China has long put severe limits on Western companies doing business in China for strategic purposes, to grow domestic equivalents, and to aid industrial espionage. As China continues to grow but does not open up, should Europe not look out for its own security interests? After all, Europe ignoring the US’s warnings about relying too much on cheap Russian energy is part of the reason that Europe is in dire straits now.
China has long put severe limits on Western companies doing business in China for strategic purposes, to grow domestic equivalents, and to aid industrial espionage.
And yes, all the western companies find that doing business in China is worth it despite the restrictions and requirements for technology transfer. This is something companies doing business in China explicitly agree to.
As China continues to grow but does not open up, should Europe not look out for its own security interests?
Why does China have to open anything up. The model they offer is already mutually beneficial. Being able to produce things cheaply in China is looking after European interests. That’s what facilitates the living of standard people in Europe enjoy.
After all, Europe ignoring the US’s warnings about relying too much on cheap Russian energy is part of the reason that Europe is in dire straits now.
No, what put Europe in dire straights was going along with US sanctions against Russia. You have an uncanny talent for turning black into white my friend.
And yes, all the western companies find that doing business in China is worth it despite the restrictions and requirements for technology transfer. This is something companies doing business in China explicitly agree to.
Yes, it’s a large market that is hard to ignore. But countries may find themselves increasingly
Why does China have to open anything up.
They don’t. But if the West has an economy that allows for increasing Chinese ownership of vital industries, but China does not allow the opposite then it is in the West’s interests to start regulating those relationships. If China wants to be an ascendant superpower, it should not expect to be hyperprotectionist forever.
No, what put Europe in dire straights was going along with US sanctions against Russia. You have an uncanny talent for turning black into white my friend.
The response to the Russian invasion is not just driven by the US, despite what the prevailing opinion on Lemmy seems to be. It is driven both by Ukrainians, who heavily support resistance to Russian aggression, and Europeans who do not want a creeping return of war to Europe by appeasing another dictator.
Yes, it’s a large market that is hard to ignore. But countries may find themselves increasingly
increasingly?
They don’t. But if the West has an economy that allows for increasing Chinese ownership of vital industries, but China does not allow the opposite then it is in the West’s interests to start regulating those relationships. If China wants to be an ascendant superpower, it should not expect to be hyperprotectionist forever.
Clearly whatever China is doing is working a lot better than the western model. Both domestically and in terms of their international relations. Seems weird for a westerner to be lecturing China on how to conduct themselves.
Furthermore, what you call hyperprotectionist is an alternative development model to liberalism and capitalism. China is a socialist country, and that implies having industry under public control. That’s the fundamental principal of socialist development.
The response to the Russian invasion is not just driven by the US, despite what the prevailing opinion on Lemmy seems to be. It is driven both by Ukrainians, who heavily support resistance to Russian aggression, and Europeans who do not want a creeping return of war to Europe by appeasing another dictator.
The trade war with Russia has done absolutely nothing to achieve any of these goals. If anything, it’s now put Europe in a far more disadvantageous position vis-a-vis Russia. Europe is now collapsing economically, its industry is shutting down, and it’s becoming demilitarized having sent most of its weapons to be destroyed in Ukraine.
We’re already starting to see civil unrest across Europe with strikes and protests in many countries, and it’s not even winter yet. We’re also seeing far right populist governments increasingly coming to power. As the economic situation continues to unravel, it’s only a matter of time until European countries start making deals with Russia on Russian terms.
I’m not sure how anybody can argue any of the events of the past 7 months have made Europe stronger in any way.
China has long put severe limits on Western companies doing business in China for strategic purposes, to grow domestic equivalents, and to aid industrial espionage. As China continues to grow but does not open up, should Europe not look out for its own security interests? After all, Europe ignoring the US’s warnings about relying too much on cheap Russian energy is part of the reason that Europe is in dire straits now.
And yes, all the western companies find that doing business in China is worth it despite the restrictions and requirements for technology transfer. This is something companies doing business in China explicitly agree to.
Why does China have to open anything up. The model they offer is already mutually beneficial. Being able to produce things cheaply in China is looking after European interests. That’s what facilitates the living of standard people in Europe enjoy.
No, what put Europe in dire straights was going along with US sanctions against Russia. You have an uncanny talent for turning black into white my friend.
Yes, it’s a large market that is hard to ignore. But countries may find themselves increasingly
They don’t. But if the West has an economy that allows for increasing Chinese ownership of vital industries, but China does not allow the opposite then it is in the West’s interests to start regulating those relationships. If China wants to be an ascendant superpower, it should not expect to be hyperprotectionist forever.
The response to the Russian invasion is not just driven by the US, despite what the prevailing opinion on Lemmy seems to be. It is driven both by Ukrainians, who heavily support resistance to Russian aggression, and Europeans who do not want a creeping return of war to Europe by appeasing another dictator.
increasingly?
Clearly whatever China is doing is working a lot better than the western model. Both domestically and in terms of their international relations. Seems weird for a westerner to be lecturing China on how to conduct themselves.
Furthermore, what you call hyperprotectionist is an alternative development model to liberalism and capitalism. China is a socialist country, and that implies having industry under public control. That’s the fundamental principal of socialist development.
The trade war with Russia has done absolutely nothing to achieve any of these goals. If anything, it’s now put Europe in a far more disadvantageous position vis-a-vis Russia. Europe is now collapsing economically, its industry is shutting down, and it’s becoming demilitarized having sent most of its weapons to be destroyed in Ukraine.
We’re already starting to see civil unrest across Europe with strikes and protests in many countries, and it’s not even winter yet. We’re also seeing far right populist governments increasingly coming to power. As the economic situation continues to unravel, it’s only a matter of time until European countries start making deals with Russia on Russian terms.
I’m not sure how anybody can argue any of the events of the past 7 months have made Europe stronger in any way.