[noir-york]

Because China is threatening the global order on which peace and prosperity lies, starting with the freedom of the seas.

China is already harassing and sinking fishing vessels and trying to close the South China Sea. It may soon try to enforce an ADIZ over the SC Sea as well. Not great.

China is a growing aggressive power with cyber attacks across a multitude of countries and is running, like Russia, disinformation campaigns to undermine democracy.

It is in the interest of EU and the US, and indeed many countries, to have a rules-based international order. It is increasingly in the interests of the US as its power is in relative decline.

[Youden]

Those are some reasons for "against China" but how about "with the US"?

The US isn't the only potential ally against Chinese influence, why should Europe align itself with America instead of other countries?

Also, do you think there's no argument to be made for changing China's behaviour through a partnership?

[noir-york]

> The US isn't the only potential ally against Chinese influence, why should Europe align itself with America instead of other countries?

Of course! All countries that value a rules-based order should ally, and that would include the EU, the US, India, Australia, and the many other smaller countries.

> Also, do you think there's no argument to be made for changing China's behaviour through a partnership?

Been tried. India was trying that by letting China have a stake in the economy. It hasn't ummmm worked out so well.

China uses the economy as a tool for its own political aims.

[fxtentacle]

For me, it reads like they wanted to discuss the rules for the new order, but then the US suspended talks over what might be called greed.

[noir-york]

I was replying to the point about why EU and the US should form an alliance against China - and the reason being the wider geostrategic context.

[NicoJuicy]

But he is correct. US withdrew current alliances, so the trust to create new ones is partially gone.

There is a reason that the next president will have to restore trust to the US as world leader and will have a tougher job than normal.

[NicoJuicy]

We all know this, but Europe has no trust in the US under Trump.

How can you not see that they are waiting till trust re-appears.

1 example: If Europe would really partner up, Trump would require Russia to be in the table ( G7). The current situation is nuts and it's not Europe's fault.

Ps. Trump has no interest in peace and prosperity. Haven't you been paying attention? The US has never been this divided and the current leader thinks tweeting is more important.

[noir-york]

> Ps. Trump has no interest in peace and prosperity. Haven't you been paying attention? The US has never been this divided and the current leader thinks tweeting is more important.

Trump's only interest is re-election.

The US govt is a huge entity with may players of which the president is one, albeit an important one. The US military, State, academia and other institutions are all actors and they do have an interest in peace and prosperity.

Presidents come and go, but institutions remain and it is important that the relevant institutions adopt a common posture towards China.

[noir-york]

> How can you not see that they are waiting till trust re-appears.

The EU cannot afford to wait that long. China isn't taking a pause on its aggression. Indeed, its exploiting the US under Trump, Covid, etc to move aggressively now.

> The current situation is nuts and it's not Europe's fault.

"fault"? It doesn't have to be your fault if the mess still ends on your lap. And Europe (and I'm a European) being neighbours with Eurasia doesnt have the luxury of huge oceans separating it from revanchist powers.

[NicoJuicy]

I'm European too.

The thing about democracy is, it's a slow process.

Currently the best thing is to wait till November and China knows that.

They are exploiting the situation, but in contrast. I think the "one road, one belt" will fail if they continue their exploitive behaviour.

Taiwan is not an easy topic right now, because it's a bit too early. Since Western democracy under Trump is not United :(

As soon as we can, harder measures should be employed.

[noir-york]

Trump is a moron - threatening to withdraw US troops out of Germany is a gift to Russia.

But the EU cannot wait for Trump to go away because if he wins reelection that could be 5 years away. We don't have that time. The EU needs to work with what its got - work with India, Australia, PacRim countries.

The problem is that the EU is itself split with different interests. Someone has to provide leadership. The US president is the natural option but Trump has not stepped up. Someone else needs to - it cannot be Merkel as she's stepping down soon, but we urgently need leadership on the issue.

[NicoJuicy]

The only sane option currently would be to exclude Trump.

But that would cause additional problems because of his ego and childish behaviour. So the best thing currently, is still too wait. It will happen if Trump gets re-elected.

It's not easy for someone new to step-up immediately as the so-called leader of Western democracy.

We all know that Obama and Merkel were potentials/it and Trump isn't. We'll c.

Ps. I think the current/best move to counter China already started. But it seems to bit below the radar currently.

[Mirioron]

How is it not Europe's fault? When it comes to digital businesses it's almost entirely Europe's fault. It's European countries that have been trying left and right to somehow squeeze more money out of largely American digital businesses. From the new digital taxes in France and Italy to the Google News row in Germany and Spain. This stuff started by Europe way before Trump ever entered the picture.

[NicoJuicy]

> squeeze more money out of largely American digital businesses

It's European money, that is taxed. Not money earned outside of the country.

American corporations squeezing money out of European countries would be a more accurate description.

Basic economic insight :)

[Mirioron]

No, it's not European money at that point. It's the corporation's money, but that's beside the point. The point is that those companies tend to not have the same representation as the local companies do and that some of those governments are willing to use their rules to benefit those local companies, especially when it gets then extra revenue.

It's not like those European countries have a gun to their head. They can always just create their own Google, Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Sony etc and stop using the products of foreign corporations. As a European, I personally very much like the services provided by these foreign corporations. I have many issues with them, but they are way better than (most of) the things I've seen made here.

[NicoJuicy]

It's not besides the point. It's money earned in European countries, so this money is bound by law in that country.

That they can create alternatives is besides the point and has nothing to do with the digital-tax you were talking about.