Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard T. Eger
There is no denying that the Chinese have lost people to terrorists. Regardless of how much you wish to water down Xi Jinping's comments Paul, they do have significance, especially in the UN Security Council. This is a unique situation in which all 5 members, generally at odds with each other, have skin in the game and are likely to vote as a block. That is very meaningful.
Regards,
Richard
|
Dear Richard,
You are attempting to argue by implication, namely that since Chinese citizens have been killed, the Chinese government will follow a particular course of action.
Let me provide an example from a very different field in order to demonstrate the problem with your line of thought. China has suffered repeated disasters in the coal mining industry, see a few listed here -
https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/EnvirGeo...eDisasters.HTM . Unlike the case with ISIS, there is no armed opposition to better safety standards, but this has been a very long and difficult road for China's government and industry. I think it is reasonable to suggest that China is not nearly as sensitive to the deaths of her citizens as you are implying.
The second part of your argument concerns the UN Security Council and its supposedly great significance. You will find that there have been
eleven unanimous resolutions of the Council regarding Syria,
seven of them during the current civil war. It scarcely needs to be said that all of this solemn activity has not led to any fundamental change. For reference, here is the list of resolutions -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ncerning_Syria .
Regards,
Paul