China's Emergence as a Superpower (till 2014)

[Ray]

What would you propose that one do, beyond clutching the pearls and rending the occasional garment? I'm not suggesting indifference, but proclaiming "encirclement" where no such thing exists or is threatened is hardly a productive approach to anything. Chinese aid to Jamaica or arms sales to Ecuador or energy investments in Canada or port management contracts in the Bahamas pose no threat to the US. The US has no reasonable way to prevent them and no real reason to prevent them. What's to be gained by hyperventilating over them.



Yes, we are all aware of the events. It's still hard to see them in any light that would constitute an "insatiable quest for hegemonic and imperialist acquisitions". That's a term that one might apply to, say, the US binge of 1898, which saw the annexation of Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and the Philippines. The Chinese effort to grab a few uninhabitable rocks hardly seems in the same league. Is it a threat to the US? Is there something the US can or should do about it? If so, what?

I am afraid no one is ‘hyperventilating’ and such a comment would be indicative of the fact that one has not quite understood Political Realism, which is the bedrock of Geopolitics. Without understanding that, one would be going round and round like Tony Lumpkin.

Political Realism bases on the objectivity of formulating a rational theory that reflects, however imperfectly and one-sidedly, these objectives. It attempts to differentiate between truth and opinion, between - what is true objectivity and rationally, supported by evidence and catalysed by reason, - and what is only a subjective judgement, divorced from fact and informed by wishful thinking!

Let us observes issues with pragmatism and realism.

On the issue of morals and viability of policy and action which seems to subsume your defence of China, let us visit history.

Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement politics were inspired by good morals and motives. He wanted Peace at all cost ignoring the progressive militarisation of, and consequent expansionism of Germany to embrace all territories that historically had Germanic roots. And the result of Chamberlain’s moral and peace inspired policy? World War II bringing devastation and misery to all!

On the other hand, Winston Churchill’s policy, arguably with lesser morality quotient, brought about Peace that was eluded in the first place by faulty appreciation of the geopolitical reality and motives of Hitler’s Germany.

Now, compare your analyses that you advocated in most of your posts on China - US equation with the above historical analogy.

By your analogy, we should be Chamberlain like and overlook the rapid militarisation and expansionism pursued by China. Peace must be at all costs! But then can I mention that we cannot foresee or predict the future, but must we forget the footprints on the sand of time as left to us by history, that too, recent history?

While no one is advocating going to war, yet, one cannot let one’s guard down and allow a Frankensteinian situation to overpower! All one is suggesting is that one should merely maintain a balance of power and status quo in the scenario of the Aggressive Rise, euphemistically called “Peaceful Rise” of China, basically adopted by China, for those who can see, to lull all into a complacent state of mind, and energetically assisted by those who fear ‘fear’ itself and be Ostrich like to find solace!

It is true that China’s increasing influence around the countries in, what could be called, US’ backyard, is hardly currently worrisome. Neither were Hitler’s incursions on Germany’s periphery worrisome to Chamberlain since it was not directly impinging on UK’s sovereignty or security.

One could argue that Hitler walked in with the military, but China is all 'peaceable'. True. But then that (What Hitler did) was the way it was done in those days to extend one’s power. We live in modern times these days. Such crude activities are not par for the course. It is economic aggression to start with and then………

You ask – Is there something the US can or should do about it? If so, what?

The US, for starters, could ‘contain’ (‘encirclement’ is such a four letter word for liberal sensitivity) China and impress through actions that each nation has a right to its territory and ocean space as per international law.

You may well ask, and justifiably so, as to why should the US bother about other country’s territorial integrity, for after all the US is not the ‘global policeman’?

The answer to that is simple.

Indeed, why should the US bother about other countries? The US could just hunker down in Continental US and watch China take its place as the Global Policeman.

And. as is wont, in such scenarios of global policemen, the US would be jumping to China’s tune! The Pied Piper and the rats (and what lemmings do elsewhere) of Hamelin town in Brunswick comes to mind!

Surely, Americans, who are so proud of their way of life – American way of life – and the painstaking sacrifices of it citizens and military personnel endured to maintain their ideals, would not find it delightful to have a scenario where Americans jump to the bidding of the Chinese!

I might as well remind that the Chinese have already made deep inroads in the US economy and I am yet to find an American who is rapturous with glee at this ‘heavenly’ state of affairs.

Therefore, I am not surprised that the US is an adherent of Miguel de Cervantes' theory, where he is supposed to have said - Forewarned, forearmed; to be prepared is half the victory.