China need a new geopolitical Doctrine ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

SimaQian

Junior Member
Registered Member
History has shown us that Chinese authorities favor projects and endeavors that have long term impact.

Take for example, the Dujiangyan Irrigation system. Its an irrigation and flood control project of immense scale in 256 BC. They divided the river, carved the mountain before excavator and dynamite were invented. And yet the system is still useful today and it irrigates vast farmlands in Chengdu plain. It is the only project in history 2200 years ago that is still useful today. The dividends over the centuries were immeasurable by the boost of agricultural output in the surrounding areas.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


There so many examples in Chinese history, that people took gigantic projects that would benefit future generations in centuries to come. The Great Wall, the Grand Canal and more recently the Great Green Wall to slow or reverse desertification in north northwest China or the South to North water diversion projects. All of these projects took decades to complete.


Now, more or less, the Chinese authorities are occupied by the attacks instigated primarily by US. The trade wars, the tech war, and more recently blaming squarely China for the virus as if the 1.4B Chinese are responsible for this. We should take note that all of those attacks are politically motivated - some people wanted it to happen to have an agenda to gain political power. They make as much noise and non sense just to have an agenda. Those American politicians need to sell something for their voters. The cheapest crap understandable for an an average voter is to blame somebody for their misfortunes. So the american president and his cohorts, he blame China, he blame the Chinese president, he blame the WHO, he even blame the state governors, he blame the media, and recently he attacked Fauci. An who knows tomorrow he will blame black cats for bad luck. In short these are short term endeavors because politicians come and go.


Now to counter these, we Chinese should think more long term just like our ancestors did.
Fro short term thinkers, the most obvious way is to counter these attacks directly.
But for long term thinkers, there are far more very difficult problems the Chinese civilization is facing.
The most obvious is climate change. If China does not cut carbon emissions, there will be a good chance, the Himalayans glaciers will totally disappear. Think of the consequences if this will happen:

The Yangtze river, Yellow river, all its tributaries including that Dujiangyan will dry up.
Not even to mention other rivers outside China, the Mekong, the Ganges all of those depend on the Himalayan water run off.
If this will happen, this will be truly an apocalyptic event. Millions if not billions will die of hunger and famine.
These rivers are the reason why in the first place, China, India or Bangladesh have so much population.
The river water gives life.

There are more unimaginable consequences if the Himalayans glaciers will disappear. I just pointed out the most severe.

So it is more pressing now to address this looming problem. China should focus more into mitigating or even negating the effects of climate change. This endeavor will not only benefit the Chinese nation but the whole humanity itself.

1.) If China can totally get rid of gas vehicles in 3 to 4 years time, this will collapse the demand of foreign oil.
This will reduce the demand of US dollars too. As oil is bought in dollars. And there is little need to invest in oil infrastructure in disputed waters.

2.) If we can eliminate the coal power plants and switch more to renewables like wind, hydro and solar, that will eliminate need to import
coal in far flung places.

3.) China should start large scale carbon sequestration to take back the billions of CO2 released in the atmosphere during the China industrialization.

These may sound unrealistic and may take science fiction technology to realize. But if we dont do it China civilization cannot last for another 2000 years.

So we should take the long term approach just like what our ancestors did.
 

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
Actually the US State Dept policy planner is still weighing whether it is possible to split the Chinese people and the Chinese gov using issues like human rights and free speech. And in case they decide the "divide and conquer" strategy is not going to work out, then they might as well destroy entire China. Kanina Kiron Skinner gave it away a few years ago.

The world is destabilising, not due to China's rise, but primarily due to the US' unacceptance of others' rights to rise.





Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Well, splitting China is nothing new. This map from the new york times take a look at how the colonial powers have design on China back in the 1900s.

FB_IMG_1594819357971.jpg

I can across this, and thought this is exactly how most Chinese feels.

FB_IMG_1594819263845.jpg
 

localizer

Colonel
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Ferocious partisanship has its uses. If nothing else, a divided nation can console itself that no government idea goes unexamined and unopposed. Scrutiny can be all the more exacting for being born of tribal malice rather than Socratic truth-seeking. The US is riven — it has managed to politicise the workaday face-mask — but it avoids the equal and opposite danger of unreflective consensus. Except, that is, on the most momentous policy of the century. To be in Washington is to sense a nation sliding into open-ended conflict against China with eerily little debate. Politicians who can be counted on to dispute the colour of the sky or the sum of two plus two are of a piece on the necessity of a superpower duel. In the Rambo trailers that pass for his campaign ads, Joe Biden only faults President Donald Trump’s China line for its softness. Nor is the Democratic candidate for the White House a rare belligerent in his party. Chuck Schumer, who leads it in the Senate, has urged the president to “hang tough” on tariffs for “strength is the only way to win with China”. He was not pressed to say what in the historic record justifies this coffee-mug banality, or against which nation he would ever counsel weakness. No, that would require debate. Neither in Washington nor in the corporate sector is there much to be found, at least on the record. Academics have been more forthcoming with their qualms, but not in great number or to great effect. The result is that un-American thing, consensus, and it concerns not just the future but increasingly the past. Everyone now “knows” that pre-Trump Washington was a place of Whiggish credulity, forever betting on material enrichment to make of China a vast Japan or South Korea: a democracy, a friend. In this account, its admittance to the World Trade Organization was the inadvertent crowning of a rival by American enablers. Leave aside the slander against presidents from George HW Bush (who defied Beijing to arm Taiwan) to Barack Obama (who put tariffs on Chinese tyres). Leave aside the idea that America’s only options are liberal naïvéte and a second cold war. As in the 1940s, when the US was said to have “lost” China to communism, the premise here is that Earth’s most populous country, and oldest living civilisation, rises and falls in response to US policy. That it has agency of its own, that its post-1978 reforms were going to restore its stature anyway is, in Washington, a more exotic suggestion than it should be. None of this is a plea for (how easily the Soviet-era patter returns) detente. It might be that a US-China struggle is not just defensible, but ordained. We know the international-relations theory by now. A surging power, an established one; a one-party state, a democracy: the raw materials for conflict are there. But it is possible to believe all this and still feel unnerved by the lack of public deliberation and prominent dissenters. Even at the dawn of the cold war, there was Senator Robert Taft to argue against Nato. There was diplomat George Kennan, the 20th century’s most unwittingly important man, who viewed “containment” as a bellicose misreading of his advice. And these minority reports were filed in a much more deferential America than today’s. The absence of such voices now is disconcerting. For it means that policy is not being refined and stress-tested through argument. It is no longer clear, for instance, if US grievances stop at China’s trade practices or reach into its domestic treatment of its own people. Mikes Pence and Pompeo, the vice-president and secretary of state, flag the second more often than Mr Trump does. Democrats mention it more than Republicans. This mission creep, if it is afoot, rather matters. An economic rivalry would be fraught enough. One that pits governing philosophies against each other is much harder to finesse. Another implication of the consensus is that dissent is becoming a political no-no. There is a dark past to contend with here. It is forgotten that McCarthyism’s breakthrough had little to do with Russia. It was that alleged loss of China. American diplomats were hounded by their own lawmakers (the right mastered cancel culture first). When President Harry Truman cashiered general Douglas MacArthur, who itched to strike China, not everyone sided with civilian over military power. Washington now is nowhere near that level of frenzy. Even by the standards of an election year, though, the reluctance to say anything construable as “soft” is impossible to miss. America’s ultimate advantage is the raucousness of its public discourse. On the China question, it is troublingly civilised.

Organized foreign policy and global brainwashing

Love how the west tells people to read 1984 as if to force upon them “were not like this”
 

Weaasel

Senior Member
Registered Member
History has shown us that Chinese authorities favor projects and endeavors that have long term impact.

Take for example, the Dujiangyan Irrigation system. Its an irrigation and flood control project of immense scale in 256 BC. They divided the river, carved the mountain before excavator and dynamite were invented. And yet the system is still useful today and it irrigates vast farmlands in Chengdu plain. It is the only project in history 2200 years ago that is still useful today. The dividends over the centuries were immeasurable by the boost of agricultural output in the surrounding areas.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


There so many examples in Chinese history, that people took gigantic projects that would benefit future generations in centuries to come. The Great Wall, the Grand Canal and more recently the Great Green Wall to slow or reverse desertification in north northwest China or the South to North water diversion projects. All of these projects took decades to complete.


Now, more or less, the Chinese authorities are occupied by the attacks instigated primarily by US. The trade wars, the tech war, and more recently blaming squarely China for the virus as if the 1.4B Chinese are responsible for this. We should take note that all of those attacks are politically motivated - some people wanted it to happen to have an agenda to gain political power. They make as much noise and non sense just to have an agenda. Those American politicians need to sell something for their voters. The cheapest crap understandable for an an average voter is to blame somebody for their misfortunes. So the american president and his cohorts, he blame China, he blame the Chinese president, he blame the WHO, he even blame the state governors, he blame the media, and recently he attacked Fauci. An who knows tomorrow he will blame black cats for bad luck. In short these are short term endeavors because politicians come and go.


Now to counter these, we Chinese should think more long term just like our ancestors did.
Fro short term thinkers, the most obvious way is to counter these attacks directly.
But for long term thinkers, there are far more very difficult problems the Chinese civilization is facing.
The most obvious is climate change. If China does not cut carbon emissions, there will be a good chance, the Himalayans glaciers will totally disappear. Think of the consequences if this will happen:

The Yangtze river, Yellow river, all its tributaries including that Dujiangyan will dry up.
Not even to mention other rivers outside China, the Mekong, the Ganges all of those depend on the Himalayan water run off.
If this will happen, this will be truly an apocalyptic event. Millions if not billions will die of hunger and famine.
These rivers are the reason why in the first place, China, India or Bangladesh have so much population.
The river water gives life.

There are more unimaginable consequences if the Himalayans glaciers will disappear. I just pointed out the most severe.

So it is more pressing now to address this looming problem. China should focus more into mitigating or even negating the effects of climate change. This endeavor will not only benefit the Chinese nation but the whole humanity itself.

1.) If China can totally get rid of gas vehicles in 3 to 4 years time, this will collapse the demand of foreign oil.
This will reduce the demand of US dollars too. As oil is bought in dollars. And there is little need to invest in oil infrastructure in disputed waters.

2.) If we can eliminate the coal power plants and switch more to renewables like wind, hydro and solar, that will eliminate need to import
coal in far flung places.

3.) China should start large scale carbon sequestration to take back the billions of CO2 released in the atmosphere during the China industrialization.

These may sound unrealistic and may take science fiction technology to realize. But if we dont do it China civilization cannot last for another 2000 years.

So we should take the long term approach just like what our ancestors did.


The time frame that you give for some of these things is not realistic, but financially and technologically speaking it is certainly doable within China's capabilities.

2.) If we can eliminate the coal power plants and switch more to renewables like wind, hydro and solar, that will eliminate need to import
coal in far flung places.


Renewables that you mention while occuring naturally have great issues with efficiency, need for very large land usage, and various reliance on time, weather, and location.

The reality is that nuclear fission is the present form of applied energy and power that best combines very high efficiency, relative abundance, reasonable operational costs, minimal land usage, and lack of time and weather dependence. There are two types of substances that can be used as raw materials for nuclear fission power, them being uranium and thorium, and there are many types of nuclear reactors.

Ideally speaking, thorium is best best, and if a working thorium utilizing molten salt reactor can be applied to power generation successfully, then all the MUCH MUCH better. Thorium is much more efficient than uranium, more abundant, and its products are less radio toxic and have shorter half lives.

It is not the stuff of science fiction.
 

davidau

Senior Member
Registered Member
Well, splitting China is nothing new. This map from the new york times take a look at how the colonial powers have design on China back in the 1900s.

View attachment 61805

I can across this, and thought this is exactly how most Chinese feels.

View attachment 61806
Great Carlos, China remembers the humination of the Opium War by which Britain used an excuse to colonise part of China, because China provincial governor burnt a consignment of opium destined for Guangdong by the British, hence the 'Unequal Treaty'. Eight powers, US, Britain, Germany etc.. including Japan carved out China in the weak Qing Dynasty.

No more! China is now strong, people are determined, intelligent, hardworking, and cohesive. China does not want a war, any war; but is not afraid of a war if it comes.
 

Weaasel

Senior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China should be prepared to see its exports and investments, not just those related to technology and advanced infrastructure, but also one's related to foodstuffs and even garments, face restrictions around the world on the basis of such things as supposed national security threats, and China's domestic policies such as on Hong Kong, its treatment of Uighurs, and even China's political structure. With regards to the latter, it will happen even though Western countries will retain relations with authoritarian regimes that are aligned to them and comment little on them, such as those within the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia Egypt.

Look, anything and everything can be invented to justify sanctions and trade restrictions, and there are ways in which multiple countries can align their policies.

The West does not welcome China's development to the extent that it has happened. Indeed it fears China's enormous potential. With regards to the US, there is great riling indignation that it will be surpassed in the medium and even short term as the world's largest economy.

China must realize that the era of 'Free' Trade is over. China is no longer a country in which Western businesses can produce low and intermediate end products cheaply for export markets. China is now a country with moderate to highly advanced technological capabilities that is capable of having multinational companies and conglomerates of its own. It produces high end steel, it produces stealth aircraft, and even though it lags behind the cutting edge it produces reasonably decent IC chip manufacturing equipment.

The strategy being pursued by the West, and being egged on by the United States, is to limit and specify the export trade and investments of China across the world, in such ways as to slowdown the rate of China's economic growth and prestige that comes with it.

China still has a very large domestic market. Those who think that China becoming more conciliatory in terms of its foreign policies and even more liberal in its domestic governance will change the prevailing mindset and strategy of the US and the West are naive. The argument can be made that for the betterment of China's own sake these should happen, but it is not going to change the attitudes of the Western elites towards China to any significant extent.

China should focus on its domestic market. Much prosperity can still arise within China through increased domestic consumption and also investments. If China pursues/accelerated the gradual and steady elimination of the fossil fuel economy with renewables and nuclear power, it will set a new paradigm for prosperity that will be much less dependent on foreign trade than was the case before... China CAN do so within 2 to 3 decades...
 

supercat

Major
Potentially banning 270 million Chinese from traveling to the U.S.? I say "bring it on". Any policy that can prevent corrupt CCP cadres from escaping to the U.S. with their family and ill-gotten gains is good for me. It's also good for me if such policy exposes that the U.S. is still mired in its yellow-peril mentality and it is still persecuting Chinese with the same fever of 1950s' McCarthyism.
U.S. Weighs Sweeping Travel Ban on Chinese Communist Party Members
The presidential order under consideration would be based on the same statute in the Immigration and Nationality Act used in a 2017 travel ban on several predominantly Muslim countries.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

localizer

Colonel
Registered Member
Potentially banning 270 million Chinese from traveling to the U.S.? I say "bring it on". Any policy that can prevent corrupt CCP cadres from escaping to the U.S. with their family and ill-gotten gains is good for me. It's also good for me if such policy exposes that the U.S. is still mired in its yellow-peril mentality and it is still persecuting Chinese with the same fever of 1950s' McCarthyism.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Thank you President Trump!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top