American and Chinese diplomats would be more successful if they acknowledge ideological competition as an inherent component of bilateral relations and then managed this tension – not resolve it.
Two questions. (1) How can the PRC refer to the “Chinese model of democracy” (from the white paper you quoted)? Do they honestly think their form of government is democratic? Do they believe this or is this just spin? (2) You write that the PRC isn’t providing intel officers to overthrow democratic governments or giving AK47s to revolutionaries, but do some of their actions today not pose similar threats but in a different format? For example, their Confucius Institutes have been controversial; there have been recent stories documenting a Chinese consul general beating up a protester in the UK (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-63972640); the unofficial and murky Chinese police outposts around the world (ca. 100) who are collecting intel (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/12/world/europe/china-outpost-new-york.html); or the Belt and Road initiative and the strings attached for recipient countries. Either way, the PRC certainly can’t claim innocence about spreading their ideology and treat the US as the only offender. Thanks.
Excellent. Well-stated and important. I found the autocorrections distracting: tenets rather than tenants of realpolitik; tempered response rather than tampered. ? Minor, but.
Interesting article, but I would agree with Laura that the spread of Chinese influence around the world is intense. An issue of The Economist from late 2022 outlines clearly how they have insinuated themselves in many countries across Africa.
Agreed. I have a whole chapter on this topic in my next book. Once I have a draft, Ill send.
Agree. Stay tuned for more.
Two questions. (1) How can the PRC refer to the “Chinese model of democracy” (from the white paper you quoted)? Do they honestly think their form of government is democratic? Do they believe this or is this just spin? (2) You write that the PRC isn’t providing intel officers to overthrow democratic governments or giving AK47s to revolutionaries, but do some of their actions today not pose similar threats but in a different format? For example, their Confucius Institutes have been controversial; there have been recent stories documenting a Chinese consul general beating up a protester in the UK (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-63972640); the unofficial and murky Chinese police outposts around the world (ca. 100) who are collecting intel (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/12/world/europe/china-outpost-new-york.html); or the Belt and Road initiative and the strings attached for recipient countries. Either way, the PRC certainly can’t claim innocence about spreading their ideology and treat the US as the only offender. Thanks.
Excellent. Well-stated and important. I found the autocorrections distracting: tenets rather than tenants of realpolitik; tempered response rather than tampered. ? Minor, but.
Interesting article, but I would agree with Laura that the spread of Chinese influence around the world is intense. An issue of The Economist from late 2022 outlines clearly how they have insinuated themselves in many countries across Africa.