Pubblicato in: Armamenti, Cina, Stati Uniti

Cina. Iniziati i colloqui tra Pentagono ed Esercito cinese. – Reuters è mutata.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-08-30.

Cina Pacifico 001

«A senior Pentagon official held talks with the Chinese military for the first time since President Joe Biden took office in January to focus on managing risk between the two countries»

«Relations between China and the United States have grown increasingly tense, with the world’s two largest economies clashing over everything from Taiwan and China’s human rights record to its military activity in the South China Sea»

«Despite the tensions and heated rhetoric, U.S. military officials have long sought to have open lines of communication with their Chinese counterparts to be able to mitigate potential flare-ups or deal with any accidents»

«Michael Chase, deputy assistant secretary of defense for China, spoke last week with Chinese Major General Huang Xueping, deputy director for the People’s Liberation Army Office for International Military Cooperation»

«(They) utilized the U.S.-PRC Defense Telephone Link to conduct a secure video conference»

«Both sides agreed on the importance of maintaining open channels of communication between the two militaries»

«Officials said U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has yet to speak with his Chinese counterpart, in part because there was a debate about which Chinese official was Austin’s counterpart»

«Vice President Kamala Harris said on Thursday that the United States welcomes competition and does not seek conflict with Beijing, but will speak up on issues such as maritime disputes in the South China Sea»

«China, Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Taiwan lay claim to parts of the South China Sea, which is crossed by vital shipping lanes and contains gas fields and rich fishing grounds»

«Biden has ramped up sanctions on China over alleged human rights abuses in Xinjiang and Hong Kong»

* * * * * * *

Se è nella logica delle cose che i militari di ambo le sponde vogliano tenersi un canale di comunicazione aperto, se non altro per poter appianare eventuali incidenti fortuiti, è del tutto abnorme il nuovo modo espressivo tenuto da Reuters.

Ciò che fino a poco tempo fa era stato dato come cosa certa, evidente, inconfutabile, adesso è riportato essere una mera opinione di parte, usando condizionale e verbi di potenzialità.

«alleged human rights abuses in Xinjiang and Hong Kong»

Passati i tempi in cui Reuters bollava i cinesi di essere gli autori di un ‘genocidio’, dato per cosa inconfutabilmente certa: ora inizia a trattarli con rispetto.

Ci si deve adeguare.

*


Pentagon holds talks with Chinese military for first time under Biden, official says

Washington, Aug 27 (Reuters) – A senior Pentagon official held talks with the Chinese military for the first time since President Joe Biden took office in January to focus on managing risk between the two countries, a U.S. official told Reuters on Friday.

The United States has put countering China at the heart of its national security policy for years and Biden’s administration has described rivalry with Beijing as “the biggest geopolitical test” of this century.

Relations between China and the United States have grown increasingly tense, with the world’s two largest economies clashing over everything from Taiwan and China’s human rights record to its military activity in the South China Sea.

Despite the tensions and heated rhetoric, U.S. military officials have long sought to have open lines of communication with their Chinese counterparts to be able to mitigate potential flare-ups or deal with any accidents.

Michael Chase, deputy assistant secretary of defense for China, spoke last week with Chinese Major General Huang Xueping, deputy director for the People’s Liberation Army Office for International Military Cooperation.

“(They) utilized the U.S.-PRC Defense Telephone Link to conduct a secure video conference,” the U.S. official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“Both sides agreed on the importance of maintaining open channels of communication between the two militaries,” the official added.

Officials said U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has yet to speak with his Chinese counterpart, in part because there was a debate about which Chinese official was Austin’s counterpart.

Vice President Kamala Harris said on Thursday that the United States welcomes competition and does not seek conflict with Beijing, but will speak up on issues such as maritime disputes in the South China Sea.

China, Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Taiwan lay claim to parts of the South China Sea, which is crossed by vital shipping lanes and contains gas fields and rich fishing grounds.

Biden has ramped up sanctions on China over alleged human rights abuses in Xinjiang and Hong Kong.

In a shift from his predecessor as president, Donald Trump, Biden has broadly sought to rally allies and partners to help counter what the White House says is China’s increasingly coercive economic and foreign policies.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti

Biden. Questa fuga dall’Afganistan fa crollare la credibilità degli Stati Uniti. Persino nei media.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-08-18.

Pollo allo Spiedo 001

Una cosa è un ritiro graduale che lasci strutture integre ed efficienti alle sue spalle, ed una totalmente differente è una fuga repentina ed incontrollata, quale quelle che si vedono solo dopo débâcle totali.

Adesso persino i media liberal di provata fede si dissociano da quanto ha fatto la Harris-Biden Administration, e lo stanno facendo usando termini aspri e duri. L’articolo riportato è tratto dal The New York Times, uno dei pilastri granitici dei liberal democratici.

* * * * * * *

«Afghanistan’s rapid unraveling is already raising grumblings about American credibility …. and reinforcing the idea that America’s backing for its allies is not unlimited.»

«The Taliban’s lightning advance comes at a moment when many in Europe and Asia had hoped that President Biden would reestablish America’s firm presence in international affairs, especially as China and Russia angle to extend their influence»

«When Biden says ‘America is back ….Yes, America is back home,’” said François Heisbourg»

«the notion that you cannot count on the Americans will strike deeper roots because of Afghanistan»

«we had to prepare for a U.S. no longer willing to assume the burden of unlimited liability alliances»

«That hesitation will now be felt all the more strongly among countries in play in the world, like Taiwan, Ukraine, the Philippines and Indonesia, which can only please China and Russia»

«The sudden withdrawal from Afghanistan after 20 years and so much investment in lives and effort will see allies and potential allies around the world wondering whether they have to decide between democracies and autocracies, and realize some democracies don’t have staying power anymore»

«China’s Foreign Ministry offered a public show of support to the Taliban, holding two days of talks late last month with a delegation that included one of the movement’s founders, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar»

«The military debacle of Afghanistan, coming after the diplomatic debacle of Syria, will make Western nations more inward-looking, cynical and nationalist, …. as they feel surrounded by a world that they don’t control, but keeps intruding»

«Afghanistan was never a particularly vital interest for Europe to begin with. NATO went to war there 20 years ago only to show solidarity with the United States after 9/11»

«But the suddenness of Afghanistan’s collapse is another reminder of what can happen when Europe outsources decisions to Washington»

«Europe’s main worries now are a new flow of Afghan migrants and a new safe haven for terrorism»

«But there is a lot more to be gained for American soft power by getting through the corona crisis and focusing on vaccines for the world, than on putting more effort into whether the Afghan government survives»

«To just cut and run is to endorse a military solution dictated by the Taliban»

«Echoing State Department warnings, he said that “if power is taken by force and an Islamic Emirate re-established, the Taliban would face nonrecognition, isolation, lack of international support.”»

«But Europe has little leverage»

«is a tacit, explicit really, admission of a dismal failure of geostrategy and of statecraft»

«I’m almost ashamed that we’re in this position»

* * * * * * *

In poco meno di sei soli mesi la Harris-Biden Administration non ha saputo generare posti di lavoro, ha lasciato crescere una severa inflazione, ha distrutto la produzione energetica, ed ora si carica dell’onta di una débâcle storica.

Persino e media liberal, quelli rossi come il fuoco di un altoforno, la stanno attaccando apertamente: non ne possono più nemmeno loro.

E tutto questo a vantaggio di Mr Putin e di Mr Xi.

* * * * * * *


Afghanistan’s Unraveling May Strike Another Blow to U.S. Credibility

Allies may understand the desire to give up on a failed project, but the retreat heightens the sense that America’s backing is no longer unbounded.

BRUSSELS — Afghanistan’s rapid unraveling is already raising grumblings about American credibility, compounding the wounds of the Trump years and reinforcing the idea that America’s backing for its allies is not unlimited.

The Taliban’s lightning advance comes at a moment when many in Europe and Asia had hoped that President Biden would reestablish America’s firm presence in international affairs, especially as China and Russia angle to extend their influence. Now, America’s retreat is bound to sow doubts.

“When Biden says ‘America is back,’ many people will say, ‘Yes, America is back home,’” said François Heisbourg, a French defense analyst.

“Few will gang up on the U.S. for finally stopping a failed enterprise,” he said. “Most people would say it should have happened a long time ago.’’ But in the longer term, he added, “the notion that you cannot count on the Americans will strike deeper roots because of Afghanistan.’’

The United States has been pulling back from military engagements abroad since President Obama, he noted, and under President Trump, “we had to prepare for a U.S. no longer willing to assume the burden of unlimited liability alliances.”

That hesitation will now be felt all the more strongly among countries in play in the world, like Taiwan, Ukraine, the Philippines and Indonesia, which can only please China and Russia, analysts suggest.

“What made the U.S. strong, powerful and rich was that from 1918 through 1991 and beyond, everybody knew we could depend on the U.S. to defend and stand up for the free world,” said Tom Tugendhat, chairman of the British Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee.

“The sudden withdrawal from Afghanistan after 20 years and so much investment in lives and effort will see allies and potential allies around the world wondering whether they have to decide between democracies and autocracies, and realize some democracies don’t have staying power anymore,” he added.

In Asia, the American withdrawal and looming collapse of the Afghan government have been viewed with a mixture of resignation and trepidation.

“Most Asians have already factored it in because it’s been a protracted process, not a shock,” said Susan L. Shirk, the head of the 21st Century China Center at the University of California, San Diego.

The country expressing the most concern has been China, which shares a short, remote border with Afghanistan, which under the Taliban served as a haven for Uyghur extremists from Xinjiang, the far western Chinese province.

China, which routinely criticizes the United States for acting as a global belligerent, has warned that a hasty American withdrawal could create instability across the region.

At the same time, China’s Foreign Ministry offered a public show of support to the Taliban, holding two days of talks late last month with a delegation that included one of the movement’s founders, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.

The issue for America’s allies and others, though, is less “credibility,” a much misused term, than ability to see commitments through to the end. And the world can seem a more anarchic, less comprehensible place, said Jean-Marie Guéhenno, former French and United Nations diplomat now at Columbia University.

“The military debacle of Afghanistan, coming after the diplomatic debacle of Syria, will make Western nations more inward-looking, cynical and nationalist,” he said, “as they feel surrounded by a world that they don’t control, but keeps intruding.’’

Still, Mr. Guéhenno said, Western democracies “must not adopt a doctrine of indifference to the plight of other people.’’

Afghanistan was never a particularly vital interest for Europe to begin with. NATO went to war there 20 years ago only to show solidarity with the United States after 9/11.

But the suddenness of Afghanistan’s collapse is another reminder of what can happen when Europe outsources decisions to Washington.

NATO countries let the Americans call the shots in Afghanistan, even if they complained about a lack of consultation. For NATO, the mantra was always “in together, out together.” Once President Biden decided to pull the plug, NATO troops also began leaving at speed; there is little appetite for returning.

Europe’s main worries now are a new flow of Afghan migrants and a new safe haven for terrorism. But for a long time now, European terrorism has had its roots closer to home, in North Africa and the Middle East and in domestic disaffection.

The Biden administration has other problems, and Europeans want support from Washington on more important issues, like climate change, Russia and China, said Robin Niblett, director of Chatham House, the London research institution.

“Biden will take some hit for lack of consultation with allies and piggybacking on a flawed Trump strategy,” Mr. Niblett said. “But there is a lot more to be gained for American soft power by getting through the corona crisis and focusing on vaccines for the world, than on putting more effort into whether the Afghan government survives.”

Allies, especially Britain and Germany, were angry at the way the pullout was announced and saw it as a fait accompli, so there will be some residual damage, Mr. Niblett said.

“But Europe won’t give up on a Biden who believes in allies on the big issues that matter,” he said, adding: “On these Biden is leading in the right direction.’’

Europeans have failed to identify their own interests in Afghanistan, which center on regional stability, energy supplies and migration, said Ulrich Speck, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund in Berlin. “Europeans ignore geopolitics at their own peril,’’ he said.

For instance, a new wave of migration could destabilize Turkey, which is already hosting nearly 4 million Syrian refugees, Mr. Speck said. That, in turn, he added, could bring new tensions with Greece and the rest of the European Union.

“The Europeans should not play the American role, but at least have consulted with one another about what we could do, even to help Kabul,’’ he said.

Carl Bildt, the former Swedish prime minister, went further, urging the U.S. and Europe to reconsider the wholesale withdrawal.

“I believe the U.S., E.U. and allies should commit to keeping a security force in Kabul until the Taliban agrees to a cease-fire and a political solution,” he said in a Twitter post. “To just cut and run is to endorse a military solution dictated by the Taliban.”

But there appear to be few volunteers at this stage.

The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell Fontelles, issued a statement Thursday night calling on the Taliban to immediately resume talks with the Afghan government in Qatar and to respect human rights. Echoing State Department warnings, he said that “if power is taken by force and an Islamic Emirate re-established, the Taliban would face nonrecognition, isolation, lack of international support.”

But Europe has little leverage. There are obvious worries about how long the Afghan government will last, what will happen to women, girls, judges and the media under a renewed Taliban rule, and about a new wave of Afghan refugees.

Earlier this week, ministers from six countries — Germany, Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece and Denmark — called for continuing deportations of Afghans whose asylum claims have been rejected.

But given the speed of the collapse, Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark and France have, for now, at least, stopped sending Afghans who do not qualify as refugees back to Afghanistan.

Few expect a repeat of the 2015 migration crisis, when more than a million people sought asylum and the resulting chaos boosted far-right and populist politics. But a large new flow from Afghanistan is likely to feed domestic anxieties, especially in Germany, which has elections next month.

Though the numbers are down, in 2020 Afghans were the second-largest country of origin for asylum seekers arriving in the bloc, with some 50,000 applying, the European Asylum Support Office says. Fully 59 percent of applications from Afghans were accepted.

Some 1,200 Afghans have been returned so far this year, and only 200 of them did not return voluntarily, European officials told reporters on Tuesday. But they said that in the last few months, at least 400,000 Afghans have become internally displaced, a number likely to rise considerably.

In Britain, which has a long history with Afghanistan and has had the second largest number of casualties after the United States, there is more chagrin and even anger.

Lord David Richards, chief of defense from 2010 to 2013, criticized his government for moving so quickly to evacuate Britons. He told BBC Newsnight that the evacuation “is a tacit, explicit really, admission of a dismal failure of geostrategy and of statecraft.”

He said he had hoped to hear “an explanation for why we’re in this position, and then, an explanation on how they are going to avert this disaster.” Instead, he said, there was just “an admission of failure and a desire to pull people out.”

He added: “I’m almost ashamed that we’re in this position.”

Pubblicato in: Cina, Devoluzione socialismo, Geopolitica Asiatica, Stati Uniti

Cina vs Usa. Gli alleati degli Stati Uniti in Asia orientale contro una linea dura sulla Cina.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-08-17.

Pollo allo Spiedo 001

Tempi grami per la Harris-Biden Administration.

«U.S. Allies in East Asia do not support a hardline on China»

«Biden would adopt a less confrontational approach to relations with China. They have been disappointed»

«Early steps by the new American administration toward China seemed to be a continuation of President Trump’s hardline policies»

«the new secretary of state echoed the charge of his predecessor that China was engaged in genocide against the Uighurs in Xinjiang. The tariff barriers on bilateral trade have been left in place»

«that competition is now the principal driver in the bilateral relationship. For much of the last 50 years, the U.S. was confident that China’s growing wealth and power did not threaten the U.S.’ vital interests and their differences could be managed by diplomacy and engagement»

«The U.S. is seeking to adjust to an international situation in which it is no longer the sole superpower»

«This is not so much because of a decline in power, but because other countries have risen to major power status and China, of course, is the first and foremost example of that»

«A new multipolar world is emerging»

«→→ At the same time, there is no question that the social and political polarization that has been a prominent feature of the U.S.’ domestic scene over the last half decade has damaged the international image of the U.S. and the perception of its reliability as a great power ←←»

«China, in turn, in a remarkably short period of time, has regained the wealth and military strength that are the attributes of major powers»

«Of particular importance for US-China Relations, the administration has reaffirmed that it will adhere to one-China policy and that it does not support independence for Taiwan, and it is also seeking a pattern of regular consultations between Beijing and Washington»

«However, the reality is less positive»

«President Biden needs congressional support for his domestic programs and congressional attitudes toward China are hostile»

«A hardline American approach to China does not mesh well with the interests of US allies and friends in East Asia who do not wish to see the region polarized»

«In other words, the U.S. that tries to work with our friends and allies will discover that they do not support a hardline approach to China»

* * * * * * *

Il problema è semplice.

La Cina è cresciuta, e sta continuando a crescere sia economicamente, sia politicamente, sia militarmente.

Nei rapporti esteri, massimamente con gli Stati Uniti, reclama relazioni inter pares, nel pieno rispetto dell’altrui sovranità nazionale, senza ingerenza alcuna nei fatti interni.

In carenza di questi requisiti, sarà sempre un dialogo tra sordi.

Ma adesso anche i tradizionali alleati degli Stati Uniti nel sud est asiatico stanno disimpegnandosi da questa politica estera americana: per loro i rapporti politici ed economici con la Cina sono assurti a grande importanza, e non possono essere più a lungo ignorati.

La Harris-Biden Administration sembrerebbe sempre più autoescludersi da questo scacchiere in piena crescita.

* * * * * * *


U.S. Allies in East Asia Do Not Support a Hardline on China

When President Donald Trump lost the November 2020 presidential elections in the U.S., some people hoped that President Joe Biden would adopt a less confrontational approach to relations with China. They have been disappointed. Early steps by the new American administration toward China seemed to be a continuation of President Trump’s hardline policies. Shortly after the administration took office, the new secretary of state echoed the charge of his predecessor that China was engaged in genocide against the Uighurs in Xinjiang. The tariff barriers on bilateral trade have been left in place. Senior officials in the Biden administration bluntly stated that the U.S. engagement strategies toward China had failed and that competition is now the principal driver in the bilateral relationship. For much of the last 50 years, the U.S. was confident that China’s growing wealth and power did not threaten the U.S.’ vital interests and their differences could be managed by diplomacy and engagement. That is no longer the case. And the question is why. 

A starting point to understanding what has happened is to recognize that the U.S. and China are both in the midst of fundamental transitions that affect their respective places in the world. 

The U.S. is seeking to adjust to an international situation in which it is no longer the sole superpower. This is not so much because of a decline in power, but because other countries have risen to major power status and China, of course, is the first and foremost example of that. A new multipolar world is emerging. Not surprisingly, the U.S. is reluctant to give up the dominant position that it has occupied since the end of the Cold War and to accept the adjustments that it must make in order to establish a new equilibrium. At the same time, there is no question that the social and political polarization that has been a prominent feature of the U.S.’ domestic scene over the last half decade has damaged the international image of the U.S. and the perception of its reliability as a great power.

China, in turn, in a remarkably short period of time, has regained the wealth and military strength that are the attributes of major powers. This has altered the psychology of the Chinese people. This is what Zheng Bijian didn’t take into account when he came up with the concept of peaceful rise. The Chinese people now are demanding a more muscular foreign policy, consistent with China’s growing power. And this has changed Chinese behavior patterns, which have become more assertive. As a result, regional countries, including the U.S., are finding China’s assurances that it will rise peacefully and never bully its neighbors less and less credible.

These are two of the key background factors that have influenced the sharp plunge in the bilateral U.S.-China relationship, to the lowest depths in half a century. This has created a dangerous situation where missteps by either side or by both could plunge the world into an unprecedented crisis. I use the term unprecedented because China and the U.S. are both major nuclear powers. Confrontations between them are particularly dangerous, and repair work by both sides is vitally necessary. 

Fortunately, despite some superficial similarities, the Biden administration is fundamentally different from its predecessors. President Biden has more foreign policy and national security experience than any American president since the first President Bush 30 years ago. In contrast to the Trump administration, President Biden has appointed capable and experienced officials as secretary of state and national security advisor. These are officials who could sit down without talking points and talk for hours with Chinese counterparts about any issue in the world. Now this was totally missing in the last administration. The Biden administration is moving carefully, to iron out internal differences and adopt sustainable policies that will not simply reflect the whims of a woman. 

Of particular importance for US-China Relations, the administration has reaffirmed that it will adhere to one-China policy and that it does not support independence for Taiwan, and it is also seeking a pattern of regular consultations between Beijing and Washington. The recent consultations between US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman and State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Vice Foreign Minister Xie Feng were marked by a barrage of charges by each side against the other.

However, if one reads carefully the public reports regarding the consultations, it is evident that there were constructive elements. According to the Chinese account of the meeting, Deputy Secretary Sherman called the US-China relationship as the most important bilateral relationship in the world, noted many times that the two sides have had contact with each other since President Biden was sworn in, expressed U.S.’ willingness to have open and candid contacts and dialogues with China, declared the U.S.’ hopes that the two countries could coexist peacefully, said that the U.S. has no intention of restricting Chinese development and does not want to contain China and would like to see China develop further, and noted that the two sides can engage in healthy competition, cooperate on climate change, drug control in international and regional hotspots, and strengthen crisis management capacity and avoid conflicts. American accounts of the meeting she had are consistent with the above statements. These are encouraging words that you would not have heard from the previous administration. 

However, the reality is less positive. President Biden needs congressional support for his domestic programs and congressional attitudes toward China are hostile. Changing these attitudes will be difficult but not impossible. A hardline American approach to China does not mesh well with the interests of US allies and friends in East Asia who do not wish to see the region polarized. In other words, the U.S. that tries to work with our friends and allies will discover that they do not support a hardline approach to China, and I think that will have an impact overtime. But as the first step, it would be useful for both China and the U.S. to tone down their rhetoric toward each other. Governments have the responsibility not only to formulate wise foreign policies, but to talk in ways that develop public support for those policies — and we are not doing that. We are talking publicly in ways that undermine the wise policy that we should be pursuing. So as a starter, let’s get our rhetoric under control and I hope that will have some chance to exchange views about other steps that could be taken.

Pubblicato in: Banche Centrali, Cina, Russia, Stati Uniti, Unione Europea

G7 e Russia. Un G7 in via di devoluzione conta molto poco.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-26.

2021-05-20__ G7 GDP (Statista) 001

L’istogramma pubblicato da Statista dovrebbe essere eloquente.

«In 2019, the G7 countries of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom and United States held 31.68 percent of the global gross domestic product (GDP). In 2025, that figure is projected to drop to 28.8 percent»

Nel 2019 il pil dei paesi G7 rappresentava il 31.68% del pil mondiale, mentre quello del G20, esclusi i paesi del G7), valeva il 41.51%.

Nel 2025 il pil dei paesi G7 è proiettato al 28.8% del pil mondiale, mentre quello del G20, esclusi i paesi del G7), è stimato arrivare al 44.77%.

Solo per dare un esempio, nel 2000 il pil indiano valeva 476.64 miliardi Usd, ma è stimato a 3,049.7 miliardi nel 2021 ed a 4,534.34 miliardi nel 2026.

Si noti come invece il pil dei paesi G7 sia in consistente diminuzione.

Non solo.

Il pil di alcuni paesi è drogato dal conteggio dei fondi pubblici erogati in via  assistenziale.

Se è vero che il pil sia un macrodato di primario interesse, sarebbe altrettanto vero ricordare come la sua lettura dovrebbe essere corroborata da altri macrodati similmente importanti, quali la produzione industriale, i volumi dell’Import – Export, la percentuale degli occupati, il valore della inflazione, solo per citarne alcuni.

Si faccia attenzione. Le parole son come le farfalle, mentre i numeri sono massi, ed anche pesanti.

* * * * * * *

Se questi dati siano fermamente chiari, l’intervista rilasciata da Mr Andrei Kelin, Ambasciatore russo a Londra, risulterebbe essere chiara.

– «G7 playing a ‘dangerous game’ by pushing Moscow towards China»

– «Russia, he said, was more interested in other forums such as the G20, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the BRICs organisation»

* * * * * * *

«G7 leaders gather for a summit in St Ives, in the southern English region of Cornwall, on June 11-13. How to deal with President Vladimir Putin’s Russia is expected to be on the agenda»

«The Group of Seven is playing a “dangerous game” by making aggressive and baseless criticism of the Kremlin because it pushes Russia closer to China»

«G7 foreign ministers this month scolded both China and Russia, casting the Kremlin as malicious and Beijing as a bully, but beyond words there were few concrete steps aside from expressing support for Taiwan and Ukraine»

«Kelin said the G7’s critique was biased, confrontational, lacked substance and was stoking anti-Western feelings among Russians, while its aggressive attitude towards Russia and China was pushing the two powers together»

«Russia, the world’s largest country by territory, denies it meddles beyond its borders and says the West is gripped by anti-Russian hysteria»

«China, the world’s second largest economy, says the West is a bully and that its leaders have a post-imperial mindset that makes them feel they can act like global policemen»

«Asked about G7 criticism of the state of human rights in Russia, Kelin said the United States and Britain should pay more attention to the state of their own democracy after the attacks on the U.S. Capitol and race issues in Britain»

«it has no grounds to judge other countries about the state of democracy»

«Asked about G7 criticism of the state of human rights in Russia, Kelin said the United States and Britain should pay more attention to the state of their own democracy after the attacks on the U.S. Capitol and race issues in Britain»

«No one gives them the right to judge others – especially on the state of democracy»

«It is strange for us as we are not eager to become once again a part of this club, …. In our view it has lost its authority»

* * * * * * *

L’enclave liberal socialista occidentale sta devolvendosi ogni giorno che passa, incapace di sottoporsi a revisione critica.

Certamente ad oggi ha ancora una potenza economica non indifferente, ma è sulla via del declino.

*


G7 playing a ‘dangerous game’ by pushing Moscow towards China – Russian envoy.

The Group of Seven is playing a “dangerous game” by making aggressive and baseless criticism of the Kremlin because it pushes Russia closer to China, Russia’s ambassador to London Andrei Kelin told Reuters on Thursday.

G7 foreign ministers this month scolded both China and Russia, casting the Kremlin as malicious and Beijing as a bully, but beyond words there were few concrete steps aside from expressing support for Taiwan and Ukraine.

The G7, in a 12,400-word communique, said Russia was a destabilising influence on the world because of its 2014 annexation of Crimea, its build up on Ukraine’s border and its meddling in the internal affairs of other countries.

Kelin said the G7’s critique was biased, confrontational, lacked substance and was stoking anti-Western feelings among Russians, while its aggressive attitude towards Russia and China was pushing the two powers together.

“This is a dangerous game,” Kelin, 64, told Reuters. “Russia and China have enormous potential in different fields – in the economy, in technology, in military capacities, in politics – this potential is spread around the world.”

“We are not allies with China, however pushing Russia and China, it closes our ranks with China – in that sense we are more and more united against challenges that are being presented from the West.”

Russia, the world’s largest country by territory, denies it meddles beyond its borders and says the West is gripped by anti-Russian hysteria.

China, the world’s second largest economy, says the West is a bully and that its leaders have a post-imperial mindset that makes them feel they can act like global policemen.

G7 leaders gather for a summit in St Ives, in the southern English region of Cornwall, on June 11-13. How to deal with President Vladimir Putin’s Russia is expected to be on the agenda.

Kelin, a career diplomat who speaks fluent English, French and Dutch, said Russia would proceed according to its own geopolitical interests and that if there were issues that needed to be discussed then dialogue was the best way.

“But the G7 prefers megaphone diplomacy,” Kelin said. “This is a club that expresses certain opinions on different subjects but it has no grounds to judge other countries about the state of democracy.”

Asked about G7 criticism of the state of human rights in Russia, Kelin said the United States and Britain should pay more attention to the state of their own democracy after the attacks on the U.S. Capitol and race issues in Britain.

“Look at yourself in this situation – but they don’t want to look at themselves,” Kelin said. “No one gives them the right to judge others – especially on the state of democracy.”

Russia was brought into what became the Group of Eight in 1997 under former President Boris Yeltsin but its membership was suspended in 2014 after the annexation of Crimea.

“We see discussions on this subject: let’s invite Russia, let’s not invite Russia. It is strange for us as we are not eager to become once again a part of this club,” Kelin said. “In our view it has lost its authority.”

“It is divisive – it has a tendency to split the world into friends and aliens: they want to talk about coalitions of friends targetted against the others. This doesn’t bring solutions – it brings more problems to the world,” Kelin said.

Russia, he said, was more interested in other forums such as the G20, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the BRICs organisation.

Pubblicato in: Banche Centrali

Mondo. Lista dei paesi con pil anno su anno maggiore dello zero.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-04-04.

Solo undici paesi presentano un pil anno su anno maggiore oppure eguale allo zero.

Tranne l’Irlanda (-1.5%), nessun altro paese dell’enclave occidentale liberal compare in questa graduatoria.

Tra i paesi asiatici, ai primi posti vediamo la Cina (+6.5%), il Bangladesh (+5.2%, Taiwan (+5.09%), il Vietnam (+4.48%) e l’India (+0.40%).

L’assenza dei grandi paesi dell’Unione Europea e degli Stati Uniti è un dato di per sé evidente: persino Egitto e Nigeria hanno fatto meglio.

Harris-Biden Administration, Frau Ursula von der Leyen ed Angela Merkel dovrebbero studiarsi meglio questa Tabella.

Pubblicato in: Cina, Economia e Produzione Industriale

Cina. Gennaio-Febbraio. Profitti Industriali +178.9% su dodici mesi, +20.10% anno su anno.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-03-30.

2021-03-29__ Cina Profitti Industriali 001

«From January to February, the added value of industries above designated size increased by 35.1 percent year-on-year (the growth rate of added value below is the real growth rate after deducting price factors); compared with January to February in 2019, it increased by 16.9 percent, with an average growth of 8.1 percent in two years»

«the value added by mining industry increased by 17.5 percent year-on-year from January to February»

«that of manufacturing increased by 39.5 percent»

«In terms of economic types, from January to February, the added value of state-owned holding enterprises increased by 23.0 percent»

«that of joint-stock enterprises increased by 34.2 percent»

«that of foreign-invested enterprises and enterprises invested by Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan increased by 41.4 percent»

«that of private enterprises increased by 43.8 percent»

2021-03-29__ Cina Profitti Industriali 002

* * * * * * *

La Cina sta crescendo a ritmo veloce, e con lei anche molti dei sistemi economici del sud est asiatico. Oramai l’Asean ed il Rcep si stanno avviando alla autoconsistenza, mentre l’enclave liberal occidentale langue, specialmente il blocco europeo. Ma la ‘colpa’ non è del Covid.

*

Il National Bureau of Statistics of China ha rilasciato il Report Industrial Production Operation from January to February 2021.

From January to February, the added value of industries above designated size increased by 35.1 percent year-on-year (the growth rate of added value below is the real growth rate after deducting price factors); compared with January to February in 2019, it increased by 16.9 percent, with an average growth of 8.1 percent in two years. On a month-on-month basis, in February, the added value of industries above designated size increased by 0.69 percent over the previous month.

According to three categories, the value added by mining industry increased by 17.5 percent year-on-year from January to February; that of manufacturing increased by 39.5 percent; and that of power, heat, gas and water production and supply increased by 19.8 percent.

In terms of economic types, from January to February, the added value of state-owned holding enterprises increased by 23.0 percent, that of joint-stock enterprises increased by 34.2 percent, that of foreign-invested enterprises and enterprises invested by Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan increased by 41.4 percent, and that of private enterprises increased by 43.8 percent.

From January to February, the added value of 40 out of 41 major industries maintained a year-on-year growth. The agricultural and sideline food processing industry increased by 22.8 percent, that of textile industry increased by 39.5 percent, that of chemical raw materials and chemical products manufacturing industry increased by 30.8 percent, that of non-metallic mineral products industry increased by 44.8 percent, that of ferrous metal smelting and processing industry increased by 21.6 percent, that of non-ferrous metal smelting and processing industry by 22.7 percent, that of general equipment manufacturing industry increased by 62.4 percent, that of special equipment manufacturing industry increased by 59.2 percent, that of automobile manufacturing industry by 70.9 percent, that of road, shipping, aerospace and other transportation equipment manufacturing industry increased by 48.9 percent, that of  electrical machinery and equipment manufacturing industry increased by 69.4 percent, that of computer, communication and other electronic equipment manufacturing industry increased by 48.5 percent, and that of power and heat production and supply industry increased by 19.6 percent.

From January to February, 565 of 612 products increased year on year. Steel was 209.53 million tons, a year-on-year increase of 23.6 percent; cement was 241.29 million tons, a year-on-year increase of 61.1 percent; ten non-ferrous metals was 10.56 million tons, a year-on-year increase of 10.6 percent; ethylene was 4.75 million tons, a year-on-year increase of 26.7 percent; vehicles was 3.855 million sets, a year-on-year increase of 89.9 percent, of which new energy vehicles was 317,000 sets, a year-on-year increase of 395.3 percent; power generation was 1,242.8 billion kwh, a year-on-year increase of 19.5 percent; crude oil processing capacity was 114.24 million tons, a year-on-year increase of 15.0 percent.

From January to February, the product sales rate of industrial enterprises was 98.5 percent, increased by 1.1 percentage points over the same period of last year; the export delivery value of industrial enterprises was 1,929.9 billion yuan, increased by 42.5 percent in nominal terms over the same period of last year.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale

Singapore. Gennaio. Produzione Industriale (Annuale) +8.6%.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-02-27.

2021-02-27__ Singapore Produzione 001

Statistics Singapore ha rilasciato il report Produzione Industriale (Annuale) per gennaio 2021.

2021-02-27__ Singapore Produzione 002

2021-02-27__ Singapore Produzione 003

2021-02-27__ Singapore Produzione 004

Come si constata, l’export verso i paesi occidentali od occidentalizzati segna profonde contrazioni, mentre quello verso i paesi del Rcep cresce in modo vistoso. I primi sono in recessione ed i secondi in crescita.

Pubblicato in: Cina, Stati Uniti

Biden. Kontrordine Kompagni. I cinesi hanno fatto bene a fare ciò che hanno fatto.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela

2021-02-20.

Biden 001

Biden ha preso l’abitudine di far pubblicare dalla White House i testi ufficiali delle sue interviste.

Quella che segue, che produciamo solo in estratto data la lunghezza del testo, verte sugli spinosi rapporti tra gli Stati Uniti e la Cina.

Si suggerirebbe di leggere con attenzione le risposte. Si tenga conto che Biden ha già variato un po’ la sua valutazione in materia, nella sua relazione al presummit G7.

Non sarebbe facile prestargli fede. Lo si valuerà sugli atti.

Tre chicche.

«China has been victimized»

«I’m not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uyghurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan»

«Culturally, there are different norms that each country and they — their leaders — are expected to follow»

*


«MR. COOPER:  You just talked to China’s President, I believe.

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, for two hours.

COOPER: What about the Uyghurs? What about the human rights abuses in China?

THE PRESIDENT:  We must speak up for human rights.  It’s who we are.  We can’t — my comment to him was — and I know him well, and he knows me well.  We’re — a two-hour conversation»

«And that’s not so much refugee, but I talked about — I said — look, you know, Chinese leaders — if you know anything about Chinese history, it has always been — the time when China has been victimized by the outer world is when they haven’t been unified at home»

«So the central — to vastly overstate it — the central principle of Xi Jinping is that there must be a united, tightly controlled China»

«And he uses his rationale for the things he does based on that»

«I point out to him: No American President can be sustained as a President if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States»

«And so the idea I’m not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uyghurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan, trying to end the One China policy by making it forceful — I said — and by the — he said he — he gets it»

«Culturally, there are different norms that each country and they — their leaders — are expected to follow.»

«China is trying very hard to become the world leader and to get that moniker»

«But it’s much more complicated than that.  I’m — I shouldn’t have tried to talk China policy in 10 minutes on television here»

* * * * * * *

Biden ha alle spalle sessanta anni di pratica politica ed è un vecchio volpone, abilissimo a rispondere alle domande senza rispondere ai quesiti posti. Deve essere letto tra le righe.

*


The White House. Remarks by President Biden in a CNN Town Hall with Anderson Cooper

….

  1. COOPER:  You just talked to China’s President, I believe.

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, for two hours.

  1. COOPER:  What about the Uyghurs?  What about the human rights abuses in China?

THE PRESIDENT:  We must speak up for human rights.  It’s who we are.  We can’t — my comment to him was — and I know him well, and he knows me well.  We’re — a two-hour conversation.

  1. COOPER:  You talked about this to him?

THE PRESIDENT:  I talked about this, too.  And that’s not so much refugee, but I talked about — I said — look, you know, Chinese leaders — if you know anything about Chinese history, it has always been — the time when China has been victimized by the outer world is when they haven’t been unified at home.  So the central — to vastly overstate it — the central principle of Xi Jinping is that there must be a united, tightly controlled China.  And he uses his rationale for the things he does based on that.

I point out to him: No American President can be sustained as a President if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States.  And so the idea I’m not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uyghurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan, trying to end the One China policy by making it forceful — I said — and by the — he said he — he gets it.  Culturally, there are different norms that each country and they — their leaders — are expected to follow. 

But my point was that when I came back from meeting with him and traveling 17,000 miles with him when I was vice president and he was the vice president — that’s how I got to know him so well, at the request of President Hu — not a joke — his predecessor, President Hu — and President Obama wanted us to get to know one another because he was going to be the president.

And I came back and said they’re going to end their One China — their one child policy, because they’re so xenophobic, they won’t let anybody else in, and more people are retired than working.  How can they sustain economic growth when more people are retired?

  1. COOPER:  When you talk to him, though, about human rights abuses, is that just — is that as far as it goes in terms of the U.S.?  Or is there any actual repercussions for China?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, there will be repercussions for China, and he knows that.  What I’m doing is making clear that we, in fact, are going to continue to reassert our role as spokespersons for human rights at the U.N. and other — other agencies that have an impact on their attitude.

China is trying very hard to become the world leader and to get that moniker.  And to be able to do that, they have to gain the confidence of other countries.  And as long as they’re engaged in activity that is contrary to basic human rights, it’s going to be hard for them to do that.

But it’s much more complicated than that.  I’m — I shouldn’t have tried to talk China policy in 10 minutes on television here.

  1. COOPER:  Well, let me — let me bring it back to the United States.  I want you to meet Joycelyn Fish, a Democrat from Racine.  Joycelyn is the director of marketing for a community theater.
Pubblicato in: Cina, Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti

Biden. Xi. Il primo colloquio telefonico. Resoconto di Reuters e di Xinhua.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-02-12.

Gufo_019__

Biden e Mr Xi hanno avuto un primo colloquio telefonico, a quanto sembrerebbe essere, alquanto contrastato.

È di grande interesse leggere i resoconti dati da Reuters e da Xinhua, ossia valutare i due differenti modi di relazionare sugli eventi.

*

                         Reuters.

«U.S. President Joe Biden and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping held their first telephone call as leaders, with Biden saying a free and open Indo-Pacific was a priority and Xi warning confrontation would be a ‘disaster’ for both nations»

«Biden also underscored his “fundamental concerns about Beijing’s coercive and unfair practices, its crackdown in Hong Kong, reported human rights abuses in Xinjiang, and increasingly assertive actions in the region, including toward Taiwan”»

«The Chinese leader maintained a hardline tone regarding Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Taiwan, which Xi told Biden were matters of “sovereignty and territorial integrity” that he hopes the United States will approach cautiously»

«Xi congratulated Biden on his election in a message in November, even though Biden had called him a “thug” during the campaign and vowed to lead an international effort to “pressure, isolate and punish China.”»

« the call came at a time when the United States believed it was in a position of strength, after consultations with allies and partners, to lay out core concerns about China’s “aggressive activities and abuses”»

«Blinken said Washington would stand up for human rights in Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong – all issues Yang had days earlier said the United States should stay out of.»

*

Chiamare Mr Xi ‘delinquente’ sembrerebbe non essere la base di buone relazioni.

* * * * * * *

                         Xinhua.

«(Xinhua) — Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday morning took a phone call from U.S. President Joseph R. Biden on the eve of the Lunar New Year»

«The two presidents wished each other good fortune in the Year of the Ox, and had an in-depth exchange of views on China-U.S. relations and major international and regional issues»

«Xi stressed that China and the United States both gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation; cooperation is the only right choice for both sides»

«Xi emphasized that while the two sides may differ on some issues, it is crucial to show mutual respect, treat each other as equals, and proper»

«The two sides should re-establish the various dialogue mechanisms, read each other’s policy intentions accurately, and avoid misunderstanding and miscalculation, he said, adding that it is important to manage differences where they exist and jointly pursue cooperation where it is desirable to do so»

«The Taiwan question and issues relating to Hong Kong, Xinjiang, etc. are China’s internal affairs and concern China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the U.S. side should respect China’s core interests and act prudently»

* * * * * * *

Più che le differenze politiche ed economiche, risulta evidente la differenza di stile nell’esporre gli argomenti.

Biden, come tutti i liberal democratici, ritiene di essere investito del diritto di far la morale a tutto il mondo, pena l’ostracismo per quanti non avessero accettato la loro ideologia.

Ma la realtà dei fatti indica come l’occidente liberal si sia oramai racchiuso in una enclave autoreferenziale, enucleata da tutto il resto del mondo.

Si voglia o meno, è iniziato il millennio cinese, anche come stile.

*


Presidents Biden and Xi hold first phone call amid tense U.S.-China relations

U.S. President Joe Biden and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping held their first telephone call as leaders, with Biden saying a free and open Indo-Pacific was a priority and Xi warning confrontation would be a ‘disaster’ for both nations.

Biden also underscored his “fundamental concerns about Beijing’s coercive and unfair practices, its crackdown in Hong Kong, reported human rights abuses in Xinjiang, and increasingly assertive actions in the region, including toward Taiwan”, the White House said in a statement.

Xi told Biden that confrontation would be a “disaster” and the two sides should re-establish the means to avoid misjudgments, according to the Chinese foreign ministry’s account of the call, which took place on Thursday morning in Beijing time but Wednesday evening in the United States.

The Chinese leader maintained a hardline tone regarding Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Taiwan, which Xi told Biden were matters of “sovereignty and territorial integrity” that he hopes the United States will approach cautiously.

Taiwan’s government, which has complained of China’s repeated military drills near the Chinese-claimed and democratic island, thanked Biden for expressing his concern.

The telephone call was the first call between Xi and a U.S. president since the Chinese leader spoke with former President Donald Trump in March last year. Since then, relations between the two countries have plunged to their worst level in decades, with Trump blaming China for the COVID-19 pandemic.

During the Trump administration, the United States launched a series of actions against China, including a trade war, sanctions against Chinese officials and firms perceived to be security threats and challenging Beijing’s South China Sea territorial claims.

Xi congratulated Biden on his election in a message in November, even though Biden had called him a “thug” during the campaign and vowed to lead an international effort to “pressure, isolate and punish China.”

Chinese officials have expressed cautious optimism that bilateral relations will improve under Biden and urged Washington to meet Beijing halfway.

The U.S. and Chinese read outs of the call mentioned areas for potential cooperation, with both honing in on climate change and fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.

“You have said that America can be defined in one word: Possibilities. We hope the possibilities will now point toward an improvement of China-U.S. relations,” Xi told Biden, according to China’s Foreign Ministry.

NO CHANGE IN U.S.-CHINA POLICY

The Biden administration has made it clear that it will continue to maintain pressure on China, however, although it has also pledged to take a more multilateral approach.

A senior Biden administration official told reporters ahead of the telephone call that Biden would be “practical, hard-headed, clear-eyed” in dealings with Xi, but wanted to ensure they had the opportunity to have an open line of communication, despite U.S. concerns about Chinese behavior.

The official said the call came at a time when the United States believed it was in a position of strength, after consultations with allies and partners, to lay out core concerns about China’s “aggressive activities and abuses”.

The Biden administration will look in coming months at adding “new targeted restrictions” on certain sensitive technology exports to China in cooperation with allies and partners, the official said. He also said there would be no quick moves to lift the tariffs the former Trump administration left in place against Chinese imports.

The call came after U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke by phone to top Chinese diplomat Yang Jiechi on Friday. That was the first announced high-level exchange between top diplomats from the two countries since former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met Yang in Hawaii last June.

In his call, Blinken said Washington would stand up for human rights in Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong – all issues Yang had days earlier said the United States should stay out of.

Biden has said Beijing is Washington’s “most serious competitor”, and his administration has indicated it will broadly continue the tough approach taken by Trump.

*


Xinhua. Xi speaks with Biden on phone

BEIJING, Feb. 11 (Xinhua) — Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday morning took a phone call from U.S. President Joseph R. Biden on the eve of the Lunar New Year.

The two presidents wished each other good fortune in the Year of the Ox, and had an in-depth exchange of views on China-U.S. relations and major international and regional issues.

Biden conveyed festive greetings to the Chinese people and wished the Chinese people a happy and prosperous New Year. Xi congratulated Biden once again on taking office as U.S. president, and wished the people of China and the United States a happy and auspicious Year of the Ox.

Xi pointed out that the restoration and growth of China-U.S. relations has been the most important development in international relations over the past half century and more.

Despite various twists and difficulties, he added, the relationship has on the whole kept moving forward and delivered enormous benefits to the Chinese and American peoples and contributed to global peace, stability and prosperity.

Xi stressed that China and the United States both gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation; cooperation is the only right choice for both sides.

When China and the United States work together, they can accomplish a great deal for the good of both countries and the world at large; confrontation between the two countries, however, will definitely be disastrous for both countries and the world, he added.

Emphasizing that the China-U.S. relationship is currently at an important juncture, Xi said it is the common desire of both peoples and the wider international community to see the sound and stable development of China-U.S. relations.

“You have said that America can be defined in one word: Possibilities. We hope the possibilities will now point toward an improvement of China-U.S. relations,” Xi said to Biden.

The two countries, he suggested, should make joint efforts in the same direction, follow the spirit of no conflict, no confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation, focus on cooperation, manage their differences, and work for the sound and stable development of China-U.S. relations.

In this way, they can deliver more tangible benefits to people in both countries, and make their due contribution to fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, promoting world economic recovery and maintaining regional peace and stability, Xi added.

Xi emphasized that while the two sides may differ on some issues, it is crucial to show mutual respect, treat each other as equals, and properly manage and handle the differences in a constructive fashion.

The foreign affairs departments of the two countries may have in-depth communications on wide-ranging matters in the bilateral relationship and major international and regional issues, and the economic, financial, law enforcement and military authorities of the two countries may also have more contacts, Xi said.

The two sides should re-establish the various dialogue mechanisms, read each other’s policy intentions accurately, and avoid misunderstanding and miscalculation, he said, adding that it is important to manage differences where they exist and jointly pursue cooperation where it is desirable to do so.

The Taiwan question and issues relating to Hong Kong, Xinjiang, etc. are China’s internal affairs and concern China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the U.S. side should respect China’s core interests and act prudently, Xi stressed.

Xi emphasized that confronting a highly uncertain international situation, China and the United States shoulder special international responsibilities and obligations as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.

The two sides, he added, should act to conform to the trend of the world, jointly safeguard peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region, and make historic contributions to promoting world peace and development.

Biden, for his part, noted that China has a long history and a great culture and the Chinese people are a great people.

The United States and China must avoid conflict and they may work together on climate change and many other issues, he added.

The U.S. side, he said, is prepared to have candid and constructive dialogue with the Chinese side in the spirit of mutual respect and to improve mutual understanding and avoid miscommunication and miscalculation.

The two presidents agreed that their phone conversation today will send a positive signal to the world and the two sides will maintain close communication on China-U.S. relations and issues of mutual interest. Enditem.