I don't have a solution, which is why I asked the question.
I am trying to get a handle on the motives/expected outcome of this particular approach.
Here's the thing. We often have knee jerk reactions to things that happen in the world, our country and our neighborhoods. (Ok, at least I know I do). We get frustrated and push back in one way or another.
It has taken me years to stop, look and listen so to speak. As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The problem is, without filtering one's gut instinct through one's brain...we get killed by unintended consequences. In this rapidly connecting world, we have to be careful to look at thing within the context of the big picture—how will this affect all these other things. There isn't always a straight-line correlation between two problems.
For instance: When dealing with China at this juncture, we have two realistic choices. Cut them completely off and isolate ourselves from them. Or make them dependent on our dollars to survive, giving us some element of control over their decisions.
Obviously, neither is a perfect option given the bleakness of the regime. However, I can see why at least having some control over their financial decisions is a better choice than giving them no options and allowing them to control things like our oil acquisition.
I digress. But I think you can see my point. In this case, I was looking for an explanation of goals from x1stcav before I commented further. But too late! : )