Anyone out there remember the massive popularity of the Datsun B210 from the 1980s? Demand was a complete response to the oil shock of the 1970s. Same thing hold here. Only question is how long the American domestic moat can hold before the proverbial damn breaks. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/some-us-car-buyers-envy-what-they-cannot-have-affordable-chinese-evs-2026-03-23/

Quick note. If the nexus to any talks is Islamabad then know that there are Chinese fingerprints all over that decision. And given recent reports of Wang Yi, China’s Foreign Minister, reaching out to Tehran that makes the movement now being discussed all the more credible.

Yahoo News

Pakistan positioning itself as intermediary in US-Israel-Iran tensions

Asim Munir, Pakistan’s Chief of Defense Forces, called US President Donald Trump on Sunday to discuss the Iran crisis and offered mediation, acco...

Just watched the latest interview with Sec Bessent. Not his best performance. He truly seemed to be at wits end. But it was his comment about how Treasury can monitor who is buying the now unsanctioned Iranian oil. If transacted in USD and done through the SWIFT network of correspondent banks in New York, then yes. Correct. If, however, done with Renminbi and processed through China’s CIPS network then Treasury has zero visibility. I’d wager it is the later and, critically, those shipments will have final settlement in gold.

After a relatively longer than expected wait, Unitree was approved to IPO late on Friday afternoon. Widely expected and the company is even already profitable. Now comes the rapid deployment of scale. The company produced and sold 5,500 units last year. Growth is now set to compound. As I’ve stated on numerous occasions, China will do to humanoid robotics what it did to the EV marketplace. And it’ll be done in a matter of a few years.

CNBC

Unitree plans Shanghai IPO, testing interest in humanoid robots

Chinese startup Unitree Robotics on Friday filed an initial public offering application to the Shanghai ​Stock Exchange, seeking to ​raise abo...

China Afternoon Missive Taiwan 2027 … A Complete Reversal in Posturing And there it is. A statement which was widely expected by the small number of people familiar with the actual confines of the China/Taiwan issue. Granted, my outlook was for this message to be conveyed at some point later in the year. It would now appear that the Beltway consensus views deescalation of the long simmering tensions in the East China Sea as the priority. For the past several years, there has been a barrage of commentary – an ardent conviction really – that planning was underway for China to take direct, kinetic action against Taiwan by 2027. That message was then taken up and aggressively amplified by virtually every single podcast platform focused on geopolitical events. The message was then wedged into every single traditional and social media conversation. And yet, today, we have the following statement. “The [intelligence community] assesses that Chinese leaders do not currently plan to execute an invasion of Taiwan in 2027, nor do they have a fixed timeline for achieving unification,” according to the 2026 Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community, which was released on Wednesday. I will not speculate as to why, now, there has been a complete reversal in the intelligence communities’ China threat assessment although it does seem that the Takaichi government in Tokyo was blindsided by Washington’s shift in its positioning on Taiwan. What does need to be communicated, albeit at the risk of being repetitive, is the far more likely scenario when it comes to Beijing’s intentions over Taiwan. Very much to the point, the strategic aim is to maintain the status quo. Beijing has been seeking for all parties, including the United States, to reaffirm the “One China” policy. Furthermore, it is widely held that Beijing has been seeking to formalize these terms into an expansive Fourth Communique. Included would be the provision that the agreed to framework would hold for a period of 50 years after which the parties would then revisit the issue of reunification. The thinking on Beijing’s part is very straight forward. Over a long enough time period, reunification would naturally occur, peacefully, so long as the current incentive structures are left to evolve unimpeded. Basically, the calculus is structured where there will come a time when the Taipei leadership, and even the populace, will accept that the net assessment for reunification delivers both economic and political gains. There are a host of critical paths underling this thinking and much could go wrong. The projections of China’s economy collapsing under the weight of debt or demographics could play out, as example. A future transfer of power in the CCP could go horribly wrong and lead to social instability. 50 years is a long time. What the proposed solution does achieve is a tabling of the issue even if that ends up being temporarily. There is one final point that I wish to add and that plays to the point just made. With Taiwan almost entirely dependent on imported energy, Beijing is reported to have reached out with an offer to provide energy to the island if the Taipei leadership would consider reunification. Now there is no question that the offer is outright coercion, and the overture will be rebuked by the DPP, the ruling party. But we do now live in a world increasingly driven by second and third order effects and it was under the DPP leadership that the decision was made to decommission all of the island’s nuclear power facilities. This could quite possibly lead to political blowback domestically. And, as we see here, it also provides Beijing with a point of leverage.

Al Jazeera

US intelligence agencies not expecting China to invade Taiwan in 2027

US spy agencies says Chinese leadership still prefers to pursue unification with Taiwan

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

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

CNBC

Senators tell ByteDance to 'immediately shut down' Seedance AI video app

Lawmakers say the new version of the Seedance AI video-generation app violates copyright and intellectual property laws.

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

CNBC

Trump says U.S. asked China to delay Xi meeting 'a month or so' due to Iran war

The Iran war wasn't expected to derail the Trump-Xi meeting in China, but analysts said it would influence the talks and any agreements that come o...

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.

CNBC

China talks up oil sufficiency as Trump seeks Beijing's help on securing Hormuz energy route

The statistics bureau said that China's energy supply is "relatively strong," while announcing an uptick in domestic production.

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.

Primal isn’t showing Notes that I’m posting in my own feed?? Odd Damus is now the option of choice I guess.

Something going wonky with my Nostr.

China Morning Missive Wuwei (无为) and the Cultural Chasm Over the past several days I’ve been overwhelmed with client emails asking whether American activities in the Gulf are indirectly targeting China. It appears that the zeitgeist, including many Washington policy makers, is operating under the impression that China has been irreparably harmed and the Beijing leadership is at a loss for how to respond. My responses to those emails are short and to the point. “Ignore the noise. We’ve seen similar instances in the past (last year’s tariff episode?). Operate under the principal that China has prepared for this eventuality.” It continues to escape the rationale mind of many that China operates at the lowest possible time preference. I make this point often and do so because it represents the singular first principal to be applied whenever any assessment of China is being made. Not only is the application critical to understand how Beijing goes about structuring policies, both domestic and foreign, it is central to the very process of decision making itself. More specifically, the importance lies in a recognition that, for Beijing, action is far more often found in demonstrable restraint. There are genuine cultural anomalies present. They need to be considered and yet are always absent. Honestly, you’d think this would have been recognized by now given thirty years of observable Chinese behavior. It hasn’t. There isn’t just a cultural gap in America’s expert class when it comes to the topic of China, there is a cultural chasm. Be it the Taoist concept of Wuwei or the teachings of Lao Tzu, Chinese society is grounded in a willingness to take the path of forbearance. An outward projection of stillness. Consider the character for patience, Ren (忍). It is comprised of two characters, blade (刃) and heart (心). What this means to the Chinese is that patience is a concept that requires a willingness to endure adversity. Be mindful though. Non-action shouldn’t always be taken literally. It is a highly layered construct and quite malleable. Yes, the Chinese default setting is a static state, but every single event is viewed through its own unique lens. If there were to be an extreme event, then the Beijing leadership would most certainly resort to an immediate response. To the Chinese, however, there is rarely ever an occurrence that is truly extreme (ie unexpected) in nature. Restraint is the consequence of ongoing preparedness present across China. At all levels of society, anxiety is born from uncertainty and the greater the uncertainty the greater the anxiety. And to counter uncertainty means a greater effort to prepare. Again, we only need to look back to last year. Contrary to all American expectations, the Chinese successfully countered the Trump administration’s escalatory tariff regime. This was achieved through advanced preparation. It was a widely held view in China that tariffs would be deployed and parties across the country simply planned well in advance for that eventuality. Exports were frontloaded and cash hoards were amassed. This provided time and flexibility to negotiate and do so from a position of relative strength. So too is it the case with events now playing out in the Middle East. Beijing has well understood, and for decades, America’s motivations and objectives across the Gulf and preparations have been underway for quite some time. Beijing made overtures to create a separate series of regional relationships and did so with success. At the same time, there were various steps taken to mitigate all identified risks from future conflict. There was the aggressive campaign to build three significant rail lines (and pipelines) traversing the entirety of the Heartland. Alternative sources of energy (ex-Gulf partners) were established, from Russia to Indonesia to Africa. Even the domestic agenda of shifting to renewables and EVs can now be seen as having a geopolitical angle. China isn’t at a loss. China is, once again, very well placed. If there is to be a focus, it needs to be on a fundamental realignment in how the American foreign policy and business community goes about assessing China. This must begin by taking China seriously and literally. Stop miscalculating China’s capabilities. Secretary Bessent famously claimed last year that China was negotiating “with a pair of twos”. He was wrong. Today, Secretary Wright is stating that “China is about to lose the second of three gas station suppliers”. Again, the Secretary will come to learn that he, too, is wrong. The script must be flipped and, moving forward, it is highly advisable that the expectation shift towards China gaining from hegemonic actions taken by America.

China Morning Missive Wuwei (无为) and the Cultural Chasm Over the past several days I’ve been overwhelmed with client emails asking whether American activities in the Gulf are indirectly targeting China. It appears that the zeitgeist, including many Washington policy makers, is operating under the impression that China has been irreparably harmed and the Beijing leadership is at a loss for how to respond. My responses to those emails are short and to the point. “Ignore the noise. We’ve seen similar instances in the past (last year’s tariff episode?). Operate under the principal that China has prepared for this eventuality.” It continues to escape the rationale mind of many that China operates at the lowest possible time preference. I make this point often and do so because it represents the singular first principal to be applied whenever any assessment of China is being made. Not only is the application critical to understand how Beijing goes about structuring policies, both domestic and foreign, it is central to the very process of decision making itself. More specifically, the importance lies in a recognition that, for Beijing, action is far more often found in demonstrable restraint. There are genuine cultural anomalies present. They need to be considered and yet are always absent. Honestly, you’d think this would have been recognized by now given thirty years of observable Chinese behavior. It hasn’t. There isn’t just a cultural gap in America’s expert class when it comes to the topic of China, there is a cultural chasm. Be it the Taoist concept of Wuwei or the teachings of Lao Tzu, Chinese society is grounded in a willingness to take the path of forbearance. An outward projection of stillness. Consider the character for patience, Ren (忍). It is comprised of two characters, blade (刃) and heart (心). What this means to the Chinese is that patience is a concept that requires a willingness to endure adversity. Be mindful though. Non-action shouldn’t always be taken literally. It is a highly layered construct and quite malleable. Yes, the Chinese default setting is a static state, but every single event is viewed through its own unique lens. If there were to be an extreme event, then the Beijing leadership would most certainly resort to an immediate response. To the Chinese, however, there is rarely ever an occurrence that is truly extreme (ie unexpected) in nature. Restraint is the consequence of ongoing preparedness present across China. At all levels of society, anxiety is born from uncertainty and the greater the uncertainty the greater the anxiety. And to counter uncertainty means a greater effort to prepare. Again, we only need to look back to last year. Contrary to all American expectations, the Chinese successfully countered the Trump administration’s escalatory tariff regime. This was achieved through advanced preparation. It was a widely held view in China that tariffs would be deployed and parties across the country simply planned well in advance for that eventuality. Exports were frontloaded and cash hoards were amassed. This provided time and flexibility to negotiate and do so from a position of relative strength. So too is it the case with events now playing out in the Middle East. Beijing has well understood, and for decades, America’s motivations and objectives across the Gulf and preparations have been underway for quite some time. Beijing made overtures to create a separate series of regional relationships and did so with success. At the same time, there were various steps taken to mitigate all identified risks from future conflict. There was the aggressive campaign to build three significant rail lines (and pipelines) traversing the entirety of the Heartland. Alternative sources of energy (ex-Gulf partners) were established, from Russia to Indonesia to Africa. Even the domestic agenda of shifting to renewables and EVs can now be seen as having a geopolitical angle. China isn’t at a loss. China is, once again, very well placed. If there is to be a focus, it needs to be on a fundamental realignment in how the American foreign policy and business community goes about assessing China. This must begin by taking China seriously and literally. Stop miscalculating China’s capabilities. Secretary Bessent famously claimed last year that China was negotiating “with a pair of twos”. He was wrong. Today, Secretary Wright is stating that “China is about to lose the second of three gas station suppliers”. Again, the Secretary will come to learn that he, too, is wrong. The script must be flipped and, moving forward, it is highly advisable that the expectation shift towards China gaining from hegemonic actions taken by America.

Once again, it is just another Monday morning here in Shanghai. Everyone just going about their day.

China Morning Missive Wuwei (无为) and the Cultural Chasm Over the past several days I’ve been overwhelmed with client emails asking whether American activities in the Gulf are indirectly targeting China. It appears that the zeitgeist, including many Washington policy makers, is operating under the impression that China has been irreparably harmed and the Beijing leadership is at a loss for how to respond. My responses to those emails are short and to the point. “Ignore the noise. We’ve seen similar instances in the past (last year’s tariff episode?). Operate under the principal that China has prepared for this eventuality.” It continues to escape the rationale mind of many that China operates at the lowest possible time preference. I make this point often and do so because it represents the singular first principal to be applied whenever any assessment of China is being made. Not only is the application critical to understand how Beijing goes about structuring policies, both domestic and foreign, it is central to the very process of decision making itself. More specifically, the importance lies in a recognition that, for Beijing, action is far more often found in demonstrable restraint. There are genuine cultural anomalies present. They need to be considered and yet are always absent. Honestly, you’d think this would have been recognized by now given thirty years of observable Chinese behavior. It hasn’t. There isn’t just a cultural gap in America’s expert class when it comes to the topic of China, there is a cultural chasm. Be it the Taoist concept of Wuwei or the teachings of Lao Tzu, Chinese society is grounded in a willingness to take the path of forbearance. An outward projection of stillness. Consider the character for patience, Ren (忍). It is comprised of two characters, blade (刃) and heart (心). What this means to the Chinese is that patience is a concept that requires a willingness to endure adversity. Be mindful though. Non-action shouldn’t always be taken literally. It is a highly layered construct and quite malleable. Yes, the Chinese default setting is a static state, but every single event is viewed through its own unique lens. If there were to be an extreme event, then the Beijing leadership would most certainly resort to an immediate response. To the Chinese, however, there is rarely ever an occurrence that is truly extreme (ie unexpected) in nature. Restraint is the consequence of ongoing preparedness present across China. At all levels of society, anxiety is born from uncertainty and the greater the uncertainty the greater the anxiety. And to counter uncertainty means a greater effort to prepare. Again, we only need to look back to last year. Contrary to all American expectations, the Chinese successfully countered the Trump administration’s escalatory tariff regime. This was achieved through advanced preparation. It was a widely held view in China that tariffs would be deployed and parties across the country simply planned well in advance for that eventuality. Exports were frontloaded and cash hoards were amassed. This provided time and flexibility to negotiate and do so from a position of relative strength. So too is it the case with events now playing out in the Middle East. Beijing has well understood, and for decades, America’s motivations and objectives across the Gulf and preparations have been underway for quite some time. Beijing made overtures to create a separate series of regional relationships and did so with success. At the same time, there were various steps taken to mitigate all identified risks from future conflict. There was the aggressive campaign to build three significant rail lines (and pipelines) traversing the entirety of the Heartland. Alternative sources of energy (ex-Gulf partners) were established, from Russia to Indonesia to Africa. Even the domestic agenda of shifting to renewables and EVs can now be seen as having a geopolitical angle. China isn’t at a loss. China is, once again, very well placed. If there is to be a focus, it needs to be on a fundamental realignment in how the American foreign policy and business community goes about assessing China. This must begin by taking China seriously and literally. Stop miscalculating China’s capabilities. Secretary Bessent famously claimed last year that China was negotiating “with a pair of twos”. He was wrong. Today, Secretary Wright is stating that “China is about to lose the second of three gas station suppliers”. Again, the Secretary will come to learn that he, too, is wrong. The script must be flipped and, moving forward, it is highly advisable that the expectation shift towards China gaining from hegemonic actions taken by America.