China's Emergence as a Superpower

[Dayuhan]

Originally Posted by Bill Moore

Dayuhan, I think you posted elsewhere that you couldn't access videos in your location, something to due with the nice tropical weather interfering with your bandwidth The speaker actually goes into a fair amount of detail on why he thinks the Chinese view their government as legitimate and points out it is not near as centralized as most of us think. He does point out that most Chinese identify themselves as Han, so those that don't like Tibetans, Uyghers, etc. don't share that view. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with his argument, simply posted it for consideration.

I do have a hard time loading videos, and I'd also really rather read, if the matter is at all serious. I have read various perspectives on the subject. Any time you start talking about what "the Chinese" collectively think of their government you're on thin ice: in China, as everywhere else, there's a spectrum of opinion. There's certainly a sense of renewed nationalism and pride; the government gets a fair bit of credit for that and tries very hard to promote it. There's also a whole lot of anger and frustration, much of it directed at local governments, over corruption, rising inequality, an increasingly unliveable environment, and many other things. There are conflicting currents and opinion can swing very quickly. To put it's simply, it's way too complex to write off with a simple statement of what the Chinese think.

I do think the Chinese government is very deeply concerned with the possibility of domestic unrest, and that when growth starts to stutter they may rely on jingoism to sustain support. Thay also know that's dangerous.

It's complicated, like a lot of other things.

[Bill Moore]

Vietnam Accuses China of Firing Flare at Fishermen

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2013...html?ref=world

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said China had taken unspecified but "legitimate and reasonable" actions against Vietnamese boats working illegally in Chinese waters. He denied that any boats had been damaged, but gave few other details.

There have been other clashes in the waters, often related to claims of illegal fishing or violations of Chinese unilaterally imposed fishing moratoriums.

Vietnam and China each claim large parts of the South China Sea. The Philippines, Malaysia, Taiwan and Brunei also maintain that parts of the sea are theirs.

The dangerous drift towards world war in Asia

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/c...r-in-Asia.html

After talking to Japanese officials in Tokyo over the last few days, I have the strong impression not only that they are ready to fight, but also that they expect to win, and furthermore that conflict may come at any moment.

"They are sending ships and even aircraft into our territory every day. It is intense provocation. We're making every effort not to be provoked but they are using fire-control radar. This is one step away from conflict and we are very worried," said a top government official.

An interesting perspective, the article also discusses what the somewhat limited control that the PRC government has over its military.

Professor Huang Jing from Singapore University and a former adviser to the People's Liberation Army (PLA) says a rising cadre of officers has slipped the leash and picked up attitudes all too like the Japan's firebrand officers in the 1930s, when they defied orders from Tokyo. He said these young bloods are on a "collision course" with the US-dominated global system.

Apparently some in China think now is the time to act due to the U.S. being over stretched in the Middle East.

What frightens me most is talk from certain quarters in Beijing that the US is a busted flush, bled dry by the financial crisis, crippled by military over-stretch in the Middle East, and that now is the moment to test the paper tiger.

This is a fatal misjudgement of course.

[Dayuhan]

After talking to Japanese officials in Tokyo over the last few days, I have the strong impression not only that they are ready to fight, but also that they expect to win, and furthermore that conflict may come at any moment.

Professor Huang Jing from Singapore University and a former adviser to the People's Liberation Army (PLA) says a rising cadre of officers has slipped the leash and picked up attitudes all too like the Japan's firebrand officers in the 1930s, when they defied orders from Tokyo.

The difference of course is that if the PLA slips the leash and has a go at Japan, they will not be dealing with fading colonial powers that are distracted by threats closer to home. They'd be taking a bite at one of the best equipped and most professional navies on the planet, and there's a very good chance that at least initially they would take a severe spanking. China might prevail by attrition in an extended conflict, but an extended conflict would not be easy for China to manage either, especially if it involved major interference with trade.

[Bob's World]

Wars are easy to start.

Something the US should keep in mind as we define our relationships with key partners and allies. Currently we have empowered and emboldened far too many foreign "tails" to wag the American dog and drag us into wars we would never start on our own, and that are not in any way in our interests.

It would be an epic tragedy of misplaced loyalties if some day Iran and the US, or China and the US, or North Korea and the US found themselves much like England and Germany in 1914, wondering how things had somehow come to this between them.

We help our longtime allies and partners more when we posture ourself to be an effective mediator of small (but important) points of friction far more than we do when we simply commit to back their every play with a blank check of American influence, blood and treasure.

[carl]

Originally Posted by Bob's World

Wars are easy to start.

Something the US should keep in mind as we define our relationships with key partners and allies. Currently we have empowered and emboldened far too many foreign "tails" to wag the American dog and drag us into wars we would never start on our own, and that are not in any way in our interests.

It would be an epic tragedy of misplaced loyalties if some day Iran and the US, or China and the US, or North Korea and the US found themselves much like England and Germany in 1914, wondering how things had somehow come to this between them.

We help our longtime allies and partners more when we posture ourself to be an effective mediator of small (but important) points of friction far more than we do when we simply commit to back their every play with a blank check of American influence, blood and treasure.

So, I got a question. The Red Chinese have been doing their best to shove around Japan at sea for some years now. According to Bill Moore's info above Japan figures things are getting worse. Now say Red China and Japan start shooting at each other. Do we back the Japanese or not?

[Dayuhan]

Originally Posted by carl

So, I got a question. The Red Chinese have been doing their best to shove around Japan at sea for some years now. According to Bill Moore's info above Japan figures things are getting worse. Now say Red China and Japan start shooting at each other. Do we back the Japanese or not?

I'm not sure it's accurate to say the Chines have been shoving the Japanese around. There have been provocations, and at an accelerated level, but the Japanese give as good as they get.

Whether we back the Japanese or not would depend on whether we're asked to and whether it's needed. In a full scale war, I would say yes. In a naval skirmish or other shooting short of full scale war, the JMSDF is more than capable of taking care of itself and would probably not need help.

[carl]

Originally Posted by Dayuhan

I'm not sure it's accurate to say the Chines have been shoving the Japanese around. There have been provocations, and at an accelerated level, but the Japanese give as good as they get.

Whether we back the Japanese or not would depend on whether we're asked to and whether it's needed. In a full scale war, I would say yes. In a naval skirmish or other shooting short of full scale war, the JMSDF is more than capable of taking care of itself and would probably not need help.

Fair enough.

[Firn]

Stepping away from recent diplomatic issues I recently took a closer look at the recent macroeconomic developments in China:

Macroeconomic Imbalances is a 2 year old video by Barry Naughton, author of the brilliant book The Chinese Economy: Transitions and Growth which I read earlier.

The end of hypergrowth and China’s Economy: Achievements; Institutional Constraints; and Development are more recent papers of the same author.

It is easy to forget just how (vertically) integrated China is in the world economy, being indeed also the leading trade economy. This should tend to reduce the chances of conflict, but **** can still happen as European countries showed pretty convincingly around 1914. China exports are still dominated by labour-intensive products which add little value and high-tech share is in general a screw-driver (assembly) job. The strength of the increase in government spending/investment as a share of a GDP is a bit of a surprise to me, I imagined it to be more limited in time. But instead of a short Keynesian stimulus to a very dangerous demand-side shock the Chinese leadership seems to want to pull the Chinese economy towards their recent grand strategy.

P.S: A nice breakdown on how the iPhone wides the US trade deficit with China...

[Dayuhan]

More on the economy...

http://news.yahoo.com/china-pmis-hig...023043130.html

China factory activity shrinks, adds to growth fears

BEIJING (Reuters) - China's factory activity shrank for the first time in seven months in May and growth in the services sector cooled, evidence that the world's second-largest economy is losing further momentum in the second quarter.

The HSBC/Markit Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) for May dropped to 49.2, the lowest level since October 2012 and down from 50.4 in April, as domestic and overseas demand fell.

The figure was slightly lower than a preliminary reading of 49.6 released on May 23. Fifty divides expansion from contraction compared with the month before...

[Madhu]

Don't know if the following Luttwak book has been discussed in this thread. Don't know this area well, so the following is for discussion. Don't know what to think:

For any country whose rising strength cannot go unnoticed, the universal logic of strategy allows only military or economic growth. But China is pursuing both goals simultaneously. Its military buildup and assertive foreign policy have already stirred up resistance among its neighbors, just three of whom—India, Japan, and Vietnam—together exceed China in population and wealth. Unless China’s leaders check their own ambitions, a host of countries, which are already forming tacit military coalitions, will start to impose economic restrictions as well.

http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.p...=9780674066427

[Madhu]

I thought the following was funny, given the tendency to romanticize a variety of Western and other texts within the American military context:

Chinese leaders will find it difficult to choose between pursuing economic prosperity and increasing China’s military strength. Such a change would be hard to explain to public opinion. Moreover, Chinese leaders would have to end their reliance on ancient strategic texts such as Sun Tzu’s Art of War. While these guides might have helped in diplomatic and military conflicts within China itself, their tactics—such as deliberately provoking crises to force negotiations—turned China’s neighbors into foes. To avoid arousing the world’s enmity further, Luttwak advises, Chinese leaders would be wise to pursue a more sustainable course of economic growth combined with increasing military and diplomatic restraint.

- from the same link above.