How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_Capt]

7 minutes ago, OBJ said:

I have to keep reminding myself of Danish politician Karl Kristian Steinke advice, 'It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future'

I thought that was the great American philosopher Yogi Berra.

[OBJ]

3 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I thought that was the great American philosopher Yogi Berra.

No, that was, 'It's just like Déjà vu, all over again'

 

Edited January 7 by OBJ

[sburke]

2 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I thought that was the great American philosopher Yogi Berra.

It’s Difficult to Make Predictions, Especially About the Future – Quote Investigator®

The saying was spoken during the parliamentary year 1937-1938, and no attribution was specified. Boldface added to excerpts by QI:[1]

Det er vanskeligt at spaa, især naar det gælder Fremtiden.

It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.

This citation was mentioned in the prominent reference “The Yale Book of Quotations”.[2] More information about Danish citations for this saying is presented in the addendum at the end of this article.

[dan/california]

 

Quote

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/07/world/europe/ukraine-medics-war-russia.html

The vehicle is at the combat medic station, a critical link in the chain of care for soldiers wounded on the front. It is often the first stop before they are dispatched to stabilization points farther from the fighting and then to advanced medical centers where more complicated.....

 

 

[dan/california]

35 minutes ago, sburke said:

so about those Autocracies making faster decision cycles... roughly comparable to Russia's corruption issues.

Xi Jinping Purges Military Following Reports Of Missiles Filled With Water Instead Of Fuel (msn.com)

 

 

28 minutes ago, JonS said:

Yeah, but Steve - it took them no time at all to decide that it would be more profitable to use H2O instead of CH3CH2OH, and rather than having endless meetings over whether to use Perrier, or Fiji, or Voss, they just hyper efficiently went with tapwater.

So, once again, autocracies and dictatorships for the win!

Checkmate, libruls!

I am seriously tempted to work back to the discussion of how much of the Russian nuclear arsenal even sort of works, but The Capt would hurt me, so......

[Seedorf81]

1 hour ago, Carolus said:

Very well.

So what do the democracies do now to prevent unnecessary deaths caused by those silly autocracies that commit these stupid mistakes so easily?

The systemic view has its place and if the point is that democracies will triumph in the long run, I am willing to grant that for the sake of argument.

But does that help the people who are getting killed right now?

And that the support for Ukraine will be gearing down somewhat until 2025 at least? 

Is this the optimal path within democratic structures?

Because I can tell quite well how things are going. No, there will be no Russian thunder run on Warsaw or even on Kiyv. 

But Ukraine will continue to slowly bleed out for the next years while the new BRICS axis will continue their very successful hybrid strategies and affect elections on all levels of governance in those democracies to make sure that whatever they try next will receive the same response as the response to the invasion of Ukraine in 2014. 

No, we are seeing democracies failing to act, not because democracies are slower, but because they are being influenced from within and without + independent internal trust and leadership crises that were going on since before the Corona era already without any interference. The WW2 axis, while it had some players in the UK and the US, never reached this level of successful internal corrosion inside their enemies as Russia and China have reached now in Europe and the US. 

There will be no big bang. But we are observing the beginning of a long whimpering end of liberal democratic order, globally.

Maybe a painful question, but why do democracies have to prevent "unnecessary" (a very debatable term, as I see it. Any death can be deemed unneccessary, if one tries hard enough) deaths? Is there an obligation, other than morality?

And how quick will some people accuse those democracies of being "colonialists", or "meddling in other people's local/national affairs" or "trying to control the world"?

And your question: "But does that help the people who are getting killed right now?" is in fact applicable for every country in history and for every human that was getting killed in any conflict. You expect democracies to save the whole world? But when democracies tried that, in RETROSPECT with wrong reasons, they were, sometimes rightly so, condemned for doing so. Eisenhower came up with the Domino-theory, with the intent to help the world from being overrun by Communism and boy oh boy, how did that work out?!

The democracies have learned some serious lessons about intervening, not the least the recent events in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And a cruel reality perhaps, but what you call "unneccesary deaths" are also happening in Sudan, Chad, Mali, Nigeria, Congo, Somalia, Gaza and the rest, but they seem less important than the Ukranian deaths?

This was not your best post, I think.

 

 

 

[OBJ]

1 minute ago, sburke said:

It’s Difficult to Make Predictions, Especially About the Future – Quote Investigator®

The saying was spoken during the parliamentary year 1937-1938, and no attribution was specified. Boldface added to excerpts by QI:[1]

Det er vanskeligt at spaa, især naar det gælder Fremtiden.

It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.

This citation was mentioned in the prominent reference “The Yale Book of Quotations”.[2] More information about Danish citations for this saying is presented in the addendum at the end of this article.

Ahhh sorry @sburke, guess I should have quoted my source, and plugged the book again.

Please see, 'The Origins of Victory: How Disruptive Military Innovation Determines the Fates of Great Powers'
By Andrew F. Krepinevich, Jr. - It's some heavy going but for me worth it for the added perspective on current geopolitics

Page 140, first sentence, last paragraph, reference, note 202
note 202, page 476, Karl Kristian Steincke, 'Ogsaa en Tilvaerelse,' vol 4, 'Farvel Og Tak: Minder Og Meninger' (Copenhagen: Fremad, 1948), also, 227, https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/10/20/no=predict (which weblink I could not get to work for me)

My apologies, @The_Capt Yogi Berra is indeed, apparently among many others including well known Danish physicist Niels Bohr, a user if not proven originator of the phrase.

'However, the website Quote Investigator discovered that this is a phrase with many parents and whose origins are much earlier, but hopelessly obscure.'

[poesel]

9 minutes ago, Seedorf81 said:

Maybe a painful question, but why do democracies have to prevent "unnecessary" (a very debatable term, as I see it. Any death can be deemed unneccessary, if one tries hard enough) deaths? Is there an obligation, other than morality?

Because politicians want to stay in office. It doesn't help if your voters are dead.

As an autocrat, you don't have to worry about that. It may even help if the right ones die. Case in point: Russia.

 

9 minutes ago, Seedorf81 said:

And a cruel reality perhaps, but what you call "unneccesary deaths" are also happening in Sudan, Chad, Mali, Nigeria, Congo, Somalia, Gaza and the rest, but they seem less important than the Ukranian deaths?

Because we don't relate to them culturally. You care about people you 'know'.

I do care more about Ukraine than Gaza, although my co-worker is Palestinian and I personally know no one from Ukraine!?!
I guess this is some basic human tribal thing.

[Sojourner]

4 minutes ago, OBJ said:

My apologies, @The_Capt Yogi Berra is indeed, apparently among many others including well known Danish physicist Niels Bohr, a user if not proven originator of the phrase.

And to quote Yogi Berra (for real)...

"I never said most of the things I said."

 

 

But he may may have just been quoting Mark Twain.

[Seedorf81]

5 minutes ago, poesel said:

Because politicians want to stay in office. It doesn't help if your voters are dead.

As an autocrat, you don't have to worry about that. It may even help if the right ones die. Case in point: Russia.

 

Because we don't relate to them culturally. You care about people you 'know'.

I do care more about Ukraine than Gaza, although my co-worker is Palestinian and I personally know no one from Ukraine!?!
I guess this is some basic human tribal thing.

Eh, I think the original post was about deaths in another - autocratic - country, so democratic politicians didn't lose any voters in their country.

And I expect, perhaps very wrongly so, that intelligent people, which the original poster most certainly is, can have the ability to look beyond "basic human tribal things". 

[LongLeftFlank]

On 1/3/2024 at 8:51 AM, LongLeftFlank said:

(no paywall).

FT: China's electric vehicle dominance presents a dilemma to the West

“Laying eyes on equipment that I had never seen in Japan and their state of the art manufacturing, I was struck by a sense of crisis.”

Last year China overtook Japan as the world’s biggest auto exporter... Chinese auto exports have nearly quintupled since 2020 to approach 5mn.

[While still 75% ICE] it is the rise of affordable Chinese EVs that is making carmakers nervous around the world.... Chinese automakers have sufficient unused capacity in their domestic factories to make significant inroads into major overseas markets before they break ground on a single [overseas] regional hub.... sitting on enough capacity to supply 75 per cent of global EV demand.

Farewell to all that Arsenal of Democracy chest-pounding, I'm afraid, gents. Western military power has always been  'firstest with the mostest' since at latest Lepanto. But we now stand on the threshold of profound change, and we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

...While the West retains a large edge in innovating tech cuz "our Freedomz", it's the Chinese manufacturing behemoth that can flood the planet with cut-price fit-for-purpose knockoffs of anything you can hit with a stick, long before our 'shareholder value' guys can even roll out the first generation.

Their capacity -- including sophisticated supply chains -- is now an order of magnitude beyond  the West's remaining heavy manufacturing centres in Korea, Germany and US-Mexico. The ramp rates are mind boggling now. And as with cars, batteries and wind turbines, so with miltech.

The Chinese state also can, and will, keep surplus heavy industrial capacity on the shelf for decades. Short of buying off China Inc. to supply our team instead, I just don't see how this changes.

Rebuttal?

@Butschi, @poesel, anyone?

 

Edited January 7 by LongLeftFlank

[Seedorf81]

22 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Farewell to all that Arsenal of Democracy chest-pounding, I'm afraid, gents. Western military power has always been  'firstest with the mostest' since at latest Lepanto. But we now stand on the threshold of profound change, and we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

...While the West retains a large edge in innovating tech cuz "our Freedomz", it's the Chinese manufacturing behemoth that can flood the planet with cut-price fit-for-purpose knockoffs of anything you can hit with a stick, long before our 'shareholder value' guys can even roll out the first generation.

Their capacity -- including sophisticated supply chains -- is now an order of magnitude beyond  the West's remaining heavy manufacturing centres in Korea, Germany and US-Mexico. The ramp rates are mind boggling now. And as with cars, batteries and wind turbines, so with miltech.

The Chinese state also can, and will, keep surplus heavy industrial capacity on the shelf for decades. Short of buying off China Inc. to supply our team instead, I just don't see how this changes.

Rebuttal?

@Butschi, @poesel, anyone?

 

If the current status in China stays as it is, you're probably right.

But there are some things brewing that may or may not cause huge problems for the current leadership.

The real estate bubble, and the manual labour job-problems could change things a bit, perhaps.

Real estate trouble:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-67890633

Manual labour trouble:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-67779222

 

 

Edited January 7 by Seedorf81

[sburke]

6 minutes ago, Seedorf81 said:

If the current status in China stays as it is, you're probably right.

But there are some things brewing that may or may not cause huge problems for the current leadership.

not to mention the demographic cliff it is facing. There is a lot wrapped up in that - pension and quality of life promises that keep the CCCP in power.  An aging population as seen in Japan and much of the west that strains the social fabric and of course hits the cheap labor pool.

Key facts about China's declining population | Pew Research Center

Quote

The UN forecasts that China’s population will decline from 1.426 billion this year to 1.313 billion by 2050 and below 800 million by 2100. That’s according to the UN’s “medium variant,” or middle-of-the-road projection. The large population decline is projected even though it assumes that China’s total fertility rate will rise from 1.18 children per woman in 2022 to 1.48 in 2100.

It remains to be seen what impact climate change will have as well.  Globally we are all facing some environmental crisis. Hard to project what this will do to stress points between and within nations.

 

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, Seedorf81 said:

If the current status in China stays as it is, you're probably right.

But there are some things brewing that may or may not cause huge problems for the current leadership.

The real estate bubble, and the manual labour job-problems could change things a bit, perhaps.

Real estate trouble:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-67890633

Manual labour trouble:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-67779222

 

 

These tend to be the go-to issues on the Glass Dragon side.  I don’t know the first thing about real estate bubbles but the US had that little burpsie back in 08 and 09 so I suspect that while impactful, China is not going to fold up over whatever that thing looks like.

Demographics is the other one - this one I think we tend to lean on like some sort of “it’s ok China is not that scary” teddy bear.  First off - look to the own house, when it comes to demographics in the western world.  Our only real offset is immigration.  To the point that in Canada it is the only thing keeping our heads above water.  But we also know that we are all unified and wholly on-side with immigration across the western world as well. [The_Capt rolls his eyes upwards]

China sees this demographic issue coming and appears to be pulling a couple offset strategies.  First is offshore outsourcing - so do pretty much what we did and have people in other countries to all the labour for cheaper.  Second is AI - EVs are one thing, QC/AI/ML are another.  For us in the west, AI could pose a major disruption.  It won’t be without ripples in China but is can likely solve more problems than it creates while facing said “demographic-pocayplse”.

Regardless, the Chinese economy, while slowing it meteoric rise, is still on track to keep growing at around 3% out to 2030.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/263616/gross-domestic-product-gdp-growth-rate-in-china/

US is looking at around 2%.  So settle in, it is going to likely be a long competition that stretches into the 21st century.  In fact the winning team might wind up being the one best placed to survive climate impacts in the second half of the century.  

 

Edited January 8 by The_Capt

[OBJ]

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Farewell to all that Arsenal of Democracy chest-pounding, I'm afraid, gents. Western military power has always been  'firstest with the mostest' since at latest Lepanto. But we now stand on the threshold of profound change, and we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

...While the West retains a large edge in innovating tech cuz "our Freedomz", it's the Chinese manufacturing behemoth that can flood the planet with cut-price fit-for-purpose knockoffs of anything you can hit with a stick, long before our 'shareholder value' guys can even roll out the first generation.

Their capacity -- including sophisticated supply chains -- is now an order of magnitude beyond  the West's remaining heavy manufacturing centres in Korea, Germany and US-Mexico. The ramp rates are mind boggling now. And as with cars, batteries and wind turbines, so with miltech.

The Chinese state also can, and will, keep surplus heavy industrial capacity on the shelf for decades. Short of buying off China Inc. to supply our team instead, I just don't see how this changes.

Rebuttal?

@Butschi, @poesel, anyone?

 

I'll pile on. My sense is the West made China over the last 20 years, the West can unmake (de-couple from) China over the next 20. 

Thank God for President Xi.
If it weren't for him revealing the true face of China under the CCP, the West might have sleep walked into a 2040 Chinese world order. We should all thank Xi for the brutal crackdown in Hong Kong, the brutal forced assimilation of the uyghurs, zero COVID policy supply chain disruptions, crippling Belt and Suspenders loans, ignoring the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague 2016 ruling, building up the Chinese navy, modernizing the PLA, continued South China Sea aggression, constant military harassment of Taiwan, and stifling China's business elites, particularly the tech titans, etc.

https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/measuring-us-chinas-conscious-decoupling-2023-11-16/

 

Edited January 8 by OBJ

[Vet 0369]

5 hours ago, sburke said:

are you asking because you don't think they have one now?  and umm, they did win ww2 and pretty much obliterated the axis powers and frankly their economic advantage in ww2 was pretty massive.  I mean hell look at the comparison in carrier fleets between Japan and the US and that was the secondary theater as far as the democracies were concerned.

let's not even begin to talk tank production etc.

Not really a very accurate balance when using Japan. Japan actually wanted more Battleships and Cruisers over Aircraft Carriers because their battle philosophy revolved more around the Battleship and Heavy Cruiser than air power. When it comes to the tank, the concept of “individual cold-steel” took precedence over everything else.

[sburke]

13 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

Not really a very accurate balance when using Japan. Japan actually wanted more Battleships and Cruisers over Aircraft Carriers because their battle philosophy revolved more around the Battleship and Heavy Cruiser than air power. When it comes to the tank, the concept of “individual cold-steel” took precedence over everything else.

Perhaps, however this assessment in the wiki page on the US navy is very appropriate to the discussion of the current situation in Ukraine.

Quote

The United States economic base was ten times larger than Japan's, and its technological capabilities also significantly greater, and it mobilized engineering skills much more effectively than Japan, so that technological advances came faster and were applied more effectively to weapons. Above all, American admirals adjusted their doctrines of naval warfare to exploit the advantages. The quality and performance of the warships of Japan were initially comparable to that of the US.

One of Russia's first casualties in the war against Ukraine was the brain drain as so many of its young and talented minds left the country.  In addition, Russia has been unable to resolve the fact that its military leadership is incapable of addressing its own shortcomings in this conflict.  While the UA has had some of those same problems it is adjusting even if slower than some might wish.

The highlighted portion above is I feel especially true of Ukraine.

[The_Capt]

28 minutes ago, OBJ said:

I'll pile on. My sense is the West made China over the last 20 years, the West can unmake (de-couple from) China over the next 20. 

Thank God for President Xi.
If it weren't for him revealing the true face of China under the CCP, the West might have sleep walked into a 2040 Chinese world order. We should all thank Xi for the brutal crackdown in Hong Kong, the brutal forced assimilation of the uyghurs, zero COVID policy supply chain disruptions, crippling Belt and Suspenders loans, ignoring the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague 2016 ruling, building up the Chinese navy, modernizing the PLA, continued South China Sea aggression, constant military harassment of Taiwan, and stifling China's business elites, particularly the tech titans, etc.

https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/measuring-us-chinas-conscious-decoupling-2023-11-16/

 

I don’t know:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/contentious-us-china-trade-relationship

3/4 of a trillion annually is still a pretty big number.  Uncoupling that is going to take time and likely hurt - we are losing our minds on inflation right now.  What is moving away from cheaper Chinese manufacturing going to look like.

As to “unmaking”, well the problem with making something human-wise is that it becomes self-aware and starts making plans (and friends):

https://www.china-briefing.com/news/chinas-trade-development-with-brics-analysis-and-opportunities/

I am not in the “China = easy day” camp.  We waited too long and got too greedy.  So now comes the hard part.

[dan/california]

34 minutes ago, OBJ said:

I'll pile on. My sense is the West made China over the last 20 years, the West can unmake (de-couple from) China over the next 20. 

Thank God for President Xi.
If it weren't for him revealing the true face of China under the CCP, the West might have sleep walked into a 2040 Chinese world order. We should all thank Xi for the brutal crackdown in Hong Kong, the brutal forced assimilation of the uyghurs, zero COVID policy supply chain disruptions, crippling Belt and Suspenders loans, ignoring the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague 2016 ruling, building up the Chinese navy, modernizing the PLA, continued South China Sea aggression, constant military harassment of Taiwan, and stifling China's business elites, particularly the tech titans, etc.

https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/measuring-us-chinas-conscious-decoupling-2023-11-16/

 

Out of likes, 100% agree wit this. Xi made a truly large strategic mistake ripping the mask off before he actually had too.

8 minutes ago, sburke said:

Perhaps, however this assessment in the wiki page on the US navy is very appropriate to the discussion of the current situation in Ukraine.

One of Russia's first casualties in the war against Ukraine was the brain drain as so many of its young and talented minds left the country.  In addition, Russia has been unable to resolve the fact that its military leadership is incapable of addressing its own shortcomings in this conflict.  While the UA has had some of those same problems it is adjusting even if slower than some might wish.

The highlighted portion above is I feel especially true of Ukraine.

The side that learns more, faster wins.

[dan/california]

2 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I don’t know:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/contentious-us-china-trade-relationship

3/4 of a trillion annually is still a pretty big number.  Uncoupling that is going to take time and likely hurt - we are losing our minds on inflation right now.  What is moving away from cheaper Chinese manufacturing going to look like.

As to “unmaking”, well the problem with making something human-wise is that it becomes self-aware and starts making plans (and friends):

https://www.china-briefing.com/news/chinas-trade-development-with-brics-analysis-and-opportunities/

I am not in the “China = easy day” camp.  We waited too long and got too greedy.  So now comes the hard part.

I also agree with this, you can't screw up as badly as the West has for the last thirty years and not a nasty bill at the end of the party. I am think about two percent of GDP in increased defense spending, and two percent in various adjustment expenses. The CHIPS act was at least a down payment on the latter.

But we wouldn't even be talking about trying if Xi had been the the least bit patient and subtle. He could have suppressed Hong Kong and Xinjiang with being a performative and genocidal bleep hole about it.

[paxromana]

50 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

 In fact the winning team might wind up being the one best placed to survive climate impacts in the second half of the century.  

And this, at least on the face of it, gives the US a huge edge ... it is a net exporter of food (and even with climate change probably won't end up suffering from famines) while China is a net importer and could well end up, demographic cliff or not, in serious food shortage territory due to climate disasters.

And buying up agricultural land in far off places will do them no good since the locals have actual physical proximity to said lands and China has no realistic way of forcing them to starve so China can be fed.

Edited January 8 by paxromana

[OBJ]

7 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I don’t know:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/contentious-us-china-trade-relationship

3/4 of a trillion annually is still a pretty big number.  Uncoupling that is going to take time and likely hurt - we are losing our minds on inflation right now.  What is moving away from cheaper Chinese manufacturing going to look like.

As to “unmaking”, well the problem with making something human-wise is that it becomes self-aware and starts making plans (and friends):

https://www.china-briefing.com/news/chinas-trade-development-with-brics-analysis-and-opportunities/

I am not in the “China = easy day” camp.  We waited too long and got too greedy.  So now comes the hard part.

I should be careful, I am expert at very little, and China is very much outside my circle of expertise, but I do have an opinion like everyone else and don't mind sharing it if it triggers debate that further informs me and others.

My sense, just my two sense, we are at the start of the de-coupling, with much still to discover about how that will go.
Xi came to San Francisco, Biden didn't go to Shanghai. To me that is Xi buying time to deal with China's economic issues, issues that make it vulnerable economically in the current world order, especially so if there were open conflict. Xi gets that China is still the 2nd most powerful economy in the world.

To me India is the country to watch. There seems less and less room for fence sitting in the new cold war.

https://carnegieendowment.org/2023/11/06/india-in-emerging-world-order-pub-90928

[alison]

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

...While the West retains a large edge in innovating tech cuz "our Freedomz", it's the Chinese manufacturing behemoth that can flood the planet with cut-price fit-for-purpose knockoffs of anything you can hit with a stick, long before our 'shareholder value' guys can even roll out the first generation.

Their capacity -- including sophisticated supply chains -- is now an order of magnitude beyond  the West's remaining heavy manufacturing centres in Korea, Germany and US-Mexico. The ramp rates are mind boggling now. And as with cars, batteries and wind turbines, so with miltech.

I have been seeing "line goes up" charts about China for at least 10 years now. China has best mobile payments system in the world. China has best bullet train network in the world. China has best surveillance systems in the world. China has best supply chain in the world. China has best drones in the world. China has best EV manufacturing in the world. And while some of these may be true in the abstract, somehow the Chinese government has not been able to convert these economic and technological advantages into global dominance. I am not sure there is enough evidence yet to show that the current Chinese government is capable of influencing foreign affairs in a major way, outside of propping up a few neighboring authoritarian states.

If China was really willing and able to flick a switch and plunge the rest of the world into darkness, it would have done so. But it hasn't. On the contrary, despite the self-own of wolf warrior diplomacy, the government largely still tries to project an image of neutrality because it needs the support of the rest of the world to succeed in its domestic goals. If the Chinese government really wanted to flex, it wouldn't just be selling weapons to Russia, it would trigger a remote kill on every DJI in Ukraine. But instead they're happy to play both sides, because making money is more important than dictating the outcome of a regional conflict. And that's going to be true of regional conflicts all over the world.

So maybe the Chinese military industrial complex eclipses the American one at some point, so what? They'll sell weapons to everyone, just like the Americans did.

The point that I think other commenters are making in this discussion is that over the long term democracy wins out over autocracy. And I think that victory is better seen through a cultural lens than a military one. People all over the world are watching Japanese anime and Korean dramas. Maybe briefly they were watching Chinese palace dramas, but those got too popular so the government squashed them. Remember Chinese hip-hop? Yeah, so do I until the government harmonized it. Maybe gaming is where Chinese pop culture will finally break through? But gaming has been under attack from the government for years now and it remains to be seen if the Disneyfied versions of what the government lets through will continue to resonate with the global audience. And, if they do, how much of that audience will translate gacha games whose stories are deliberately as far removed from political controversy as possible into a greater trust of China-as-global-leader, as the government perhaps hopes?

In recent years, the Xi administration has been pushing Chinese people, Chinese corporations and useful idiots overseas to "tell China's story well", so it can parlay that into global influence, but is that really happening? If the only version of the Chinese story that can ever be shared with the world is a sanitized one, is that really a compelling story? And if the Chinese government can't win hearts and minds, can it ever really achieve the kind of hegemony that the US - or, more broadly, "the democratic west" - does today? Are you really the winner if you sell gadgets to everybody but nobody actually trusts you?

[paxromana]

"Dictators are good at getting stuff done. They're not so good at deciding whether stuff should be done in the first place."

Prince Harry (paraphrased slightly as its from memory and bowdlerised ... he doesn't actually say 'stuff' but uses another four letter  word starting with s), Axis of Time series, John Birmingham

Edited January 8 by paxromana

[Kinophile]

22 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said:

I remember there was some interest in in the spillover of this war into Africa last year. Interesting video of General Budanov's birthday being celebrated in Sudan. Guessing this is related to Ukrainians helping them take care of their Wagner problem.

I know it is a few days late but I would also like to wish General Budanov a happy belated birthday.

I'm at a loss for where the advantage or usability is for UKR SOF in Sudan. Wagner is out of the fight, WhatsHisFace fell out of the ultimate window and every experienced man is needed at home. There aren't enough UKR in Sudan to do anything more than minor irritation.

So why are UKR snipers dicking around in east bloody Africa? Why pop off Wagnerites in the savannah or jungle instead of Donetsk or Zaporizhia or Kherson where, y'know, it  might actually make a teeny tiny difference? Why not have them in Rostov On Don, freaking out the fat HQ folks?

I'm baffled.