Well, many of us were waiting for this – and we have discovered exactly what most CTH readers anticipated, China is a paper tiger.
Last night China finally delivered the official communist government position outlining their perceived leverage over the U.S. and President Trump’s economic diplomacy and economic security platform.
China has always used The Global Times to communicate their official communist state positions. Last night China delivered their warning; oh, you’re gonna love this:
[…] The US asks China for help when it cannot solve its problems with North Korea. Some US elites even want to urge China to claim full responsibility for the issue or they will threaten to retaliate. Under this logic, isn’t it reasonable for North Korea to attack its southern neighbor when it is under military threat from the US?
Moreover, those US elites may not have considered the leverage China has over the US. What if China restricts the usage of iPhones and the number of Chinese students to the US, or imports fewer US agricultural products? (link for more)
Now, it is critical to emphasize this is the official outlook of the Chinese Communist regime and what they perceive as their leverage over the United States. This is the official outlook of the party apparatus behind Xi Jinping.
So let’s look at their position in sequence.
[…] isn’t it reasonable for North Korea to attack its southern neighbor when it is under military threat from the US?
There’s always been a little bit of a disagreement within the U.S. as to whether China is the actual policy team behind the North Korean aggression. Whether they intended it or not, the paragraph that ends with that quote actually solidifies the case that yes, China does control the activity of North Korea; and yes, China is looking to leverage attacks against it’s neighbors as a deterrent.
President Trump has played this out perfectly because there’s a big difference between taking economic action against your neighbor and taking military action. The international community will isolate any conduct based on the latter.
Again, communist China doesn’t ever seem to fully grasp the difference between Economic War and actual Military War because they have a disconnected outlook – SEE HERE– They view conflict, all forms, as a natural part of their expansion.
[…] Moreover, those US elites may not have considered the leverage China has over the US. What if China restricts the usage of iPhones and the number of Chinese students to the US, or imports fewer US agricultural products?
Threat #1 – Leverage over us based on iPhones? Seriously you cannot make this stuff up.
Perhaps China has, as many suspected, embeded a technological kill switch as part of their stealing innovation from Apple. Or perhaps they are just threatening not to allow Apple to make iPhones in China any more. Regardless, the consequences to the U.S. are nothing more than a possible annoyance for snowflake millennials who might have to switch to the Android platform.
Oh, smack me Big Panda. Smack me so good.
However, take note Apple and other U.S. manufacturing corporations… it might not be so safe with all those investments in China. China is essentially threatening nationalization of your capital. Oh, yeah, let’s hope they actually do that. That’s going to be horrible business optics, and will only drive global investment back into the U.S.
Hurt me Panda. Hurt me true… You’ve got me right where you want me.
Threat #2 – What if China restricts … the number of Chinese students to the US? Oh noes, Big grunchy panda threatening to keep their students at home and leave more opportunities for American students in American colleges. Oh, the horror.
Yes, universities do get to make more money from the rates charged foreign students for tuition. As much as five-times more. But the bottom line is keeping foreign students out of U.S. colleges only opens up space for more American kids and the potential for lower student costs as a result of collegiate competition for Americans.
Oh, Big Panda, you so bad. That one hurt me long time.
Threat #3 – What if China imports fewer US agricultural products? Oh dear. Rut roh. As we have outlined Big-AG is essentially a system of multinational corporations charging Americans more for domestic foodstuffs by exporting U.S. grain, wheat, citrus, poultry, beef and pork. –FULL EXPLANATION HERE – If you take away a portion of the export part of the domestic production equation the net supply-demand result is lower prices for Americans, for American farm products, at the grocery store.
Oh, Big Panda please don’t make me pay less for my groceries. Oh noes.
Yes folks, this is the economic leverage many of us have been talking about for decades as this shift in globalism has taken place. The U.S. Market is the largest market on the planet. Specifically because of bad policy, we are the CUSTOMERS in most of these trade equations. It is OUR MARKET, OUR BUSINESS the Chinese need access to. Not necessarily vice-versa, yet.
China is more dependent on access to us, their customers, than we are to them. There’s virtually nothing we cannot produce ourselves. We can feed ourselves and manufacture ourselves and we have all the raw materials -and abundant energy resources- to do just that.
So let’s summarize the view of leverage the Chinese government claims:
[…] What if China restricts the usage of iPhones and the number of Chinese students to the US, or imports fewer US agricultural products?
Here’s our economic punishment:
♦Less Apple products (iPhones)
♦Lower college tuition for American students.
♦Lower prices at your grocery store.
Oh, hurt me Big Panda.
Hurt me so good.