United States Defense Thread

[John Fedup]

And yet it would not be unique to him. Obama did it before him. Though, I think Trump might be aiming for a term after Biden.

I personally don't see Trump as destructive. I think there are some things he did right that none before him had done, but my bias here is that as an Israeli I didn't really hear about his policies that might be bothering most Americans.

Well his policies bothered many Americans (which is why he got the boot) but he didn’t exactly make many friends in NATO and I freely admit his stance on allies doing more was right on, albeit poorly conveyed. He did right by Israel and some Arab partners but has left Asia Pacific somewhat concerned.

The bigger issue for me are his business dealings and lack of transparency. It is not unreasonable to assume he may be compromised financially, something team Putin are experts at exploiting. Just my two cents.

 

[ASSAIL]

Well his policies bothered many Americans (which is why he got the boot) but he didn’t exactly make many friends in NATO and I freely admit his stance on allies doing more was right on, albeit poorly conveyed. He did right by Israel and some Arab partners but has left Asia Pacific somewhat concerned.

The bigger issue for me are his business dealings and lack of transparency. It is not unreasonable to assume he may be compromised financially, something team Putin are experts at exploiting. Just my two cents.

He got the boot because of his crass, boorish and narcissistic personality.
His policies were supported which is why every Republican standing for the house was re-elected giving the GOP one of the best results for years, more than half the States have Republican Governors and the Senate is likely to remain a Red majority.
As a further indication, Proposition 16 failed in that most progressive of state California. This proposition tried to force diversity as a prerequisite for public employment. (Some US contributors can describe it better)
The “Blue Wave” never eventuated despite the uttering of commentators, the tech oligarchies and big media.
Americans seem comfortable with GOP policies which should temper the progressive tendencies of the new administration.

 

[ngatimozart]

And yet it would not be unique to him. Obama did it before him. Though, I think Trump might be aiming for a term after Biden.

I personally don't see Trump as destructive. I think there are some things he did right that none before him had done, but my bias here is that as an Israeli I didn't really hear about his policies that might be bothering most Americans.

Well in the last 24 hours he's managed to decapitate the top levels of the civilian leadership of the Pentagon. That's not good.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326282583613779968

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326246002995695619

 

[Ananda]

The “Blue Wave” never eventuated despite the uttering of commentators, the tech oligarchies and big media.
Americans seem comfortable with GOP policies which should temper the progressive tendencies of the new administration.

Seems that's true. Just read assessment from one of US based Investment Bank. This Election can't be call Democrat's win, as they only regained White House due to Trump behavior and not to Democrats politics.

Thus this will raise question on how's the Trade policies changes can be expected from Biden Administration. On China issue for one thing, they expect Biden approach will be softer. However Chinese should not except that US will reduce demand that being put by Republican before. Domestic mood in US over Trump policy toward Trade seems favorable still.

In short potential Trade War still can happen.

I've put in Indonesia AF thread on question of CAATSA. Will Biden wafer on that ? This's will determine how confrontational Biden will be on dealing with China and Russia.

 

[ngatimozart]

Seems that's true. Just read assessment from one of US based Investment Bank. This Election can't be call Democrat's win, as they only regained White House due to Trump behavior and not to Democrats politics.

Thus this will raise question on how's the Trade policies changes can be expected from Biden Administration. On China issue for one thing, they expect Biden approach will be softer. However Chinese should not except that US will reduce demand that being put by Republican before. Domestic mood in US over Trump policy toward Trade seems favorable still.

In short potential Trade War still can happen.

I've put in Indonesia AF thread on question of CAATSA. Will Biden wafer on that ? This's will determine how confrontational Biden will be on dealing with China and Russia.

I don't believe that Biden will waver too much on the PRC. Obama was into human rights issues and I will suspect Biden is the same. Given the PRC's recent history in that field since Xi Jinping's rise to the top, I suspect that Biden will keep the screws on. Biden may be softer on international trade organisations such as the WTO, but I believe that his administration's focus will be far more domestic than foreign. I also think that he favours isolationism, but we'll have to wait and see.

 

[oldsig127]

Well his policies bothered many Americans (which is why he got the boot) but he didn’t exactly make many friends in NATO and I freely admit his stance on allies doing more was right on, albeit poorly conveyed.

Trump less trusted than leaders of Germany, France, UK, Russia and China

www.pewresearch.org

He made few friends with any of his allies excepting Israel as far as I can see. There was a Pew Research study on the subject earlier this year that found that the United States' allies felt both Putin and Xi more trustworthy than Trump. Given the current situation between Australia and Chinese I find that instructive. The USA has been our ally a long time, but we'd reach the stage of expecting Chinese aggression but not knowing whether the unstable administration in Washington would stab our back.

oldsig

 

[OPSSG]

Trump being destructive — Part 1

I personally don't see Trump as destructive.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326211556456214529

1. You have got to be kidding — in the last 4 years, we have seen a tactically incoherent Trump in the Middle East, and strategically clueless Trump in the South China Sea and the Indo-Pacific — given the scale of the China challenge and the determination of Russia, Iran and Turkey to inject themselves into regional conflict. To many, Trump is just a weapons salesman/cheerleader in the Middle East to the oil rich Gulf states — American foreign and defence policies is beyond arms sales, right? Interestingly, Emirati Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, with his eye on acquiring 50 F-35As for the UAE, was quick in congratulating Biden.

• The UAE has been preparing for a potential Biden victory for several months, and it made sure to get a blessing from Biden and other senior Democrats for its normalization deal with Israel.
• The Emiratis hope the goodwill they won with that deal will help them navigate Biden world, particularly given their concerns about a possible revival of the Iran nuclear deal.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322065723712294912

2. Trump’s mafia like demands for protection money from South Korea and Japan while down playing the alliance — made the Americans look untrustworthy to Japan and ASEAN. And then he sidelined South Korean President Moon Jae-in when talking to Kim Jong-un — in the process wasting millions of Singapore tax payer dollars to hold a fake Trump-Kim summit in Singapore because he did not do his homework — while trying to win the Nobel prize.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202696129994846208

Trump has always tried to ‘extort’ money via host nation support payments from Japan.

3. In 2017, US President Trump said North Korea’s threats will be met with fire. Prior to the 3 Trump-Kim summits he even threatened war with North Korea. If you stayed in Seoul, you would be nervous to have Trump in charge of peace negotiations. President-elect Joe Biden has made clear that he would not follow Trump’s incoherent North Korea policy.

4. Instead of bypassing the established diplomatic steps, President-elect Joe Biden, would re-energise working-level talks and secure a commitment to reduce nuclear capacity from North Korea before meeting Kim.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326270330416017408

5. Even some Americans hold the view that Trump’s acts are destructive.

I think there are some things he did right that none before him had done, but my bias here is that as an Israeli...

6. America First means America the lonely. See: Opinion | Donald Trump's Foreign Policy Hurt American Alliances

7. Allies believe a second Trump term could lead to a breakdown of the US led alliance system. Democracies across Europe, Canada, and Korea have been attacked by Trump. Australia and Japan had to make extra-ordinary efforts at a back room level to avoid being on Trump’s trade hit list. To get an idea of how badly Trump does in working with allies, just look at the German response to the Biden win.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1325162011609747457

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Well, as I said, I'm not really exposed to Trump's policies that don't involve me. I have very little care for American domestic news because it often involves a lot of additional info I'm not too eager to understand, and regarding ASEAN I don't think it even got any attention in the media I read past the first few months of his term IIRC.

 

[ngatimozart]

Well, as I said, I'm not really exposed to Trump's policies that don't involve me. I have very little care for American domestic news because it often involves a lot of additional info I'm not too eager to understand, and regarding ASEAN I don't think it even got any attention in the media I read past the first few months of his term IIRC.

Well you'll have to broaden your horizons then, which is one advantage of being here. We learn from you and you learn from us.

 

[OPSSG]

Trump being destructive — Part 2

8. The Trump admin’s deliberate destruction of the TPP, made China’s Belt & Road the only game in town until Japan stepped up through Abe’s leadership (at an international level). Thanks to Japan, the trade pack survived and entered into force on 30 Dec 2018 between 11 countries, namely, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. For details see: What Is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326547144421961730

9. In its original form, the TPP would have put around 40% of the world economy on the side of the U.S. — compared with China's share of 18% or 20% of global GDP, said Graham Allison, Harvard University's Douglas Dillon professor of government.

10. The 2017 US withdrawal decision from TPP, by Trump, made it impossible to be pro-American within the 11 TPP member states and ASEAN (some of which have ratified the TPP) during his 4 years of mis-rule.

​

(a) "Trump has been a source of frustration to the Vietnamese in that his policies have been so bipolar," said Zachary Abuza, a professor at the National War College in Washington D.C. who specializes in Southeast Asia. "He's so transactional, and they understand transactional, but he pulled out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership [trade deal], and no country did more to get into the TPP than Vietnam, so they were angry."​

​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326744931151474689

(b) Under Trump, ASEAN trade ministers have no hope for liberal trade agreements with the US. If anything, the momentum seems to be in the opposite direction: Washington has suspended trade preferences for Thailand and Indonesia under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP); Bangkok and Jakarta are now focused on attempting to negotiate their partial or full restoration.​

​

(c) I see Trump trying to force ASEAN to choose a side (without any benefits), when Obama, through the TPP, was trying to integrate 11 local economies with that of America and ween away ASEAN’s dependence on China for growth. Keeping in mind that in 2010, the ASEAN–China Free Trade Area became the largest free trade area in terms of population and third largest in terms of nominal GDP.​

​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326746745745731585

(d) Singapore repeatedly stresses that, for the region, economics is security. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a proposed free trade agreement in the Asia-Pacific region between the ten member states of ASEAN, namely Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam, and five of their FTA partners—Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea. The three biggest economies in RCEP are China, Japan and Korea — with the US is excluded due to a destructive Trump.​

​

(e) The U.S. was never invited to join RCEP as it was created in part as an answer to TPP. Given that the US withdrew from TPP, it has no part in either of the region's two major free trade agreements — RCEP and Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (that excludes the US due to Trump). China has in the end outmaneuvered the Trump administration on trade. In the end of 4 years under Trump, the Americans are reduced to an uni-dimensional power (with deep regional security ties) and are just another arms dealer (like France or Russia), with an UN Security Council veto and little more.​

 

[OPSSG]

Trump being destructive — Part 3

11. As noted in the South China Sea thread, China has flexed its muscles to a maritime dominance. Initially, Indonesia and China crossed watery-swords arising from the tensions in Natuna Island. Another standoff flared up involving Vietnamese vessels and the Chinese government survey ship, near Malaysia.

(a) Uneasy times continued with the Haiyang Dizhi 8 surveying in resource-rich waters 352 km off the coast of Brunei and Malaysia. Last year, a Chinese Coast Guard vessel spent weeks in waters close to oil rig in a Vietnamese oil block while the Haiyang Dizhi 8 conducted suspected oil exploration surveys in Vietnam’s EEZ. Early January, Chinese encroachment in waters near Natuna Islands, prompted Indonesia to send warships and fighter jets forcing the boats to retreat.​

​

(b) Loss of American influence goes deeper than the cancellation of the TPP, rather, it’s the failure to show up for ASEAN meetings that matters more. Trump’s failure to send a cabinet-level figure to the ASEAN and East Asian Summit (EAS) in Nov 2019 and Nov 2020 was an avoidable blow to US-ASEAN relations. Avoiding a repeat is needed if the Biden administration is to restore the US credibility as a multilateral player, both in Asia and globally.​

(c) Concurrently, the Biden administration should consider avoiding a head-on ideological confrontation with China as its main approach, as this is not likely to be the most productive way forward, or in the US and region’s interests. Further, the incoming the Biden administration, should take note that in Indonesia, opposition figures are under siege, as the elected Indonesian government embraces digital harassment and censorship to combat dissent.​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321205184773718024

(d) “The Non-Aligned Movement must unite and serve as a positive force amidst the global geopolitical dynamics," stated the Indonesian Minister of Foreign Affairs Retno L.P Marsudi in the Oct 2020 NAM Summit. Marsudi also stated that the intensified rivalries between powerful nations have caused tensions and distrusts, impeding cooperation amongst countries in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. It has brought upon increasing unilateralism and planted the seed of distrust of the multilateralism system.​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1324182608100708352

(e) Indonesians feel that the Americans, under Trump or Biden uses sanctions and it’s muscles too much against other countries. Indonesia, valuing its ties with China, and as a non-aligned nation and leader of ASEAN, rejected a proposal by the Trump administration to allow its P-8As to land and refuel there. US officials made multiple "high-level" approaches in Jul and Aug 2020 to Indonesia's defence and foreign ministers before Indonesia's president, Joko Widodo, rebuffed the request, the officials said.​

12. If you ask CCP members, the Chinese will tell you that Trump has accelerated America’s decline in influence and felt that he does more harm to American interests than any other US President in history.

(a) Beijing's conviction is that the U.S. is now rapidly declining and lashing out — which gives Xi strategic patience. As a result this has emboldened China to accelerate pursuit of longtime goals, with regard to her ambitions in the Sea of Japan, the South China Sea and her land borders, including disputes with India and her expectation of subservience from Korea. On the 2020 election:​

"Many leading Chinese voices are convinced that whatever the result of the U.S. presidential election, the trajectory of U.S.-Chinese relations is now set by the inexorable forces of American decline and hostility to China."​

(b) More importantly, Donald Trump’s and Mike Pompeo’s lack of respect for the ‘rule of law’, are a propaganda gold mine for CCP and helps make the case against America’s vision (of a Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy) for China’s spokesmen.​

​

 

[OPSSG]

Trump being destructive — Part 4

13. President-elect Biden looks to project confidence about the work his transition team can do without Trump conceding the race or taking the required steps to begin the process of transitioning power from one administration to another. The first, and most important step, is a formal determination from the General Services Administration, which would unfreeze more than US$6 million in funding to Biden's transition team. President-elect Biden also said that he was not worried about how long it was taking the Trump-led General Services Administration to ascertain the results of the election but said Trump's denial was an "embarrassment."

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1325862292995584004

14. Pentagon has confirmed mass firings of civilian leadership in the last 24 hrs, starting w/Defense Sec. Esper on Monday. Pentagon has confirmed the exits of Anderson (policy head), Kernan (intel head) and Stewart (Chief of Staff to SecDef). Jack Detsch of Foreign Policy further reports that Stewart (Chief of Staff to the Defense Secretary) had been tapped to lead the Department of Defense transition from the Trump administration to the Biden Administration prior to her sudden departure — Jen Stewart was the former Staff Director of the Republican House Armed Services Committee, which makes her well respected in Congress.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1327043123667562497

15. Extra-ordinary to force the Chairman of the JCS to say this in defiance of Trump’s arbitrary orders — that the military respects the constitution (and not a king or a queen, a tyrant or a dictator).

​

(a) In the wake of Trump's dramatic purge of some of the senior-most civilian officials at the Pentagon who have been replaced with political loyalists and conspiracy theorists, all eyes are now focused on whether Trump will take any action against the uniformed military leadership, including Milley.​

​

(b) Speaking immediately following Milley's speech, Miller, who was named acting secretary Monday in a tweet by President Donald Trump that also fired his predecessor Mark Esper, joked, "thanks for setting the bar very high for the new guy to come in and make a few words, I think all I would say to your statements is amen, well done."​

​

16. On 17 Nov 2020, 63 days before the end of Trump’s term, the US Navy Secretary Kenneth Braithwaite says he plans to establish a new numbered fleet as a “formidable deterrence” to China, basing it closer to allies and partner nations “at the crossroads between the Indian and Pacific oceans.” “If we’re really going to have an Indo-Pacom (U.S. Indo-Pacific Command) footprint, we can’t just rely on the 7th Fleet in Japan,” Braithwaite announced to webinar participants at the annual symposium of the Naval Submarine League. Braithwaite not only hasn't spoken to Miller about it, but he announced it without asking Singapore. “We have to look to our other allies and partners like Singapore, like India and actually put a numbered fleet where it would be extremely relevant if, God forbid, we were to get in any kind of a dust-up,” Braithwaite said. Braithwaite also said he wants to stand up A First Fleet, "in the crossroads between the Indian and the Pacific oceans."

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1329244736717279236

 

[OPSSG]

Trump being destructive — Part 5

17. Trump fires yet another. Christopher Krebs, the head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Krebs was one of the lone voices inside the government countering President Trump's stream of election misinformation. Krebs has drawn widespread bipartisan praise for his handling of the 3 Nov 2020 election, which generally ran smoothly despite persistent fears that foreign hackers might try to undermine the vote.

18. Trump recklessly abandoned the Iran deal, which allowed Iran to stockpile 12 times the amount of uranium they would have been allowed under the deal, and then in the last days of his presidency, asked for a harebrained plan to attack them. Trump’s top advisers, including Pence, Pompeo and General Milley, warned that could start a wider war — during the lane duck period of his presidency.

19. Loose talk of war or bombing Iran, resulted in the US Embassy in Bagdad coming under attack during presidential transition — by a Iranian supported PMFs in Iraq.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1328795343610208257

20. The rockets attack in Baghdad resulted in the death of a young Iraqi girl and injuries to five civilians is an example of American strategic narcissism. Where Trump defines foreign policy only in relation to his world view and assumes that whatever he does will lead to his desired outcome. Strategic narcissism is flawed because both Obama and Trump do not take into consideration the agency of others, like China, Iran, Indonesia or South Korea.

(a) Because strategic narcissism doesn't consider that agency, Obama engaged in wishful thinking and self-delusion — his Iran policy was mainly one of reconciliation, assuming that the Iranian regime would change stop its proxy wars against the US, Israel and the West. That has not happened and it is not going to happen as long as the ideology of the Revolution continues to drive Iran’s Supreme leader and the IRGC.​

(b) Likewise, Obama’s policies towards China is based on his preferences rather than what the situation demands — his China policy was based on the assumption that once it was welcomed in the community of nations, China would play by the rules, would liberalize its economy and, as it prospered, it would liberalize its form of government. In China, Xi Jinping was elected president in March 2013. The era of “peaceful rise” gave way to a plan for increased influence and dominance.​

(c) Meanwhile, China’s military forces made huge advances. China had launched its first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, in 2012. Soon thereafter, China began island building in the South China Sea, converting small reefs and terrain features into a string of seven military bases. China also began to buzz the airspace around Japan on a daily basis.​

 

[ngatimozart]

Now for something completely different.
A Foreign Policy article which discusses the proposition that the US is as unprepared for upcoming military revolutions as the Europeans and the US were in the beginning of the 20th Century up to, and including the beginning of WW1. For example none of them were prepared for the impact of the machine gun on the battlefield, but the British had used it 20 years earlier in the Boer War, and prior to that in the Matabele Wars to good effect. Then there was the explosive shell which had been around since the US civil war, long range artillery, the telegraph, telephone, balloons and the aircraft. In many ways the British, Russians and French were still fighting the 1870 Franco Prussian War and the US probably the Spanish American war at best, but most likely closer to the Civil War. The Austro-Hungarians, well they probably thought that they were still fighting Napoleonic style wars.

Come WW2 the British, French, US, and the Russians were ill prepared with the defeated Germans from WW1 having taken many lessons to heart. The British, French, US, and the Russians hadn't learned the lessons from 30 years earlier and were doomed to learn the hard way. "Peace in our time" as Chamberlain waved a piece of paper in 1938 after stepping off a plane from a meeting with Hitler - bah humbug. The reasons that we won were that:

• The US (mostly) and other allies were able to out produce the Axis in war materials and food,
• Hitler was the best general the allies had,
• The political fighting between the Imperial Japanese Army and Imperial Japanese Navy damaged the Japanese war effort in that there was no unified national command,
• Russia won the European war by bleeding the German Wehrmacht dry on the plains of Russia before Moscow, Leningrad, and Stalingrad, at tremendous cost before beginning to push the Wehrmacht west back towards Germany. If they hadn't done that, the D-Day invasion at Normandy may have had a different ending.

110 years later we are in the same position where there are new disruptive technologies that are changing how wars are being fought now and will be fought in the near to medium future. Is the US prepared? I would say, that along with the rest of the west no, and we are well behind the eight ball at the moment. Russia and especially the PRC are well ahead, plus add to the mix North Korea and Iran, with their own bespoke contributions. Again we are playing catchup and again the big question is do we have enough time left?

So I think that the proposition put forward by the article's author is definitely valid and much cause for concern. The article is well worth the read and gives cause for thought.

The United States Can’t Sleepwalk Into the Coming Military Revolutions

European leaders misjudged World War I. America shouldn’t repeat their mistake.

foreignpolicy.com

 

[Boagrius]

I find this a frustrating topic to wrap my head around since so much of what happens to the left of kinetic military action takes place outside of the public eye. One might look at the parlous state of US politics, for example, and come to the intuitive conclusion that foreign interference has been successful in fostering a polarised American political discourse and producing a more divided America than we have seen in living memory. That said I genuinely have no idea how much of this is actually due to external influences vs genuine internal dysfunction (perhaps that is the point?). Moreover, as a westerner, it is also not entirely clear to me what equivalent actions are being directed at geopolitical competitors like Russia or China, and to what effect. As a consequence, it is extraordinarily difficult to ascertain who has the "upper-hand" in the contest of institutional/governmental/systemic integrity and resilience etc.

 

[ngatimozart]

I find this a frustrating topic to wrap my head around since so much of what happens to the left of kinetic military action takes place outside of the public eye. One might look at the parlous state of US politics, for example, and come to the intuitive conclusion that foreign interference has been successful in fostering a polarised American political discourse and producing a more divided America than we have seen in living memory. That said I genuinely have no idea how much of this is actually due to external influences vs genuine internal dysfunction (perhaps that is the point?). Moreover, as a westerner, it is also not entirely clear to me what equivalent actions are being directed at geopolitical competitors like Russia or China, and to what effect. As a consequence, it is extraordinarily difficult to ascertain who has the "upper-hand" in the contest of institutional/governmental/systemic integrity and resilience etc.

Look at the current situation between Australia and the PRC. The ChiComs have got their panties in a twist and are throwing a dummy spit because Australia supports an investigation into the COVID-19 outbreak at Wuhan and has condemned the PRC over its breaking of the one country two systems agreement with the UK over Hong Kong. So the PRC has instituted a trade ban on most Australian goods, but not officially. All of a sudden Aussie goods run into lots of problems at the borders, contracts are cancelled by Chinese customers for all sorts of reasons etc. That's one way of coercion or grey areas of warfare.

 

[Boagrius]

True, although to what extent does a comparative minow like Australia standing up to a giant like China constitute its own form of left-of-kinetic gamesmanship? I have long thought that the comparatively free and open form of governance we enjoy in the west is a potential trump card in the idealogical struggle with China. An appreciation of the virtues of this system among the Chinese populace would surely be unwelcome to the CCP. Perhaps publicly highlighting the lack of western style government/institutional oversight in the wake of such a catastrophe is a calculated pressure/sore point for Xi et al. in its own right...

 

[OPSSG]

Look at the current situation between Australia and the PRC.

1. I think fundamentally, both sides are at some level misunderstanding each other and getting their signals crossed.

The ChiComs have got their panties in a twist and are throwing a dummy spit because Australia supports an investigation into the COVID-19 outbreak at Wuhan and has condemned the PRC over its breaking of the one country two systems agreement with the UK over Hong Kong. So the PRC has instituted a trade ban on most Australian goods, but not officially.

2. We need to be clear about 2 district levels of analysis:

One anything to do with Taiwan and Taiwanese intelligence support for HK protesters to ensure 1 country, 2 systems fail. Given Chinese leadership’s emotions about 1 country, 2 systems, IMO:

​

(a) the CCP are conflating Australian track 2 analysts’ explicit support for HK protestors, with a Western disinformation threat, that are seen by some in ASEAN (with some justification and consistent with their domestic politics position), as ‘internal’ affairs of China;​

​

(b) ASEAN concern for HK protestors and ASEAN unwillingness to cross a red-line into internal interference are separate and distinct concerns (in contrast to Australia’s direct approach of speaking their mind);​

​

(c) we should seek to understand some of China’s legitimate concerns. Just as hackers and foreign intelligence attempts at disinformation attempts around the #USAelections2020 to amplify the actual tweets of Trump — which I see as hostile to American interests, the Chinese see unhelpful comments as part of Western disinformation attempts to affect law and order in HK; but​

​

(d) the actual reality is the incompetence of the current HK government that gave rise to their inability to govern. The CCP confuse Australian civil society freedom of speech concerns with Australian or Western intelligence efforts; and​

​

(e) we should make it clear that Western intelligence efforts at data gathering in China and HK are also not aligned with Taiwanese efforts, which I feel is at sowing the seeds of disorder in greater China (but I have no evidence on hand) — which I feel the CCP does not appreciate.​

Two, the Australian government’s legitimate efforts to support a CORVID-19 investigation at Wuhan. I suspect that Xi does not know crucial info at ground zero, as the officials at ground zero have destroyed some crucial info, to prevent Xi from executing them for incompetence. The CCP has a preferred narrative for Wuhan and they are sticking by it come hell or high water.

All of a sudden Aussie goods run into lots of problems at the borders, contracts are cancelled by Chinese customers for all sorts of reasons etc. That's one way of coercion or grey areas of warfare.

3. No argument here, use of non-tariff barriers it is a standard tactic no only in China but elsewhere.

 

[ngatimozart]

This article explains why so many US voters still think that Trump has won the election and are being stubborn about it.

Reuters | Breaking International News & Views

Find latest news from every corner of the globe at Reuters.com, your online source for breaking international news coverage.

uk.reuters.com

A Foreign Policy article about American exceptionalism and why it can't beat COVID-19. It has paragraph in it which is very important to this discussion and I've quoted it in part.

"... the United States has natural disasters. But the regular exceptions are limited and regionally specific: floods in New Orleans, tornadoes in the Midwest. They’re also much more visible than the pandemic; nobody can disagree with the existence of a hurricane. Throw into the difficulty of accepting an invisible foe the paranoid history of American conspiratorialism, [see Hofstader story below], and you end up with a nation dotted with denialists. Being denied a high school party or a Thanksgiving get-together has become defined for tens of millions of Americans as an act of government oppression, not a necessary sacrifice. (In contrast, Chinese sacrificed the single-most important family event of the year, the Spring Festival, entirely.)"​

Why the United States Can’t Defeat the Coronavirus

For too many Americans, disasters are things that happen to other people, never themselves.

foreignpolicy.com

But it's not a new thing either with this article from the November, 1964 issue of Vanity Fair that explains the US voter and conspiracy theories. It's quite enlightening.

The Paranoid Style in American Politics, by Richard Hofstadter

harpers.org

So we can see that when we link all three articles, the current phenomena of Trump supporters not accepting the election result is nothing new as far as the US is concerned.

 

[John Fedup]

After reading these articles, as a Canadian, the idea of having an Australian-NZ ditch between Canada and the US is starting to look very attractive. I really don’t see how the US can dig itself out of its current mess, especially with a rising China and a declining American manufacturing base.