Xijinping need to cut USA @ throat, dismember it's limbs, to be recognized as superpower, civilized ways WON'T WORK!

[war is best form of peace]

https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/go...ts-mar-xis-plan-to-raise-china-on-world-stage

Recommended by




Diplomatic outbursts mar Xi's plan to raise China on world stage
Thu, Mar 07, 2019 - 9:54 AM

That may be damaging China President Xi Jinping's efforts to win friends abroad and capitalise on Mr Trump's international unpopularity.
PHOTO: AFP

[BEIJING] China's diplomats aren't being very diplomatic.
In the past few months, its envoy to Canada publicly accused his hosts of "white supremacy", its ambassador in Sweden labelled the Swedish police "inhumane" and blasted the country's "so-called freedom of expression", and its chief emissary in South Africa said US President Donald Trump's policies were making the US "the enemy of the whole world".
"I don't think we are witnessing a pattern of misstatements and slips of the tongue," said Ryan Hass, a fellow at the Brookings Institution who previously oversaw China affairs at the US National Security Council.
"We seem to be watching China's diplomats matching the mood of the moment in Beijing. Beijing rewards diplomats that are aggressive advocates of China's views and scorns those that it perceives as overly timid."






That may be damaging China President Xi Jinping's efforts to win friends abroad and capitalise on Mr Trump's international unpopularity. While China has seized on the trade war and US disengagement abroad to pitch itself as a champion of globalisation, 63 per cent of respondents to a 2018 Pew poll in 25 countries said they preferred the US as a world leader, compared with 19 per cent for China.
SEE ALSO: China's steel futures dip on uncertain demand outlook



At stake is China's avowed goal of establishing itself as a global superpower with influence over a network of allies to balance US influence. China is pouring billions into global efforts such as Mr Xi's Belt and Road Initiative to forge stronger links with countries around the world.
But China's increasingly strident diplomatic approach could do more harm than good. Anti-China sentiment has played a pivotal role in election surprises across Asia, and more countries around the world are becoming sceptical of Chinese investment - particularly in telecommunications, with fears growing about using its equipment in 5G networks due to concerns about espionage.
China's foreign ministry didn't respond to faxed questions about the more aggressive language from diplomats. After Mr Trump took office, China has sought to portray itself as a supporter of the international order, with Mr Xi himself defending globalisation at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. His charm offensive stood in contrast to Mr Trump, who has reshaped public discourse with regular insults of other world leaders on Twitter.
Even so, foreign diplomats in Beijing say that the behaviour of Chinese officials has become far more aggressive and assertive in private meetings in recent years. Their discussions have become more ideological, according to one senior foreign envoy, who described the behaviour as a strong sense of grievance combined with increasing entitlement about China's international role and rights.
China's reported behaviour at the Apec summit in November highlighted the shift. Papua New Guinea police were called after Chinese officials attempted to "barge" into the office of the country's foreign minister to influence the summit's communique, according to the Agence France-Presse news agency. Chinese officials later denied the report, calling it "a rumour spread by some people with a hidden agenda".
Chinese diplomats' advocacy for the country's embattled tech giant, Huawei Technologies Co, has even riled heads of government. After the Chinese ambassador to the Czech Republic, Zhang Jianmin, announced in November that the Czech cybersecurity body's decision to ban Huawei did not represent the view of the Czech government, Prime Minister Andrej Babis said: "I do not know what the ambassador is talking about," according to Czech Radio. One European ambassador in Beijing said China's aggressive advocacy for the company has been prevalent across the 28-nation bloc.
In some regions, China's overseas rhetoric has been hardening for years. Foreign officials noticed an increasingly strident tone from Beijing following the global financial crisis. At a 2010 meeting hosted by South-east Asian nations in Hanoi, then foreign minister Yang Jiechi famously dismissed some of China's neighbours as "small countries" when challenged over Beijing's stance in the South China Sea.
Foreign diplomats said the outbursts have increased in both frequency and intensity since Mr Xi took power in 2012. In the last few years, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia and now Canada have all incurred Beijing's wrath, with diplomatic barbs often accompanied by economic pressure through import restrictions, store inspections and safety warnings to Chinese tour groups.
In a speech at the 2017 Communist Party conclave that saw Mr Xi appointed for a second term as party chief without an apparent successor, Mr Xi described China as "standing tall and firm in the East" and pledged to make the country a global leader in innovation, influence and military might. At a conference for Chinese ambassadors at the end of that year, Mr Xi urged diplomats to play a more proactive part in an increasingly multipolar world - a speech China's ambassador to the United Kingdom described as a "mobilisation order", or "bugle call".
China's diplomatic corps has been quick to show its loyalty to Mr Xi. In a 2017 essay in the party's theoretical magazine Qiushi, top diplomat Mr Yang pledged to study and implement Mr Xi's thought on diplomacy in a "deep-going way". And Foreign Minister Wang Yi recently praised Mr Xi for "taking the front line of history" and "braving 10,000 crags and torrents".
"Chinese ambassadors always feel they have to speak to the leaders in Beijing more than to the local public. Their promotions depend on it," said Susan Shirk, a former US deputy assistant Secretary of State for East Asia. "If today what they say is more overtly anti-American or anti-Western then that reflects the changing foreign policy line."
In line with national "party-building" campaigns, Chinese diplomats regularly engage in "self-criticism" sessions at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, according to people familiar with the meetings. Last month, the former deputy head of the party's powerful Organization Department, Qi Yu, was appointed as the foreign ministry's party secretary despite a lack of diplomatic experience. One foreign ambassador said Chinese diplomats are skilled and smart but also increasingly "scared".
China has seen this kind of ideology-driven diplomacy before. During the Cultural Revolution, Chinese diplomats in London videotaped themselves fighting protesters on the streets of London, according to the book China's Quest by historian John Garver. In Beijing, British and Soviet diplomatic missions were besieged or invaded and other diplomats were threatened on the streets.
The new wave of truculence is also affecting how foreign envoys are treated in China. Detained Canadian citizen and former diplomat Michael Kovrig has been questioned about his work as a diplomat, according to people familiar with the discussions. The move may be a violation of Article 39 of the Vienna Convention, which explicitly covers the past work of former diplomats. China is a signatory.
Foreign diplomats visiting China's far western region of Xinjiang have been followed, temporarily detained and forced to delete photographs from their phones, while Swedish citizen Gui Minhai was grabbed by Chinese authorities in front of Swedish diplomats, according to the country's foreign ministry.
The shift in mood, and tensions with the US, have altered the tone of discussions inside China's bureaucracy. One Chinese trade diplomat said that while it's never been easy to be a dove in China, all but the most senior officials now refrain from publicly voicing moderate positions toward the US.
"Beijing has established a pattern of making examples of middle powers in hopes that doing so deters others from challenging China's interests," said Mr Hass at the Brookings Institution. "Some in Beijing also seem to be growing frustrated that China's rising national power is not yet translating into the types of deference from others that it seeks."

 

[war is best form of peace]

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/453260-ww3-nuclear-weapons-threat/


Calling Dr. Strangelove: The threat of nuclear war cannot prevent World War III forever

Robert Bridge is an American writer and journalist. Former Editor-in-Chief of The Moscow News, he is author of the book, 'Midnight in the American Empire,' released in 2013.

Published time: 7 Mar, 2019 14:18 Edited time: 7 Mar, 2019 16:07
Get short URL

A still from the film / Dr Strangelove or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb © Getty Images / Archive Holdings Inc.

• 99
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Today, humanity is confronted with an ugly paradox in that the world’s foremost peacekeepers are nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles. One bad move on the geopolitical chessboard, however, could trigger a global catastrophe.
On July 25, 1945, in the waning moments of World War II, then US President Harry S. Truman jotted the following words in his diary, “We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world.” But not terrible enough to employ them, it seems.
Just weeks later, the United States dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese industrial cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, indiscriminately killing some 200,000 civilians in, literally, a flash. Many others died in the years that followed from radiation poisoning and other associated illnesses. If there is a special place in hell for those who would expose the planet to such horrific weapons, Truman must certainly be there.
Read more
Apocalypse in 2019: Is Russia-US war possible?
The historic tragedy is not without some dark irony. Albert Einstein, whose theory of relativity spearheaded the development of atomic weapons, was worried that Adolf Hitler would acquire the deadly know-how before the West. This prompted him in 1939 to write a letter to Truman’s predecessor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, advising him to expedite research into nuclear fission. American scientists, working in the secret Manhattan Project, succeeded beyond Einstein’s wildest dreams.
The famous physicist, appalled by the devastation visited upon the two Japanese cities, expressed regret over his fateful decision to warn the Americans.
“Had I known that the Germans would not succeed in producing an atomic bomb,” he said, “I would have never lifted a finger.”
Since then, the world has been forced to live with the knowledge that all life on earth could be quickly extinguished in the event of some mishap or conflict. Yet this knowledge has not stopped most governments from coveting nuclear weapons because they understand this technology is their best life insurance policy, so to speak.
Indeed, only the simple-minded could have failed to take away lessons with regards to the West’s top hits list. A brief glance at the candidates designated for US-led regime change – Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Ukraine, Yugoslavia and Syria as the most obvious – demonstrated an obvious fact: only unarmed countries need to worry about foreign actors determining their ‘democratic’ future.
In marked contrast to those weaker countries that ‘suffer what they must’, members of the nuclear club (US, Russia, UK, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea, while it is generally recognized that Israel possesses nuclear weapons although it does not officially acknowledge them) can rest easy in the belief that they are safe from outside attack.
Also on rt.com US accuses China of preparing for WWIII: What you’re not being told
Lately, however, that self-confidence has been greatly shaken by a spate of dramatic events that have given the entire world pause. The most recent wake-up call came this month with a series of aerial dogfights between Pakistan and India – two countries that possess over 100 nuclear warheads apiece. The incident demonstrated exactly how fast things can spiral out of control, especially when third-party actors i.e. terrorists are involved in the equation.
On February 14, the Pakistan-based terrorist group Jaish-e-Mohammed carried out a suicide attack on an Indian military convoy in the Pulwama District that killed over 40 soldiers. Less than two weeks later, New Delhi – accusing Islamabad of going soft on terrorism (sound familiar?) – retaliated by hitting a “terrorist camp” in a Pakistan-controlled part of Kashmir. Tensions mounted the following day as the Pakistani military carried out airstrikes along the Line of Control (LoC), shooting down two Indian aircraft that crossed into its territory and capturing one pilot, who has since been released.
Also on rt.com Pakistan downs 2 Indian aircraft inside its airspace, pilot arrested – military

It is impossible to read such reports without recalling that both Pakistan and India possess nuclear weapons. This places the enemy combatants in a curious position in that they must practice extreme restraint so as to avoid a ‘worse-case scenario’, and we all know what that is. Whether or not the two regional rivals can continue to keep cool heads remains to be seen.
Another recent incident involving nuclear powers came as a tragic accident, although no less disconcerting. In September, four Israeli F-16 fighter jets launched a reckless attack on Latakia, Syria that resulted in the downing of a Russian military aircraft, which was accidentally hit by Syrian ground fire. The incident resulted in the death of 15 Russian crew members, as well as heightened global tensions.
The Russian Ministry of Defense accused Israel of deliberately using the Russian aircraft to attract fire in that the Israeli aircraft failed to either change their approach to the intended targets or give Moscow enough time to move the Il-20 to safety.

Although tensions eventually calmed down between Moscow and Tel Aviv, the incident provided a grim reminder that the world is becoming chaotic to the point where accidents between nuclear powers are increasingly likely.
By far, the most disturbing development on the global stage, however, is the spectacle of Washington unilaterally withdrawing from arms control treaties – specifically the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Needless to say, these moves will rekindle the global arms race – a positive development for defense contractors, no doubt, but an unmitigated disaster for everyone else.
Most worrisome is that the US is trashing these landmark treaties at the very same time it has built a missile defense system in Eastern Europe, while actively building up its military footprint smack on Russia’s border. Moscow, naturally, has responded in kind, with Vladimir Putin having recently unveiled an array of weapon systems that will make US-led NATO think twice about making any aggressive moves against Russia.
Judging by such American antics, one almost gets the impression that it believes a nuclear war is somehow a winnable venture. And there are grounds to believe that is the case. According to a 2017 report, for example, a panel of Pentagon officials have called on the president to consider a “tailored nuclear option for limited use.”
Also on rt.com Remove nuclear weapons from Europe for ‘everyone’s peace of mind’ – Russian PM to US
As described in the National Interest, using low-yield nuclear weapons against an adversary’s conventional forces will “demonstrate that you mean serious business and might be crazy enough to launch an all out nuclear attack.”
Judging by what transpired in 1945 against the Japanese, is there any reason to doubt that many people could believe that America is “crazy enough” to do the unthinkable for a second time?
With such deranged ideas floating around, it’s no wonder that the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a non-profit group of academics devoted to the study of security issues, said the world is now perched at “two minutes before midnight” with regards to a nuclear cataclysm due to ongoing events that place the world in “extraordinary danger.”
To paraphrase the 1964 black political comedy, Dr. Strangelove, maybe we should all just stop worrying and love the bomb?
@Robert_Bridge
Subscribe to RT newsletter to get stories the mainstream media won’t tell you.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

• 99
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

 

[war is best form of peace]

It is close to GLOBAL TRADE WAR cum GLOBAL SANCTION WAR now.

To make it stronger and solidified, I propose the world to be Divided into 2 distinctive hostile sanction packs as a prelude to WW3.

Dotard will lead one pack of his suckers screaming to sanction and trade war anyone or everyone else. Russia China NK Iran Venezuela Cuba etc, in another pack opposing Dotard. Both pack 100% sanction and embargo each other, cut off internet connection, postal mails, telephone, civilian transportation, shipment by air land and sea, totally blocked and disconnected. Currency Exchange also banned.

Each and every country in the world are forced to take side firmly and without any exception nor exemptions. No one is allowed to be neutral nor connected on both sides. Strict monitoring by satellites and all military spying means. Any violation will be punished by nuke.

Very soon we can see who can last better and longer and survive this. Who will blink first and surrender or switch side.

When can not last further, can begin global nuke war or conventional war.