I think everyone needs to understand the damage that was done by 8 years of Obama foreign policy. Allies have been alienated while foes were emboldened. The TPP was a disaster. We needed to pull out of it. That being said I have not heard Trump say anything to indicate that he is opposed to Free Trade. He simply understands that it doesn't take thousands of pages to write a true Free Trade document. The writer of this article exposed himself as a Globalist/Collectivist when he mentioned Climate Change. China is going to take the lead? China is a major polluter at this point and Climate Change is a hoax. The United States will once again be a leader in the world under Trump because we will be respected again.

A speech to the international elites who are losing influence by the day does not equate to "global leadership." China's bid for influence is thanks to Obama's "America Last" policy rather than Trump's "America First".

What is the cost of "playing" world leader? What is the benefit? Any benign leadership is best done by example not intervention and force. Parsing slogans that are for rallying those that don't think for themselves doesn't invalidate the task itself.

Big Deal! socialism has never been able to run the world! Obama tried for 8 years and he successfully failed!! It seems that Trump is doing things daily and the capitalists all over the world are responding positively. 0 did nothing while in office until someone directed him. It is nice to see a chief executive officer who works. But then again he has been at the job for his whole life. Now for the Chinese, what can the give the world if the world choses not to buy from them, nothing. The world wants American made products, not Chinese. so let the Chinese do what ever they want because it will go nowhere.

In Isaac Asimov's original Foundation Triology psycho-historian Hari Seldon was able to sell the emperor on the idea of two foundations at opposite ends of the galaxy that would gather and store existing knowledge in order to shorten an inevitable dark age following the collapse of the galactic empire. Seldon's point, known only to the other psycho-historians, was that even as the empire seemed strong, the idea of preservation and restoration was an easy sell because the empire had already lost its sense of initiative.

FEL TEMPS RESTORATIO - FEL TEMPS REPARATIO. Roman coins of the late third to early fourth centuries often heralded the return of better times. Severus Alexander was perhaps the best of the lot. Philip the Arab was not half bad. But no emperor could turn the hour glass over and bring back the Augustan silver age. And that, too, Pax Romana, was a "silver age" not the golden age of the early Republic.

The reforms of Diocletian split the empire into two large administrative units, East and West. Those reforms created the sub-units called "diocese" which the Roman Catholic Church inherited. Asimov's "second foundation" was his own invention. Ireland was the "first foundation" where churchmen away from the barbarian invasions preserved learning, and brought it back to the court of Charlemagne 300 years after Romulus Augustulus was removed by Odoacer.

Even those who know history are condemned to live among those who must repeat it.

The idea that we must "make America great again" echoes with those who have lost their sense of initiative. But that sense is subjective. A different spokesman for a different philosophy could have ignited a truly positive initiative to downsize government, exploit the sea beds, colonize the Antarctic, and put Americans on the Moon... and beyond...

Good, let the rest of the world see how that turns out for them...

I am happy to pass the leadership by example baton to China for all things environmental. That will be the end of their growth. That is about as scary as an arm wrestling match at high noon with Don Knots.

' media feuds and protests."
Like-
"Let one hundred flowers bloom, let 100 ideas contend' ?
That didn't last long.
Or like protesters in Tien Mein Square?
They were quickly corrected.

There is little of time wasting disagreements and protests in China nowadays.
In control systems theory, study of rigid systems shows that they are indeed rigid,
until they fail, when they fail it is spectacular.

China is going to have to improve its human rights image before others are entirely comfortable with them as an ascendant world power. The Chinese government is even more paranoid than the Russians, fearful of too much American contact undermining their tight control over their people.

While more Chinese are rising to the level of middle class, the bulk of the more than a billion people are poor, victimized by low level corrupt bureaucrats. The situation is volatile, with thousands of protests every year against lawless politicians and administrators. China is a police state, nervous and terrified of rebellion.

The U.S. has had, and will continue to have, strong economic connections with the Pacific nations. The Trump administration isn't going to abandon anyone, but wants to work out trade agreements that are mutually beneficial. China isn't going to sweep in and take over, because they've already screwed too many people, undermining domestic firms and engaging in freewheeling intellectual theft.

China should be nervous if President Trump directs his team to seek sources other than China for many of the goods that China currently has a monopoly on for the U.S. market. Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Vietnam are all possibilities.

The TPP wasn't a good deal for the small countries or U.S. small businesses. Vietnam and New Zealand felt they were shoved to the back of the bus, and most of the deals were to the advantage of big globalist firms, restricting any chance for small businesses to enter the international Pacific market.

President Trump makes any public figure look clear-thinking and cool-headed. I think it's good for these other countries to be "world leaders". The Chinese gov't wants to have free trade without personal freedoms. I suspect they're nervous wondering if trade and the economic prosperity that comes with it are linked to personal freedom. Maybe if you want zero freedom, you end up being a dark spot on the map of electric lights like North Korea is. US is sabotaging itself by restricting trade. I think Chinese leaders are hoping bad decisions in the US validate the Chinese form of gov't.

I suspect that's what's behind the statement, although my knowledge of foreign policy is very basic. It sounds like they're saying, "See, democratic gov't is not all it's cracked up to be."