G7 and ‘De-Risking’: Deconstructing the Fables
Countries and companies ‘de-risk’ from China, but their real objective is to avoid the great risk from the U.S. This is the dark path of increasing hegemony and imperialism.
Countries and companies ‘de-risk’ from China, but their real objective is to avoid the great risk from the U.S. This is the dark path of increasing hegemony and imperialism.
The global order is shifting in favor of multipolarity, which effectively makes such U.S. led mini-cliques anachronisms in attempting to depict the world ‘how they want it to be’ rather than ‘how it actually is.’
The other six members of the G7 club should first discuss how the U.S. has been coercing them so far.
The U.S.-Japan-ROK cooperation mechanism, as these developments show, is now on a dangerous path. The closer their cooperation becomes, the more dangerous it is going to be for Northeast Asia.
Whether China is a developed country or not is not for the United States to decide.
The U.S. believes it has an infinite right to use sanctions aggressively, while simultaneously accusing China of ‘economic coercion.’ This situation only highlights the hypocrisy, arrogance, double standards, and unequal nature of American unipolarity.
China does support the diversification of international currencies, which helps shore up the global economy’s ability to cope with risks.
Dialogue cannot be used to justify actions that harm China’s interests and the U.S. must demonstrate its commitment to improving bilateral relations through tangible actions.
Washington’s new restrictions in efforts to push ahead on U.S.-China economic and hi-tech decoupling are placing many Taiwan exporters in a bind.
China takes everybody’s interests seriously and tries to find a path forward that minimizes conflict. Maybe it’s not going to be necessarily one big group hug. But it respects the interests of the various parties involved.
Charting ways to impede countries’ strategic autonomy while blaming Beijing for infringing upon maritime rights is an exercise in futility.
A lot of the behaviors we see from the established power are reflected in historical cases where we ended up in war because there were misjudgments about the intentions of the rising power or misunderstandings of basic factual scenarios.