Monday, May 14, 2007

China is Not an Immediate Threat

ABCNews: The China Threat and How to Resolve It


Written by Washington Post columnist Bill Gertz, Gertz seems to be bent on war with China (more on that later). He says we should learn from the 20th century; different ideologies will eventually collide. Looking back at history again, he compares the current Chinese regime to Nazi Germany and the U.S.S.R. While warning that internal government divisions or arrogance could lead to new war, he comes up with some pretty wild ideas. “China also could collapse and fragment, Soviet-style, raising new dangers about the loss of control of the small but growing strategic nuclear arsenal.” Because of the U.S.’s intended defense of Taiwan we could go to war, he says. In the title of the story it appears Mr. Gertz will not only talk about the threat but also “how to resolve it.” Strangely enough, he never gets into how to settle the situation. Once he says that “the solution is not trade but democracy,” and, “the United States must maintain and build up its military power,” but never really goes any further than that.


One might classify Mr. Gertz as a “fear-monger”; he rambles on and on about the Chinese threat, when none actually exists. China needs us much more than we need them. China is also a nuclear power, as he mentioned. So is the U.S. No direct confrontation could ever materialize. The consequences would be horrendous.


Nothing can realistically be done by outside forces to overthrow the Communist government. Instead, diplomatic pressure should be applied to the Chinese until they topple (as what happened in the U.S.S.R.).


middleXeast said...

Your post is a good piece, and, more or less, I agree with it. However, there are few points we need to take into consideration when it comes to China:

China's military rise does pose a strategic threat to the United States, because China believes that the US is China's main adversary in Asia and in the Middle East, in where China needs of energy leaves it no choice but to expand its influence over the Persian Gulf.

This requires the China's military to eventually replace the US as the world's leading military

On top of this, the Chinese army is determined to take back the Taiwan. The military will do it in the next 10 years.

Why, then, China has accumulated
an arsenal of some 1,000 ballistic missiles just opposite the Taiwan, and why it keeps adding about 100 missiles a year. Why China is so eager in blasting satellites in space?

Simmons said...

Unless the Chinese military becomes even more powerful than it's expected to be by then, the Chinese would be taking a HUGE risk by attempting to take back Taiwan. Imagine the consequences.

The U.S., UK, and possibly Framce are immediately outraged. The U.N. cannot do anything because China will veto any attempt to sanction it. Voluntary sanctions are placed on China by most Western democracies. With less countries to export to, China's economy plummets. By now, China is not nearly as dependent on exports as it was way back in 2007, but cheap labor producing goods still runs its economy.

And let's not even get into military involvement.

Anonymous said...

In Khrushev's memoir, he recounts how Mao confided that China would not fear a nuclear war with the USA, because China, unlike Russia, could afford to lose 300 million people - that it might even be a benefit - and would come out on top once the dust settled.

It is to be remembered that the hard-line Chinese Army owns outright much of China's heavy industry and its income, which makes it fiscally self-sufficient and not directly to evolving economic & political process among civilians.

Consider: If a joint CIA/US Army consortium really did (not in some convoluted hypothetical manner) own outright a portfolio consisting of companies like Boeing, GE, Microsoft, GMC, Ford, Walmart, etc., etc. you would be quick (and correct) to point out what a terrible threat it was. This is a good metaphor for the repidly growing Chinese situation. The Chinese are far more hard-assed that we are by constitution, forged by much harder circumstances than we have ever known.

Upshot: You are an ignorant fool.