David Rennie is an exceptionally talented journalist. His views on China provide an interesting perspective, especially since he is on the ground there and is, of course, fluent in the language. I enjoy all his interviews and his podcast is well worth hearing. Trivia - His father (Sir John Ogilvy Rennie) was "C", the head of MI6, the British secret intelligence agency.
Breathtaking talk, full of insights! One of the bests I've heard from a wsterner. I agree on most what Mr. Rennie says, but I'd refute on two points. It's part of the UN charter that countries do not mess in other countries' internal affairs. So the boundary between that and the obligation to protect is blurry. The US abuses the latter to its advantage. Secondly, it is not true that the US was (conditionally) ready to let china grows as big as it wants. The US would under no circumstances tolerate that, e.g. Japan. The US is happy as long as China just makes t- shirts for the Americans.
The U.S. had been happily buying high value-added goods (e.g., solar panels, iPhones) from China for more than a decade and would have been content to continue to do so if China itself hadn't adopted mercantilist trade policies and increasingly revealed its nefarious intentions during Xi Jinping's reign.
@@gallaxian funny, Iphone only 5% product value belongs to china supply chain, and most of the components is from other countries. you think it's high value?
Being a journalist is hard work - have to quote sources, present arguments from all sides, fact checking, stay neutral. Being a commenator/influencer is easy, just use clever wordsmithing, and sell a lot of books. A journalist would research, investigate why very few Fabio exist, and Fabio would have no reason to be barechested and ride a horse on a beach; and he would not likely be interested in the average 200lb fat women. What David Rennie is doing is just wordsmith a "romance" novel for a specific type of audience and sell a lot of books.
Interestingly, in the first example of violation of the Post War Order, large powers using military might to violate the order, does not include example of the US. The only example is Russia. I am sure David is aware of Iraq 2003.
I visited Beijing in 1979 in an official government-led delegation in 1979. At dinner my Chinese host went to great lengths to explain why China will reclaim all land north of the Amur River and there was a very deep-seated antagonism against what was then the USSR because of that Russian aggression by the Czar. Culturally, this puts China on a revenge footing against Putin’s Russia.
@stanyeaman4824 what the Chinese govt official (no idea how high his rank) told you in 1979 becomes completely irrelevant after the collapse of the USSR in 1991. In other words not worth bringing up as world geopolitics has undergone a dramatical change after that latter date.
China's mission for the new world order is to straighten the current so-called " world order " ( actually no order ) which is mainly dominated by hegemony ( MIGHT IS RIGHT , 强权就是公理 ) . If this mission is successfully accomplished ( mutual respect , peaceful coexistence , justice , etc), it would be very good news for the whole world because all people will have the chance to enjoy peaceful life....
The speaker was ok on some aspects but not on the crucial questions. For example, he argued that China has no alternative to the existingbpostv1945 order but anyone who cares to read China's three Global Initiatives can see that it does indeed have a well worked out alternative which is much better than the current western dominated system. That is why China is now supported in these initiatives by the majority of countries in the UN and why the US only has around 30 countries standing by its side.
Re: "What-about-ism" - isn't that just a derogatory term for wanting consistency? (If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander). To argue against it is, imo, arguing for 'exceptionalism', 'privilege' and discrimiation.
By building infrastructures all over the world to promote trade between countries, China's ambition is for every person in every country to develop to their fullest possible potential.
Interesting presentation. If Mr Rennie's observations are correct, then with the benefit of hindsight, it was a catastrophic error by Bush1 and Clinton to support PRCs entry into the WTO and allow its exporters access to US consumer markets, without which China could not have accrued such massive power. The notion that China seeks to turn key international accords - here I mention UNCLOS - into meaningless anachronisms, is consistent with analysis of Isaac Kardon in his book "China's Law of the Sea" which I recommend.
Hindsight is always 20/20. Had the US blocked China's entry into the WTO and China became a gigantic North Korea, we'd be bemoaning our catastrophic error not integrating China into the global economy when we had the chance.
Funny, US even is not the member of UNCLOS, and don't want to follow the terms and reject to sign. then take the advantage to ask other countries to follow. It's obviously ridiculous. If not china, then ask USA who help him when 2008 crisis and what will happen. If just mention one part of real things, It's not a constructive way for the negotiator, only left for the propaganda and tool to promote the hatred and unnecessary conflict.
we should make this a song... a play on theater , scenes in movies, in arts , in education, post this everywhere without changing any of the words he said. Those are facts that China are afraid for the people of the world to know and so afraid for them to help each other to stop their evil ambition which is to control the world by themselves.
The r d. Thank Britain for being a real one. China really need to take their soul searching seriously public facing infrastructurally and not just ephemeral and just their weird algos. Like co create but also their weird as homogeneity what is multiculturalism to those danks ingulag.
Hypocritical but factual. He does his homework. He would be more professional if he had not continue to perpetuate the Xinjiang lies after he had reversed his debt trap narrative. He does admit to his western liberal ideological bias so he is more of a missionary, activist than a journalist. Life and human being are complicated, which makes countries complicated. Mass killing of people to propagate liberal ideology does not make it less evil than nationalism. It would have been better if he had acknowledged that China solved its religious extremism problem without killing a few million people in the middle east and incarcerating/reeducating them was a more humane solution.
David Rennie is an exceptionally talented journalist. His views on China provide an interesting perspective, especially since he is on the ground there and is, of course, fluent in the language. I enjoy all his interviews and his podcast is well worth hearing. Trivia - His father (Sir John Ogilvy Rennie) was "C", the head of MI6, the British secret intelligence agency.
Fantastic. So clear, so profound, and so threatening!!! Thank You!!!
hehe , he hide too much things, and mislead...
Breathtaking talk, full of insights! One of the bests I've heard from a wsterner. I agree on most what Mr. Rennie says, but I'd refute on two points. It's part of the UN charter that countries do not mess in other countries' internal affairs. So the boundary between that and the obligation to protect is blurry. The US abuses the latter to its advantage. Secondly, it is not true that the US was (conditionally) ready to let china grows as big as it wants. The US would under no circumstances tolerate that, e.g. Japan. The US is happy as long as China just makes t- shirts for the Americans.
The U.S. had been happily buying high value-added goods (e.g., solar panels, iPhones) from China for more than a decade and would have been content to continue to do so if China itself hadn't adopted mercantilist trade policies and increasingly revealed its nefarious intentions during Xi Jinping's reign.
@@gallaxian funny, Iphone only 5% product value belongs to china supply chain, and most of the components is from other countries. you think it's high value?
Being a journalist is hard work - have to quote sources, present arguments from all sides, fact checking, stay neutral. Being a commenator/influencer is easy, just use clever wordsmithing, and sell a lot of books.
A journalist would research, investigate why very few Fabio exist, and Fabio would have no reason to be barechested and ride a horse on a beach; and he would not likely be interested in the average 200lb fat women. What David Rennie is doing is just wordsmith a "romance" novel for a specific type of audience and sell a lot of books.
How ignorant! UN to sanction China, as one of the P5, has the power to veto any proposal.
Interestingly, in the first example of violation of the Post War Order, large powers using military might to violate the order, does not include example of the US. The only example is Russia.
I am sure David is aware of Iraq 2003.
Iraq 2003, Afganisthan ...never happened!
I visited Beijing in 1979 in an official government-led delegation in 1979. At dinner my Chinese host went to great lengths to explain why China will reclaim all land north of the Amur River and there was a very deep-seated antagonism against what was then the USSR because of that Russian aggression by the Czar. Culturally, this puts China on a revenge footing against Putin’s Russia.
Absolutely not by today's Chinese thinking. They regard Russians as allies
@stanyeaman4824 what the Chinese govt official (no idea how high his rank) told you in 1979 becomes completely irrelevant after the collapse of the USSR in 1991. In other words not worth bringing up as world geopolitics has undergone a dramatical change after that latter date.
Brilliant talk
His opinion clearly reflects the bias of Western or liberalism, as he put it.
yes, they fail to take into account the eastern view of prisonorism
China's mission for the new world order is to straighten the current so-called " world order " ( actually no order ) which is mainly dominated by hegemony ( MIGHT IS RIGHT , 强权就是公理 ) . If this mission is successfully accomplished ( mutual respect , peaceful coexistence , justice , etc), it would be very good news for the whole world because all people will have the chance to enjoy peaceful life....
The speaker was ok on some aspects but not on the crucial questions. For example, he argued that China has no alternative to the existingbpostv1945 order but anyone who cares to read China's three Global Initiatives can see that it does indeed have a well worked out alternative which is much better than the current western dominated system. That is why China is now supported in these initiatives by the majority of countries in the UN and why the US only has around 30 countries standing by its side.
A lot of hypocrisy and double standards in this speech.
US lecturing others while genooo siding in gaza with help of israaa eeel
Re: "What-about-ism" - isn't that just a derogatory term for wanting consistency? (If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander). To argue against it is, imo, arguing for 'exceptionalism', 'privilege' and discrimiation.
By building infrastructures all over the world to promote trade between countries, China's ambition is for every person in every country to develop to their fullest possible potential.
Interesting presentation. If Mr Rennie's observations are correct, then with the benefit of hindsight, it was a catastrophic error by Bush1 and Clinton to support PRCs entry into the WTO and allow its exporters access to US consumer markets, without which China could not have accrued such massive power. The notion that China seeks to turn key international accords - here I mention UNCLOS - into meaningless anachronisms, is consistent with analysis of Isaac Kardon in his book "China's Law of the Sea" which I recommend.
Ah, the fundamental attribution error-a bad geopolitical analyst's favorite dead end.
Hindsight is always 20/20.
Had the US blocked China's entry into the WTO and China became a gigantic North Korea, we'd be bemoaning our catastrophic error not integrating China into the global economy when we had the chance.
Funny, US even is not the member of UNCLOS, and don't want to follow the terms and reject to sign. then take the advantage to ask other countries to follow. It's obviously ridiculous. If not china, then ask USA who help him when 2008 crisis and what will happen. If just mention one part of real things, It's not a constructive way for the negotiator, only left for the propaganda and tool to promote the hatred and unnecessary conflict.
Usa doesn't recognise unclos
@@aslampervez2294 But China does.
What are the old colonial powers ambitions in the conflicts for the next "world order"
we should make this a song... a play on theater , scenes in movies, in arts , in education, post this everywhere without changing any of the words he said. Those are facts that China are afraid for the people of the world to know and so afraid for them to help each other to stop their evil ambition which is to control the world by themselves.
This literally fit and what American are lol 😂
ccp say 1 thing， people should think the opposite
Wrong, the neocon said one thing, you do the opposite.
I think papa US already teach us all about might makes right. China has more to teach on that?
China's model sounds better. The world is sick of western interventionism.
第一：中国谴责了10月7日针对平民的袭击；第二：中国的清真寺数量巨大。以上两点很容易查证，所以这个演讲者采用明显错误的论据。真让人惊讶，这些事实很容易验证。
He is a activist not a journalist.
He a fake journalist.
He is full of craps about Russia and China.
The r d. Thank Britain for being a real one. China really need to take their soul searching seriously public facing infrastructurally and not just ephemeral and just their weird algos. Like co create but also their weird as homogeneity what is multiculturalism to those danks ingulag.
Hypocritical but factual. He does his homework. He would be more professional if he had not continue to perpetuate the Xinjiang lies after he had reversed his debt trap narrative.
He does admit to his western liberal ideological bias so he is more of a missionary, activist than a journalist.
Life and human being are complicated, which makes countries complicated. Mass killing of people to propagate liberal ideology does not make it less evil than nationalism. It would have been better if he had acknowledged that China solved its religious extremism problem without killing a few million people in the middle east and incarcerating/reeducating them was a more humane solution.
This is a typical Western perspective.
There is no force labor in Xinjiang.
Biden himself is forced labour by deep state