The policy will not change. It does not need to. The Chinese will intervene when it is needed they have already done so a few times. They are pragmatic, and biding their time. Building mutually beneficial relationships. But look to Korea to see what happens when they feel the need to get involved directly.
In China the Japnese invasion and atrocities are still freshly remembered. They know the pain of being brutalized by imperialism. If the US plays around and strikes China they will wake a sleeping dragon. China will not start a conflict, but once one begins they will not hesitate to meet the challenge.
China isnt isolationist. They are pragmatic. Soft power is more effective at the current time. Do not let their pragmatism fool you though. The dragon may be resting, but it has not lost its teeth.
They are specifically designing a new medium range bomber/fighter to strike US airbases in the pacific. They have the undeniable best destroyer in the world. No ship can match it. They are an entire generation ahead in cyber warfare. They have more industrial capacity, better infrastructure, better self sufficiency, more manpower, etc. It is not a question of IF the US will fuck around and find out but WHEN.
The Dragon isn’t even resting. It’s exercising. China has a pretty impressive build up of weapons in preparation for the looming threat of WW3.
I completely understand this policy of non-interference. But personally it is so frustrating to me that for example Rojava has no allies. Ofc thats just venting frustration, not serious critique. Because for serious critique I’d need to actually have a good understanding of chinas foreign policy from a dialectical materialist standpoint.
China saw the overthrow of the USSR, and I read a few years back that Chinese universities offer a whole master’s program in that subject too. They learned from it, and I think it’s no coincidence that reform and opening up happened around the time the USSR was overthrown too (I’d wager to say Deng must have even directly wrote about it but it would be conjecture on my part).
The end of the USSR had two repercussions, one inside and one outside. It destroyed the country inside, but, it destroyed the communist movement outside. The Union was a huge supporter of communist movements and parties. Tons of parties in Europe received funding from the USSR, it’s how they were able to afford buildings and stuff. When the union fell, all these parties either dissolved and integrated into social democrat parties, or turned to eurocommunism because the funding dried up, and they had not built a system in which they could depend only on themselves.
This is what China is trying to avoid. It’s also not catering to our privileged first world lifestyle. China prefers to rally the imperialized periphery and they understand that very well, because BRI is pretty much only helping the Global South. By that I mean they know which part of the world is imperialized and which part is doing the imperialism. So in that way it’s not incorrect to say China has a policy of non-interference if we think of it militarily (and I also use the term myself), but in another way they’re also interfering, right? They’re interfering in imperialist plans for Africa and South America. It’s a “softer” form of interference (but with the same results) that the US knows how to do very well with the NED, CIA and USAID.
We could say yes, but they should be more open about it. But I think their system works very well and we can see that because every year it’s growing. More countries are turning to China willingly, and it’s exactly because they don’t tell the world what to do. They don’t presume to know the local material conditions better than those on the ground. African countries are now moving towards China precisely because they don’t impose debt-trap loans and don’t ask for concessions in return.
Regarding Rojava they have an ally, the US military lol. It is my understanding that Kurds were doing pretty well in Syria under Assad. Certainly much better than they’re gonna do under ISIS. They chose to secede instead of joining forces with Assad, and this move weakened the resistance. Now they steal Syrian oil to sell to the US. Liberation doesn’t necessarily mean sovereignty, it means autonomy. Living in dignity. Uyghurs have autonomy in the PRC. Rojava chose instead to do ethnic cleansing - they’re not after liberation, they’re after being the oppressors. Explains why they allowed the US military so easily.
No
I remember reading from a Xinhua article a long time ago (I think roughly a year or more) that China’s non-interference policy isn’t permanent, and that one day they will begin to strike back and truly stand up against the U.S. empire, and that time was approaching. But it probably won’t be for years, at best.
Why are you spamming this as a reply to everyone in the thread?
It’s the root of their success. I don’t expect them ever to change while the American empire exists (even in a diminished state).
I remember reading from a Xinhua article a long time ago (I think roughly a year or more) that China’s non-interference policy isn’t permanent, and that one day they will begin to strike back and truly stand up against the U.S. empire, and that time was approaching. But it probably won’t be for years, at best.
It will have to. China’s policy of self development and economic diplomacy has worked amazingly but it isn’t unstoppable. As it is quite obvious the us and europe have gotten wise to China’s game and are working to find a counter. I doubt China will be the one to initiate the change in policy but the change will come. As much as capitalists would love to sell the rope that will hang them the imperialists wont let that happen. Eventually the west will do what it has to to disrupt the rise of China and they will have to change tack.
I have to agree. There will come a point where the US navy will do something like throw up a blockade and just steal any Chinese ships that attempt to approach Africa to buy raw minerals and China can either try and construct the most elaborate smuggling scheme in the world or they have to confront NATO with force, maybe sink some ships, maybe just escort their own and start providing military assistance to friendly African or other states who risk being couped or attacked by western forces. It’ll likely be very low confrontation and framed as defensive and limited in nature to start as I don’t see China wanting to war with the west even if the west takes off both gauntlets and slaps them repeatedly across the face. It then becomes a question of whether Chinese assistance can overcome centuries of western expertise and experience couping, dividing and conquering, creating proxy forces, sectarian strife fostering, blackmail, and destabilizing regions for profit and imperialism. It tends to be easier to destroy than to build so it’s going to be rough.
Blockades only work against small countries, China is just huge, there is no way the US + lackeys could ever blockade current China.
Sadly it is not as impossible as it seems. Panama channel, Greenland to seal the arctic route and the strait of Malacca. Some military on these points effectively seals the pacific. Going around these points is prohibitively expensive.
The US is reining in Panama, wants to pute more troops in Greenland and is heavily pushing for regime change in Myanmar and Thailand…
Leaves the land routes: Pakistan is instable and a US removed, Afghanistan still not peaceful, Syria regime changed, Iran very much in the crosshairs of US hawks, The border area between Russia and Ukraine is in flames already, regime change operations in Georgia, Azerbaijan openly supported by the west, Isn’treal being Isn’treal.
Also not rosy.
I remember reading from a Xinhua article a long time ago (I think roughly a year or more) that China’s non-interference policy isn’t permanent, and that one day they will begin to strike back and truly stand up against the U.S. empire, and that time was approaching. But it probably won’t be for years, at best.
I remember reading this comment at least 5 times here word for word
I just wanted to reply to everyone, since I doubt everyone reads every single comment in every single thread.
This policy has earned them the trust of many political actors world wide, so I doubt they would change, as it could result in diplomatic disruptions in many countries. This could be used by the US in attempts to isolate the country. But only time will tell.
I remember reading from a Xinhua article a long time ago (I think roughly a year or more) that China’s non-interference policy isn’t permanent, and that one day they will begin to strike back and truly stand up against the U.S. empire, and that time was approaching. But it probably won’t be for years, at best.
I don’t have the article on-hand, unfortunately. But I appreciate that China seems to be weighing the costs and benefits of the policy.
No and they shouldn’t. Milei said it best “China es un socio comercial muy interesante porque no exigen nada, solo que no los molesten.” = “China is a very interesting partner because they do not demand anything other than letting them do business.”
I remember reading from a Xinhua article a long time ago (I think roughly a year or more) that China’s non-interference policy isn’t permanent, and that one day they will begin to strike back and truly stand up against the U.S. empire, and that time was approaching. But it probably won’t be for years, at best.
Why are you spamming this as a reply to everyone in the thread?
