Hacker News Reader

Comment by cogman10 | Hacker News Reader

Is China really a foreign adversary?

I get that we aren't best buds with china but they are also a huge trade partner with the US. Bigger than many countries which we have friendlier feelings towards.

View on HN

> Is China really a foreign adversary?

Yes, they are officially recognized as a foreign adversary. They're the first country listed:

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subp...

WWII gave the US opportunity to dramatically expand its Pacific sphere of influence right to China's shores and borders. At that time, China was largely turned inward, modernizing and recovering. But China is no longer in that condition and openly signals that they're ready to start asserting their own influence over the region.

Further, the escalation of NATO/Russian tensions, the war in Ukraine, and resurgent Gaza conflict, have all contributed to a specific window of opportunity for China to act as these each spread US readiness thinner than at quieter times.

This has all unequivocally and openly set China as an adversary to the US until that "sphere of influence" conflict is resolved. They're not hiding it, the US is not hiding it. There's no question about this except among people who just happened not to be paying attention to what's going on in the region.

We can hope (perhaps too optimistically) for a gradual diplomatic reorganization or deescalation without hot trade or military conflict, but the whole world is preparing -- on many fronts -- for more confrontational scenarios.

They're actively undermining our interests all over the world. What else are they but an adversary?

Just look at the situation in the Philippines at Second Thomas Shoal. They're actively baiting the US.

> They're actively baiting the US.

How about we don't take the "bait" in the South CHINA Sea that is thousands of miles away from even the furthest abroad US territory (Guam)?

This is quite a naive take with regard to US global hedgemony. They don't have 11 aircraft carrier groups for nothing.

Naivete and challenging orthodoxy are not the same thing.

> South CHINA Sea

Very little of the South China See is owned by China. China doesn't own it any more than Japan owns the Sea of Japan.

What foreign ally steals terabytes of data about top-of-the-line weapons programs like the F-22 and F-35?

https://www.sandboxx.us/news/the-man-who-stole-americas-stea...

Legally speaking, yes

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subp...

> Is China really a foreign adversary?

I can't imagine what else we would call them. Also, turnabout is fair play. You can't run a company in China without giving up ownership and abiding by a number of, often draconian, rules. This isn't a "ban", it's a "You can't be owned by China" law. Given what China requires I find that completely reasonable.

Yes, China is the number one threat to the US and we've been at war with them for the past decade+, both an economic war and cyberwar.

Feels like giving them billions of dollars in trade every year and making them a critical dependency of the US economy is a weird way of being at war. Are you sure that's not just a typo for "valued trading partner"?

What a trip you are on. You can't be in war with the country that produces all the stuff you have in your house.

Even the current tensions at the South China Sea alone where a war could break out is a pretty good sign that they are. In fact China is probably the biggest threat to the US but Israel will make you think it is Arabs as they continue to use the US for its own goals.

YES

What sort of adversarial actions have they taken against the US?

The most recent one I can think of is responding with tariffs against the US after we put tariffs on their solar exports.

Beyond that... the Korean war I think was the last time we were any sort of direct/semi direct conflict with them. And Taiwan is the touchiest aspect we have with them.

What type of company does China keep? Last I checked, they were pretty buddy-buddy with Russia, and North korea on an estranged leash. If we know other countries fund terrorist organizations for intent of undermining western influence, is it that big of a stretch to say China is probably doing the same thing?

You can't use 'direct conflict' as a measure in this type of game. Russia has done damning harm to american politics, but its not clear how to measure that effect.

Large scale hacking of US companies, IP theft, brinksmanship regarding issue of Taiwan (backed by real incentive to follow through) where have you been?

> Large scale hacking of US companies

This is a solid point. What most people don't get is that despite the enormous investment the CIA, NSA, and DoD Sigint have made into their offensive security teams, most of their budget is dedicated to Friday team-building activities, Bowling Nights, and Foosball tables. The US definitely does not hack anybody.

"Everyone but FVEY are the super evil hackerz" is a childish, head-in-the-sand position to hold in the modern geopolitical climate. Everyone is hacking everyone, and China is not some sort of unique Bad Guy in this regard.

Agreed, but if you're going to play whataboutism, then you surely understand that China does not allow US companies unfettered idealogical access to their populace, so why should we grant them as much?

I mean.. are you really not aware that the US and China have an adversarial relationship? Both countries embedding spies, industrial espionage, trade wars, soft power projection, etc etc. Power is a zero-sum game.

What kind of power do you mean? The military, economic, and industrial power of China and United States have both been increasing, it doesn't look like "zero-sum".

US and China choose to act this way, but they could stop harassing each other without affecting their own power bases.

Chinese backed threat actors have basically hacked into every major Fortune 50 tech company and stolen R&D.

Where is the evidence that they are backed by the Chinese government?

There's articles all over the place about it if you look. For example:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/cybersecurity/apt31-chine...

Articles and headlines themselves do not constitute evidence. All we get from your Reuters article is an allegation from the US Government (of Iraq WMD fame), and a denial from the Chinese Government. It's hearsay not evidence. Where is the evidence?

All over the place if you actually care but I somewhat doubt that.

If actual evidence were all over the place, you wouldn't be making this comment.

The fact is the accurately attributing expert cybercrime is extremely difficult and anyone that implies otherwise is making a fool out of you.

> Is China really a foreign adversary?

Only in election years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com