All of the following are my personal observation and opinion of all the events that have occurred in the past years, please feel free to point out anything that I'm wrong with it. Also please do not ask for source of any of them because they are personal observation and perspective of multiple events, and they are not meant to be any objective fact
The current US government actually inherited quite a lot of foreign policy direction set by the previous government term, while optimizing a number of them.
But one thing they are optimizing which I don't see the point is their relationship with the government of China.
The previous government initially focus on trade and North Korea when it come to relationship with China, with Trump attempting to form trade deal with China in the cinematic acting of trade war, but the relationship deteriorate into the year 2020, which saw China signing the phase 1 trade deal with the United States amid the ongoing pandemic inside their territory which have result in delay in trade deal implementation that should have been anticipated, but more importantly the Chinese government managed to persuade the US president at the time that the pandemic will soon be over which turns out not to be the case and caused him to refuse further talk and discussion with China, and the relationship between two countries significantly worsen.
Into the year 2020, the US government under the new presidential term have refocused their approach with China, emphasizing issues like human right and diplomacy, which have been covered but isn't being emphasized by the previous administration, but the current administration also trying to have discussion with China and such on topics like climates.
It took the previous administration three years and a pandemic to realize that China isn't a partner worth making agreement is as their government isn't one that can keep promise, but then here with the new administration it seems like they're going back trying to make deal with it, as Biden plan to organize climate talk with China.
When will the current administration learn that, no matter aspects, the current government of China isn't something which can be held accountable by international talk, treaty and agreement?
How much time will each US government in the future need to take to learn about it?
Yes, indeed, climate change is an important topic to the whole human society, and it goes beyond all political difference between human nations, that everyone needs to work together to overcome the challenge, but what use will there be in international cooperation agreement if the one who you are talking with isn't going to follow through what they promise to do?

c933103 wrote:

All of the following are my personal observation and opinion of all the events that have occurred in the past years, please feel free to point out anything that I'm wrong with it. Also please do not ask for source of any of them because they are personal observation and perspective of multiple events, and they are not meant to be any objective fact
The current US government actually inherited quite a lot of foreign policy direction set by the previous government term, while optimizing a number of them.
But one thing they are optimizing which I don't see the point is their relationship with the government of China.
The previous government initially focus on trade and North Korea when it come to relationship with China, with Trump attempting to form trade deal with China in the cinematic acting of trade war, but the relationship deteriorate into the year 2020, which saw China signing the phase 1 trade deal with the United States amid the ongoing pandemic inside their territory which have result in delay in trade deal implementation that should have been anticipated, but more importantly the Chinese government managed to persuade the US president at the time that the pandemic will soon be over which turns out not to be the case and caused him to refuse further talk and discussion with China, and the relationship between two countries significantly worsen.
Into the year 2020, the US government under the new presidential term have refocused their approach with China, emphasizing issues like human right and diplomacy, which have been covered but isn't being emphasized by the previous administration, but the current administration also trying to have discussion with China and such on topics like climates.
It took the previous administration three years and a pandemic to realize that China isn't a partner worth making agreement is as their government isn't one that can keep promise, but then here with the new administration it seems like they're going back trying to make deal with it, as Biden plan to organize climate talk with China.
When will the current administration learn that, no matter aspects, the current government of China isn't something which can be held accountable by international talk, treaty and agreement?
How much time will each US government in the future need to take to learn about it?
Yes, indeed, climate change is an important topic to the whole human society, and it goes beyond all political difference between human nations, that everyone needs to work together to overcome the challenge, but what use will there be in international cooperation agreement if the one who you are talking with isn't going to follow through what they promise to do?

I understand if you are laser focused on the PRC as a Taiwanese/HK national (I gathered from previous posts), but the US cannot simply abandon all diplomacy, treaty, and agreement engagements with an entity the size of the PRC. That didn't happen with the strategic competition inherent to the USSR and certainly won't with a trade partner of the PRC's influence. Also, just look at who some of the US's partners around the world are - how many are 'governments that can keep promises'?

Climate might be the one area where China and US interests coincide. At this time the US is utterly dependent upon Chinese goods or material, to a lesser degree the opposite is true. The US's current government is seeking an industrial policy which will reduce that dependence. In addition Trump's abandonment of the TPP has been a disaster, and Biden is seeking reestablishing alliances with our true allies throughout the western Pacific and south Asia.

c933103 wrote:

It took the previous administration three years and a pandemic to realize that China isn't a partner worth making agreement is as their government isn't one that can keep promise,

You still need to show some examples/proof in that domain giving substance to your claim.

c933103 wrote:

It took the previous administration three years and a pandemic to realize that China isn't a partner worth making agreement is as their government isn't one that can keep promise

As the US between 2017 and 2021 had a government which pulled out of and broke promises to uphold international agreements left right and centre like the Iran Nuclear deal and the Paris Climate agreement. It’s all better now with Biden? Just wait until the next GOP administration get in, now the party is the party of Trumpists.

Whereas China for the most part delivers promised infrastructure projects on time. All the BRI initiatives seem to be built promptly. A neutral third party nation will probably appreciate this business like efficiency and stability rather than America’s tossing between slightly sane Democratic Presidents and totally insane Republicans.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

It took the previous administration three years and a pandemic to realize that China isn't a partner worth making agreement is as their government isn't one that can keep promise

As the US between 2017 and 2021 had a government which pulled out of and broke promises to uphold international agreements left right and centre like the Iran Nuclear deal and the Paris Climate agreement. It’s all better now with Biden? Just wait until the next GOP administration get in, now the party is the party of Trumpists.

Whereas China for the most part delivers promised infrastructure projects on time. All the BRI initiatives seem to be built promptly. A neutral third party nation will probably appreciate this business like efficiency and stability rather than America’s tossing between slightly sane Democratic Presidents and totally insane Republicans.

BRI is arguably based on the same infra-for-influence policy the US pursued in various countries in the 1960s

WIederling wrote:

c933103 wrote:

It took the previous administration three years and a pandemic to realize that China isn't a partner worth making agreement is as their government isn't one that can keep promise,

You still need to show some examples/proof in that domain giving substance to your claim.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR); the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD); and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) and the Sino-British Joint Declaration, all of which China has ratified

https://www.justsecurity.org/72074/how- ... -xinjiang/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hong ... SKBN2425LL

Their adherence to United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is also more than just questionable....

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Their adherence to United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is also more than just questionable....

Throw first stone when you are innocent

All the UN VETO powers, up front the US, have ignored anything they signed on occasion .. or in most cases.
The US uses it solely for pressuring other nations afaics.
Compare the Popanz done around Navalny vs their own activities in Guantanamo and against whistle blowers
( citizens but also people not under their jurisdiction ).
continue into various invasions and bombings of places they are not at a declared war with. ...

China (and Russia neither) is not the elephant in the room in that domain.

Aaron747 wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

It took the previous administration three years and a pandemic to realize that China isn't a partner worth making agreement is as their government isn't one that can keep promise

As the US between 2017 and 2021 had a government which pulled out of and broke promises to uphold international agreements left right and centre like the Iran Nuclear deal and the Paris Climate agreement. It’s all better now with Biden? Just wait until the next GOP administration get in, now the party is the party of Trumpists.

Whereas China for the most part delivers promised infrastructure projects on time. All the BRI initiatives seem to be built promptly. A neutral third party nation will probably appreciate this business like efficiency and stability rather than America’s tossing between slightly sane Democratic Presidents and totally insane Republicans.

BRI is arguably based on the same infra-for-influence policy the US pursued in various countries in the 1960s

What ownership stakes did the US government or proxies retain under the policy you describe?

WIederling wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Their adherence to United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is also more than just questionable....

Throw first stone when you are innocent

All the UN VETO powers, up front the US, have ignored anything they signed on occasion .. or in most cases.
The US uses it solely for pressuring other nations afaics.
Compare the Popanz done around Navalny vs their own activities in Guantanamo and against whistle blowers
( citizens but also people not under their jurisdiction ).
continue into various invasions and bombings of places they are not at a declared war with. ...

China (and Russia neither) is not the elephant in the room in that domain.

Guantanamo was visited multiple times by the ICRC. I believe at least 100 times by the point I stopped tracking such things.

How many visits by independent outside observers has the PRC allowed to various detention camps in Xinjiang?

acecrackshot wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

As the US between 2017 and 2021 had a government which pulled out of and broke promises to uphold international agreements left right and centre like the Iran Nuclear deal and the Paris Climate agreement. It’s all better now with Biden? Just wait until the next GOP administration get in, now the party is the party of Trumpists.

Whereas China for the most part delivers promised infrastructure projects on time. All the BRI initiatives seem to be built promptly. A neutral third party nation will probably appreciate this business like efficiency and stability rather than America’s tossing between slightly sane Democratic Presidents and totally insane Republicans.

BRI is arguably based on the same infra-for-influence policy the US pursued in various countries in the 1960s

What ownership stakes did the US government or proxies retain under the policy you describe?

Proxies benefited a lot - ever heard of Pemex or PDVSA? The PRI party in Mexico? House of Saud? Hello! The US govt itself obviously cannot retain stakes due to our system. But Hilton, Coca Cola, Lockheed, GE, IBM et al certainly did well.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

It took the previous administration three years and a pandemic to realize that China isn't a partner worth making agreement is as their government isn't one that can keep promise

As the US between 2017 and 2021 had a government which pulled out of and broke promises to uphold international agreements left right and centre like the Iran Nuclear deal and the Paris Climate agreement. It’s all better now with Biden? Just wait until the next GOP administration get in, now the party is the party of Trumpists.

Whereas China for the most part delivers promised infrastructure projects on time. All the BRI initiatives seem to be built promptly. A neutral third party nation will probably appreciate this business like efficiency and stability rather than America’s tossing between slightly sane Democratic Presidents and totally insane Republicans.

BRI initiatives are business-like? Asking for a Sri Lankan friend.

johns624 wrote:

WIederling wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Their adherence to United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is also more than just questionable....

Throw first stone when you are innocent

All the UN VETO powers, up front the US, have ignored anything they signed on occasion .. or in most cases.
The US uses it solely for pressuring other nations afaics.
Compare the Popanz done around Navalny vs their own activities in Guantanamo and against whistle blowers
( citizens but also people not under their jurisdiction ).
continue into various invasions and bombings of places they are not at a declared war with. ...

China (and Russia neither) is not the elephant in the room in that domain.

I don't believe that tommy1808 is an American, but I could be wrong. I've always thought that he was German.

And you would be right.

Best regards
Thomas

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Climate might be the one area where China and US interests coincide. At this time the US is utterly dependent upon Chinese goods or material, to a lesser degree the opposite is true. The US's current government is seeking an industrial policy which will reduce that dependence. In addition Trump's abandonment of the TPP has been a disaster, and Biden is seeking reestablishing alliances with our true allies throughout the western Pacific and south Asia.

When it comes to Trump - I always say "His China policy is correct, but his execution is all wrong".

Trump basically play right into Chinese playbook of divide and conquer - i.e. create mistrust between traditional US allies. For example, he decided to start a trade war with China and Europe (and South Korea) at the same time. All that did was to get Europe pivot to China. Europe (ok, EU) was literally inches away from signing that trade deal with China before it was torpedoed due to the Xinjiang situation.

On the flip side, without Trump setting the tone US would probably just appease China left and right. Now that Trump set the tone, it is not easy for Biden to back away from that as Biden doesn't want to be the CCP lover who sold out US again.

Aaron747 wrote:

I understand if you are laser focused on the PRC as a Taiwanese/HK national (I gathered from previous posts),

I believe c933103 is from Taiwan. I could be wrong, though. (I am HKer living in US, as some can probably gather from my heavily anti-CCP stance).