Tariffs On? Or Tariffs Off? Or What?

Are the walls there. Or not?

So as I write this (on May 12) Trump has announced a temporary suspension of tariffs against China, and he’s trumpeting the suspension as a great victory and a feat of deal-making.

But, also as I write this, experts are not convinced that the suspension isn’t just a short-term measure, and that America has gained anything for all the effort (other than a titanic embarrassment internationally), and that the deal won’t collapse in the end. (See The U.S. and China make a deal on trade. Here's what analysts are saying: Stocks are rallying, but this victory looks hollow, analysts and economists say — and it might not last, By Catherine Baab, Quartz)

So, by the time you read this (I’m scheduling it for May 23), pretty much everything may have changed. Probably for the worst.

But maybe that’s the point. Maybe the theory is that if he just keeps talking, just keeps blithering, people won’t notice what a disaster he really is.

Not even when we all end hungry, selling blood to survive, and offering kidneys for the transplant market. 

The Next Sino-Russian War?

In January of this year,  Sarah C. Paine, a Professor at the U.S. Naval War College, authored an extraordinarily interesting article in The Kyiv Independent,  “The question isn't if China will turn on Russia, but when: Putin’s war on Ukraine blinds him to Russia’s real threat: a hungry China waiting in the wings.” In it, Professor Paine argues that it is only a matter of time before the (already somewhat shaky) alliance between Moscow and Beijing comes apart. Simply put, she says, China has more to gain from opposing the Russians than it does from supporting them – as in significant chunks of Siberia and the Russian Far East.

True? False? I’m afraid I have no idea. I’m not sufficiently versed in the field to make that kind of judgement. But, I’m old enough to recall the border clashes of 1969, when it seemed some sort of Sino-Soviet conflict was a distinct possibility. We no longer have a Soviet Union any more, and – at the moment – it seems that the Russians and Chinese have vastly more to gain from standing with each other, and against the United States and the West, then they do from pursuing any ancient quarrels.

But, the tensions that led to the 1969 clashes are still there. And one wonders if Beijing might not feel a certain temptation to make up for lost time, and lost territory, at a moment when Russia is distinctly weakened. After all, eastern Eurasia would be a marvelous addition to anyone’s real estate portfolio.

Frankly, I’m guessing a Sino-Russian conflict isn’t in the cards. I’m not sure what China stands to gain from a war with its neighbor. Russia is already China’s economic satellite. China controls Russia’s economy. Whether Putin likes it or not…or knows it or not…his country now dances to a Chinese tune, and will do so for the foreseeable future.

Still, perhaps that could change. Maybe China will see some sort of advantage in territorial expansion someday. Maybe…

Or to put it another way: if there is no honor among thieves, there is still less among dictators.

He's coming for you, Ivan.

The Hero Li Wenliang

Note: This originally appeared on 25 Feb, 2020, on LiberalResistance.net. I reproduce it here with the kind permission of the editors. 



I continue to be fascinated (albeit with a chill fascination) the spread of coronavirus in China, and from there to the rest of the world. I shudder to think what’s coming, and hope that, somehow, the virus gets stopped before it goes any further.

So far, the only thing that I find remotely positive about the disease is that it seems to be sparing children.(1) Unlike, say, the great “Spanish” Influenza of 1918, which apparently targeted younger people, the coronavirus seems to leave the young alone, while hitting those of us who are older harder. As a grandfather, that reassures me a wee bit. At least I know that I may fall, but my granddaughter may be safe. Or at least safer.

Okay, but the other thing which interests me is China’s response to the problem. Like most authoritarian regimes, it has both advantages and disadvantages in this situation. The advantage is that it can impose strict measures (like fairly brutal quarantines) that simply wouldn’t fly in a more democratic society.

The disadvantage is that it is morbidly concerned about its image, both at home and abroad. So, it tends to shut down the flow of information about the disease, even when that censorship puts lives at risk.

Maybe the most telling example of this is in the treatment of Li Wenliang, the rather heroic doctor who tried to warn his country (and the world) about the danger, and for his efforts was arrested for spreading “alarmist” rumors — which only goes to prove just how well, alas, Henrik Ibsen knew human character, particularly at its worst.

Dr. Li died of the pandemic he tried so hard to prevent. But he did get, in a sense, his revenge. According to at least some reports, his story has spread wide and far in China, in spite of the best efforts of the authorities to control it. (Seems that disease and information are equally difficult to control.)

In fact, according to one article I saw on CNN, Dr. Li’s case has very, very seriously damaged the government’s reputation with its people. (2) Thus, by trying to control its image, the government managed to injured its image, perhaps beyond any hope of recovery.  Who knows? It might even result in a genuine crisis of legitimacy. It probably won’t bring down the government all by itself, but, in combination with other problems…

Maybe there’s a lesson there, for governments, and, indeed, for us all. One of the central premises of the Enlightenment, and science, is that the free flow of information is a good thing, and that attempts to prevent that freedom — however tempting it might be — become in the end destructive…even fatal.

The Enlightenment, and science, have not been popular of late. For both Right, and yes (let’s confess), the Left, it has seem so more much satisfying to rely instead on faith, received wisdom, “alternative facts,” and sophist mumblings about “postmodernism.”

Yet, here’s the lesson of the day, as provided by the coronavirus and the martyrdom of Dr. Li:  facts may be disruptive. They may be economically inconvenient.  They may clash with your faith. They may be politically incorrect. But …they are inescapable and immutable. And when you ignore them, they bite you.

Hard.



1) https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/11/the-coronavirus-appears-to-be-sparing-one-group-of-people-kids.html
2) https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/asia/china-doctor-death-censorship-intl-hnk/index.html

~~~

Please check out my new book, Padre: To The Island, a meditation on mortality, grief, and joy, based on the lives and deaths of two of the most amazing and unconventional people I ever met, my mother and father.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Tiananmen, Or, The Gate Of Heavenly Peace

Without comment...

copyright©2019 Michael Jay Tucker

BRICS 2, and why I'm not really a B*stard

Another little video meditation on the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa)...

And on why I'm not really a B*stard. Or, anyway, not as much as you might think.

A video about BRICS and Brazil

A video with a few thoughts about the recent election in Brazil (2014) and the long term prospects for the BRICS...

And for us...

On China