Many of China's neighbors, as judged by their renewed willingness to reach out to the US for strengthened security partnerships, grow increasingly wary of their powerful neighbor. This does not mean they do not embrace the economic aspect of their relationship with China, or that they seek some sort of alliance with one power to the exclusion of the others. It merely means that they recognize the value of balancing relationships with larger nations as they remain focused on their own interests as they perceive them.

Many in the West grow wary of China as well. The West has grown used to a China that was for a century too weak to defend its own sovereignty from "100 years of humiliation" at the hands of nations such as Japan, Russia, Germany, Great Britain, and yes, the US as well. Since the fall of the Nationalists China's focus has been largely internal, as it worked to redefine and reestablish itself as a viable, sovereign nation.

Recently China went on record regarding her "core interests" as she defines them; and yet much like Generals Willoughby and MacArthur in 1950, the West ignores clear expressions of red lines, purpose and intent. If I were to categorize China's posture it would be one of "strategic defense," but after so long being compressed within a posture forced upon her by others, I can see why so many see China simply shrugging her shoulders of compromises forced upon her by others, and seeking to stand up tall once again as a nation to seem "offensive" in nature.

The South China Sea is one of several regions of the world where several sphere's of influence overlap. Given the potential benefits of control over that region it is logical that competition will occur. The sooner we work to establish a reasonable distribution of the wealth from and the influence over that region the better. Otherwise such competition can only lead to conflict, warfare, and potentially war. Such a war benefits no one, but China is clear, that if given no other options, once the time is right they will exercise whatever is necessary to secure their core interests.

China is actually far less obtuse than the US when it comes to defining core interests and spheres of influence. The US seems to act as if global hegemony is some enduring right, rather than fleeting coincidence; and that our sphere of influence is, and should remain the entire globe up to the 12-mile limits and borders of Russia and China. Why else do we bandy about odd (and expensive) concepts such as "A2/AD" and Air-Sea Warfare, or somehow come to interpret a simple recognition of the importance of the far East to our national economy as a call to "contain" a rising China?

Chinese government officials have been declaring on different occasions that Taiwan, Tibet, South China Sea and Yellow Sea are national core interests. Agree or disagree, but I caution that to simply ignore is the same brand of foolishness that brought China and America to war 60 + years ago in Korea.

China is a coiled spring. She has tolerated arms sales to Taiwan because she had no choice but to do so. That does not mean that such sales do not cross a clearly marked red-line on her part. If the US continues to cross that line there will come a day when China feels she is in position to respond in kind to what she sees as an act of war against her. Better we recognize that now, rather than continuing to push dated policies that act as if China' position on such matters is irrelevant.

I am no expert on Asian culture, but know enough to roughly appreciate the concept of "losing face." Even if one only drills Wikipedia deep, it is a sobering concept to consider:

Lin Yutang considered the psychology of "face."

Interesting as the Chinese physiological face is, the psychological face makes a still more fascinating study. It is not a face that can be washed or shaved, but a face that can be "granted" and "lost" and "fought for" and "presented as a gift." Here we arrive at the most curious point of Chinese social psychology. Abstract and intangible, it is yet the most delicate standard by which Chinese social intercourse is regulated. (1935: 199-200)

How much "face" does a society such as China lose in an era declared as "100 years of humiliation"? How about in an ensuing 60 years of containment? Perhaps it is time to simply treat China with appropriate respect in general and respect specifically in regard to her declared core interests? Isn't it time to work to find a new balance of power in that region that secures the sovereignty of the smaller nations of the region without at the same time compressing so vigorously the sovereignty of the largest?