian surtogates were dependent on Iranian money and weapons support.
No mention of Beijing’s most touted Middle East talking about: brokering Iran-Saudi rapprochement. PRC can hardly take sides with one against the other.
Depth of thinking and clarity of expression - tremendous. As you point out, given the extent of China's investment, the acid test is its response. And yeh, not much. Alot pivots on this "epic" event. Appreciate your use of facts and analysis, with dry extrapolation to the big picture. Beware of trolls.
Here's my BIG question for you: did/do Trump and/or his key national security advisors KNOW that this war against Iran was actually a move against China? is the administration's "all over the map" vague BS-ing about the war's rationale all a calculated smokescreen to make sure people don't know it's a war against China -- which if known would force
china to make some response?
China is at the heart of U.S. national security policy under the Trump administration, as analysts like Niall Ferguson have been talking about for months. The Middle East, Greenland, Canada... There was a good article in Tablet on this last October (It's All About China), or take a look at Ferguson's two articles about Davos.
I’ve been asking the same question the last couple of days. Who is the actual architect of the chess moves that the US has made since Trump came into office?
What good would it bring to declare it to be a move to counter Beijing long-term plan in the West Pacific? Have you ever seen a chess master commenting or announcing anticipated repercussions of their current moves? It is often claimed that Russians are clever chess players and the Chinese are experts in the Go game but people usually forget that the most dreaded chess champion on record was an American player named Bobby Fisher.
This is great analysis, but I find myself unable to shake the sense that this ambiguous situation stands to benefit Beijing as much as it could also present a challenge. After observing the US military's actions and dwindling missile stockpile in real time, I can't imagine that Beijing wouldn't feel much more confident about making a move on Taiwan in the coming years.
If this war remains a war of attrition, it seems to me that Iran holds all the cards, even without their supreme leader. The US and its allies are much more desperate to negotiate and end this conflict than Iran is. To me, this is an utter embarrassment for the US military, revealing how shallow our capacity really is, which raises troubling questions about our ability to credibility claim hegemony.
China's energy is being cut off one by one while decades of relationship-building in the Middle East has been blown up. They are hardly brimming with confidence right now.
I agree. Losing Iran will have significant implications for China, especially for their access to energy, which is why I find the analysis in the piece compelling. Trump striking at Venezuela and Iran has put new and powerful pressure on both Russia and China.
Further, Russia and China have undermined their own relational credibility with their allies/BRICS-partners/Belt-and-Road recipients by responding to this war of aggression with words rather than military support. They've shown themselves unwilling to put their neck out for an ostensive ally. Countries who were aligned with them might begin to wonder whether they really are allies worth trusting.
i agree wholeheartedly on all of this but i have a lot of faith in our defense complex to make more of ‘em. but the stockpile thing is a very serious issue
I think US national security advisors may have already given up on Taiwan - I doubt the US will go to war for it. But, the US will work with rest of the world to enforce sanctions on China.
Iran was a direct threat to to Israel, and to other US allies in the region, and was also a sworn enemy of the US - and therefore invited this war upon itself. Taiwan is not a threat or enemy of China - so China attacking Taiwan would be less justified, and they may not want to do that anyways and prefer to wait a bit longer so the unifications happens voluntarily. If Taiwan falls, the only loss, albeit a big one, would be TSMC.
I don't believe that we would have gone to war for Taiwan, but my underlying assumption was that being unable to credibly posture that we could intervene if we wanted to only serves to reduce our negotiating leverage in that geopolitical situation.
What are the chances China indeed sees its weakness -- but also the US's momentary engagement, and decides now is the ideal (or least bad, from their POV) moment to invade Taiwan?
Zineb, just found you and your analysis a few days ago. Would be interested in hearing how Venezuela/Maduro, and the Panama Canal ports fit into your global analysis
All of this pressure is only on China because it rails to engage against the US. It could bring down the global economy by blockading Taiwan but it won't. Its policy of gradualism will be its downfall.
Insightful. Thank you.
With Iran being decimated, what is the midterm and long-term capacity for the Houthis, Hezbollah and Hamas? It seems that the Iranian surtogates were dependent on Iranian money and weapons support.
No mention of Beijing’s most touted Middle East talking about: brokering Iran-Saudi rapprochement. PRC can hardly take sides with one against the other.
Name checks out
🤣