China - Geostrategic & Geopolitical.

Sandhi Yudha said:
A very remarkable case. A Belgian politician from the nationalistic right political party Vlaams Belang worked for three years for communist china as informant, from 2019-2022. This article is telling that he seems to be put under pressure to become an informant, by a chinese intelligence officer and that he also had to influence discussions about china.

He is now kicked out of his political party.
nos.nl

Belgische politicus was jarenlang informant Chinese geheime dienst

In die rol moest hij discussies binnen de Europese politiek beïnvloeden. Het ging daarbij bijvoorbeeld over onderwerpen als covid, de Oeigoerse moslimminderheid of de democratie in Hongkong.
nos.nl nos.nl
Click to expand...

He likely had a bad behaviour issue which the Chinese agent could blackmail him with.
 
@Sandhi Yudha Frank Creyelman was not a high rank politician, and he didn't do much spying yet his functions were high enough to make the case extremely worrying.
I was member of the Flemish Separatist and overtly Right Wing party Vlaamse Belang.
It's worth noting that he was a long time ally of Vladimir Putin. He was invited to Moscow several times and went to the Donbas as a observer for the referendum in 2014. Only a handful western observers, selected by the Kremlin were allowed to oversee the votes. It means he was not unknown to Russia and somebody in Russia recommended him to China.
It's also worth noting that his close ties with Russia didn't cause him any trouble but a short relationship with China got him fired from politics and from his party. This is in line with the traditional Right Wing attitude toward Putin. Yet, I didn't have evidence of such link between the Vlaamse Belang and Putin until now.
 
John Fedup said:
Xi does have a control advantage via the immense security apparatus (technological and human). The budget for this rivals the defence budget. Even George Orwell would be astounded.
Click to expand...
The security budget covers:
"The institutions under the MPS 2022 ministerial budget include: 51 law enforcement, scientific research, and teaching units, including MPS organs, the Railway Public Security Bureau, the Yangtze River Shipping Public Security Bureau, the Police Dog Base, the Physical Evidence Forensics Center, the Traffic Management Research Institute, People’s Public Security University of China, Criminal Investigation Police University of China, and Nanjing Forest Police College."​
​
The 2022 budget was 5,280,118,300,000 Chinese yuan Renminbi (RMB) - US$741,644,129,595.85, (1 CNY = 0.140364 USD: 1 USD = 7.12432 CNY).
In round figures that makes it US$741 billion.

The 2023 defence budget is roughly 1.55 trillion yuan (about $224.79 billion) for fiscal year 2023.
China’s 2023 Defense Spending: Figures, Intentions and Concerns - Jamestown

So, their security budget is > 3 x their defence budget and the 2023 defence budget has a 7.2% increase over the 2022 defence budget. To put things into perspective the 2022 fiscal year US defence budget was US$796 billion.
​
 
Doesn't cost 10X less. Nowhere near. If it did, China's real GDP would now be 6.5 times the USA's & China's real military spending 4 times the US amount, even without adjusting it for the things the official budget misses out.

[Edit]
GDP per capita according to the World Bank (World Bank Open Data)
2022 PPP Nominal
China 21483 12720
USA 76330 76330

So reasonably close to what Ananda says: overall price ratio across GDP 1.7
 
GDP PPP and GDP nominal comparison is still parameter calculation being used as benchmark on production cost ratio. For example 2022 China Nominal GDP being calculated USD 17 T, while PPP GDP is close to USD 34 T. Thus the rough ratio cost of production with US is 2x less expensive or US 2x more expensive to produce (2:1). This as US nominal vs PPP in USD 1:1.

However that is only rough averaging comparison, and many factors influencing production costs. Especially how many components of production items and materials come from your domestic chains and imported chains.

For example Indonesia Nominal GDP 2022 is USD 1.3 T and PPP GDP close to USD 4 T. By rough ratio production costs with US is 3x less (3:1), thus in paper cheaper then China. However that's not entirely true, as other factors weight in. Take car production as example. China car production using more then 95% components source from local production chain, while Indonesia car production only using around 50% components from local production chain. Thus Indonesian car relied much more with Imported components then Chinese ones. This make China cars cheaper to produce then Indonesian ones relative in nominal USD.

This as domestic components can be calculated more with PPP USD while imported ones with Nominal USD. This is cost of production, but not reflecting all of cost toward end users. As it is not factor in the relative comparison of Cost of Capital, Inflation/CPI, logistical costs and fiscal charge. That's also matter in calculating real costs toward end users.

Still as China again produce most of their defense equipment domestically with domestic components, then it can be say their production costs roughly half of what US or Euro build. This is production costs comparison, nothing about quality wise.
 
@Ananda Thanks for this explanation. I threw 10x as a wild guess. For military production especially, I think the ration is much more than 2x. US defence supplier can charge almost as much as they want. That's why development costs are always twice what was predicted (at least). Whereas in China there are national entities paying just fixed salaries to their workers. Of course they probably also subcontract to local private suppliers, but they also pay a minimum for their workers. Energy and regulations are also cheaper.
The US private defence industry is especially very expensive compared to production for the commercial sector while the Chinese defence industry is maybe just a little bit more expensive with much stringent budget control.
 
Fredled said:
@ngatimozart Given that everything cost 10x less in China than in the US, it's as if the US spent $7.4 trillion in homeland security and 2.2 Trillion in the military.
Click to expand...
The cost differences and economics etc., between the two nations are irrelevant. It's the differences between internal security and defence that are important. The PRC spends more on internal security than any other nation and it illustrates where the country's leadership perceive the greatest risk is. Don't forget that the CCP is only interested in remaining in power (in perpetuity); everything else is irrelevant. North Korea and to a lesser degree Russia are the same along with other autocratic nations.
 
During the New Years eve adress Xi Jinping claims that reunification between communist china and Taiwan is inevitable.
He is also telling that the vice-president of Taiwan, Lai Ching-te, a dangerous seperatist is.

A speech you can expect from him.
nos.nl

Xi Jinping: hereniging van China en Taiwan onvermijdelijk

China voert twee weken voor de verkiezingen in Taiwan de druk op het zelfstandig bestuurde eiland op.
nos.nl nos.nl
www.bbc.com

Taiwan and China will 'surely be reunified' says Xi in New Year's Eve address

The Chinese leader's New Year's Eve message comes just weeks ahead of Taiwan's crucial general election.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
Last edited:

US intelligence indicates that President Xi Jinping’s sweeping military purge came after it emerged that widespread corruption undermined his efforts to modernize the armed forces and raised questions about China’s ability to fight a war, according to people familiar with the assessments.

The corruption inside China’s Rocket Force and throughout the nation’s defense industrial base is so extensive that US officials now believe Xi is less likely to contemplate major military action in the coming years than would otherwise have been the case, according to the people, who asked not to be named discussing intelligence.

The US assessments cited several examples of the impact of graft, including missiles filled with water instead of fuel and vast fields of missile silos in western China with lids that don’t function in a way that would allow the missiles to launch effectively, one of the people said.

.....
Click to expand...

Whilst Xi's position as head of the CCP may be unassailable, the lack of transparency regarding the Chinese military may be hiding an organisation that is much less effective in reality than it should be on paper.
 
Musashi_kenshin said:



Whilst Xi's position as head of the CCP may be unassailable, the lack of transparency regarding the Chinese military may be hiding an organisation that is much less effective in reality than it should be on paper.
Click to expand...

The problem is “may be”. It is simply too dangerous to assume capabilities are limited. The other question is can Xi correct the corruption problem quickly?
 
John Fedup said:
The problem is “may be”. It is simply too dangerous to assume capabilities are limited.
Click to expand...

No assumptions made, just posting the article.

The other question is can Xi correct the corruption problem quickly?
Click to expand...

Probably not. Corruption is endemic within the CCP and Chinese officialdom. It involves people in humble positions like teaching up to the most senior members of the Party - Xi himself is likely to be corrupt. It's so bad that wealthy people have got caught up in powerplays within the CCP because they bribed the wrong corrupt faction.

In order to deal with corruption in the CCP you need to substantially increase wages whilst also giving the courts and prosecutors independent authority to prosecute people based on their actions rather than their connections.
 
Musashi_kenshin said:
Probably not. Corruption is endemic within the CCP and Chinese officialdom. It involves people in humble positions like teaching up to the most senior members of the Party - Xi himself is likely to be corrupt. It's so bad that wealthy people have got caught up in powerplays within the CCP because they bribed the wrong corrupt faction.

In order to deal with corruption in the CCP you need to substantially increase wages whilst also giving the courts and prosecutors independent authority to prosecute people based on their actions rather than their connections.
Click to expand...
Xi could solve the corruption problem, but he would have to channel his inner Mao and Stalin brutality in order to succeed and the political risks for him would be very high.
 
ngatimozart said:
Xi could solve the corruption problem, but he would have to channel his inner Mao and Stalin brutality in order to succeed and the political risks for him would be very high.
Click to expand...

He could try, but corruption within the USSR and CCP were also bad in Stalin and Mao's time. It isn't just an issue of officialdom tolerating corruption, for some it's about basic survival due to poor pay.

Also I doubt he would get away with being the only member of the Party accepting payoffs. Whilst he has a daughter living in the US an undisclosed location living off her father's contingency fund an unknown lifestyle, he would have zero credibility trying to put the CCP on the straight and narrow. If he really wanted to end corruption he'd have to recall his daughter to China and somehow make it known that he had given away all his ill-gotten loot, without admitting he had broken the law.
 
Musashi_kenshin said:
He could try, but corruption within the USSR and CCP were also bad in Stalin and Mao's time. It isn't just an issue of officialdom tolerating corruption, for some it's about basic survival due to poor pay.

Also I doubt he would get away with being the only member of the Party accepting payoffs. Whilst he has a daughter living in the US an undisclosed location living off her father's contingency fund an unknown lifestyle, he would have zero credibility trying to put the CCP on the straight and narrow. If he really wanted to end corruption he'd have to recall his daughter to China and somehow make it known that he had given away all his ill-gotten loot, without admitting he had broken the law.
Click to expand...

Everything you described so far can be found in most developing countries.

In a former job which I work / advise foreign governments, we used to joke about which countries has the most "effective" corruption. Effective" corruption (our internal, joke definition) is how can one find the balance between corruption and governance, while numbing the mileu that they acknowledge it but won't done anything about it, and even actively participate in it.

Paying for promotion? Seen it in Vietnam. Fast-tracking some permits? A guy in one south american country unabashedly told me that he knew a guy close to the president and can get it "fixed" for a fee. China? Yup, some second tier city land bureau had a complete GIS system in a storeroom and pretended to me that the system doesn't exist, just because the chief was caught getting a cut from that contract.

Are these deal breakers for those governments? Nah. I would be very skeptical that corruption can be absolutely rooted out, or the government / leader replaced with someone better since everyone is in on it.
 
Interesting development. So it is not that Fijian police carry out the raids and arrests supported by intelligence and translators from china, but the chinese police carry out the whole operation on Fiji soil, while the Fijian police just stands on the background.
Video of Chinese police rounding up alleged scammers in Fiji sparks serious concern | Newshub (youtube.com)

China's dirty tactics to control the Pacific | 60 Minutes Australia (youtube.com)

Developments like this can be worrying, on the other hand you can see this operation as a way china cleans up its own garbage.
 
Last edited:
Redshift said:
Or US police arresting US citizens in the UK.
Click to expand...

The idea of overseas police stations isn't a Chinese idea. The NYPD runs a very large overseas intelligence program with police officers stationed in multiple countries, including, yes, the UK. Yes, technically no powers of arrest. But the chinese will argue the same thing.

The entire program is controversial to say the least. One, NYPD hardly represents the United States; and two the stated objectives (counter terrorism) overlaps with federal agencies like the FBI.

Counterterrorism - New York City Police Foundation

www.nycpolicefoundation.org www.nycpolicefoundation.org
nypost.com

NYPD to send liaisons to Arizona and Colombia to help handle migrant crisis

Police Commissioner Edward Caban announced the expansion of the department’s International Liaison Program during his “State of the NYPD” address.
nypost.com nypost.com
 
koxinga said:
The idea of overseas police stations isn't a Chinese idea. The NYPD runs a very large overseas intelligence program with police officers stationed in multiple countries, including, yes, the UK. Yes, technically no powers of arrest. But the chinese will argue the same thing.

The entire program is controversial to say the least. One, NYPD hardly represents the United States; and two the stated objectives (counter terrorism) overlaps with federal agencies like the FBI.

Counterterrorism - New York City Police Foundation

www.nycpolicefoundation.org www.nycpolicefoundation.org
nypost.com

NYPD to send liaisons to Arizona and Colombia to help handle migrant crisis

Police Commissioner Edward Caban announced the expansion of the department’s International Liaison Program during his “State of the NYPD” address.
nypost.com nypost.com
Click to expand...
The Chinese have these sorts of operations already, and they are defined controversial, they aren't the same as arresting people though, at least not yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top