xiaohongshu

Can any Geopolitics Understander tell me more about US control of Greenland and what this means for the Arctic trade route that Russia and China are forging?

Thanks, I’ll look into it for sure

This is the correct answer

Trump is a businessman. That’s just how he treats geopolitical matters as though he’s negotiating a business deal, as he did in his tariff negotiations with the various countries. He loves the art of the deal negotiation shit.

In other words, it means “we’ll see what Venezuela has to offer after we made our big spectacle and we’ll respond to that”.

They’re export competitors. With US-China trade war going, Vietnam has become an intermediary hub for Chinese exports and offshore production base for tariff evasion purposes, and Vietnam actually benefited quite a lot from the ongoing spat between the two superpowers.

However, this gap is being plugged with Trump’s global tariffs, and China knows that sooner or later, Vietnam will no longer have the ability to keep importing Chinese goods. So, it’s still ends with competing for the same market - to keep workers in China employed or in Vietnam employed? Somebody will have to lose.

This is why I said that China’s domestic market is going to be a deciding factor in the geopolitical relationship between China and the rest of the world. If the US remains the world’s greatest consumer market, it gets the final say.

I have a question since you know more about this: was the need for oil by Nazi Germany driven by their expanding militarization (mechanized forces)? i.e. if they had to sustain the size of their military for continuous warfare, they had no choice but to seize the oil in the Caucasus?

The same way Nazi Germany did in the 1930s. Germany was under severe financial strain after the defeat in WWI and the increasing squeezing during the Great Depression. They had to turn to Russia to secure for themselves the energy source in the east.

Which… is exactly what is happening today. Energy sovereignty has always been a key issue for Europe since the past century. You’d have noticed that Europe placed a lot of emphasis into transitioning into green tech and renewable energy over the years, hoping to transform their economy out of fossil fuel reliance, only for such effort to be killed by China’s superior renewable industrial sector.

Being choked by the US, being out-competed by China, Europe has no choice but to secure the energy for themselves one way or another, and the option here includes invading/collapsing Russia to secure the resources for themselves. Hence, the vast militarization effort in Europe right now. None of this is a coincidence. That’s their strategic play for the near future.

To be fair, Trump isn’t exactly wrong when he said that Europe has been taking advantage of NATO to save a lot of spending on defense budget.

For years, the NATO countries in Europe leveraged the US military for protection and that allowed them to spend more on other parts of their domestic economy, within the neoliberal EU framework, of course. You can say that they are vassals, but let’s not pretend like they didn’t take advantage of that to turn the EU into the world’s largest economic bloc.

And to be honest, if Hillary had won the US presidential election in 2016, I suspect that this warm relations between the US and Europe would not have changed at all. The US bourgeois establishment fully anticipated that Hillary would have secured the position.

Unfortunately, the bourgeois establishment awoken to a new harsh reality, where the signs were already showing since the primaries in 2015. The rise of populism spearheaded by Bernie Sanders on the left, and Donald Trump on the right, and the eventual Trump’s victory made the establishment realized that the internal contradictions of US capitalism - the long-term consequences of de-industrialization - could not longer be contained. The two decades long of smooth-sailing neoliberalism since the collapse of the USSR was ending, and the last straw was the 2008 global financial crisis that killed the social mobility of tens of millions of the so-called “middle class” people in America.

I believe that this was the real turning point. All conflicts have a class component in it. And everything that is happening today is likely what caused the US to start looking into taking drastic measures to leave behind the current order.

The US is no longer pretending because for them, the neoliberal era is expected to be over. It is the Europeans, and interestingly also the BRICS countries, who have enjoyed running trade surpluses over these years that want to defend the global neoliberal order.

This is why you’re seeing the US taking initiatives to break all those pretense about democracy and sovereignty and human rights. None of these was a mistake or blunder. The breaking down of the status quo is the goal. They are already forging a new fascist future for themselves, while the rest of the world is still reacting to what just happened and hasn’t accepted the new reality yet.

Yeah, there’s still a big gap when it comes to developing Hainan into a competitive industrialized region, so it’s far from certain that this strategy can succeed. But again I wouldn’t bet against China’s infrastructure building capacity either.

Hainan Island used to be an experimental real estate speculation haven in late 1980s until it all crashed down in the early 1990s. Since then it’s rather underdeveloped. And yes there is difficulty when it comes to accessibility but never doubt China’s ability to build infrastructure. They can build superhighways in a matter of years if that’s the plan forward.

The key to Hainan Island is to turn it into a fully liberalized part of China, where entry and exit to the mainland can still be regulated relatively easily. Its economic role is also completely different from the manufacturing hub like Guangdong, or technology hub like Shenzhen, which are fully subject to Chinese laws.

Hainan’s advantage is its free trade status, that will allow foreign investments to come in and build their production sites there while enjoying duty-free access to mainland China (provided a 30% added value), and not being subject to strict Chinese laws in the mainland (a typical complaint from foreign companies).

Its proximity to Vietnam means it’s going to directly challenge Vietnam’s role as a rising manufacturing hub, as more and more companies are relocating to Vietnam and other parts of Southeast Asia. Hainan is China’s response to these foreign companies’ decisions. But as you can see from my comment above, the thinking goes much further. It is a strategic move.

I ended up writing that (semi) effort post in response to another user in the thread here, though I initially planned to present more data but I don’t have the time right now.

Feel free to have a read and let me know of your thoughts. Again, I don’t pretend to know everything, but I do believe in China’s competency and its deliberate strategy of positioning itself to gain every advantage against the US. Unfortunately this does not mean China has the desire to overturn the global neoliberal order. If anything, China simply wants the US to return to the status quo so they can get rich together lol, as have been shown repeatedly by China over the past year in their negotiations with Trump and previously, Biden.

I struggle to see how this contradicts with my statements?

I have always said that China is a major player and knows exactly how to play its cards. In fact, China’s dominance in trade (which is what my comment above refers to) is caused precisely its inability to build up a strong domestic consumer market, hence the increasing reliance on global trade to offset the low growth in domestic consumption.

Here’s what I said most recently:

Some Chinese commentators already suspected that the Trump-Xi meeting a while ago was China ceding the Middle East and Latin America to the US (see my post here) in exchange for Taiwan and Japan.

Look at what happened to China’s petroleum import from Venezuela immediately after the Trump-Xi meeting:

China divested its import from Venezuela and shifted to importing from Canada. The US gave China at least 2 months to readjust its oil import routes. While we do not have direct evidence, it is not hard to see that this helped reduce China’s energy reliance on Venezuela, and allowed them to cede Latin America to Trump (which is exactly part of the US imperial strategy).

You can also follow the link above and see how China is also giving up Iran and the Middle East on both its investment and the UN front.

Meanwhile, following the reasoning that China gets Taiwan and Japan in return, do you think it’s a coincidence that South Korea’s president is now bringing the entire business entourage to warm relations with China this week?

It’s very clear that the US has no objection to that, and Trump wouldn’t mind it either, because Trump’s main objective is to reduce US trade deficit first and foremost.

Now, back to Southeast Asia, which is the main story here - clearly under the tariffs and the ongoing US-China dispute has positioned Southeast Asian exporter countries such as Vietnam to benefit from the current development, as foreign companies attempt to relocate their production sites from China to Vietnam.

And what is Vietnam’s advantage here? The world-class entrepot of Singapore that is conveniently situated in the East-West sea-based trade route. Vessels have to pass through the Malacca Straits to load and unload their cargoes in Singapore, and Vietnam being part of the ASEAN community takes advantage of Singapore as part of their supply chain network to integrate into the global market.

Now, the Hainan Island being converted into a Free Trade Port is about to upset this balance completely, if China’s strategy succeeds.

Read the link of China’s readout in my comment above - the key clause is that goods entering Hainan and achieving 30% added value will be able to enter Mainland China duty-free. In other words, Hainan Island will simultaneously function as a key logistics hub that threatens to replace the role of Singapore, and more importantly, foreign companies that add 30% value to their products within Hainan Island will now enjoy tariff-free entry into China.

Look at Hainan Island’s geographical location in relation to Southeast Asia (Vietnam and Singapore) - pay attention to its proximity to Vietnam:

If Hainan Island can be developed into an industrialized region, do you think foreign investments, especially high tech sector, will still find Vietnam attractive?

First of all, Singapore has 17% corporate income tax. Hainan Island’s going to be 15%. So Singapore is going to lose its comparative advantage there.

Second, Hainan Island will effectively function as a portal for foreign corporations into China that will enjoy virtually very low tariff and tax for their goods (complementing Hong Kong’s role as China’s offshore financial powerhouse).

Third, just behind Hainan is the backing of the world’s most powerful industrial economy complete with world-class logistics and supply chain.

If China’s Hainan strategy succeeds, Vietnam will be locked into low end manufacturing for it cannot offer cost advantage for the high tech sectors with Hainan just next to them.

Now, there’s a caveat: which is that Hainan is still comparatively underdeveloped compared to Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries, but the potential for growth is strong if China invests heavily into the region.

And most importantly, by supplanting Singapore and Southeast Asia as a chokehold against itself, China gains geostrategic advantage against the US blockade strategy and ensures its dominance in global trade on the supply side of the equation (i.e. Chinese export industries get to remain competitive).

Finally, just to reiterate: there is no contradiction at all with what I’ve been saying. China’s problem is internal and ideological - that its neoliberal policy cannot sustain a healthy growth of domestic consumption due to growing wealth inequality, hence its prioritization on global trade-based strategy, which in turn, serves as a positive feedback loop that makes China become even more reliant on global trade than ever. And when you have over-capacity, you have no choice but to kill your competitors’ trade through mercantilism because there isn’t enough demand in the world to keep all of the workers employed.

The opposite strategy, which is what I propose, will take advantage of China’s huge consumer market to absorb the global export surplus goods (including those from Vietnam) and alleviate much of the regional tension, allowing those countries to successfully transition into higher end manufacturing eventually. This will require wealth redistribution and abandoning of neoliberal policies to raise the income of the Chinese working class. Otherwise, China will have to choose protecting its own export industries and destroy that of its neighbors.

The Vietnamese Century.

I doubt it. China is already pre-empting this by turning Hainan Island into a Free Trade Port since mid-December, which by the way, is officially fully open to the world (you can access Youtube and the entire Western internet from Hainan Island without restriction now).

If China plays the card right, then Vietnam will be locked into low end manufacturing while China kills any chance of Vietnam transitioning into high end manufacturing sector.

I will write an effort post maybe later this week if I have the time to detail the genius move behind China’s Hainan Island strategy. If played right, it will kill the Southeast Asian economy and ensure China’s independence from Western imperialism, who is increasingly looking to block China’s rise through Southeast Asia sea-based trade route (aka the Malacca Straits).

Once again, China is at least two moves ahead of everyone.

And China cannot wield its economic power? China literally just forced the US to retreat by threatening to pull their rare earth exports.

The global trade literally cannot run without China. This is a fact. You are really underestimating what China can do if it really wants to. You’re not telling me that the world’s largest economy (or second, however you see it) with 31% global manufacturing share has no real cards to play?

If that’s the case, then it’s a superpower without power. A contradiction in terms.

Furthermore, what you’re saying actually agrees what I’ve been saying all along: that China is afraid of losing. So what if China lost in a war to fight against injustice? Is it bad because it’s not profitable enough for its business? Smaller and weaker countries have fought more valiantly and defiantly against much greater opponents in the face of injustice. Is it bad to fight against Nazi Germany because you don’t think you have a chance of winning?

If the world continues to behave like that, then we deserve what we deserve.

The late Qing mentality never died, it seems. Maybe Mao was right about having a Cultural Revolution after all.

friend

allies

Whoa, hold it right there! We’re trade partners, ok? It’s purely transactional. Just because I used to sell some weapons to you once, doesn’t mean I’ll come to defend you or that I won’t sell even more weapons to your enemies if they can pay a good price!

Mexico is in a very difficult position. Its economy is much too dependent on the US export market, but worse, they are direct competitors to the Chinese, especially in the automobile sector. If China cannot get its domestic consumer market up in time, Mexico will be forced to compete with China, and we all know who’s going to win in this match up. This will limit Mexico’s policy space in terms of what they can actually do in decoupling from the empire itself.

There is a reason why I keep emphasizing China’s domestic consumption, because it really seem as though the world is hingeing upon it!

At some point, upon witnessing the person who you used to admire as “wise”, “composed”, “mature” and “restrained” staying unreactive in the face of innocents getting assaulted, you have to doubt your past impression of the person and ask: is this person really just a coward on the inside who puts on a stoic front? Who, all the while, has been praying that “thankfully I’m not the one being bullied today”?

China has virtually no international clout other than its economy. Is China willing to stand up for its “partners” getting bullied? No? Is China willing to wield its massive economic power to stop a genocide from taking place? No? Then this whole global governance thing has no leg to stand on in the first place. Nobody’s going to buy into that. It’s more Global Times circle jerking to make it seem like they are reacting to some world events while doing nothing (and hopefully win as a result).

If you’re a developing country, you’d have a better chance of getting the Russians and even the Cubans to come to your aid when you’re being invaded by the empire.

lol, too many people got mad at me for no reason. But that’s just the nature of anonymized internet forum I guess.

Honestly the Warring States period seems more apt considering the current configuration of the global order, if we really want to force an analogy out of it.

You have the superpower in the West (Qin) with its unstoppable killing machines.

The rising economic superpower in the East (Qi) who’s about to challenge the dominance of the Qin.

The crumbling old colonial superpower in the center (Wei) who’s being eroded by Qin.

The small nation in between the East and West (Han) known for its advanced weaponry that somehow manages to survive over the era by playing all sides.

The martial power in the North (Zhao) whose military reform is giving Qin a good run for their money.

The mysterious nation in the far Northeast (Yan) who’s mostly been forgotten and secretly biding its time.

And the nation comprising hundreds of tribes in the South (Chu) with a vast landmass best known for proudly calling themselves the “barbarians” (蛮夷).

Moreover, the period is known for the School of Diplomacy (纵横家) where the Horizontal Alliance (连横, aka the superpower Qin allying with a couple smaller states to prevent a greater coalition from being formed against itself) would come to clash with the Vertical Alliance (合纵, aka the six weaker nations band together to fight the superpower Qin in the West).

There would be 5 major expeditions formed by the six nations against Qin over the next 200 years, each one more desperate than the previous one. Spoiler: they lost.

xiaohongshu [none/use name]

@ xiaohongshu @hexbear.net

Posts

3
Comments

850
Joined

1 yr. ago

xiaohongshu [none/use name]

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

They truly are decades ahead of us

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from January 5th to January 11th, 2026 - The New Old Colonialism (And Long Live Chavismo) - COTW: Venezuela

Bulletins and International News Discussion from December 29th 2025 to January 4th 2026 - A Bold Step Forward For The AES

Bulletins and International News Discussion from December 29th 2025 to January 4th 2026 - A Bold Step Forward For The AES

Zohran Mamdani Wins New York With a Youthquake

Ridiculous Chinese censorship used AI to change the gay couple in Together (2025) to a heterosexual couple

Average working hours dropped drastically after 1917, due to fear that the Russian Revolution would inspire similar revolutions in other countries