Results 1 to 20 of 807

Thread: China's Emergence as a Superpower (till 2014)

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member The Cuyahoga Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Yes, they have a plan and we don't.
    Ok, but do they have a good plan?

    Personally, I think that the Chinese government has started buying the same bull it's sellling, that China is going to maintain it's current rate of economic growth for 20-30 years, instead of accepting that once today's youth bulge evaporates in the 2020's, productivity is going to drop off drastically, and the PRC's influence with it.

    Just an 18 y.o.'s perspective, but I think that the CCP is trying to play in the big leagues, when they should be playing small ball, and that centralized policy planning is part of the problem, not the solution.
    Last edited by The Cuyahoga Kid; 06-05-2011 at 09:40 PM.

  2. #2
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Cuyahoga Kid View Post
    Ok, but do they have a good plan?

    Personally, I think that the Chinese government has started buying the same bull it's sellling, that China is going to maintain it's current rate of economic growth for 20-30 years, instead of accepting that once today's youth bulge evaporates in the 2020's, productivity is going to drop off drastically, and the PRC's influence with it.

    Just an 18 y.o.'s perspective, but I think that the CCP is trying to play in the big leagues, when they should be playing small ball, and that centralized policy planning is part of the problem, not the solution.
    Agreed from someone who has visited the mainland away from the seaboard a few times and also experienced the CCP local bureaucracy in its unfettered glory.

    Just an example of this in the NYTIMES regarding a much larger CCP project than any 'Battlestar Galactica' drilling platform:

    Plan For China's Water Crisis Spurs Concern

    North China is dying.

    A chronic drought is ravaging farmland. The Gobi Desert is inching south. The Yellow River, the so-called birthplace of Chinese civilization, is so polluted it can no longer supply drinking water. The rapid growth of megacities — 22 million people in Beijing and 12 million in Tianjin alone — has drained underground aquifers that took millenniums to fill.
    Not atypically, the Chinese government has a grand and expensive solution: Divert at least six trillion gallons of water each year hundreds of miles from the other great Chinese river, the Yangtze, to slake the thirst of the north China plain and its 440 million people.

    The engineering feat, called the South-North Water Diversion Project, is China’s most ambitious attempt to subjugate nature. It would be like channeling water from the Mississippi River to meet the drinking needs of Boston, New York and Washington. Its $62 billion price tag is twice that of the Three Gorges Dam, which is the world’s largest hydroelectric project.

    And not unlike that project, which Chinese officials last month admitted had “urgent problems,” the water diversion scheme is increasingly mired in concerns about its cost, its environmental impact and the sacrifices poor people in the provinces are told to make for those in richer cities.

    Three artificial channels from the Yangtze would transport precious water from the south, which itself is increasingly afflicted by droughts; the region is suffering its worst one in 50 years. The project’s human cost is staggering — along the middle route, which starts here in Hubei Province at a gigantic reservoir and snakes 800 miles to Beijing, about 350,000 villagers are being relocated to make way for the canal. Many are being resettled far from their homes and given low-grade farmland; in Hubei, thousands of people have been moved to the grounds of a former prison ...

  3. #3
    Council Member LawVol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Kabul
    Posts
    339

    Default

    Carl, I disagree, to a point, that law of the sea arguments will not stop them. From some things I've read and some China experts I've spoken to, China is quite in tune with legalities. In fact, they tend to predicate their activity on a legal basis. In response to the incidents with the US (EP-3 and USNS Impeccable), China crafted legal arguments. It may have something to do with their "smile campaign" and "peaceful rise" strategy. In any event, a vocal challenge to this interpretation of international law combined with US activity (e.g. port calls to Vietnam, continued surveillance from inside China's EEZ, etc.) may be beneficial. What else can we do?

    Tequila, I've never been to China, but can we really gauge their military by analyzing the CCP? Doesn't their military have more of a free hand vis-a-vis political control than ours? The weather satellite shoot-down comes to mind; the pols over their seemed caught off guard. Can we afford to be wrong?

    We don't need to go toe-to-toe with China to protect our interests. SImply guaranteeing access and freedom of navigation in accordance with international law is sufficient. This is why China's strategy is anti-access and increased sovereignty at the expense of global commons.
    -john bellflower

    Rule of Law in Afghanistan

    "You must, therefore know that there are two means of fighting: one according to the laws, the other with force; the first way is proper to man, the second to beasts; but because the first, in many cases, is not sufficient, it becomes necessary to have recourse to the second." -- Niccolo Machiavelli (from The Prince)

  4. #4
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    Tequila, I've never been to China, but can we really gauge their military by analyzing the CCP? Doesn't their military have more of a free hand vis-a-vis political control than ours? The weather satellite shoot-down comes to mind; the pols over their seemed caught off guard. Can we afford to be wrong?
    The CCP maintains absolute control over the military. Frankly I don't buy the idea that the Party leadership did not know about the shootdown. There are factions and politics within the Party leadership, with corresponding factions within the Army. Some are more aggressive than others in the foreign policy realm. There may have been some disagreement between one faction with another over whether the shootdown was the right thing to do, but overall the shootdown fits with a broader CCP move towards reminding the U.S. that China maintains an aggressive deterrence capability.

    That the CCP could force the military to divest itself from its enormous Egypt-like economic empire in the 1990s and early 2000's shows, IMO, who still has control. I agree that the professionalization of the PLA has distanced it from civil society and the CCP to an extent, but they still are under the full control of the Party.

  5. #5
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    John:

    The things you mention will work in the short term, the next few years, if...if we do them with great energy. I am not sure we are doing anything. The Chinese pushed around some of our ships last year and whatever we did didn't stop them from shooting at Filipino and Vietnamese fishermen this year. What have we said about these latest incidents? Nothing much that I am aware of, and if my local paper doesn't make me aware of it then it wasn't strong enough. We have been friends with the Filipinos for a long time and the Vietnamese could do us a lot of good in the future and yet we say nothing. Some actual harsh words and regular port calls to Cam Ranh Bay by strong battle groups would work wonders. Of course the Chinese would scream bloody murder but I doubt they would do much. If we aren't willing to accept squawking we are back to doing nothing.

    Once their navy gets big enough, all bets are off.

    Guaranteeing access and freedom of navigation may require us to go toe to toe with the Chinese someday. Their actions over the last several years suggest it may come to that. Better to do something now thereby postponing it at the least.

    Tequila is right, the CCP controls the military, all of it. I've read though that it is very useful for the CCP to keep people wondering, a clever tactic. They can hint that the peace loving CCP members are doing their best to keep those military savages in line, but they need help. So the CCP diplomats ask that other countries don't do anything that would set the savages off, like say exercising legitimate international rights or reacting to Chinese military provocations. Our elites would be suckers for that argument because it conforms to their pre-conceptions.
    Last edited by carl; 06-07-2011 at 03:58 PM.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Family ties

    From another thread (post # 103) (with other links), a link to Let's fly the red flag again, says general:

    BEIJING: A Chinese general has issued a clarion call for the true heirs of the communist revolution to rediscover their fighting spirit and reinvent a rationale for their existence. ''No-surrender, Communist Party members!'' writes General Liu Yuan. ''Let's start again.''

    Pointedly, General Liu distinguishes ''no-surrender'' cadres from unnamed top leaders who have sold out to foreign interests. ''Actually, the party has been repeatedly betrayed by general secretaries, both in and outside the country, recently and in the past,'' Liu writes.

    Chinese leaders since 1989 have successfully presented a disciplined and united public face, in the knowledge that airing their differences could be collectively fatal. General Liu, the political commissar of the general logistics department and the son of a one-time anointed successor to Chairman Mao Zedong, Liu Shaoqi, jokingly acknowledged that his essay breaks all the rules. ... (more in article)
    General Liu Yuan, son of Liu Shaoqi, role in life as a general (political commissar) is to enforce the CCP line. Liu Yuan is an example (2nd generation) of CCP dominance over the PLA - as made by Taquila "The CCP maintains absolute control over the military."

    One would not be too surprised to find "Unrestricted Warfare" (with more than a little "Lawfare") in the Chinese menu. The Political Struggle and the Military Struggle are intertwined - thus, the need for senior political commissar generals such as Liu Yuan.

    Regards

    Mike

  7. #7
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LawVol View Post
    Can we afford to be wrong?
    John, I forgot about this. We had better play it such a way that we can afford to be wrong, if we can, because we probably will be wrong. That leads to the good old plan around their capabilities and actions rather than their words.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

Similar Threads

  1. Ukraine (closed; covers till August 2014)
    By Beelzebubalicious in forum Europe
    Replies: 1934
    Last Post: 08-04-2014, 07:59 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •