A Bloomberg editorial on China advises, "Needless to say, the best way to avoid the consequences of a war with China over Taiwan is to stop such a conflict ever happening. The US, in particular, should try harder to reduce tensions with Beijing. Concentrating on narrowly defined national-security risks, rather than seeming to plan ways to cripple China's economy, would help."
I also don't want a war with China, but the line about how "The US, in particular, should try harder to reduce tensions with Beijing" made me chuckle. It's not entirely up to us. How about China trying harder to reduce tensions with America by, say, cooperating fully with the probe into the origins of Covid-19? Or by quitting imprisoning pro-democracy journalists in Hong Kong? Or by not sending spy balloons over America? Or by not operating alleged agents in New York and Boston to intimidate America-based advocates of freedom in China? Or by stopping the ongoing genocide in Xinjiang? Putting the onus on the US for reducing tensions, when it is Communist China that is the trouble-making dictatorship, seems a bit much. If I were Mike Bloomberg, I'd be a little embarrassed.
The cynical view of this is that Bloomberg makes money by selling terminals to state-owned Chinese enterprises or has other more complicated China-related businesses. The personality-driven view of it is that Henry Kissinger is whispering in Bloomberg's ear. I don't totally buy either of those explanations. I do think that Bloomberg's customers have so much invested, psychologically and financially and ideologically, in open U.S.-China trade relations that they are susceptible to deluding themselves that reducing tensions depends on the amount of American effort ("try harder") rather than the nature of the Chinese communist regime.