China's Emergence as a Superpower (till 2014)

[Bill Moore]

Posted by Backwards Observer

The preference for the opinions of ideologues over those of individuals with regional experience is understandable but hardly exceptional.

Not sure who you are implying in the articles you posted that has a preference for ideologues over regional experience unless it is Holbroke? I am also not convinced that regional experience erodes the views of ideologues.

The Great Game is still being played out in Central Asia despite GEN Petreaus' comments to the contrary. The regional players do see it as a zero sum game, and it is unlikely we'll develop meaningful cooperation in the region. At best we'll continue to buy influence by paying off the right actors, and that can get expensive when you're competing with the Chinese and Russians.

IMO we won't find much consensus with the Chinese on counter terrrorism in the region, because they most likely see it as a small problem and won't forsake their larger regional hegemonic strategic objectives to partner with us.

How this unfolds in the next decade will be very interesting. Russia and India will have a huge vote, and once we pull out of Afghanistan our vote will diminish considerably.

[Backwards Observer]

COL Moore, always a pleasure.

Not sure who you are implying in the articles you posted that has a preference for ideologues over regional experience unless it is Holbroke?

I apologize for the confusion. It was my impression that the author of the article you posted (Our Broken China Policy) was an ideologue. Perhaps this is an unfair description:

Neoconservatives have formed the first successful American political movement of the 21st century, and this anthology takes a needed step toward identifying the ideas, most of them at least 20 years old, that can be loosely identified as their platform. Though Stelzer, a former American Enterprise Institute resident scholar, points to a diversity of neocon positions in his introduction, most would probably agree with the contributor who considers democracy "a framework to protect, and be protected by, a moral ethos," a belief shaping many of the views on foreign policy found here. Many of the names are familiar: Kristol, Kirkpatrick, Rice, Thatcher, Will, James Q. Wilson. George L. Kelling's famous "Broken Windows" essay (1982), which re-envisions police forces as a means of preserving social order before crime breaks out, is absorbed into the neocon canon in a prominent example of Stelzer's historical reach. (from the amazon product blurb for The Neocon Reader - by Irwin Seltzer)

The Neocon Reader by Irwin Seltzer - Amazon

I am also not convinced that regional experience erodes the views of ideologues, I have known a few Ambassadors that stubornly hold onto ideologies despite the fact that their ideologies are not embraced by the nation they're in.

I certainly agree with this. Is this, however, an argument for giving undue credence to the opinions of people with no experience whatsoever in the regions they are tasked with understanding? Certainly, having to listen to the inanities of the people who actually live in these regions is to be avoided at all costs.

IMO we won't find much consensus with the Chinese on counter terrrorism in the region, because they most likely see it as a small problem and won't forsake their larger regional hegemonic strategic objectives to partner with us.

Perhaps they are misinterpreting the apparent US support for Islamic separatism in the Xinjiang region (which they may not view as a small problem); while the US is also at the same time presiding over what appears to be an influx of Evangelical Christian NGOs in Central Asia. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

[Backwards Observer]

To digress briefly, I'm just finishing Carl Sagan's, The Demon Haunted World, and the following impressed upon this reader no small reflection:

Friedrich von Spee (pronounced "Shpay") was a Jesuit priest who had the misfortune to hear the confessions of those accused of witchcraft in the German city of Wurzburg (see Chapter 7). In 1631, he published Cautio Criminalis (Precautions for Prosecutors), which exposed the essence of this Church/State terrorism against the innocent. Before he was punished he died of the plague - as a parish priest serving the afflicted. Here is an excerpt from his whistle-blowing book:

***

9. If a madman's ravings or some malicious and idle rumor (for no proof of the scandal is ever needed) points to some helpless old woman, she is the first to suffer.

10. Yet to avoid the appearance that she is indicted solely on the basis of rumor, without other proofs, a certain presumption of guilt is obtained by posing the following dilemma: Either she has led an evil and improper life, or she has led a good and proper one. If an evil one, then she should be guilty. On the other hand, if she has led a good life, this is just as damning; for witches dissemble and try to appear especially virtuous.

11. Therefore the old woman is put in prison. A new proof is found through a second dilemma: she is afraid or not afraid. If she is (hearing of the horrible tortures used against witches), this is sure proof; for her conscience accuses her. If she does not show fear (trusting in her innocence), this too is a proof; for witches characteristically pretend innocence and wear a bold front. (excerpts, pp.402-403)

Friedrich Spee - Wikipedia

Friedrich Spee - Catholic Encyclopedia

And also this footnote:

Making the President nervous, said a member of Congress, "is the new crime." Jefferson believed the Alien Act had been framed particularly to expel C. F. Volney,*

*A typical passage from Volney's 1791 book Ruins:

You dispute, you quarrel, you fight for that which is uncertain, that of which you doubt. O men! Is this not folly? . . . We must trace a line of distinction between those that are capable of verification, and those that are not, and separate by an inviolable barrier the world of fantastical beings from the world of realities; that is to say, all civil effect must be taken away from theological and religious opinions. (p.400)

Comte de Volney - Wikipedia

Such is the world of men in this measure.

[slapout9]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articl...cy_526878.html

Author's bio (note, not simply a HS graduate)

http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/he...bio/221858.htm

Fantastic article. In some ways he misses the extreme power China has because of their financial system....which is based upon the Lincoln/American/Constitutional model.....China has no Federal Reserve, they do not borrow money to meet their budgets, they have a Nationalized Banking system that prints all the money it needs in order to achieve its stated policies.

[Bill Moore]

Posted by Backwards Observer,

Perhaps they are misinterpreting the apparent US support for Islamic separatism in the Xinjiang region (which they may not view as a small problem); while the US is also at the same time presiding over what appears to be an influx of Evangelical Christian NGOs in Central Asia. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

I too have deep concerns with the Neocon ideology, and I believe all economists are ideologues, but that doesn't mean we can simply disregard everything they put out, because much of what they put out are facts, not ideology. In the case of Irwin's comments, many of them seem to be validated today yet again by the comments made by Hu who once again criticized the global economy being based on the USD standard.

Personally, I think we underestimate the challenge China presents, because our politicians believe we're living in a new era where we all have common interests. We also tend to view threats mostly as military opposition, and China at this time is not a credible military competitor, but war can be waged through other means, which was Irwin's point. In the end I'm not sure what's worse, seeing boogey men that aren't there, or refusing to see the threats that are there? Fortunately the nature of the threats presented by China don't necessarily have to lead to a shooting war, especially if the threats are recognized now and subsequently meant with a longer term well thought out strategy, versus a knee jerk reaction to a particular event. I think another strategy we should be thinking about is what happens if China's economy collapses?

I believe it is true we provide some moral support to the Muslim separatists, but I doubt the policy is to encourage separation, but rather better integration and less discrimination. As for the Christian NGOs, they're normally perceived as problematic by the U.S. government because their agenda frequently has nothing to do with our policy, but they're perceived to be pushing our government's agenda. In both cases I don't know, so the above is simply my speculation.

[Backwards Observer]

Posted by Backwards Observer,

I too have deep concerns with the Neocon ideology, and I believe all economists are ideologues, but that doesn't mean we can simply disregard everything they put out, because much of what they put out are facts, not ideology.

I'm not sure what Neocon ideology is, should it cause one concern?

President Hu knows better: Trade, overseas investment, currency manipulation​—​all, war by other means ("Our Broken China Policy" excerpt)

Many in South East Asia who grew up under colonialism, lived under occupation, did business with the new breed of Westerners in the Eighties or watched the Asian Financial Crisis unfold in the late Nineties are somewhat familiar with what economic warfare looks like. To infer that President Hu is practicing some nefarious black art is curious to say the least.

1997 Asian Financial Crisis - Wikipedia

I believe it is true we provide some moral support to the Muslim separatists, but I doubt the policy is to encourage separation, but rather better integration and less discrimination. As for the Christian NGOs, they're normally perceived as problematic by the U.S. government because their agenda frequently has nothing to do with our policy, but they're perceived to be pushing our government's agenda.

A region that's seen thousands to millions of people die when instability erupts may view the threat differently. Could China conceivably be recognising a long-term problem in the sometimes haphazardly applied freedom agenda? Destabilisation by outside powers, whether intended or unintended, is not a dinner party either.

COL Moore, thanks for taking the time.

[Bill Moore]

Posted by Backwards Observer,

COL Moore, thanks for taking the time.

Much appreciate the promotion, especially if a paycheck comes with it

As the old saying goes, I'm not a COL, I work for a living. COL's also claim to know the answers, I only offer alternative views (not life styles) to hopefully challenge the dogmas that plague our thinking (mine included).

I'm not sure what Neocon ideology is, should it cause one concern?

Based on my readings and listening to various political talk shows the neocon philosophy touches a lot of areas ranging from culture to foreign policy. My main concern is they tend to aggressively push democracy and free markets (and under the former President used the military to forceably install this type of government system). They see it as a natural evolutionary state for States, and if they achieve it they'll be unlikely to engage in hostile acts against our interests. I used to be a big believer, but have soured on the philosophy over the years. I now tend to think if a nation and its people (not sure how you separate the two) desire to establish a democracy, we should be there to help (if requested), but we have no business forceably installing democracy and free markets at the tip of the bayonet, nor do we have a good track record in doing so. I think our foreign policy needs to be more pragmatic. Should it be a cause of concern? I think that depends on your world view.

Many in South East Asia who grew up under colonialism, lived under occupation, did business with the new breed of Westerners in the Eighties or watched the Asian Financial Crisis unfold in the late Nineties are somewhat familiar with what economic warfare looks like. To infer that President Hu is practicing some nefarious black art is curious to say the least.

Maybe, maybe not, and I don't think we really know how much President Hu actually controls.

Could China conceivably be recognising a long-term problem in the sometimes haphazardly applied freedom agenda? Destabilisation by outside powers, whether intended or unintended, is not a dinner party either.

I agree, and this is where our neocon approach is seen as by others as destablizing and dangerous, which in turn pushes some countries to pursue a hostile relationship with the U.S..

[Backwards Observer]

Posted by Backwards Observer,

Much appreciate the promotion,

I almost was going to address you as GEN Moore, tuan sahib. I blame my post-colonial upbringing.

[Bill Moore]

I almost was going to address you as GEN Moore, tuan sahib. I blame my post-colonial upbringing.

I can hear the rumors now, Bill retired and then joined some mercenary group that overthrew a small country in Africa and appointed himself General.

[davidbfpo]

A recently published paper on China's Military Rise (which awaits reading on holiday) and to public statements on US-PRC military links:http://www.iiss.org/

[slapout9]

Link to article on how China does money.

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/cr...accounting.php

[Jedburgh]

INSS, 18 Jan 11: Getting Beyond Taiwan? Chinese Foreign Policy and PLA Modernization

Key Points

• Deeper rapprochement across the Taiwan Strait would remove a longstanding source of regional tension and the most likely source of war between the United States and China.

• Cross-strait rapprochement would also lead to new frictions and new worries among regional countries and the United States that a China no longer focused on Taiwan will use its increased power to challenge their interests elsewhere in Asia.

• Stabilizing the cross-strait political situation will free up resources previously devoted to military preparations for Taiwan contingencies and allow the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to undertake new missions and reassess priorities.

• The direction of PLA modernization can help alleviate or further exacerbate the concerns about a rising China that will become more powerful but also less constrained by Taiwan.

[slapout9]

Link to opening seen of one of greatest Unconventional War movies of all time(Chinese call it Unrestricted Warfare). The movie is about Chinese brainwashing techniques used to support a political assassination that stages an internal takeover of America by the Secret Rich Elite of America who have always supported the basic idea of Communism (rule by a rich,privileged central planning committee). The original movie is showing on some cable channel this month.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBDhoUZgsDo&NR=1

[Backwards Observer]

The movie is about Chinese brainwashing techniques

Ya, I saw this movie in Brainwashing Camp, good film. It seems to activate the CHOODA Loop: CHICOMS!OMFG! -> Observe -> Orient -> Decide -> Act -> CHICOMS!OMFG! -> Observe -> Orient -> etc.

[Backwards Observer]

As far as China's Emergence as a Superpower: The Sequel, my guess is that barring world-crippling, high-stakes kineticism, the US will probably be back to playing at an advantage within a generation or so. Uncritically buying self-generated PR seems to hobble the so-called OODA loop, and China appears to be exhibiting signs of this; a common human failing perhaps. The oft and correctly cited US advantages of intellectual open society and melting-pot dynamics are probably more advanced than anywhere else is going to be for a long while.

The downside might be that Americans seem to derive more pleasure from kicking each other in the balls than anything else. Maybe it's a "fun" thing, I dunno.

[Cliff]

As far as China's Emergence as a Superpower: The Sequel, my guess is that barring world-crippling, high-stakes kineticism, the US will probably be back to playing at an advantage within a generation or so. Uncritically buying self-generated PR seems to hobble the so-called OODA loop, and China appears to be exhibiting signs of this; a common human failing perhaps. The oft and correctly cited US advantages of intellectual open society and melting-pot dynamics are probably more advanced than anywhere else is going to be for a long while.

The downside might be that Americans seem to derive more pleasure from kicking each other in the balls than anything else. Maybe it's a "fun" thing, I dunno.

I agree that China's time appears to be limited. See Paul Krugman's op ed on the NYT website... there are serious structural economic problems in China that aren't being addressed.

Backwards Observer, I think your last point is important - America has been able to deal with significant changes in the environment precisely because we are able to figure out we were wrong, kick ourselves, and still manage to somehow change policy and move in a positive direction.

Would China's (or most other country's!) leaders be able to mess something up as badly as the US did Iraq, admit they were wrong, and implement unpopular policies to change things for the better?

The real problem is the effect a Chinese downturn would have on the world economy. The US, EU, Japan etc are not recovered to the point where we could deal with such a bump in the road...

V/R,

Cliff

[Backwards Observer]

I agree that China's time appears to be limited. See Paul Krugman's op ed on the NYT website... there are serious structural economic problems in China that aren't being addressed.

Backwards Observer, I think your last point is important - America has been able to deal with significant changes in the environment precisely because we are able to figure out we were wrong, kick ourselves, and still manage to somehow change policy and move in a positive direction.

Would China's (or most other country's!) leaders be able to mess something up as badly as the US did Iraq, admit they were wrong, and implement unpopular policies to change things for the better?

The real problem is the effect a Chinese downturn would have on the world economy. The US, EU, Japan etc are not recovered to the point where we could deal with such a bump in the road...

V/R,

Cliff

I find your positive take on my comment fascinating. This is probably for the best. Ching chong, ching chong chong.

[blueblood]

The rise of PR China is much less the issue than the erosion of classic military power attributes of the West.

The shipyard industry of the U.S. is tiny, inferior to Croatia's or Poland's - but its navy is the biggest one.
Western steel production is much greater than in WW2 - but dwarfed by steel production in China.
Our electronics industry is good - but lots of electronics production happens in Asia.
Our chemical industry is strong - but new production plants are typically either close to natural gas resources or in Asia (because that's where so much of the manufacturing industry is now).
We still have huge populations - but their age structure and the rise of China and India to relevance dwarfes our mobilization strengths.

Even if you believe that major conventional wars are a thing of the past - we should adjust the perception of ourselves to reality.
It's not just the rise of developing countries that changes the balance - it's also our relative and often even absolute decline in many areas.

It would be dangerous to base our foreign policy on the feet of clay that the perception of our own strength really is.
Maybe the ongoing wars help our populations and politicians to understand the message.

China's shipbuilding capacity or rather manufacturing capacity as a whole is huge and it's only getting bigger.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/busines...t_11863027.htm

http://news.chinaa2z.com/news/html/2...256244750.html

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/photo/2...nt_9366573.htm

But China still lacks a formidable semiconductor industry like other East Asian nations like Japan And South Korea and also their technology will need some 10 - 20 years to be on par with West. Their natural resources are dwindling fast but they are trying to have a stronghold in Central Asia and its abundant natural resources.

India on the other hand is all together a different story, unlike China our growth is driven by the private sector so it will take a bit more time when compared to China. But then again India is no threat to any country other than Pakistan and up to certain extent China.

Regarding mobilization of American and European troops to China, I don't think its feasible as China's population is nearly twice as much as that of the whole Europe therefore it has a very large pool to draw soldiers and after its economic success, a surge of nationalism and assertiveness has engulfed the nation.

Thanks.

[davidbfpo]

Paul Rogers writes, with a variety of links, to technical comments on the J-20 fighter and the strategic and ends with:

...by allowing the release of information about the J-20 they may also achieve the aim of diverting some of America's best scientific and technological talent into big new defence projects - while China maintains the priority of building its civil economy. Such a policy would be even more complicated for the United States: for if a jungle full of elusive snakes was difficult to "keep track of", a devious new dragon that remains one step ahead even as you think you have its measure - that is much more tricky.

Link:http://www.opendemocracy.net/paul-ro...hreat-or-twist

[davidbfpo]

From IISS Strategic Comments:http://www.iiss.org/publications/str...air-dominance/