By Pepe Escobar, posted with permission and first posted at Asia Times
Everything about US-China hinges on the result of the upcoming US presidential election.
Trump 2.0 essentially would turbo-charge its bet on decoupling, aiming to squeeze “malign” China on a multiple Hybrid War front, undermine the Chinese trade surplus, co-opt large swathes of Asia, while always insisting on characterizing China as evil incarnate.
Team Biden, even as it professes no desire to fall into the trap of a new Cold War, according to the Dem official platform, would be only slightly less confrontational, ostensibly “saving” the “rules-based order” while keeping Trump-enacted sanctions.
Very few Chinese analysts are better positioned to survey the geopolitical and geoeconomic chessboard than Lanxin Xiang: expert on relations between China, US and Europe, professor of History and International Relations at the IHEID in Geneva and director of the Center for One Belt, One Road Studies in Shanghai.
Xiang got his PhD at SAIS at Johns Hopkins, and is as well respected in the US as in China. During a recent webinar he laid out the lineaments of an analysis the West ignores at its own peril.
Xiang has been focusing on the Trump administration’s push to “redefine an external target”: a process he brands, “risky, dangerous, and highly ideological”. Not because of Trump – who is “not interested in ideological issues” – but due to the fact that the “China policy was hijacked by the real Cold Warriors”. The objective: “regime change. But that was not Trump’s original plan.”
Xiang blasts the rationale behind these Cold Warriors: “We made a huge mistake in the past 40 years”. That is, he insists, “absurd – reading back into History, and denying the entire history of US-China relations since Nixon.” And Xiang fears the “lack of overall strategy. That creates enormous strategic uncertainty – and leads to miscalculations.”
Compounding the problem, “China is not really sure what the US wants to do.” Because it goes way beyond containment – which Xiang defines as a “very well thought of strategy by George Kennan, the father of the Cold War.” Xiang only detects a pattern of “Western civilization versus a non-Caucasian culture. That language is very dangerous. It’s a direct rehash of Samuel Huntington, and shows very little room for compromise.”
In a nutshell, that’s the “American way of stumbling into a Cold War.”
An October Surprise?
All of the above directly connects with Xiang’s great concern about a possible October Surprise: “It could probably be over Taiwan. Or a limited engagement in the South China Sea.” He stresses, “Chinese military people are terribly worried. October Surprise as a military engagement is not unthinkable, because Trump may want to re-establish a war presidency.”
For Xiang, “if Biden wins, the danger of a Cold War turning Hot War will be reduced dramatically.” He is very much aware of shifts in the bipartisan consensus in Washington: “Historically, Republicans don’t care about human rights and ideology. Chinese always preferred to deal with Republicans. They can’t deal with Democrats – human rights, values issues. Now the situation is reversed.”
Xiang, incidentally, “invited a top Biden adviser to Beijing. Very pragmatic. Not too ideological.” But in case of a possible Trump 2.0 administration, everything could change: “My hunch is he will be totally relaxed, may even reverse China policy 180 degrees. I would not be surprised. He would turn back to being Xi Jinping’s best friend.”
As it stands, the problem is “a chief diplomat that behaves as a chief propagandist, taking advantage of an erratic president.”
And that’s why Xiang never rules out even an invasion of Taiwan by Chinese troops. He games the scenario of a Taiwanese government announcing, “We are independent” coupled with a visit by the Secretary of State: “That would provoke a limited military action, and could turn into an escalation. Think about Sarajevo. That worries me. If Taiwan declares independence, Chinese invade in less than 24 hours. “
How Beijing miscalculates
Unlike most Chinese scholars, Xiang is refreshingly frank about Beijing’s own shortcomings: “Several things should have been better controlled. Like abandoning Deng Xiaoping’s original advice that China should bide its time and keep a low profile. Deng, in his last will, had set a timeline for that, at least 50 years.”
The problem is “the speed of China’s economic development led to hot headed, and premature, calculations. And a not well thought of strategy. ‘Wolf warrior’ diplomacy is an extremely assertive posture – and language. China began to upset the US – and even the Europeans. That was a geostrategic miscalculation.”
And that brings us to what Xiang characterizes as “the overextension of Chinese power: geopolitical and geoconomic.” He’s fond of quoting Paul Kennedy: “Any great superpower, if overstretched, becomes vulnerable.”
Xiang goes as far as stating that the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – whose concept he enthusiastically praises – may be overstretched: “They thought it was a purely economic project. But with such wide global reach?”
So is BRI a case of overstretching or a source of destabilization? Xiang notes how, “Chinese are never really interested in other countries’ domestic policies. Not interested in exporting a model. Chinese have no real model. A model has to be mature – with a structure. Unless you’re talking about export of traditional Chinese culture.”
The problem, once again, is that China thought it was possible to “sneak into geographical areas that the US never paid too much attention to, Africa, Central Asia, without necessarily provoking a geopolitical setback. But that is naiveté.”
Xiang is fond of reminding Western analysts that, “the infrastructure investment model was invented by Europeans. Railways. The Trans-Siberian. Canals, like in Panama. Behind these projects there was always a colonial competition. We pursue similar projects – minus colonialism.”
Still, “Chinese planners buried their head in the sand. They never use that word – geopolitics.” Thus his constant jokes with Chinese policy makers: “You may not like geopolitics, but geopolitics likes you.”
Ask Confucius
The crucial aspect of the “post-pandemic situation”, according to Xiang, is to forget about “that wolf warrior stuff. China may be able to re-start the economy before anyone else. Develop a really working vaccine. China should not politicize it. It should show a universal value about it, pursue multilateralism to help the world, and improve its image.”
On domestic politics, Xiang is adamant that “during the last decade the atmosphere at home, on minority issues, freedom of speech, has been tightening to the extent that it does not help China’s image as a global power.”
Compare it, for instance, with “unfavorable views of China” in a survey of nations in the industrialized West that includes only two Asians: Japan and South Korea.
And that brings us to Xiang’s The Quest for Legitimacy in Chinese Politics – arguably the most important contemporary study by a Chinese scholar capable of explaining and bridging the East-West political divide.
This book is such a major breakthrough that its main conceptual analyses will be the subject of a follow-up column.
Xiang’s main thesis is that “legitimacy in Chinese tradition political philosophy is a dynamic question. To transplant Western political values to the Chinese system does not work.”
Yet even as the Chinese concept of legitimacy is dynamic, Xiang stresses, “the Chinese government is facing a legitimacy crisis.” He refers to the anti-corruption campaign of the past four years: “Widespread official corruption, that is a side-effect of economic development, bringing out the bad side of the system. Credit to Xi Jinping, who understood that if we allow this to continue, the CCP will lose all legitimacy.”
Xiang stresses how, in China, “legitimacy is based on the concept of morality – since Confucius. The communists can’t escape the logic.
Nobody before Xi dared to tackle corruption. He had the guts to root it out, arrested hundreds of corrupt generals. Some even attempted two or three coups d’état.”
At the same time, Xiang is adamantly against the “tightening of the atmosphere” in China in terms of freedom of speech. He mentions the example of Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew, an “enlightened authoritarian system”. The problem is” China has no rule of law. There are a lot of legal aspects though. Singapore is a little city-state. Like Hong Kong. They just took over the British legal system. It’s working very well for that size.”
And that brings Xiang to quote Aristotle: “Democracy can never work in bigger countries. In city-states, it does.” And armed with Aristotle, we step into Hong Kong: “Hong Kong had rule of law – but never a democracy. The government was directly appointed by London. That’s how Hong Kong actually worked – as an economic dynamo. Neoliberal economists consider Hong Kong as a model. It’s a unique political arrangement. Tycoon politics. No democracy – even as the colonial government did not rule like an authoritarian figure. Market economy was unleashed. Hong Kong was ruled by the Jockey Club, HSBC, Jardine Matheson, with the colonial government as coordinator. They never cared about people in the bottom.”
Xiang notes how, “the richest man in Hong Kong only pays 15% of income tax. China wanted to keep that pattern, with a colonial government appointed by Beijing. Still tycoon politics. But now there’s a new generation. People born after the handover – who know nothing about the colonial history. Chinese elite ruling since 1997 did not pay attention to the grassroots and neglected younger generation sentiment. For a whole year the Chinese didn’t do anything. Law and order collapsed. This is the reason why mainland Chinese decided to step in. That’s what the new security law is all about.”
And what about that other favorite “malign” actor across the Beltway – Russia? “Putin would love to have a Trump win. The Chinese as well, up to three months ago. The Cold War was a great strategic triangle. After Nixon went to China, the US sat in the middle manipulating Moscow and Beijing. Now everything has changed.”
no way. the chinese have nothing to fear except maybe a lack of self-confidence. Deng was right and i don’t feel the chinese authorities precipitating things. no , the chinese can just watch the usa alienate itself , crumble under lack of infrastructural investment , basically live out to the extreme the “american dream”, dog eats dog , everyone to himself, competition galore, make money-spend money and die lonely.
yorg
I don’t think the Chinese made any great mistakes as far as the US is concerned. It all goes back to the 19th century and Britain’s opium trade with China. It was picked up by the US, which enriched the famous Eastern American families. As for the Chinese, they never forgave Britain and the US for the opium trade. To this date they trust neither.
In 1971 Nixon sends Kissinger to China to initiate American-Chinese reconciliation and establish political and economic relationships. The aim was to separate China from the Soviet Union, bring China into the Western camp and isolate the Soviet Union (ie. Russia). The Chinese accept the game, but do not fall for this well know divide and conquer tactic. They do not turn their back on the Soviet Union (ie. Russia), with the result that today China has economic benefits from both Russia and the West, something that was not planned by the Western elites.
As for Nixon, he foolishly goes for detante with the Soviet Union, seeking a place in the history books as the man who established positive relations with both China and the Soviet Union (ie. Russia) and avoided a potential nuclear war. That was not the geopolitical plan of the Western elites, who wanted to see both the Soviet Union and Russia broken up and plundered. Nixon gets Watergate and removal from Office.
Kissinger was the deep state operative who orchestrated Watergate when Nixon was no longer useful for them.
Agree, its silly to say China no longer Followed Deng’s advice To keep a low profile- how to hide when you economy is now the second largest, and every day the US slanted media is maximizing the China threat, debt trap, various made up stories of “ concentration camps”, etc etc? How? Pretend other countries do not know? That part is really silly. Plus, what constitutes “ wolf warrior” strategy – that the Chinese foreign ministry dared talk back? Did China invaded any country yet? Wolf warrior my foot.
You are very wrong. The maltreatment of minorities is happening, there is enough evidence out there.
China is in everybody’s business, because almost anything produced today is linked to China. This power potential isn’t going anywhere. It doesn’t matter what the CCP doesn’t do, only the perception what it can do with you, if you get on the wrong side of the CCP. Just speaking persistently of historical facts will get you censored and after a while put in prison in China.There are numerous examples where collective actions of the Chinese, make it clear whose boss and how easy it becomes to be a Chinese enemy if you have another point of view, so spare us with your righteous indignation. The globalists have fed their own creation and now they don’t know what to do with it. To paraphrase, it’s hard to be against someone if your antibiotics depend on his/her goodwill. That’s it. Pro Chinese don’t get this simple fact. It’s about power stupi♤. That’s why a multipolar world is better and in theory can exist. What I see right are 2 and a half poles with one becoming stronger by the day; and hegemonic one thought away.
If you don’t get that, you brain was melted by over education and socialization.
>The maltreatment of minorities is happening, there is enough evidence out there.
I’ve seen..
a middle school labeled as a concentration camp
a Taiwanese BDSM video given as proof of Uighur torture
a video of an Indonesian police officer beating a minority used as proof of Chinese police brutality despite everyone in the video speaking languages only found in Indonesia
a video of Indian police suppressing rioters with batons as proof of Chinese police brutality, despite the bengali written on the signs
a prisoner transfer involving the ringleaders of a pyramid scheme used as poor of Uighur detainment
a Falun Gong street demonstration in Taiwan involving out of date chinese police uniforms used as proof of policy-on-minority brutality
..and the list goes on.
Please show me one piece of evidence that proves your point. Just one.
I don’t believe for a second that China’s some sort of utopia, so there HAS to be something out there that isn’t straight up agitprop.
You will find a whole thread about this, search under my name:
/sinophobia-lies-and-hybrid-war/
I was censored at a certain point and couldn’t answer amarynth at the top of the page. I brought enough examples. The reader will decide.
I have seen evidence of individual and party financial corruption and bribery but every time it chase up evidence of human rights abuse it turns out to be just another western fake.
I’m with SEAtizen on this one. So much is fake,
Deliberate starvation – pure fake, the opposite is true
Tiananmen massacre – pure fake, and easy to prove
Maltreatment of minorities – pure fake, the opposite is true
Falun Gong body parts – pure fake
Its not China that has military bases on the Yankistan border, its not china that used nuclear weapons on civilian cities, its not China that murdered 3 million people in Vietnam and burned people to death with its napalm, its not China the killed one third of the population of Nth Korea
Dont take anything at face value, its better to believe nothing then to accept what the west holds to be true.
Nightingale, this reader has taken the trouble to follow your Link, and this reader has decided that you are peddling standard anti-Chinese propaganda. Here is example of anti-Sinonic assertion by yourself followed by refutation from Antonym:
Nachtigall on September 28, 2020 · at 5:16 am EST/EDT
Now, for all those Chinese cheerleaders, I present to you a Russian’s report of Xinjang and the Uighur situation. It’s in Russian, this time you cannot excuse it for American propaganda:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDZcWsm6X9o
Reply by amarynth on September 28, 2020 · at 8:04 am EST/EDT
Oh yes, I can. And I’ll give you a few hints as to how to do some homework on this issue. Go listen to 10 other propaganda pieces – all languages. You will find that every accusation is the same – there is no creativity there to even change the accusations.
Yeah, you know, if I cannot reply to it (wrote an extensive reply), its no use at all. Basically, my reply was, that I look at the footage in all videos and filtrate what is happening. Many behave like hurt children, which cannot distinguish facts from fiction. The point of the videos is, that Xinjiang has become an Orwellian nightmare, where everything is recorded(that was the point of the Russian vid, see on site footage, not the phone calls made to the diaspora), checked and if you are Uighur you will be stuffed in these lovely reeducation camps aka concentration camps. You can be hurt about your delusion of happy Chinese state, but even the gd officials are talking about pre-crime (BBC vid). All the answers on all of my injunctions orbit around the CCP’s propaganda media (which I will happily judge on the data [e.e. footage] ) and amateur filming themselves, while having fun in Xinjiang, which I do not deny in the slightest.
I repeat it is about the on site footage, sat images, filming of the camps itself (the gd BBC was allowed on site!) and Xinjiang demographic yearbook data.
Lol, quote mining to make point – how brave! I respect that the site has its own rules for censorship, but just censoring one side makes you not 1 iota better than the mainstream anglo press.
Your evidence of “Uyghur genocide” is Al Jazeera, Vice News and New York Times? Have you ever heard of word “propaganda”?
Warmongering rubbish about Chinese trying to destroy minorities could be easily debunked by looking at one simple fact: Minorities in China were never subjected to one-child policy!
Or we could compare Uyghurs to other conquered nations like Sioux.
Uyghurs were conquered 250 years ago. They are still numbered in millions, have their own language, religion and Autonomous region where they are still majority. Sioux were conquered 150 years ago. And they are numbered in thousands, speak language of their conquerors and practice foreign religion. They dont have any kind of autonomy, and are negligible minority in their own land.
And still, their conquerors shamelessly talk about human rights of other conquered nations!
I’m not an American. Never will I be a part of any Anglo nation. These are their crimes. My ancestor and family lived in the Russian Empire and then In the USSR for about 250 years. We never had any slaves, never committed any genocide, but paid for being German in the wars. That was the war time.
I have no dog in the fight with the Chinese.
Regardless of whether you have dog or beef, you have still fallen for the anti China propaganda from the West. Go to China to see for yourself instead of relying on serial fake news sources. Its silly for some one to continue to follow the weather forecast of a known lousy forcaster, so why continue to rely on sources that have been known to peddle fake news….
More fake news. Its funny how the Left likes to believe any stories about concentration camps or “
Repression of minorities”, So long as its about China, but will have the common sense to treat it as propaganda if it is any other country ( Syria, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, Etc, you name it).
If you are serious, go see for yourself
https://youtu.be/gygxrdNmzUQ
https://youtu.be/pSWaFsLgEpU
https://youtu.be/rjgQt53akBU
Fascinating insight and openness from Xiang. The insights open avenues to more exploration, a unique and great mind
“Xiang got his PhD at SAIS at Johns Hopkins, and is as well respected in the US as in China.”
That says it all. There are a lot of such corrupt Chinese, inside and outside China, who cry to get back their “win-win situation” — all what matters for them is that they can make money. Who believe “it’s just Trump” (and who give a damn about the mass murdering by the USA).
There is no “overstretching” by China, only “understretching”. They don’t “sneak into areas”. OMG, they have “upset the US — and even the Europeans”.
How can Escobar not just listen to such a typcial “expert”, but even praising these completely standard “words of wisdom”, which is just the ordinary language of complete submission to “The West”??
You do have a point. Some Chinese scholars remind me of those “convergence theories” in the USSR. According to which uniting with the West was inevitable, and socialism-capitalism would become one system. That may as well have happened, but it destroyed only one party. Although that could be blamed on someone like Gorbachev.
And I thought the name was familiar: Lanxin Xiang. Read a piece in the blog “reading the China dream”. It used to be a very broad blog, but lately it has taken quite a strong Atlanticist turn.
Thanks, my thought also.
Agree as well. These are elites with “one foot on both ships” as Chinese saying goes….
I hope that the U.S. is not evil, insane, and stupid enough to believe that they can beat China in a hot war. That just will not happen. They will get their asses kicked. Let me know if they intend to go through with it, so that I can make my I told you so signs. The U.S. military probably couldn’t even beat Guam and has a repeated history of losing wars in modern history. They might want to take their long history of failures into consideration before starting a hot war with China!
War – Just For The Hell Of It!
Andrea Iravani
You: “War – Just For The Hell Of It!” – *not just for the hell of it!
‘Tis trange how we didn’t get a century of world war until the US got its central bank – the Federal Reserve (1913)
Written by twice awarded 5-star Maj. General Smedley D Butler – who was recruited by Prescott Bush et.al. for the coup d’etat called the “Business plot” to oust FDR, ‘War is A Racket’ (5 short chapters) states that *all wars are bankers’ wars:
https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
Regards
Thanks for this, Mr. Escobar. It cuts right through the toxic mix of self-interest and “true believer” mindlessness of current American politics. The Belt and Road Initiative offers nations the ability to become unhooked from the constraints of the Anglo-Zionist Empire. Many are availing themselves of the opportunity “to become independent again, rather than swelter under continued neo-colonialism, defy WEF and IMF advice and work steadily with perseverance towards political and financial autonomy…”
“De-dollarize and de-globalize and turn to local production for local consumption with local sovereign money and local public banking, directed by a sovereign local central bank that works for the socioeconomic wellbeing of her country’s people, not for the faraway shareholders of a Wall Street or internationally affiliated banks.”
https://www.globalresearch.ca/imf-wef-great-lockdown-great-transformation/5721090
No Pepe, everything about US-China hinges on the pending US presidential election not! It really matters not who wins, a Dem or a GOP; China knows enough about US politics to shrug at all the hypes and hysteria that happens once every 4 years in the circus. China does not need a friendly USA to thrive. Yankees, or for that matter all members of the so-called 5-eyes, please don’t indulge in flattering yourselves. You are just another entity in this world that China knows to have to deal with, for better or for worse. But please be informed that a friendly Africa or a friendly Eurasia are no less valuable to China’s growth and development than the snooty so-called West. Hate us all like, who gives a hoot?
Everything actually hinges on how China manages to alter the psychology of ‘admiration for the west’ among a large swath of its own population, and develops the confidence of self sufficiency in its own economy. That psychology is the remnant of western dominance in this world for the past two centuries. It has proved indeed hard to shake. The 14th 5-year Plan, about to be unveiled later this year, should make a big thrust in that direction.
Western hegemony is for sure a notion hard to shake. But this COVID pandemic is shaping up as the catalyst that goes a long way in dissolving that unhealthy psychological spell. The West has been caught not wearing pangs when the tide has ebbed. Oh what an ugly sight! And they can print paper money for a few more years, but you know and I know the days of reckoning is fast approaching just around a corner or two. Populations with average per capita weight of 250lb. are simply not productive or efficient enough to keep their weights at 250 pounds. Shedding 100 pound of weight is gonna be a long and painful undertaking. Are you ready, Yanks and Brits? Or are you ready to swing your rotting stick?
This guy you cited, Xiang Lanxin, never heard of him. Sounds also like he harmonizes with the western meme of geopolitics, just as most so-called Chinese experts do amongst the dozen or so ivory towers in the west who fancy themselves as knowing anything about China. LOL! For if they did, how in hell could China have managed to develop far beyond their expectations??? In China there is a term called ‘Gong-zi’ (translated as one who knows it all) that applies to English speaking scholars who are psychologically biased to admire the west. This Xiang character appears to be one of them. If you want to hear those who really know about China, read the comments to articles that appear in the blog site Guancha.cn.
If and when China imposes unification upon Taiwan, with force if necessary, it is not an invasion. It is a change in administrative policy of leaving 23 millions of Taiwan residents alone to their own devises. You see, China doesn’t really savors having to rule a population who takes pleasure in sniffing western behinds and brainwashed to hate their own kind. But what can you do with them? Kill them all? That’s rather draconian. Ship them off? The majority of them have no place to go (and believe NOT that any western nations or Japan would take them in as refugees). You have to feed them; they would demonstrate, they would riot, they would desecrate, ….., every chance they get. They would be just like those roaches in Hong Kong, but this time over 20 millions of them. What a drag!!! So thus far China has played it dumb, left these roaches alone as if their wish for self determination is being respected. But you roaches dare to move to declare independence, allowing for the possibility of Yankee/Jap military hardware being deployed 300 kilometers from China’s coast, no way Jose! Even if there would be 20 million ghosts instead of souls. October surprises or not, that’s how things will proceed. Within 4,000 kilometers of China’s coastline, China is confident enough to take on any enemies that come.
Agreed. I am finding it real hard to believe that the Democrats will be any more sane and human regarding China policy than Trump. I suspect the above criticism of Pepe’s “China expert” is the most relevant fact.
No, what she’s saying is that China is not paying attention to dumbass mindless US partisan politics.
To be objective, in order of importance the reasons Mainland China wants reunification with Taiwan is:
1) Taiwan is an unsinkable aircraft carrier, 70%
2) Remove the legitimacy of other separatist movements in Xinjiang, Tibet, and Inner Mongolia (i.e. preserve the authority of Beijing’s word,) 20%
3) Historical claim, i.e. close the chapter on the “century of humiliation,” 10%
If the PLA was able to deploy S-400s, S-500s, Kalibre cruise missiles, Su-35s, J-20s, etc, China would be able to secure its entire eastern flank from hostile navies, a traditional Chinese weakness.
This is one of Pepe’s pieces that I am disappointed with. Recently, Pepe has gone on to quoting several obscure “experts” – such as Mr. C for armenia azerbaijan conflict and now this Xiang regarding China’s “over reach.”
My pulse on China is that things have come on hard quickly for China. The U.S. pressures are much harder than most China leaders and observers expected. U.S. allies for the most parts have toed the Empire’s line – albeit not enthusiastically. India has been a surprise win for U.S.
But none of this is China’s fault per se. None of this China could have prevented. China has gotten too big for the U.S. to ignore if the American intent is to have no peers.
China has not been aggressive. And merely helping others build roads and bridges and other infrastructures does not make China colonial just because the European colonialists built roads and bridges and other infrastructures throughout their empires.
Pepe is getting confused about the world. I don’t blame him. I get confused too. But I recall one of his article even said China will catch up and surpass Western chip manufacturing by 2025. Now I think he is in Neverland….
Ok. Maybe there is a secret weapon China hasn’t revealed. But I highly doubt it.
China will get its chip industry. No doubt about it. But like its progress with Engine technology. It aint’ going to be swift.
This ain’t the Boxer’s rebellion. Chinese have no magical qigong powers.
China however is capable. It will stay strong enough to deter others from mortally wounding it. My dog attacked a skunk last week. He quickly let go after the skunk sprayed it.
The lesson I drew? Yes my dog in theory could have that skunk for lunch. But the skunk is not an easy animal to attack. In reality, it is not easy to attack it. China has enough strength to defend itself.
The West can try to slow down China’s rise, but soon enough, China will rise.
I don’t know when China will catch up with the West. The original goal was 2049 – 100 years since the founding the of PRC. Alright that date is kind of arbitrary. But it does give some sense of reality.
China ain’t going to catch up by 2025. China will be dissed by the West for a while longer. But it will start looking sillier and sillier. Some time between mid 2030 and 2050, China will catch up.
The founders of the PRC had always imagined PRC to be a force for good in the world although that’s not its primary purpose. The primary purpose of the PRC is to liberate the Chinese people from foreign domination and subservience – to be able to walk its on path. But to the extent China interacts with the rest of the world, it will be a force of good. It will help other nations stand up.
The rest is just noise….
Relax Allen, things haven’t come on hard for China. How else could they have achieved 3.8% GDP growth in Q2 after just emerging from their share of the pandemic while their export markets were sinking into the worst recession since the 1930’s? News outlets, the western MSM that is, trumpet China’s hiccups and sneezes habitually, but China keeps to the grind and does its own things, and has been doing them well for couple of decades now. American pressure? That’s a laugher. It’s more like Trump catcalls in desperation. Doesn’t amount to anything other than headlines for MSM to sell their papers and western dumbasses getting what they like to hear.
Even the so-called disruption tactics of the West to throw barriers in 1B1R’s way are no more than just noise making. Truth of the matter is, China is now well aware of West’s genuine fear of its rise, knows of the inevitability of the West undermining 1B1R, and thus have focused on developing domestic consumption as it’s main engine of growth for the next thirty years (all the way to 2049, that is). 1B1R’s main goal is not ever increasing exports; rather it’s making use of its infrastructure expertise to facilitate the integration of its trading partners economically, politically, and culturally. Those who want out, by all means stay out. No big deal to China per se. But no amount of noise making by the West is going to detract China from building its AI economy, its green energy economy, its new transportation networks, and its people’s living standard.
So, Satan Sam will continue to incite other nations to rub China the nasty way, recruiting cannon fodders and sacrificial beasts, hoping China would lose cool and pull triggers. Imbeciles in Hong Kong and Taiwan will continue to create western favored headlines. India and Australia will continue to act like fools. But China will keep to its grind. 2021 will see 8% GDP growth. South China Sea will continue build up. C919 C929 will see commercial deployments. Sky Lab will begin construction. China will be China, as always.
Uchh, ouch, sounds like a big f make I wish plantation in the comment section. Green economy, 1B1R, growth, brotherly love, kumbaya my lord ……
China is not existing in a void, as the West isn’t. You have a jungle full of evil creatures with bright red eyes out there in the night – also an upset nature around you. Do you think anglos sit idly by and won’t cut resource supplies? Dare I say the eternal growth delusion is a cancerous thought? How much crapping, destroying, burning and looting can the biosphere take? I have my doubts everyone will have 2 1/2 car, a 800sqm home, an energy footprint of an murican slob and waterfalls of water at his disposal. Dare I say this is mildly unrealistic?
Food for thought: Just recently the shipment of baikal water to China has been discontinued, because of the locals. To a not so little degree the stand off in Aksai Chin is about this lovely story. I suppose this will be an emergent theme and coming to a theatre near you soon. Have I rattled the cage a bit?
//Everything actually hinges on how China manages to alter the psychology of ‘admiration for the west’ among a large swath of its own population, and develops the confidence of self sufficiency in its own economy.//
Couldn’t agree more. Any country that wishes to get rid of western domination should follow this rule.
Precisely my intimation too. Indeed, China should take the initiative and incorporate Taiwan for good – the sooner the better even for the 20 million faun-subject. Come November USA will plunge into a civil war – good for them! And even more so for the world too. Get ready to rumble …
Mr. Oriental Voice,
Your comment strongly resonates with me, though I am not oriental. It is very refreshing to get a native view. This reminds me of the time when I was a graduate student and discussed many of such things with a student from Taiwan, outstanding ping-pong player, fiercely independent minded, and Confucian in his speech. I once teased him why he doesn’t date American Chinese women and his answer was : they pick bad habits from both sides. In general, that is, he added a mathematical qualifier as an afterthought.
Since then, I worked with, published papers, and have many friends among Chinese people from all over the world and they are as varied in their outlook as any other nation, if not more. Also, a 5000+ year old civilization ought to be able to, without much difficulty, find ways and means to defend against cultural and moral destruction that Anglos are bringing to Japan, South Korea, Thailand etc.
Best regards, Spiral
Taiwan was ceded to Japan in 1895. In 1953, Japan relinquished all claim at the Treaty of San Francisco. It was never “re-ceded” to China…….get lost
@Bufallobiff,
Taiwan was returned to China under the ROC. All that remains now is for the PRC to formally end the civil war once and for all and reunify Taiwan with the mainland.
Any chance we can persuade Guancha.cn to include a ‘translate’ button for articles and comments (like Facebook does)? Looks like an interesting site but it is all Greek to me :).
I doubt that this would happen, given that their news coverage is wide and esoteric, translation costs would be substantial but scarcely appreciated because global interest in plying into Chinese points of views is not yet great. In any case, the comment sections are the jewels of that site, and much of the comments are versed in slang Chinese verbage that defies translation. One simply has to be proficient in the Chinese language to appreciate the brilliance of much of these comments :o).
I suspect there are similar blog site in Russian, French, German, etc. whose brilliance are hard to grasp by non-speakers of these languages.
“Chinese always preferred to deal with Republicans. They can’t deal with Democrats – human rights, values issues. “
Because when Biden/Obama attacked and destroyed Libya, then attacked Syria with a Al-qaeda terrorists killing half a million people and then went on to starve150 kids to death every day in Yemen – they were concerned with human rights.
Thats the power of propaganda, even with the ”experts” – China has a much better record on human rights then the USA
I love the comments here. terrific! it ain’t easy to catch this commentariat napping
I think the Pew Research Survey only demonstrate the impact or strength of the Western media in mind control. Really astonishing
“China is not really sure what the US wants to do.”
It is quite simple, the neocons running the US want to dominate all nations. These people are not “agreement capable”, just ask the Russians or anyone else who has attempted to have treaties or business agreements with them. International law means nothing to these people, the law is what they say it is.
China has acquired existential threats to its continuing development (600 million more people to raise to a modest level middle class), to the continuation of its internal balancing of shift from the eastern seaboard and southern locations of industry to more central and western provinces, and to its push out to Eurasia, Africa and South America via BRI and Maritime Silk Road.
All these initiatives are at threat by the trade war, the containment strategy, alienation of neighbor nations, color revolution-destabilization efforts, and possible war over Taiwan.
Taking the most serious threat first, war over Taiwan: the bravado of President Tsai, a woman of no subtle political skills or wisdom, might trigger the Mainland’s reaction to her attempt to take Taiwan independent of the People’s Republic of China. Flirting with the US State Department is very dangerous. Mrs. Tsai thinks the US will protect her regime and keep China from taking control of the island. She will be lucky to escape with her life, but for certain Taiwan will not escape capture. Somewhere in Tsai’s calculations she assumes that the US would be willing to sacrifice Marines by the many hundreds if not thousands to secure Taiwan’s independence.
On the other side of the equation, how many casualties to PLA would Beijing’s Central Government be willing to suffer to gain control of Taiwan? 100,000 is not unimaginable. How about jet fighters lost? And naval vessels damages and sunk? Here’s the calculation Mrs. Tsai and the US State Dept/Pentagon do not comprehend.
The Chinese don’t care what losses they suffer. Taiwan will not be allowed to separate from China. This is what intractable conflict means. One side must use military power to defend its interests or suffer a loss of those interests. China cannot afford the loss of Taiwan. National dignity, national identity, historic connectivity are at stake. And that’s not including the economic value, regional value and societal and some blood ties between the two entities.
As Pepe writes, the PLA will react the hour Mrs.Tsai announces Taiwan’s change of status and there will be war. She may be standing with American Admirals and Generals at her side, a hundred US embassy staff applauding, and a few F-35s overhead. That won’t impede the missiles from China reducing the Taiwanese military’s offensive and defensive abilities. Mrs. Tsai’s government infrastructure will be shattered. How long the war lasts is determined by how much pain the Taiwanese officials leading the separatist action allow their citizens to suffer.
Such a war will color everything else threatening China’s rise. Everything will get worse for China.
The card in the US deck, Mrs. Tsai’s irrational desire to take Taiwan separate from China as an independent country, will be played because it does the dirty work of harming China in a myriad of ways.
China can do nothing but react.
Historically the Chinese have always tried appeasement first, the Xiong Nu were appeased with gold, iron, silk, women and none of these worked. Eventually the Xiong Nu discovered a huge Chinese army on their doorstep that essentially wiped them out.
The Rouran were another people who had the same idea – the Chinese attempted appeasement and trade, the Rouran existed to raid and plunder. The old joke ran, ‘why do we raid? Steel and iron for weapons. Why do we need steel and iron? So we can raid’. Their culture was obliterated and stragglers were assimilated – they no longer exist as a cultural group.
I think the Chinese will continue to attempt appeasement, but from my read of the current Chinese political comments in the general wechat groups I’d say that their patience with the US is pretty close to exhausted as a people. They will play a waiting game to see how the election turns out but after the election any bets are off, my thoughts.
Agreed to 80%. It will be still a very bloody endeavor, you won’t control shit, if your troops are not on the ground. War should always be the choice of last resort. It will tie up your resources in a myriad of ways.
Taiwan will also be the sacrificial lamb, that will drive US-Zio propaganda through the galactic rough. The USanians will search for communists between the bedsheets again.
This is where the West propaganda will feel most at home, the US won many times not so much militarily, but by pure propaganda- excavating brains, which leads brothers to be enemies. Think Ukraine, think ex-USSR, etc.
At this stage no CEO will resist the onslaught of public perception to exfiltrate bizness out of China. Just look at what a mere unfounded virus story developed into.
US Policy is they will cheer on a heavily armed proxy (Taiwan) while it stimulates a war that will severely harm all of China’s interests for decades.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-security-adviser-obrien-warns-china-against-taiwan-attack-stresses-us-ambiguity
China cannot afford the loss of Taiwan. National dignity, national identity, historic connectivity are at stake. And that’s not including the economic value, regional value and societal and some blood ties between the two entities.
I would argue the most important factor is strategic: Taiwan is an unsinkable aircraft carrier that could allow the rest of China to potentially control half of the Pacific ocean. Unlike its current aircraft carriers, military bases on Taiwan can:
*Launch H-6 & H-20 bombers,
*Launch various ballistic missiles,
*Launch J-20 fighters,
*Launch Kalibre & other cruise missiles
*Deploy A-235 & other anti-missile defences + radars
*Host submarines & other ships
Put simply, having full control of Taiwan would allow China to correct a historical weakness by fortifying its entire coastline.
Absolutely
The Chinese will continue to ignore Taiwan if possible until it becomes too dangerous for them. Therefore unless the USA put serious weapons there ie nuclear bombers, China will talk loudly but do little, assuming that over time with the growing shift economically towards east Asia, Taiwan will willingly fall into the Chinese orbit, perhaps with a touch of rage as for Scotland in the UK but more or less united.
However the moment that Taiwan becomes a serious threat of weapons deployment (and capacity to block access to the South China Sea), then China will have little choice but to act, although I feel sure they will try other methods first – appeasement, trade sanctions, incentives etc.
I rather got the impression that Pepe’s “source” had an agenda ie is part of an anti Xi pro “Deng”political persuasion. This suggests to me that he is himself rather out of touch since just as the comfortable realities of the Kennedy led USA are no longer relevant in Trump’s USA so too the Deng strategies and realities are no longer relevant. The world has moved on and while i am sure Deng’s approach was absolutely right for HIS China, it is not the strategy for the current world, where the USA is a changed beast and the USSR no longer exists.
PHD = permanent head damage. PHD from JHU = permanent indoctrination. THAT is precisely why China has problems today: her ‘thinkers’ are rooted in zionist dogma.
seems the same in Russia if Lavrov is the Russian exemplar
Reading Lavrov’s speech to the AEB, it seems to paint him as an essential Globalist in the Zionist frame of reference…
that makes no sense to me for the Russians. I thought the Russians were pushing nationalist independence and a multi-state globe…multinationalism?
the world is naturally global, always was, from the start when Africans walked and sailed to the furthest corners and set up shop, giving rise to all of us currently. the world will come together in it own practical ways as we go, merging in ways that fit and work, without coercion
there is no need for the coercion, elitist coercion to make a world fit for elites and for no one else. national banks in the hands of the people…all banking in fact. the need of the people, ordinary majorities as the basis of all social movement must be the way. and global cooperation, relations, taking into consideration the nationalist basis of all states comes first, the starting point…which must be protected
and economies must be able to function same way..in the interest of their people. the of the people of every nation, the ordinary people must be the basis of economic organization, and all international relations predicated on that principle.
whichever structural way the people find that best suits their organizational needs on any day it’s quite up to them. when and if they find themselves wrong they are free to adjust.
I once saw a photograph of Lavrov as a young squire mounting a fine horse. From a perspective high on the saddle globalism is the natural way.
This article is missing the point about what is really going on in China.
1. Chinese state actors :
‒ Chinese who studied social sciences in Western universities (economics, sociology, politology and law) were welcome to participate in the governance reforms that took place from the ninetieth until recently
‒ today Chinese who studied social sciences in Western universities are being kept at a distance of the institutional debates and decisions about governance. That means that Western indoctrinated economists and other are not welcome any longer by Chinese state institutions… New positions are being filled nearly exclusively by China educated candidates. And so the noise generated in the West is now the exclusive fact of Western educated Chinese who have lost marketability inside China… In other words those who have been indoctrinated by Western social sciences have de facto become irrelevant. It is high time we start reading and listening to those who are immersed in the reality of Chinese life.
2. the restructuring of the governance-world :
‒ the economic center of gravity of the economy-world has shifted to East-Asia with China as the economic locomotive (region regrouping ASEAN, the Confucian sphere, and Northeast Asia). The US tries to divide the different countries composing East-Asia. But their economic future is entirely dependent on their good relations with China and so, with time, the US dividing campaign is bound to fizzle away. What we should keep in mind is that the perception of the future by East-Asians is optimistic. They view the future of their kids as being better than their own present situation.
‒ the economic center of gravity of the economy-world has been shifting to East-Asia because of structural factors that affected the societal cohesion of Western nations over the last decades. Chief among these structural factors was ‒ the financialization of Western economies that depleted their production sector ‒ the over indebtment of Western actors (state, corporations, individuals) ‒ the atomization of Western societies that results in their ungovernability (the recent Covid-19 Western madness is a perfect example of how atomization renders societies ungovernable). All this generates a perception in Western minds that is fundamentally pessimistic. Thy view the future of their kids as being far worse than their own present situation.
‒ Western pessimism contrasts with Eastern optimism and this contrast has started to shape different material and cultural realities on the ground which are projecting radically different societal realities. On one side we observe ‒ that the West is falling into fourth-world national decrepit ‘shitholes’ and on the other side we observe ‒ that the East is building a future which is rapidly deviating from Western Modernity.
3. the side-effects of Modernity :
‒ multiple side-effects are plaguing Late-Modernity. Climate change is only one of these side-effects. What is remarkable is that each of these side-effects taken separately has the potential to collapse our societies… But what is determinant in generating our future is that these multiple side-effects of Modernity are now converging and generating feed-back loops among themselves that unleash thresholds of unsustainability. And so we observe dumbfounded one tipping point emerging after the other that ruptures the continuities of a stable past and forces on us “natural catastrophes” like pandemics, heat-waves, fire infernos, hurricanes, floods, rising sea levels, chemical poisoning of air water and land, and so on.
‒ the great convergence of Late-Modernity :
the multiple side-effects of Modernity are converging with the restructuring of the governance-world and this “great-convergence” forms the present and future context in which humanity is plunged…
4. The context of Late-Modernity is not lost on Chinese governance :
That’s why their motto is that “China wants to participate in a community of nations that shares a common destiny building a sustainable ecological future for its children”
@laodan,
Excellent comment. Might you have more on these topics to craft into an article for Saker to publish?
Some expansion and examples of the points you make are certainly worth developing.
No question that the US is having a tough time gaining traction among ASEAN nations, despite their sometimes unhappiness with China’s South China Sea actions and some BRI projects.
If you have the desire to write more on this, please do so. It’s very interesting.
Seconded, your proposal that Laodan might expand interesting “inside view” re China.
The Chinese government is much more willing to explain its policy these days, some times via scholars. This is because the 90’s netizens are more educated and with more experiece abroad, and thus more patriotic. For example, a scholar (Dr Jin Canrong) refuted the myth that abandoning Deng’s abide time policy was a mistake. He said that Chinese government had 40+ departmental level exchanges with the US. The US knows exactly the economy progress inside China. Chinese had become an elephant too big in the room to avoid attention. Believing that keeping low profile can avoid US aggression is naive and not respect US intelligence.
Basically, as far as the west is concerned, any words or action that indicate China will not do as the Empire wishes is considered “ wolf warrior behavior”, and “ not following Dengs advice”. Not kidding.
As long as we will think in terms of nations – US vs Russia vs China – world politics will be confusing. Because if you say US, do you mean US of Biden, democrats and globalists or US of Trump and republicans? The same applies on China. There is patriotic China of Xi Jinping, communist party, army and north provinces and there is pro-American China of Li Kegiang, Shanghai group, financiers, American and UK educated youth generally called Komsomolets and mostly southern provinces. In Russia there is fifth column, financiers like Gref, Siluanov and Nabiulina vs patriots like Fedorov, NOD, Rogozin and in the middle Putin balancing them.
I have found lectures of Nikolai Vavilov about contemporary China very good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoZFCrlQBkQ&t=6s
Bianca
Indeed that is interesting. It reminds me of Putin-Medvedev, where one is more patriotic and the other is more Western-oriented. So also in the PRC there is this President-Prime Minister dissonance.
And I remember when the virus appeared in Wuhan, and first Li went there, and a heavy lockdown was imposed, destroying the city. Later, Xi went there and the approach changed, it became more focused on risk groups and so on.
That is simple duality and maybe too simplified (President-PM, North-South, patriot-globalist…) but imposing tough lockdown and destroying internal economy could have been this Komsomol way to further China’s dependence on global market. Breaking commercial-industrial economy also plays into the hand of speculative-financial capital. Not surprising how lockdowns are in full throttle in the West.
Interesting article Pepe, but in the sense that there is a great deal of naivety at play with the person that you quote:
1) The US has never seen anyone, including its closest allies, as equals. They can work together, but only as pooddles, subjects and minions of US imperial power.
2) To think that there can be, qualitatively, a difference between the two parties ain question, and that the power structures can be radically altered depending on who wins, is absolute rubbish. US imperialist power structures are not endangered in the least and elections are merely a struggle of administrators for which party wins the contract to best protect, benefit and increase the wealth of the ruling class. As well, these debates – “pathetic spectacles” – are a necessary theater that stoke the masses into a nationalist frenzy and into believing that a difference can be made through elections.
3) Using the plight of blacks and immigrants I will try to explain the policies of the US regarding China: In times when capitalists need cheap labor and/or are experiencing labor shortages they will allow breathing space to these people and to workers in general because they need them to make money. As soon as that brief “boom hits the bust cycle” – endemic to capitalism – these people are then thrown to the dogs. If they are represented by worker’s organizations the media goes into a raging frenzy blacklisting them. Looking at the world through the lens of class is essential!! When Nixon arrived in China the economy of the US was waning. Capitalists needed to make more money, killing unions and jobs in the process (divide and conquer of the socialist block was also a strong feature). As a result, many corporations were able to set-up shop in china and proceeded to building fortunes that they could only dream about, and which they are still doing as I write this. Of course, maligning China at every step continued and increased. The fact is that China is a country whose economy is different than that of the US. Yes there are capitalists there, but these exist with the permission of the CCP. The Chinese system is socialism (as in socialism in one country) with Chinese features. That is, upholding capitalist bastions such as HK,Taiwan and Macau.
4) China benefitted from the arrangement explained above and has become an important historical force that can dethrone the US Empire. This equation is not different than the capitalist contradiction centered on the fact that the workers whom the capitalists exploit will, by the very dynamics of the system, become a class that can organize itself and wield enough material power to overthrow the capitalist. Now that is what you call irony!! In other words, anti-communism is and has been the credo of the US bourgeoisie since the Bolsheviks took away approximately 1/6th of the earth’s land mass from capitalist exploitation. The US policy towards China is to destroy the CCP and penetrate it from every angle to capitalist exploitation. For now the fortunes of the US and its stock market benefit largely from deals with China. Problem is the intense anti-communism and racism inherent in the US political class is blind to these facts.
5) I will stop here, although there is so much more that I need to say. And please, no death threats.
The Chinese were lying low and not being too prominent.
However, the US has decided that in order for it to have full spectrum dominance it needs to tackle China before 2025 otherwise it will be too late.
Hence the problems.
The article wanders off into academic and ideological abstractions and commonplaces. China doesn’t need to blow up Taiwan because it “declares” independence. Who cares? In a decade it will fall into their lap. Does anyone think the US Government, regardless of administration, cares about Human Rights? It’s a useful pose, inconsistently applied. As for legitimacy–does any well-housed, well-fed population, whose standard of living is improving give a damn about constraints on speech or about liberal pluralism? Dengian low profile? Pretty tough when you are the world’s biggest trading partner and the soon to be center of the world economy. China is rising–an opportunity for the U.S. military-industrial complex to fear monger and make a lot of money and American politicians to scapegoat. But essentially US foreign policy is driven by wider business interests. The brake on America’s malevolent stupidity will be the huge losses to corporate America and U.S. agriculture engendered by exclusion from the Chinese market. Time is on China’s side. George Kennan in reverse. Hold steady and don’t do anything too stupid.
“…The problem is “the speed of China’s economic development led to hot headed, and premature, calculations. And a not well thought of strategy. ‘Wolf warrior’ diplomacy is an extremely assertive posture – and language. China began to upset the US – and even the Europeans. That was a geostrategic miscalculation.”
That right there is patently false.
China’s so called “Wolf Warriors diplomacy” did not precede the onset of these trade sanctions, and bad-mouthing and aggression from the US and its lackeys against China.
It was instead, a reaction to it.
China has not been aggressive or overly assertive in any way towards the West, as some would like to imply.
What has Huawei or Tik Tok done to any of these countries?
In fact, most persons are of the view that its high time that China push back against the West against its envy, interferance and bullying.
Deng cautioned against hubris, he did not say that China should tolerate humiliation.
As for Taiwan, I would love for the “lady” to declare independence, so that the Beijing can resolve this re-unification issue once and for all, and also call America’s bluff.
The US is just posturing and pretending that it will come to Taiwan’s defense.
Rest assured, the US will not go to war with China over Taiwan.
And when the rest of Asia see how America hyped up and abandon Taiwan, they will simply dump their illusions and cooperate with China.
Selah
All this analysis is assuming, that US president has the real power to decide, while he is very limited as Trump shows every day!All he can do is boasting on social media, but when it comes to decisions, he must succumb!
Many also ignore the fact that USA knowledge base – education system – has not been able to produce enough humana potential for all the things West plans to do.It was one generation of CEOs that outsourced everything. Todays business “leaders” in the west are incapable of creating anything like industry and healthy economy. What worked for them is the living standard was higher in USA than elsewhere, so desperate masses flocked to America. Some were well educated and easily blended into industrial world. It was a signal for others to follow. However, for a long time there is no industry to blend in.
How would they “bring industry back”? Two possible ways: 1) physically dismantle industrial plants in China and elsewhere, and ship them to America. Then assemble everything back, and start working and producing. 2) start from scratch. Both options need will and skill in planning and executing plans, engineering, available competent working class, ready to be exploited. Take any of listed conditions and the whole idea becomes a delusional wishful thinking.
It is simple as that – there is no capability to bring the west back anywhere close to what it used to be. And that leads to not so bright a future, as we see everyday. 70% of chinese leadership are engineers. 2005 of western leadership are – lawyers. Everybody keeps doing what they know the bes, Engineers build and lawyers lie.
Which part of the equation we don’t understand?
With “intellectuals” like “Lanxin Xiang: expert on relations between China, US and Europe, professor of History and International Relations at the IHEID in Geneva and director of the Center for One Belt, One Road Studies in Shanghai” kicking around within China, China doesn’t need external enemies. Its own elites may suffice to finish her off. It is amazing why Pepe, normally a Sinophile, would promote the views of comprador Chinese elites.
When Lanxin Xiang opines “The speed of China’s economic development led to hot headed, and premature, calculations. And a not well thought of strategy. ‘Wolf warrior’ diplomacy is an extremely assertive posture – and language. China began to upset the US … ” what is he really saying? That China should slow down her speed of economic development? That China should avoid getting into high tech industries (Huewai 5G, Tik Tok, etc.) because it upsets the West? The problem is not that China has adopted a “Wolf warrior” international posture; the problem is that China naively thought that the West would welcome her rise and her emerging high tech power. No, the West only respects military power. If a country is weak the West knocks it down before it can begin to rise.
International relations are a dog eat dog affair – sadly! The real problem is that the Chinese have been much too naïve and soft. Had they really been wolf warriors, the West would have been more wary and respectful dealing with them.
As a culture, the Chinese are very calm, averse to conflict, and not at all a warrior race. That is the real threat that China faces. Will it man up and fight if push comes to shove or will it keep trying appeasement with a predator race?
I agree with your observation of the Chinese and your conclusion of the threat China bears, itself.
To overcome that weakness inherent in the culture, President Xi has injected a Maoist Mass Line ideology. That is a very flawed “solution”. All power and trust in him is not a good idea.
It would be better to reach into the stakeholders, the highly educated, highly energized people of China and present to them the geopolitical, economic and hegemonic threats the nation faces and empower them to come up with solutions. The Chinese are clever, creative and understand their history. They are also self-organizing and would create groups tasked to deal with the various challenges.
If you watched them react to the virus, the shutdown of Wuhan, the volunteer forces that went to help inside the locked down city, the adjustments in other cities and provinces, the big name entrepreneurs and businessmen who went into action to manufacture and distribute PPEs, to organize food delivery, to provide logistics to the medical teams and hospitals, to construct new hospitals, etc., you know the Chinese people can accomplish whatever they need and should do.
Analysis, deconstruction, designing and engineering are skillsets the Chinese possess and use with dexterity. I think they can create whatever they need to hold off the predators.
The sense of a national project to avoid war and still win, protecting its security and sovereignty, would mobilize the best of Chinese character and talent. You don’t have to be a warrior to be smarter than your adversary.
In a way the Chinese and Russia characters complement each other. The Chinese possess business and trading acumen, developed over a dozen plus centuries, which Russia has not displayed much of (such is my observation, though I could be wrong). Both are very science and engineering capable people, though Russia is, and has been, clearly in the lead. Both have thoughtful and introspective cultures, relatively free of the fads, fetishes, and eccentric ideas that have been the history of western (especially Anglo-Saxon) intellectual and cultural life. China has shown better political and administrative skills – the adaptation of socialism to changing times – compared to Russia. The Chinese state preserved itself as it left Communism, while Russia floundered very badly. More professional, managerial, and administrative exchanges between the two should prove helpful to both, particularly to Russia.
But, alas, (in my view which could be wrong) both are very weak actors on the international political stage. Both are almost zero in international public relations. The speeches and statements of the leaders of both countries on international matters, while extremely polite and retrained, are out of touch with the realities of today. Modern homo sapiens thinks and talks in soundbites and sentences of few words. Media savviness and perception management are therefore crucial in getting across messages to world people and getting them to respect and understand your point of view.
Both face treacherous fifth columnists at home, Russia more so but China too substantially. If push comes to shove and a war has to be fought to ward of western aggression, Russia and Russians are very likely going to do so – and once aroused will finish the job. Not so sure about China at this stage, though I hope I am wrong on this crucial point. Problem is China never imagined that the West would turn from friend to foe in the blink of an eye. The Russian state has had a longer time to recognize this reality, but I think there are still too many deluded pro-West types among the Russian people.
For seven decades, the world has been told that an invasion of Taiwan is imminent. The American military-industrial-congressional complex needs threats to justify wartime budgets, and China provides one excuse. American warships and aircraft routinely operate just off China’s coast. If China complains, the world is warned that China is threatening military action. The good ole “China will soon invade Taiwan” tale is a perpetual favorite. In reality, China lacks the naval power to invade Taiwan and attempting to conquer this large island would prove bloody, devastate the Chinese economy, lead to domestic unrest, and may not succeed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM6HwH9FxQk
It is difficult to assess someone’s take on a statement. The mind is free to associate and conclude anything. But just look at the ground from which this article below is written, the tone and content. The ability to encapsulate so much in so little and the implicit universe of options to maneuver Foreign Policy and Geopolitics. This is evidence that the game has changed, completely.
As well indicated, there’s no George F. Kannon to draft a course for containment. Or an FDR to placate the greed of banksters. In the end, the vision of entrepreneurs, both in the US and in China will depend on one thing only: the ability and drive of governments to foster economic development. And this is the remarkable ideological difference driving the chasm between east and west. Will in be bridged? At what cost? At the lives of young soldiers in another mad dash by the oligarchs? Or at the deranged vision of a delusional pseudo elite bent on enslaving the world?
Democracy as an universal principle from now on has a different meaning. But who will have the courage to define it?
.
https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3101220/china-us-relations-are-tatters-can-both-sides-cool-their-hostile?exp_signup=opt-ggl-sign-in
I have a different analysis of Keenan’s Strategy. He did understand that pushing too hard on the Soviet Union was like “Poking a real live Bear” and a recipe for getting eaten alive. That made sense but the containment part didn’t make any sense. Containing a Country that builds Kremlins and Great Walls to hold off the Barbarians to when they were not planning on invading anywhere didn’t make any sense. They were trying to rebuild their countries and heal their Citizens not build Empires like Europe and the United States had been doing. FDR and Stalin wanted to end the Colonial system but they died so it kept going and now it is off the rails.
Unlike most Chinese scholars, Xiang is refreshingly frank about Beijing’s own shortcomings: “Several things should have been better controlled. Like abandoning Deng Xiaoping’s original advice that China should bide its time and keep a low profile. Deng, in his last will, had set a timeline for that, at least 50 years.”
China probably didn’t have a choice. Without a heavy Chinese military buildup, Taiwan might have declared independence, thus triggering a war with the mainland, and very likely sucking in the US, starting World War 3. This would be the very war that scares Xiang so much. The only way to stop the Taiwanese from doing something stupid is to be so strong that the islanders could not be sure of US help.
Remember, in 1996 Bill Clinton sent two aircraft carrier battle groups through the Taiwan Strait (the narrow passage separating Taiwan from the mainland). Could this massive demonstration of support have stimulated Taiwan to go for independence? Perhaps, in time. So not only did China have to beef up militarily, the country also had to show its new muscles, so the Taiwanese could not have failed to miss the message. The new strength guaranteed a reaction from the US. And so we have the current situation.
What could China have done instead? Wait for Taiwan to provoke a war that the US was still strong enough to win? That would have guaranteed disaster for the Middle Kingdom. Or create Assassin’s Mace, which may or may not result in a disaster? I think the choice was obvious.
Compare it, for instance, with “unfavorable views of China” in a survey of nations in the industrialized West that includes only two Asians: Japan and South Korea.
The West will always find some excuse to demonize the Middle Kingdom.
I find it always interesting to read Pepe Escobar’s articles: they present today’s politics in a chosen historical context: and so the “Quest for Legitimacy” in Chinese or any other country’s politics. Where does the idea of “legitimacy” come from?
Xiang stresses that in China, since Confucius, ‘legitimacy is based on the concept of morality’, while the main thesis of his book is that ‘the Chinese concept of legitimacy is dynamic’. Does this lead to a dynamic morality – anything goes? Does corruption then becojme legitimate?
Xiang then quotes Aristotle, “Democracy can never work in bigger countries. In city-states, it does.” He negates this with the examples of Singapore with its ‘enlightened authoritarianism’ and Hong Kong as a model of neoliberalism effectively controlled by its dominant authoritarians. Poor Aristotle seems to have got it wrong as far as city-statesare concerned. What about bigger countries?
“Any great superpower, if overstretched, becomes vulnerable” is a favourite quote of Xiang. What is meant by ‘superpower’ – any country that extends its control over many other countries? This certainly currently applies to the United States of America, but does it apply to China? Which other countries does it control? If it refers to ‘economic interests’ such as the Belt and Road Initiative, then perhaps China could be included as a ‘superpower’. But is it overstretched?
As well as a ‘quest for legitimacy’, the question is raised as to whether international infrastructural investment is part of “geopolitics”? Perhaps geopolitics is essentially an idea that arises from rivalry among competing countries? Alternatively, countries could collaborate in international trade. Would this still be geopolitics?
Given so many questions, it is fortunate that Pepe promises us a further follow-up article on this ‘major breakthrough’ of the conceptual analysis of Xiang’s book.
The concept of “legitimacy”as i was taught it is very good but NEVER as used in the usual western media/”thinkers.”
Basically the concept means that the people of a country/city/empire etc accept the legitimacy of the rulers to rule. However the type of government to which which the population grants legitimacy changes over time with the changes in the culture of the people being ruled.
Revolutions, civil wars etc happen when the government of the time lose that “legitimacy”usually after a period of economic collapse, a defeat in a war or some other catastrophe.
Now 500 years ago in Europe (and many other places), the right to rule as king was given to the eldest son of the last ruler. Problems arose when that son was very weak and often a brother, cousin, nephew etc put together a coalition of powerful forces to topple the first king. However almost always the new king called on some shred of a reason to be legitimate. The most absurd in English history was the arrival of the Tudors, whose claim to the throne was very weak. However if the new king delivered peace and prosperity legitimacy was maintained. However the need for a son to inherit was critical, hence Henry VIII and his 6 wives.
But there are plenty of other forms of legitimacy –
–the religious leader – pope, mullah or shaman,
–the military strong man – probably the most common – who often attempts to change into a dynasty
–rule by an oligarchy – family or tribe eg Saudi
–rule by “soviets” as in the USSR
In most modern western democracies, legitimacy is given by means of the ballot box, so for most of US legitimate government arrives after free and fair elections, and for most ignorant people in the west that is the only form of legitimacy they comprehend. So they set out imposing this form of government on other societies and seem surprised and offended when there preferred form of government fails.
However for most societies the form of legitimacy will very much reflect whatever came before it – modified for certain, but still heavily based upon it. In Europe the transition to democracy did NOT happen overnight, but rather gradually emerged as specific interest groups gained power. The Kings chosen councillors of family and friends, first became a group appointed by powerful sectors of society (Dukes, churchmen, military), then into a “parliament” of larger landholders but not only the great Dukes. Over time merchants who were rich were included, then smaller households. Few in the west have the knowledge that it was less than 150 years ago that the British system achieved universal MALE suffrage and barely 100 before women were included. It is arguable that the USA has never really achieved that goal given the exclusion of so many blacks.
The point is that legitimacy was granted to the government by the people of the time, with changes happening quite gradually.
So taking us back to China, a country where there has usually been a powerful emperor, but also an incredibly powerful and well educated bureaucracy, then obviously that is the form of legitimacy which will be granted to the rulers and the sort that will be not just tolerated but preferred. Only those who are western educated and who have spent most of their adult life in western “democracies” will have an appreciation of understanding of our sort of system. What is more most such people will be out of touch with the approach of the ordinary people back at home.
It is also worth noting that in November the “legitimacy”of the USA form of government will be sorely tested, and I am not certain that it will survive, given the perfect storm of pandemic, economic decline, relative loss of international status, racial tension and geographic tension, combined as they will be with doubts about the fairness and accuracy of the election result and a gun toting culture that seeks to solve problems by violence and force.
“Any great superpower, if overstretched, becomes vulnerable.”
The pattern of history shows every superpower does: a cautious reminder to all powers – incumbent hegemon or pretender.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
The October Surprise will not be China, but Iran. Read: “Is Mike Pompeo preparing an October Surprise?” By Trita Parsi – Responsible Statecraft – Sept. 16, 2020
There is no rise of China, simply because it doesn’t have enough nukes to match US. It doesn’t have equal nuclear deterrence. It doesn’t even have full nuclear triad. You shouldn’t dare to economically surpass US, when you don’t have enough nukes.
“But in case of a possible Trump 2.0 administration, everything could change: “My hunch is he will be totally relaxed, may even reverse China policy 180 degrees. I would not be surprised. He would turn back to being Xi Jinping’s best friend.” ”
This guy is completely delusional. If Chinese foreign policy makers are stupid like this, then China is headed for a cliff. The whole nation is overconfident.
The only power that can stand up to US is Russia, simply because it has equal nukes. There is only 2 real world power. Russia and US.
Deng’s advice worked well up until 2001. When Bush Jr. decided to confront China anyway, despite China following Deng’s advice to bide time, at least until 9/11 happened that gave China some breathing room and time to grow peacefully. Then in 2008, an opportunity arise, when the global financial meltdown caused by the US reckless financial syste,. China had two choices there, to keep following Deng’s advice, or to seize the moment to rise. China chose the second one. Many western experts called China became arrogant after that, but I disagree. Whether China follow Deng’s advice or not, Trump will still happen, because Trump is the product of every thing that went wrong in America’s political and economic system. Since it is going to happen anyway, might as well prepare for it. Like some of you said, when you become the second largest economy, it is tougher to hide your strength. Just like that Chinese expert said, you may not like geopolitics, but geopolitics like you.
This so called wolf warrior diplomacy is just China following the western diplomacy tactics, especially the US ones, that they have been doing to other weaker countries for the last 2 centuries. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, the west feel uncomfortable. They miss the day when Chinese diplomats are boring and meek. When you have friend who you used to order around, suddenly says NO, you are shocked and feel like your friend has turned into rude person. Well give it time, you will get used to your friend’s new personality.
As for domestic issues, I agree that Xi could do with relaxing the political space and people’s life choices. After all, one of the reasons why CCP still popular today is because they let go of the Mao’s era constraint. But I do support the Xinjiang crackdown. Violence have been reduced significantly since then, and terrorists have tried to fled. Though I believe this harsh crackdown has expiry date. As for Tibet, I think this is a good time to make peace with Dalai Lama. For religion issues, I also think China should tread carefully and let the major religions to practice freely as long as they don’t break the laws. China just need to beware of cultism that have been a plague through out Chinese history. But dealing with cultism, China need to work with major traditional religions.
The crackdown on lawyers was a crackdown on a group of self-confessed extortioners. The crackdown on journalists was far less political than the crackdown on Phil Donohue for refusing to support the Iraq War. Those civil society activists were, as usual, funded by the NED. And the breakdown of the authoritarian political rules of the game is a pure invention.