October 30, 2010
— Geoff While we've been preoccupied with the latest election polls and candidate gaffes, the rest of the world has been ambling along. And Gregg Easterbrook, taking note of some of the more hostile ambling betwixt the US and China, tries to convince us that China is no threat at all:
China should not be our next whipping boyApparently Mr. Easterbrook can't conceive of a China that may believe that they can dispute American air power over their country. But what has China been up to lately? Well, in the past week:
...
But in the main, there has never been a superpower relationship like the one between Washington and Beijing — mainly constructive, mainly cooperative, neither side positioning to destroy the other.The world’s largest public works endeavor — the $75 billion South-to-North Water Transfer Project in its early stages in China — could be smashed from the air in a day by United States precision-guided bombs. China is building the project because Chinese leaders assume they will never go to war with the United States. That’s what we should assume too — and not make China into a distant whipping boy for our own domestic problems that U.S. leaders are afraid to face.
- China Sends the Marines to Thailand (10/28/2010)
- Chinese Army conducts live military exercises in Tibet (10/27/2010)
- China, Azerbaijan pledge to strengthen military ties (10/26/2010)
- Yemen, China discuss military cooperation (10/26/2010)
- China wants full military exchanges with India (10/24/2010)
- High-level Chinese military delegation arrives in North Korea amid succession (10/23/2010)
- Rwanda, China boost military ties (10/23/2010)
- Turkey-China Military Drill Reveals Deepening Ties, Widening Reach (10/22/2010)
While China's been gallivanting about the world consolidating its military relationships and conducting military exercises, we've sent in our toughest man in the administration to deal with the Asian situation: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. I honestly don't think anybody in this administration is better suited to address the problem, but that's not saying much when you've got dim bulbs like this on the National Security Council:
"We're seeking the mantra of a positive, cooperative, constructive relationship," Jeff Bader of the National Security Council said Thursday.Yeah, unprecedentedly ineffective. Bush got his diplomatic ass handed to him by Jintao Hu, pursuing diplomatic talks with the expectation that economic interdependency would lead to concessions on the part of the Chinese. Didn't happen. The Chinese love diplomacy for the same reason that Iranians love it - it costs them nothing and gives them the time to do what they want.He noted that Obama has met seven times with Hu and three times with Premier Wen Jiabao. "I guarantee you that's unprecedented in modern history," Bader said.
But back to Easterbrook. He eventually talks about China's naval limitations:
China is expanding its navy, which today is equipped only for coastal operation, though perhaps someday will venture into the “blue water” where the United States Navy rules.But Financial Times tells us:
2010 is likely to go down as the year when ChinaÂ’s blue-water navy became reality. This switched on warning lights among ChinaÂ’s coastal neighbours as well as the US, the incumbent superpower.Attention Mr. Easterbrook: in geopolitical reality, "perhaps someday" = "this year."
A lot of people believe that China's unsustainable growth rate, weakening demographics and hyperinflated real estate market will lead it to crash before it becomes a threat. But people have been making that point for nearly 10 years, and China is still growing, still modernizing its military, and still extending its influence around the world. They may indeed collapse, but sitting and hoping for it isn't a very formidable strategy.
Posted by: Geoff at
11:24 AM
| Comments (114)
Post contains 615 words, total size 6 kb.
Posted by: Navycopjoe on his IPhone4 and cubbies superfanboy at October 30, 2010 11:31 AM (9IFxO)
Posted by: Navycopjoe on his IPhone4 and cubbies superfanboy at October 30, 2010 11:33 AM (9IFxO)
Posted by: rdbrewer at October 30, 2010 11:33 AM (//Cu/)
Of course, it's general collapse could make it more of a threat, trading of capability for likelihood of action.
Posted by: Methos at October 30, 2010 11:34 AM (Ew1k4)
Right now, thanks to Osama Obama, we'd be sitting ducks if they took on S Korea, Japan or the U.S.
Bush gave the store away to the Red Chinese through stupidity and wishful thinking. The Traitor-in-Chief is finishing the job out of solidarity with oppressed peoples and his suicidal desire for revenge on America.
Posted by: MrScribbler at October 30, 2010 11:34 AM (Ulu3i)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 11:34 AM (tJjm/)
The Chinese love diplomacy for the same reason that Iranians love it - it costs them nothing and gives them the time to do what they want.
This.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at October 30, 2010 11:35 AM (0fzsA)
Posted by: Navycopjoe on his IPhone4 and cubbies superfanboy at October 30, 2010 11:35 AM (9IFxO)
I worry about what China will do if a crash there seems imminent. The "logical" solution is to annex another nation -- or nations -- and seize their wealth, or maybe push for an international "conflict."
That's one of the reasons its so focused on taking Taiwan.
O/t: Geoff, did you see the "Chinese Professor" parody by NMA in the sidebar?
No, I read a summary of it, though.
Posted by: geoff at October 30, 2010 11:35 AM (Oxm+X)
Posted by: Gregg Easterbrook at October 30, 2010 11:36 AM (BP6Z1)
Excellent job
Posted by: Navycopjoe on his IPhone4 and cubbies superfanboy at October 30, 2010 03:35 PM (9IFxO)
Pics?
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 11:37 AM (tJjm/)
Excellent job
pics etc.
Posted by: Waterhouse at October 30, 2010 11:37 AM (j+ygy)
Posted by: Suge Knight at October 30, 2010 11:38 AM (0YS61)
Like he did for the Czechs and Poles. And the Iraqis and Afghans.
No... wait!
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 11:38 AM (tJjm/)
Geoff we owe them a trillion. Stop buying their stuff from WalMArt if you are afraid of them.
Stop stalking me when I go to Walmart.
And I'm not afraid of China. I'm afraid of an America that has lost its way, and politicians that don't see the need for a coherent domestic and foreign policy that will protect American interests and keep America strong.
Posted by: geoff at October 30, 2010 11:40 AM (Oxm+X)
Posted by: logprof at October 30, 2010 11:40 AM (BP6Z1)
Posted by: Steph at October 30, 2010 11:40 AM (ZfkPl)
My favorite Easterbrookism is that "horsepower causes road rage." Uh, no, horsepower causes one to be able to safely execute a pass on a curving two-lane road. Stupidity causes road rage.
Posted by: schizuki at October 30, 2010 11:41 AM (M+lbD)
Right, because the Chinese would NEVER go to war with us, without warning and unprovoked. Oh, wait... they already did, didn't they?
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 11:41 AM (tJjm/)
If the Mohammedan Mouthpiece lets Taiwan go Red, he'll only be finishing up what Nixon started.
Forget Watergate. The worst think that old crook did was throw Taiwan over the side so he could suck up to Chairman Mao, who played him like a p'i-p'a.
Posted by: MrScribbler at October 30, 2010 11:43 AM (Ulu3i)
Chinese products are everywhere - not just Walmart.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at October 30, 2010 03:40 PM (0fzsA)
Yeah, cheap Chinese crap made of highly toxic chemicals, too much lead paint, contaminated food, and shoddy workmankship. I really wonder if all the money we save now on crap like that won't be repaid with interest in the form of huge defense budgets of the future.
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 11:43 AM (tJjm/)
Uh, when was that?
Posted by: Methos flipping through a history book at October 30, 2010 11:45 AM (Ew1k4)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at October 30, 2010 11:46 AM (XDeui)
Posted by: Methos flipping through a history book at October 30, 2010 03:45 PM (Ew1k4)
1951
Posted by: robtr at October 30, 2010 11:48 AM (hVDig)
What a stupid non-sequitur from a stupid fucking troll. The only reason the US owes China anything is because the federal government runs deficits financed by Chinese purchases of government debt.
Posted by: Waterhouse at October 30, 2010 11:49 AM (j+ygy)
Posted by: logprof at October 30, 2010 03:40 PM (BP6Z1)
Next big war is China-India, what else is China & India going to do with their excess young men? I guessing around 2025. And India does have Aircraft Carriers and uses them.
Our most important assets to counter China - Nuclear Attack subs.
Posted by: Radioactive Satellite Of LOVE at October 30, 2010 11:49 AM (PWj+8)
Oy, duh. I was thinking something along the lines of the Germans and Pearl Harbor. All I remember about the Chinese involvement in Korea was that MacArthur wanted to nuke them.
Posted by: Methos at October 30, 2010 11:50 AM (Ew1k4)
Posted by: In Exile at October 30, 2010 11:51 AM (JJSIm)
RCP has just rated Barney Franks district as lean democratic. Cook rated it as lean democratic this week as well. Just imagine if he loses. No amount of pudding in the world would be enough to satisfy me.
Posted by: JC at October 30, 2010 11:51 AM (7PT3B)
This at the same time we are making huge cuts in our Navy.
Posted by: Vic at October 30, 2010 11:53 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 11:53 AM (tJjm/)
Posted by: MrScribbler at October 30, 2010 03:34 PM (Ulu3i)
If China fears a crash? All they have to do is call in the US Debt... and when we can't pay what we owe, seize International assets...
Now, will they? No, as it would destroy too much of a market place they need... BUT... with the soon to come crash of the US economy, that market will not be the saftey net it once was.
Posted by: Romeo13 at October 30, 2010 11:53 AM (AdK6a)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 11:53 AM (tJjm/)
This at the same time we are making huge cuts in our Navy.
Posted by: Vic at October 30, 2010 03:53 PM (/jbAw)
Not to mention abandoning our manned Space Program. I understand why the economy is the hot button issue this year, but I hope the conservatives start to bring Obama's efforts to destroy us as a superpower & space faring nation to the public's attention.
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 11:56 AM (tJjm/)
Posted by: In Exile at October 30, 2010 11:56 AM (JJSIm)
Also, on the "Navy" issue.
China does not NEED a true Blue Water Navy. Blue Water Navys are built around long range sustainable operations on the other side of the world... China understands that her interests are Regional... thus they only need enough of a Navy to defend the region (ie keep our Carriers out of Range)... which with regioanal Air Power and Land based long range missles, is a much easier proposition.
Posted by: Romeo13 at October 30, 2010 11:56 AM (AdK6a)
Yeah, I can't understand why we don't extra-close with India and make them our #1 allies instead of the Brits and the rest of turds in Eurabia.
And if I were Israel, I'd make India my BFF.
Posted by: Soothsayer is getting lost down Memory Ln at October 30, 2010 11:56 AM (uFokq)
Are you kidding? I doubt the Japanese and the South Koreans would agree. Building up our enemies -- which Red China was then, and is now -- is, to put it as mildly as possible, short-sighted. Nixon gave them access to our economy, and Bubba Clinton made sure they got some juicy secrets to help them in the electronics and armament arenas.
Until Nixon pulled that, I almost thought he was a fairly decent president. But that photo-op with the Great Helmsman and a desire to get his name in the history books overrode whatever sense he had.
Posted by: MrScribbler at October 30, 2010 11:58 AM (Ulu3i)
'Cause That's What Liberals Do.
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:00 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: In Exile at October 30, 2010 12:02 PM (JJSIm)
Posted by: In Exile at October 30, 2010 12:05 PM (JJSIm)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 12:06 PM (9Cooa)
Obama would sell our launch codes for the price of a shitty presidential library full of Bill Ayers' books.
Posted by: sifty at October 30, 2010 12:08 PM (bNuUU)
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htart/articles/20101024.aspx
Posted by: Captain Ned at October 30, 2010 12:08 PM (P1/uX)
I had an economics professor that scoffed at the idea of a "service-based economy." He said the classic example of one was already Ireland: you would wash your neighbor's laundry, and he'd wash yours. But is that really "wealth creation"?
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:08 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 12:08 PM (9Cooa)
Posted by: Annita Dunn at October 30, 2010 12:08 PM (tf9Ne)
I think the Chinese remember Chosin better then most of the morons here.
A lot of Chinese may have died, but at the end of the day they kicked us out of North Korea.
Posted by: Greg not Greg Troll at October 30, 2010 12:10 PM (3W1+C)
Posted by: sifty at October 30, 2010 12:10 PM (bNuUU)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:11 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 12:11 PM (9Cooa)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:12 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: Annita Dunn at October 30, 2010 04:08 PM (tf9Ne)
Because he could slurp the frosting off a wedding cake without using his hands?
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:12 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: In Exile at October 30, 2010 12:12 PM (JJSIm)
Posted by: TuckFurkey at October 30, 2010 12:13 PM (QcFbt)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 12:14 PM (9Cooa)
Posted by: In Exile at October 30, 2010 12:14 PM (JJSIm)
True, and in theory anyway all that money will eventually be repatriated in the form of capital investments from overseas, that will help our economy. On the other hand, we are very close to no longer having a car industry, long seen as a hallmark of a developed economy.
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:15 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 12:17 PM (9Cooa)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 04:15 PM (tJjm/)
We have a car industry, just no longer in Detroit.
Posted by: Vic at October 30, 2010 12:18 PM (/jbAw)
Posted by: Alex at October 30, 2010 12:18 PM (aAsSp)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 12:18 PM (9Cooa)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 04:17 PM (9Cooa)
Touché
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:20 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: In Exile at October 30, 2010 12:20 PM (JJSIm)
We have a car industry, just no longer in Detroit.
Posted by: Vic at October 30, 2010 04:18 PM (/jbAw)
More accurate to say, We no longer have Detroit.
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:20 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 12:21 PM (9Cooa)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 30, 2010 12:21 PM (9Cooa)
Posted by: country blumpkin at October 30, 2010 12:31 PM (ADeN1)
And all we have to do is refuse to repay it. One thing is a fact: if all of China's dollars become worthless, they are SCREWED royally.
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 30, 2010 12:32 PM (tJjm/)
the bigger concern is fighting a 30-45 day conflict between a US Division sized force and a Chinese army.
Agreed.
I hear you there.
Posted by: 1st Marines at Chosin at October 30, 2010 12:35 PM (3W1+C)
Nixon opened up China to play them off against the USSR and detach them from supporting N. Viet Nam. The Chinese and the Vietnamese are ancestral enemies, and it was part of the "realpolitik" to end our involvement in Viet Nam.
I don't think anyone in 1974 could have foreseen what has happened with our trade relationship with China since, let alone the hollowing out of the US industrial base.
The Chinese will make military moves, but will not really theaten war, regardless of what some may say within China (such as various published articles from military people in the PLA). The way things are going, they will get what they want by default.
1) Russia has imploding demographics. China will get everything they want out of Siberia by default in a generation.
2) As the US fades as THE Pacific military power, Taiwan (the errant province) will fall back into the Chinese orbit without a shot being fired.
3) The Japanese in particular are getting older faster, and will fade from the scene within another generation.
4) For most of the last 1,000 years Korea has been a satellite of China. It probably will be again,as the US military strength fades in the years to come.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch says... at October 30, 2010 12:37 PM (sJTmU)
Hey TOTUS, or Toonces, or whoever's in charge, how'd you like a trillion dollars of debt forgiveness? Two trillion? We'd just like to become charter signatories to the (makes up name) Pacific Unified Nautical Kamakazi treaty to redistribute the defense agreements for the south Pacific. We're volunteering to do all the heavy work now! Of course it protects South Korea. Taiwan and Japan, naturally. There's a small fee for non-signatory nations and naturally a prohibition against non-participating military vessels....
Posted by: Al at October 30, 2010 12:38 PM (MzQOZ)
Posted by: country blumpkin
You couldn't be more wrong. I once knew an Army artillery guy who was in North Korea before the Chinese came across the border. The conflict was pretty much over, the NoKo army was beaten and they were packing up their gear for an orderly withdrawal south. By orders of the Theater Command. There was no plan to advance into China. Then they were nearly over-run by the Chinese and left most of their heavy equipment behind to save themselves. The Chinese were waiting for the Yalu to freeze hard enough for trucks and tanks to cross it, because they knew if they relied solely on the bridges, the US Air Force would take them out.
Most of what you think you "know" is latter-day revisionism meant to make Truman look good and MacArthur look bad. Everything that MacArthur did in Korea up to the time that the Chinese came into the war was approved by Truman and his cabinet.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch says... at October 30, 2010 12:45 PM (sJTmU)
Posted by: Dan at October 30, 2010 01:09 PM (1jzSs)
He was like all Democrats, a corrupt liberal.
Posted by: Vic at October 30, 2010 01:12 PM (/jbAw)
Central Asia is the most likely place. Afghanistan has historically been a crossroads for the movement of troops and resources, and that hasn't changed in the last thousand years. China is already making inroads to access the mineral wealth of the region, and it offers an avenue for population expansion.
Posted by: Alex at October 30, 2010 01:29 PM (aAsSp)
As much as I dislike the way the totalitarian Chinese govt. treats its people, I tend to side with the view that disasters will overtake China long before it is able to sustain any power projection on a global scale. Along with the points made in the last paragraph, I would add the coming calamity that will be caused by the Three Gorges Dam. The earthquake (yes, it's built on a fault) and aggravated peak ground accelleration caused by the weight of the water and dam itself will be cataclysmic. That will release the water in the resevoir which, once completely full, will be long enough to stretch from St. Louis to New Orleans. The resulting flood, and disease and starvation that follow, will kill tens of millions of Chinese.
All we really need to do is keep conducting FONOPS at sea and collect intelligence via HUMINT and across the electromagnetic spectrum to keep them in line until the inevitable happens.
Posted by: Ed Snyder at October 30, 2010 02:11 PM (Jkzj3)
Meh. They're barely a threat to Taiwan. I wouldn't worry.
The thing people often overlook about trade surplus economies is that they're utterly dependent on our consumers. China didn't spend the last three decades undergoing economic reform just to try autarky today. Some of the senior people in their military may be that stupid, but if they try it they won't survive the ensuing revolution.
Remember, China is still very poor -- an economic disruption will mean hungy people rioting in the streets.
Posted by: TallDave at October 30, 2010 02:25 PM (lNW+B)
Agree. Also I have read that there are only 16 Million people in the eastern 2/3rds of Russia. China needs land and wives...
Knock Knock
Russian Farmer: Who's there?
Chinese Soldier: A Chinese Soldier
Russian Farmer: What The F**k?
Chinese Soldier: Is that any way to talk to your Son-In-Law?
Another thing, check a map. They don't deed a deep water navy. All of the oil tanker routes from the Suez to Japan/So. Korea/Etc are within reach of their Littoral navy.
I've always believed China was a thin crust of modernity along the coast...the rest of the Country hasn't changed in a thousand years.
As for Taiwan, a couple of divisions of Chicom Airborne could hold parts of Taiwan for a month...but one US sub would cut off resupply by sea, and resupply by air is a chancy proposition.
Posted by: trainer at October 30, 2010 02:31 PM (yCWYQ)
I know who you are talking about, Mr. Smarty McChartypants.
You forget to mention that the piratical exchange rate of the yuan is artificially propping up their economy and can't be sustained. They can't keep absorbing U.S. Treasuries indefinitely.
Posted by: Michael at October 30, 2010 02:45 PM (JtKsy)
Posted by: trainer at October 30, 2010 06:31 PM (yCWYQ)
More importantly, look at where pipelines are either currently being built, or are in the planning states.
They are in the provess of creating a Pipeline system which, when complete, will bring energy in without the need of Super Tankers....
Posted by: Romeo13 at October 30, 2010 02:57 PM (AdK6a)
Meh. They're barely a threat to Taiwan. I wouldn't worry.
Nope. The fall of Taiwan is a foregone conclusion at this point. It's already become too expensive a proposition for us to conduct a battle in the strait, not that we have the national will to do it anyway. And the Taiwanese know it.
Posted by: geoff at October 30, 2010 03:31 PM (Oxm+X)
Posted by: logprof at October 30, 2010 03:43 PM (BP6Z1)
Posted by: Hrothgar at October 30, 2010 03:47 PM (gZt79)
Excellent job
Around here, tits are NEVER off topic. Also, if all she got was tits and not boobies, then she was rooked. I'm just sayin'. Of course, growing my own at age 11, I never had to worry about getting ripped off...
Posted by: tcn at October 30, 2010 05:24 PM (+dwY/)
Posted by: Adjoran at October 30, 2010 05:35 PM (VfmLu)
Posted by: CMU VET at October 30, 2010 05:53 PM (6/2eP)
Posted by: sexypig at October 30, 2010 07:44 PM (xRO9i)
Posted by: Margotte at October 30, 2010 10:15 PM (cHW6J)
Posted by: Zakn at October 30, 2010 11:59 PM (zyaZ1)
The US and Brit navies both originated as protectors of trade interests.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at October 31, 2010 04:07 AM (T2vxq)
Posted by: gayuh at December 20, 2010 06:38 AM (flXoi)
Posted by: ipad cover at March 02, 2011 01:23 AM (nG5aZ)
Happy to see your blog as it is just what IÂ’ve looking for and excited to read all the posts. I am looking forward to another great article from you.
Posted by: African Mango at April 07, 2011 01:44 AM (bKYWF)
Posted by: wantong123 at April 27, 2011 07:59 PM (nVyIQ)
Posted by: phillies jersey at July 12, 2011 01:08 AM (p2+VS)
Posted by: yankees Jersey at July 12, 2011 01:09 AM (p2+VS)
There is certainly so significantly data all around about this subject matter that sometimes you cannot
see the wood for the trees but you might have pitched this at just the suitable level so that the lay
individual can understand - thank you!
Posted by: red sox jersey at July 12, 2011 01:11 AM (p2+VS)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2046 seconds, 242 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Olivia Wilde at October 30, 2010 11:31 AM (Ew1k4)