Storm clouds
It would be good to be wrong about this, but it seems to me that a major crisis is brewing, of which the Huawei affair is just one of the clouds gathering on the horizon. The Huawei debate is just part of a larger awakening in the west, as it realises that China—or more specifically, its autocratic regime—is becoming existentially dangerous to our freedoms and way of life.
While it's true that Trump's unhinged stupidity has contributed to the sense of crisis, particularly by enabling terrible behaviour by other leaders, he alone can't take the blame for this: all American presidents, past, present and future, are going to have to face up to some extremely worrying facts.
China has a murderous, autocratic, ruthless, repressive and downright nasty regime. Considering its behaviour, it is at least as evil as the Soviet Union was alleged to be. It has a vast economy which may eventually be the largest in the world. It has a huge population, an army to match, and is engaging in a rapid build-up of military strength both in numbers and advancing technology. This is paralleled by unprecedented expansionism and even some military adventurism. Militarily, without the corruption of a US Congress and pork politics to worry about, it has made much shrewder investment and procurement decisions than any large western country. (For example, despite knowing everything about F-35, China has chosen to avoid replicating such a useless boondoggle and is investing instead in anti-stealth measures, and less ambitious, longer-ranged, more heavily armed, more manoeuverable fighters which, if they get within visual range of an F-35, will kill it in a dogfight nine times out of ten*¹. China fancies having a carrier or two, which they'll use similarly to the US, i.e. for dick-waggling and in places where a competent foe cannot reach them, ideally to blow up rusty $200 pickup trucks in warm places using $1m missiles. Perhaps they'll be handy at keeping Third World debtors in line. But they know that carriers, in a serious war, have a very brief life expectancy, and are ensuring this is particularly true of American ones by developing a large arsenal of carrier-killer weapons, just like the Russians. If you can buy 1,000 supersonic manoeuvering missiles and/or supercavitating torpedoes for the price of a carrier, how many need to get through to become a cost-effective choice? The smart money says between three and five missiles; and potentially a single torpedo, if it disables the props/rudder, for a "mission kill".)
So you have a rival intent on securing domination, growing more powerful by the day, unable to change its regime into anything resembling basic human decency—when autocrats fall, they die: you ride the tiger, then it eats you—which, unrestrained, will quite obviously one day crush you and your democracy and enslave your people.
What are you gonna do?
Considering China, and to a lesser extent Russia, the Trumpified infantilisation of world politics (i.e. the children have taken over the playgroup: look at how nuclear flashpoints are stoked by people like Modi over Kashmir), the likelihood of major economic turmoil exacerbated by climate and refugee crises, it seems to me that a major war is becoming a possibility—perhaps even a probability.
A horrifying prospect, especially consdering the presence of nukes, but sooner or later you have to make a choice: fight for your freedom—or learn to suck Chinese dick at gunpoint.
This isn't a criticism of Chinese people, mind: it's their government that's foul. Unfortunately, they won't get rid of it.
⁞
*¹ Which won't happen because Trump thinks that F-35 is "invisible" and anyway, who needs to dogfight when you've got missiles? I wonder which part of the F-4's humiliation over Vietnam they have forgotten about? Puh-leese.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
