China need a new geopolitical Doctrine ?

gadgetcool5 said:

A few hundred square miles of land, an island here or there that nobody inhabits, even if it is yours forever, does you very little good, whereas as long as it causes emnity, costs you tremendously. America's alliance with Canada and the UK has lasted for over 100 years, its alliance with Japan for over 70 years and going strong. Longer than China's current borders.

Click to expand...

Japan, Vietnam, and South Korea have been China vassal states for hundreds of years without China giving them any territory. Not sure what logic behind giving away territories to form an alliance. It is absurd to claim appeasement would make any difference especially when SK and Japan both have US troops station in their territories.

Russia is only relevant state that can alter the geopolitical arena in Asia and China has already resolved its territory dispute with Russia.

gadgetcool5 said:

A few hundred square miles of land, an island here or there that nobody inhabits, even if it is yours forever, does you very little good, whereas as long as it causes emnity, costs you tremendously. America's alliance with Canada and the UK has lasted for over 100 years, its alliance with Japan for over 70 years and going strong. Longer than China's current borders.

Click to expand...

It's not much good today but they can all be developed. Even before that, sometimes, they serve as buffers. If they are truly useless, then you should try to convince the other claimants to forsake them to China and see if anybody wants to give away "useless" territory. If not, then maybe your thinking is the only thing here that does "you very little good." Like I said, you get into the habit of giving, you better keep that habit up and keep giving.

America's alliance with these countries is due to American strength; if they don't follow, they will be ruined. That's exactly what I said; Chinese leadership and its future political alliances can only be founded through strength, no other way. As others said, America gave these countries nothing for their alliance except to follow its power; certainly not any land. And that alliance has lasted and will last for as long as American strength is worthy of their following. When that is no longer true, the alliance is broken. There are no friends or eternal alliances, only interests.

manqiangrexue said:

It's not much good today but they can all be developed. Even before that, sometimes, they serve as buffers. If they are truly useless, then you should try to convince the other claimants to forsake them to China and see if anybody wants to give away "useless" territory. If not, then maybe your thinking is the only thing here that does "you very little good." Like I said, you get into the habit of giving, you better keep that habit up and keep giving.

America's alliance with these countries is due to American strength; if they don't follow, they will be ruined. That's exactly what I said; Chinese leadership and its future political alliances can only be founded through strength, no other way. As others said, America gave these countries nothing for their alliance except to follow its power; certainly not any land. And that alliance has lasted and will last for as long as American strength is worthy of their following. When that is no longer true, the alliance is broken. There are no friends or eternal alliances, only interests.

Click to expand...

Do you think the United States has never given up land? It gave up the Philippines and Cuba. It gave up the Panama Canal. It gave up Okinawa. It withdrew troops from Iraq. If it wanted, the United States could occupy many other countries, but it chooses not to. That is because it knows its real strength is not in land but in technology and alliances.

For instance, look at the UK debate over Huawei. Until 2020, the UK defied the US and agreed to let Huawei into 35% of its network. According to your theory, this is impossible, since the US with its strength would have "ruined" the UK. Further, the Covid crisis has not increased the US's strength. But the UK defied the US because the two countries' alliance was not strong on this point. It has nothing to do with strength. Why did the UK change? It was not because the US became stronger suddenly in 2020. It was because the UK backbencher MPs became hostile to China due to a combination of blaming China for Covid and China's crackdown on Hong Kong. This weakened the relations between China and the UK, and forced Boris Johnson's hand. In other words, the decision was made by relative friendliness, not relative strength.

Having friends is critical.

gadgetcool5 said:

Do you think the United States has never given up land? It gave up the Philippines and Cuba. It gave up the Panama Canal. It gave up Okinawa. It withdrew troops from Iraq. If it wanted, the United States could occupy many other countries, but it chooses not to. That is because it knows its real strength is not in land but in technology and alliances.

Click to expand...

I don't think any of those examples show graciousness on the part of the US, but I'll restrict my response to the Greater Middle East. The US didn't withdraw out of graciousness. It's withdrawing after it realized that its position in the Middle East is worse now then it was 20 years ago, strategically. The US lost Turkey as an ally. Iran no longer has a buffer and is expanding its influence, and let's not forget that the Saudi/US war in Yemen is a disaster. This is significant, because it will likely lead to the Saudis coming to a detente with Iran, which would be another strategic disaster for the US, because it would bring the region closer to unity (which is the worst thing from America's perspective.) Also, in Afghanistan, the US is now begging the Taliban for a 'deal' which will, of course, be sponsored by Pakistan (it's the last thing the US wanted, and the same thing we offered 20 years ago.) The US was naively hoping that its senile show of strength would bring the Muslim World to its knees, in awe of its 'fire and fury' we would all adopt 'liberal democracy' and become its vassals... Mission failed, miserably, and now the US is exhausted and broke. That's why the US is withdrawing.

I also think you're misunderstanding Western culture and mindset. We've been fighting them for over a thousand years, so we know them better than anyone. Don't ever think the West will treat anyone well out of kindness. Any treaty you sign with them will be thrown away at the first chance they get. Geopolitically, they are ruthless and completely self-serving. The amount of times they have backstabbed their own 'allies' is beyond belief. This is the type of self-serving relationship that falls apart at the first sign of trouble, because there is zero actual trust on either side. It is not a model to replicate, because it is clearly unsuccessful.

gadgetcool5 said:

Do you think the United States has never given up land? It gave up the Philippines and Cuba. It gave up the Panama Canal. It gave up Okinawa. It withdrew troops from Iraq. If it wanted, the United States could occupy many other countries, but it chooses not to. That is because it knows its real strength is not in land but in technology and alliances.

For instance, look at the UK debate over Huawei. Until 2020, the UK defied the US and agreed to let Huawei into 35% of its network. According to your theory, this is impossible, since the US with its strength would have "ruined" the UK. Further, the Covid crisis has not increased the US's strength. But the UK defied the US because the two countries' alliance was not strong on this point. It has nothing to do with strength. Why did the UK change? It was not because the US became stronger suddenly in 2020. It was because the UK backbencher MPs became hostile to China due to a combination of blaming China for Covid and China's crackdown on Hong Kong. This weakened the relations between China and the UK, and forced Boris Johnson's hand. In other words, the decision was made by relative friendliness, not relative strength.

Having friends is critical.

Click to expand...

All the places you listed are not American territory but areas they attacked and conquered. Ask US to give up a couple of states like Virginia or Georgia for alliance with UK.. o right, there was that thing called the civil war...

I agree that if the US puts sanctions on all Chinese banks, companies, which is a nuclear option, would probably accelerate the decline of the US dollar as global currency.

However the key word is ALL. If the US only puts sanctions on Huawei, that will have close to zero impact on the dominance of the USD, Lets be real here, China's historical growth has always depended on a certain extent to access to foreign markets, financial institutions, foreign technology, etc.

If we lose access to those things, it is unlikely we can maintain a 6% growth rate or even a growth at all. Technology development will probably slow down as well. If companies realize that it may not be worth investing in R&D, if it puts them in the target of US sanctions, vis-a-vis Huawei.

So to say that we will be 4x the us market in the future or whatever projections, is pretty dumb thing to say, because we won't be able to get to 4x the US market size, if China is being constantly hobbled by US sanctions.

The only reason why we were able to have this economic miracle in the first place, was because Deng Xiao Ping, put aside politics, ideology, pride, etc. to focus on economic development. We had rapproachment with the US, because we stopped our aggressive world communism revolution rhetoric, we had rapproachment with Japan because we put aside the differences about WW2. In return we got technology, investment, and access to markets, via normalization of relations and membership in WTO.


The two choices we have:

1) We sacrifice some of our pride: Put away the territorial disputes with ASEAN, Japan, India for now. Doesn't mean we have to concede anything, just tone down the aggressive rhetoric. Solve tensions with the EU over Xinjiang reeducation camps, "Unfair" trade practices and find commonalities that both sides can support: Paris Agreement, Multilateralism, Globalization, etc.

2) We continue our disputes with all these nations and the EU, and end up making a bunch of enemies, that we have to fight, while the US laughs at us while we exhaust our energy feuding with ASEAN, India, Japan, EU etc.

Lets comprehensively list all of China's perceived enemies aside from the US:

1) India --> dispute over Ladakh and borders.
2) Vietnam --> dispute over spratley
3) Philippines --> dispute of SCS
4) Malaysia --> dispute over SCS
5) South Korea --> dispute over THAAD
6) Taiwan --> dispute over Taiwan independence
7) Japan --> dispute over Diaoyu
8) Austrailia --> dispute over HK and Huawei 5G
9) Canada --> dispute over HK and Huawei 5G
10) UK --> dispute over HK and Huawei 5G

The only entities on this list that we have a truly unresolvable dispute with is Taiwan.

Aside from the five eyes country who are basically satellite states of the US (UK, Canada, AUS, NZ) and taiwan, we have no unsolvable disputes with any other country on the preceived enemies list.

free_6ix9ine said:

Lets comprehensively list all of China's perceived enemies aside from the US:

1) India --> dispute over Ladakh and borders.
2) Vietnam --> dispute over spratley
3) Philippines --> dispute of SCS
4) Malaysia --> dispute over SCS
5) South Korea --> dispute over THAAD
6) Taiwan --> dispute over Taiwan independence
7) Japan --> dispute over Diaoyu
8) Austrailia --> dispute over HK and Huawei 5G
9) Canada --> dispute over HK and Huawei 5G
10) UK --> dispute over HK and Huawei 5G

The only entities on this list that we have a truly unresolvable dispute with is Taiwan.

Click to expand...

But China has solved the land border dispute with most of the country in central asia The only land dispute is with India and Bhutan because China does not recoqnize McMahon line since it is arbitrarily drawn without China consent . And british effort to undermined Chinese border.
You are reading and believing western propaganda.

I don't know how old you are but I remember clearly that China totally demolished Indian army in 62 All the road are open to New Delhi. My Indian friend told me that he expect Chinese army to march in new delhi But no such thing he is surprised and thankfull for that . China even returning Tawang and the province of Arunachal Pradesh. China treated the Indian prisoner humanly and even returning every single weapon captured, There is no anal in history that conquering army treated their vanguished opponent so generously.

The South China sea dispute with ASEAN is something else China never cede claim on South China sea sea when she join UNCLOS in their preamble agreement it stated clearly And China is not the only one that make exception to UNCLOS agreement specially the right of passage where many countries define it more narrow scope saying that right of passage guarantee with certain condition.

China has no dispute with Hongkong, Hongkong is not independent country she is part and parcel fo China So china can do anything she want with her


So you are mixing many separate dispute here . China has the right to deny american snooping on her ballistic missile launches and that is the matter that goes in the heart of dispute with South Korea. S Korea does acceded to China concern by limiting THAAD to single battery problem solved.

Problem with Japan is due to american chicanery of returning those island to Japan when the San Francisco treaty clearly spell out for US to absolved any japanese claim on Taiwan and her possesion

I am glad China is now slowly stiffened their back for too long she is deferrential to the west and only now She has the gut to stand up to the west due to generational change in the diplomatic corp. For too long Chinese diplomatic corp are dominated by people in the 60's who were educated in the west and worshipped the west and large dose of inferiority complex since they grew up in poor china

I have no worry at all China should stay on the course keep growing the economy and beefed up the military Her destiny is clear she will once again dominate the Asian land mass and has been for thousand years the last 200 years is abberation and the west influence will slowly recede.

You can see now both Japan and Korea are slowly reorienting their policy toward China. BTW there are no problem with people to people contact More and more both Japanese and Korean young people are studying Chinese, working and living in China and vice versa
Ryo Takeuchi are documenting this change and he got a lot of support and sponsor from Japanese companies

List of the US's perceived enemies

1) India - discrimination of Christians, trade
2) Vietnam - communist government, daring to trade with China.
3) Philippines - defying the US
4) Malaysia - freedom of religion
5) South Korea - not paying more for the honor of having US troops stationed there
6) Taiwan - more Taiwanese are caught spying for China than any other nationality
7) Japan - Trade Imbalance, not paying more for the honor of having US troops stationed there
8) Australia - daring to trade with China
9) Canada - Talks behind Trump's back, trade
10) UK - has a London mayor that insults Trump, dares to trade with China.
11) France - Trade
12) China - Trade, threat to US hegemony
13) Germany - Trade, not paying more for the honor of having US troops stationed there
14) Israel - military technology transfers
15) Saudi Arabia - birthplace of radical Islam, oil
16) Iraq - doesn't pay up for US invasion, not loyal to the US
17) Iran - threat to US hegemony, can shoot down US drones
18) Mexico - immigration, trade, war on drugs
19) Indonesia - discrimination of Christians
20) Afghanistan - US occupation, radical Islam
21) Pakistan - does not appreciate being backstabbed by the US after the Cold War, War on Terror
22) North Korea - threat to US hegemony, having nukes
23) Russia - threat to US hegemony
24) South Africa - sh*hole country
25) Venezuela - violation of the Monroe Doctrine
26) Cuba - violation of the Monroe Doctrine

Basically every country that does not blindly obey the US is an enemy.