Bradley A. Thayer and Lianchao Han’s op-ed at Spectator has about the harshest view of China of any I’ve encountered:
This is the intellectual framework that China is creating under the guise of ‘a community with a shared future for mankind,’ most recently expressed in the July 2019 defense white paper. Precisely what the Chinese Communist party (CCP) means by this concept is deliberately vague and nebulous. But it is clear enough from the more tangible comments defining peace, stability, and prosperity in China with the collective good of the world, as is the equation of a strong Chinese military as a force for world peace, stability and the building of a shared future for mankind.
This shared future is certain to be dystopian. Any community that the CCP creates will be totalitarian and oppressive by its nature. Any shared future that it seeks to create will be one in which the rest of the world adapts to serve the interests of Beijing. The future will be shared only because China’s power is great enough to trap states into it either by seduction or coercion. It will be like Foxconn on a global scale. Beijing’s conception of global governance is a firm hierarchy with it on top. This shared future will be less free, less diverse, and far more oppressive than the present one.
I don’t know how that view can be reconciled with our present policy. I don’t even see how any trade with a country pursuing such an agenda can be justified.
I’ve been highly critical of the Chinese regime but my view isn’t quite as extreme as that. I guess my view would be more along the lines of “he who sups with the devil must have a long spooon”. Our commerce with China should be more cautious than at present and contingent on China’s adhering to the international commitments it has undertaken. Trade with China should benefit more than the Walton family. Cost-benefit should be considered.