Banjo,

"We need to correctly identify and analyse the root causes of the hate, violence and fanaticism ... and treat them appropriately."

Yes, and the primary 'root cause' is 'inequality'.

Inequality of living standards, national security, self-sufficiency, services (health, housing, technology, education) and opportunity.

I acknowledge this list is IN-COMPLETE - with 'religious differences and intolerance' concerns (even hatred), racial or nationalistic wounds founded in historical 'conflicts', territorial or resources disagreements, or disparities in wealth distribution.

Given the 'social disturbances' within the US, UK and Europe, including extraordinary squabbles within the UK - Ireland 'split in two' and Scotland pushing for independence - if these supposedly enlightened, democratic, 'stable' world powers have difficulty getting their acts together, then what, realistically, is the solution?

Short of a new 'Messiah', it looks as though it may indeed be up to 'China' to lead the way - as counter-intuitive as this may appear - and as difficult to swallow as it presents.

Trump, Boris, Putin, UN, Narendra Modi, Imran Khan, EU Commission? None presents any real prospect for resolving their own problems, let alone the world's problems.

May a global 'pact' with China, with Xi Jinping, be the best, even the only practical way forward?
A tough one, but in combination with a revised and rejuvenated UN - with all Security Council 'veto powers' revoked?

Alternatively, the rest of the world may need to withdraw relations, trade and people-movement with China, declaring China a 'pariah' state, and then girding-their-loins for a 'reaction', strengthening their resolve via a reformed UN to unanimously embark on a program of global, universal equality - subject to an immediate complete cessation of all conflicts and hostilities, and an acceptance by all participating nations that all disagreements may only be resolved by the UN, by majority vote (no veto powers for anyone), with compliance being mandatory - and with any defiance or non-compliance invoking immediate expulsion and cessation of 'membership benefits'.

All member armed forces compliant with UN mandate - Taliban and Boko Haram etc to get lost or get stomped - no exclusions. Conformity, and no more 'China-viruses'.

Saltpetre, I could be wrong, BUT, if I have learned one thing, in all my years of interaction with the people of THIS world, is that even though the greater majority want to live an harmonious and inclusive life, there are those who are born with an adversary and dictatorial mentality.
It is therefore NOT possible to expect peace and harmony, at any level, as long as we have these people at large.
Even more disturbing, is when they are voted into power and are allowed to induct like minded people to assist them.
Remember, WE are the ones who decide such things, it therefore follows that it is the people who must first want peace and harmony if we are serious.
I submit OLO as a good case in point, just look at the spectrum of attitudes and mind-sets on here.
I have previously said that we must get pro-active and rid ourselves of the liars, cheats, and con-men and their brethren or followers.
This means taking up arms and attacking the institutions both private and govt, and I do mean the govt, or more precisely the ministers, that are the root cause of our problems and hardships.
Anarchy, I hear you yell.
Well call it whatever you like, but if we persist down this road of having decisions made that are not to our liking or expectations, we should not have to agree with them, otherwise what is touted to be a democracy is more like a dictatorship or other similar un-democratic system, of which there are many.
I prefer a system whereby I can do what I want, as long as I am not injuring or compromising others along the way.
I would much prefer as system of logic and common sense than what we have today.
And of course we need a system that is not black and white, because there is NOTHING about humans that is black and white.
Such is this stupid system of law that if you are charged with an offence, you are asked if you plead guilty or not.
Forget courts.

Dear Saltpetre,

As I've stated previously - it is in Australia's
national interest that we continue to contemplate
China's role in the world and debate how Australia
should respond to the challenges posed by China.

This is a conversation that needs to be conducted based
on facts and the merits of the argument not on insinuation
of intention. Therefore the promotion of greater knowledge
is crucial. Scholars, policy makers, economists, national
security experts, and even the media need to work
together and disseminate China knowledge and research.
This would help improve understanding of the issues and
put news stories in context. Also involving other
countries might also help.

A simplistic "pro china" "anti-China" division ignores complex
questions and shuts down the conversation.

Yes, foxy.

Sorry to tell you no one is listening. The Cold War is on, well and truly.

Dear Chris,

You probably mean no one is listening in your circle.

The Prime Minister and his Foreign Minister and
Cabinet are not only listening but actually acting.

Do your research.

I have to ask, but is it not obvious that China has been, for as long as I can remember, doing whatever it wants, mainly within China, but more so of late outside China.
It is acting more and more like someone who will not tolerate dissent or not getting it's way.
It has been clear for decades that it is building up it's military, why?
The irony is that we, the rest of the world, has been helping them by sourcing all our goods from China.
On the topic of conversation.
Has anyone tried to convince anyone on OLO and succeeded to change their minds, ideals or beliefs,......... anyone?
No, I didn't think so.
So how smart or aware or maybe un-aware do you have to be to suggest that we engage in CONVERSATION, with China?
That's a stupid idea normally, but especially so with China.
Can anyone tell me where there has been a difference of opinion with China, that CONVERSATION changed their mind??
Hmmmm??
NO?
I didn't think so.
If those of you with a broader range of knowledge about international affairs, could weigh in on this question, I for one, would be very great-full as I know too little about this and so I am not confident about talking about it as I have not given it the time and attention it deserves, when one considers the implications/ramifications of the current state of affairs surrounding China and the rest of the world.