Heard that Xi told Trump on Feb 5 that China was seeing early success in containing COVID, and wanted the US air travel ban lifted 'soon'
Trump interpreted Xi's words to mean that the virus was not that bad and it wouldn't spread to the US, and felt betrayed when it did spread
Of course, we now know that by Feb 5, the US likely had at least a few hundred active cases, if not more. Neither leader seemed aware of that at the time. Also, Xi emphasized test/trace/isolation but it's unclear if Trump thought that knowledge would matter to the US
Instead, Trump got advice from national security specialists like Matt Pottinger, who told him Xi must be lying and China's numbers must be much worse, and that travel bans would substantively contain the disease.
For the next three weeks, US domestic policy remained driven by the economy, while Pottinger, Pompeo, and others directed staff to think about how to weaken China's government and its international image using COVID
Very little top-level attention was given to a potential lack of tests, ventilators, or hospital beds, or building trust and coordination between state and federal officials (or even understanding what public health policy options were available)
Much of this was because, at the start, the interagency COVID response was coordinated out of the NSC by DNSA Matt Pottinger, and focused on "national security" and anti-China messaging instead of public health & state/local policy
Here, the timeline gets interesting: on March 30, Josh Rogin (close to Pottinger) said P was leading interagency response until late February. But on April 8, as COVID cases mounted, think tank CGP was saying the NSC had transferred responsibility on Jan 31 to Mike Pence.
Ultimately, the US's COVID response can be blamed on many factors - and Xi's Feb 5 message around China's early success might be one. But an equally large factor was the US natsec apparatus's own biases and lack of relevant knowledge...
...as well as the increasing tendency of the US to defer nearly all major policy endeavors to the natsec apparatus under the Trump administration.
And, of course, the US's irrational fixation with zero-sum politics with China.
tldr: when COVID started, the NSC ran the show, and they focused on securing borders and demonizing China. Sometime btwn Jan 30 & late Feb, they handed back control to Pence, who also botched it. And Xi's Feb 5 call was badly misinterpreted by nearly everyone in the White House.
You may also be interested in this excellent piece by @chinahand
COPIUM - A Thread: I think what Covid demonstrated is that most of the English-language pundit class is not only useless but counterproductive. In Jan/Feb (2020) it was "Reeeeee Chernobyl!" In Mar/Apr it was "it is vital to call this the Wuhan virus"
while actual debate around tests/masks etc., was conducted by noobs like Noah Smith. In May to Nov (2020) it was prolonged tussling over how this would affect the election. From Nov onwards it's been "Reeeeee vaccines! America is awesome!"
Punctuated by Tyler Cowen's article saying that America is resilient because it endured 500k deaths without mass riots!
if you look at this, Intel started slipping vs its internal schedule and vs its competitors as Canon/Nikon exited the lithography/tooling race
this was because TSMC and Samsung were happy to co-develop each new generation of tooling with ASML, AMAT, LRCX etc while Intel generally hoarded process knowledge to itself
1/ The problem with even less toxic faux-progressives like Tobita is that their takes are devoid of geopolitical context.
AOC speaks up about Tibet because Tibet is a salient issue to India, and a Dem POTUS is pushing a diplomatic initiative with India, Japan, and Australia.
2/ Tobita then draws a strawman as to why people are criticizing AOC. At least for me, I don't find her views on Tibet ipso facto problematic - I dislike her use of human rights in a way that benefits American geopolitical objectives, like she did with Venezuela.
3/ This, again, also extends to why I find the Tobita, Promise Li, Wilfred, and the rest of the "Lausan Left" so troublesome, because they have shown at most lip service tut-tutting to how their progressive ideals are used for decidedly unprogressive ends
All extended air campaigns boil down to degrading opfor c4isr and airbases while keeping your facilities intact, while maintaining acceptable loss ratios
A max effort USN USAF campaign on short notice vs China can plausibly generate 4000 to 5000 sorties across a week without additional replenishment. 1200 each from two carriers, with the remainder from INDOPACOM land based aircraft
As I've said again and again, US nuclear capabilities are increasingly critical to credibly denying China air superiority over the TW straits. That the US people are unaware of this is profoundly disturbing
BTW, this is why I find the pro-TW faux-progressives in Critical China Scholars so infuriating. They willfully ignore how their identity politics provide cover for an arms race leading to a possibly nuclear conflict. At least US conservatives are upfront about nuking China
If you're a "progressive" or "leftist" who believes constructing separatist identities on an island claimed by one nuclear superpower and under the security umbrella of another nuclear superpower is a good thing, you should check yourself into the nearest mental health facility.