Political Posts

[Hektor]

Chinese are enterprising!

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/30/business/chinese-electric-vehicles-thailand.html

 

Chinese E.V. Makers Rush in and Upend a Country’s Entire Auto Market

China’s electric vehicle companies are making inroads in Thailand, a key industry hub, as Europe and the United States wield tariffs to keep them out.

 

Ma Haiyang and eight of his colleagues arrived in Thailand a year ago to establish the first overseas operation for GAC Aion, an electric vehicle maker from China. They had no office, no factory, no local employees and, basically, no clue.

 

The Aion team set up shop in a Bangkok hotel, commandeering conference rooms and holding meetings in the lobby. They had a long list of things to do: Find office space, recruit dealers and devise a business strategy. The team worked around the clock and, 74 days after arriving in Thailand, sold its first electric vehicle.

 

“The window of opportunity for Chinese new energy vehicles going overseas will be relatively short,” said Mr. Ma, general manager at Aion for Southeast Asia, using China’s preferred phrase for fully electric and gas-electric hybrid vehicles. “This is why we wanted to hurry up,” he added.

[nsx5200]

https://www.wsj.com/world/china/chinas-politburo-pledges-steps-to-boost-consumer-spending-f18e6a5b

"As the recovery has shown signs of slowing this year, China’s central bank has already jumped into the fray, delivering a string of surprise rate cuts last week that amount to the most substantial easing of monetary policy so far this year."

"The Politburo’s downbeat tone indicates that more policy support and stimulus could be in the offing."

 

As much as I dislike the CCCP, they are working on the issues, which is good for everyone inside and outside of China.

[ValueArb]

On 7/29/2024 at 8:23 AM, james22 said:

Five conservative states have forced their employee pension funds to divest from China over the past year, amid increased tension with the Asian country, and more are considering following suit.

 

Tension between the United States and China has been worsening for years, but Director of U.S. National Intelligence Avril Haines most recently warned lawmakers in May that China is preparing for increasingly unstable relationships with the United States.

 

Indiana, Florida, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Kansas are leading the calls to divest from the economic powerhouse, over fears that U.S. assets could be frozen if conflict breaks out between China and Taiwan, Politico reported Friday.

 

https://justthenews.com/nation/states/five-states-force-employee-pension-funds-divest-china-amid-increasing-tension

interesting take. I’ve always been of the opinion that it’s unlikely 74 years of Chinese bluster over Taiwan is going to turn into a hugely costly amphibious assault. Esp when it risks war with the powerful Japanese and Korean militaries, let alone US.

 

Of course I might be biased as I’ve put a quarter of my portfolio in Chinese companies.

 

https://nvariant.substack.com/p/my-current-favorite-stocks

[ValueArb]

Interesting update on Shoigu scandal

 

 

[Xerxes]

https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/geopolitics-decanted-by-silverado/id1614010500?i=1000664009725
 

Koffman and others on the book on Air War in Ukraine. And about the F-16s

 

 

——————

Good review of this new Command & Conquer PC game. Below :

 

[UK]

This is also quite interesting: https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/07/24/how-ukraines-new-tech-foils-russian-aerial-attacks

[Pelagic]

The only consolation is Russia has limited aerial refueling capacity and aircraft having to travel further allows for more time to track and potentially intercept them. Still, seems like a miss by the Biden admin that just prolongs the conflict.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/08/05/ukraine-had-a-chance-to-blow-up-russias-best-warplanes-on-the-tarmac-the-white-house-said-no-and-now-its-too-late/

[Xerxes]

7 minutes ago, Pelagic said:

The only consolation is Russia has limited aerial refueling capacity and aircraft having to travel further allows for more time to track and potentially intercept them. Still, seems like a miss by the Biden admin that just prolongs the conflict.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/08/05/ukraine-had-a-chance-to-blow-up-russias-best-warplanes-on-the-tarmac-the-white-house-said-no-and-now-its-too-late/

 

how is that different than a hypothetical scenario where let’s say in the 2003 war with Iraq, Moscow would not authorize Baghdad to use its long-range ballistic missiles to hit Diego Garcia, where B-52s are based. 
 

Seems to be just “great power” management. 

[ValueArb]

12 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

 

how is that different than a hypothetical scenario where let’s say in the 2003 war with Iraq, Moscow would not authorize Baghdad to use its long-range ballistic missiles to hit Diego Garcia, where B-52s are based. 
 

Seems to be just “great power” management. 

 

Its the same "great power" management that won us the war in Korea, and the one in Vietnam, and kept Sadaam in power after Kuwait was freed, and allows the Houthis to keep receiving new Iranian missiles and drones through their unmolested ports.

 

To quote Starship Troopers: The ukrainians do the dying while the US just brags about the supplyin.

Edited August 6, 2024 by ValueArb

[Xerxes]

2 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

 

Its the same "great power" management that won us the war in Korea, and the one in Vietnam, and kept Sadaam in power after Kuwait was freed, and allows the Houthis to keep receiving new Iranian missiles and drones through their unmolested ports.

… which also brought PRC to Washington’ fold, and broke the Red block, decisively. Or do you prefer seeing 30 million Chinese burned in nuclear blasts in the 1950s, just for the sake of “winning” the Korean War. 

 

 

we can write essays and PhD dissertation about Korea, Vietnam and all the things done wrong, tactically or strategically. But that would be in hindsight. 

 

The game is the game. But the game also has unwritten rules. and it is not about individual feelings of what feels good. 

[Pelagic]

21 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

 

how is that different than a hypothetical scenario where let’s say in the 2003 war with Iraq, Moscow would not authorize Baghdad to use its long-range ballistic missiles to hit Diego Garcia, where B-52s are based. 
 

Seems to be just “great power” management. 

I realize it's a hypothetical but is that a capability Iraq had in 2003? It looks like in 2003 they had modified Scud-Bs which are somewhat similar in range to ATACMs as a tactical ballistic missiles with around 300km range, which they fired a couple of at Kuwait. Their long range cruise missiles program had around 1,000km range, well short of Diego Garcia range.

 

In either case, Russia uses SU-34s in the conflict daily, these are hardly "strategic" assets both by virtue of their continued use and how close Russia was willing to place them to the front. If Ukraine was asking for permission to put an ATACMs through the hull of a SSBN perhaps you have a point in managing escalation but by virtue of them being continuously involved in the conflict they're on the board so to speak.

 

More to the point though, Ukraine has managed to destroy actual strategic assets like the A-50s taken down a few months ago and it didn't lead to further escalation. 

[ValueArb]

2 hours ago, Xerxes said:

… which also brought PRC to Washington’ fold, and broke the Red block, decisively. Or do you prefer seeing 30 million Chinese burned in nuclear blasts in the 1950s, just for the sake of “winning” the Korean War. 

 

False dichotomy. Didn't have to go nuclear, could have just taken out Chinese airfields and supply depots on other side of Yalu river and starved their Korean troops of ammo and supplies. A decisive defeat in Korea may have led to regime change in China, which would have saved tens of millions of lives and re-opened China decades earlier.

 

2 hours ago, Xerxes said:

 

we can write essays and PhD dissertation about Korea, Vietnam and all the things done wrong, tactically or strategically. But that would be in hindsight. 
 

The game is the game. But the game also has unwritten rules. and it is not about individual feelings of what feels good. 

 

Hindsight is also called learning from mistakes. Such as extending conflicts for years on end and causing millions of deaths instead of decisively ending them quickly. And there are no unwritten rules.

 

in the case of Ukraine only allowing the use of US weapons against Russians  throughout all Russian held territory in Ukraine but not 100 miles deep in Russia proper is absurd. Especially when Ukraine is already making those strikes using jerry rigged home designed drones, only not in the volume or effectiveness required. 

 

Russia's been drawing red lines from the shipment of the first palette of ammunition to Ukraine, at Bradleys, at Abrams, at HIMARs, at ATACMs, at F-16s, etc. They have nothing left to escalate other than tactical nukes, which are of very limited effectiveness and would be a huge political disaster for Russia so extremely unlikely.

 

Biden is doing just enough to ensure Russia can't win, but not enough to let Ukraine win and end the conflict. Just let the Ukrainians bleed for years on end until Russia overwhelms them with human waves of conscripts. Just another failure of Realpolitik.

 

[Xerxes]

2 hours ago, Pelagic said:

I realize it's a hypothetical but is that a capability Iraq had in 2003? It looks like in 2003 they had modified Scud-Bs which are somewhat similar in range to ATACMs as a tactical ballistic missiles with around 300km range, which they fired a couple of at Kuwait. Their long range cruise missiles program had around 1,000km range, well short of Diego Garcia range.

 

In either case, Russia uses SU-34s in the conflict daily, these are hardly "strategic" assets both by virtue of their continued use and how close Russia was willing to place them to the front. If Ukraine was asking for permission to put an ATACMs through the hull of a SSBN perhaps you have a point in managing escalation but by virtue of them being continuously involved in the conflict they're on the board so to speak.

 

More to the point though, Ukraine has managed to destroy actual strategic assets like the A-50s taken down a few months ago and it didn't lead to further escalation. 

That is fair based on your explanation of their “continued use” as assets. Therefore legitimate target.
 

Would moving of those assets further inland change their status. Does / should distance to the front line play a role  …. Do you think 
 

Were B-52s not used as stand-off launch platforms. But flown across the Indian Ocean ?  
 

Are Tu-160 White Swans, flown say from the Far East, used as stand off launch platforms against Ukraine legitimate target Biden should push for ?

 

If Moscow has nothing left than just bluffs and nukes, why not take out the White Swans … as all their red lines has proven rather not red. 

[Xerxes]

36 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

 

False dichotomy. Didn't have to go nuclear, could have just taken out Chinese airfields and supply depots on other side of Yalu river and starved their Korean troops of ammo and supplies. A decisive defeat in Korea may have led to regime change in China, which would have saved tens of millions of lives and re-opened China decades earlier.

 

Fair comment with my nuke scenario, as it is not as black and white as I wrote.
 

But also not as a clear cut as you wrote about Red China re-opening decades earlier, if Washington was just a bit more decisive in Korea.  
 

Mao was ready to lose tens of millions and move deep inland and fight a guerrilla war. Not sure if that alternative timeline that you proposed would have had any chance of pulling re-opening of PRC much earlier. Those Korean troops that you speak of included 300,000 Chinese volunteers. 
 

For Nixon-Mao to meet, history had to unfold exactly as it did in the 50s, 60s and early 70s. 
 

In other words, both Vietnam and Korea Wars had to unfold exactly as they did. 

[Xerxes]

48 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

Hindsight is also called learning from mistakes. Such as extending conflicts for years on end and causing millions of deaths instead of decisively ending them quickly. And there are no unwritten rules.

 

in the case of Ukraine only allowing the use of US weapons against Russians  throughout all Russian held territory in Ukraine but not 100 miles deep in Russia proper is absurd. Especially when Ukraine is already making those strikes using jerry rigged home designed drones, only not in the volume or effectiveness required. 

 

Russia's been drawing red lines from the shipment of the first palette of ammunition to Ukraine, at Bradleys, at Abrams, at HIMARs, at ATACMs, at F-16s, etc. They have nothing left to escalate other than tactical nukes, which are of very limited effectiveness and would be a huge political disaster for Russia so extremely unlikely.

 

Biden is doing just enough to ensure Russia can't win, but not enough to let Ukraine win and end the conflict. Just let the Ukrainians bleed for years on end until Russia overwhelms them with human waves of conscripts. Just another failure of Realpolitik.

 

 

All true.
 

And everyone played their role in this tragedy. Putin may have pulled the trigger, but he was not the only contributing factor.
 

Just like in the 1854 Crimean War. 
 

what can I say. A true tragedy. And a total waste of human potential.  

[Pelagic]

1 hour ago, Xerxes said:

That is fair based on your explanation of their “continued use” as assets. Therefore legitimate target.
 

Would moving of those assets further inland change their status. Does / should distance to the front line play a role  …. Do you think 
 

Were B-52s not used as stand-off launch platforms. But flown across the Indian Ocean ?  
 

Are Tu-160 White Swans, flown say from the Far East, used as stand off launch platforms against Ukraine legitimate target Biden should push for ?

 

If Moscow has nothing left than just bluffs and nukes, why not take out the White Swans … as all their red lines has proven rather not red. 

 

Generally, Russia has the option to simply not use assets against Ukraine and move them away from the front if it wants to preserve them. Any assets that are currently being used to target Ukraine or aid the Russian war effort are fair game.

 

Specifically, while Ukraine hasn't downed any tu-160s yet, Russia has lost 3 tu-22s and a tu-95, similar in nature. And perhaps more to the heart of the matter regarding the specific strike against a base full of Su-34s, Russia has lost 31 Su-34s so it's clear that their loss doesn't have major strategic implications.

 

It's also somewhat ironic the Biden admin engages in this high level analysis of specific targets that Ukraine can hit with US weapons while Russia utilizes North Korean ballistic missiles against Ukrainian cities, to say nothing of Iranian drones. Do you think the North Koreans have any input into what targets Russia can use their missiles on?

Edited August 6, 2024 by Pelagic

[Xerxes]

54 minutes ago, Pelagic said:

It's also somewhat ironic the Biden admin engages in this high level analysis of specific targets that Ukraine can hit with US weapons while Russia utilizes North Korean ballistic missiles against Ukrainian cities, to say nothing of Iranian drones. Do you think the North Koreans have any input into what targets Russia can use their missiles on?

If I was Ukraine, I would it pretty annoying. The first six months would have been ok …. One can argue.
 

I don’t disagree on how they must feel. 

 

Clearly North Korea doesn’t impose any restrictions, not that it would matter if they would impose any. 

[Spekulatius]

On 8/6/2024 at 4:54 PM, Pelagic said:

 

Generally, Russia has the option to simply not use assets against Ukraine and move them away from the front if it wants to preserve them. Any assets that are currently being used to target Ukraine or aid the Russian war effort are fair game.

 

Specifically, while Ukraine hasn't downed any tu-160s yet, Russia has lost 3 tu-22s and a tu-95, similar in nature. And perhaps more to the heart of the matter regarding the specific strike against a base full of Su-34s, Russia has lost 31 Su-34s so it's clear that their loss doesn't have major strategic implications.

 

It's also somewhat ironic the Biden admin engages in this high level analysis of specific targets that Ukraine can hit with US weapons while Russia utilizes North Korean ballistic missiles against Ukrainian cities, to say nothing of Iranian drones. Do you think the North Koreans have any input into what targets Russia can use their missiles on?

Totally agree here. This micromanagement from the Biden administration is totally counterproductive. Worst was probably to tell Ukraine not to bombard energy infrastructure in Russia, even those that has been used by the Russian army to supply themselves for the war.
At the same time , Russia can sent drones at will into Ukraine and hit any target they can reach, as some will always make it through the air defenses.

Edited August 8, 2024 by Spekulatius

[Spekulatius]

Another battle of Kursk:

Goal is probably to cut the Russian rail supply lines. I don’t think Ukraine attempts to cut the entire salient, seems too ambitious.

Edited August 8, 2024 by Spekulatius

[formthirteen]

Russia on the offensive in Venezuela and Cuba:

https://apnews.com/article/russian-warships-visit-cuba-havana-fcddda9e9406a81b686d648d007b8757

 

Two of the oil and cigar richest countries on Earth.

[John Hjorth]

Reuters - Markets [July 26^th 2024] : Russia's central bank governor Nabiullina on rates, economy and banks.

 

Russia Central bank's key rate up to 18 percent.

 

Bloomberg - News [August 9^th 2024] : Russia War Economy Set for Sharp Slowdown After Second Quarter.

 

Growth is likely to halve in second half of year, analysts say.

Huge government defense spending helped drive wartime growth.

- - - o 0 o - - -

This will soon become very tangible and real to feel for the Russian population. Poor Ms. & Mr. Ivanov [similar to 'Jones' for us]. Russia has a population of ~ 145 million. It's a nation with huge differencies in living conditions based on geografical locations, Living in Moskow or St. Petersburg is materially different compared to large parts of the rest of the country.

 

[Hektor]

Looks like the crack down season in China is not over!

 

https://www.scmp.com/business/china-business/article/3273955/chinese-fund-manager-zhao-xuejun-whisked-away-beijing-cracks-down-securities-sector

 

Chinese fund manager Zhao Xuejun whisked away as Beijing cracks down on securities sector

The chairman of Harvest Fund Management has resigned after being placed under investigation, according to a statement from China’s fourth-largest mutual fund firm

 

 

[UK]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/watch-russian-drives-past-trail-114519189.html

[Spekulatius]

LOL:

 

[Spekulatius]

He is viewed as an open-minded professional with an international perspective on the mainland’s stock market. 
 

 

There is his problem. He will be back, fully re- educated.