• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Is China a threat? (from: Global NATO?)

schering said:
A poster.
not for long, with that attitude, smart-ass

George with all due respect your stated opinion is so outrageous and unreasonable that the burden of proof falls squarely on your shoulders.

There are countless serious articles and publications that dwelve extensively on precisely this subject matter, most of whom are available for free on the internet. A knowledge of current geopolitics unhindered by conspiracy theories might also help.
for someone trying to come across as super-duper smart, you already stepped on your dick. George didn't write the post you're referring to.

Please be my guest, enlighten me with your daring demonstrations.
again with the mouth. Smarten up.

- para-mod-boy
 
George Wallace said:
;D

schering

And you are?  (Empty profile and all - no credentials) 

schering said:
A poster.

A Master of the Obvious  ::)

schering said:
George with all due respect your stated opinion is so outrageous and unreasonable that the burden of proof falls squarely on your shoulders.

What stated opinion have I made.  None that I can see.  I have asked you to expand on yours.  Nothing outrageous or unreasonable there.  As for burden of proof; with your lack of credentials we can only accept yours as being absent and thus worthless.

schering said:
There are countless serious articles and publications that dwelve extensively on precisely this subject matter, most of whom are available for free on the internet. A knowledge of current geopolitics unhindered by conspiracy theories might also help.

Swell!  There are countless serious articles on the ramifications of many controversial topics.  Please enlighten us to where you are drawing your commentary.


schering said:
Please be my guest, enlighten me with your daring demonstrations.

It seems your arrogance has confused you.  We are asking you for "your expansion on this subject", not your abilities as a Troll.

Shall we call you Pascal?



{Sorry I was such a slow typist.  :-[ }
 
George Wallace said:
A Master of the Obvious  ::)

What stated opinion have I made.  None that I can see. 

I'm really sorry George, I mistook you for the other poster.

George Wallace said:
I have asked you to expand on yours. Nothing outrageous or unreasonable there. 

No except that I don't want to spend 1 hour writing the obvious. Let me just mention then as a mere example of the growing strategic reality the Shanghai Cooperation Organization that, beyond its stated developmental purpose, also pursues a quite obvious and effective agenda of reducing the US influence in Central Asia. 

George Wallace said:
As for burden of proof; with your lack of credentials we can only accept yours as being absent and thus worthless.

Yes George, you have every right to be upset. Let me apologize again.

George Wallace said:
Swell!  There are countless serious articles on the ramifications of many controversial topics.  Please enlighten us to where you are drawing your commentary.

http://www.csis.org/images/stories/china/060914_EurasiaForum_ChinaShanghai.pdf


 
schering around here it is considered polite, but not mandatory, to fill in your profile to let people know where from you speak.  If you have little or no military background then please use the notes section.  Just a little advice to make the ride more enjoyable for all.  And welcome to the site.
 
big bad john said:
schering around here it is considered polite, but not mandatory, to fill in your profile to let people know where from you speak.  If you have little or no military background then please use the notes section.  Just a little advice to make the ride more enjoyable for all.  And welcome to the site.

Thank you John, I enjoy reading more than posting. Is my profile any better?  ;)
 
schering said:
http://www.csis.org/images/stories/china/060914_EurasiaForum_ChinaShanghai.pdf

I can see that you and Edward, who has just returned from China,  will have a lot to discuss.
 
George Wallace said:
I can see that you and Edward, who has just returned from China,  will have a lot to discuss.

Yes, I can't wait to start discussing how "Europe" - like China - is not our friend .  :)
 
schering said:
Thank you John, I enjoy reading more than posting. Is my profile any better? 
no. Nor is it clever, witty, or cute. You are already on my last nerve.
 
schering said:
No except that I don't want to spend 1 hour writing the obvious.

Now you just come across as lazy or uninformed and won't admit it. If you have a case to make in rebutal, make it or put the keyboard away entirely.
 
schering said:
Yes, I can't wait to start discussing how "Europe" - like China - is not our friend .  :)

Then for the love of God, Allah, and the spirit of Mother Earth start discussing.  Exactly how is Europe our friend? Put all the history trash aside and focus on the here and now- explain to me how is Europe our so-called friend? 
 
Wow - 6 posts and you step into the ring with a fellow with extensive contact and experience in the region.  And what, preytell, qualifications do you bring to this debate.  As Whiskey said, put up....
 
Echo9 said:
I do stand by my characterization of China as a threat through the next 100 years.  I'll take your characterization at face value, and I would say that it's largely accurate as a view of where they're at now (the Chinese people are certainly not and never were socialist- quite possibly the most innately capitalist in the world; and, the CCP is no longer communist, but is instead the "Red Dynasty").  It's  where the CCP would like things to go.  My view is that China, within the next 10-20 years will be overcome by its own momentum coupled with some key structural faults.

1.  Much of the current growth is built on a weak business foundation.  The vast portion of loans brokered by banks in china are granted on the basis of party connections, and will not be repaid. 

2.  The one child policy, while effective at sharply reducing poverty levels has led to a situation where:
- there is a coming population inversion, where the elderly greatly outnumber the working population required to support them.  Think of this- in 2 generations, 1 child means that one worker needs to support 4 grandparents...
- there is a gross imbalance of men to women, and many men have no prospects for employment or marriage.  This leads to a restive population that increasingly becomes aggressive toward its neighbours.

3.  The country has a small and diminishing resource base which must be maintained.

4.  The country as a whole has been undergoing massive growth consistently for the last 20 years.  That cannot continue without some correction.

Take a step back, and you can argue that this is not so different from where Japan sat 30 years ago.  In the early-mid 80s everyone seemed to think that Japan would be the next hyperpower (at least economically).  Things didn't happen that way, for reasons similar to what I noted above, but less in severity- the bad loans were given to underperforming sister companies, rather than political cronies, the age imbalance was there but not the gender imbalance, Japan's rise was as much a result of intellectual property building as manufacturing growth.  More importantly, Japan had achieved a rather comfortable level of prosperity in its rise.  China also has a much more troubled history of civil war than Japan.


So, what's the likely impact of the fall, when it occurs.  To my mind, the most likely path is that China will turn aggressive, seeking to militarily achieve its needs for resources (and here the likely target is Siberia with its rich resources and sparse population), and to divert the attention of its restive populace.  The other likely path is civil war, with a partition of China into multiple parts.

In either case, while China may or not be an enemy of the West/ Anglosphere, it certainly will be a threat, simply because of the chaos that will spin from its path.

I agree that over the next century, even over the next 25 years, China will have some pretty serious ‘downs’ to balance the fairly steady (but I agree unsustainable) ‘ups’ of the past 20 years.

Resources are a problem.  The nearest good, rich ‘resource base’ is in Eastern Siberia which some Chinese scholars and analysts regard as Asian, which is their code for ‘not Russian.’  I have postulated before that, for China, the most likely conflict is with Russia over access to Siberian natural resources.  It doesn’t have to be a military conflict.

I think the bank loan crisis, and I agree it was one, is ‘contained’ – largely by huge infusions of Asian money, party raised by taking Bank of China and the larger ICBC public this summer.  I think the ICBC capitalization was the largest in the history of the Hang Seng.

The one child policy is having taking interesting twists and turns.  It is being relaxed in the countryside because too many young men have already left for better paying, easier work in the East coast cities.  In Zhejiang province many (fairly prosperous) farmers are building nice new three story houses – for the husbands they are trying to recruit for their daughters.  It appears, based on purely anecdotal evidence, that the rate of abortions based on sex selection is dropping/has dropped towards zero, in the cities, anyway.  The ‘little emperor’ is now accompanies by the ‘little empress’ – not surprising, I don’t think, given that women are not devalued in China as they are in many other cultures.

The demographic bubble is a real problem for China – no easy solution.  While the Chinese are not a xenophobic as, say, the Japanese, they still have trouble with some ‘minorities’ and most ‘foreigners’.  Importing people, à la North America, is not going to solve the people problem – even if there were enough ‘spare’ people in the world.  In fact some Chinese are talking about the Philippines model – encouraging even greater emigration to provide remittances to support family members in China.  The central government has already made quite severe cuts to the national pensions – a family of two retirees is down to about ¥500-750 (≤$100.00) per month.  (By contrast some provincial/city and institute (former government agency or ‘corporate’) pensions are a full order of magnitude larger and many are in excess of ¥1,000 per person.  I don’t know how far the (currently) more generous pensions will fall but, I’m pretty sure they will fall because, as you point out, they are unsustainable in the next generation.)  The good news, for China, is that bubbles do pass through the system and the boom/bust/echo cycle moderates over a century or so.

I agree wholeheartedly with: “…China may or not be an enemy of the West/ Anglosphere, it certainly will be might become a threat, simply because of the chaos that will may spin from its path.”  In my view that is all the more reason to ‘engage’ China as a competitor, using every available tool including the WTO, IMF and whatever other institutions, and I favour bringing China into a new G10 (with India) and the OECD soon.
 
Edward Campbell said:
...

‘Peace, order and good government’ are central to the Communist Party’s understanding of its mandate.  As of this week yet another anti-corruption programme has begun and arrests of senior officials have occurred and some political corruption convictions will result in capital punishment.  Corruption, in the Chinese, sense does not encompass all the things we understand by that word; Chinese family valuesreal family values rather than the light weight fluff espoused by e.g. evangelical Christians – mean that some things we would regard as ‘corrupt’ are essential components of business, connections, for example.  That being said the Chinese people want and are demanding that laws be applied equally and fairly to all, even to officials and Party members.  That will happen, in spades, during the next decade. 

...

I want to expand on this point.

The arrest, last week, of Chen Liangyu (former Mayor of Shanghai and, therefore, very senior Communist Party member) is the most public in a process which is multi-pronged (as almost everything is in China).  The message is:

• To foreign investors – China is intent on dealing with political corruption.  This is an especially welcome message for North American industry, where laws prohibiting bribes are taken fairly seriously;

• To Chinese politicians – egregious corruption does harm to the Red Dynasty and is, therefore, going to be punished harshly – if, right now, a bit randomly;

• To the Chinese people – we, the Dynasty, are cleaning our own house to make ourselves worthy of your continued support or, at least, toleration; and

• To the leadership, itself – we are embarked upon Deng Xiaoping’s new path and we are going to stay the course.  It requires reformed public administration and governance.  You will adapt … or die.

This is part of a well established process, going back to the detention (conviction without trial) of former Beijing Mayor Chen Xitong and his son and the investigation of Vice-Mayor Wang Baosen which resulted in his suicide.  That was part of a process aimed at reassuring Hong Kong, especially and personally Anson Chan, about China’s commitment to reasonably honest public administration.  This was vital because she, quite publicly, feared that Chinese corruption would damage Hong Kong’s financial position.

I need to reiterate that corruption ≠ corruption.  I had the occasion this summer, as a guest of a Chinese official, to attend a briefing on development of the Pearl River Delta – Guangdong and area.  One speaker, a partner in a major Hong Kong financial concern, told officials, roughly:

“You need to mobilize five key resources –

1. An educated, productive workforce – which the region has,

2. Suitable infrastructure, including civic infrastructure (roads, sewers, etc) and technology – which the regions needs,

3. Capital – which is readily available,

4. The well known Chinese entrepreneurial spirit – which is re-emerging, and

5. Connections.”

I could see almost every Euro-American head in room jerk and look to a neighbour to confirm that they had heard correctly.  So did the speaker and he continued along these lines:

“Yes, of course, connections.  This is China, we can read your corporate reports and balance sheets but they only tell us, hopefully, that you are making money without being convicted of any criminal offences.  That’s unlikely to persuade me to go to my management committee and say ‘let’s invest several billion (US) with these people.’  I want, I need to hear from someone I trust that you are an honest, upright company, one which can be a trusted partner in a shared enterprise.  Then we can do business together, for our mutual profit.

That means that you cannot, likely, just into the Chinese market in a big way. You need to start with a small joint-venture with a Chinese company.  You have to earn our trust.  Then you can do another, bigger joint enterprise.  Once you are sufficiently ‘Chinese’ we will welcome you into the fold.  But even then you, like me and my company, need connections to grow bigger and better, and you need to continually maintain and ‘burnish’ and expand your web of connections.  The closer and ‘better’ your connections, the more likely you are to prosper, with them.  It has nothing to do with corruption but it has everything to do with trust and the the way we Chinese prefer to do business.”


 
I apologize for three in a row and this is it for me.  There is an old saying to the effect that those who spent a week in China want to write a book, after six months they are content to write an essay and after a year they are wise enough to keep quiet.  My contributions this thread may soon approach essay length, so I will be quiet.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization raises its head again.

The AIM of the SCO is to strengthen China’s position throughout Central Asia.  This must, consequentially, counter America’s influence but that’s a tertiary concern.  It is Russian influence the Chinese are most intent on reducing.

• Primary goal: strengthen China;

• Secondary goal: weaken Russia;

• Tertiary goal: discomfit America; and

• Everything else: everyone else.

It is very sound policy, for China.

The Chinese are worried about their North West and they do not trust the Russians or the Americans to deal with Central Asia in a manner which will serve China’s best interests.  The best course open, therefore, is to exploit Russia’s current weakness and China’s current strength and supplant Russia as the primary foreign power in Central Asia.

I believe that the Chinese want something akin to colonial status for Kyrgystan and Tajikistan; I think they’re already close to that with Kyrgystan.  They want to ‘help’ Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to suppress radical Islamic groups, etc.  Hence the SCO.

Russia’s position as a junior partner in the Chinese organized, Chinese led SCO is a visible reminder to all members, and to foreigners, that, for China, all of Asia is within Chinese influence.

China is working very hard to strengthen its ties with the ASEAN group, and their efforts are being reciprocated, if not exactly welcomed.  In that case Japan is the Russia-like ‘target.’

China will deal with India and Japan one-on-one, as it must because they are both important regional powers.



 
Since this discussion is covering lots of ground, I will christen it for our newer readership:

Demography and the future of the West  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/38075.0.html

Developments in China/ Japan/ Taiwan  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/2941.0.html

A scary strategic problem - no oil  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/37017.0.html (Some related issues about oil and resource dependency)

China: Where Poor Nations go to Shop (for Weapons) http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/45240.0.html

A new "Asian Axis"? http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/32247.0.html

The United States building a 21rst Century alliance system  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/40510.0.html (a look at the globe spanning potential of an Anglosphere alliance system)
 
whiskey601 said:
Then for the love of God, Allah, and the spirit of Mother Earth start discussing.  Exactly how is Europe our friend? Put all the history trash aside and focus on the here and now- explain to me how is Europe our so-called friend? 

That thing called NATO comes to mind.

France, Italy, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Estonia, Lativa, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands, Slovenia and Georgia all where invovled with the Afghan coalition. (and possibly more that I can not remeber)

You know, they all fall under EUROPE. That seems pretty current. (not historical).
 
Hmm.  Definitely lots to ponder, Edward.  Your saying is apt- I can only admit to having spent a couple of months there (albeit spread out over a year, while working with a Chinese subsidiary).  My "book" is really limited to two ironies (I seem to remember having 3 at one point, but I forget the third):
1.  that such an innately capitalist people would allow a communist revolution to succeed
2.  that such a culturally centred people would adopt a foreign religion (Buddhism) so widely

Like so many things, this is a topic of conjecture.  Certainly, if we can avoid conflict with China, it would be in our interest.  I think that where we diverge is in the preponderance of likelihoods.  If the CCP is actually able to keep things together, then they will rule for a long time indeed.  I just feel that the centrifugal forces that will hit will be too strong for any government to ride, particularly one that is as dedicated to central planning as this one (which they are, even if they've given up a little on the economy).
 
NATO beyond the borders of Europe is pretty dicey. We have NATO countries engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq and other alliance members either make a token contribution or none at all.  An alliance which operates like a cafeteria is not a strong alliance and frankly not worth the effort to maintain.

I have felt for some time now that future conflicts will be confronted by coalitions of like minded members or perhaps even done unilaterally. If China attacks Taiwan will NATO oppose China ? No they wont. In fact Taiwan owes its independence to the US. The PRC knows that if they strike Taiwan they will have to deal with the US. Before the PRC can strike Taiwan they will need to neutralize Washington. Once that is done then Taiwan is doomed.
 
Back
Top