relevant context buried deep in the article: This is not the first time China has omitted the word peaceful
my interpretation: this does not signal any meaningful change in policy. Whole article is basically worthless. though the bit about stamping out corruption in military procurement ig is vaguely interesting?
relevant context buried deep in the article: This is not the first time China has omitted the word peaceful
my interpretation: this does not signal any meaningful change in policy. Whole article is basically worthless. though the bit about stamping out corruption in military procurement ig is vaguely interesting?