I really appreciated this essay as a Vermonter who was scared away from voting for Sanders in the primary. I think my vote for Warren was a mistake. Too frequently the centrist Democrats cite Bernie’s departure from the foreign policy consensus as proof of his lack of electability. We have to remember not to be afraid of voting for candidates who don’t accept the consensus of the blob. Obama and Ben Rhodes pushed back on the blob and Democrats are better off when we do.
I vividly recall the selling points for engagement. Near the top of the list was “it will change China from within by creating a middle class that will demand political pluralism and basic civil rights.”
Another one was “market access reciprocity.”
The first one has not materialized. Instead, centralized one party control is stronger than ever.
The second one is a very mixed result.
Forget Containment, fine, but due we really have to help the CCP grow ever stronger through our investment dollars?
My major concern/potential disagreement here is that China is such a bad actor internally and in its own region. There are so many issues involving China right now (Xinjiang, Tibet, the South China Sea, the border with India, pressure on Taiwan). I can understand concerns about conflict going to far, but are we just going to ignore all these issues? There must be a reasonable point somewhere in the middle between full cold war and an uncritical embrace of "engagement"
The only difference between the USSR and China is their relative economic importance. I don’t support cooperation with China, and containing their dreadful ideology, and economic impact, is crucial to a healthy planet earth.
I really appreciated this essay as a Vermonter who was scared away from voting for Sanders in the primary. I think my vote for Warren was a mistake. Too frequently the centrist Democrats cite Bernie’s departure from the foreign policy consensus as proof of his lack of electability. We have to remember not to be afraid of voting for candidates who don’t accept the consensus of the blob. Obama and Ben Rhodes pushed back on the blob and Democrats are better off when we do.
Thank you
I thought the same about his essay --- although I'd like to think we are not as fated as your conclusion portends.
hope you're right
For the sake of all of us, I hope I am too. Appreciate the writing Peter, keep it up!
I vividly recall the selling points for engagement. Near the top of the list was “it will change China from within by creating a middle class that will demand political pluralism and basic civil rights.”
Another one was “market access reciprocity.”
The first one has not materialized. Instead, centralized one party control is stronger than ever.
The second one is a very mixed result.
Forget Containment, fine, but due we really have to help the CCP grow ever stronger through our investment dollars?
Disengagement please.
My major concern/potential disagreement here is that China is such a bad actor internally and in its own region. There are so many issues involving China right now (Xinjiang, Tibet, the South China Sea, the border with India, pressure on Taiwan). I can understand concerns about conflict going to far, but are we just going to ignore all these issues? There must be a reasonable point somewhere in the middle between full cold war and an uncritical embrace of "engagement"
The only difference between the USSR and China is their relative economic importance. I don’t support cooperation with China, and containing their dreadful ideology, and economic impact, is crucial to a healthy planet earth.
🕊⚖❤