Political and Military Analysis on China
- Thread starter escobar
- Start date
- Status
escobar
Brigadier
Reassessing China: Awaiting Xi Jinping
In the Hu Jintao era (2002–2012) China’s politics, economics, and national security policies have changed almost beyond recognition. The ongoing transformation has been largely obscured by images that dominate many Western minds: Manichean democrats see a jasmine revolution waiting to happen; hedge fund managers see a gigantic bubble waiting to burst; national security executives see China as having perfected an enduring, dynamic state capitalism with Leninist political management that threatens to overwhelm us. These contradictory images share one thing: lacking roots in Chinese reality, they project the hopes and fears of their respective believers. Two decades ago, when writing The Rise of China, I could confidently predict Chinese success based on Deng Xiaoping’s emulation of similar policies in South Korea and Taiwan. After three decades of that success, China’s future is far less certain today.
The South China Sea: Oil, Maritime Claims, and U.S.–China Strategic Rivalry
The risk of conflict escalating from relatively minor events has increased in the South China Sea over the past two years with disputes now less open to negotiation or resolution. Originally, the disputes arose after World War II when the littoral states—China and three countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines, as well as Vietnam which joined later—scrambled to occupy the islands there. Had the issue remained strictly a territorial one, it could have been resolved through Chinese efforts to reach out to ASEAN and forge stronger ties with the region.
In the Hu Jintao era (2002–2012) China’s politics, economics, and national security policies have changed almost beyond recognition. The ongoing transformation has been largely obscured by images that dominate many Western minds: Manichean democrats see a jasmine revolution waiting to happen; hedge fund managers see a gigantic bubble waiting to burst; national security executives see China as having perfected an enduring, dynamic state capitalism with Leninist political management that threatens to overwhelm us. These contradictory images share one thing: lacking roots in Chinese reality, they project the hopes and fears of their respective believers. Two decades ago, when writing The Rise of China, I could confidently predict Chinese success based on Deng Xiaoping’s emulation of similar policies in South Korea and Taiwan. After three decades of that success, China’s future is far less certain today.
The South China Sea: Oil, Maritime Claims, and U.S.–China Strategic Rivalry
The risk of conflict escalating from relatively minor events has increased in the South China Sea over the past two years with disputes now less open to negotiation or resolution. Originally, the disputes arose after World War II when the littoral states—China and three countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines, as well as Vietnam which joined later—scrambled to occupy the islands there. Had the issue remained strictly a territorial one, it could have been resolved through Chinese efforts to reach out to ASEAN and forge stronger ties with the region.
escobar
Brigadier
Indigenous Weapons Development in China’s Military Modernization
The rapid economic growth of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since 1979 has enabled the country to implement an extensive military modernization program. Since the mid-1990s, China’s military reforms have accelerated and defense spending has steadily increased. In China’s 2008 white paper on defense, China projected that it would lay a “solid foundation” for the development of national defense and the armed forces by 2010, “accomplish major mechanization and make major progress in informatization* by 2020,” and reach modernization of its national defense and armed forces by the middle of the century...
The rapid economic growth of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since 1979 has enabled the country to implement an extensive military modernization program. Since the mid-1990s, China’s military reforms have accelerated and defense spending has steadily increased. In China’s 2008 white paper on defense, China projected that it would lay a “solid foundation” for the development of national defense and the armed forces by 2010, “accomplish major mechanization and make major progress in informatization* by 2020,” and reach modernization of its national defense and armed forces by the middle of the century...
eldarlmari
New Member
A short article from a Singaporean morning chinese daily newspaper on the summary of strategic affairs between the US and China (sorry but im abit lazy to 'better-translate' the entire 'awkward translation'):
3月31日电 新加坡《联合早报》30日刊文说，中国在原始文化传统核心层，没有非要挑战谁的理念动力，挑战美国全球领导地位对中国也无益。这都决定了中国无意挑战美地位。
文章摘编如下：
没有人怀疑中美关系从战略上决定着全球的未来，包括全球经济、全球政治和国际安全。中美关系的基石是战略互信，这个问题不解决，其它努力都不具有根本意义。
中美战略互信矛盾的主要方面在于美国，因为这种互信从战略上主要基于两个问题的解决：一个是意识形态不同，一个是美国是否释怀其担心，即中国崛起可能挑战美国的全球领导地位。有关前一个问题，主要取决于美国是否接受多元化的国家治理体制，这个问题的矛盾主要方面显然在美国。
有关第二个问题，可以从两个方面讨论，一个方面是中国有没有能力挑战，一个是中国有没有意愿挑战。前一个问题结论很明确：中国没有能力挑战。后一个问题始终没有得到充分讨论。
March 31-Singapore's Morning Daily 30th issue of the morning post said China cultural tradition of the original core layer, there is no idea of who not to challenge power to challenge the United States global leadership on China is also useless. This determines the status of China has no intention to challenge the United States. Article excerpts are as follows: there is no doubt the future of Sino-US relations from a strategic decision on the global, global economics, global politics and international security. Strategic trust is the cornerstone of Sino-US relations, the problem is not solved, other efforts are not fundamental. Strategic trust between China and the main areas of conflict is the United States, because the trust strategy based mainly on solutions to two problems: an ideology is different, one is the United States can't make their fears that China's rise could challenge United States global leadership. Before about a problem mainly depends on the United States accepts a wide range of national governance systems, the contradictions of the main aspects of the issue in the United States. About the second question, from both discussions, China has no capacity to a challenge, a challenge is China's willingness to have. First issue the conclusion is clear: China has no ability to challenge. One issue has not been fully discussed.
我个人认为，讨论中国挑战美国全球领导者地位的意愿，要从以下几个方面入手。
首先，中国的文明形态、文化传统是否具有挑战的人文基础。文化形态决定了族群的行为模式。以农耕为生存基础的中华文明，决定了中国人的行为模式呈现出温良恭俭让的行为特征，温文尔雅，顾及双方的感受，尽可能采用协调机制，千方百计避免冲突。大概只有这样的民族，才会提出中国式的和谐世界概念，和谐体现了顾全大局，体现了以安为先的姿态和倾向。
因此，中国在原始文化传统核心层，就没有非要挑战谁的理念动力。
其次，挑战美国全球领导地位是否有利可图。利益是国际关系的核心。以中国当下以及可展望的未来，挑战美国并承担全球领导者责任，有百害而无一利，中国有什么理由为之？承担全球领导者责任需要承担巨额成本、政治风险，需要向全球提供巨大的公共物品供给，这对中国没有好处。
最后，挑战美国全球领导地位是否具有价值观优势。当今世界是一个被充分西方化了的世界，除非中国广泛地吸收各种文明成果，使中华文明及其外在的价值观体系，具有全球广泛接受性，并成为全球各民族可以分享的公共物品，否则中国难以承担领导者责任。
因此，没有理由认为中国试图挑战美国在全球的领导者地位，中国不可能有这个意图。如果非要说中国具有这个潜在意图，那就是有人要把中国说成有这个意图，即被意图化。假如这一认识过于偏激，那么就只有一种可能性，即就像中国是全球事务处理的初学者一样，美国对于一个以农耕文明为基础的东方大国崛起，可以造就一个和平相处的大国关系也是一个初学者。
I personally Think, China challenges United States global leadership will, to start with the following 。
First of all, Chinese civilization Humanistic Foundation of the State, cultural traditions, is challenging. Culture determines the behavior patterns of the community. With farming as the foundation of Chinese civilization, determines the behavior of the Chinese mode showing gentle, modest and courteous behavior, thin, take into account the feelings of both sides, as far as possible the use of coordination mechanisms, and do everything possible to avoid conflicts. Only such people, would raise China's harmonious world concept, embodied the whole of harmony, embodies the safety first attitude and orientation .
Therefore, in primitive culture in China Traditional core layer, there is no idea of who not to challenge power 。
Second, pick United States global leadership position is profitable. Interest is at the heart of international relations. Present and prospect to China's future, challenge United States responsibility and global leader , harm and no good, China has any reason for it? Assume responsibility for global leaders need to bear significant costs, political risks, you need to provide a huge supply of public goods in the world, this is not good for China .
Finally, pick United States global leadership position has a value advantage. Today's world is a world that is full of Western, unless widely absorbed a variety of achievements of civilization, Chinese civilization and its external value systems, worldwide acceptance, and became a national public goods that can be shared around the world, and otherwise unbearable leader responsibility in China .
Therefore, there is no reason Think China is trying to challenge United States global leadership, China cannot have this intention. If I have to say that China has the potential intent, that is to say China has the intention, is intended. If this understanding is too extreme, then there is only one possibility, just as China was the beginner of the global transaction, United States for an agricultural civilization based on the rise of great powers in the East, you can create a peaceful relations among the major powers is also a beginner to get along with .
3月31日电 新加坡《联合早报》30日刊文说，中国在原始文化传统核心层，没有非要挑战谁的理念动力，挑战美国全球领导地位对中国也无益。这都决定了中国无意挑战美地位。
文章摘编如下：
没有人怀疑中美关系从战略上决定着全球的未来，包括全球经济、全球政治和国际安全。中美关系的基石是战略互信，这个问题不解决，其它努力都不具有根本意义。
中美战略互信矛盾的主要方面在于美国，因为这种互信从战略上主要基于两个问题的解决：一个是意识形态不同，一个是美国是否释怀其担心，即中国崛起可能挑战美国的全球领导地位。有关前一个问题，主要取决于美国是否接受多元化的国家治理体制，这个问题的矛盾主要方面显然在美国。
有关第二个问题，可以从两个方面讨论，一个方面是中国有没有能力挑战，一个是中国有没有意愿挑战。前一个问题结论很明确：中国没有能力挑战。后一个问题始终没有得到充分讨论。
March 31-Singapore's Morning Daily 30th issue of the morning post said China cultural tradition of the original core layer, there is no idea of who not to challenge power to challenge the United States global leadership on China is also useless. This determines the status of China has no intention to challenge the United States. Article excerpts are as follows: there is no doubt the future of Sino-US relations from a strategic decision on the global, global economics, global politics and international security. Strategic trust is the cornerstone of Sino-US relations, the problem is not solved, other efforts are not fundamental. Strategic trust between China and the main areas of conflict is the United States, because the trust strategy based mainly on solutions to two problems: an ideology is different, one is the United States can't make their fears that China's rise could challenge United States global leadership. Before about a problem mainly depends on the United States accepts a wide range of national governance systems, the contradictions of the main aspects of the issue in the United States. About the second question, from both discussions, China has no capacity to a challenge, a challenge is China's willingness to have. First issue the conclusion is clear: China has no ability to challenge. One issue has not been fully discussed.
我个人认为，讨论中国挑战美国全球领导者地位的意愿，要从以下几个方面入手。
首先，中国的文明形态、文化传统是否具有挑战的人文基础。文化形态决定了族群的行为模式。以农耕为生存基础的中华文明，决定了中国人的行为模式呈现出温良恭俭让的行为特征，温文尔雅，顾及双方的感受，尽可能采用协调机制，千方百计避免冲突。大概只有这样的民族，才会提出中国式的和谐世界概念，和谐体现了顾全大局，体现了以安为先的姿态和倾向。
因此，中国在原始文化传统核心层，就没有非要挑战谁的理念动力。
其次，挑战美国全球领导地位是否有利可图。利益是国际关系的核心。以中国当下以及可展望的未来，挑战美国并承担全球领导者责任，有百害而无一利，中国有什么理由为之？承担全球领导者责任需要承担巨额成本、政治风险，需要向全球提供巨大的公共物品供给，这对中国没有好处。
最后，挑战美国全球领导地位是否具有价值观优势。当今世界是一个被充分西方化了的世界，除非中国广泛地吸收各种文明成果，使中华文明及其外在的价值观体系，具有全球广泛接受性，并成为全球各民族可以分享的公共物品，否则中国难以承担领导者责任。
因此，没有理由认为中国试图挑战美国在全球的领导者地位，中国不可能有这个意图。如果非要说中国具有这个潜在意图，那就是有人要把中国说成有这个意图，即被意图化。假如这一认识过于偏激，那么就只有一种可能性，即就像中国是全球事务处理的初学者一样，美国对于一个以农耕文明为基础的东方大国崛起，可以造就一个和平相处的大国关系也是一个初学者。
I personally Think, China challenges United States global leadership will, to start with the following 。
First of all, Chinese civilization Humanistic Foundation of the State, cultural traditions, is challenging. Culture determines the behavior patterns of the community. With farming as the foundation of Chinese civilization, determines the behavior of the Chinese mode showing gentle, modest and courteous behavior, thin, take into account the feelings of both sides, as far as possible the use of coordination mechanisms, and do everything possible to avoid conflicts. Only such people, would raise China's harmonious world concept, embodied the whole of harmony, embodies the safety first attitude and orientation .
Therefore, in primitive culture in China Traditional core layer, there is no idea of who not to challenge power 。
Second, pick United States global leadership position is profitable. Interest is at the heart of international relations. Present and prospect to China's future, challenge United States responsibility and global leader , harm and no good, China has any reason for it? Assume responsibility for global leaders need to bear significant costs, political risks, you need to provide a huge supply of public goods in the world, this is not good for China .
Finally, pick United States global leadership position has a value advantage. Today's world is a world that is full of Western, unless widely absorbed a variety of achievements of civilization, Chinese civilization and its external value systems, worldwide acceptance, and became a national public goods that can be shared around the world, and otherwise unbearable leader responsibility in China .
Therefore, there is no reason Think China is trying to challenge United States global leadership, China cannot have this intention. If I have to say that China has the potential intent, that is to say China has the intention, is intended. If this understanding is too extreme, then there is only one possibility, just as China was the beginner of the global transaction, United States for an agricultural civilization based on the rise of great powers in the East, you can create a peaceful relations among the major powers is also a beginner to get along with .
Last edited:
escobar
Brigadier
from The Jamestown Foundation
* China Fêtes Turkish Leader as Beijing Recognizes Ankara’s Growing Role
* The Limits to Sino-Indonesian Relations
* Hong Kong’s Chief Executive Election Reveals Rift with Beijing
* China’s Awkward Presence at Seoul Nuclear Security Summit
* Chinese Nuclear Force Modernization: How Much is Enough?
* China Fêtes Turkish Leader as Beijing Recognizes Ankara’s Growing Role
* The Limits to Sino-Indonesian Relations
* Hong Kong’s Chief Executive Election Reveals Rift with Beijing
* China’s Awkward Presence at Seoul Nuclear Security Summit
* Chinese Nuclear Force Modernization: How Much is Enough?
escobar
Brigadier
The Evolving Economic Picture in Asia
The following conversation derives from an on-line chat between Global Forecast editors and three CSIS scholars on opportunities inherent in the changing economic landscape in Asia. When the next administration assesses the global economic picture on Day 1, what do you expect it will look like?
U.S.-China Parallel Development Assistance Goals
The expansion of China’s economy in recent decades has brought a corresponding rise in the amount of foreign assistance China offers to the developing world. In particular, China increased aid to countries in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. Some of China’s methods and objectives are controversial within the international aid community. Critics accuse China of frequently following a “mercantilist” strategy in using aid and loans in order to secure natural resources such as oil and raw materials...
The following conversation derives from an on-line chat between Global Forecast editors and three CSIS scholars on opportunities inherent in the changing economic landscape in Asia. When the next administration assesses the global economic picture on Day 1, what do you expect it will look like?
U.S.-China Parallel Development Assistance Goals
The expansion of China’s economy in recent decades has brought a corresponding rise in the amount of foreign assistance China offers to the developing world. In particular, China increased aid to countries in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. Some of China’s methods and objectives are controversial within the international aid community. Critics accuse China of frequently following a “mercantilist” strategy in using aid and loans in order to secure natural resources such as oil and raw materials...
Last edited:
escobar
Brigadier
China and Afghanistan china’s interests, stances, and perspectives
Spinning the Wheel: Policy Implications of the Dalai Lama's Reincarnation
This study examines the long-running dispute between the Chinese Communist Party and the current Dalai Lama over the issue of his reincarnation. The paper provides a multifaceted analysis of some of the challenges facing the Tibetan spiritual leader and his people. It highlights important historical, political, and cultural aspects of his relationship with regional players as well as his emerging strategic vision for the future. Spinning the Wheel also offers insight into the recent self-immolations and protests that have occurred in ethnographic Tibet.
Spinning the Wheel: Policy Implications of the Dalai Lama's Reincarnation
This study examines the long-running dispute between the Chinese Communist Party and the current Dalai Lama over the issue of his reincarnation. The paper provides a multifaceted analysis of some of the challenges facing the Tibetan spiritual leader and his people. It highlights important historical, political, and cultural aspects of his relationship with regional players as well as his emerging strategic vision for the future. Spinning the Wheel also offers insight into the recent self-immolations and protests that have occurred in ethnographic Tibet.
Last edited:
escobar
Brigadier
Chinese Reactions to Taiwan Arms Sale
Past behavior indicates that China is unlikely to challenge any fundamental U.S. interests in response to any future releases of significant military articles or services to Taiwan. The U.S. therefore retains considerable freedom of action in abiding by the Taiwan Relations Act. Barring a substantive reduction in the Chinese military posture opposite Taiwan, the U.S. will likely continue to provide Taiwan with weapons of a defensive character for the foreseeable future.
Past behavior indicates that China is unlikely to challenge any fundamental U.S. interests in response to any future releases of significant military articles or services to Taiwan. The U.S. therefore retains considerable freedom of action in abiding by the Taiwan Relations Act. Barring a substantive reduction in the Chinese military posture opposite Taiwan, the U.S. will likely continue to provide Taiwan with weapons of a defensive character for the foreseeable future.
- Status