China is an economic threat because corporate America handed them all the required tools. The corporations could do that because they bought enough legislators and even a President to make sure it happened. Now the corporations are strip mining American wealth to invest even more in the growing Chinese economy and the legislators are making sure that continues to happen. On top of that US universities welcomed full-price foreign students, which also allowed tuition and student housing inflation, to train as competitors to the US to go back to China with top American technology insights.

The serious threat to the US is the US and the US alone.

If there is consideration for military threat from China - that won't happen until the US corps have drained the most they can from the US economy.

The problem is that the calculation of a successful military venture by dictators is mostly erroneous so the suggested deterrents to action by China probably don't weight very heavily on the 'Go/No go' scales over there.

Shutting off all trade with China would bring a deal of pain to the West as well as China. They are already nibbling, (Pacific Islands.) Sooner or later they will think they can take a little bit bigger nibble.

Especially with their attitude towards Taiwan.

”Is that a threat?”

”No, it’s a promise.”

Even on the eastern side of the Atlantic one could hear the lamentations of the corporations doling out reasons why they had to be 'players' in the China market. You are undoubtedly knowledgeable about this long list...all smudged over with the guarantee that by taking their business to China it would nourish the roots of a budding democracy.

Selling out the technical and proprietary secrets and knowledge just for the access to the market will, of course, go down as one of the stupidest moves of 20th and 21st century corporate history.

i don't throw too many stones however, as Europe has a trotter in the trough on this as well.

We in the west have been withdrawing from China since Covid broke out, there are some companies like apple that cannot withdraw quickly, because all of it's assembly platforms, not to be confused with manufacturing, are in China. I would be surprised if any of the big names are still in China beyond 2026.
When our company pulled out it was because China banned our products because our government had the audacity to ask for an investigation into the origin's of covid. It hurt, it hurt alot we had to mothball, decommission or repurpose about 30% of our infrastructure. Two years on they want to trade again, well no chance in hell, we will not invest again regardless of what our government has to say about that. There are many companies doing the same globally, building their infrastructure back home. China is in trouble, Huge, we can see it happening already, by 2026 China will be lucky to survive in it's current economy and it doesn't have anything else to trade, unlike Russia.

Really great to hear of an Oz (I'm guessing?) company that sees through the BS of the China boosters. Good on you. What industry?

It is about time we got serious about bringing back steel and aluminium processing to Oz too. With our abundant wind and solar potential it's the biggest thing we could do for carbon neutralisation, and great for the economy and regional Oz.

I agree with you on China's near-term prospects. I find Peter Zeihan's conclusions there very persuasive - they're stuffed. And really, the way they treat the international community and global trade network on which their whole economy was based, they've only got themselves to blame. As others here have suggested, their best bet is probably to wait until Russia collapses following the Ukraine fiasco and pick over the pieces, starting with Outer Manchuria. A lot more realistic for them than Taiwan, and gives them access to some of what Russia's got and they need.

Airbus think otherwise...

https://www.reuters.com/business/aer...er-2023-04-06/

That is true. France has always had- in my opinion - a very schizophrenic relationship with America. On the one hand, the popular culture is very much admired and enjoyed - most obviously by those under 30 - yet there are and have always been, large numbers - often the very same individuals - who loudly loathe all aspects of American business and politics. Now I understand that this isn't automatically incompatible, although it's not something I see to this degree in other nations I know well.

I am sure that Zelensky recognises that France is the least supportive of the major euro-nations ( a quick look at support given to Ukraine would illustrate that very clearly ) and whilst he may be happy to shake hands and have meetings to gain more favourable PR, is unlikely to be taking advice from the Élysée, especially when it is linked to a visit to China.

It certainly has to be a message that sells well with the French voters, it's been a standby in French politics for 75 years. It seems to be not only a bifurcated relationship with the US, but also a fetish toward Russia. During the cold war Communism was a popular idea in France and I thought that explained things, but Communism is gone and the fetish remains, even under fascist rule in Russia.

It doesn't look like it's going to change in anyone living now's lifetime.

I think resisting pressure to become America's followers is sound advice. There is no guarantee that the US will always be Europe's friend or that even as friends their support will be reliable and vice versa. What would happen if the interests of the US came into conflict with those of Europe? Allies and co-conspirators by all means but followers implies a degree of subservience. We should always sup with a longer spoon with any state that may not always have our best interests at heart,

The support and friendship of America may well be something that should be treated as conditional, but it's easy to have a predictable and consistent relationship with the French; they're always the enemy.

Other than Britain under Tony Blair (and post war Germany), when has any European state been a "follower" of the US?

Also, this strikes me as a funny time to be spewing that message.

Not sure how thar is an answer,
The point was about resisting pressure to become a US follower..
The verb implies a change from the status quo, You cannot become what you already are.
As you point out, Europe is not a US follower. No one has argued otherwise.

Your previous argument( #1544 )was the Europe was not a follower and with recent exception (according to you) never had been. Now in #1546 you say there is/has been . You cannot have it both ways,

LOL
You can argue all alone with yourself from here on out.

I'll just watch.

You make it sound as if Europe is a monolithic block.

So did Politico and allegedly M. Macron. The EU is quite a large part of Europe though

As is Russia. Hungary is a part, as are the Balkans, etc…

It’s pretty clear that Macron was talking about a European Military organisation under the leadership of France, not the EU and not NATO. You could argue that splitting most of continental Europe away from NATO, effectively destroying it, would be warmly welcomed in Moscow and Beijing.

Only part of Russia is part of Europe geographically speaking but it is not part of the EU whereas Hungary et al are. To save you the trouble, here is a list of the member states. You will note the UK is sadly not part any more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member...European_Union