I’m trying to get my head around the recommendations of the editors of the Washington Post to the leaders of the G-7 regarding China:
This weekend’s summit of the Group of Seven industrial democracies offers an opportunity for those governments, including the United States, to send Mr. Xi a clear message: If he chooses to crush Hong Kong’s democracy movement, there will be far-reaching consequences for China’s political and economic relations with the West. The G-7 leaders should make clear that they will not hesitate to adopt punishing sanctions, including the immediate revocation of Hong Kong’s special economic status, which facilitates flows of trade and investment to the mainland.
Such a declaration is needed because, until now, the West’s response to the Hong Kong crisis has been weak. Official statements, such as one issued last week by the European Union and Canada and another by the State Department, have mostly stuck to generic diplomatic calls for “restraint†and “deescalation†and “dialogue.†While supporting Hong Kong’s “fundamental freedoms,†neither the E.U.-Canada statement nor the State Department’s explicitly backed the mass protest movement or its entirely reasonable demands.
Worst of all has been the performance of President Trump, who has repeatedly made statements siding with Mr. Xi. In July, he declared that the Communist ruler had handled the protests “very responsibly†because “he has allowed that to go on for a long time.†A couple of weeks later, he called the demonstrations “riots†and mused that China might “want to stop that†before flashing a green light: “But that’s between Hong Kong and that’s between China, because Hong Kong is a part of China.â€
They have routinely ignored China’s disregarding of the commitments it made when admitted to the World Trade Organization. They don’t care about China’s violations of the UNCLOS law of the sea agreement to which China is signatory. The Chinese authorities are supposed to take them seriously now?
If world leaders want the countries of the world to take international law seriously, they must enforce it even in small things. Even when it hurts their own countries.
For China, the slippery slope in Hong Kong leads to Taiwan. China will not let either have real independence.
By the way, the US itself has a very sordid history when it comes to rejecting inconvenient treaties. ABM, NAFTA, JCPOA, and INF are just four examples. INF was abandoned so that we could test a new intermediate range missile for use against China. Bolton has made it clear that New Start is likely to die. After that are SALT I, SALT II, and START.