Dynamic China-Us ties
raymondusa  Updated: 2004-11-10 09:04

I disagree with your opinion about which evidence really matters. Truthful evidence is valuable, but false information given as evidence doesn’t help to undercover the truth, which is the most important criterion to determine whether the information has value or not. The point of view, interpretation, degree of importance, etc. may differ among different people. For many of the topics discussed here, there is either truthfully evidence to support an opinion, or someone is giving self-serving opinions with no facts. When I gave you the above list of economic problems US is experiencing now, those facts are verifiable and truthfully undeniable. Depending on a reader’s point of view or from the different people you cited, they may choose to interpret the evidence differently. But that doesn’t change facts. Deficits, debts, trade deficits, etc. are facts, and there is no way to spin it. I don't base the evidence on just what people say publicly, but more so on what they do in accordance with the evidence. I've given you plenty of chances to refute China's financial leverage, which you and I both know you cannot because it's the truth. Despite the grandstanding and posturing from different politicians on both sides, the key to peace is the political and financial leverage which serves as a check and balance. Japan is just posturing for internal political reasons, just like TW's leadership was posturing to appease certain groups in their base. That's politics.

The Saudi example help illustrate the point that when a country becomes too dependent on another country for something, they lose leverage.

China and US have a dynamic relationship. Both aren’t going to agree on everything, nor disagree on everything. Sometimes, I feel disagreement, leading to a mutual understanding of different points of view and interest, leading to a diplomatic solution of give and take on both sides, can actually strengthen a relationship. Adversity can test a relationship to see if it has depth and strength. When two countries can disagree, yet still find mutual interest to resolve their disagreement, that’s a sign of strength and maturity in that relationship.

While the neocons may want to contain and undermine China, China can exercise political and economic leverage to keep the peace and not let the neocons dictate foreign policy regarding China. To me, that’s a good thing because it helps to maintain the peace. The neocons are made up of chickenhawks, defense industry people, think tank people, and have ideas of creating friction in this world, by pushing for more wars, so they can profit from it. Some of these war profiteers also have imperialistic desires. I feel it’s an oversimplification to say there is more confrontation, more conciliation, more this, more that, when the reality of most relationships include ups, downs, and everything in between. That’s life as relationships between countries are dynamic and not some static example.

US may have hegemonic relationships with several other latchkey satellite states around the world. But that isn’t a healthy relationship since those latchkeys don’t have the clout to serve as a check and balance. No country is right all the time, nor wrong all the time. The check and balance focuses US on what’s right for the world, not just what’s right for US. Rather than an asymmetric hegemonic relationship around the world, having peer countries around the world is not only a good thing for the world, but in the long run, it’s good for US because instead of a destructive imperialistic hegemonic ideology from the neocons, US can and do have constructive, diplomatic and cooperative relationships than further world interest, especially the all important issue of world peace. It’s the political and economic leverage of China that provides this check and balance with US.

Close