Is China a threat to the security of the United States and the world? If so, why? If not, why not?


* This thread originally started in the War & Peace section, but I'm starting another one here to focus more on the topic and less on off-topic remarks.

First reply to this thread was from Winter Soldier:


Source

Good luck to the brave one's who attempt to read this.


OK, WinterSoldier ("WS") uses 14 different examples to claim that China is a threat, however I feel that this is theoretically a very sloppy way to think about the situation. One must understand with a few concepts how to organize the rest. A few ideas drive the rest, even though this is not stated in WS's post.

So, let's look at the main issues in WS' post. I've identified 4 main issues that I think drive the rest of the points. How you view those issues, pretty much determines which side of the argument you tend to favor.

The four issues are:


(1) China Threat folks Double Standards. He allows that it is ok when the US maintaings its sovereignty, when the US has gone to war, when the US meddled in the affairs of other countries, and for the US to be might now to spend more money on its military budget than almost every other country in the world combined. These are clearly double standards, and it's up to the reader to decide if it is OK for a person to say "do as I say, not do as I do."


(2) China Threat folks blames China for behavior which every country (including the United States) does. Every country commits espionage, trains a military, tries to maximize its military strength, tries to increase its international prestige and influence and tries to build military and political alliances. WS points out when China does this and say oh shit! So, again, it is up to the reader to decide if it makes sense to blame one country for doing what all other countries do. I disagree with WS on this here.

(3) The main reason that most people view China as a threat, is not necessarily due to whatever international political or military actions they do. The real reason for the China threat is that China is an authoritarian state, and not because she is powerful or because of her attitude towards other countries. That is what gets China Threat folks so nervous. Now the question is to decide how to handle an authoritarian state. This is what is really behind this issue. If not for China as an authoritarian state, WS would probably not have read the book he did and so forth.

(4) The final issue here, which has been left unstated, but is probably a concern for US nationalists, there is merely the need for the US to be #1 in the world. Personally, I believe that neo-cons, out of a mixture of arrogance, confidence in the US, greed and nationalism just want the US to be #1 are inclined to call anyone who is strong a threat. This partially explains why neo-cons are so hostile to the European Union and would like to see it fail, despite that they are our allies in NATO and that they are democracies. Some (US) nationalists merely want the US to be #1, just because they want their own country to be #1. This also applies to China as well. Since US nationalists want the US to be #1, then what they want to do is turn China into a threat so that they can hold China down.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Now that I have identified these four key issues and where WS stands on them. I will say where I stand on them.

(1 & 2) WRT double standards and blames China for things that every country does :

Obviously, it is absurd for the US to maintain double standards without just cause. Now China is a country of 1.3 billion people, a nuclear power, and a member of the Security Council. China should has the right to a modern armed forces to defend itself. The fact that China chooses to replaces its antiquarian armed forces with more modernized weapons is natural and is the logical and normal thing that any country would do. Actually, in my opinion, China’s geo-strategic position is weaker than the United States, in that China is surrounded by other great or middle powers (i.e. Russia, India, Japan, and many other nations of Southeast Asia). Two of them are nuclear armed. This will provide a check on any expansionism by China. The US should play a role in preventing any unwarranted aggression in the region as well.

(3) WRT the real reason (for the debate) is that China is an authoritarian state

I believe that the current authoritarian regime in China right now, is the best for of government for China right now. Feel free to read that again.

Let me quickly add that I would like to see China become democratic eventually, however I think that at this point in time it would be bad for China to try to do a regime change. Why would it be bad? It would slow down China’s economic growth and could possibly jeopardize China’s social stability. China needs to gradually transition from authoritarianism to democracy, just as she is transitioning from communism to capitalism.

(4) WRT the supposed necessity for the US to be #1 in the world I think that leadership of the world must be moral, and it need not be from the US. Whoever leads best should lead. That does not have to be the United States, although it potentially could be. There is no need to hold down other countries just for the sake of one’s home country being the strongest. This is just infantile and is best left to the world of Warcraft III and Starcraft.


Having laid out these 4 pivotal issues, I will go to the 14 examples provided by WS. I will be referencing the ideas on these 4 issues throughout them.


WEB

The Republican Party is more in favor of trade with China than the Democratic Party.

This is an issue about the Democratic Party being more supportive of free trade than the Republican Party. This is pure bunk. The Republican Party is far more corporate friendly than are the Democrats who still have a large union base that does not favor free trade. Corporations on the otherhand do favor free trade because it allows them to sell to new markets and to produce their goods at a lower cost to labor, safety equipment and environmental equipment. Thus, so is the Republican Party in favor of this and in favor of trade with China far moreso than the Democrats.

I have shown this to WS in an earlier thread:

Here is the vote in the House to grant China Permanent Normal Trading Relations with the United States and thus entry into the World Trading Organization.


http://www.techlawjournal.com/trade/20000525.htm
We see the Republicans in favor of it roughly 3:1 and Democrats opposed roughly 2:1.

Here we see proof of the Republicans drawing more support from corporations than do Democrats, getting more corporate dollars in campaign funding by a ratio of 2:1.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fea...onfessore.html
Lastly, under Bush’s first termand the House still controlled by the Republicans, we see that the US increased imports from China by two fold.

http://usinfo.state.gov/eap/Archive/...03-517799.html

Now, I don’t think trade with China is a bad thing, but let’s be honest here. Whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing, it’s definitely a Republican thing.

Trade with China is the humanitarian thing to do. Also, it lowers the price of US consumer goods, creates global growth and a market for US exports.

Why is trade with China not bad? Because it lifts human beings out of poverty. It helps China to industrialize and there is also some snow-balling effects for the Chinese economy by doing this. It allows China to stop funding inefficient state enterprises because the foreign direct investment soaks up the unemployment created by disbanding those entitites. This means that money can go from inefficient factories to things like power plants, roads, railways, schools, hospitals and things like that. I favor international trade on humanitarian grounds.

I also believe that in the long run it will benefit the world to have a stronger consumer and innovator in a vast country like China. The US exports to China have recently been picking up.

China is spying on us. However, this falls into one of my earlier issues of blaming China for doing things that every other nation (including the US) does. Israel also spies on us, despite the millions of dollars we give them every year. What shall we do to them? I am sure the US spies on China as well. Every country spies on every other country so why should we single one country out for what we do and what everyone else does?

Of course the US must stop Chinese spies, as well as Israeli ones and Russian ones and everyone else who’s doing that, however this behavior is normal for any state. International espionage has been going on for at least 100 years. It’s not a Chinese invention.

This one, I would say falls into the realm of double standards. The US also had territorial disputes. We fought a war with Canada, Mexico, Spain, and countless Native American tribes in order to take their land. The US has fought overtly or covertly a very large share of countries across the planet, so how can the US say that another country is to blamed for having fought a lot of wars?

Looking less generally at this, I’m confident WS is not even sure of the circumstances of those wars with China, yet blames them anyway. This is about as fair as blaming the US for WWI and WWII. This is merely a bias against China with no merit.


This falls under the issue of double standards. China’s feeling towards maintaining its territorial integrity are akin to the US’ feeling of doing the same during the Civil War. We should ask ourselves how we would feel if China sold weapons to a rebellious state government in Hawaii and fostered independence for them from us, and put warships in between the US and Hawaii. This is the same as how it would be, if the US were to abuse its relationship with Taiwan.

For the record, I will say that I favor the status quo of two effective states right now with no formal independence. I favor peaceful re-unification. However, what I am saying is that you can no more blame the Chinese for wanting to re-unify their nation, than you can the US for wanting to re-unify during the Civil War, and the Chinese anger at US intervention is similar to how our anger would be if China helped to foster “state to state relations” between Hawaii and the US government.


Professional China threat folks are generally dishonest and make wild claims. This man is not as influential as WS claims.

I don’t much care for China Threat folks. I’ve read a book called “The Coming Conflict with China” and it was factually incorrect and most of its predictions of what China might get (like Backfire bombers, Typhoon or Akula submarines) never materialized. I have watched a panel of China Threat folks and they are rather dishonest. They say all the stuff China is developing, but what they omit is that the Chinese armed forces today is what one US officer called a “junkyard army.” The US fighting China today would be akin to Germany fighting Poland in WWII. Tanks vs Cavalry.

I would also disagree with WS’ comments on the impact of this book. I believe that Condolezza Rice wrote a paper on doing much the same thing as WS mentions here, but years ago. She has doneso with her deals on India lifting sanctions and offering them nuclear technology. This was not the work of Menges influence though, I do not think.

What is WS really saying here? That it’s bad for another country in the world to be more powerful than the United States? That the US must try to hold down another country and prevent it from modernizing itself?

This seems like the issue of blaming China for behavior typical to all countries, including the United States I think it shows a fair amount of paranoia to say “the use of economic factors as a weapon through the recent attempt by the PRC to buy Unocal.” Uncoal is an oil company, and how can you begrudge anyone in the world for wanting to buy oil?

WRT Deng Xiaoping’s statements here, China and the US were rivals during the Cold War for several decades. The US has threatened to drop nuclear bombs on China, and also keeps the country separated. Naturally, from the Chinese perspective they would not want to fight at a time when they are weak. They may or may not fight the USA some day. It’s a chance. The US may go to war with many countries, perhaps China will be one of them someday. Nonetheless, the quote mentioned by WS shows wisdom, not aggression. Is it or is it not foolish for China to go to war with the United States when this would be similar to the Israelites declaring war on Rome or Egypt or some other such lop-sided battles? Not committing suicide is good leadership for a nation. Would you want the US to go to war with Russia right now and get nuked?

This falls under the category of blaming China for doing things that every other nation (including the US) does. The US just recently did a regime change in Iraq. The US has been in the regime change business since 1919 when it tried to topple the Bolsheviks in Russia. The US has FORCEFULLY tried to do regime change more than a dozen times on other countries in world history. The US has assassinated popular leaders in other countries before. So how can a country PEACEFULLY trying to influence the US be called a threat while the US’ forceful actions are not a threat?

Of course these attempts by China should be thwarted without exception, but WS complaint here is totally hollow, since the US has done and still does do more than this to other countries. It is highly likely that at this moment the US is funding propaganda to be sent to Chinese audiences in China.


Two points here, which are similar. Firstly, this is merely a variation of guerilla warfare, which you could say China is one of the first authors of, WRT Mao’s variations on the Art of War. This is the classical Chinese method of fighting a superior foe, is to take advantage of the foe’s over-extension and strike him where he is the weakest. These two points of WS fall into the category of double standard. What would any country including the United States do, if it were forced to fight a stronger foe? Resort to guerilla tactics of course. The patriots during the American Revolution used guerilla warfare against the Redcoats, so why shouldn’t the Chinese make a similar plan if they fight a stronger foe?

WRT the comment by the Chinese general or colonel who implied that Los Angeles would be nuked, I believe this is in the context of the US assisting Taiwan to separate from China. Again, how would any American citizen feel about China helping part of the United States to secede? I would expect to someone to say “nuke the Chinese” as a response.

In any case, this was one general out of probably hundreds in China, and I believe that the Chinese government publicly disavowed and distanced themselves from this general or colonel and said that he was speaking his own thoughts and not on behalf of China.

This falls under double standards. Most likely, China does hide its true military spending. If they did not, then the US would somehow use the information against them. It would constantly play up the China threat and prevent China from upgrading its military. Let’s be clear on what kind of military China has. I will not go through a detailed list of the Chinese military, but I have studied it as an amateur for years. I would say that less than 10% of China’s forces are capable of fighting on a technological level of the mid 1980’s for the United States. The rest of China’s equipment is Vietnam and Korean War era stuff. The bulk of the Chinese submarine forces are more or less equivalents of German WWII era U-boats. So, it’s not like China is hiding some advanced upgrades for equipment far in excess of our own. They want to be able to build the same quality of weapons that we have.

I would estimate that China spends some $80 billion a year on defense expenditure. The US spends more than $500 billion a year on defense expenditure. If we are to say that the Chinese level of expenditure is extreme, than what is the US’ level of expenditure?

Clear-cut blaming China for behavior which all other countries (including the USA do). A blue water navy means a navy that can fight in the ocean and not just on the coast. What country in the world does not want that basic capability?




This is in large part blaming China for what all countries also do (including the USA). Actually, before the Tiananmen Square massacre, the US was helping China to build its FC-1 fighter, which China later finished with Pakistan and will be putting on the export market. So, WS blames China for selling weapons to despotic regimes, yet we helped China to build those exports.

Secondly, all countries want to export their weapons to earn money. The US is the largest arms exporter in the world. We sell large quantities of weapons to Saudi Arabia, have offered them to Pakistan, we’ve sold them to Indonesia which has massacred the people on Timor. We sold weapons to the Shah of Iran who was little better than Stalin. So this complaint is rank hypocrisy.


This falls under the category of blaming China for doing things that every other nation (including the US) does. The US does war games with all of its allies, and China and Russia are allies, so they held war games too.

No doubt that the Russians and Chinese are allied against US. That is true. However, it is more of a defensive alliance as even combined, the militaries of these two nations is no match for the United States.

In summation, I would like to say that China may or may not be a threat to the world and the United States. Any country that has long range ballistic missiles like Russia, China, North Korea and eventually India is a threat to the United States. Now I find WinterSoldier’s China Threat theories to be based upon hypocrisy and double standards and thus I reject many of his views on China.

China may someday become everything we feared. It may become expansionist and attack other countries and maybe they will threaten us with nuclear weapons. However, this is highly unlikely because China is surrounded by powerful countries, many of whom have nuclear weapons. China expanding would leave it vulnerable to being nuked by its neighbors and an alliance forming against China by all of its neighbors. China may someday make a powerplay on the Spratly Islands, the Diaoyu Tai Islands, Taiwan or Mongolia, however by and large I do not think it is realistic to expect China to try to take over Siberia, or to conquer India or Japan or Vietnam or Hawaii to posit a more absurd example.

China is limited in the potential benefit it can get from any of those attacks. The US must be wary of China, as China is just like any other country. They care about themselves first and they will do what is in their best interests, just as the US cares about itself first and will do what is in its best interests.

China is already rising and international trade is flourishing with China and the world and the United States. The China Threat folks really have little chance for stopping China’s economic rise. What we must do is to watch China and to prevent China from conquering India and Russia, Japan and Vietnam, or initiating aggression against the United States. However, given that this is not even in China’s interests, China is not going to try to do that anyway.



WEB

How come India is a threat to the U.S just because India has ballastic Missiles. Your assumption is a flawed one. If we go by the same logic U.S is a much much bigger threat to India. Not only to India to all the nations of the world.

It's not an assumption. That's the definition of the word threat.


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/threat

A weapon that can incinerate millions and kill millions more through radiation is a source of danger.

That's right.


WEB

Haha,your speech is very interesting.and it's the truth!many Chinese consider US is a threat to China,because american arrey many long range missiles aim China.

__________________
[url]http://hi.baidu.com/winter6126blog[/url]

Lets remember everyone. There are very effective ways to wage wars without bombs.

Economic warfare ?

Yes, it's a strategy.

if you're able to fatten and make lazy your enemy ( that be America ), your enemy becomes more and more dependant (and in debt TOO you) on you over time.

A very different way of considering "warfare". Not one most are used to even thinking about. Time and economic manipulations etc. etc.

__________________
[I]They exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator. . . . Therefore, God gave them up to passions of dishonor; for their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature.[/I] - Romans 1:25-26

Use liberals artistic manipulation of logic and language against them.