Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

sentinel.tw

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 158 posts

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#131

Post by avar »

Reason077 wrote: post #128
avar wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand that Norway doesn't have duty-free import of goods into the EU. What I'm referring to is that the existing tolls and import duties weren't negotiated with the assumption that Norway has tariff-free access to the biggest producer of cheap goods in the world. I elaborated a bit on this in a sibling comment[1], but let's say for example that the import duties on electric drills from China into the EU are se…

Norway certainly can't import Chinese drills at 0% and then re-export them to Germany under the Norwegian tariff. Those drills are still of Chinese origin, and re-labeling them otherwise would be illegal. Only Norwegian drills can benefit from Norway's 10% tariff. As for goods of mixed origin (manufactured in Norway but benefiting from Chinese inputs/components), that is indeed where things get complicated. And that'…

Yes legally it can't, but enforcing this on an open border with a direct road connection to the rest of the EU is going to be quite interesting.

Right now this situation exists in theory, but in practice pretty much nobody in the EU has any cause to try to import something via Norway, since its trade deals are quite similar to what the EU itself has.

But the EU has huge tariffs on some Chinese products, including slapping China with 30-70% tariffs on basic metal alloys in some cases[1][2].

The difference can be so large that it becomes beneficial for you as a private EU citizen to drive up to Norway yourself to fetch e.g. basic alloys at lower prices.

Nothing remotely like this situation exists within the land borders of Schengen today. There's the agreement with Iceland, but as it's an island enforcement is much easier.

1. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/09/reuters-america-update-2-eu-...

2. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/07/european-un...

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#132

Post by HillaryBriss »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #116
whatyoucantsay wrote: post #17

There are two notable points in this piece: 1) China suspended normal diplomatic relations with Norway, tossed out a free trade agreement, largely shut down fishing imports from the country and made it far more difficult for Norwegians to get visas to travel study or work in China. All of this was because of an activist being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, which is process controlled a foundation, not directly by the N…

And the second is the more interesting point, it is the difference between having the US be the most powerful nation on earth and having China in that role. Look to see more of that happening over the next few years.

The style of diplomacy China is using has also been practiced by the US and its allies.

For example, in the early 1990's, just before the First Gulf War, Yemen cast a UN vote against the resolution to invade Iraq. But, Yemen paid a hefty price after the US, Saudi Arabia and other allies retaliated:

A member of the U.S. delegation candidly told the Yemeni ambassador that it was “the most expensive vote you ever cast,” and indeed it was, and might even play a part in the chaos there today. Not only did Washington cut off its $70 million foreign aid program, but the Saudis also abandoned their long-standing treaty with Yemen which allowed its nationals preferential treatment as immigrant workers. The Kingdom and the Gulf states brusquely repatriated a million or so Yemenis, whose missing remittances over the past two decades have contributed to the poverty and underdevelopment of the state.

https://www.wrmea.org/2010-march/united-nations-report-a-cos...

EDIT: also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Counci...

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#133

Post by oh-kumudo »

dak1 wrote: post #55
oh-kumudo wrote: post #5

Which in fact, is what most countries in the world signed up for. Also, it is a prerequisite for any country to even establish ANY formal diplomatic relationship with China[1]. It is almost certain Norway government has acknowledged this way back then through some bilateral treaty, and this time it is simply a reiteration. TL;DR:this is no news https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-China_policy#Diplomatic_re...

The US has never recognized the One China policy or China's claim over Taiwan. Instead, the US merely acknowledges China's position. Of course, as a superpower, you have a little bit more negotiating leverage. However, China's only been successful at bullying countries into recognizing some of its more absurd positions because it has negotiated on bilateral bases, where in almost every case China holds significantly…

> If the US, the EU, the UK, Canada, Japan, and Australia

Well that will never happen

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#134

Post by astebbin »

shaobo wrote: post #127
astebbin wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It gave the impression that China is defying the UN, not saying that China wouldn't do something like that, but they didn't in this instance. You're right that they _would_ do something like that! ;) In fact, they did in this case. I'll explain below. >And because it is a court of arbitration, both sides have to agree to have their dispute resolved by arbitration in the first place. China did not agree to it. Not qu…

Okay, this is getting way beyond my level of legal knowledge. > China knew this going in, and agreed to it when they signed the treaty. China signed it but they didn't agree to compulsory arbitration. They made declaration to that effect, along with a number of countries. https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/conventio...

Ah, good eye. IANAL, and I missed that part.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration has written their own argument for jurisdiction [0]. Having flipped through it, I don't have the legal background to form a strong opinion in light of China's declaration.

I'd lean towards "don't build on reefs in another country's Exclusive Economic Zone," but I'm neither a court nor plaintiff with standing :)

[0] https://www.pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/1503

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#135

Post by barkingcat »

jonnathanson wrote: post #112
Geekette wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure other countries' recognition of (which does not necessarily equate to acceptance or support of) China's position on this do not extend to the level of sovereign embarrassment and capitulation outlined in the post.

As barkingcat suggests, pretty much every country on the planet that has normalized diplomatic relations with China formally accepts the One China policy. This is part of China's chess strategy for forcing the world to accept its ownership of Taiwan. I will go out on a limb for a second and suggest that the day will come soon enough when the United States formally bends the knee on this issue as well. We are headed i…

Yup the US is not far behind.

As far as "sovereign embarrassment," there is no such thing. If you want Chinese trade and embassy relations, you put out whatever news releases, go on television, press conferences, and at the UN General Assembly you stand up and proclaim exactly what Norway has said. It's an "embarrassment" in the poster's mind, but pretty much every country has done it. Then you go behind China's back and buy Taiwanese stuff and talk to the President of Taiwan in backchannels because everyone needs cpu's, microchips, and cell phones. The level of hypocrisy is pretty high in global politics.

I do not agree with this, but it is the state of the world.

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#136

Post by ChuckMcM »

HillaryBriss wrote: post #132
ChuckMcM wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the second is the more interesting point, it is the difference between having the US be the most powerful nation on earth and having China in that role. Look to see more of that happening over the next few years.

The style of diplomacy China is using has also been practiced by the US and its allies. For example, in the early 1990's, just before the First Gulf War, Yemen cast a UN vote against the resolution to invade Iraq. But, Yemen paid a hefty price after the US, Saudi Arabia and other allies retaliated: A member of the U.S. delegation candidly told the Yemeni ambassador that it was “the most expensive vote you ever cast,”…

> The style of diplomacy China is using has also been practiced by the US and its allies.

That was my point exactly. If you're the top dog, you can do this kind of stuff and get away with it. What the future holds, with an ascendant China, is that they will continue to put this kind of pressure on other countries and we will be unable to counter it so it will work against us.

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#137

Post by isr »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #136
HillaryBriss wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The style of diplomacy China is using has also been practiced by the US and its allies. For example, in the early 1990's, just before the First Gulf War, Yemen cast a UN vote against the resolution to invade Iraq. But, Yemen paid a hefty price after the US, Saudi Arabia and other allies retaliated: A member of the U.S. delegation candidly told the Yemeni ambassador that it was “the most expensive vote you ever cast,”…

> The style of diplomacy China is using has also been practiced by the US and its allies. That was my point exactly. If you're the top dog, you can do this kind of stuff and get away with it. What the future holds, with an ascendant China, is that they will continue to put this kind of pressure on other countries and we will be unable to counter it so it will work against us.

To be more precise, the point is really this:

Up till now, Western countries have been able to do "this kind of stuff and get away with it". Now, a non-Western country is able to do this stuff to "Western countries", and get away with it.

So naturally, denizens of said "Western countries" will be aghast, upset, indignant (pick your emotion).

While denizens of, well, the rest of the world, might well be laughing their asses off.

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#138

Post by gurkendoktor »

captainmuon wrote: post #51

International "meta"-law is so ridiculous. I mean the customary rules concerning recognition of states, embassies, passports [1], etc.. If I was ruler of a small country, I would say "of course we won't recognize Taiwan. We will foobar them. They don't get an embassy, but they get a blah ." (which de facto will be exactly the same thing) [1] Concerning passports, no matter how radically different states are, the US,…

Plenty of countries foobar Taiwan. For example, we are more than happy to accept the ROC passport even if we pretend the ROC doesn't exist: https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php?ccode=tw

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#139

Post by ekianjo »

StavrosK wrote: post #36
ekianjo wrote: post #8

I dont understand the word Forcing here. Norway had a choice to continue denying The one China policy. Putting pressure on Norway thru various means is not forcing. Forcing would be done via a military operation leaving little choice.

> Forcing would be done via a military operation leaving little choice. I mean, they'd still have the option of denying the one China and going to war, by your definition. Basically, the way you see it, nobody can force you to do anything, as you can always kill yourself.

I'd seriously doubt not recognizing China would lead them to war with them. So therefore there were still clearly able to continue on the previous line of thought.

Re: China Forces Norway to Adhere to ‘One China’ Policy

#140

Post by ekianjo »

rdlecler1 wrote: post #43
ekianjo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Id rather say you are narrowing the scope of free will. Succumbing to pressure is not the same as being forced.

You clearly don’t understand the meaning of the word.

Oh really ?

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/forced

> enforced or compulsory

Is the first definition of the word. How was it compulsory for Norway to comply? They had their officials at gunpoint?

Post reply on HN