Thread by @philippilk

1/ A sensible thread in which @ElbridgeColby recognises that economic war against China is a non-starter. As with the Russian sanctions, they wouldn’t hurt the target that much but the blowback would be devastating and would destroy the United States.

https://twitter.com/ElbridgeColby/status/1586683010312769536

2/ But it seems like @ElbridgeColby hasn’t really followed through the logic of this state of affairs: if China is this powerful economically then why would it need to engage in a primitive and risky military strategy against Taiwan?

3/ China increases its global power through trade and economic dominance. This strategy has deep roots in Chinese history. Now check out what they’ve been doing with Taiwan.

4/ American diplomats can tell themselves fairytales about freedom and democracy, but the brass tacks deal the US made with Taiwan was something like: “You be our immovable aircraft carrier, we’ll make you rich by exporting high tech chips to the US.”

5/ When the deal was made there was still some memory lingering about the Chinese civil war too. That is now gone. Ancient history. Meanwhile, the US can no longer offer Taiwan prosperity. Rather it demands that they sanction their largest trade partner.

6/ This is a bad deal. It runs something like: “Side with us because we both love freedom and democracy, but to side with us you need to make yourself substantially poorer by despoiling economic relations with your largest trade partner”.

7/ Now, say you’re sitting in Beijing watching this. Are you thinking: “We need to launch a risky invasion”? Or are you thinking: “Let’s just let this stew for a while, applying pressure when needed; this is an alliance that is no longer in Taiwan’s interest”.

8/ If you read the Chinese language publications on these matters they all council the latter, which is also in keeping with centuries of Chinese behaviour. Maybe this is 4D chess infowar to fool the West in preparation for the surprise attack. But that’s very improbable.

9/ When Americans get themselves riled up about an invasion they’re projecting their favourite strategy - gung ho General Patton military intervention - onto their rivals. But the truth is their rivals have watched this strategy in action and concluded it is self-defeating.

10/ The Americans will likely continue the invasion rhetoric. The arms manufacturers will appreciate it. But as the strategists wait for the Chinese invasion they’ll soon find they’re waiting for Godot.

11/ They’d be far better served looking coldly at the emerging balance of powers in the world and strategising accordingly. Question number one should be: “How do we maximise our position in this emerging constellation with the lowest risk strategy possible.”