Donald Trump’s phone call to Taiwan following the election, and more recent statements regarding a “One China” policy, have both disturbed leaders in Beijing.
Risk of a global trade war, which Trump seems itching to fight, is very real.
Please consider Beijing Hits Back at Donald Trump Over Taiwan Stance.
China has warned Donald Trump that the two countries will have “nothing to discuss” if his incoming administration discards the four-decade-old “One China” policy.
“Adherence to the One China policy is the political bedrock for development of [bilateral] relations,” Geng Shuang, a foreign ministry spokesman, said on Monday. “If compromised, there will be nothing to discuss on co-operation in major fields.”
Mr Geng was responding to comments that the president-elect made on Sunday in which he questioned whether his administration would continue to respect the One China policy and shun official contacts with Taiwan over which Beijing claims sovereignty.
Mr Trump’s remarks dramatically raised the stakes with China just a week after he broke diplomatic precedent by accepting a phone call from Taiwan’s leader, Tsai Ying-wen.
Earlier on Monday, a stinging editorial in the Global Times, an offshoot of the official People’s Daily, urged Mr Trump to “listen clearly, the One China policy cannot be traded”.
“China needs to wage resolute struggle against [Mr Trump],” it added, warning the president-elect that China “cannot be bullied easily”.
On Sunday, Mr Trump said he fully understood the One China policy, but was unconvinced by the logic. “I don’t know why we have to be bound by a One China policy unless we make a deal with China having to do with other things, including trade,” he told Fox News.
Dennis Wilder, a China expert who served in the CIA and was the top Asia adviser to George W Bush, said that China would be watching to see whether Mr Trump was serious or whether he had been unwittingly pushed into a corner by his pro-Taiwan advisers. He said that Beijing would be hoping that Mr Trump really had not been aware of the call.
“Look, we’re being hurt very badly by China with [currency] devaluation, with taxing us heavy at the borders when we don’t tax them, and building a massive fortress in the middle of the South China Sea,” Mr Trump said. “And frankly, they’re not helping us at all with North Korea.”
Negotiating Tactic or Real?
This very well could be a negotiating tactic, but it’s also unclear how much China is willing to bend, if at all.
Meanwhile, everyone is scrambling to figure out precisely what Trump’s surprise phone call to Taiwan, means.
Playing Things Both Ways
Trump has a pronounced propensity to say and do anything, then back down later. Two prime examples include prosecuting Hillary and “clearing the swamp”.
On December 6, the Financial Times asked Is Trump using Taiwan as a China Bargaining Chip?
Is Trump preparing to shred US policy on Taiwan?
That depends who you ask. Vice-president elect Mike Pence said on Sunday that the conversation was nothing more than a “courtesy call”. Anthony Scaramucci, an aide to Mr Trump, said on Monday that “this is not a deviation in US policy”.
But Stephen Moore, an economic adviser to Mr Trump, insisted that Taiwan deserved greater American support because of its democratic system. “We oughta back our ally, and if China doesn’t like it, screw ‘em,” he told a radio station on Monday.
Mr Trump has tried to have it both ways. Initially playing down the call, on Sunday he linked it to Chinese policies on currency and the military build-up in the South China Sea.
Mr Trump’s inner circle has strong Taiwan connections. Reince Priebus, the incoming White House chief of staff, has visited Taiwan twice in recent years, and Ed Feulner, the former president of Heritage, the conservative think-tank who is on the transition team, visited the island after the election.
Not Just a “Courtesy Call”
It now obvious the Taiwan call was more than a “courtesy call” as described by Mike Pence a week ago.
More recently Trump stated “I don’t know why we have to be bound by a One China policy unless we make a deal with China having to do with other things, including trade.”
If this is a bargaining ploy, we do not know two critical things:
- What Trump is bargaining for
- What Trump is willing to settle for
It’s possible Trump wants to change US policy, and floated a trial balloon to see how China would react.
Whatever is going on, the risks of a blow-up one way or another leading to a global trade war are very real.
Trump believes the yuan is undervalued, but the IMF doesn’t. I have long held the opinion the Yuan could crash if floated.
Flashback January 16, 2010: Goldman Says “Something Brewing” in China on Currency; What’s Really Brewing Is “Trouble”
The way to let a currency trade against multiple currencies is to let it float. Given China’s rampant speculation, unsound bank lending practices, and enormous property bubble, if China was so bold as to float the Renminbi right now, it might collapse, perhaps after an initial move higher.
At that time everyone was in love with the yuan. Many believed the yuan would replace the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency.
Bogus Threats to US Reserve Currency Status: No Country Really Wants It!
On April 27, 2011, I made this claim Bogus Threats to US Reserve Currency Status: No Country Really Wants It!
In spite of all the hype regarding the Yuan as a reserve currency I have stated many times recently that discussion of the Yuan as a reserve currency is nothing but ridiculous hype.
My reasons are:
- The Yuan does not float, and there is no indication China is prepared to allow the Yuan to float any time soon
- China is a command economy
- In China, property rights and civil rights are questionable
- Chinese banks are insolvent because of malinvestments in infrastructure and an enormous property bubble
If reserve currency status was such a gift, why doesn’t China take the steps that would make it possible. Why doesn’t Europe?
The fact is, for all their bitching, nearly every country on the planet does not want to relinquish their “export growth model”. Every week there is some trumped-up report by someone about how China is trading more in the Yuan with Russia and Southeast Asia countries. In the grand scheme of things such trade in Yuan nearly meaningless, not representative of a significant adjustment.
Mathematically, the fact remains, the US runs a huge trade deficit, and countries accumulate US assets, most frequently US Treasuries.
China Not Prepared to Float the Yuan
China still has not floated the yuan, it still does not have large bond markets, it still has an enormous property bubble, and it still has insolvent banks and SOEs.
China also has a new problem, capital flight.
The irony in this mess is that if China floated the yuan, it very well could crash, even though Trump wants the yuan to strengthen.
Reserve currency? Put it on the back burner as I said long ago. Meanwhile, risk of a global trade war escalates on many fronts in the US, EU, and China.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Trump has no clue or plan. He just likes attention from important people. There is nothing more to figure out about this.
“Trump has a pronounced propensity to SAY AND DO ANYTHING, then back down later.”
How can this possibly be misconstrued as a desirable quality in ANY leader, much less a President?
It won’t just be a problem for China…
but for EVERY country…
including the United States.
Sorry CzarChasm, but you just don’t understand diddly-squat about Negotiating and Persuasion. Watch what Trump does, and be amazed. The confused public has already had their first head explosion with the election.
It may be a bargaining ploy, but you can only use it once. So use it well.
We survived Obama’s red line that wasn’t.
I don’t see how the USA gains with the status quo. China erects barrier after barrier to US companies. We allow all their cheap shist into our country no questions asked.
I’d say when you are resting dead flat on the bottom the direction you can go is up.
“If this is a bargaining ploy, we do not know two critical things:
1. What Trump is bargaining for
2. What Trump is willing to settle for”
Of course we do not know that. There is NO WAY the Master Negotiator and author of “The Art of the Deal” would want that to be known, it would ruin the negotiation for him.
Everything Trump does, he does like a Master Negotiator. He is going to be a very effective president.
Trump did not write, “The Art of the Deal”. He is more conman than master negotiator, and I do not think the Chinese will let themselves be conned.
Technically correct as Trump hired Tony Schwartz to do the writing based on interviews with Trump, and following him around, and the writing being reviewed by Trump before publication. This is common practice for most very busy businessmen and politicians.
At least as far as I have seen, Trump has not been using a teleprompter, like his predecessor always does.
Tony Scwartz said he’d leave the US if Trump was elected.
Absolutely disgusted by the guy.
BBC interview:
https://youtu.be/ZIsgFmTwPd8
Has he left yet? Anything I can do to hurry that along?
So… he came up with the name of the book and got paid to write the Art of the Deal. This interview is with BBC (Big Bullshitting Corporation, probably the king of all the MSM), so it’s probably paid for by the CIA Oh, and he listened to Trump’s phone calls, gleaned all the information he needed… I think we know who the the Russian election-connection is now. So he says on leaving the US, “… i would do it”. So, now he’s going to Russia, I guess.
The BBC is disgusting, biased, without balance and prejudiced.
The other writer who got co-writer credit with Trump on Art of the deal followed everything Trump does for a year including listening on business phone calls how Trump negotiates and then wrote his observations on Trumps negotiation strategies and style into a book form which Trump read and instructed some corrections here and there and the book was born.
.
The art of the deal is how Trump negotiates and is the best blueprint for a successful negotiation tactics written.
How’d the Taj Mahal deal work out for him? It was one of the deals talked about in Chapter 1, IIRC.
“Meanwhile, risk of a global trade war escalates on many fronts in the US, EU, and China.”
…
Possibly. The last crew kicked the hornet’s nest … and walked it back tout suite.
…
January 2009:
Barack Obama’s choice as the next treasury secretary has fired the first shot in what could be a new protectionist battle between America and China.
Tim Geithner told US senators that Obama believes that China has been manipulating its currency, the yuan – an accusation that is likely to hurt relations between the two countries.
In written testimony at a confirmation hearing, Geithner said that “President Obama – backed by the conclusions of a broad range of economists – believes that China is manipulating its currency.”
The former head of the Federal Bank of New York went on to tell the Senate finance committee that Obama will use “all the diplomatic avenues open to him” to push for changes in China’s currency practices.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/jan/23/china-us-dollar-yuan
…
April 2009:
The Obama administration declined to label China a currency manipulator, a move that could smooth relations with the Asian giant but also inflame tensions with groups that believe Beijing is artificially weakening its currency to gain a trade advantage.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123982680459622079
In any other week but this one I suppose this would be big news.
But since the Clinton campaign (via Podesta) just formally reactivated the 2016 Presidential Election campaign by suggesting an intervention in the Electoral College processes and the White House just explicitly questioned the validity of the election of DJT and also questioned the motives of the Republican Members of Congress who backed him, well, lets just say that when an outgoing Administration declares war on an incoming one then it is a certainty that the results are going to be explosive and that all other news will be eclipsed.
And now it appears that DJT will be “back on the stump” at multiple rallies in the days preceeding the Electoral College vote and one can easily surmise that the one and only topic will be the attempt to reverse the results of the election.
Yes this is going to be a war week but the distant Chinois will have very little to do with it.
He might be advised to limit the number of apple carts he upsets for now.
I’ve been banging the drum on this point since Trump Reflation started. Shutting off the refinance spigot will hurt bank revenue + deny households one of their favorite ways to free up $$s for consumption –
…
The number of homeowners eligible to refinance their mortgages fell 60%, or 5 million, since the end of October, with 700,000 in the last two weeks alone, according to data provider Black Knight Financial Services.
The number of homeowners who are eligible — that is, who have a mortgage with a high enough interest rate and enough equity in their home to benefit from refinancing — hasn’t been this low since the aftermath of the 2013 “taper tantrum,” when rates were about 30 basis points higher.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/700000-homeowners-fall-out-of-refinanceable-population-as-trump-trade-rolls-on-2016-12-12
I’m not expecting this Trump Reflation to last too long…
IMO, the Markets reflect only the optimism of the 1% as Trump promises more of the same:
more swamp people, more tax cuts for the rich, and more of whatever the corporations need…
“Others have drawn parallels with the economic nationalist and protectionist Hoover administration, which sparked a 13 percent market surge in 1928 before the US economy plunged into the Great Depression.”
Selected quote from “Markets pushed to record highs on Trump surge”
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/12/12/stoc-d12.html
The same 1% that refused to support him, Goldman who financed Hillary a hundred to one against Trump, the Koch brothers, and countless others who predicted that a Trump win would crush the markets? THAT 1%?
Lets remember the 900 point fall the night of…and then the subsequent bounce the next morning.
There’s something going on alright, but it’s those wanting to prevent Trump from taking office at any cost (and I’m not talking about money here)
The market has been floating on highs long before Trump and EVERY down swing during the election was blamed on Trump….his talk of bubbles and collapse bringing us all down.
And as always, the typical blaming of Hoover for the depression, the blaming of protectionism for the depression, but not a peep about FDR’s crazy socialist interventions that made it GREAT and long lasting (paging mr. Obama, paging mr. Obama).
Stopping the refinance money spigot is good news for the long term health of US economy.
The refinance money spigot was what allowed the offshoring to get to the level it did and it also allowed the importation of H1B’s and illegal immigrants get to the level it did.
.
Refinance money kept the economy rolling and kept the consumer demand up creating a false illusion that one can offshore well paying jobs and dump wages inside USA with H1B’s and illegal immigrants and consumer demand will still continue.
.
If there had not been bubble blowing by FED and the massive refinance craze then consumer demand would have crashed and there would have been economic problems and corporations and CEO’s and regular americans would have clearly seen that the cause is offshoring and bringing in H1B’s and illegal immigrants and the offshoring would have been stopped and immigration policies tightened already in 2004-2005.
.
Refinance money creates FALSE demand which hides the problems created by offshoring of jobs and economically self-destructive immigration policies like the H1B-mill and the tolerance of illegal immigration and wage dumping by CEO’s without morals.
In an interview on Fox News Sunday, Trump said there should be a “lifetime restriction” of top defense officials going to work for defense contractors.
“The people that are making these deals for the government, they should never be allowed to go to work for these companies,” he said. “You know, they make a deal like that and then a year later, or two years later, or three years later you see them working for these big companies that made the deal.”
Usually they only say this before elections. Hope he doesn’t talk himself into a CIA dirt nap. I’m starting to love the guy.
LOL! LMAO! You will see his buddy Mad Dog working for a defense contractor right after he leaves office. You chumps actually believe anything Trump says? I have a bridge I can let you have cheap!
Maybe. It’s still unusual post-campaign talk.
I think he discovered a new government employee scam with the new 4 billion dollar Air Force One project… apparently, quotes were pumped up by procurement staff who seem to later quit their government jobs to go work for Boeing.
Monthly budget statement just released and it’s really bad. Obummer will have no problem hitting a landmark $20 Trillion debt by the time he leaves:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Those republican towers of fiscal restraint, in charge of it all when Bush was President, also doubled the national debt. McCain might have shaved a dime or two off the 20 trillion if he won in 2008, if that.
Arnold was going to cut up the credit card here in California- until it was time to run for re-election. Then it was spend, spend, spend.
Neither political party has any intention of balancing the budget. They all want to get re-elected by spending the tax payers money.
90+% of incumbents win. Why not, the tax payers are a huge campaign finance fund for them.
Our only salvation comes from spending, and there may be some truth in it. If so, what I think is proven thus far is that it depends on spending on WHAT. When Obama was running his first time, he constantly bashed Bush for spending, for deficits,…. but once elected I heard him claim in rebuttal to his spending that in a recession ALL spending was stimulative. IF THAT WERE TRUE, would we still have this economy?
Spending is much like touching. There’s good spending (if it creates an income stream) and there’s bad spending (like anything obama does)… then there’s the Podesta Brothers mixed in there in places.
How does Pizza fit into all of this?
Ron, do you remember the budget balancing initiatives that Arnold tried to pass early on in his political career? They all got shot down in flames by the liberal democrat majority of voters, with the help of massive spending by the unions. It was a slap upside the head for Arnold who then accepted the fact that he would have to somehow try the best he could to work with a big majority of democrats in the CA legislature.
Or Arnold could have resigned. Instead he signed on with ‘California Decline’. You get no respect for being a caver in my book.
I remember them and i voted against them. I didn’t want the special election in the first place. Arnold changed his tune in order to get re-elected and he left the state in a mess, for his own benefit. Whenever his video game ads show up on TV i change the channel.
Interesting perspective there, Ron. Arnold inherited a fiscal mess from Davis, but the fiscal mess was Arnold’s fault. Arnold tried to reign in spending with some initiatives, but you voted against them, and the fiscal problem is Arnold’s fault. Hard to figure some people out.
“Taxpayer money”? There is no taxpayer money. It’s FED money.
Paul Ryan funded everything Obama wanted including the refugee programs bringing somalis and syrians to USA.
.
Paul Ryan is a completely failed politician and his obsession with cutting social security and medicare is what caused Romney to lose the 2012 election because then there was lots of Talk how Paul Ryan as a vice-president wants to take away social security and medicare from old people.
.
To hide his own idiocy and responsibility for the loss in 2012 Paul Ryan championed the stupid “election autopsy” with the pre-determined conclusion that to win elections Republicans have to legalize tens of millions of illegals most of whom would vote democrat just like hispanics vote 65%-70% democrat.
.
Paul Ryan has even worse political instincts than Hillary Clinton and he should be nowhere near the republican leadership but apparently other republicans are scared of responsibility so Paul Ryan gets to stay as a default despite him already undermining Trump by staying that just a fence is enough and Ryans 2nd in command whatshisname was already in public saying that even a fence is not needed that US will just use drones.
.
The wall MUST be built and it must be high so it stays after Trump leaves office.
Fences and drones can be removed just by cutting the funding to keep them operational after Trump leaves office and a hole in fence takes about 5 minutes with the right kind of tools.
Paul Ryan is shaping up to be the biggest political whore that the earth has ever seen. Watch his interview with Hannity, just after he abruptly stops hating Trump post election. Several things pop up… He’s on board with Trump though they don’t agree on everything, but when he talks about energy, he slips out part of “the plan” to sell Europe liquified natural gas? Sounds like he’s on board to cut into Gazprom and cut Russia out of dealing with Europe. It’s more NATO moves that will trigger more tension with Russia. The landscape is littered with Paul Ryan’s opportunist moves, his posturing, and I am just waiting to see how he blocks the new administration.
But lets not forget that Trump is a sell out because he is appointing business people with NO government experience. Sadly listening to the news of how Rex Tillerson is ill equipped to be SOS as he has no experience in government. Admitted, he has little experience GIVING everything away or possibly trading away people’s lives and liberties for political expediency, but he has a lot of experience negotiating with a lot of people all over the world…not the same.
The Donald needs to remember that China is a totalitarian communist state. It can happily nationalize all American assets in the country and declare all American IP “invalid”. And there’s not a thing the US can do about it.
The US would be exposed as the hollowed out shell of a nation it is.
Apple is the only US company with material assets (mostly IP) within China — and if you know anything about China and Apple, you know there are already dozens of iPhone knock-offs being sold all over China.
China has $5-6 trillion in worthless US Treasury Obama debt. It needs to constantly import raw materials, and it needs to constantly export finished goods — all of which comes from countries that would be threatened by a Chinese nationalization.
So, China holds all the cards.
WE can’t say NO.
They can do what they want with their currency.
They can charge any tariff on imports they choose.
They can build as many islands as they please.
They can claim as much of the ocean as they please.
but
Taiwan does NOT exist,even though we sell arms to Taiwan.
yet
CUBA DOES
This is what he needs to know. Our defense industry is beholden to China:
Depending on when you want to start the clock, this “bedrock” problem is now a teenager or old enough to vote. The last U.S. rare-earth mine ceased mining operations in 1998, the same year that the premiere U.S. rare-earth metallurgist company, Indianapolis-based Magnequench, was essentially sold to members of Deng Xiaoping’s family. Magnequench’s facility was shut down, moved and reopened in China in 2003.
Since then, U.S. defense contractors have become completely reliant on Chinese sources for rare-earth metals, alloys, and magnets—directly or indirectly. The short list of reliable non-Chinese metallurgy companies get all of their rare earth oxides from China and their production is fully committed to Japan and other industrial users. Outside this small circle, there is an even shorter list of financially troubled metallurgical companies that have ongoing quality control issues, limited capabilities, and uncertain economic futures. None of these currently supply U.S. defense contractors. The reality is that all rare earth metallurgy used in U.S. defense systems originates in or must pass through China.
This means that Boeing, Raytheon, General Atomics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, and all of the other primary defense contractors are beholden to China for these critical materials. The contractors themselves have remained quiet on this issue, though they have privately expressed their fear of supply disruption and loss of Chinese contracts if they get on Beijing’s bad side. Control over the supply of critical materials and enormous contracts thereby gives China tangible control over the financial fortunes of the defense industry. Perhaps this also helps explain the Pentagon’s unwillingness to force a solution.
Absent strong U.S. action, there’s little reason to believe other producers will emerge. China has demonstrated its ability to bankrupt any new producer. China has also shown its willingness to use rare earths as a geopolitical weapon, as it did to Japan in 2010.
The lesson is clear: ensuring supply security for U.S. technology companies and defense contractors will require placating Chinese masters. If rare earths are a bedrock issue, then the Pentagon has built its entire advanced weapons on Chinese quicksand.
Continued inaction is not an option and is technically a violation of federal law. Solutions begin with recognizing the origins of the problem. China’s road to monopoly began in 1980………………..
http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/05/heres-way-out-our-rare-earths-mess/128250/
With a government that seems absolutely intent on reducing its population to a level of complete dependency, why we we not think they would have any issues with our complete dependency on China for critical materials? It sure makes sense to me. An there is no reason why all of our defense contractors should not become simply high paid middlemen who sub out all of their contracts to Chinese companies. I don’t see how ANYTHING could go wrong. America EMBRACES dependency…as long as it comes with a large color touch screen and plenty of entertaining apps.
I have to laugh watching all of the advertisements for video games and how they are explicitly for “mature users”…..thinking really, “mature users” are playing video games?
Everything will be fine as long as they can keep us entertained.
The media has questioned Obama about this all the way back to at least 2011, and they get absolutely no cooperation. This crap started way back in the early Reagan days. We knew we had a commercial goldmine, but nobody wanted to pursue it. It just slipped out of our hands… Now we are totally screwed because they have us tight by the short hairs. This article eludes to about the only solution.
http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/05/heres-way-out-our-rare-earths-mess/128250/
China has been playing the US like a fiddle for far too long. It’s about time we got a President who has the intestinal fortitude to take a stand on China and make it a 2-way mutually beneficial negotiation for once.
The new boss is NOT the same as the old boss. That’s what we wanted. That’s what we got.
Now stand back and let the man do his thing.
I am fed up of being lied to by Washington DC (both parties) — with their “free trade” rubbish. Free trade should flow both directions, not just one way. I support true free trade (both directions), and I am positive that Americans can be competitive on an even playing field (not in every product / category, but certainly overall). I don’t support the one-way trade that the IMF and Washington DC keep trying to ram down everyone’s throats.
It is a shame that none of the allegedly “better educated” folks in Washington or the media can grasp this truism. Too busy worrying about safe spaces and transgender bathrooms to see the damage they cause to middle class Americans
“One China Policy”.
ROFLMAO.
What a complete load of BULLSH*T.
Here is the list of US Arms Sales to Taiwan, dating from 2015 (Obama) back to 1979 (Carter) in $Millions. The total is a little bit over $72 BILLION.
BTW, Obama signed the latest $1.8 BILLION arms deal with Taiwan in December, 2015.
“One China Policy”.
Apparently, the US President, or President-elect is only allowed to answer the phone when the President of Taiwan calls if he/she is calling to place another order for US weapons. Otherwise it goes to voicemail.
ROFLMAO.
You cannot make this stuff up.
1979-7 48 F-5E Jimmy Carter $240
2 1979-11 500 AGM-65 Maverick Jimmy Carter $25 1982-11
3 1980-1 BGM-71 TOW, MIM-23 Hawk, MIM-72 Chaparral Jimmy Carter $280
4 1980-7 M110A2 Jimmy Carter $3.7
5 1982-4 Aircraft Parts Ronald Reagan $0.64
6 1982-6 Armored personnel carriers, mortar vehicle, command vehicle Ronald Reagan $97
7 1982-8 Ronald Reagan $620
8 1982-11 Vehicles, including spare parts and ancillary equipment Ronald Reagan $97
9 1983-2 66 F-104G Ronald Reagan
10 1984-6 12 C-130 Ronald Reagan $325
11 1985-2 F-5、F-100、T-33、T-28 radar and spare parts Ronald Reagan $86
12 1985-6 262 MIM-72 Chaparral Ronald Reagan $94
13 1986-8 S-2T, AN/TPQ-37, S-2E/G, Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate (Cheng Kung class frigate) Ronald Reagan $260
14 1989- 88 Standard Missile George H. W. Bush $44
15 1990-8 F-5, F-104, C-130 Radar George H. W. Bush $108
16 1991-9 110 M60A3 George H. W. Bush $119
17 1992- 8 C-130 George H. W. Bush $220
18 1992-7 3 Knox-class frigates (Rental) George H. W. Bush 1993-7
19 1992-8 207 Standard Missile George H. W. Bush $126
20 1992-9 150 F-16 George H. W. Bush $6,000 1997-4
21 1993-1 200 Patriot missile and related equipment Bill Clinton $10,000 1996-8
22 1993-3 4 E-2T Bill Clinton $900 1995-9
23 1993-6 Aircraft parts, radar and navigation equipment Bill Clinton $590[citation needed]
24 1993-11 150 Mk46 Mod5RC torpedoes and associated components Bill Clinton $54
25 1994-2 3 Knox-class frigates (Rental) Bill Clinton $230 1995-7
26 1994-9 4 MSO designation minesweepers[1][2][3][4] Bill Clinton 1995-2
27 1994-10 2 Newport class tank landing ship (Rental) Bill Clinton $2.6 1995-2
28 1995-5 160 M60A3 Bill Clinton $223 1996
29 1996-8 1,299 FIM-92 Stinger and related equipment Bill Clinton $420
30 1996-9-5 110 MK-46 MOD 5 torpedoes, etc. Bill Clinton $66[5]
31 1997-2-24 54 HARPOON missiles with containers, etc. Bill Clinton $95[6]
32 1997-5-23 1,786 TOW 2A anti-armor guided missiles (to include 27 Lot Acceptance missiles), 114 TOW launchers, 100 M1045A2 High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicles trucks, etc. Bill Clinton $80[7]
33 1997-7-24 21 AH-1W Super Cobra helicopters, etc. Bill Clinton $479[8]
34 1997-9-3 13 OH-58D Kiowa Warrior Armed Scout helicopters with mast mounted sight subsystems, 13 T703-AD-700 helicopter engines, 13 HELLFIRE launchers, Hydra 70 rockets and rocket launchers, etc. Bill Clinton $172[9]
35 1997-11-9 Provide funds for the establishment of a Cooperative Logistics Supply Support Arrangement (CLSSA) for spare parts in support of F-5B/E/F, F-104, F-16, C-130, C-119, C-47, and T-38 aircraft and for U.S. systems and sub-systems of the Indigenous Defense Fighter (IDF) aircraft. Bill Clinton $140[10]
36 1997-11-9 The continuation of a pilot training program and logistics support for F-16 aircraft, etc. Bill Clinton $280[11]
37 1998-1-28 3 KNOX class frigates (FF 1052), weapons and ammunition to include 1 MK 15 PHALANX Close-In Weapons System (CIWS), 1 AN/SWG-1A HARPOON launcher, etc. Bill Clinton $300[12]
38 1998-6-1 28 sets of Pathfinder/Sharpshooter navigation and targeting pods, integration of the pods with the F-16A/B aircraft, etc. Bill Clinton $160[13]
39 1998-8-27 131 MK 46 MOD 5(A)S torpedoes, etc. Bill Clinton $69[14]
40 1998-8-27 61 Dual-mount STINGER Missile Systems, etc. Bill Clinton $180[15]
41 1998-8-27 58 Harpoon anti-ship missiles, etc. Bill Clinton $101[16]
42 1998-10-9 9 CH-47SD CHINOOK helicopters, etc. Bill Clinton $486[17]
43 1999-5-26 240 AGM-114K3 HELLFIRE II Air-to-Surface Anti-Armor missiles, etc. Bill Clinton $23[18]
44 1999-5-26 5 exportable AN/VRC-92E SINCGARS radio systems, 5 Commercial Off-the Shelf/Non-Developmental Item (COTS/NDI) Intelligence Electronic Warfare (IEW) systems, 5 HMMWV, etc. Bill Clinton $64[19]
45 1999-7-30 2 E-2T Hawkeye 2000E aircraft, etc. Bill Clinton $400[20]
46 1999-7-30 2 Provide funds for the establishment of a Cooperative Logistics Supply Support Arrangement (CLSSA) for spare parts in support of F-5E/F, C-130H, Indigenous Defense Fighter, F-16A/B with Block 15 Mid-Life Upgrade and for U.S. systems and sub-systems of the aircraft. Bill Clinton $150[21]
47 2000-3-2 A conversion of TPS-43F air surveillance radar to TPS-75V configuration, etc. Bill Clinton $96[22]
48 2000-3-2 162 HAWK Intercept Aerial guided missiles, etc. Bill Clinton $106[23]
49 2000-6-7 39 sets of PATHFINDER/SHARPSHOOTER (LANTIRN derivative) navigation and targeting pods, etc. Bill Clinton $234[24]
50 2000-6-7 48 AN/ALQ-184 Electronic Countermeasures pods, support equipment, etc. Bill Clinton $122[25]
51 2000-9-27 continued Improved Mobile Subscriber Equipment (IMSE) communication system, etc. Bill Clinton $513[26]
52 2000-9-27 146 M109A5 155mm self-propelled howitzers, 79 M2 machine gun, 6 M88A2 recovery vehicles, 160 AN/PVS-7B Night Vision Goggles, 146 AN/VRC-87E and 6 AN/VRC-90E SINCGARS, etc. Bill Clinton $405[27]
53 2000-9-27 71 RGM-84L Harpoon anti-ship missiles Bill Clinton $240[28]
54 2000-9-27 200 AIM-120C Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM), 292 LAU-129 Missile Launchers, etc. Bill Clinton $150[29]
44 2001-4 George W. Bush $18,0000 incomplete
47 2003-11 200 AIM-120C-5 George W. Bush
48 2004-4 2 超高頻率遠端早期預警雷達及相關設備 George W. Bush 17.8
49 2007-3 453 AIM-120C-5空對空導彈和小牛空對地導彈 George W. Bush $421
50 canceled 66 F-16C/D George W. Bush $3,700
51 2007-9-13 P-3C, Standard Missile-2 George W. Bush $2,230
52 2007-11-13 Patriot missile system upgrades George W. Bush $939 incomplete
53 2008-10-3 Patriot PAC-3 missile system, E-2T, Apache Longbow attack helicopters George W. Bush $6,463 incomplete
54 2010-1-29 60 UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters with 120 T-700-GE-701D engines, etc. Barack Obama $3,100[30]
55 2010-1-29 35 Multifunctional Information Distribution Systems Low Volume Terminals (MIDS/LVT-1), etc. Barack Obama $340[31]
56 2010-01-29 2 Osprey Class Mine Hunting Ships, incl. refurbishment and upgrade, etc. Barack Obama $105[32]
57 2010-1-29 10 RTM-84L HARPOON BLOCK II Telemetry missiles; 2 ATM-84L HARPOON Block II Telemetry missiles, etc. Barack Obama $37[33]
58 2010-1-29 114 Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missiles, 3 AN/MPQ-65 Radar Sets, 1 AN/MSQ-133 Information and Coordination Centrals, etc. Barack Obama $2,810[34]
59 2011-09-21 Continuation of a pilot training program and logistics support for F-16 aircraft at Luke Air Force Base, Arizona Barack Obama $500[35]
60 2011-9-21 retrofit of 145 F-16A/B aircraft that includes sale of: 176 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars, etc. Barack Obama $5,300[36]
61 2011-9-21 a Foreign Military Sales Order II (FMSO II) to provide funds for blanket order requisitions, under the Cooperative Logistics Supply Agreement (CLSSA) for spare parts in support of F-16A/B, F-5E/F, C-130H, and Indigenous Defense Fighter aircraft. Barack Obama $52[37]
62 2015-12-16 208 Javelin Guided Missiles, etc. Barack Obama $57[38]
63 2015-12-16 4 Multifunctional Information Distribution Systems (MIDS) On Ship Low Volume Terminals (LVTs); 4 Command and Control Processor (C2P) units, etc. Barack Obama $75[39]
64 2015-12-16 769 TOW 2B Aero, Radio Frequency (RF) Missiles (BGM-71F-Series)；14 TOW 2B Aero, Radio Frequency (RF) (BGM-71F-Series) Fly-to-Buy Missiles；46 Improved Target Acquisition System (ITAS)；4 ITAS spares, etc. Barack Obama $268[40]
65 2015-12-16 13 MK 15 Phalanx Block lB Baseline 2 Close-in Weapons System (CIWS) Guns; 8 CIWS Block 1 Baseline 0 to Block 1B Baseline 2 upgrade kits; 260,000 Rounds of 20mm MK 244 MOD 0 Armour-Piercing Discarding Sabots (APDS) Barack Obama $416[41]
66 2015-12-16 The sale, refurbishment, and upgrade of 2 Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates (FFG-7) being provided as Excess Defense Articles (EDA). Barack Obama $190[42]
67 2015-12-16 250 Block I -92F MANPAD Stinger Missiles; 4 Block I -92F MANPAD Stinger Fly-to-Buy Missiles, etc. Barack Obama $217[43]
68 2015-12-16 36 Assault Amphibious Vehicles (AAVs); 30 .50 Caliber M2 machine guns; 6 7.62mm M240 machine guns Barack Obama $375[44]
69 2015-12-16 Follow-on life cycle support to maintain the Multifunctional Information Distribution Systems Low Volume Terminals (MIDS/LVT-1) & Joint Tactical Information Distribution Systems (JTIDS). Barack Obama $120[45]
70 2015-12-16 unspecified minesweepers in a direct commercial sale
The US “one china” policy was, is, and always will be a diplomatic convenience with little practical reality. Even though there is “legally speaking” only one China, the US has a defense agreement with a certain island that “legally speaking” does not exist (so do many other countries). According to diplomatic babble, Taipei supposedly does not exist — yet dozens of Taiwanian companies do business with dozens of Chinese companies.
Taiwan (which diplomatically does not exist) regularly exchanges cannon fire with the Chinese mainland. The US, UK, Australia, Japan and Singapore all sell weapons to this island pretend nation, without China’s permission. Singapore, whose citizens are majority Chinese ancestry, holds military drills with Taiwan every two years, even though Taiwan officially doesn’t exist.
Trump wants free trade — as in two way free trade, not the one sided trade that is fraudulently labeled free trade by Washington diplomats, who regularly land their planes on an island that doesn’t exist (at least not in their pretend world).
China isn’t going to cut itself off from most of its export markets, no matter what silly threats their press weenie makes. China isn’t going to launch a military strike against Taiwan, because such an attack would be self defeating even assuming they “win” the island that diplomatically doesn’t exist.
The US government isn’t going to risk alienating its top debt holder, nor the one country that would be needed to successfully isolate the boogeyman in Moscow. China’s commodity needs are way too important to Australia and the trade opportunities too important to South Korea, Japan and the USA itself.
Exposing the schizophrenia between the practical real world and the pretend world of diplomats put Beijing in a very tough spot. They cannot invade Taiwan without causing bigger trade problems elsewhere. They cannot stop other countries from continuing to trade with Taiwan. China cannot maintain domestic growth while isolating itself from major global economies — even if those other economies have serious problems of their own.
China will improve bilateral free trade, because they don’t have any real choice. The rest of the world will continue to pretend like Taiwan doesn’t exist, diplomatically speaking, because we don’t really have a choice.
The citizens of Taiwan and the citizens of China will decide how the official maps are drawn, not the politicians. Trump knows that, even if the hysterical mental patients in the media are too dumb to pick up on it.
The US fought two border wars with China during the 20th century. One in Korea, and one in Nam. Since then China has become an economic super power by adopting some elements of free market capitalism. Meanwhile, bank printing and ivory tower academic theories have moved the US backward. Keynesian GDP stats mischaracterize service inflation and Keynesian Pyramids as GDP, but the reality is that the US has fewer planes, ships, and troops each year. Cities and their pension plans across the nation are on the verge of oblivion, thanks to ZIRP and outrageous service inflation.
Thankfully China never got into those shenanigans of printing money and infinite debt. They are solid as a rock…or maybe an island build of sand on dead coral in the ocean
Trade war? How about an actual war?
Good idea — send in all the Washington DC and Beijing bureaucrats to fight each other to death, but leave the citizenry out of it. They are the ones with the axes to grind, not us.
People with more common sense know there is nothing for China or the USA to gain by fighting a real war instigated by inept bureaucrats from both sides.
And businesses, both in the US and in China, know a trade war would not benefit either side. That is the difference between a President-elect who was a real estate weenie, and a president who never held a single job outside of government.
China’s not quite ready yet.
Give it a few years though. They’re working on it.
It would be pretty stupid to get into a ground war with a country with 1.4 billion people. Sort of like leaning into a right hook.
But we never seem to learn. When’s the last time we actually won a war?
Request for clarification: “when is the last time **WE** won a war?”
“WE” did pretty well in the last official war (world war 2) — its not a war unless Congress declares it *AND* we the people get behind it.
On the other hand, “we in Washington DC” has lost a lot of police actions and diplomatic interventions. They just finished losing in Ukraine and Libya, and they are working diligently to lose in Syria.
The problem is too many citizens got killed, not enough bureaucrats.
“When’s the last time we actually won a war?”
By what definition? The original stated objective in Korea was to save South Korea. We won the original objective. In 1991, the stated objective was to remove Saddam from Kuait. We won the objective. In 2003, the stated objective was to remove Saddam from power. We won the objective.
We have been losing the war on drugs and the war on terror, neither of which are actually wars.
Trump will also refuse to call China a market economy, a key decision under WTO rules which allows the U.S. to restrict Chinese imports.
China has the weakest hand of any country right now, they can’t afford a drop in global trade. If they lash out militarily it will play into Trump’s hands.
America’s Ponzi allows us to pay people indefinitely to NOT work. China seems to not have that luxury as with each major layoff they have riots and violence. It is hard to imagine they will be able to absorb much further production cuts without real pain coming to the surface. Which is why I keep saying they will give product away to keep the factories running. America has no protectionist policies in place so when we experience dumping it takes sometimes years for it to work through our courts and allow any restrictions. By then the damage is done. America’s manufacturing is about cooked and I doubt it could last more than a year under heavy dumping. Once our factories are gone we will pay whatever the Chinese want to charge. Outside of any madness or economic theory, the Chinese ARE predatory traders. They do not seek balanced fair markets. They seek domination and are not afraid to be aggressive, especially compared to our passive approach. Trump offers to change that, but it may prove too little too late.
China’s response to Trump simply means they are telling him that they are prepared to negotiate with the Master Negotiator. The adults are now back in charge and doing their job. Ignore the hysterical nattering nabobs in the MSM who have no clue, but do have their own agendas.
US and EU anti dumping actions and China going to WTO even before Trump is in office,
http://www.euractiv.com/section/trade-society/news/china-starts-trade-battle-over-market-economy-status/
“Trump has a pronounced propensity to say and do anything, then back down later. Two prime examples include prosecuting Hillary and “clearing the swamp”.”
It isn’t January 21st, yet. Hillary seems to want to push her luck, with this electoral college stunt. Trump can still have her prosecuted, once the clock starts. As for draining the swamp, we will just have to wait and see what happens on that front.
At one time Teddy Roosevelt was sitting in the office of Vice President, with no more power than Trump has now. Once he had the power, Teddy went after the Trusts.
If you think Trump’s Goldman boys are going to go after anyone you’re dreaming. He also has a Secretary of Labor who is on record as preferring Central American illegals to American workers. And still the Trump fanboys think their messiah has come.
At least let us hope, and it’s not like Hillary was even offering to improve things….well maybe. I take that back. If American business was willing to donate MORE to her foundation than Chinese interests, then maybe she might have improved things for American workers.
Maybe.
Trump “fanboys” are responding to the media and the Democrats clear intent to delegitimize Trump’s victory. You might also call them citizens concerned that a victory for Team R be treated the same as a Victory for Team D. It’s a dangerous game the media is playing. It’s important to know they’re not doing this without being noticed.
Expecting conservatives to be treated equally to progressives is the ultimate in futility.
Progressives have worked tirelessly in conjunction with the MSM to create the notion that liberalism is light, enlightenment, and conservatism is darkness, repression, racism and hate. For each policy declaration of the left, regardless of its ultimate destructive course, it is deemed of good cause, while conservative policies seldom even reach the level of a debate of facts and when conservative facts are raised, they are instantly attacked again as racist hate speech, or wanting people to die, or destroying the planet for money.
Progressives can institute policies that cost millions of jobs, making people destitute, and they are declared the lovers of the environment. They can use welfare system to create poverty class, multi-generational dependents, and they love the poor.
There is NO argument that can be had with a progressive that does not end up in disparagement of the conservative. Not a dispute of facts. Not a discussion of cost. No. It ends up with an attack on the character of the messenger, and the media is with the program on page one.
We have the insistence that Russians have elected Trump. No evidence. No fact. But anyone who questions it is carrying water for the Russians. Further, the “influence” that the Russians have supposed introduced are the unrefuted emails of Hillary and supporters.
FACT.
TRUTH.
UNFAIR.
Meanwhile, we have reams of circumstantial yet very real evidence of a multitude of Hillary crimes of which NO REASONABLE Prosecutor would indict. Real evidence. The kind that prosecutors use every day to build cases with.
Further, we are told that unofficial, unattributed, anonymous testimony from unnamed CIA sources are convinced of Russia interference, which Obama believes makes an investigation imperative, while COMEY, of the FBI, who timidly released limited info on Hillary, was NOT credible and an obvious political operative in the tank for Trump.
Fair treatment from the press or ANY progressive? GIVE ME A BREAK.
“If you think Trump’s Goldman boys are going to go after anyone you’re dreaming.”
The funny thing is, you never know. A Goldman boy exposed the fact that GS refers to their clients as Muppets.
A chance US citizens may need a visa to visit EU, Art of the Deal mentioned here, hardball with Trump.
http://www.euractiv.com/section/all/opinion/eu-should-play-hardball-with-us-on-visa-reciprocity/
France has become a failed state, with SWAT teams and militarized police guarding what are essentially gated communities (like Iraq’s “green zone”). Crime is rampant. Police officers sitting in their patrol car were ambushed by illegal immigrants who smashed the car windows and hurled molotov cocktails into the police officer’s laps — two officers burned to death, with two more shot (in serious condition in hospital). France’s unemployment rate is much higher than the EU average, and the opinions of Paris clearly differ from what French farmers think and demand.
Italy’s government just collapsed. Renzi isn’t even sure if he is officially fired yet, mostly because there is no official government to throw him out. Two of the three major parties in Italy are strongly anti-EU, while Renzi’s party is in complete disarray. Oh, and he just lost a major referedum.
In Germany, the CDU cannot find anyone foolish enough to want to even try to clean up Merkel’s illegal immigration mess. The economy is weak. Illegal immigrants are not paying taxes but demand endless welfare, and that is when they aren’t committing serious crimes. German police departments have publicly expressed their frustration with the horrid policies imposed on them by Merkel’s government. As with Italy, the parties most likely to replace the CDU are all strongly anti-EU.
Those are the three supposed “anchor countries” of the EU.
The fourth “anchor country” (England) already left the EU. Theresa May to her credit is focused on expanding trade outside the EU and dialing back silly EU regulations — she doesn’t have the time to waste “negotiating” with the EU to leave. England already left, and there is really nothing the EU can do about it — even if the EU were solvent.
We can all take bets on when the doctor will officially pronounce time of death, but the EU is already dead.
Art of the Deal rule one: don’t waste time negotiating with corpses. Negotiate with England or Italy or Germany or some other live counter-party
I’m not sure what it is you have against multiculturalism, but obviously you have a low tolerance for alternate value systems. Immigrants are just looking for a better life, and the fact that they might actually have to take someone else’s life to accomplish it, is simply an unfortunate consequence.
Sorry for the sarcasm.
It is such a sad thing to watch as civilization just sacrifices itself on the pyres of political correctness. Cultures that in some cases are thousands of years old will simply vanish because they have been indoctrinated with guilt for their success and led to believe that their only atonement is suicide.
How come when the Japanese and other cultures resist integration and multiculturalism, it is seen as a cultural choice, but when western (white) societies do it, it is overt racism?
Plenty of US citizenry can trace their family history back to a person or persons who arrived in the US at Ellis Island in New York harbor (its the island behind the Statue of Liberty for those unfamiliar). Millions of disgusting, unwashed, poorly educated immigrants (my family among them) immigrated legally to the US thru Ellis Island immigration facility.
There is a big difference between lawful immigration (which I think most US citizens endorse whole heartedly), versus illegal immigration and lawlessness (which is the purview of “globalists” like Obama, Soros and Merkel).
Yes, I know your reply was sarcasm. I just wanted to clarify for the readers that don’t understand the difference
There is no real purity of race that I see as important, but there ARE genocides that most would find difficulty with. When we see a mass influx of people from cultures with NO common values, religion or culture INVADE regions, it becomes a genocide for that culture. There is no blending, no integration. It is simply the displacement of one people for another.
Some Americans bemoan Russia’s taking of the Crimea, when the Crimea was and has been for all practical purposes Russian for centuries. Regardless of the politics of it, the CULTURE remains largely intact. Now flood the Netherlands with Moroccans, and tell me what we have?
We are all mutts but our family lines have been pretty much gradual in transformation and generally voluntary. That is not what I’m seeing in Europe. In America we are experiences much of the same thing in that the Hispanic influx has been massive. The big difference for us is that the cultures are not incompatible and the Hispanic culture has not been foreign in much of America for many years….if ever. Our immigration problem is more about economics than anything else.
No, the UK. Has not left the EU.
We’re still talking about it weeks after a close vote with low turnout.
It
Going to happen no matter what the remainers hope
Mish, unfortunately it is deliberately being complicated. Transitional deal so no leave before 2020, EU saying EU citizens should be under EU law even if in the UK and UK citizens offered EU citizenship to split the UK.
Once the EU has its claws into a country it is very hard to get out, Best we can hope is early election February 2017 and opposition wiped-out at the balance box to teach them a lesson.
First act thereafter should, in my opinion, be to remove the vote from all dual or triple nationality voters.
The notion of freedom is voluntary choice….by the people, NOT their masters.
Diplomatically speaking, and legally speaking — Taiwan “does not exist”. But in practical terms, the island is clearly there. It has an autonomous government that trades with other countries, buys/sells military hardware, and negotiates treaties without Beijing’s permission.
Diplomatically speaking, and legally speaking — the EU might be waiting for England to ‘activate Article 50’. But in practical terms, England is already gone.
Diplomatically speaking, the EU still exists on paper. In practical terms, its members cannot afford to keep it going.
We have been in a trade war with China since the mid ’90’s, when China pegged its currency to the dollar, and it still does (though now with a “trading range” which it manages to change whenever it wants.
The war has resulted in an aggregate trade deficit for American industry of roughly $8 Trillion. That, added to its multiplier effect, has resulted in the gutting of our middle class economy and manufacturing base.
Manufacturing happens to be one of the few economic activities which actually has a “multiplier,” and our economists appear brain dead to this loss.
If they don’t want a “trade war,” surprise; they already have one. And the US is a complete loser in that war. It does, however, make Walmart, GE and other importers to US markets, very profitable, subsidized by the Chinese peg. Needless to say, that’s the source of much of the whining about protecting “free trade,” which Chinese trade is absolutely not.
Actually it’s only consider a Trade War if we fight back. AS is, it is simply a war of attrition where we complain incessantly while doing NOTHING.
You had Geert Wilders case, now, read blow and weep. Whistle blowers in court and convicted – for outing Luxembourg under Junkers.
Today Lagarde is also in court – if found guilty she’s probably toast as head of the IMF. Somehow I have no confidence at all in European justice.
Read aghast: http://www.euractiv.com/section/all/news/the-brief-luxleaks-whistleblowers-trial-is-a-disgrace/
China needs America more than America needs China. GO TRUMP!
Kissinger was in China when Trump took the Taiwan phone call. Afterwards Kissinger met with Trump again [Kissinger had previously met with Trump before Kissinger’s China visit.] The whole thing appears orchestrated.
I have a very simple opinion on this.
The One China Policy should have never been accepted by the United States no matter how many other nations accept it. The U.S. should have exercised its veto in the UN Security Council to demand that China’s seat remain with Taiwan or be abandoned.
If the UN did not go along, we should have kicked it out of New York City.
The acceptance of the One China Policy was a mistake and it is time to undo it.
While I don’t know what Trump is thinking, but at least he is not playing the game the Chinese way. The way China does business is to make people admitting what is false to be true. If you want to do business with me, you will have to see things as I imagine, and not as they really are.
Taiwan is not (currently) a part of China, and there is no reason why it must be part of China. But when China tells the US to say that a deer is a horse (Chinese idiom), the US happily obliged.
I don’t know what Trump is up to, but at least he’s not played by the Chinese, he plays them.
Taiwan is not part of China, and unless taken by force, it won’t be for a long time. To say otherwise just to please the Chinese for some trade gains is so un-American.
In the 30’s the us was hit hard in the trade wars because we were the world’s big exporter. Europe did not see the jobless rates we did.
In the present we are the big importer… reduced trade will hurt Germany and China, our domestic mfrs and local jobs would benefit, though our big internationals might get hurt.
I think candidate Trump’s visit to Mexico will be a good model for what will happen with China. He will stir up a lot $h-t with comments about Taiwan, like he did with the wall, and go to China and act as if it never happened once he gets there.
The problem is that the Chinese leadership is not president Enrique Peña Nieto. They may not be so easily convinced that this was done just to keep the base happy.