Global Chinese diplomatic presence and intervention?
- Thread starter TK3600
- Start date
Chicken and egg problem. If US had no overseas bases, they also can't project power. They were able to get to Europe during WW2 with a treaty with the UK and was the purpose of the island hopping campaign in WW2 but couldn't have done it without Hawaii and Australia either. How to get overseas bases? Either by conquering land, or by making security guarantees.
There is a big difference though, the US homeland and immediate neighborhood was secure. That's why they could expand overseas.
Compare their strategic location with China's and its very easy to understand why China is boxed in and why it can't and won't significantly expand overseas any time soon
Who can invade China? China's neighborhood is not secure, but the homeland is. So some minor strategic expansion is merited.
The neighborhood of the US was secure because of 150 years of effort by the USA. During US Civil War, France (which had friendly relations with the USA and was a major trade partner) built some influence in Mexico. After the civil war, the US said to France and Mexico that France is getting out or they will invade Mexico to kick out the French. The US was wartorn and politically unstable, and France was a trade partner (might the biggest one back then) and a friend. The USA couldn't care less. They decided that a Mexico under French influence would be a long term security risk and some of their foreign trade was an insignificant price to pay compared to that. We are talking about the 1860s here. Security of the neighborhood of the US wasn't given to the USA, it was earned.
China should come up with a vision to kick out any non-local non-economic influence from WESTPAC. Monroe doctrine was formulated in the 1810s, way before the US could enforce any of it. The British were burning down Washington DC during those times
Yes, the USA used to plan for the next 50 years, a stark contrast compared to their current style.Note: China might not be able to secure its distant allies against the USA. But it can secure them from other US proxies.
Its not only for invasion. Long range fires can threaten and disrupt China without needing to physically invading it.
Lets see the US, what credible opponent was the closest to American industrial and business centers when the US started gaining overseas bases? The US at that time of its expansion was the undisputed extra-regional (superpower basically) overlord
And lets compare it to the China at the present time. Is China today the undisputed regional overlord? No. There is nothing to do about it, the strategic environment that the US faced a century ago is immeasurably many times better than what China is facing today. There is really no comparison to be made
So to conclude, if I wanted to complain, I would only do so if China maintained or slightly expanded its current posture even after 20 years. You can only significantly expand when your homeland safety is rock solid
And China has long range fires to hit back. The US already started making bluffs about the entire western hemisphere via the Monroe Doctrine in 1820's, as pointed out above. while Britain was the undisputed superpower of the world.
How would they have known long ranged fires by Royal Navy and raiding their commerce wouldn't have disrupted them? US Navy at the time was a few small sailboats vs. the Royal Navy which had steam powered frigates since the HMS Comet in 1822. If UK did a distant blockade of the US and shot up their merchant marine there would've been nothing they could do about it. Yet they didn't. Because the Monroe Doctrine was a declaration of intent and resolve with just enough capability backing it to make contesting it painful and not worth it.
with a 30 trillion economy that's heavily weighted towards wartime-useful output, the issue isn't ability but justification.
how is the emperor crowned through illegitimate violence and bullying to be viewed by his subjects? Their rule will ascend fast and descend equally fast, and the laws they write will be hated by others and rewritten the moment there is a chance for it.
US could only get Europe and Japan because of WW2. In the same vein, the only reason China has Russia now is because of the cold war.
The Soviets in WW2 were in terms of power able to govern all of East Europe, but it took German aggression to make the Soviet claims real and justified.
As a country that wants a lasting rule based on "first among equals" principle rather than dictatorship/hegemony, even through China has the military and industry to violently storm the Philippines, unify Korea and blockade Japan, he will not do that without having a reason except naked hegemonistic thinking. Instead, he will do what all clever contenders of power in history did, wait for the bombastic and boastful neighboring king to initiate aggression first, so he can mobilize and enforce unity with the excuse of defending the realm from warmongers.
Diplomacy won't get rid of US bases in countries where US have bought out the government. If China has won in Asia, it has won globally, because Asia is the center of economics, industry, innovation and population. To take back its status globally, China needs a global threat to be their kingmaker, the same way the Germans were kingmakers for US and USSR.
I would expect China to keep "turtling" the same way USSR and UK ignored Germany up until Poland invasion. This is a scenario where China absolutely does not want to be viewed as the aggressor, and it has no reasons to be aggressive until the "threat" actually reaches its shores.
The strategic environment at that time was very different. Then, the European theater was basically an arena where continental powers were playing a game of life and death. One wrong step and you were immediately suppressed.The neighborhood of the US was secure because of 150 years of effort by the USA. During US Civil War, France (which had friendly relations with the USA and was a major trade partner) built some influence in Mexico. After the civil war, the US said to France and Mexico that France is getting out or they will invade Mexico to kick out the French. The US was wartorn and politically unstable, and France was a trade partner (might the biggest one back then) and a friend. The USA couldn't care less. They decided that a Mexico under French influence would be a long term security risk and some of their foreign trade was an insignificant price to pay compared to that. We are talking about the 1860s here. Security of the neighborhood of the US wasn't given to the USA, it was earned.
China should come up with a vision to kick out any non-local non-economic influence from WESTPAC. Monroe doctrine was formulated in the 1810s, way before the US could enforce any of it. The British were burning down Washington DC during those times
France trying to play any serious games in Mexico was infeasible the moment the US made any noise. Could France dedicate its entire strength and withstand US pressure, yes. Would France do it though? No.
Because in Europe there was a constant undercurrent of diplomatic and military games. Throw all your power in Mexico and the big powers in Europe would laugh all the way to Paris. Even Britain couldn't dedicate too much power against the US unless it wanted everyone else to take a bite out of its interests somewhere else
The diplomatic games in the 1800s were unfathomable. The time of Metternich, Bismarck and Palmerston, that's the real horror right there.
Good thing that Western strategic and diplomatic capabilities have atrophied so much that they haven't produced anyone of that caliber
Last edited:
China is constantly weighing the benefit of geopolitical benefit vs damaging trade relation with the west. Like you said, China is constantly getting sanctioned despite being cooperative. At some point the trade dependency benefit will fall below geopolitical benefits. We are getting to that point, but not yet. There are a few milestones China needs to meet before fully commit.
1. Establish alternatives to USD payment system so China can fully dump USD. This way when USA inevitably attempt to seize the Chinese wealth the damage is minimized. I expect this to be more or less complete this year. Expect big dumping of USD assets to follow.
2. Capture the crown jewel of industrial sector: Automobile. Chinese firms needs to expand their investment globally to capture the global market. This will be the final deindustrialization damage China can inflict and so far the west is not wise up to yet. I want to see the industrial damage fully inflicted before attracting attention to bans.
3. Establish alternative suppliers of all western products. You know, semiconductors, precision instruments, airliners, etc. I am quite pleased with the progress thus far and I expect it to reach acceptable level this year.
Once those are done in 2024 China should go all out contesting American sphere of influence short of actual conflicts.