True, resilience and up to a point sparing the world bigger trouble from the Trump Effect, is called βdominanceβ.
China is supposed to suffer and be seen as evil.
Ameria cannot stand the fact that China manages.
The New York Times always manages to demonstrate the innovative spirit of the American media when discussing China.
It has discovered a fascinating new form of geopolitics β again:
We started the fire.
China built firewalls.
China prevented the fire from burning through its own economy.
Chinaβs demand adjustment even helped keep the global oil shock from becoming worse.
And somehow the conclusion is:
China has become too powerful.
Chinaβs ability to survive our fire is evidence of its ambition to dominate the world.
China was supposed to remain vulnerable.
It was supposed to panic when Hormuz closed, beg producers for supply, and absorb the price shock like everyone else.
Instead, it spent years building reserves, refining capacity, EVs, rail, coal substitution and energy redundancy.
So now resilience itself is being rewritten as βdomination.β
America creates the crisis.
China survives the crisis.
Western media calls survival a threat.
If China refuses to play the villain, the narrative will write the role for it anyway.
That is the entire pathology in one article.
America starts the war.
Oil prices surge.
China cuts imports, draws on reserves, leans on EVs and alternative energy, and helps prevent the shock from becoming much worse.
APβs conclusion?
Trump has Xi to thank for lower oil prices.
Read that again.
Washington launches the conflict.
Beijing absorbs the shock.
The global market benefits from Chinaβs resilience.
And then the same political system turns around and tells the world that China is the threat.
America destabilizes.
China stabilizes.
America complains that China has too much power.
This is nothing short of an American version of geopolitical schizophrenia.
The New York Times always manages to demonstrate the innovative spirit of the American media when discussing China.
It has discovered a fascinating new form of geopolitics β again:
We started the fire.
China built firewalls.
China prevented the fire from burning through its own economy.
Chinaβs demand adjustment even helped keep the global oil shock from becoming worse.
And somehow the conclusion is:
China has become too powerful.
Chinaβs ability to survive our fire is evidence of its ambition to dominate the world.
China was supposed to remain vulnerable.
It was supposed to panic when Hormuz closed, beg producers for supply, and absorb the price shock like everyone else.
Instead, it spent years building reserves, refining capacity, EVs, rail, coal substitution and energy redundancy.
So now resilience itself is being rewritten as βdomination.β
America creates the crisis.
China survives the crisis.
Western media calls survival a threat.
If China refuses to play the villain, the narrative will write the role for it anyway.
That is the entire pathology in one article.