Michael Schuman's analysis so far is typical of what I see a lot in western China analysts - an abundance of charity given to the US and Europe for the state of the Middle East and Africa today, while China and other 'rivals' are framed as purely opportunistic and self interested. I hope he brings more to the table during the rest of the discussion.
I can't take him seriously at all when he mentions Anthony Blinken as seriously working on a ceasefire and drawing moral equivelancy between China and US foreign policy - he seems to not want to express his position explicitly but he clearly doesn't understand how the global south views the issue, as the US arming and supporting a genocide and doing nothing to reign in its puppet regime
Totally agree. Seems like China is taking advantage of what’s going on in the Middle East, surprisingly enough, they do have their principles and moral standards, and so does the global south.
Totally agree. Sadly, they see China as taking advantage of the situation in the Middle East, Surprisingly enough, China does have its principles and moral standards on those issues, and so does the Global South.
Sadly, the two analysts see China as taking advantage of the situation in the Middle East, as if China or the Global South, could not and should not have their principles and moral standards on these important issues.
They seemed to tiptoe around US interests in the Middle East too - there is a reason that Israel is largely immune to criticism in both parties. I also found their references to the Uyghurs as an attempt to draw a moral equivalence between the two issues as quite disgusting and self serving, a way to deflect from their own 'sides' complicity in something much worse.
Very disappointed. I came to CGS to hear a more balanced view and get a different perspective that we don’t usually hear in the West. I could have just turned on CNN or FOX for these western talking points from both Schuman and Fulton. 👎
Fulton does sound more reasonable than Schuman. I think it's good to bring on some perspectives from the West, not the least to show how the intellectual gymnastics along their line of reasoning. The hosts did a great job in balancing out the bias from Schuman.
It always amazes me how solipsistic most American IR people are (and how uninteresting their perspectives are as a result). The US is at once the most powerful country on earth and at the same time just a plucky underdog entirely at the mercy of other actors when things go wrong. If there is a government that isn't taking responsibility in Gaza, it is the US. Which is something most Americans realize but apparently nobody at the top.
The Atlantic Council: China’s Middle East policy shift from “hedging” to “wedging” by Jonathan Fulton and Michael Schulman: tinyurl.com/286pyh3o
Michael Schuman's analysis so far is typical of what I see a lot in western China analysts - an abundance of charity given to the US and Europe for the state of the Middle East and Africa today, while China and other 'rivals' are framed as purely opportunistic and self interested. I hope he brings more to the table during the rest of the discussion.
I can't take him seriously at all when he mentions Anthony Blinken as seriously working on a ceasefire and drawing moral equivelancy between China and US foreign policy - he seems to not want to express his position explicitly but he clearly doesn't understand how the global south views the issue, as the US arming and supporting a genocide and doing nothing to reign in its puppet regime
Exactly, he is pretty much projecting.
Totally agree. Seems like China is taking advantage of what’s going on in the Middle East, surprisingly enough, they do have their principles and moral standards, and so does the global south.
Totally agree. Sadly, they see China as taking advantage of the situation in the Middle East, Surprisingly enough, China does have its principles and moral standards on those issues, and so does the Global South.
He is an Atlantic Council guy... What to expect? A douche bag
Sadly, the two analysts see China as taking advantage of the situation in the Middle East, as if China or the Global South, could not and should not have their principles and moral standards on these important issues.
They seemed to tiptoe around US interests in the Middle East too - there is a reason that Israel is largely immune to criticism in both parties. I also found their references to the Uyghurs as an attempt to draw a moral equivalence between the two issues as quite disgusting and self serving, a way to deflect from their own 'sides' complicity in something much worse.
Israel and US conducting genocide, and the bald dude’s like, “China bad bad boy”
we support China Africa good cooperation all welcome to China Asia
Very disappointed. I came to CGS to hear a more balanced view and get a different perspective that we don’t usually hear in the West. I could have just turned on CNN or FOX for these western talking points from both Schuman and Fulton. 👎
Spot on. Ridiculous conversation.
Fulton does sound more reasonable than Schuman. I think it's good to bring on some perspectives from the West, not the least to show how the intellectual gymnastics along their line of reasoning. The hosts did a great job in balancing out the bias from Schuman.
The Atlantic Council?! Seriously?!
Hahahahah!
It always amazes me how solipsistic most American IR people are (and how uninteresting their perspectives are as a result). The US is at once the most powerful country on earth and at the same time just a plucky underdog entirely at the mercy of other actors when things go wrong.
If there is a government that isn't taking responsibility in Gaza, it is the US. Which is something most Americans realize but apparently nobody at the top.