[BostonCard]

Being "right" about China is of little comfort when there are 350,000 cases and 10,000 deaths due to coronavirus in the US.  Trump deserves as much credit for being right rhetorically as Obama does for his "pivot to Asia", which was also "right" strategically but was executed poorly.  Trump's supporters often said to take what Trump says "seriously but not literally"; here's a case where we are being asked to take him literally but not seriously.

AS even the article notes, skepticism of China's conduct has been going on over the last three administrations in a bipartisan way:

For the decade and a half prior to 2017, Republican and Democratic leaders publicly worried about China’s unwillingness to play by the rules, but were reluctant to deal head on with China’s authoritarian government and statist economy. The bipartisan U.S.-China Economic Security Commission has consistently called out China’s unfair practices. In 2010, President Barack Obama lambasted China before the G-20 for its currency manipulation. The need to compete effectively with the policies of the Chinese Communist Party is one of the few points of agreement between Trump and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

It is also worth noting that China's conduct has become more brazen since Xi Jinping took office in 2013.  For example, Chinese repression of the Uighers started in April 2017. Xi has consolidated power in a way that his predecessors have not (for example, by getting rid of term limits).  China's economic and military might has risen.  There is an alternative universe in which China followed a different path.  Thus, a harsher response is more appropriate.

So, sure, let's give Trump a golf clap for his rhetoric, but the executive branch has to, you know, execute.

BC

[BostonCard]

Being "right" about China is of little comfort when there are 350,000 cases and 10,000 deaths due to coronavirus in the US.  Trump deserves as much credit for being right rhetorically as Obama does for his "pivot to Asia", which was also "right" strategically but was executed poorly.  Trump's supporters often said to take what Trump says "seriously but not literally"; here's a case where we are being asked to take him literally but not seriously.

AS even the article notes, skepticism of China's conduct has been going on over the last three administrations in a bipartisan way:

For the decade and a half prior to 2017, Republican and Democratic leaders publicly worried about China’s unwillingness to play by the rules, but were reluctant to deal head on with China’s authoritarian government and statist economy. The bipartisan U.S.-China Economic Security Commission has consistently called out China’s unfair practices. In 2010, President Barack Obama lambasted China before the G-20 for its currency manipulation. The need to compete effectively with the policies of the Chinese Communist Party is one of the few points of agreement between Trump and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

It is also worth noting that China's conduct has become more brazen since Xi Jinping took office in 2013.  For example, Chinese repression of the Uighers started in April 2017. Xi has consolidated power in a way that his predecessors have not (for example, by getting rid of term limits).  China's economic and military might has risen.  There is an alternative universe in which China followed a different path.  Thus, a harsher response is more appropriate.

So, sure, let's give Trump a golf clap for his rhetoric, but the executive branch has to, you know, execute.

BC