Consider this paragraph from a recent piece at the South China Morning Post complaining about Australia’s “rhetorical war” with China:
China and other nations in Asia have been poorly served by the existing world order and there is every need to let them have a greater say. Xi has pledged to make the system fairer. Rather than trying to shore up an outdated foreign policy, Australia should be trying to work for a more inclusive approach. While building improved ties and understanding with China, it can work for and encourage the strengthening of multilateral organisations such as the United Nations, G20 and the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank.
Now look at this graph:
What is the effective definition of “poorly served” in that context? It would seem to me that China has been very well served, indeed, by the “existing world order” whatever that may be.
In this case, “poorly served†means that China isn’t getting the subservience it thinks it is due.
Agreed, China believes it has earned respect as Sicilians would say.
Interesting that furthur down that page, an Australian MP’s has resigned his leadership post because of Chinese ties and to furthur insult China, Australia is pondering a ban on all foreign campaign donations. Interesting he also told a visiting Chinese business man how to avoid monitoring of their conversation by their spy agency.