Interesting article by the intrepid @inthenewera with an interview from Jeffrey Sachs. A couple of thoughts. First, Sachs clearly in PR mode saying all the right things though many of his statements still come off as stilted and wishy washy but I'd need more info 1/n
Second, my primary issue with Sachs was over Xinjiang and pleading ignorance or that it was "US propaganda" which was at best willful ignorance. If he says It is disturbing and UN inspectors should have access, I'll take him at his word that he wants that 2/n
Third, I find his entire mode of thinking about the US-China relationship problematic but I find it so commonly among Americans, Europeans, even Democrats and GOP that I don't prioritize it but I want to explain why I find it deeply problematic. 3/n
There is no absolute truth or standard involved for individual parties or the relationship. For instance, Sachs (and many others) talk about how the US and China need to cooperate more. Cooperating is a verb. You cooperate towards some end. Cooperation is not the final 4/n
Cooperation helps you ACHIEVE the end goal. Consequently, saying cooperation has no actual meaning as an objective. You might as well say China and the US should both breathe air to realize their shared goals. You cannot reach agreements if both sides stop breathing. 5/n
Xi and Trump could cooperate to take over the world and rule as evil overlords or start a coffee chain. Saying they should cooperate more does not actually say anything. This seeming linguistic slight of hand has an important consequence. It removes any standard upon 6/n
which the parties should be judged. Free trade, open markets, or human rights do not have meaning independently of what China or the US define them as. This is however absurd. We know these words have meaning independent of what a politician may want them to mean at 7/n
a specific moment. Let's take Sach's argument that Huawei is being targeted purely for industrial protection anti-China reasons. (Personally: I do not believe this as Huawei was an intelligence concern for almost a decade in the Obama administration for both GOP and Dems) 8/n
If Prof. Sachs feels this strongly about Huawei and free trade, it would only make sense that he feel just as strongly about other countries firms being denied market access in China for purely market protection anti-EU/Japan/US reasons. I am have not perused his entire 9/n
Body of work but I have not seen any work criticizing China for its wide variety of market restrictions. If you claim to believe in specific ideals or standards then great apply them to all equally not just your political axe to grind du jour. Pick almost any standard 10/n
Prof. Sachs wants to hold up and if he faithful to the standard rather than politics, he will spend significant time critiquing China for not good faith attempts to meet a standard, but refusal to even acknowledge the so called standard. I've been amazed at global liberals 11/n
Who belong to every progressive organization & campaign for European or US liberals but when it comes to China issues really lose any sense of what their values. Please criticize Trump/US/human rights/trade policy. No issues. Standards apply everywhere, not just when comfortable
