The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) commends the New People’s Army (NPA) for the series of successful tactical offensives across the country over the past two months. Various NPA units hav…
This is one of the actual left critiques I have of them. I understand why they do it as they don't intervene in foreign affairs, but still I can't help but to feel they could be better. Still better not start a proxy war in the Philippines as that would make the situation worse.
Yep, I think they could do differently, but I'm not smart enough to say confidently what that should look like. Building relations with fash is a bad look though, straight up.
I'll even add that both the MR pact and extending non-interventionism to include fascist regimes may be the best decision in all of the parallel universes, but that doesn't make it "good". It's a definitie sign that the PRC, while an order of magnitude less bad than the USA, is no longer in a revolutionary state, and while Xi is the left most leader they've had in a couple decades, they are still at risk of succumbing to capital in the future (it's happened partially, but remains to be seen if it's just going to level off as it is, or if there is going to be a future phase of stamping it out).
China has had a strict non interventionist foreign policy for decades, and Maoists groups throughout the region have been staunchly opposed to China since the 80s too. The Philippines has massive strategic geopolitical implications for China and US involvement in the area increasing is not good for anyone, China is not gonna just not have trade relations with the Philippines. Its a shit situation for sure though.
It's one thing to be anti interventionist, it's another thing to provide massive economic support to a nation actively suppressing their local communist movement. That's called being interventionist in support of the regime.
China is not going to just not engage in any sort of trade with one of the most important geopolitical places in the region, regardless of what internal struggles exist. Maintaining a strict boycott of the Philippines would just leave it open to US intervention and influence. They engage with the Philippine through the BRI the same as any other country.
Yeah this is a bad take if you're saying this in an argument to still think of China as being good.
Communists should not be supportive of real politik as a broad strategy for international affairs. As this action is completely devoid of any sort of ideological end goal, if China wanted to exert major influence in the philippines they absolutely have the resources to make it a reality.
Revolving this discussion around the childish and western-centric ideal of bestowing your approval upon countries as though the world revolves around our every inclination makes this an entirely inane conversation, and it is in many ways a sort of remnant of a colonial imperialist mindset that makes westerners think their approval and "support" of this or that country to be of some sort of crucial importance. I support the efforts of the CPP but I have no delusions to their situation, and I don't expect China to either. They had materially supported the efforts of the CPP for decades until the 80s and then finally cut ties in the 2000s once the situation became more apparent as the internal conflicts within the CPP fractured and impaired the movement. The Philippines is a major economy and has a strategic importance to China and the region as a whole, of course they're going to trade with them, i'm not sure what you're envisioning the alternative as exactly because the US would love to swoop in and provide direct support instead.
Leftist support for a country should stem from the belief that they represent a model of governance that should be emulated by other countries and their own country. This isn't about should you be happy in the event of regime change or not, as obviously it would be bad if the CCP collapsed.
I think that is not consistently true one way or another for China. There are some things I think they do that are good, but for others, they act no differently than America would react in the same situation and I still think it's okay to say that's bad on a leftist forum.
Just like I said it was bad that Vietnam was giving up their sovergnty by joining the TPP and was downvoted for that.
is a very tiring way to frame things, especially when you consider the context of the existential threat to which the west has posed to these countries historically. Revolving your discussions around whether China or Vietnam or Venezuela or the DPRK are to be deemed good or bad or should be supported or not is a way of thinking that leftists need to be more critical of because it carries a lot of gross colonialist implications people often don't consider.
There's things to criticize about China, their foreign policy has always been less than ideal, but there's also a lot of history in the area to consider in this as well. I don't really see how China could uphold a non interventionist foreign policy while directly then punishing the Philippines with sanctions or tariffs or cutting trade on the basis of internal conflicts. How does that help the CPP if Duterte just turns to the US instead for support?
I'm more educated than that and I'm totally aware of the sorts of constraints that these countries are under, we're no longer on reddit and need to defend these countries to people who have no idea about the above constraints. But I generally do not believe contemporary China is under the same constraints as other contemporary socialist nation's are.
China is more powerful than you're giving credit for and the philippines is already US aligned by default due to the imperial legacy. China siding with Duerte is irrelevant as the US will then just try and push him out should they get a real foothold in there. They need a longer term solution anyways and supporting a neofascist is a very bad look. Communist nation's should at an absolute minimum be actively providing resources for countries that are actively suppressing communists (both electorally and against them in the streets).
They simply either just don't care or have more pressing short term concerns like how the philippines joined the TPP.
The Philippines is part of the NAM, so they are not aligned with any major power bloc, but they have had a historical relationship with the US which is exactly what China had been worried about and why its looking to counter that in order to diminish the influence the Quad has in the region. This recent relation with China is new in terms of its scope as the Philippines has been looking to move away from American influence recently. I think you might be underestimating the threat to which China is actually facing, we've seen the sort of attempts made by the west through things like the HK protests and Xinjiang and how they've escalated recently, as well as with Tibet and the Indian border. China is by no means a regional hegemon, and it still faces continual conflicts, so its understandable that it would need to have relations with all countries in the area to maintain influence. I'm not sure theres any such simple solution to this, China is going to follow its interests in surviving and developing.
I can't help but feel if China does fund communists there, there would be a massive proxy war that would fuck things up worse. Maybe their foreign policy could change as China becomes the worlds largest economy, but what do I know? My hope is the CPP at least makes some gains and survive for a while at minimum. If they do the thing, then fuck yeah.
Maybe one day they can, but China isn't powerful enough to start antagonizing every nation by undertaking aggressive actions. All it would do is drive even more nations into the US's arms for protection. Even the Soviets were like "fuck this" sometimes and they had a much more based foreign policy
China is absolutely powerful enough to do such a thing. It's still bad foreign policy, but they could at the very least sanction their nearby neighbors if they're fucking around.
China is largely in support of maintaining the status quo of all the countries it does business with.
I mean stoppage of upcoming planned foreign direct investment into the country and suspending certain BRI projects that credit the existing government with a win.
I still don't see how this would stop Duterte's government. If China starts going "Stop being a fascist, bro, or we won't give you any more investments" then he's just going to turn to even more US-investment. Either way, the fascist government is going to exist. It's a matter of deciding whether the fascist is going to be western aligned or Chinese-aligned. Nobody likes making deals with fascists, but it's literally the only option, unless you want a Chinese invasion and puppet government.
Similar to Iran and the whole theocracy thing. Nobody likes theocracies but if you wanna survive on the international stage you have to make tenuous alliances with Bad Guys.
I don't see any solution where China has a greater foothold in the philippines than the US does without supporting rebels there. The only reason to support Duerte is short term concerns that are insignificant compared to what the US has already done there. Theyre already a part of the TPP lol.
I don’t see any solution where China has a greater foothold in the philippines than the US does without supporting rebels there.
I don't know how I would quantify who has more influence over Duterte's government, but as it stands now, China has enough influence to keep Duterte from taking hostile actions towards China. I don't care if the USA holds more overall influence, just that China has enough influence to not have another fascist enemy working against them.
China has enough resources to fund communist rebel groups in tons of countries, but they don't because if the rebels either get crushed or end up severing ties with China, then they end up not just losing a potential alliance, but facing ramifications from international organizations that they aren't strong enough to contest right now. They are going with the safer option. Soviet funding of successful rebel groups produced some of the best communist governments of the 20th century, but it was also a massive strain on their national budget and incredibly risky. China is choosing to not do that. I understand both foreign policy methods, but in this specific instance I think the Chinese line is better.
Maybe, but they have taken aggressive stances in the past towards places they should have been supportive to, well beyond simple realpolitik.
I support China and Xi without hesitation and understand that difficult choices must be made to ensure China's survival, but I think we need to reserve the right to say we think they are making the wrong decision.
Not because China is going to listen to some idiots on the net but because it can inform our own praxis and approach.
Being non-interventionist is one thing, supporting Fascists now and attacking communists like they did in the 70s-80s is another. We are allowed to say backing Pol Pot was not a great look.
That's what the USSR did lol, but its not about expecting the same from china as much as it is providing massive economic support to a nation that is actively shutting down their communist movement.
From what i've read it seems they have the same relations as China basically. Vietnam is the closest to them so they actually are the only ones who also have a military alliance with them.
Reminder that the CPC have decided to work with Duterte instead of giving a shit about their comrades' struggle against the fascist regime
This is one of the actual left critiques I have of them. I understand why they do it as they don't intervene in foreign affairs, but still I can't help but to feel they could be better. Still better not start a proxy war in the Philippines as that would make the situation worse.
Yep, I think they could do differently, but I'm not smart enough to say confidently what that should look like. Building relations with fash is a bad look though, straight up.
Molotov-Ribbentrop pact vibes.
I'll even add that both the MR pact and extending non-interventionism to include fascist regimes may be the best decision in all of the parallel universes, but that doesn't make it "good". It's a definitie sign that the PRC, while an order of magnitude less bad than the USA, is no longer in a revolutionary state, and while Xi is the left most leader they've had in a couple decades, they are still at risk of succumbing to capital in the future (it's happened partially, but remains to be seen if it's just going to level off as it is, or if there is going to be a future phase of stamping it out).
China has had a strict non interventionist foreign policy for decades, and Maoists groups throughout the region have been staunchly opposed to China since the 80s too. The Philippines has massive strategic geopolitical implications for China and US involvement in the area increasing is not good for anyone, China is not gonna just not have trade relations with the Philippines. Its a shit situation for sure though.
It's one thing to be anti interventionist, it's another thing to provide massive economic support to a nation actively suppressing their local communist movement. That's called being interventionist in support of the regime.
China is not going to just not engage in any sort of trade with one of the most important geopolitical places in the region, regardless of what internal struggles exist. Maintaining a strict boycott of the Philippines would just leave it open to US intervention and influence. They engage with the Philippine through the BRI the same as any other country.
Yeah this is a bad take if you're saying this in an argument to still think of China as being good.
Communists should not be supportive of real politik as a broad strategy for international affairs. As this action is completely devoid of any sort of ideological end goal, if China wanted to exert major influence in the philippines they absolutely have the resources to make it a reality.
Revolving this discussion around the childish and western-centric ideal of bestowing your approval upon countries as though the world revolves around our every inclination makes this an entirely inane conversation, and it is in many ways a sort of remnant of a colonial imperialist mindset that makes westerners think their approval and "support" of this or that country to be of some sort of crucial importance. I support the efforts of the CPP but I have no delusions to their situation, and I don't expect China to either. They had materially supported the efforts of the CPP for decades until the 80s and then finally cut ties in the 2000s once the situation became more apparent as the internal conflicts within the CPP fractured and impaired the movement. The Philippines is a major economy and has a strategic importance to China and the region as a whole, of course they're going to trade with them, i'm not sure what you're envisioning the alternative as exactly because the US would love to swoop in and provide direct support instead.
Leftist support for a country should stem from the belief that they represent a model of governance that should be emulated by other countries and their own country. This isn't about should you be happy in the event of regime change or not, as obviously it would be bad if the CCP collapsed.
I think that is not consistently true one way or another for China. There are some things I think they do that are good, but for others, they act no differently than America would react in the same situation and I still think it's okay to say that's bad on a leftist forum.
Just like I said it was bad that Vietnam was giving up their sovergnty by joining the TPP and was downvoted for that.
I'm just saying this:
is a very tiring way to frame things, especially when you consider the context of the existential threat to which the west has posed to these countries historically. Revolving your discussions around whether China or Vietnam or Venezuela or the DPRK are to be deemed good or bad or should be supported or not is a way of thinking that leftists need to be more critical of because it carries a lot of gross colonialist implications people often don't consider.
There's things to criticize about China, their foreign policy has always been less than ideal, but there's also a lot of history in the area to consider in this as well. I don't really see how China could uphold a non interventionist foreign policy while directly then punishing the Philippines with sanctions or tariffs or cutting trade on the basis of internal conflicts. How does that help the CPP if Duterte just turns to the US instead for support?
I'm more educated than that and I'm totally aware of the sorts of constraints that these countries are under, we're no longer on reddit and need to defend these countries to people who have no idea about the above constraints. But I generally do not believe contemporary China is under the same constraints as other contemporary socialist nation's are.
China is more powerful than you're giving credit for and the philippines is already US aligned by default due to the imperial legacy. China siding with Duerte is irrelevant as the US will then just try and push him out should they get a real foothold in there. They need a longer term solution anyways and supporting a neofascist is a very bad look. Communist nation's should at an absolute minimum be actively providing resources for countries that are actively suppressing communists (both electorally and against them in the streets).
They simply either just don't care or have more pressing short term concerns like how the philippines joined the TPP.
The Philippines is part of the NAM, so they are not aligned with any major power bloc, but they have had a historical relationship with the US which is exactly what China had been worried about and why its looking to counter that in order to diminish the influence the Quad has in the region. This recent relation with China is new in terms of its scope as the Philippines has been looking to move away from American influence recently. I think you might be underestimating the threat to which China is actually facing, we've seen the sort of attempts made by the west through things like the HK protests and Xinjiang and how they've escalated recently, as well as with Tibet and the Indian border. China is by no means a regional hegemon, and it still faces continual conflicts, so its understandable that it would need to have relations with all countries in the area to maintain influence. I'm not sure theres any such simple solution to this, China is going to follow its interests in surviving and developing.
It's a land of contrasts
I can't help but feel if China does fund communists there, there would be a massive proxy war that would fuck things up worse. Maybe their foreign policy could change as China becomes the worlds largest economy, but what do I know? My hope is the CPP at least makes some gains and survive for a while at minimum. If they do the thing, then fuck yeah.
They don't necessarily need to find the communists, but they should take a different stance toward Duterte
Yeah it's very different to be non interventionist than actively supporting right wing governments.
The CPC has chosen to work with pretty much every existing state.
what!! China isn't constantly spending it's national budget on aiding every foreign Maoist militia !! Socialism is ruined 😤 😤
This, but unironically
Maybe one day they can, but China isn't powerful enough to start antagonizing every nation by undertaking aggressive actions. All it would do is drive even more nations into the US's arms for protection. Even the Soviets were like "fuck this" sometimes and they had a much more based foreign policy
China is absolutely powerful enough to do such a thing. It's still bad foreign policy, but they could at the very least sanction their nearby neighbors if they're fucking around.
China is largely in support of maintaining the status quo of all the countries it does business with.
sanctions are immoral and more often than not hurt the people instead of the political elite causing the problems.
Or you mean other sorts of sanctions?
I mean stoppage of upcoming planned foreign direct investment into the country and suspending certain BRI projects that credit the existing government with a win.
I still don't see how this would stop Duterte's government. If China starts going "Stop being a fascist, bro, or we won't give you any more investments" then he's just going to turn to even more US-investment. Either way, the fascist government is going to exist. It's a matter of deciding whether the fascist is going to be western aligned or Chinese-aligned. Nobody likes making deals with fascists, but it's literally the only option, unless you want a Chinese invasion and puppet government.
Similar to Iran and the whole theocracy thing. Nobody likes theocracies but if you wanna survive on the international stage you have to make tenuous alliances with Bad Guys.
I don't see any solution where China has a greater foothold in the philippines than the US does without supporting rebels there. The only reason to support Duerte is short term concerns that are insignificant compared to what the US has already done there. Theyre already a part of the TPP lol.
I don't know how I would quantify who has more influence over Duterte's government, but as it stands now, China has enough influence to keep Duterte from taking hostile actions towards China. I don't care if the USA holds more overall influence, just that China has enough influence to not have another fascist enemy working against them.
China has enough resources to fund communist rebel groups in tons of countries, but they don't because if the rebels either get crushed or end up severing ties with China, then they end up not just losing a potential alliance, but facing ramifications from international organizations that they aren't strong enough to contest right now. They are going with the safer option. Soviet funding of successful rebel groups produced some of the best communist governments of the 20th century, but it was also a massive strain on their national budget and incredibly risky. China is choosing to not do that. I understand both foreign policy methods, but in this specific instance I think the Chinese line is better.
I agree and I understand the material analysis, but they could do better than what they are doing currently imo.
Maybe, but they have taken aggressive stances in the past towards places they should have been supportive to, well beyond simple realpolitik.
I support China and Xi without hesitation and understand that difficult choices must be made to ensure China's survival, but I think we need to reserve the right to say we think they are making the wrong decision.
Not because China is going to listen to some idiots on the net but because it can inform our own praxis and approach.
Being non-interventionist is one thing, supporting Fascists now and attacking communists like they did in the 70s-80s is another. We are allowed to say backing Pol Pot was not a great look.
That's what the USSR did lol, but its not about expecting the same from china as much as it is providing massive economic support to a nation that is actively shutting down their communist movement.
The Soviets were very ineffective at supporting revolutions abroad. Basically the only communist country to actually support revolutions is Cuba.
Where does Vietnam, Laos, or Nepal stand on this stuff too if your knowledgeable?
As far as trade relations or interventionism with fascist or protofascist countries?
From what i've read it seems they have the same relations as China basically. Vietnam is the closest to them so they actually are the only ones who also have a military alliance with them.