Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
At least it's not a mommy article, but this is one of the most poorly researched and argued pieces on China I've ever read; and I'm in the "China business," as it were. I'm not sure who the author is, but you have to do better than take a presupposition that whatever the Administration is doing geostrategically is bad and force it into whatever shoe is handy to prove your point. The ascription of benign motive and understandable "reflexive" reaction to the PRC's leadership is just short of comic, and demonstrates no understanding of Chinese political culture or strategic planning. China's military build-up began more than a decade ago and is moving full steam ahead. In particular, the construction of what will be the largest nuclear submarine fleet in the Pacific is well under way, with only one realistic purpose: blockade, of Taiwan, of Japan, etc. China's military and the Chinese arms pipeline destabilize SE Asia; support Burma's corrupt regime and help keep Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest; contribute to the oppression of millions of Shan, Karen, Kachin, and other ethnic minorities; and occupy Tibet. And all that doesn't even touch the severe internal repression of Muslim minorities like the Uighers and the utter lack of within China of wetsern standards of freedom of speech, assembly, religion, etc.
China isn't evil incarnate, but is playing a very rationale, calculated, and aggressive brand of realpolitik that is increasingly frightening the pants off of Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, even Vietnam-- with which, incredibly, we may well have a military relationship in the next 20 years, coming full circle. It isn't very hard to drum up a containment policy when the countries involved are already approaching you from their own self-interest. Some measure of response is clearly necessary, and probably over late. The PRC isn't on the verge of "reacting" to U.S. containment policy; the U.S. is scrambling in Asia to play catch up to smart Chinese strategic moves. Wishful thinking and buying more plastic toys probably won't cut it 15-20 years from now.
Well David, I'm not at all in the "China Business," but I have to agree. Though they have no history of reaching far beyond their own borders, and probably won't start now, China has indeed been building itself up militarily and economically to be the regional hegemon in East Asia, and to supplant American influence there. I am certain that their military buildup has as its aim the eventual retaking of Taiwan, or at least the ability to threaten Japan, especially considering their recent disputes over the islands to the southwest of Japan (or southeast of China), with their natural gas deposits. So far, I find our response there to be firm, but not hysterical.
As the Economist has reported, China has built up their military, and has conducted joint military maneuvers with Russia. They have bought submarines, whose primary purpose might well be to attack Taiwan, though they can have many uses for a country bordering or near Japan, Russia, Southeast Asia, and India. The Economist has made me laugh sometimes, first by musing that China haven't "yet" conducted joint maneuvers with the US or Japan (unless they were being sarcastic), and then by saying that China isn't likely to go to war with Taiwan, but that it would be nice if they told us why they were arming up. Gosh; I wonder why they could be buying submarines?
They have, according to the Guardian of London, dropped handfuls of spies off in England and America, with every "diplomatic" visit; they have made concord with Iran, and with Russia, is one of Iran's main backers; as Condoleezza Rice was telling Canada to stop whining about the billions of dollars in softwood lumber tariffs we owed them (as we had reneged on our NAFTA agreement), China's Hu Jintao was visiting Vancouver, to lay the groundwork for a sea change in Canada's oil sands distribution, to the benefit of China; and China has fanned out across the South Pacific, in search of raw materials like timber, minerals, and energy sources, with which to fuel their expansion. Their influence in East Asia seems to be growing exponentially.
The only thing that seems fatal in it all is the financial question. The Economist has (probably rightly) bemoaned the fact that, while we lambast China for pegging their currency at 8 Yuan to the Dollar, our balance-of-payments deficit is more likely caused by the fact that the Chinese save more than we do. I think that the currency peg (you will be able to confirm or refute this, probably) follows an economic and financial plan advanced by the very intelligent but ruthless Deng Xiaoping. However it has happened, though, one fact is clear: China sits on a huge, huge store of American dollars, in the many hundreds of billions. The first person I heard mention this fact was economic historian Niall Ferguson, in a speech a few years ago. I asked him, if this is the case, then can't we expect China to use this store of dollars as a weapon against us? He replied: yes. Not if, but when. I thought: well China won't pull out of the dollar all at once; they'll probably diversify subtly.
Sure enough, China, since then, has diversified its portfolio, by pegging the Yuan to a basket of currencies, said to include (no-one knows for sure which currencies, nor the proportions) the Dollar, the Euro, the Yen, and the South Korean Won. I didn't hear much after the first report of it, a couple of years ago. This is China's weapon. What will happen if they sink the dollar? And can we not expect them to do just that, when they press the Taiwan issue? And have they not intended to do just that from the beginning, using our greatest strength (our economy) to make it into our greatest weakness?
It is we who are reacting.
>China sits on a huge, huge store of American dollars, in the many hundreds of billions. The first person I heard mention this fact was economic historian Niall Ferguson,
That should read: ...China sits on a huge, huge store of American dollars, in the many hundreds of billions, and their purchases of our Treasury Bonds are the only thing keeping the dollar afloat, and are, in fact, funding our war against Iraq. The first person I heard mention this fact was economic historian Niall Ferguson...
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
