The only thing that China lacked was petroleum. Now they have it. Also it is somwhat strange to see a communist country becoming good friend with a theocracy.
The only thing that China lacked was petroleum. Now they have it.
Also it is somwhat strange to see a communist country becoming good friend with a theocracy.
Despite popular western rhetoric and mixed messaging from China itself, China is not a communist country. The PRC and ruling CCP do hold on to the cultural and historical significance of...
Despite popular western rhetoric and mixed messaging from China itself, China is not a communist country. The PRC and ruling CCP do hold on to the cultural and historical significance of post-civil war founders like Mao and their ideologies of Maoism, but the practical implementation of formal communism has been waning since the late 1970's. In 1978 Deng came to power and brought with him economic reforms; he transitioned China into a mixed economy, rather than a planned economy. Leading into the 21st century, liberalization and economic expansionism through programs like the Belt and Road Initiative have furthered the country from their communist past. Now-a-days, the PRC's economy is best described as state capitalism, not communism.
I think this generally proves US-led sanctions will be useless or detrimental if China doesn't follow along and that Iran will probably never come back to the US unless China faces a serious...
I think this generally proves US-led sanctions will be useless or detrimental if China doesn't follow along and that Iran will probably never come back to the US unless China faces a serious economic crisis.
Details about the agreement weren’t immediately published, but a draft of the agreement circulated last year included Chinese investments in projects ranging from nuclear energy, ports, railroads and other infrastructure to transfer of military technology and investment in Iran’s oil-and-gas industry.
The accord offered the promise of opening Iran up to foreign investment, but the U.S. withdrawal from the pact, combined with harsh U.S. sanctions, has deterred and prevented many Western companies from sinking money into the country.
Now, the agreement with the Chinese offers Iran the prospect of much-needed foreign investment.
Useless is a strong statement. Unilateral sanctions in the style of the Trump Administration are without a doubt less effective today than they would've been in, say the 1990s, but US-led...
Useless is a strong statement. Unilateral sanctions in the style of the Trump Administration are without a doubt less effective today than they would've been in, say the 1990s, but US-led multilateral sanctions ARE effective. We see that still with US-led sanctions on Russia and North Korea, both of which also have a decent amount of support from the PRC, with the Kim regime being more or less entirely kept afloat by the Chinese.
What do you mean? I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you referring to a specific sanction? The practice of sanctions in general? The multilateral aspect? The US-led aspect?
What do you mean? I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you referring to a specific sanction? The practice of sanctions in general? The multilateral aspect? The US-led aspect?
Often the wayback machine or similar services have a full copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20200711211214/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/11/world/asia/china-iran-trade-military-deal.html
One does'nt need to pay for using Deutsche Welle's website because everything is paid for by German taxpayers' money. Incidently, the historical and primary mission of those German Waves is radio...
paywalled
One does'nt need to pay for using Deutsche Welle's website because everything is paid for by German taxpayers' money. Incidently, the historical and primary mission of those German Waves is radio broadcasting. Reading the radio is now a thing : tell that to grandma ;-)
The New York Times, on the other hand, and while arguably beeing a public service, lives and functions only with the money paid by its readers and its advertisers. Its paywall, however, is of the weak sort and doesn't survives the browser's coockies being cleaned, which should be done anyway. CtrlShiftDel and all the news are yours. Strange times, aren't they ?
Anyway, bear in mind that there is no such thing as free information.
The only thing that China lacked was petroleum. Now they have it.
Also it is somwhat strange to see a communist country becoming good friend with a theocracy.
Despite popular western rhetoric and mixed messaging from China itself, China is not a communist country. The PRC and ruling CCP do hold on to the cultural and historical significance of post-civil war founders like Mao and their ideologies of Maoism, but the practical implementation of formal communism has been waning since the late 1970's. In 1978 Deng came to power and brought with him economic reforms; he transitioned China into a mixed economy, rather than a planned economy. Leading into the 21st century, liberalization and economic expansionism through programs like the Belt and Road Initiative have furthered the country from their communist past. Now-a-days, the PRC's economy is best described as state capitalism, not communism.
Shall we call this "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" ?
And indeed, there are many political parties in teh PRC.
They're communist in ideology and are officially dedicated to establishing socialism. But they don't claim to be fully communist yet.
I think this generally proves US-led sanctions will be useless or detrimental if China doesn't follow along and that Iran will probably never come back to the US unless China faces a serious economic crisis.
A few related articles are (paywall-less)
With the West opposed to it, Iran looks to China
Iran and China sign a 'strategic' deal in Tehran
(Fully paywalled, far more elaborate presumably)
Defying the US, China and Iran near a trade and military partnership deal
Useless is a strong statement. Unilateral sanctions in the style of the Trump Administration are without a doubt less effective today than they would've been in, say the 1990s, but US-led multilateral sanctions ARE effective. We see that still with US-led sanctions on Russia and North Korea, both of which also have a decent amount of support from the PRC, with the Kim regime being more or less entirely kept afloat by the Chinese.
Where is the cost/benefit analysis on this ?
What do you mean? I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you referring to a specific sanction? The practice of sanctions in general? The multilateral aspect? The US-led aspect?
Often the wayback machine or similar services have a full copy:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200711211214/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/11/world/asia/china-iran-trade-military-deal.html
One does'nt need to pay for using Deutsche Welle's website because everything is paid for by German taxpayers' money. Incidently, the historical and primary mission of those German Waves is radio broadcasting. Reading the radio is now a thing : tell that to grandma ;-)
The New York Times, on the other hand, and while arguably beeing a public service, lives and functions only with the money paid by its readers and its advertisers. Its paywall, however, is of the weak sort and doesn't survives the browser's coockies being cleaned, which should be done anyway.
CtrlShiftDeland all the news are yours. Strange times, aren't they ?Anyway, bear in mind that there is no such thing as free information.
I meant for the stuff in parentheses to apply to the stuff above them, not below. I guess I'll edit that.