China's Dreams of World Leadership are Fading

[Marcin2 + 725]

5 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

We don't WANT it to happen.

China, to the extent that it is centrally managed, has definitely gone well past the scale in which a single organization can actually run it. The 50-60% of the economy that was private is unplanned but for a handful of the year's most favored industries sucking in free capital from the provinces or big four CCP controlled banks. It is a truly wild vicious capitalism that we rarely see in the West. It is very short term oriented and flits capital from one endeavor to another just as fast as Shenzhen listed stocks go into speculative manias and then burn up into a crash. The fact is that China is beyond unmanageable as a single unit, unless it is a loose confederation. So it may be better off disbanded. I believe that if history is a guide, then that is why China was rarely unified.

I was considering how the large countries are managed: India, China, United States.

All of them have majority of country functions at the level of the first internal division: states in India and US and provinces in China, not at the central level. Only some functions: financial system, currency, defence, most of taxes are managed at federal level.

As you have observed China is the most homogenic of them all, 92% of population Han Chinese. What more, if you want to be somebody you need to be able to write in Chinese and to speak in one of Chinese languages.

I think modern technology makes it easier to manage large countries. Somehow both China and United States trace each of their citizens in real time, through their mobiles, CCTV cameras etc. I call it very high level of control.

[0R0 + 6,251]

22 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

My question was more general, and I explained that in my comment, it was based on opinions here wishing the fall of CCP followed by partition of China:

Please ask yourself, if you are American how far are you gonna go to protect your hegemony ?

1- tariffs,

2- global sanctions for business with some entities

3- across the board high-technology embargo,

4- full economic conflict and global sanctions like with Iran

5- resources embargo, navy blockade,

6- shooting conventional war

7- nuclear war

We are now at 3,

4 is 30% possibility of armed conflict,

5 is 100% possibility of armed conflict. Please answer.

It is not the hegemony that is at stake. It is the independence - not just for US but everybody else. China's plan is about using everything in order to dominate and control the world so that the CCP can remain in power and obtain stature globally. Everybody else, and especially Americans, just want to make a buck. As you have seen, China manages to bribe away American's freedom of expression and access to information by pressuring Google and social media as well as censuring government officials and business leaders who poke the Panda. 

We most definitely want to see the CCP gone. Completely discredited and its statues pulled to the ground and its banners burnt. Its personnel shunned and abhorred and pushed to the sidelines of society, tried criminally piecemeal for what they had done. 

Step 4 is financial disconnection of China on a selective basis. If they don't disband their SOEs and SOE bank funding mechanisms and state led efforts in any industry. 

Nobody will shoot China, and there will be no blockade. After the horrible dysfunction of China on repeated bird flue in chickens, swine feever, green rot, it is on the verge of being unable to feed itself if not well past it. You don't need to resort to military actions under those circumstances, just trip up their food financing or their energy, or both.

 

 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

42 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

Couldn't care less about an ascendant China if it were not so obvious that so much of what is stocked on their shelves comes from China and so many of the jobs  they once had are held by folks at the industrial outskirts of Shanghai or Guangzhou.

I disagree. 

Many Americans don't buy American despite having the choice and increasingly awareness. Agree on the joblosses though. 

[0R0 + 6,251]

16 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

You say, you are perfectly OK living in the world in which China is the global power, with GDP 200% of US GDP ?

You know that with economic domination, comes also technology domination and later also military.

I mean US would be able to defend North America, but would not be able to project power around Eurasia.

Eurasia would be Chinese continent, North and South America would stay to be US continent.

I think for a lot of US citizens this would be very tough to choke.

I mean US spends a lot of money, nearly  1 trillion US dollars each year to have control over hydrocarbons.

A lot of people were killed by Americans for the purpose of control over hydrocarbons.

I think I do not believe, that you believe what you write.

 

I am not describing my opinions. 

I am describing popular American attitudes

The people who care - like those on this forum - are few and far between in America. 

The hydrocarbons are no longer a concern for the US for their own value. They are part of the weighing of incentives for the US to remain engaged or do what it wants and withdraw.

I believe US leadership is very much interested in keeping China out of the negemony game because it is dangerous to our way of life even if North America were disconnected from the world. 

[Tomasz + 1,608]

Not that I would like to argue, but should I really list here all the coups in which the CIA was involved and all wars and minor military interventions in which the United States participated.

Dear colleagues, America has many advantages, great achievements for world science and culture, and I have nothing against ordinary American.

But the fact is that the United States has a very aggressive foreign policy and has led to the death  of millions of people after the end of World War II.

So please do not make the United States an innocent giant because you have dozens of military interventions and coups on your account , and now, in order to defend the position of the US as hegemon you are slowly coming into conflict with the whole world and imposing sanctions on several large global economies.

Perhaps being under the dominance of the USA is not the worst option if you look at Germany or Japan but apart from that you have destroyed many countries from South America to the Middle East and with all due respect very strong anti-Americanism in many regions of the world is completely justified.

It so happens that China is a very authoritarian regime but at the other hand at least for the time being they have not participated in so many wars outside their territory for the last 200 years and reasonable people in Europe even those who value the USA see it.

Because how do you think to whom, if not American politics in the Middle East, we owe the invasion of refugees to Europe?

This is a very huge problem in Europe and people  are basically not stupid and see who triggered the Arab Spring and destroyed Libya, Iraq and Syria.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_United_States

Edited February 9, 2020 by Tomasz

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

54 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

My question was more general, and I explained that in my comment, it was based on opinions here wishing the fall of CCP followed by partition of China:

Please ask yourself, if you are American how far are you gonna go to protect your hegemony ?

1- tariffs,

2- global sanctions for business with some entities

3- across the board high-technology embargo,

4- full economic conflict and global sanctions like with Iran

5- resources embargo, navy blockade,

6- shooting conventional war

7- nuclear war

We are now at 3,

4 is 30% possibility of armed conflict,

5 is 100% possibility of armed conflict. Please answer.

or 6 - if you count the 3 current wars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_lengths_of_United_States_participation_in_wars

[Marcin2 + 725]

53 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

My question was more general, and I explained that in my comment, it was based on opinions here wishing the fall of CCP followed by partition of China:

Please ask yourself, if you are American how far are you gonna go to protect your hegemony ?

1- tariffs,

2- global sanctions for business with some entities

3- across the board high-technology embargo,

4- full economic conflict and global sanctions like with Iran

5- resources embargo, navy blockade,

6- shooting conventional war

7- nuclear war

We are now at 3,

4 is 30% possibility of armed conflict,

5 is 100% possibility of armed conflict. Please answer.

43 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

It is not the hegemony that is at stake. It is the independence - not just for US but everybody else. China's plan is about using everything in order to dominate and control the world so that the CCP can remain in power and obtain stature globally. Everybody else, and especially Americans, just want to make a buck. As you have seen, China manages to bribe away American's freedom of expression and access to information by pressuring Google and social media as well as censuring government officials and business leaders who poke the Panda. 

We most definitely want to see the CCP gone. Completely discredited and its statues pulled to the ground and its banners burnt. Its personnel shunned and abhorred and pushed to the sidelines of society, tried criminally piecemeal for what they had done. 

Step 4 is financial disconnection of China on a selective basis. If they don't disband their SOEs and SOE bank funding mechanisms and state led efforts in any industry. 

Nobody will shoot China, and there will be no blockade. After the horrible dysfunction of China on repeated bird flue in chickens, swine feever, green rot, it is on the verge of being unable to feed itself if not well past it. You don't need to resort to military actions under those circumstances, just trip up their food financing or their energy, or both.

Exactly, very good observation - it could be about our independence, in a very long term, and our way of life, but I do not think it is a concern in 20 years, but in 30 years could be.

That is I asked the Question: How are you gonna go ?

You say, you would go to step 4 and this should be enough to contain China and get rid of CCP: Of course they would not change their internal economic policies, also regarding SOE, as long as they find it sound policies, even if US requires this move.

On the basis of my knowledge step 4 would not be enough. Step 4 is a full weaponization of US dollar, SWIFT disconnection, global sanctions against any entity and country doing business with China, the same as current sanctions against Iran.

First of all, it is simply not possible, China is the factory of the world, it is deeply connected through supply chains with all the world countries,  actually the country that is the most connected out of all countries. In 10-15 years world will live without United States supply chains (Chinese are busy working towards this goal, under US sanctions) but not Chinese supply chains.

Even that it seems not possible China is already prepared for step 4 to a large extent.

Would you go to step 5 and risk nuclear annihilation if the stake is your way of life 30 years later ?

I would not, but a lot of people would answer yes, and I really understand them.

Only step 5 crude oil embargo could cripple China, they are also preparing for this remote possibility, increasing their SPRs and increasing imports via land routes.

But of course step 5 leads to step 6 and possibly step 7.

Edited February 9, 2020 by Marcin2
typo

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

17 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

There is opinion here at oilprice that it is China that is more aggresive towards the world and US particular, than US against China.

People in EU do not share this view. Why ?

Because we are also the victims of US hegemonic wrath in the form of blackmail and sanctions if do not toe US foreign policies, if EU wants to be independent in its foreign policy.

And also at simple PR level probably mainly US and Japan citizens, each because of different reason believe that US tariffs , sanctions and recently embargos are just benevolent contra actions.

And I think that US is squandering the real Opportunity to co-operate with EU on the pressing problem how to deal with Chinese giant.

Even that US and EU views differ substantially, we are bedfellows and need to have common front against China or be dominated, at least in economic terms.

But EU perception is US are treating us as a junior partner, not equal, I really watch in astonishment how „exceptional” US recently became.

perhaps if, I don't know, the EU paid for their own damn defense? But no, the defense Minister of Germany whines about being asked to contribute. You're junior "partners" for a damn good reason

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

2 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

Guys, why you wish the most populous country to fall apart, after revolution ?

It would cause immense suffering, millions of casualties. What is the reason, forget about ethics for a moment, what is the reason of such a wish (it was formulated before at this fourm, in many different ways by a lot of other commenters) ?

Are you afraid that otherwise China would be too strong ? Do you envision this as a way to get rid of : "the major danger for our planet" as major US politicians inform us, daily ?

Do you want to "liberate" 1.4 billion of Chinese from dictatorship oppression ?

I understand that 500 million hungry Chinese people and 10 million dead Chinese are the means that are justified by  the noble goal.

This is actually the major line of rift between United States and the European Union relating to the topic: 'How to engage rising China?"

As a citizen of EU country I believe in my naivety that EU+US and China can co-exist peacefully together.

I do not have significant doubts (and this is not my wish, I am actually afraid of the rise of China) that China, maybe with some hiccups, will continue its rise, until it will achieve developed country status. There are just too many indicators showing that the things are generally done well in economic terms in China.

I think that it is impossible for US citizen to live in the world in which United States is number 2, that Chinese GDP could be 200% of US GDP. You simply cease to be exceptional at this very moment.

I would like US and EU and some other countries to gang up economically to counter the China.

But my red line of maximum pressure is access to our market.

Embargos, global sanctions and shooting war is out of my arsenal of means of China containment.

For US (at least politicians) it is not that easy, I think and I am afraid that US would start real shooting war if any other means of China containment will not work.

That is why I want strong and independent EU and that is  why US wants weak, partitioned EU.

I do not want Chinese hegemony, but much more I do not want war in Eurasia.

Please ask yourself, if you are American how far are you gonna go to protect your hegemony ?

Marcin why do you conflate the population of China with its current leadership? The leadership of China is the problem, not the people. If and when the 99.99% of China decide to band together and throw off the shackles imposed on them by the 0.001% who are gathering vast wealth and power while being utterly amoral. I know you read the general's speech I posted here before. I didn't make that up and my wife knew the Chinese phrases he was quoting. There's no way that was written by a westerner. It wasn't supposed to get out I'm sure, but get out it did. 

Speaking of getting out, there's a church in Singapore that has had multiple parishioners infected by the coronavirus. How did they catch it? Turns out there were a couple of folks from Wuhan who just happened to join last month. Their expenses were being paid by the Chinese government. They might as well have been suicide bombers. Think about that for a minute. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

Marcin et al... 1) Tariffs are about morality.  Do not let dictators/oligarchies and immoral people in your own country to use ~slaves. 

After that .. are you this delusional?  2) No one is forcing you and the world to trade using USD.  No one. Go your own way. 

The US, and its allies used to be fully 100% aware of #1 and #2 as this is HOW the world works currently.  You want out, ok. 

You want it to work another way?  Buckle up, pay the price. 

[0R0 + 6,251]

32 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

You say, you are perfectly OK living in the world in which China is the global power, with GDP 200% of US GDP ?

I am saying that China has a problem that is structural to their policy suite. In order to grow innovation, you need to feed it very substantial funding, thus you need to have high margins. In order to have high margins, products must be protected from copying and IP theft, and processes and designs must be kept secret from everyone, and in the case of China, kept away from the party's power to peer in and take it over and distribute it among its friends.

Thus the insistence of the CCP to have a cadre on each shop floor and design office makes that impossible. The CCP's refusal to protect IP leads to its membership's inherent power to conduct espionage, to be up for bid for anyone, and thus distribute IP.  Therefore, by policy, China can never have a high margin economy. 

As pointed out before, the Chinese economy can be demonstrated to be a fee economy that generically transforms inputs into next stage production for a percentage fee. The output has no supply and demand dynamic of its own to determine pricing and thus vary margin. That means that whatever China does, turns into a commodity with low commodity margins. That means that innovation will always require an external subsidy and never produce a financial return. 

Whatever powers China's CCP imagines it has, it will succumb to this loss making policy initiative by producing volume without value. And must eventually go bankrupt the same way the Soviets did. If the popular Chinese investment in overpriced real estate were not so dominant and by its nature is not expected to be producing cash flow, then China would have gone bust financially a long time ago. Because of large scale savings by the still not halfway retired boomer generation, the losses can be hidden into the mountain of (bad) debt.In a few years, the savings rate will drop further as the rest of the boomers retire, thus the financial system (AKA Ponzi scheme) will melt down with greater cash flow liabilities than inflows. 

As I keep pointing out, at that stage, policy will have to respond rapidly to either reduce the liabilities via mass bankruptcies and shut down of financial institutions and capital formation and therefore incomes of the 40% of the people working in that sector, or print up the cash flow difference and monetize the toxic credit to move the losses on to the PBOC balance sheet and hope that the resulting price inflation does not wipe the CCP off the planet in a wave of food riots. 

So, no. I am not worried about China becoming 200% of US GDP, By PPP, it is already well past 100%. But its margin is puny. I would guesstimate it is about 30% as opposed to the US at 70% and Europe at 60%. Apparently, ROI has turned negative in China in about 2014, and has gotten worse ever since, despite a huge relief from commodity pricing in 2015. I have yet to do a formal calculation for the figures for China, but that seems to be where they are. Total Factor Productivity has been negative since 2011, a little at first and now whole percentage points, and credit has long ago departed on its own sharp upwards trajectory away from GDP. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

Marcin et al

India/China have always had several times the "GDP" of every other nation on earth throughout history... nothing of any value outside of medicine(everyone needs this and will pay whatever it takes) gets developed/distributed in those nations due to their culture/society/government even if they technically invented it. 

[0R0 + 6,251]

I should add this, which includes off the books shadow banking debt which is unreported into the IMF World Banks and BIS statistics.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

“Eurasia would be Chinese continent, North and South America would stay to be US continent.”

You are making the assumption that Europe and Asia would just sit idly by and let China dominate them...I do not think this is realistic.

I think it was back around 1979 when the Vietnamese gave China a ‘bloody nose’ after a Chinese border incursion...as an example.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

4 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

 

Speaking of getting out, there's a church in Singapore that has had multiple parishioners infected by the coronavirus. How did they catch it? Turns out there were a couple of folks from Wuhan who just happened to join last month. Their expenses were being paid by the Chinese government. They might as well have been suicide bombers. Think about that for a minute. 

"Would you like some free blankets for the poor?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Fort_Pitt

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

I seriously doubt that the Chinese government have EVER sponsored ANY religious activity! Look at their stated policy towards religion!

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

8 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I seriously doubt that the Chinese government have EVER sponsored ANY religious activity! Look at their stated policy towards religion!

He was suggesting they were trying to kill off the church members by sending in infected people.

Like an atheist inquisition...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition

Edited February 10, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

 

”He was suggesting they were trying to kill off the church members by sending in infected people...”

 

I understand this, my point is, if you are trying to create a narrative, at least make an effort to make it believeable.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

7 hours ago, 0R0 said:

You really misread Americans. They would like to believe there is no one greater, but quite frankly they don't give a hoot. Americans are not Russians. They don't feel an affinity to the power of the central government in international affairs. It is not even a political issue in national elections, not to speak of State and local ones. The US is uniformly ambivalent on the issue of international engagement. Couldn't care less about an ascendant China if it were not so obvious that so much of what is stocked on their shelves comes from China and so many of the jobs  they once had are held by folks at the industrial outskirts of Shanghai or Guangzhou. Other than that, so long as China isn't really threatening the US with nuclear annihilation, Americans don't care. 

Americans distinctly want out of peacekeeping Europe and the middle east. It is only at the top end of business and politics that US' international role matters. It is entirely different from the natural issue of Europe's position on a huge interconnected continent and a Warsaw resident's natural concern with what Italians might be up to in their EC negotiations if Cicciolina gets a ministry portfolio in a newly elected Italian government. 

A number of people on here have tried in various ways and with various words to say what you just did, but your version is quite succinct while, hopefully, not being so antagonistic or making Americans just sound like people that don't care about anything or anyone else.  Well done.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I seriously doubt that the Chinese government have EVER sponsored ANY religious activity! Look at their stated policy towards religion!

Reading comprehension much? They were from Wuhan sponsored to go to Singapore for reasons unknown and just happened to go to the number one Christian Church there, where they just happened to infect at least 5 people (so far). Come to your own conclusions you're not my problem. 

In English

Hanzu. I believe you claimed your wife was Chinese let her translate it. 

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Ward Smith
Added links

[Marcin2 + 725]

Hopefully guys cooler heads always prevail, this time in Pentagon.

Pentagon was recently against further sanctions against Huawei cause it would hurt US suppliers.

As @Rasmus Jorgensen said it is really wishful thinking to expect Chinese break up as a country.

China is a country that is burgeoning fast, very fast.

Look at transport statistics: Passengers kilometres of air travel increased by 9.0%, high speed rail ridership from 2.0 billion to 2.2 billion in 2019, retail sales of consumer goods increased by 8.0%. This stupid CCP somehow predicted 15 years ago , I still do not know how,  that China needs high speed rail system for increased mobility. Total passenger kilometres of high speed rail and domestic air travel are 50% higher in China than domestic air travel in US and rising fast.
If that would be data of US economy ( had US had expertise and means to have high speed rail in the first place) you would be very excited.

For China such results are doom and gloom, they are on the verge of break up, how bad they still enjoy their lives and do not know about it.

Edited February 10, 2020 by Marcin2
Typo

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

1 hour ago, Marcin2 said:

 This stupid CCP somehow.... Total passenger kilometres of high speed rail and domestic air travel are 50% higher in China than domestic air travel in US and rising fast.

If that would be data of US economy ( had US had expertise and means to have high speed rail in the first place) you would be very excited.

Thank God we do not have slow ass trains, we only have very rare VERY slow ass trains.  Vast majority of distance travel is done by vacationers/family not business in downtown city centers.  No, I do not wish to take 5X longer to go the same distance which eats most of my vacation time...

Keep trolling!

EDIT: IF anyone wants to go slower, and I have wanted to do so as have millions of others, you either rent/buy an RV and see the sights along the way or use camping gear. 

Edited February 10, 2020 by footeab@yahoo.com

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

7 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I seriously doubt that the Chinese government have EVER sponsored ANY religious activity! Look at their stated policy towards religion!

 

5 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Reading comprehension much? They were from Wuhan sponsored to go to Singapore for reasons unknown and just happened to go to the number one Christian Church there, where they just happened to infect at least 5 people (so far). Come to your own conclusions you're not my problem. 

In English

Hanzu. I believe you claimed your wife was Chinese let her translate it. 

I believe that you 2 gents may have much more in common than you may realize. 

For starters, neither of you are "typical Americans" who have never been overseas, and you both seem to have a good grasp of global politics.

[0R0 + 6,251]

2 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

Hopefully guys cooler heads always prevail, this time in Pentagon.

Pentagon was recently against further sanctions against Huawei cause it would hurt US suppliers.

As @Rasmus Jorgensen said it is really wishful thinking to expect Chinese break up as a country.

China is a country that is burgeoning fast, very fast.

Look at transport statistics: Passengers kilometres of air travel increased by 9.0%, high speed rail ridership from 2.0 billion to 2.2 billion in 2019, retail sales of consumer goods increased by 8.0%. This stupid CCP somehow predicted 15 years ago , I still do not know how,  that China needs high speed rail system for increased mobility. Total passenger kilometres of high speed rail and domestic air travel are 50% higher in China than domestic air travel in US and rising fast.
If that would be data of US economy ( had US had expertise and means to have high speed rail in the first place) you would be very excited.

For China such results are doom and gloom, they are on the verge of break up, how bad they still enjoy their lives and do not know about it.

Yes, doesn't a credit bubble feel wonderful? It produces such confidence and great incomes. Till it doesn't.

Do you believe that somehow the meteoric rise of debt that accompanies these good but no longer spectacular numbers is not going to form a crisis and economic retrenchment? 

The high speed rail idea is insanely stupid for the US. The population density is just too low. So the only locations it would have any usefulness to it are along the Eastern Seaboard DC to Boston, or along the Pacific coast San Diego to San Fran, and unlike China, those areas were urbanized a century ago, and the passenger rail that served them has gone bankrupt by 1960. So now is not the time and the US is not the place to build high speed rail. Unless you build it underground.

[Marcin2 + 725]

On 2/9/2020 at 12:13 PM, Douglas Buckland said:

“Even that US and EU views differ substantially, we are bedfellows and need to have common front against China or be dominated, at least in economic terms.”

1. What you say is correct. The problem is that the EU has never taken a serious stand against China and their trade practices. For that matter, prior to Trump the US had not either.

2. Now that Trump is aggressively tackling the issue, the EU should lend support - but they have not. They will wait and see how the tariffs and other measures work for the US before they take action. 
 

3. Much of this is due to Trump’s stand on issues such as ‘climate change’, funding NATO and participation in the failed UN experiment. A form of diplomatic blackmail on the part of the EU.

4. We’ll see how this all works out, but with the UK leaving the EU, the state of the European economy and the issues with uncontrolled immigration...things are suddenly looking shaky in Europe.

1&2. US actions are US centric and based on a failed assumption that bilateral US-China trade deficit is important. EU actions are more long-term like protection of IP and control over Chinese investment, we have common ground with US here. Later US actions were pure tech containment of China.

These are very harmful US actions, but mainly harmful for US, I do not think EU should join.  For tech containment of China to be succesful: EU and East Asia should work in team with US, they have no willingness to do it. For each EU and East Asian country China is a giant, and these countries want to utilize the giant not fight with it.

There are also diverging interest inside EU: Germany is the major beneficiary of co-operation with China and they will be pro-Chinese, indefinitely. Chinese market has given large German manufacturing companies like Volkswagen once in a lifetime opportunity to tap market much larger than Germany and in a near future also larger than EU.

3. Trump has domestic agenda, he had to appease its specific voting base. We all understand this, so nobody has problem with: climate change or UN experiment as you call it. It was just domestic politics, isolationism. Withdrawal from  TPP was just a great gift for China and Japan, and EU understands the right of US to give gifts to anybody, even its adversaries. Apart from the fear that TPP withdrawal was symptom of bigger isolationism trend, all is fine. Withdrawal from Iranian deal: EU is against this withdrawal, cause the deal gave the so needed stability in the Middle East. But again EU perceives US games in Syria, Iran and Iraq from the perspective of spillover effects like all these refugees and earlier strengthening of ISIS and terrorist attacks in Europe. We just do not wars in our continent and want oil to flow, the rest is second priority.

On defense budgets Trump is right, I think everybody knows this only just cannot acknowledge politically.

But increase of defence spending, mainly by Germany has very tangible indirect effects: first would be indigenous German missile program and later nuclear weapons development. I think Germany waits for Iran, Japan, South Korea to do it, and they will join next.

4. I think not much would change in Europe, it would become more pro-Chinese and less pro-US, natural hedging during change of hegemony.

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Marcin2
typo