China's Emergence as a Superpower (till 2014)

[Dayuhan]

Basing actions upon your read of somebody else's intentions or motivations lacking any evidence is unwise. That is why you base your actions upon what they are capable of doing, will be capable of doing and what they are actually doing at the moment. The Chinese are building a big navy that will be capable of doing a lot. They are currently acting aggressively toward several nations that really pose no threat at all to them. From that evidence, I believe it is wise to conclude they are up to something. They are building a big navy and they have been shoving others around, those are facts not assumptions.

They really have been acting that aggressively. The "yea, but what about what we did in (select the historical event you like the most)" argument is a distraction. It has nothing to do with what the Chinese naval forces are doing now and what it might mean in the future. Sometimes when a pot calls a kettle black it is black and you should note that when planning your kitchen decor.

You mention the Chinese have to keep themselves from being closed out of the South China sea. When have they EVER been threatened with being closed out of the South China sea? There is no threat there. If they aren't responding to a threat, and they're not, it is logical to assume they are building up to make a threat.

Do you not see the inconsistency there?

Assume that the Chinese are looking at us exactly the same way that you want us to look at them. We have a very large navy, bigger than theirs by orders of magnitude. We have a tradition of pushing people around whenever it suits us to do so... how many people and countries have been pushed around by the US in the last 50 years, and how many have been pushed around by China? Why would they not see us as a threat, and why would they not beef up force and try to mark out territory - sort of the international equivalent of a dog pissing on trees - in response to that perceived threat? How do you think Americans would react if China declared that they had critical economic interests in the Gulf of Mexico, and was the dominant naval power there?

It is no comfort to me when you say they will gin up something abroad to distract the people from troubles at home. That is a scary thing to contemplate when they are building up the navy and air force and shoving around little countries. That kind of thing tends to get out of hand, because of...emotions, which was the point I made many posts ago. Any conflict in the western Pacific makes no economic sense for anybody, but emotions tend to drive things where they shouldn't go, as I said before. There is no rational, externally driven reason for the Chinese to be doing what they are doing now and it concerns me.

You seem to be treating the current developments as something new. They aren't. This has been going on periodically for decades, and I see now reason to treat it any differently now than we have before. Ignoring it is a mistake, but blowing it out of proportion and treating it as a sign of imminent aggression is an equal mistake. Taking it too seriously, and showing too much concern, is as big a mistake as showing too little.

Again, we have to recall that what the primary disincentive to actual Chinese aggression (as opposed to jockeying for position on the periphery) is not US military force, but the likelihood that conflict would bring significant economic disruption, which the Chinese regime would probably not survive. Of course if that disruption occurs anyway, which is likely, a lot of things could happen, including an anti-capitalist backlash and a takeover by much more aggressive factions. Undermining the Chinese government is really not in our interest, given the likely alternative.

There is no need for the mainland to make an opposed landing on Taiwan to take the island. If we cut the Taiwanese loose they would have to capitulate.

Why?

Nobody's talking about "cutting the Taiwanese loose" anyway, so I don't see much point in hypothesizing over it. It's not an all-or-nothing situation, and shouldn't be; the degree of commitment and the level of visible action that's required or useful at any given point has to be assessed as the situation evolves.

I think personal ambition can trump actions that are good for the country, and a conquest or two is really good for a guy's cv, especially if it helps distract the populace from internal woes. Chasing the Viets and the Filipinos out of the South China sea and having the U.S. Navy stand idly by while they did it would be quite a feather in somebody's cap. I believe, judging by their actions, that has dawned on some of them and they are willing to chance it for personal gain. If they were able to pull it off, it is that much more likely they would try it again.

Again, I think you're overstating what's going on. It's nothing new, it's usually followed by rounds of negotiation and a whole lot of statements, then everyone goes home and stays clam a while until the whole thing flares again. Nobody's achieved a conquest or a great victory; it's just one more step in the process of jockeying around the periphery and seeing what can be gotten away with without significant economic repercussions.

I think we have something to be concerned about.

We always have something to be concerned about. That's cause for concern, not panic or hysteria, and responses have to be based on realistic assessments of problems and goals.