China's Emergence as a Superpower (till 2014)

[davidbfpo]

Just what drives China's expansion? Well maybe it is this, with my emphasis:

Unbridled industrialization with almost no environmental regulation has resulted in the toxic contamination of one-fifth of China's farmland, the Communist Party has acknowledged for the first time.

The report, issued by the ministries of Environmental Protection and Land and Resources, says 16.1 percent of the country's soil in general and 19.4 percent of its farmland is polluted with toxic heavy metals such as cadmium, nickel and arsenic. It was based on a soil survey of more than 2.4 million square miles of land across China, spanning a period from April 2005 until December 2013. It excluded special administrative regions Hong Kong and Macau.


In a dire assessment, the report declares: "The overall condition of the Chinese soil allows no optimism."

Link:http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...s-contaminated


There is a link to an offocial PRC news agency report and The Guardian report.


Might this loss of productive land explain Chinese interest in overseas agricultural land purchase and of course earning foriegn exchange to enter the world food market.

[Bill Moore]

Several of the recent posts indicate PRC is perhaps rotten to its core internally, and I tend to agree with many that PRC faces significant domestic challenges. Some will likely interpret this as a PRC that is too hamstrung by domestic issues to lash out, while others will see a more dangerous PRC that will seek to mitigate the impact of their domestic challenges by potentially lashing out at one of their neighbors to generate a nationalistic spirit that distracts their citizens from their dissatisfaction with their government. Some member states of the European Union think the U.S. underestimates China as a threat and sees a historical parallel to Nazi Germany's rise.

The most dangerous adversaries we have had historically since the American Revolution have been rotten on the inside (domestic/economic issues) (Nazi Germany, USSR, Iraq, Iran, etc.), but that alone doesn't prevent them from being dangerous. In may in fact make them more dangerous.

[Dayuhan]

Some member states of the European Union think the U.S. underestimates China as a threat and sees a historical parallel to Nazi Germany's rise.

Who's saying that on the European side? Not saying it isn't so, I just haven't heard it.

The most dangerous adversaries we have had historically since the American Revolution have been rotten on the inside (domestic/economic issues) (Nazi Germany, USSR, Iraq, Iran, etc.), but that alone doesn't prevent them from being dangerous. In may in fact make them more dangerous.

It does make them more dangerous. There's no telling what could happen in the event of serious domestic economic upheaval and/or social strife. As much as we dislike the current Chinese order, the last thing we'd want to see would be it's fall, because the most likely successor would be the PLA, in one form or another.

I do suspect that our fears about China may be misdirected in many ways. We hear way too much talk like "if China keeps growing at it's current rate, by 20__ they will uy us all and have us for breakfast. The danger isn't that China will grow forever and swallow the world, the danger is that China will stop growing and go berserk over it.

[AdamG]

Just what drives China's expansion? Well maybe it is this, with my emphasis:

So. Once again, Lebensraum.

Also,

China's seizure of a Japanese cargo ship over a pre-war debt could hit business ties, Japan's top government spokesman has warned.

Shanghai Maritime Court said it had seized the Baosteel Emotion, owned by Mitsui OSK Lines, on Saturday.

It said the seizure related to unpaid compensation for two Chinese ships leased in 1936.

The Chinese ships were later used by the Japanese army and sank at sea, Japan's Kyodo news agency said.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27068466

See also
Japan in China: 1937 - 1945
http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ad.php?t=14255

[Dayuhan]

So. Once again, Lebensraum.

Probably not. The Senkakus and the Spratlys combined couldn't accommodate the population of one city block in Beijing or Shanghai, and Beijing isn't showing any interest in any territory that could provide lebensraum. The current efforts seem less aimed at measurable material gain that at fueling jingoism and national pride as a distraction from an increasingly lousy domestic state of affairs. If the Chinese really needed lebensraum it would be easier to move people west to Xinjiang, which has more of it than anyone the Chinese would be likely to conquer, than to go out looking to conquer it.

Somewhat superficial review:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...15182434090254

but this quote caught interest:

Visiting Manila in February, U.S. Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert answered a hypothetical question about China seizing Philippine-controlled territory in the Spratlys. "Of course we would help you," he said initially—before adding: "I don't know what that help would be specifically. I mean, we have an obligation because we have a treaty. But I don't know in what capacity that help is."

That's obviously not a very reassuring statement, but it does raise the question of what the US could or would do if China makes a move on Second Thomas Shoal, the current object of contention.

Worth noting that China can't exactly "seize" the shoal: there's nothing to seize, it's underwater. The Philippine garrison (8 marines) lives on an ancient LST that was run up on the reef back in the 90s. The current Chinese strategy appears to be to force a Philippine withdrawal by harassing resupply missions and preventing efforts to repair the ship, which is structurally very unsound and at serious risk of collapse. The Chinese could of course take the ship or destroy it with the greatest of ease, but seem more interested in just letting it collapse, which would force a Philippine withdrawal. There's some question over whether the hull will survive another typhoon season; it's apparently in pretty bad shape (the shoal is not in the usual typhoon track but catches heavy seas from typhoons passing north and from the June-Oct SW monsoon). Typhoon season starts in July, so the window for major repair is very short.

Given those circumstances, how would the US usefully intervene? Possibly by helicoptering in needed materials, equipment, and technicians fpor repairs (large vessels can't get close enough, shallow water)...

[davidbfpo]

Once more hat tip to the Australian Lowy Institute e-briefing for its maritime dimension. First
















Then imported oil (in 2012).

[davidbfpo]

I am sure holes will be picked in this and it is not clear if the aircraft carrier is fully operational:http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/...LCC=454764420&

[Dayuhan]

The maritime trade graphics are interesting, and illustrative.

The the percentage of the world's merchandise and commodity trade passing through SE Asia is often interpreted as a threat from China, on the assumption that China could do great damage by interrupting that trade. What that assumption fails to recognize is that the vast majority of that trade is moving in or out of China, and that China is the party most vulnerable to any trade disruption in the area. The graphics above represent less a threat from China than a threat to China: a trade interruption in the Starais of Malacca, or further abroad in the Indian Ocean, where the PLAN has virtually no capacity to project power, would be a problem of staggering dimensions for China, which depends on trade more than any nation in the world.

[Dayuhan]

Interesting...

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/eu-firms-h...051120343.html

EU firms help power China's military rise

As China boosts its military spending, rattling neighbours over territorial disputes at sea, an AFP investigation shows that European countries have approved billions in transfers of weapons and military-ready technology to the Asian giant.

China's air force relies on French-designed helicopters, while submarines and frigates involved in Beijing's physical assertion of its claim to vast swathes of the South China Sea are powered by German and French engines -- part of a separate trade in "dual use" technology to Beijing's armed forces...