China's future geopolitical evolution!

solarz said:

We have to take into account the current geopolitical situation. It is very unlikely that Japan and SK will move away from US influence to align themselves with China.

The best candidate looks to be Pakistan. For the time being, its goals and self-interests align with those of China. It provides a valuable service to China by acting as a counter to India, and China reciprocates with economic and military aid.

If Kim Jong Un can successfully open up NK for reforms, China would be strengthened by a more stable and prosperous NK.

Click to expand...

yes, the current geopolitical situation seems static, but we never know what might come from intense negotiations over contested territories.

several commentators have suggested pakistan. please share your projection of pakistan's economic evolution that would allow it to become an equal, or near equal, partner with china.

your suggestion about nk is an interesting one as well.

Maggern said:

As per experience, I'd say this thread has a ver short lifespan in any case, as it is political (?).

The whole China-SK-Japan triangle is really interesting I'd say. In one way, SK and Japan should be able to shake off their cold war positions as frontiers against the Soviet Union, and claim a central role in a new East Asia region, where they (and China) would be in the center. But then again, they might simply have floated too far away.

I think China's best bet still is the third world, Africa, South Asia etc. That's where China is leading the pack, and that's where they have relatively free elbowroom from the West.

Click to expand...

as long as the situation in the "China-SK-Japan triangle" is fluid, i think there is always a possibility that they'll find common ground. so, what might that common ground be?

which country, or countries, in the "third world" might be the best candidate or candidates?

nugroho said:

In near future ( less than 10 years ), China Pakistan will be best friend, China Myanmar close friend, China India cold but can't be war.
The fate of China is very much influenced by southeast Asia, as in the east Taiwan,South Korea and Japan is US allies.
Vietnam will be new enemy because south china sea, and they have a reputation taking war risk. Philipine is not. singapore, Malaysia, Laos, Brunei will not play hard. The most unpredictable is Indonesia. Indonesia military nowadays is weak, but has very much resources.
I never think that Japan and China will be friend, the long history had shown.

Click to expand...

since your analysis is similar to others', in that you project pakistan, but also myanmar, i'll ask you the same as i've asked others. please explain how you believe that each of these will evolve, economically and politically, to become equal or near equal to china.

jackliu said:

Hope I'm not late here.

Click to expand...

if anybody's late, jackliu, it's me! thanks for the interest and i'll respond to your contribution when i've had a chance to read it again, and consider it more thoroughly.

Subedei said:

since your analysis is similar to others', in that you project pakistan, but also myanmar, i'll ask you the same as i've asked others. please explain how you believe that each of these will evolve, economically and politically, to become equal or near equal to china.

Click to expand...

Pakistan and Myanmar in 10 years term can't be economical equal, but they will be China " friend ".
" Friend " is difficult to define, but at least they will not attack China and diplomaticly help China.
Example : Because Cambodia and China are close friend, then Cambodia asked the discussion that will cornering China about South China Sea can be cancelled or postponed in AIPA ( ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly ) meeting. It is a small help from a friend.
Claim about South China Sea can be achieved by 3 way.
1. By military war
2. By diplomatic negotiation ( China choose this way )
3. By both of them
Choosing number 2 means China has to have many friends to negotiate.

Subedei said:

i have also considered the strategic importance of the nations you mention. if you would, please tell us how you think china's relationships with these first island chain nations might evolve.

i personally think that china and japan might ultimately become one of the most significant partnerships in the world. but, as a few have suggested, history, up to now, seems to indicate otherwise.

Click to expand...

It's simply the dynamics between China and US

As long as Japan and SK host US troops on their soil, they will always act as a strategic containment against China

Geopolitics aside, trade and cooperation will flourish bar any extraordinary incident

paintgun said:

It's simply the dynamics between China and US

As long as Japan and SK host US troops on their soil, they will always act as a strategic containment against China

Geopolitics aside, trade and cooperation will flourish bar any extraordinary incident

Click to expand...

True, but thinking long term I just don't see a way for this to keep continuing. Political and military power all come out of economic power. How long do you think US can sustain this when all of Asia's economy is centered on China?

Or rather, how long will it take before US's allies in Asia sees the wind is shifting? And realize they cannot maintain the old world order anymore?

paintgun said:

It's simply the dynamics between China and US

As long as Japan and SK host US troops on their soil, they will always act as a strategic containment against China

Geopolitics aside, trade and cooperation will flourish bar any extraordinary incident

Click to expand...

so, then, is it likely that future strategic partnerships in the region could depend on the successful de-militarization of the korean conflict? if china could use its considerable leverage with n korea to broker a termination of hostile attitudes and postures, the supposed bases for us troops in japan and s korea would be removed.

i would love to see the chinese involve themselves more aggressively in foreign policy initiatives intended to finally end the korean war. this could establish china as a forceful voice of moderation in the region.

jackliu said:

True, but thinking long term I just don't see a way for this to keep continuing. Political and military power all come out of economic power. How long do you think US can sustain this when all of Asia's economy is centered on China?

Or rather, how long will it take before US's allies in Asia sees the wind is shifting? And realize they cannot maintain the old world order anymore?

Click to expand...

i think that, if japan's and s korea's positions shift, they will do so based more on chinese soft power initiatives than out of a fear of chinese military might. once they accept that china will build and maintain a military commensurate with their regional and global economic interests, and that this military power is not a threat to the region, i believe they will adapt a more relaxed attitude.

i think this pertains more to japan than s korea currently as japan still maintains far too much of its imperialistic sentiments.

I think you are looking at the issue from the wrong perspective. This is not about China making special strategic alliances with specific individual nations, but acting as a pole around which other nations can amalgamate and form new economic and security structures.
I would say look no further than the SCO, it has enabled Russia and China to harmonise their policies in critical areas and it allows both countries to expand their interests in Central Asia at no expense to the other. It is this organisation that all other major Asian powers are now lining up to join, with Iran, Pakistan and India chief among them.
India and China may have issues with each other, but within the context of a structure like the SCO, both know that the relevance of these disputes are reduced and the areas where they can co-operate; together and with others, is increased.
Indian and Pakistani rapprochment is itself being driven by the mutual desire of both countries to join this organisation and a pre-condition of being able to do so. This illustrates that making Peace not only carries significant benefits in its own right, but also opens up myriad opportunities elsewhere, that would otherwise be denied.
That I think is the central point of the argument that I am trying to make in general.