You may be interested on a little more info on Jesus College, Cambridge. It was not until the college was compelled under the Freedom of Information Act to publish its receipt of Huawei and Chinese government funding that it decided to review its ties to China.
Oxford was far more robust. When the Chinese Embassy in London threatened to prevent Chinese students from studying there if the University did not stop Chris Patten (Chancellor of Oxford and last Governor of Hong Kong) from speaking about Hong Kong, they simply replied that an awful lot of students want to study at Oxford.
It is scandalous that academics can be so tolerant of tyranny.
I am not accusing Bill Bishop of any misdeeds but his use of the phraseology, "US attempts to keep China down and thwart its great rejuvenation" is reminiscent of the things Chinese government arms are arguing. It is part of a very important propaganda line and we all know how powerful propaganda can be in China and indeed in the world. The truth is that the United States helped China achieve unprecedented gains in wealth through 40 years of investment, trade, and security cooperation. We pushed to admit China into the WTO even though it was clear that Chinese state-owned enterprises did not fit neatly into any capitalist model. We believed China would gradually allow greater political freedoms and we believed China would fit into the security framework we established after World War II.
But Xi Jinping has changed all that. He has wiped out all civil society and launched brutal campaigns against the Tibetans and Uighurs. He is crushing Hong Kong. He is using China's impressive telecommunications and Information Technology gains to create a global technology theft and espionage infrastructure. He is subverting international organizations such as WHO. In short, he is engaged in behaviors that are directly counter to Western interests and values. It's not that the United States wants to keep China down--it's that we are groping for answers to the question, how do we stop Xi Jinping?
"But it also may be useful to Xi and the CCP, as it is yet another rallying point for patriotism in the face of US attempts to keep China down and thwart its great rejuvenation." I am saying what I think the message from those organs might be, not endorsing a specific message
Seems like we are on a slope down in Chinese/American relations. The destination is not in sight yet but we’re getting there. It’s a structural shift but there will be a new normal and not an endless escalation. The rest of the world is shifting around the US/China axis as well. I guess we end up with 50-70% less trade bt US & China, a US continuum of allegiance with Canada and Mexico tightly integrated (maybe UK?), China’s neighbors integrated to a lesser degree, and Europe as unaligned. China will have almost no allies but Europe/Middle East will keep it afloat.
Dear Bill,
You may be interested on a little more info on Jesus College, Cambridge. It was not until the college was compelled under the Freedom of Information Act to publish its receipt of Huawei and Chinese government funding that it decided to review its ties to China.
Oxford was far more robust. When the Chinese Embassy in London threatened to prevent Chinese students from studying there if the University did not stop Chris Patten (Chancellor of Oxford and last Governor of Hong Kong) from speaking about Hong Kong, they simply replied that an awful lot of students want to study at Oxford.
It is scandalous that academics can be so tolerant of tyranny.
See
https://www.tcs.cam.ac.uk/stephen-toope-blind-to-tyranny/
I am not accusing Bill Bishop of any misdeeds but his use of the phraseology, "US attempts to keep China down and thwart its great rejuvenation" is reminiscent of the things Chinese government arms are arguing. It is part of a very important propaganda line and we all know how powerful propaganda can be in China and indeed in the world. The truth is that the United States helped China achieve unprecedented gains in wealth through 40 years of investment, trade, and security cooperation. We pushed to admit China into the WTO even though it was clear that Chinese state-owned enterprises did not fit neatly into any capitalist model. We believed China would gradually allow greater political freedoms and we believed China would fit into the security framework we established after World War II.
But Xi Jinping has changed all that. He has wiped out all civil society and launched brutal campaigns against the Tibetans and Uighurs. He is crushing Hong Kong. He is using China's impressive telecommunications and Information Technology gains to create a global technology theft and espionage infrastructure. He is subverting international organizations such as WHO. In short, he is engaged in behaviors that are directly counter to Western interests and values. It's not that the United States wants to keep China down--it's that we are groping for answers to the question, how do we stop Xi Jinping?
"But it also may be useful to Xi and the CCP, as it is yet another rallying point for patriotism in the face of US attempts to keep China down and thwart its great rejuvenation." I am saying what I think the message from those organs might be, not endorsing a specific message
Seems like we are on a slope down in Chinese/American relations. The destination is not in sight yet but we’re getting there. It’s a structural shift but there will be a new normal and not an endless escalation. The rest of the world is shifting around the US/China axis as well. I guess we end up with 50-70% less trade bt US & China, a US continuum of allegiance with Canada and Mexico tightly integrated (maybe UK?), China’s neighbors integrated to a lesser degree, and Europe as unaligned. China will have almost no allies but Europe/Middle East will keep it afloat.