POTUS direct confrontation is not reserved for domestic political enemies, it also applies to external nations threatening the U.S. However, notice with each example there is an almost identical pattern: ♦An honest attempt at an open handed diplomacy; ♦a rebuke from the opposition in favor of the status quo; ♦a sincere appeal to reconsider; ♦time for reflection, contemplation and planning; ♦a final request not to engage in combat (today); ♦and then the hammer.
The sequence is always the same.
“foolish past leaders” … “We will no longer allow”..
China, the Big Panda, chose the Red Dragon approach and is positioned to feel the big hurt if they don’t take action…
While in Warsaw Poland earlier in July President Trump was asked about possible action against North Korea:
“I have some pretty severe things we’re thinking about. Doesn’t mean we’re going to do them. I don’t draw red lines.” … “It’s a shame they’re behaving this way and they’re behaving in a very dangerous manner, and something will have to be done about it.” (link)
Three days later during a bilateral meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping President Trump reinforced the message:
President Trump, at the start of his meeting Saturday in Germany with Chinese President Xi Jinping, called the Asian nation a “great trading partner” and said the increasing North Korea nuclear threat will eventually be resolved “one way or the other.” (link)
“One way or the other.” Where “one way” is China taking action to dial back the regime they control; and “the other” is Trump delivering a series of economic consequences upon China for their refusal.
What is increasingly clear is China enabling and utilizing North Korea as a proxy foil against President Trump’s intent renegotiate bilateral trade deals. However, big panda knows -albeit with an uncertainty to the severity- they are walking a tenuous tightrope given the intensity of President Trump to resolve those two issues simultaneously.
The media might be ignoring where this predictable path is leading for reason, but there is no doubt the U.S. is prepared to deliver substantive and actual economic consequences toward China for their unwillingness to stop Kim Jung-Un from advancing toward ever more threatening conflict.
[The G20] meeting also focused on trade between the two nations.
Trump said “many things have happened” that have created trade imbalances between the United States and China but “we’re going to turn that around.”
The president was flanked in the meeting room by about a dozen top administration officials including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and adviser Jared Kushner. (more)
Notice the shift in Trump’s hand position?
Subtle nuances visible for anyone who has followed the negotiation practices of Donald Trump in business and in life.
As with the initial Mar-a-lago meeting in February, Donald Trump always takes the position of advanced partnership toward his encounters allowing the incoming party to define themselves as an honest negotiator or a duplicitous adversary.
Throughout his dealings, Donald Trump, now President Trump, doesn’t position the engaged participant as opposition; instead he establishes his own stake -openly- and then watches to see how the opponent defines the nature of the relationship going forward.
The entire dynamic of how President Trump has engaged with the Chinese delegation is a case study in how this takes place. However, if you follow this approach to its historic and natural conclusion, it generally doesn’t end up well for the participant who chooses the adversarial route.
CTH would not be at all surprised to see massive economic action take place within the next few weeks as a result of China playing trade leverage games and enabling N-Korea with such dangerous provocations. China might think they are being their customary sly and sneaky selves, however they would be well advised to notice this is not their traditional adversary.
Donald J Trump is not engaged in this political strategery as a matter of creating benefit to himself or his business enterprise. No, President Donald J Trump is approaching this relationship from a perspective of stewardship. President Trump will intensely protect America with the ferocity the same Donald Trump protects his family.
President Xi Jinping has no formative understanding of how this intensely American President views his role of national stewardship. This is not a political adversary Xi has ever encountered within the body of U.S. politicians.
President Trump is not a typical western politician from the perspective of self-interest. This president would grind the bones in his own hand to make his lady liberty a rib if that was what is necessary to generate a win for America. Believe it.
Pause – Repeat and Re-read as necessary.
There is no upper limit to the level of economic pain Team U.S.A. (America First) is willing to inflict upon China. There is no ending perimeter of action too far for President Trump to travel. Trump will battle his adversary far beyond traditional horizons and will follow them in retreat if that’s what it takes to ensure the safety of the our economic nation.
China has no cultural or political space between peace and war; they are a historic nation based on two points of polarity. They see peace and war as coexisting with each other. China accepts and believes opposite or contrary forces may actually be complementary, interconnected, and interdependent in the natural world, and they may give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another. Flowing between these polar states is a natural dynamic to be used -with serious contemplation- in advancing objectives as needed.
Peace or war. Win or lose. Yin and Yang. Culturally there is no middle position in dealings with China; they are not constitutionally capable of understanding or valuing the western philosophy of mutual benefit where concession of terms gains a larger outcome. If it does not benefit China, it is not done. The outlook is simply, a polarity of peace or war. In politics or economics the same perspective is true. It is a zero-sum outlook.
Therefore, when you see China publicly use strong language – it indicates a level of internal disposition beyond the defined western angst. Big Panda becomes Red Dragon; there is no mid-status or evolutionary phase. Every American associated with investment, economics and China would be well advised to put their business affairs in order accordingly.
President Trump hasn’t been talking about this for three decades only to put limits on his approach; including daring this economic adversary, China, to strike back by nationalizing U.S. private corporate assets.
Can you think of a faster way to drive economic patriotism than for U.S. companies to see China lash out and seize U.S. assets? Think about how fast U.S. manufacturing would return if corporations had their manufacturing overseas assets frozen or nationalized by the Chinese government.
Everything centers around trade, the underlying economics, and the leverage. From President Trump’s current perspective China is in a position where either action or inaction creates an economic win for the U.S.
If China takes action against North Korea, real and substantive action, they might retain some of the structural benefits currently allowed with their trade position in the U.S. market. U.S. wins with binding Korean military issue now resolved.
If China doesn’t take action against North Korea, real and substantive action, President Trump begins a series of seriously punishing economic pressures against China that have almost no end. The U.S. wins with tighter trade policy driving greater benefit to U.S. national manufacturing and our economic base.
Favorable action, or unfavorable action, the U.S. wins in either scenario. But let their be no doubt, there will be action.
The Eagle and the Arrow – An Aesop’s Fable
An Eagle was soaring through the air. Suddenly it heard the whizz of an Arrow, and felt the dart pierce its breast. Slowly it fluttered down to earth. Its lifeblood pouring out. Looking at the Arrow with which it had been shot, the Eagle realized that the deadly shaft had been feathered with one of its own plumes.
Moral: We often give our enemies the means for our own destruction.
Again, we repeat for emphasis: Donald Trump limits those who know the strategy to a select group he chooses; and even within that group each participant often doesn’t know the intent of their role in the larger dynamic. However, he ensures each member has clarity of purpose in the specific action required. Action that he designs after a great deal of consideration.
There are not three aircraft carrier battle groups positioned off the coastal waters of Asia and North Korea because President Trump is positioning for military engagement, or positioning as a deterrent for DPRK military engagement. Thinking that’s the purpose is the popular review, but it, in the full scope of review, is incorrect.
Again, President Trump doesn’t bluff; he tells you openly what is the focus. President Trump has not mentioned one-single-word about using the military to engage the North Korean missile threat.
All of President Trump’s words are directed at the economics of the situation. All of them. Yet almost every review of analytical opinion of the situation is centered around the military. Why is that? Tradition? Traditional frames of reference?…
If the long-term strategy is economic, and with Trump almost everything is economic, the military inventories are more purposeful as enforcement mechanisms for a trade and mercantile blockade, not for military combat.
President Trump has positioned his advanced economic strategy to deal with the extremes.
President Trump knows the key to North Korea is China. Intellectual minds established in decades long perspectives of geopolitical events have not yet caught up to the reality of modern trade economics driving the behaviors of militaristic nations.
Those same minds are so entrenched in the larger, more popular, dynamic of advanced global logic, they can no longer contemplate national action shaped by anything other than applied force.
President Trump doesn’t apply force, he simply creates outcomes were the best alternative for the adversary is to change their approach according to their own best interests. Trump positions the interests themselves, he does not need the direct application of force.
President Trump doesn’t seek to apply force to the mouse running through the economic maze; he simply changes the location of the cheese, and the mouse’s travel responds accordingly.
China will take direct action to change the behavior of North Korea because it will be in China’s best interest to do so. Trump doesn’t bluff. Once he makes up his mind on a long-term strategy he simply works through each sequential move to obtain the objective.
There’s no limit to the economic squeeze President Trump is willing to apply toward China. The U.S. Treasury, the U.S. Dept of Commerce, the U.S. Dept of State, the U.S. Dept of Agriculture, these are all tools in the sequential approach that are far more powerful than bombs, planes and rockets.