Face Off: US-China

Former New York Times Beijing bureau chief Jane Perlez joins the show to discuss her new Harvard podcast and the latest tensions in the U.S.-China relationship.
---------------------------------------------
A nonpartisan institution, CSIS is the top national security think tank in the world.
Visit www.csis.org to find more of our work as we bring bipartisan solutions to the world's greatest challenges.
Want to see more videos and virtual events? Subscribe to this channel and turn on notifications: cs.is/2dCfTve
Follow CSIS on:
• Twitter: csis
• Facebook: CSIS.org
• Instagram: csis

[@Samson373]

The lady is wrong on almost every count. I don’t know where to start. I feel like a mosquito at nudist colony.

[@HotPinkst17]

Since you give no support to your claim, you invalidate yourself. Not knowing where to start, isn't anything to brag about... you a Chinese troll bot or just a MAGA troll?

[@KaFeCocoa]

🎯 I'm stealing your quote. A mosquito at a nudist resort. That is very funny. Glad I skipped the podcast and went straight to the comments. This conversation mentions only the flawed talking points of USA.

[@HotPinkst17]

@@KaFeCocoa If you skipped the podcast how do you know what the conversation mentions? smh

[@GeoScorpion]

I don't think mosquitos do well at nudist colonies. They get lured in by all the flesh, but then slapped down and squashed like a bug by people expert at slapping and poisoning mosquitos... 😘or, were you using 'mosquito' euphemistically about your size?

[@GeoScorpion]

@@HotPinkst17 He wrote down the first sentence that the lady was wrong on almost every count, but then didn't know where to start in trying to defend his own statement. lol!

[@waynegore5291]

"As i understand it" Simply you don't understand anything.

[@voranartsirisubsoontorn]

Face off = Confrontation which is so overdue. When two nations have opposite political system, opposite direction, opposite objective etc. , the world should realize that sooner or later something must be done in order for both to survive in the same arena. It is an unavoidable situation. But this may not need to start any kind of war but start the necessary actions by both. If they, the leaders/in power groups , understood then negotiations start back and forth to solve the causes of conflicts. It is a point before any further worsen situation or not?

[@GeoScorpion]

Yeah: "We win, they lose."

[@user-yw4rx6kb3r]

The Filipino has America. They're not defenseless.

[@lomotil3370]

Useless conversation. This woman doesn't know anything.

[@GeoScorpion]

LOL! I always laugh when a TON of Wumao go into a comment section saying she doesn't know anything, thus proving that the CCP is afraid of her. Good going! You just informed on your own government and showed their hand. Wanna play poker?

[@iguana1677]

No mention of Chinese subsidies to their EV companies? To the tune of $25k per car for the past 20 years? No discussion of the financial repression of Chinese workers so that they are forced to build these cars for lower wages because of the autocratic government? No discussion of the technology theft by the Chinese? This is an amateurish discussion.

[@HotPinkst17]

Your points are common knowledge, no need for an expert to reiterate all this. She mentioned the tariffs, you mention the reasons for them. Its clear both people in the interview were aware of this. What does stating the obvious do when everyone else interested in this content also knows. You seem to be giving an amateur critique of a decent short overview of US/China tensions. The US doesn't really care about Chinese working conditions but your other points we do care about, hence the tariffs. The meat of this conversation went way beyond tariffs. The most substantive part was really the how Biden cut the Chinese off of our microchip technology and how foreign workers are subject to imprisonment thus chilling foreign human capital investment in the failing Chinese system. By calling this discussion amateurish you imply you are such a a superior expert. If you are so superior, how come you only mention Chinese subsidies and not something more intractable between the US and China?

[@overseaschinese2445]

Does she even hear herself? Such a hegemonic view!

[@grapeape780]

15:00 The proceeding psycho babble is explained simply by the title "former Beijing bureau chief".

[@KaFeCocoa]

Skip the podcast when I read the "former Beijing bureau chief" of the NY Times. By definition, anyone working at the NY Times is not a journalist. Just a stenographer for the CIA and the deep state.

[@phil20_20]

What Would J.C., Jackie Chan Do?

[@yahoosucks234]

Terrible. Worst guest I've ever listened to. Did she just read a bunch of headlines and call herself a top China observer?