Will China's rise trigger Sino-US confrontation?

People Daily ^ | 12.26.03

[Dr. Marten]

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

"China does not seek hegemony, nor does it have spheres of influence, it simply has no intention to contend for hegemony with the United States"

Well, there you have it straight from Communist China's own newspaper.
So, is there no word for "transparent" in the chinese language? Or, do they really think that we are that stupid?
I suppose they do think we are that stupid, given our current trade policy and deficit with them.
It seems they would re-write history and deny they supported the North Koreans in the Korean War and the North Vietnamese in the Vietnam War.

[demlosers]

"China does not seek hegemony, nor does it have spheres of influence, it simply has no intention to contend for hegemony with the United States"

And I'm the King of Mars bow to me you peasants!

[JimRed]

China is a peace-loving country and the Chinese people long for a peaceful world environment for economic development.

That is probably correct when speaking of the people of China. But the people are not in charge, and their government and military are another thing entirely!

[Egon]

While predicting Sino-US relations in the next 20 to 50 years, Mearsheimer said that ... the United States cannot tolerate the existence of rival that maches it in force.

Wow. WTF?!

Based on this guy's prejudices, he'd be more accurate predicting the weather.

[dwd1]

Being that most leaders in China tend to fight as a last and not a first resort, I doubt if anything would occur anytime soon... However, with a two billion person population, capitalism and a need for natural resources and economic security might be a motivation for aggression... And they could lose 600 million people and still have enough to take over the world... We can not do that here....

From what I know of the "Art of War" tenets, the Chinese would most like use a perceived threat of force rather than actually resort to it... They do cherish life to a certain degree though the people on boats would probably disagree with me...

[Ancesthntr]

However, with a two billion person population, capitalism and a need for natural resources and economic security might be a motivation for aggression...

China currently has about 1.25 billion people, and its growth rate is very slow - per government orders. India is likely to pass China in population sometime in the next 25 or so years. You don't see the Indians being very aggressive, and they are more capitalist and richer than the Chinese, and they have far less in the way of natural resources. Perhaps the Indians have seen the light, namely that cooperation with advanced countries like the US and western Europe is more advantageous than conflict. Had the Germans and Japanese realized this, they'd have some very strange governments, but we'd have been spared WW2. One would hope that the Chinese leadership is also wise enough to "see the light" and to similarly cooperate for the mutual benefit of all concerned.

[Americanscorpion2003]

i have spoken to many people telling me that china is a threat because of the size of their population. i tell them im not afraid of anyone of those bastards. and they feel froggy then let them jump for all i care. we are already at a state of war with terrorism. if china wants a piece of us, then they better not only sing it, they better bring it.

[dwd1]

I think India is a good comparison from a numeric standpoint but the philosophies behind the cultures are different.. I think with India, the Hindu influence, decent economic conditions, the unspoken traditions, their relationships with the East and the West, and the fact that they do possess nuclear weapons, make them an unlikely candidate for aggression. Also, India was ruled by England until 47 I think and they do not seem want to be seen as oppressive...

China has a different history...

And I do think it is in the best interests of the world community to foster economic development so that you don't have such a large nation having to choose between aggression and starvation... I don't see that happening without a lot of things going real bad...

[templar]

From what I know of the "Art of War" tenets, the Chinese would most like use a perceived threat of force rather than actually resort to it...

Or appear to be harmless while developing and deploying overwhelming force.

The art of war is the art of deception. When weak appear strong, when strong appear weak. When near appear far away, when far away appear near.

[dwd1]

Well stated... What scares me the most is the perception (hopefully based on deception) that they have a lot of "disposable people"...
I also notice how they are quietly gaining more influence over Taiwan...

And with Hong Kong having gone back to them in 1997, one could argue that they are discreetly executing some plan...

And unlike Saddam Hussein, they do have a historical claim to Formosa (Taiwan)...

[dwd1]

Granted we did not have satellites back in 53 but to be able to move 300,000 men to the Yalu River... Scary....

[Quix]

YES!

THEY DO think we are that stupid.

And then they resent us, look down on us, castigate us more for being so stupid.

[Quix]

Quite so!

[Dr. Marten]

"And unlike Saddam Hussein, they do have a historical claim to Formosa (Taiwan)"

Are you saying that China has a historical claim to China? If so, please do enlighten me because I can tell you that any claim over the island of Taiwan by the mainland Chinese was lost in 1895 when the Island was ceded to the Japanese under the treaty of Shimonoseki after the first Sino-Japanese war. Japan maintained control of the island until the end of WWII at which time Taiwan basically was unclaimed by any country until 1949 when Gen. Chiang Kai-shek and his nationalists fled to the Island and etablished themselves.

China has no rightful claim over Taiwan.

[Dr. Marten]

"Are you saying that China has a historical claim to China?"

ooops, I meant to say: "Are you saying that China has a historical claim to Taiwan?

[Kudsman]

And exactly how many armed conflicts have you fought in may I ask?

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Chinese enterprises' investment in America also increased.

Yes, the bi-partisan Cox Report -- heavily redacted by the Clintons, released on a Friday afternoon before Easter I believe, and promptly forgotten -- has the details of the "Chinese enterprises' investment in America."

As for the saying that competition between China and the United States is "similar to the confrontation between Moscow and Washington during the Cold War", we cannot agree to this saying.

He's right. It's not the same. Americans prevented traitors from helping the Soviets.

the United States and the Soviet Union both had a strong tradition of expansionism

That is a lie. As Sec. State Colin Powell said we've kept only enough territory to bury those Americans who died fighting to protect the foreign country. Now if this commie lover means corporations have expanded, yes that's true. Where would the chi-coms be without our corporate traitors handing over our technology to them?

Oh, well. The chi-coms and our free traders got warm fuzzy feelings reading this.

The chi-com version of Lenin's New Economic Plan really fools the greedy rope sellers -- "It's for the consumers," ya know. Yeah, sure, Hillary.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

CHina has never made bones about wanting to rule the world. Only a fool thinks they mean well. We're fools. Why else would we continue to allow them to prosper at our expense?