Tag Archives: China

If the US continues to go down the wrong path, there will be irretrievable consequences for the China-US relations and the US will have to pay an unbearable price

The Russia-Ukraine conflict is very similar to the Chinese-Taiwan conflict. NATO and the EU in Ukraine are a big threat to Russia. The same can be said about Taiwan. NATO in Taiwan will be a threat to China. So, this is the next big problem for the United States.

The tension is rising, and China is building up its military bases and have 14 warplanes in Taiwan`s air-defense zone.

President Biden said yesterday in a speech in Tokyo that he vows to intervene militarily if China invades Taiwan. «We have a commitment to do that,» Biden said. But that is not an official U.S policy. Is Biden trying to change U.S policy?

Photo by u674eu6602u8ed2 on Pexels.com

The U.S officials walked back Biden`s comments quite quickly and said this after his speech: «As the President said, our policy has not changed. He reiterated our One China policy and our commitment to peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. He also reiterated our commitment under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide Taiwan with the military means to defend itself.»

The Taiwan Relations Act obligates the U.S to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability, and maintain the capacity of the U.S to resist any resort to force. But despite U.S weapons sales to Taiwan, the U.S has been ambiguous about whether it would intervene militarily, and the U.S acknowledges that all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain that there is one China, and Taiwan is a part of China, as Biden reiterated yesterday.

In a speech in Japan yesterday, president Biden said; «We agree with the one-China policy. We have signed on to it and all the attendant agreements are made from there. But the idea that it can be taken by force, will dislocate the entire region and be another action similar to what happened in Ukraine. And so it`s a burden that is even stronger.»

China`s reaction to President Biden`s comments on Taiwan came very quickly: «China will take firm actions to safeguard its sovereignty and security interests. We mean what we say.»

What China wants is reunification. So, China is right now threatening Taiwan militarily.

The U.S policy dates back to December 15, 1978, when Jimmy Carter restored relations with Beijing and ended formal ties with Taipei (capital of Taiwan). Taiwan is a big chip-maker, and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said intense economic talks with Taiwan will take place in the weeks to come.

Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman, Wang Wenbin said this yesterday:

«The US has been racking its brains to play with words when it comes to the one-China principle. I want to remind the US side that no forces, the US included, can hold back the Chinese people’s endeavor to reunify the nation. Also, no forces, the US included, can change the fate of the “Taiwan independence” forces who are doomed to fail. 

Reneging on its promise on the Taiwan question, the US has obscured and hollowed out the one-China principle, and publicly or stealthily incited and endorsed “Taiwan independence” separatist activities. If the US continues to go down the wrong path, there will be irretrievable consequences for the China-US relations and the US will have to pay unbearable price.

Our stern warning to the US: There is but one China in the world, Taiwan is part of China’s territory and the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China. This is a consensus of the international community and a commitment made by the US to China.

The one-China principle is unshakable, China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity cannot be violated and the red line of avoiding creating “two Chinas” and “one China, one Taiwan” must not be crossed. 

China has full confidence and capability and is fully prepared to firmly stem the “Taiwan independence” separatist activities, foil all external interference and resolutely uphold its sovereignty and territorial integrity. I’d like to advise the US to listen to a well-known Chinese song with these lyrics: “For our friends, we have fine wine. For jackals or wolves, we welcome with shotguns.”

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Economic globalization is the trend of the times. Though countercurrents are sure to exist in a river, none could stop it from flowing to the sea

World Economic Forum (WEF) started its annual meeting yesterday, and it will continue till Thursday this week. This is the first global in-person leadership event since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, and this time their theme is; «Working Together, and restoring Trust.»

But the annual meeting has never been confronted with so many unprecedented global issues as it is now in 2022. The WEF`s annual meeting is coming at a crucial time. The most crucial in its 50-year history.

The world is recovering from a global pandemic, struggling with a war in Ukraine, and facing huge challenges from climate change. On top of that, monkeypox is coming, and so are inflation and famine.

One of the topics is globalization, and as we all know, globalization is dead right now. But, I think it`s only set on «pause.»

Chinese President Xi Jinping visited WEF in 2017, and on his first trip he said; «Whether you like it or not, the global economy is a big ocean that you cannot escape from.»

This time, in 2022, Xi said; «Economic globalization is the trend of the times. Though countercurrents are sure to exist in a river, none could stop it from flowing to the sea.»

Xi is also the founder of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which is the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. The Silk Road has always been important to the trade in the world. It was an ancient trade route that linked the Western world with the Middle East and Asia.

It was a major conduit for trade between the Roman Empire and China and later between medieval European kingdoms and China.

Established when the Han Dynasty in China officially opened trade with the West in 130 B.C., the Sild Road routes remained in use until 1453 A.D., when the Ottoman Empire boycotted trade with China and closed them.

Although it`s been nearly 600 years since the Silk Road has been used for international trade, the routes had a lasting impact on commerce, culture, and history that resonates even today.

I find it very interesting to see that Venetian explorer Marco Polo famously used the Silk Road to travel from Italy to China, which was then under the control of the Mongolian Empire, where they arrived in 1275.

Notably, they did not travel by boat, but rather by camel following overland routes. They arrived at Xanadu, the lavish summer palace of the Mongolian emperor Kublai Khan. (You can see the film about that relationship on Netflix. I think you will like it a lot).

In all, the explorer spent 24 years in Asia, working in Kublai Khan`s court, perhaps as a tax collector.

Marco Polo returned to Venice, again via the Silk Road routes, in 1295, just as the Mongolian Empire was in decline. His journeys across the Silk Road became the basis for his book, «The Travels of Marco Polo,” which gave Europeans a better understanding of Asian commerce and culture.

Khan`s Empire is gone. So are the Roman and the Ottoman Empire. Some historians say the start of the British Empire started around the 1490s, while others say the early 1600`s, but it all ended in the years after World War 2, with most of Britain`s colonies ruling themselves independently by the late 1960s. But what about the American Empire?

A New World Order started after World War 2, and the U.S became the leading Empire in the World. Now, we are all facing a revolution. A New World Order. Again. Globalization is dead, but it will come back, because as Xi said: «Economic globalization is the trend of the times. Though countercurrents are sure to exist in a river, none could stop it from flowing to the sea.»

On Friday, the S&P 500 briefly fell into a bear market, and the inflation in the UK hit a 40-year high in April. We are into a vicious cycle, and the WEF`s Chief Economists Outlook has warned of lower economic activity, higher inflation, lower real wages, and greater food insecurity globally in 2022.

They warn that this could have devastating human consequences as the global economy fragments.

As Saadia Zahidi, Head of the Centre for New Economy and Society and a Managing Director at the World Economic Forum explained:

«We are at the cusp of a vicious cycle that could impact societies for years. The pandemic and war have fragmented the global economy and created far-reaching consequences that risk wiping out the gains of the last thirty years.

Leaders face difficult choices and trade-offs domestically when it comes to debt, inflation, and investment. Yet business and government leaders must also recognize the absolute necessity of global cooperation to prevent economic misery for millions around the world.

The WEF`s Annual Meeting this week will provide a starting point for such collaboration.»

Four Futures for economic Globalization: Scenarios and their implications:

Globalization has created significant opportunities and lifted millions out of poverty, while also driving inequality and economic disruption. With many countries turning inward in search of new strategies to increase security and resilience, the convergence of physical and virtual forms of economic globalization is no longer a given.

As the traditional drivers of globalization have reached a critical juncture, we are entering a new phase of increased economic volatility, polarization, and structural reset of the global system. Ever-accelerating digitalization, however, means that the rivalry between global centers is rapidly expanding from the physical to virtual space, where competition over the control of technology and information networks is growing. How different economic centers of gravity will choose between physical and virtual integration, fragmentation or isolation will shape the fate of economic globalization in the years to come.

This White Paper outlines how the nature of globalization may shift as economic powers choose between fragmentation or isolation in both physical and virtual integration. The report calls for “no-regret actions” by policymakers: global cooperation on the climate crisis; investment in human capital to prepare populations for a range of economic futures, and returning to developing resilience through greater economic integration, knowledge-sharing, and diversification.

Globalization is at crossroads. It`s changing, but it isn`t ending.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

From Unipolar world to Multipolar world

Do you remember when Vladimir Putin invited many world leaders to Russia`s annual Victory Day parade in Red Square on May 9, 2015? Do you remember that all the western leaders were boycotting that event because of the crisis in Ukraine?

Vladimir Putin said at that time that the U.S is trying to create a «unipolar world». Putin and Russia have used an address commemorating the 70th anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany to accuse the U.S of attempting to dominate the world.

I wrote an article about it on June 3, 2015, and you can read that article here. Cuba`s Fidel Castro shares Putin`s worldview. He released a new book called «Cold War – A warning for a unipolar world» on September 1, 2003. Castro said; «To endure the global struggle between the superpowers is bad. To live under the total hegemony of one of them is worse».

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

That`s exactly what the war in Ukraine is about. A world order. World dominance. But Putin stopped this big dream, which means we will go from a Unipolar world to a Multipolar world.

The U.S President, Barack Obama, and Germany`s Angela Merkel didn`t come. Neither did other Western leaders like UK`s Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Francois Hollande. Moscow has increasingly appeared to pivot away from Europe and focus more on developing relations with China, I wrote in the article at that time in 2015.

The Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, was the most high-profile guest on the podium next to Putin. Other presidents in attendance included India`s Pranab Mukherjee, Presiden Abdel Fatah al-Sisi of Egypt, Raul Castro of Cuba, Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, and Jacob Zuma of South Africa.

«The boycott illustrates the depth and breadth of the chasm now separating Russia and the West,» said Dmitri Trenin, head of the Carnegie Moscow Center.

But what is Putin trying to say when he claims that the U.S is trying to create a «Unipolar World?»

Unipolarity in international politics is a distribution of power in which one state exercises most of the cultural, economic, and military influence. Unipolarity is an interstate system and not an Empire. Unipolarity implies the existence of many juridically equal non-states, something that an empire denies.

Unipolarity is anarchical. Anarchy results from the incomplete power preponderance of the Unipole. Kenneth Waltz, argues that great power cannot «exert a positive control everywhere in the world.» Therefore, relatively weaker countries have the freedom to pursue policy preferences independent of the Unipol.

Unipolar systems possess only one great power and face no competition. If a competitor emerges, the international system is no longer unipolar. Kenneth Waltz maintains that the United States is the only «pole» to possess global interests.

So, here we are. We knew at that time that Russia appeared to pivot away from Europe and focus more on developing relations with China.

Russia in bed with China, India, and Africa means a new world order, and that coalition is powerful. Keep in mind that 50% of the world population lives in China and India alone. In terms of business; that is a huge market.

The unipolar world has come to an end.

The modern international order, system, and relations developed after the end of the Thirty Years’ War in 1618 – 1648, and the conclusion of the Westphalia Treaty in 1648. Raymond Aaron studied international relations and he said: «I call the international system a set of political entities that maintain constant relations and can be involved in a large-scale war».

It`s all a part of an evolution, and there are four types of structural organization of the international system: the Westphalian system (1648-1789) as a system of classical European balance, the Vienna system (1814-1914) the system of European concert, the Versailles-Washington system (1919-1939) with the main conquest, the League of Nations and the Yalta-Potsdam system (1945-1991), the crown of which is the creation of the United Nations.

There are three types of world order: unipolar, bipolar, and multipolar. The unipolar world order presupposes the domination of a single super-power that is ahead of all other states by its combined power.

The bipolar world order is transformed into a multipolar one when economic and military power comparable to the power of the two states is reached by other powers. In an equilibrium system, several large states maintain roughly the same influence on the course of the events, restricting each other`s excessive claims.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the world was multipolar, but by the middle of the century, two World Wars and many smaller conflicts had created a bipolar model.

With the end of the cold war and the collapse of the Soviet Union, bipolarity was replaced by unipolarity. The United States began to play a major role. But that has come to an end.

Recent facts and events show that the United States cannot cope with the role of being the only pole in the current world order. They were unable to balance forces in the Middle East. Neither with their troops nor with the support of groups that tried to seize power. Therefore; the troops withdraw from the war in Afghanistan.

The old world order is gone forever. Now, the world has entered a period of uncertainty and increased risks, exacerbated by the inability of the United States and its allies to solve the global problems of our time.

Former Barack Obama adviser, President of the Council on Foreign Relations Richard Haas introduced the concept of a world without states or a multipolar world in his book «A World in Disarray: America Foreign Policy and the Crisis of the Old Order.»

Nations must be prepared to surrender independence to world structures. The unipolar system has ended, and International relations in the 21st century will determine the situation of polarity. The power would be blurred rather than concentrated, and the importance of nation-States would diminish as non-state actors strengthened.

A multipolar system complicates diplomatic activity. it`s not just that they’re more actors in the polar world. It lacks the predictable fixed structures and systems of relations that characterize unipolar, bipolar, and multipolar structures.

The multipolar system will be difficult and dangerous, and international relations are undergoing a powerful transformation in the 21st century that changes the nature, structure, and essence of the international order.

A formation of a new model of international relations will be very painful and costly, and the entire world order will have to go through an era of turbulence. We had the pandemic. Now, we have a war, but there is more pain to come. There will be more economic and social hardships and it`s time for more world chaos.

The British philosopher and sociologist Sigmund Bauman said: «No one can consider themselves truly indispensable. Even the most privileged status can be temporary and suddenly change».

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

The US/NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 was a culprit for torpedoing world order

Thursday this week marks the 23rd anniversary of NATO`s bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which began on March 24, 1999, and lasted 78 days, Serbian media reported.

The European security crisis began in 1999 when US/Nato started to bomb Yugoslavia, and that was then erosion of all foundations of the world order, according to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov in an interview with Russian Tass.

«Back then, these bombs in addition to killing civilians started destroying the system of international relations. It was exactly then that NATO (and when we say «NATO», we mean «Americans») started to bomb the foundation of the world order, which led to the European security crisis, which we are living through today», the spokesman underscored.

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

This is exactly in line with what I have said in my recent articles. Putin`s war in Ukraine has many sides. Putin is attacking the European globalists, and globalization is dead.

Peskov pointed out that this crisis primarily involves the European continent. Russia and other states are located, most of which are currently unfriendly towards Moscow. «The very Americans, who instigated all this, they suffer from this crisis much less, we must understand it well», he added.

Serbia was attacked as responsible for the humanitarian catastrophe in Kosovo, and the immediate cause was the events in Racak and the failure of negotiations on Kosovo`s future status in Rambouillet and Paris, according to Novinite.

NATO’s air operation began at 7.45 p.m. on 24 March 1999. Nineteen NATO countries began bombing ships in the Adriatic and four air bases in Italy. First, the air defenses and other Yugoslav military sites in Pristina, Batajnica, Belgrade, Mladenovac, and elsewhere were bombed.

According to the Serbian Ministry of Defense, 2,500 civilians were killed during the NATO airstrike, including 89 children and 1,031 members of the army and police. 6,000 civilians were injured, including 2,700 children and 5,173 soldiers and police, and 25 are still missing.

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said last night that there was no justification for NATO aggression in 1999 but that if he had been in Slobodan Milosevic’s place, he would have acted differently, Politika reported.

In a few days, I would have stopped it, either by resigning or something else. 78 days is too long to cripple a country that had no chance to defend itself and wait for someone else to help us, but we knew that no one would,” Vucic said in an interview with RTV.

The president noted that Russia at the time, led by Boris Yeltsin, was weak. Vucic also pointed out that the one who leads the country must take care of how to save his people.

I am now looking at the conflict in Eastern Europe and wondering why some people are not thinking well about the consequences”, Vucic said.

Serbian President Aleksander Ucic said in an interview on March 24; «“Now, after 23 years, one can see with clarity how despicable, ill-judged, unlawful and immoral this operation by 19 NATO countries was” and how “ridiculous, even stupid, to hear them now blaming Russia for its so-called aggression against Ukraine”, adding that “the morals, principles, and values they constantly talk about do not exist at all”. Does China have any comments?

Wang Wenbin is a Chinese politician diplomat, the spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, deputy director of the Foreign Ministry Information Department, and a member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). He had a speech and said this on CCTV:

«On March 24, 1999, US-led NATO forces blatantly bypassed the UN Security Council and began the 78-day incessant bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, a sovereign country, in grave violation of relevant international conventions and basic norms governing international relations.

In 12,000 strikes, over 10,000 tonnes of explosives were dropped and more than 3,000 missiles fired, targeting everything from medical facilities to ancient cultural relics, residential buildings, and schools.

Thousands of innocent civilians including three Chinese journalists were killed. During the bombing campaign, NATO even used depleted uranium bombs prohibited by international conventions, causing long-term damage to Serbia’s environment and people’s health.

The people of Serbia will not forget NATO’s aggression, nor will the people of China and the rest of the world.

NATO is convening a summit on Ukraine on the 23rd anniversary of its bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. I wonder if the US and other NATO members have asked themselves:

What is the root cause of the Ukraine crisis?

What responsibility should the US and NATO assume?

Before reflecting on their crimes against the people in countries like Serbia, Iraq , and Afghanistan, the US and NATO have neither right nor authority to judge others.

Born out of the Cold War, NATO serves no other purpose than war. It has never contributed to the peace and security of our world and will never do so. All those who truly love peace and are committed to advancing peace will resolutely reject NATO’s continued expansion».

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Biden`s disastrous misadventure with Afghanistan

Former president Donald Trump was a commander-in-chief, but the Hate Media attacked him every single day. No matter what he did or say. The same cannot be said about President Joe Biden. Media loves him. No matter what he say or does.

A commander-in-chief or supreme commander is the person who exercise supreme command and control over an armed forces or a military branch. As a technical term, it refers to military competencies that recides in a country`s executive leadership, a head of state or a head of government.

Trump confronted China, defeated ISIS and depleted Iran. He did this because he wanted to protect the United States of America. Trump also created security at the boarder with Mexico, while Biden made a lot of chaos, but the Hate Media doesn`t talk much about that.

Steve Hilton think Trump was a strong leader with a peace of strength leadership, but Biden and the failed establishment is nothing but chaos through weakness. Rep Jackie Speier said on CNBC that the chaos is an «Intelligence failure.»

On July 8, Biden was questioned over intel before Afganistan collapsed. «Your own intelligence community has assessed that the Afghan government will likely collapse,» a journalist said. «That`s not true,» Biden said. Experts are claiming Biden lied and the Democrats is trying to shift the blame on the Intelligence community.

Wait a minute. This is similar to the chaos former president Bush created. He said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and went to war on that. But it was all a big lie. The chaos started after the attack on twin towers, 9/11, 2001.

For all I know, Bush has never been in Iraq. So, who told him that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?

We all know the chaos in Afghanistan, but who is talking about the leadership that created it? Very few, but Steve Hilton does, and he is angry. President Biden gave the government to Taliban only days before the 20th anniversary of 9/11.

This is a war England lost. This is also a war that Russia lost. They got bankruptsy in 1998 because of the war in Afghanistan. Now, the US gives up too. Billions is lost. Thousands of soldiers are killed, and there is nothing left.

This is embarrassing and Taliban declares the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. It seems like the democracy in Afghanistan is working, if democracy is «control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.»

To contact the author: post@shinybull.com

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Uncategorized