Analysis Of James Fallows Relationship With China

James Fallows believes that the new U.S. Presidential administration needs to rethink its foreign policy strategy with China. He states that the U.S. has built a relationship with China under the premise that a more prosperous and connected China would ultimately help the U.S. further its global goals and projects. But Fallows calls this premise into question. He argues that the Asian giant has become increasingly repressive at home in recent years, in unprecedented ways. Meanwhile, China has outwardly projected an increase in confidence and aggression. It is no longer clear that a difficult U.S.-China relationship provides the best opportunity for the U.S. to realize its potential. Fallow believes that, more and more, a rising China impedes
He uses another quote, this time from an interview he conducted with Orville Schell, who ostensibly has written about China for decades. Schell states that he believes China is regressing closer to its Maoist roots. Although the reader understands that Schell must be well versed in Chinese history, his credentials are unclear. We don’t know if Schell’s expertise is in Chinese politics, business, art or food. It is also uncertain whether Schell is associated with an entity which may lend him credibility, such as a university or governmental entity. But even more basic, a reader who lacks knowledge of Chinese history is unable to fully interpret Schell’s words. In particular, we don’t know when China was in its Maoist roots. Knowing the time period in reference is important because the further back in history it is, the greater the quote supports Fallows’s main thesis. Thus, without further context, this piece of evidence seems
In that study, nearly half of the companies reported flat or falling revenues and tougher business conditions. Furthermore, three-quarters of participants agreed with the statement that “foreign businesses are less welcome than before in China.” The survey provides one of the only authoritative and quantitative pieces of evidence used in the article. But the statistics induce some questions. How much is nearly half? Why are flat revenues combined with falling revenues, and how do these compare to the overall Chinese economy? Finally, if businesses believe they are less welcome, how much do they attribute this to Chinese governmental policy? The survey somewhat supports the premise that anti-foreignism is affecting businesses; but it hardly supports the thesis that the degree of anti-foreignism is so high that the U.S. government needs to rethink its relationship with