Political Crossfire Forums

1. Hot on the heels of the Trump-Xi meeting at the G20 in Buenos Aires, the Trump administration took three hostile actions in quick succession against China.

(a) As usual, the Jekyll and Hyde US leader keeps up pressure on China by tweeting threats of more tariffs if he cannot get what he wishes for.

(b) It was reported on December 4 that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told diplomats and officials In a foreign policy speech that Trump was not abandoning its global leadership but instead reshaping the post-World War Two system on the basis of sovereign states, not multilateral institutions, as it sees fit to stop “bad actors” such as Russia, China and Iran from gaining.

(c) It was reported on December 5 that Canada has arrested Huawei's global chief financial officer in Vancouver, where she is facing extradition to the US. The arrest is related to violations of US sanctions against Iran. Meng Wanzhou, who is one of the vice chairs on the Chinese technology company's board and the daughter of company founder Ren Zhengfei, was arrested on December 1 and a court hearing has been set for Friday.

2. Meng's arrest throws into question whether Chinese citizens and tourists are safe when they travel to countries allied to the US. Now it seems Chinese could be arrested anytime in those countries and extradited to the US to be charged for violation of US laws. It is noted that US sanction against Iran is itself a violation against international law. Hence it would be an outrage and laughing stock for a country that violates international law to arrest and charge foreign citizens as though their countries are US colonies.

It is noted that Meng is a potential successor to her father. Through this arrest, it seems that the US is trying to destroy Huawei once and for all. This in turn is an attempt by the US to destroy China’s high tech industry.

It is ironical that Meng was arrested on December 1, the day of the Trump-Xi meeting at the G20 in Buenos Aires. It would be surprising that Trump and his top aides were unaware of it. It shows that Trump has no sincerity in improving US-Sino relations.

Are those hostile actions taken by Trump as additional bargaining chips? If so, he needs to go for a mental checkup.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1O3102

https://money.usnews.com/investing/news ... ran-report

It's not a US sanction. Canada is participating in sanctions against Iran. Canada is probably sanctioning a dozen other countries as well at any given time, as are most Western countries.

Unless she was actually doing something in violation while on Canadian soil, I'm not sure I understand the jurisdiction limits.

1. With regard to the mysterious arrest of the Huawei CFO, it is obvious she has been targeted and followed for a long time by the US spy agency. It would not come as a surprise that the Trump administration was planning to arrest her on December 1, which fell on the same day of the dinner meeting, in order to embarrass the Chinese government.

Since Trump took over the presidency, a number of Chinese were arrested for dubious charges either on US soil or in US allied nations. It is obvious that the Chinese “offenders” have been targeted and followed for a long time by the US spying agency. Hence it is not surprising that the US spy agency has a list of Chinese citizens (businessmen, military personnel, scientists, students, etc.) for arrest at the right moment.

However doubtful the conspiracy theory, there is no doubt that Trump and his top aides were aware of Meng's arrest on the same day during the dinner meeting. This shows the hypocrisy of the Trump administration at the trade talks.

2. Regardless of whoever was paying for the dinner on December 1, it is obvious that the dinner came as a high cost for China as the US would quite likely slap an astronomical fine on Huawei for the dubious "crime". With regard to this, I coin the term "Trumpian dinner" for a meal which the guest has to pay more than the "pound of flesh" on the dinner table. In other words, a Trumpian dinner ultimately comes with a high price and serious consequence for the guest. The following sentences show the use of the new term.

(a) It was a Trumpian wedding dinner for dozens of people as they fell ill a few hours later after reaching home.

(b) On the way home after dinner at a restaurant, John was killed in a road accident. "What a Trumpian dinner!" cried his wife.

(c) A week after eating out with his boss, the employee received a bill from the restaurant demanding him to pay for the Trumpian dinner.

(d) A Mafia godfather was shot dead by a sniper at the restaurant doorstep after attending a Trumpian dinner meeting with another gang leader to settle some issues.

(e) It was a Trumpian dinner for the guests as they later discovered that they had eaten beef products contaminated with mad cow disease.

P.S. What's the US fuss about others going against its unilateral action against certain countries? If China is so enraged by the continuing US harassment and detention of its citizens, she may be forced to hit back at US violation against international law (i.e. she could go all out to do business with Iran, North Korea and Russia). Does the US Empire have a prison gigantic enough for the Chinese population of 1.4 billion?

http://www.worldometers.info/world-popu ... opulation/

1. Donald Trump tweeted on 4 December 2018:

"....I am a Tariff Man. When people or countries come in to raid the great wealth of our Nation, I want them to pay for the privilege of doing so. It will always be the best way to max out our economic power. We are right now taking in $billions in Tariffs. MAKE AMERICA RICH AGAIN."

Source: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 0535902208

2. In view of this, I use the expression "Tariff Man" humorously or sarcastically to denote a kind of bogeyman (of either sex) with the following characteristics:

(a) An imaginary monster or evil spirit used by adults to frighten children into good behaviour.

(b) A terrifying spectre or peeping phantom that strikes fear in sexual miscreants by hiding under the bed and crawling out at unexpected moments.

(c) An apparition or hobgoblin that bankrupts businessmen if they cannot keep him happy.

(d) A person or thing that is widely regarded as an object of fear.

3. All the above-mentioned Tariff Men are different from other imaginary spirits or bogeymen. They have Jekyll and Hyde tendencies, being mercurial and contradictory in behaviour and speech. As an object of fear, a Tariff Man has contradictory characteristics too. For instance, morphine (as an example of Tariff Man) has a high potential for addiction and abuse. Although it can kill a person by stopping his breathing, it is used to treat moderate to severe pain in hospitals.

The following sentences show how to use the new term "Tariff Man".

(a) The mother told her son: "If you don't behave well, the Tariff Man will come to get you."

(b) The president told the coal miners that climate change is a Tariff Man created by an enemy country to discourage them from digging "beautiful, clean coal".

(c) The presidential candidate portrayed the opposition as a Tariff Man out to break the country into a thousand pieces.

(d) The adulterer had a nightmare of being dragged into a closet by the Tariff Man last night.

(e) When asked by the shop owner on ways to improve his business, the witch proposed creating an altar for the Tariff Man in a corner of his shop.

(f) The politician accused the media of being the true Tariff Man of the people in the dissemination of fake news.

(g) The angry woman accused her husband's mistress of being the Tariff Man who wrecked her dreams.

P.S. Like bogeyman, Tariff Man, being an imaginary monster, is used for both genders.

1. The following are excerpts from an article by Jesse Johnson, staff writer of the Japan Times, posted on December 2, 2018 under the headline "Trump says three sites under consideration for January or February meeting with North Korea’s Kim".

(Begin excerpts)
A second U.S.-North Korea summit is expected to be held in either January or February, with three sites currently under consideration, U.S. President Donald Trump said Saturday.

Speaking aboard Air Force One, Trump was quoted as saying that said a second meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will happen soon, with the location and timing continuing to be hashed out as the two sides work toward the goals agreed to at the landmark first summit in Singapore in June.

Media pool reports quoted Trump as saying that he and Kim are “getting along very well” and have a “good relationship,” and that at some point he’d like to invite the North Korean leader to the United States.

Trump did not announce the candidate sites, but some observers have speculated that the president’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and Seoul could be possibilities.... (End excerpts)

Source: https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/ ... Apac_ZuLIU

2. After the "Meng Incident" in Canada, one would wonder whether Kim will dare to have a second summit at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, not to mention of a state visit to the US at some point. In particular, when Trump talks about “getting along very well” or having a “good relationship" with the “very honorable" Kim whom he once mocked as "Little Rocket Man", Kim ought to look at the dark side of Trumpian friendship, Trumpian deal and Trumpian dinner.

Under his "America First" or "All Free" (AF) world order that turns into a free-for-all, the Jekyll-and-Hyde US leader resorts to the banditry of the bygone era. International agreements and treaties are no longer sacred and inviolable in his hands as he scraps them anytime according to his whims and fancies. His administration brazenly violates the sovereignty of foreign countries by taking unilateral actions against foreign nationals without prior consultation with their governments. For instance, the Chinese government is kept in the dark while its citizens are being stalked, trapped, ambushed and arrested in US allied nations before extradition to the US.

In ancient times, there was no guarantee that a head of state could return safely to his homeland after a state visit to another country because of the risk of being detained and executed by the host. Now with Trump returning to the barbaric past to "Make America Great Again" (MAGA), will Kim dare to accept Trump's invitation to the US?

1. The following are excerpts from a news report by Francesca Chambers, White House correspondent for DailyMail.com, posted on 7 December 2018 under the headline "Trump says 'China talks are going very well' as he tries to avoid another stock-market roller coaster amid trade war panic".

(Begin excerpts)
President Donald Trump attempted to settle stock market jitters Friday morning after traders nearly wiped out the year's gains following the White House's threat of an all-out trade brawl with China.

The Dow was down nearly another 500 points to 24,450 in the mid-afternoon as uncertainty over trade negotiations continued.

Before departing the White House for a law enforcement event in Kansas City, the president reassured investors with a tweet that said: 'China talks are going very well!’

Trump sent the market into a downward spiral this week as he declared himself a 'tariffs man' and said he'd be just fine doubling or even quadrupling $200 billion in penalties on imports from China at the end of a three-month window for talks.

He later insisted that he was sincere in his interest in striking a trade accord with Beijing, just as he believes that China's Xi Jinping genuinely wants to broker one.

His muddled message -- amplified by conflicting claims among his chief economic advisers -- sent shivers through the business world....

A weaker than expected November jobs report was also a factor in the market's performance. Analysts had hoped for 200,000 or more new jobs heading into the holiday season, but the Labor Department put the monthly number at 155,000....

'We are right now taking in $billions in Tariffs. MAKE AMERICA RICH AGAIN,' Trump said in messages. 'Let the negotiations begin. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!'

Trump's tweets sent the market plunging. The Dow fell throughout the morning and was down by more than 700 points by early afternoon. Stocks recovered but dived again on Friday, closing 558.72 points down. (End excerpts)

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 4123098112

Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... panic.html

2. The Jekyll-and-Hyde US leader has obviously overlooked the purchasing power of the Chinese population. Once the Chinese population views the US as the "new hegemonic imperial Japan of this century", there will certainly be a tremendous backlash in the form of a silent boycott of American goods. In such circumstances, Trump can hold a thousand trade talks with his Chinese counterpart or tweet a thousand times about his Trumpian friendship with the Chinese leader or tweet a thousand times claiming that “China talks are going very well!", but all these will come to naught.

Buying American goods does not depend on a small group of people but the majority of the Chinese population of 1.4 billion. When one fifth of mankind are infuriated with America for treating them like colonial subjects by "plucking" them like cherries at will for sentencing in the US, the resulting backlash will definitely be a force to be reckoned with. In such circumstances, even if the Chinese government buys a lot of agricultural products from America, it won't find much demand from the general public. In the end, tons and tons of rotten US agricultural products will be dumped into the choppy waters of geopolitical conflicts, followed in quick succession by the plunging Dow and US economy.

1. A netizen in a UK-based political forum believes the arrest of Meng Wanzhou is "just a smokescreen, the real aim being to damage Huawei which is seen as a competitor to US and European telecom equipment providers". Furthermore, he thinks "basically, it is part of a trade war".

2. I feel it informative to post a copy of my reply here as follows:

I agree that it "is just a smokescreen, the real aim being to damage Huawei which is seen as a competitor to US and European telecom equipment providers". However, I don't agree that "basically, it is part of a trade war”. In my opinion, it is more than a trade war. It is a tech war, or worse, a geopolitical war in which the US tries to stem the rise of such would-be competitors as China.

As an analogy of the paradox of Meng's illegal arrest, some years ago I heard from my friend that a policeman of a certain country went all the way to a school to handcuff a teacher who had punished his son without first informing him. There is a parallel between this story and Meng’s arrest. The US has been trying all sorts of stealthy ways to stalk, trap, ambush and arrest Chinese nationals in US allied nations for extradiction to the US without prior consultation with the Chinese government. This is a downright violation of China's sovereignty. It has created a paradoxical situation in which China has the legal right to demand the US to send all officials involving in Meng's arrest to China to be punished for violation of China's sovereignty.

However, the ultimate factor in determining the outcome of the geopolitical tug-of-war will not be any government but the economic power of 1.4 billion Chinese. When one fifth of mankind views the US as the "new hegemonic imperial Japan" of this century, there will be tremendous backlash in the form of a silent boycott of American goods. In such circumstances, Trump can hold a thousand trade talks with his Chinese counterpart or tweet a thousand times about his Trumpian friendship with the Chinese leader or tweet a thousand times claiming that “China talks are going very well!", but all these will come to naught. Even if the Chinese government buys a lot of agricultural products from America, it won't find much demand from the general public. In the end, tons and tons of rotten US agricultural products will be dumped into the choppy waters of geopolitical conflicts, followed in quick succession by the plunging Dow and US economy.

It will be a similar case for Canada whose Prime Minister Justin Trudeau seems to have been cowed into US submission by Peter Navarro's threat of a "Special Place in Hell". He seems to be so frightened now that he has willingly become Donald Trump's equivalent of Dracula's Renfield. Like the US economy, the Canadian economy could face the full wrath of one fifth of humanity.

P.S. One thing for certain that could set Justin Trudeau's mind at ease is a “Special Place in Heaven" reserved for him by Peter Navarro.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/busi ... varro.html

1. The following are excerpts from a news report by Shawn Donnan of Bloomberg News, posted on 10 December 2018 under the headline "Trump Trade Rep Tries to Insulate China Talks From Huawei Case".

(Begin excerpts)
(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump’s trade czar insisted that the U.S.’s pursuit of a Huawei executive for allegedly violating Iran sanctions was separate from trade talks with China, but warned that further criminal actions against Chinese companies were likely in the future.

Speaking on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday, Robert Lighthizer, the U.S. trade representative, also played down the possibility of extending a tariff truce between the world’s two largest economies beyond the current 90 days....

“It’s my view that it should not really have much of an impact. I can understand from the Chinese perspective how they would see it that way. This is a criminal justice matter. It is totally separate from anything that I work on,’’ he said.

He also, however, warned that further cases against Chinese companies were likely as part of a broader crackdown on China’s theft of technology and other issues such as sanctions violations.

“It is certainly true that there will be continuing criminal justice matters that will go on, that will come up,’’ Lighthizer said.

Lighthizer, who’s seen as a China hawk in the Trump administration, set a high bar for a deal with Chinese officials, saying the U.S. was looking for meaningful and verifiable “structural changes’’ related to Chinese policies aimed at stealing U.S. technology....

He also said he couldn’t reassure financial markets, which have been nervous about the possibility of a truce crumbling, that a deal would be forthcoming by a March 1 deadline.... (End excerpts)

2. That fellow must be talking with his head in the cloud and his mouth at his very bottom when he insisted: "It’s my view that it should not really have much of an impact." How can his view be similar to others, including 1.4 billion Chinese? Unless that fellow is a phantom that could possess the bodies and minds of one fifth of the world’s population, he could not claim such nonsense.

It is laughable and contradictory that while trying to calm fears over the fallout of the Huawei saga, that fellow warned that it would not be the last case against a Chinese firm. In other words, he threatened "further criminal actions against Chinese companies" in the future.

One would wonder whether he would stand idly like a zombie if his grandchildren or related family members got a sound thrashing in school without prior consultation with him? Trump and company seem to be going all out to play with fire as if one fifth of mankind is non-existent or already dead.

Source: https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/trump-trade ... -1.1180567

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... uawei-case

Using the analogy of the 1950 Korean War, the US has crossed the "Yalu River" of tech war through its arrest of the Huawei CFO without prior consultation with China. The US threat of arresting more top executives of other Chinese firms to fill up its fast depleting coffers is analogous to its invading forces threatening to advance deeper into Chinese territories to plunder and destroy.

If China under Chairman Mao did not stand its ground and push back forcefully against the invading forces near the Yalu River in 1950, the history of the entire world would be different. China's resolute action in 1950 had not only ended the Korean War but also maintained a long period of peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula since then.

The present crisis calls for calm but resolute action. Like the Korean War in 1950, China must stand its ground and respond forcefully against more US threats and intimidation. China's great resolution in facing the US invaders in 1950 not only provides food for thought but also a valuable lesson for its leaders in facing the crisis.

Let me elaborate in further detail on my thread. At the mention of Korean War, some people may at once get the wrong idea that I am proposing a "hot" or physical war with guns, cannons or missiles.

What I actually suggest is that China must prepare to clash head on with the US in the present crisis. Using an analogy of two men wrestling at the edge of the rooftops of a skyscraper, the fighter who is prepared to die together with his opponent will have a greater chance of winning before resorting to such extreme measures. In other words, he must not hesitate to hold tightly onto his opponent so as to die jumping down together from the skyscraper.

Hence, any country including China will increase its chance of winning the trade war or tech war when it faces the crisis calmly but prepares to fight to the end even if the Jekyll-Hyde US leader or Tariff Emperor increases the tariffs to one million percent or higher.

In short, who can stop you on the path to victory if you are afraid of nothing even death?

Victory goes to the Fearless!

1. Donald Trump tweeted on Mar 2, 2018:

"When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win. Example, when we are down $100 billion with a certain country and they get cute, don’t trade anymore-we win big. It’s easy!"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 2580484098

2. By now, however, it is obvious that "trade wars are NOT good, and NOT easy to win". Hence it won’t come as a surprise to find several Chinese nationals arrested for unsubstantiated charges in the US even before the latest arbitrary detention of the Huawei CFO. Trump seems to be using Chinese nationals as political pawns in his dangerous political game to achieve his personal political agenda.

3. As noted by a netizen in a US political forum:

"Something that everyone should take note of, if only for the concerning legal precedent it sets.

If one country can take its laws and apply it to everyone else in the world, what type of place is that going to be?

.... I'm pretty sure the U.S. laws she is being charged with don't specifically say they were designed to include foreign citizens in foreign countries anywhere in the world.

If that's how it works, imagine how many laws in other countries you are violating right now."

4. In this thread, I coin the term "Trumpian pawn" for any innocent foreigner who has become an unsuspecting victim of state-sponsored terrorism of another country.