NATO adopts tough line on China at Biden’s debut summit with alliance
By - Bundeschef
So much for Biden being a chinese puppet
Were we even asked? Won't have been the first time NATO goes and issues a statement taking for granted its member states' opinion, it happened with Greece before at least once.
> Were we even asked?
All 30 NATO members were represented. afaik the comunique needs to be unanimously agreed before being issued to press.
Like I said that has happened before though. NATO issues statement supposedly like that and then Greece complained because we weren't even asked.
But that had to do with Turkey iirc that's why we had complained. We don't care much about China. But it still goes to show we are being taken for granted.
Yes we should really focus more on Greece’s contribution to the alliance. Let me know when you think of one
I got one. We passed intelligence to Serbia, during the NATO bombings. That's how they that stealth bomber down.
Wow that’s really helpful to NATO! That’s probably the attitude and spirit that made Greece so economically successful huh? Maybe Cyprus is better off in Turkey’s hands.
This is the final communiqué of the summit. I assume unanimously decided.
Also I don't think NATO headquarters asks for approval in each press statement.
_The new U.S. president has urged his fellow NATO leaders to stand up to China's authoritarianism and growing military might, a change of focus for an alliance created to defend Europe from the Soviet Union during the Cold War._
and that is what you call "if the only tool you have is a hammer, you treat everything as if it were a nail"
We ignored the fact China meets virtually none of its WTO commitments 20 years into membership and it hasn't worked. There was a naive belief trade would liberalize China, yet it has only gotten more authoritarian.
Almost like we should have considered dissolving the Cold War era anti-Soviet alliance when the USSR collapsed.
"stand up" is also a pretty vauge action to take.
How dare China.... not be poor or something!
Yeah, that's totally all China is doing. Poor China is simply trying to claw its way up after the century of humiliation after the evil barbarians destroyed the celestial throne. No imperialism, no authoritarianism, no suppression of liberties the west takes for granted...
Maybe actually bring up some instances of this happening. Then we can discuss Nato's support for imperialism and compare the two.
>no authoritarianism, no suppression of liberties the west takes for granted...
Even if these were the case who the fuck gave Nato the authority to police this?
>Maybe actually bring up some instances of this happening.
China building a hydroelectric dam in Ecuador that shakes violently and shorts out their national grid when they use it yet still keeping 80-90% of the country's oil output. Confiscating a Sri Lankan port. Building artificial islands on reefs off the coast of the Philippines, militarizing them, and threatening anyone who sails in international waters around them.
But we all knew you didn't want honest discussion.
>China building a hydroelectric dam in Ecuador that shakes violently and shorts out their national grid when they use it yet still keeping 80-90% of the country's oil output. Confiscating a Sri Lankan port.
So they haven't invaded any other nation. Haven't overthrown any foreign government. Haven't even threatened to do so. All they did was spend money to build infrastructure that in a couple of instances didn't work out. And this is "imperialism". Meanwhile when Nato goes and invades several countries at once it's all ok I guess.
>Building artificial islands on reefs off the coast of the Philippines, militarizing them, and threatening anyone who sails in international waters around them.
It's almost as if there is a dispute among several countries about this... but somehow it's only China being imperialist for defending their own interests...
>But we all knew you didn't want honest discussion.
Indeed you never intended to.
They recently sent troops into India. I constantly threaten the sovereign nation of Taiwan with invasion and constantly militarily threaten their neighbors. There is no dispute on the South China Sea Islands. The Hague ruled China has no claim there and that it's islands are illegal. Sorry try again.
NATO can police this in their own countries and put stop to growing chinese influence in their countries for good. They also can help countries that do not want this chinese shit to be imported into their countries by force if they ask and do not want to become another Tibet or Hong Kong. Like for example Taiwan or pretty much every other country around that area.
Funny you bring up Tibet or Hong Kong. Products of British imperialism.
Also you wouldn't want to pay or would be able to if everything was produced without modern slavery.
All this coming from a bunch of imperialists who've been toppling governments, bombing and raping the world for their resources. You can't make this shit up.
And who gives a fuck how they were created? The only thing that matters is that they were happy with system they had and democracy they had. Now they are leaving in massive numbers because China destroyed their way of life and is trying to do this to all countries in the area.
I am from small country in central Europe. My country has never once before toppled government and it was occupied by Russia for quite some time so I know exactly how it feels. I do not buy anything chinese and mostly buy local produces or european products or non chinese electronics. Maybe it might surprise someone who does not care and spouts bullshit everywhere around but price is pretty much exactly the same with up to 20% more in price in cases like electronics. So go troll someone else chinese tabloid.
China has kind of a right to care how Hong Kong was created.
China agreed to respect their autonomy until 2047.
If Britain wants to continue to enforce their colonial bullshit they are gonna need a bigger military.
If by "colonial bullshit" you mean when the citizens of Hong Kong want.
Kek. My dude never heard of half products. Also modern slavery doesn't limit itself to Asian countries nor their you know. You might wanne get out of your village, you come across as one naiive dude
I do not know what shithole you live in but there is no slavery in my country and products from my country are not that much expensive than products from shithole countries. And they are of much better quality.
Either way your comment came across pretty well and I can now easily guess your age thanks to it. Do not worry, you will grow up and figure out that internet circle jerk is not how real world operates.
Tough words coming from a villager. I've seen more of this world and its people than you ever will but it's OK, keep running around with eyepatches. It's easy for a Westerner to say we have freedom when you never experienced the opposite and let others slave for you
Can you explain the Tibet comment or point me at where I can learn more?
Very short. It was a move to stop advancing British armies(from Nepal) to colonise China.
If you're interested in it, you should start with the opiumwars and colonisation of China.
That's my point i want to make. All these issues are way more complicated than just 'the freedom of the people'
Shall I remind you that HK is actually part of China and COLONISED BY THE BRITISH? Maybe you slept through school when that was mentioned?
And how is that relevant in any way? They were quite happy with British like government system. Now they are leaving en masse because China did not give them any other choice if they want to keep their way of living.
We're talking about who's the imperialist here. But you're suggesting China is the imperialist for applying their own laws and policies IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY. Sorry but if you're this full of it there's no point even talking to you.
Oh go fuck yourself. HK had autonomy and China promised to upheld their status up until 2050 atleast. And Tibes was not part of China right? Chinese tabloid apologists on the run. Too bad you live in free country with freedom of speech so you can write bs like that without being detained and jailed. That would teach you a lesson for sure.
“Quite happy” is a fair bit of revisionism and ignores the long period where they were not happy at all.
China should have kept their agreements (for the people of Hong Kong, not because a remnant of colonial arrogance is worth the paper it’s written on), but it never should have been anything but Chinese in the first place.
Ever since Hong Kong was given to British empire when they made an agreement with China and ended opium wars it was by far the best place to live in that area. And it is still true up until this day. I would say that average people were quite happy with what they had in comparison to mainland China which was absolute shithole during that time, imperial and expansionist for 2000 years, British were nowhere close to this level of imperialism and such a long period of imperialism, they were just more succesful than China ever was and technologically advanced to the point that they took over territories that were on the other side of the world which China was never able to.
Hong Kong was Chinese before it was stolen by imperialists.
Pretty lousy example of imperialism.
Tibet is different. I don’t know much about Tibet tho.
the problem with “helping countries that don’t want this shit” is that it’s functionally very hard to differentiate from bullying countries into not engaging in mutually beneficial relationships with China (which actually is imperialist behavior).
Hong Kong was independant before it was stolen by chinese imperialists. Just like many other territories that are named "China" nowadays. Your "imperialism" calling is really laughtable considering that we are talking about China that has by far the longest and biggest imperial history out of all countries in the world because unlike British they kept those territories.
Also let me give you a lesson:
>Imperialism is the state policy, practice, or advocacy of extending power and dominion, especially by direct territorial acquisition or by gaining political and economic control of other territories and peoples.
China has acquired territory and still has it against its will and is threatening to acquire more every couple of months. Even if your ridiculous idea of (bullying countries into not engaging in mutually beneficial relationships with China) was true which it is absolutely not then it would still not be imperialism. There is absolutely nothing imperialist about giving someone free choice of "us or them". What China did in Hong Kong where they gained political influence through installing political puppets and allowing just someone to run, what they do in Taiwan where they have massive influence in their internal politics and what they do in Africa is imperialist as by definition.
> Hong Kong was independant before it was stolen by chinese imperialists
It was Chinese before the British took it as a crown Colony in the first opium war.
You did not strike me as bright person so you did not get it so let me put it straight. Who gives a shit what happened 200 years ago, or 1800 years ago. Noone from that time is alive today. What matters is what people who live in that city want. They do not want toxic chinese regime, they want their democracy and freedoms that enjoyed for long decades. Most of them do not even identify as chinese nowadays. Yet they did not want to seccede. All they wanted was to have their autonomy and live their lives in democracy and peace. That is all that matters and unfortunately there was absolutely nothing anyone could do because China is shithole dictatorship and HK could not have been protected in any way. Different countries that are however in direct threat of ending exactly like Hong Kong have full right to defend themselves and ask for outside help. Which includes G7 countries.
East Africa. Pakistan. Sri Lanka. The South China Sea. Not even mentioning the actions happening inside China's own borders - Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong?
"Even if this were the case" It is the case. It's not a postulate. Do not present it as such. NATO calling this out is a geopolitical strategy which makes sense, plus... you know... putting pressure for a state to stop crushing dissent is good? The idea of things being the internal affairs of other countries is just an excuse to be willfully ignorant - countries SHOULD call out the injustices of other countries, even if they are incredibly hypocritical (especially so, coming from the United States.)
>East Africa. Pakistan. Sri Lanka. The South China Sea.
And in which of these have China sent their military to invade another country's territory exactly?
>Not even mentioning the actions happening ***inside China's own borders*** \- Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong?
Which is none of the NATO's business?
Tibet. It has invaded Tibet.
Also, fun fact! Not all imperialism is military action. Not all of the scramble for Africa or America's actions in Latin America involved the American military, would you still exempt those from imperialism?
Also, why is it none of NATO's business? If Nazi Germany was exterminating its minorities inside it's own borders, would it not be the business of other humans to care?
>Tibet. It has invaded Tibet.
It *invaded* a region that was already officially under Chinese control 70 years ago. Shall I list how many sovereign nations Nato has invaded since then?
go ahead - I'm not a bootlicker for NATO and am willing to call it out as an instrument of American imperialism, despite the security it does provide Europe in the face of a similarly imperialist Russia. You haven't countered any of the points about economic imperialism and influence, nor about countries complaining about human rights' abuses in other countries.
The "internal affairs" defense of China is a joke. We are all inextricably tied to one another and to pretend as if we aren't is just more reactionary thinking.
That’s fair but the problem is you’re not demanding the level you of proof you should if you’re going to argue a moral imperative.
I'm not sure I follow.
so if you understand this, why an American imperialism is "security" and everything else is an "attack"? yes, it changes the balance of power in the region, and yes it upsets some people... but so does American imperialism? it has certain violations and things are not perfect... but they are not perfect under American imperialism?
so does it boil down to simple "we are better" argument in the end? America is better than everyone, so even when they do the same thing, even when they employ the same methods, it's all good because they are better. Would you agree with that?
WW2 wasn’t about the Holocaust and even after finding out about what was happening the allies prioritized war goals over stopping the slaughter.
Even so, if we want to argue a moral stance against genocide then we should be *damn* sure and so far the evidence is nothing that hasn’t been easily faked before.
We’re talking about the potential for millions of people to die. For a nuclear exchange in the worst case. So let’s maybe slow down with the rhetoric.
I'm not calling for another war, I'm saying that there is reason and right to have a stance on the internal affairs of another country. Obviously war between two powers should be avoided.
Also, I'm aware WW2 wasn't about the Holocaust - but assuming other countries did know about what was going on, would it not be fair to demand your government use its diplomatic and military weight to say "hey, stop."?
Putting pressure on them by declaring your intent to sabotage them.
That’s sure to help with internal dissent. Kinda feel like NATO is helping justify the CCP to their people. If the average Chinese person feels okay with their life and starts seeing stuff like this why would they view the security state as oppressive vs keeping them safe from the same countries who spent a century humiliating China.
Because China is not a monolith, and westerners need to stop seeing China as a monolith. It's not. There are many people who are aware of China's human rights abuses, wish for greater freedom of speech, less government centralization, etc. This kind of rhetoric on behalf of the west signals that, at the very least, their plight is recognized.
Sabotage is not an incorrect word to use, but removing it from the context- that is- imposing sanctions unless you stop tearing down the autonomy guaranteed to HK, allow us to investigate Xinjiang, stop building islands in the SEA, etc. is kinda disingenuous.
Right, so we’re going to declare a massive economic war and punish a billion people to try and get our way.
Why would anyone in China view us in a good light?
You can argue human rights abuses, but trying to control Hong Kong at this point is ridiculous.
I think it's more the expansionism, authoritarianism and genocide that people object to
Yet they haven't invaded a single country in over 40 years. Where exactly are they expanding to? Space?
You mean from the same countries that sell weapons to Israel and S.Arabia? Doubt.
They've effectively invaded Hong Kong by breaching the treaties on how it is to be governed.
Apart from that, their expansionism in the South China Sea is pretty well documented, including their attempts to assert control over the 'nine-dash line' area, ignoring UN judgements on that issue, and their construction of multiple artificial islands which they have constructed military installations on in an attempt to push their claims in defiance of the UN ruling.
As to your pathetic attempt to deflect from China's genocide of the Uighur people, it would be better if you were just honest in your support of genocide rather than trying such a weak whataboutism.
They didn’t invade Hong Kong, they forced the British to give back a colony.
>They've effectively invaded Hong Kong by breaching the treaties on how it is to be governed.
You're absolutely fucking with me? HK is part of China. Jesus Christ the ignorance of some people is absolutely astounding.
HK was to be governed per a treaty agreed between the PRC and the UK in exchange of the UK handing over control. The PRC broke that treaty.
Oh no, the British can’t enforce their bullshit colonial treaties on China anymore. 😭😭😭
how did you UK happened to be a party to that treaty? was that the non-expansionary Brits who found themselves half way across the world?
We were returning a leased island after developing it from a fishing village to one of the wealthiest cities on the planet.
Now its people, after years of protesting and being violently suppressed are fleeing the oppressive CCP regime.
thank you very much for your service, I guess?
They invaded their own country annexed by the Brits? They retracted that law. Also, China can't decide what to do in their own country? Do they need the permission of hypocrite America to make their own laws? Would America do that if China objected their laws?
You don't know any uyghurs nor have you ever been there. Where's your proof? A photo of 10 prisoners? Cuz I'm been chilling in Xinjiang with two Iranian homies and the people are still here man
Suggesting there is poverty in China is [very unharmonious](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-56194622). Extreme poverty has been eradicated and there are only [17 people in poverty out of 80 million in the Jiangsu province](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51058339).
20 more years and China will eat America alive. Biden is so scared xD
Gotta say, did not expect that from the Polish person.
r/europe provides us with a very eye-opening experience
with a dictatorship model for society? tough luck bro
China is not exporting "dictatorship", they are exporting economic prosperity and so people will have no problem siding with them
you won't hear the problems they are having with it, that's not the same
what are you talking about? problems or no problems they did demonstrate incredible progress with their model
>they did demonstrate incredible progress with their model
Exactly. They declared a very short sighted "war on sparrows" that killed millions of people. Scientists in the field knew what would happen but were too afraid to speak up. Then they pat themselves on the back for ending the famine they created. Just like they pat themselves on the back for ending extreme poverty by lowering the definition of poverty. On top of that, there is the lack of trust with any statistic coming out of China. So you really need to take any statistics you plan on citing with a grain of salt.
I don't need to cite statistics, I know how China looked 20 years ago and now
denying that their quality of life went up is just moronic
You could make that argument for many places.
the point was that somehow their system is worse than the West, and it's objectively not
yes, the West was starting from a higher base, so the same growth should not have been expected
but it's also not obvious that were China to go trough a complete neoliberal overhaul at some point, it would be better off now
>and it's objectively not
In many ways, it objectively is.
Taiwan and China started off at the same point. Taiwan is a much better place to live with a far higher quality of life.
>but it's also not obvious that were China to go trough a complete neoliberal overhaul at some point, it would be better off now
Yes it would. See Taiwan and Hong Kong before the CCP turned it into an authoritarian state.
you really have no idea what the West is about
>they are exporting economic prosperity
to Asia and Africa
Where in Asia and Africa?
look it up
You made the assertion
I answered your question
if you ask me what color is the sky and I say "blue", it's not on me to research it for you
look into it or don't, I don't care either way
>I answered your question
You did not answer it. Not even in the slightest.
So they do nothing in the future and rest is just propaganda?