web analytics

NEVER TREAT WITH COMMUNISTS

By Pete Moore On May 22nd, 2020

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has condemned China’s plan to impose a new security law in Hong Kong, calling it a “death knell” for the city’s freedoms […]

That article says Hong Kong “must improve” national security, before adding: “When needed, relevant national security organs of the Central People’s Government will set up agencies in Hong Kong to fulfil relevant duties to safeguard national security in accordance with the law.”

That means China could potentially have its own law enforcement agencies in Hong Kong, alongside the city’s own.

I’m so old I remeber when evil communist dictatorships were called out for being evil communist dictatorships. They were not welcome at international forums. They were boycotted. They were undermined and eventually defeated.

Then one day we woke up to find that everything we buy is made in China and that China has planted an awful ot of agents and spies in Western institutions. Nevertheless the Chinese Communist Party is as evil as any evil communist authoritarian regime of the past and significantly more so than many.

The idea of dealing with the CCP as equals to be respected is abhorrent. The idea of not quarantining the regime is morally indefensible. There can be no open trade and civil diplomatic links with evil, enemy regimes.

42 Responses to “NEVER TREAT WITH COMMUNISTS”

  1. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has condemned China’s plan to impose a new security law in Hong Kong, calling it a “death knell” for the city’s freedoms

    Bravo Pompeo, and I never thought that I would say that. But the robust response of the USA (no doubt conditioned by Trump electoral considerations for November, but whatever) contrasts starkly with the total lack of condemnation from the former colonial power. Let’s not forget that the “one country, two states” agreement signed in 1995 which guaranteed that Hong Kong would have considerable democracy and political freedom was supposed to last until 2045. China has now torn it up without (so far at least) even a peep of protest from Johnson. For shame, quit with the kow-towing Boris and show some ****ing backbone.

  2. Pompeo is correct, but Hong Kong and China are very far away.

    We can’t influence events over there much.

  3. We can stop buying stuff from China. Let’s start with embargoes on all the stuff that we know they produce at below cost prices. That’s cheating and they should be punished for it. Then we can move on to all the stuff they produce with stolen IP.

    If we add those two together we would be putting a very severe dent in their exports and might even cause the severe recession which they so deserve. It’s the only language that the CCP junta will understand. They fight dirty and we need to do the same.

    Of course, this will mean making ourselves poorer in the short term, but surely it’s a case of short term pain for long term gain.

  4. Peter –

    A few Tories have been sound. Even Chris Patten, who is a Tory wet by any measure, has been critical. Tom Tugendhat and his colleagues in the China Research Group are doing good work too, but that’s it.

    To be honest Boris looks like he’s not 100 percent yet after his brush with Covid-19, but he could at least say something for Hong Kongers who look to the UK and the West for support.

    Dominic Raab is the Foreign Secretary and he’s mediocre.

    All in all it’s shameful. No-one expects gunboats up the Yellow River, but statements of support for HK and intent against future Peking aggression aren’t a lot to ask for.

  5. Not necessarily opposing that, but they have a million ways of retaliating.

    And they – correctly – see Hong Kong as being a part of China, etc. I know of the history and the agreements. But many Chinese, not only the government, will see any western attempt to influence events there as interference in Chinese internal affairs.

  6. Not necessarily opposing that, but they have a million ways of retaliating.

    Let them go for it. The trade balance is so massively in their favour that they have much more to lose than we have. As the old saying goes: “If you owe your bank £1 million they have the whip hand but if you owe them £100 million it could be that you have the whip hand.”

  7. Understood.

  8. To be honest Boris looks like he’s not 100 percent yet after his brush with Covid-19, but he could at least say something for Hong Kongers who look to the UK and the West for support. Dominic Raab is the Foreign Secretary and he’s mediocre.

    Johnson made the shameful Huawei decision long before he fell ill and he has no track record whatso****ing ever of standing up to China. Raab is way below mediocre and like the rest of the cabinet (with the possible exceptions of Gove and Cummings) he is a Johnson sock-puppet.

  9. “The trade balance is so massively in their favour that they have much more to lose than we have.”

    The trade balance isn’t in anyone’s favour. That isn’t how trade works. When you buy from China it benefits you and China.

  10. The Chicoms are in an internal battle they are destined to lose…..

    and it won’t be pretty

  11. Actually much as I have no respect for the Chinese regime, we do have to be careful how we deal with these matters. You can’t shout loudly when you don’t have a big stick and the consequences of China’s anger will affect the powerless people of Hong Kong. China won’t respond to loud public demands from the UK govt. They will not want to be seen to lose face and back down. Perhaps quiet but serious political, financial and legal pressures may work in making China realise they have more to lose by crushing the golden egg that is Hong Kong as it currently operates.

  12. The Chicoms are in an internal battle they are destined to lose…..

    There is no reason to believe that is necessarily so

    People expected a democracy spring there in 1989, what they got was the Tien an Men massacre.

  13. I’m aware of how trade works.

    As I posted above, in the short term we will be poorer. By that I mean that we would miss a lot of that cheap Chinese stuff and either go without it, buy it elsewhere at a higher price or make it ourselves. But they would be the immediate losers in terms of lost dollars and lower growth and lower employment.

    And it’s their massive dollar reserves, built up through trade cheating, that have enabled them to buy the support of numerous states in the developing world and even in Europe (hello Greece and Italy). This plays out in the UN and its offshoots, such as the WHO. This week they watered down an Australian proposal for a thorough WHO investigation into the Whuan pandemic. And they imposed a tariff of 80% on Australian grain imports. They know how to fight dirty.

  14. “But they would be the immediate losers in terms of lost dollars and lower growth and lower employment.”

    As would we. Only it will be a self inflicted, probably illegal measure. While they would be able to shore up domestic support by blaming everything on the West.

  15. As would we. Only it will be a self inflicted, probably illegal measure. While they would be able to shore up domestic support by blaming everything on the West.

    1. See my point above. We could survive the loss of their goods better than they could survive the unemployment that we would create for them. The CCP deal with the people is rising living standards in return for no political freedom. Those rising living standards depend on ever-increasing exports to the west and that deal will collapse if the exports are significantly reduced.

    2. Illegal? LOL, they have been breaking the WTO rules for two decades and that organisation is on the brink of collapse due to a severe lack of credibility. Good riddance.

    3. Their people are mostly brainwashed, either knowingly or not. Let the CCP spout their lies all they want, unless they ban the tens of millions of their people who travel abroad each year they will not be able to hide the truth forever. The millions of tourists and students in the west see a different reality when they travel.

  16. It’s very hard to read anyone outside the US talk trade.

    Since WWII the majority of the world has lived off the largess of the US and it’s Marshal Plan Tradition of how we structured trade.

  17. While they would be able to shore up domestic support by blaming everything on the West.

    Let them blame who they like, as long as they have a reason to blame someone for their demise.

    The idea that the world must suffer the evil CCP in return for cheap trainers is the biggest load of old shit anyone can try on.

  18. How many countries do you think would take part in an anti-China alliance of the kind that you speak of?

    I’d be very careful about such a thing

  19. It was a great idea to transfer our industry to China and then to allow them to buy up wjat remaisn of our own industry and cart off the intellctual property. Now, we have huge trade deficits with China and if we try anything remotely sensible to recover, they’ll offload our currency. Still, cheap TV sets are worth losing your country’s industrial base.

  20. “We could survive the loss of their goods better than they could survive the unemployment that we would create for them”

    Can we better survive the unemployment it causes us? When prices go up demand goes down. People can’t buy as much stuff in shops so shops lose profit. And cut jobs. Construction companies can’t buy steel as cheaply. And so cut jobs.

    “Illegal? LOL, they have been breaking the WTO rules for two decades and that organisation is on the brink of collapse due to a severe lack of credibility. Good riddance.”

    It is on the brink of collapse because of the actions of people who don’t understand trade. When it comes to issues of trade you have a tendancy to go full Trumper.

    And the best way to enforce trading rules is via the WTO, the legitimacy of which China craves. Taking cases against China in the WTO is the only method that will actually work.

    “Since WWII the majority of the world has lived off the largess of the US and it’s Marshal Plan Tradition of how we structured trade.”

    And the last time you spouted that nonsense you were asked for evidence. You still haven’t provided any.

  21. “Now, we have huge trade deficits with China and if we try anything remotely sensible to recover, they’ll offload our currency”

    Trade deficits don’t matter. They aren’t positive. They aren’t negative. They are the definition of irrelevant.

    And no one in the West has lost industrial base to China. The goods China produces couldn’t be competitively made in the West.

  22. Phantom –

    It’s not how many countries. Its the GDP and the drift of history, which is against evil communist regimes. The US, UK, India, Australia, NZ, various EU nations alone is a great chunk of global GDP. Many more around the world are in on that basis.

    At the same time we need to avoid overstating the economic and military power of China. It’s a big country, bit still not as powerful as some think. In the end an alliance of a few countries is easily more powerful in every way.

  23. So Pete, countries should pool their economic power so as not to be bullied on the global stage?

  24. Not subtle Seamus. Pete will see through that one 🙂

  25. The goods China produces couldn’t be competitively made in the West.

    Seamus – China does not have a right to sell goods in anybody’s domestic market. If certain goods which have always been made in Britain are twice the price of thse which are made in China, so what? It means nothing unless Britain lets Chinese goods in – then British workers lose their jobs, and this has happened. Of course, we don’t have Chinese social workers competing with British/Irish social workers and bureaucrats, so you’re OK

  26. But put aside Hong Kong for the moment and look at New York and its death knell:

    https://nypost.com/2020/05/20/end-new-york-citys-lockdown-now/

    Last Friday morning, some 3,500 New Yorkers lined up at a Catholic church in Queens to receive free food hours before it even opened, ­according to the New York Police Department. Catholic Charities has reported a 200 percent increase in demand over the past month and a half.

    By prolonging the coronavirus shutdown long after its core mission was accomplished, Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio have plunged tens of thousands of New Yorkers into poverty.

    It needs to end. Now.

    We did what we were asked. We flattened the freakin’ curve. There is no longer any reasonable justification for the government to deprive us of our livelihoods. And our rights aren’t the government’s to grant or take away. They belong to us — the free grant of nature and the God of nature. We’re Americans. More than that: New Yorkers, goddammit.

    And yet, all I see at ATW is NY-ers as absolutely terrified, quivering, wrecks. It should be shameful, but there’s no such thing any more. Such a pity.

  27. “If certain goods which have always been made in Britain are twice the price of thse which are made in China, so what? It means nothing unless Britain lets Chinese goods in – then British workers lose their jobs, and this has happened.”

    And those British workers are better off for it. Because even in a minimum wage job they are better off financially than your autarky plan. Because the shop they buy from, in your plan, would have to pay double, triple, even ten times as much for the goods. So even if that workers wages were higher they would have less purchasing power.

    “Of course, we don’t have Chinese social workers competing with British/Irish social workers and bureaucrats, so you’re OK”

    Well considering I am neither a bureaucrat nor a social worker then I guess you would be wrong.

    Outside of a year working for an MP, I’ve pretty much worked in the private sector my entire career. I did work briefly for the local council (ironically in a profit generating job) and was self employed doing some research work for the NI Executive. But even counting both of those as public sector then still the majority of my career I have been in the private sector.

  28. then British workers lose their jobs, and this has happened.”

    And those British workers are better off for it.

    Only an idiot could write that. Being without productive work is dreadful for working people. Seamus – you don’t do real work, you feed off the taxpayer’s teat

  29. Can we better survive the unemployment it causes us? When prices go up demand goes down.

    How the **** did we ever have full employment before 2000 when we allowed the CCP to join the WTO? If we need toasters we don’t have to buy them from China. We can make them ourselves if we have to. And the same goes for the rest of the stuff we buy from them. We might be poorer in the short term but so what? Better to suffer standing than live comfortably on your knees.

    When China was allowed to join the WTO in 2000 it was on the understanding that they would abide by the rules. But they have flaunted the rules since day one and used the mercantilist dollar profits to buy the WTO and the WHO and the UN. It’s time to call a halt and tell them to go and do one. If they wipe out Hong Kong they will be even bigger losers.

    The UK can give a lead to what used to be called the free world by cancelling the monstrously stupid Hinckley nuclear plant and reversing the Huawei 5G decision. And telling the CCP to do their worst. Because they stand to lose a lot more than we do. But I have no hopes of Johnson rising to this challenge. He loves to channel Churchill but so far he is much more like Chamberlain.

  30. Being without productive work is dreadful for working people.

    What you are describing is welfare. Welfare masquerading as work. And expensive welfare at that. What you are describing is the opposite of productive.

    Seamus – you don’t do real work, you feed off the taxpayer’s teat”

    Actually no I don’t. I’m work in the private sector.

  31. “Because they stand to lose a lot more than we do. “

    Except they won’t. It will harm western nations with higher standards of living.

    How the **** did we ever have full employment before 2000 when we allowed the CCP to join the WTO?

    Normally by having economy shattering inflation.

  32. Normally by having economy shattering inflation.

    No, that ended in the mid 1980s. You need to stop with your China apoligism, they are despotic scumbags and you know it. See the 80% tariff imposed on Australian grain last week. Maybe you think that the Australians should kow-tow to get that removed? Is that what you would do?

  33. “No, that ended in the mid 1980s.”

    Also a time of widespread trade liberalisation. Do you think the two are not connected?

    “You need to stop with your China apoligism, they are despotic scumbags and you know it.”

    And you need to stop being economically illiterate. And stop confusing not wanting to commit suicide with Chinese apologise.

    “See the 80% tariff imposed on Australian grain last week. Maybe you think that the Australians should kow-tow to get that removed? Is that what you would do?”

    Well given that the Chinese have accused Australia of the very things you accuse China of, namely subsidising and dumping, then I’d have thought you would support the Chinese on the issue.

    Either way the Australians should take a case to the WTO before Trumpers like you destroy it.

  34. And you need to stop being economically illiterate.

    Strange how it always ends with the ad-hominem with you. Toys outa the pram.

    the Australians should take a case to the WTO before Trumpers like you destroy it.

    LOL. You think I’m a Trumper? You are obviously just an occasional visitor here who doesn’t take too much trouble to check stuff. Ask Patrick if he thinks I’m a Trumper like he is.

  35. The Chinese have a history of no honoring international rulings

    See the South China Sea ruling

  36. “Strange how it always ends with the ad-hominem with you. Toys outa the pram.”

    And accusing me of Chinese apologise isn’t as hominem?

    This is the normal pattern. You lose an argument, so you throw out insults instead, and when people respond you cry about it.

    “You think I’m a Trumper?”

    On this issue you are full Trumper.

    “The Chinese have a history of no honoring international rulings”

    They have a history of honouring WTO commitments, because the crave the legitimacy the WTO gives them.

    Between 2004 and 2018 China lost 22 cases at the WTO (out of 22 – they lost or settled them all (which is normal for what it is worth). In 21 of the 22 cases China complied with the ruling. The one they didn’t comply with was a case where the complainant stop pursuing the case.

  37. Good stuff, Seamus.

    Those that decry the Chinese flouting of the WTO’s rules-based system of global trade are the first to suggest unilateral measures in response….thus, further undermining the rules-based system.

    Of course it is flawed, but, as Seamus says, it works pretty well given there can be no enforcement of DSB decisions.

    Oh, wait, I know – Let’s have a protectionist free for all where the largest economies bully the rest. That’ll work out well.

  38. MourneReg

    What is DSB ?

  39. Dispute Settlement Body

  40. Thanks Mourne

  41. Oh, wait, I know – Let’s have a protectionist free for all where the largest economies bully the rest. That’ll work out well.

    I believe the Greeks, and now the Italians will agree there.

  42. Is it Thursday yet?

    Clap for carers..

    https://twitter.com/Holbornlolz/status/1263532855319199752