Ok, if you have an interest in a long form interview on my varied perspectives on China then you’ll enjoy this talk. Granted, not a fan of the title. C’est la vie https://youtu.be/sS2pyxgS21k?si=ilnZbpolvxGyjf9T

Seems like China is having a Napster moment. It never ceases to amaze me how the go to approach out of Washington is to angrily shake fists. Diffusion is unstoppable. Get busy adapting or get busy being run over. Senators tell ByteDance to 'immediately shut down' Seedance AI video app https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/17/bytedance-seedance-shut-down-tiktok-marsha-blackburn-peter-welch.html?__source=iosappshare%7Ccom.apple.UIKit.activity.CopyToPasteboard

Been meaning to reply to your note. Fantastic set of questions. What you described with Covid, I lived. No question that the entire lock down episode of 2022 impacted many people. For myself, it was just another lived experience here in Shanghai. My wife is a local Shanghainese and it didn't bother her much. Yes, it was chaotic in the beginning. A bit Lord of the Flies for the first week, but then you just found a way to manage through it all. It was hardest on those with children and 90% of the foreign community here fled. It all depends on who you talk to. There are those, as you pointed out, who left and left with a very bad view of how the government handled the situation. The vast majority, I would say, just got on with it. Thank you again for the question and engaging on the topic of China.

Sorry for the delay in replying. Great question though. Here's the thing about Hong Kong. You need to start by asking the question, from the perspective of Beijing, is Hong Kong a foreign or domestic jurisdiction? The answer is YES. Hong Kong will be viewed as foreign when it suits the purposes of Beijing's overall agenda and domestic when needed. As I see it, there is a desire to remain somewhat on top of the entire Bitcoin landscape, but to only do so in a controlled setting that resides outside the easy grasp of Mainland Chinese. It is for this reason why developments look to be inconsistent. It might look that way to outsiders, but for Beijing there isn't any inconsistency.

I appreciate you sending this through and have actually been rather vocal, albeit elsewhere, on the topic of the manmade islands in the South China Sea. What I view as the greatest geopolitical blunder by the Obama administration. Once the Hague Court of Attribution ruled in 2016, there should have been direct action taken given that China refused to abide by that ruling. I also agree on the point of incremental assertiveness by the Chinese. It's been a mainstay in how China seeks to engage with its bilateral relationships and how it seeks to test American resolve. In fact, it has been my contention that the Russian move on Crimea in 2014 was aligned with China's initial foray in the South China Sea with building those islands. All of this, I'd also stress, underlying why it is that China won't move on Taiwan at any point in the near future. An incremental approach remains the focus and Beijing knows it has far more work to be done. To my pervious Note, what it was I attempted to convey was more about how the Chinese perceive engagement. The cultural differences. Not as much any commentary on China's views over Hormuz itself. Still, can't thank you enough for engaging on the topic. Thank you.

China Morning Missive Trump Derails the China Agenda President Trump is now seeking to postpone his scheduled trip to China. My immediate response was that Beijing learned of this decision the same way we all did. From the President while speaking publicly with the media. If this is accurate, it would be a colossal foreign policy error. The decision, more than likely, is in response to China’s unwillingness to assist with the Strait of Hormuz. Once again, President Trump took the path of applied pressure. And, once again, it was a gross miscalculation much in the same vein as last year’s trade conflict. Whomever is advising the President on China needs to be removed from that position with immediate effect. “Come to Hormuz and assist with reopening the strait”. That was the ask. Below is the formal response from yesterday afternoon. – Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian "The recent tensions in the Strait of Hormuz and its surrounding waters have disrupted international trade routes for goods and energy, and undermined regional and global peace and stability. China reiterates its call for all parties to immediately cease military operations, avoid further escalation of tensions, and prevent regional instability that could have a greater impact on global economic development." Clearly, there was no possible way that either Israel or the United States would halt the ongoing Gulf campaign. China would have been very well aware of this fact and, to deflect from the pressure applied, conditions were placed on assistance as any shrewd geopolitical player would do when facing a similar situation. Now, it could all just be happenstance and the decision to postpone the trip could very well be the result of President Trump needing to remain in Washington to oversee the military operations. Let us, for the sake of argument, assume that this is the case. It doesn’t matter. For the Chinese, the irritation comes from how the decision was both made and communicated. For the Chinese, a last minute request to postpone a State visit is within the realm of acceptable diplomatic behavior. Not ideal, but it happens albeit infrequently. For Beijing, especially after the Paris meetings over the weekend, where initial pressure would have most certainly been applied, there would have been an expectation that the President might delay the trip. It would have been a known unknown. Where the gross miscalculation comes into play is in how that decision was communicated. Very publicly. Whenever you are engaging with the Chinese, be it on foreign policy or commercially, any decision that fundamentally alters the direction of a relationship must, and I stress MUST, first be communicated and agreed to privately before either party makes a public statement. Such is clearly not the case here. I’ve been on the receiving end of making that very mistake. You do not want to find yourself in that position. It impairs a relationship in ways that most will not truly understand or appreciate. When an error in judgement is made such as we have here, you won’t even know that the relationship has been impaired. The Chinese side will smile and overtly express an understanding. In reality, there is a deep sense of betrayal, and your Chinese counterpart will fundamentally reorient how engagement will proceed from that point forward. What should be expected is a lower willingness by Beijing to move on any agenda item. There will continue to be dialogue, but the Trump team will now face a new slate of obstacles. Even previously agreed to terms will resurface. For the Chinese, there is no longer any goodwill. My outlook is now firmer than ever. The Chinese will diplomatically impede all progress on the bilateral relationship and await the outcome of the mid-term elections. Trump says U.S. asked China to delay Xi meeting 'a month or so' due to Iran war https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/16/trump-china-iran-xi-war-trade.html?__source=iosappshare%7Ccom.apple.UIKit.activity.CopyToPasteboard

Dont' expect any support from China on opening up Hormuz. There was a press conference in Beijing a hour or so back. The question was raised if China will send navel assets to the region. This was the answer given. "The recent tensions in the Strait of Hormuz and its surrounding waters have disrupted international trade routes for goods and energy, and undermined regional and global peace and stability. China reiterates its call for all parties to immediately cease military operations, avoid further escalation of tensions, and prevent regional instability that could have a greater impact on global economic development." What that means is for China to provide any support would first require all sides, including the US and Israel, to halt all military actions. I can't even imagine Washington agreeing to such terms, let alone from Beijing.

Yet another example of just how poorly the decision makers in Washington understand their primary opponent. Seems as though I can’t go a single day when some new edict is produced that will generate the opposite outcome. Hormuz is certainly important to China, but it is nowhere near as critical as it is being made out to be. China has a massive spoke network of energy access points from Alegria to Indonesia and all point in-between. Then there are the multiple pipelines into both Russia and Central Asia. Yes, from a cost analysis it would be far better for Beijing to buy cheap oil from the Iranians. Being cut off from Qatar natgas will also have an impact. It’s the long game that matters. Near term solutions to China’s energy needs are readily available. Keeping the US bogged down in the Gulf is an accelerant worthy of any near term pain. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2026/03/16/china-oil-reserves-trump-iran-war-hormuz.html

Is there some rule that if you are interviewed by the media remotely that you are REQUIRED to have several hundred books behind you? Always comes across to me that the individual in question is trying way too hard to telegraph their bond fides.

Recall, the original quote has been expanded upon and, in doing so, makes it all the more impactful. “The only way out is through.” Robert Frost “And the only way through is together” John Green

People calling this a “plot twist”. More just a natural extension of how China has been operating on the margins for a decade now. Systems are in place (CIPS offering an alternative to SWIFT) and final settlement in gold. Current events have simply accelerated the process. https://internationalnewsandviews.com/iran-strait-of-hormuz-yuan-oil-trade-tanker-policy-report-399394-2/

It is a beautiful Saturday morning here in Shanghai. Have a great weekend all.

What’s up? Here for any questions you might have