Posted on 12/30/2004 8:15:56 PM PST by CHARLITE
In the middle of fighting the global war on terror, America has forgotten about their "strategic competitor" to the East. The Chinese have noticed.
THE POST-9/11 WORLD has been a mixed bag for the Chinese. The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and the deployment of forces to Central Asia renewed fears of American encirclement and upset a decade of careful diplomacy. Beijing's efforts to negotiate security and stability along its continental border--a prelude to greater activity in maritime Asia--seemed all for naught.
But then came the invasion and, more significantly, the occupation, of Iraq. The U.S. military, which had seemed entirely invincible, now seemed to be bogged down in an interminable quagmire. The Bush administration, which had campaigned for office in 2000 by casting China as a "strategic competitor," reversed course 180 degrees under the winds of the "global war on terrorism." Arms sales to Taiwan, once a priority for the White House, have been all but cancelled, while the plucky democrats of Taipei have been reviled by President Bush and his lieutenants as independence-obsessed troublemakers. From Beijing, the future looks better than it has for some time. China is a great power, not only in its own mind but increasingly in the minds of the rest of the world.
The Chinese can barely contain their self-satisfaction these days, and Beijing's recently-released white paper, China's National Defense in 2004, is a 36-page-wide smirk. Consider this passage: "The trends toward world multipolarization and economic globalization are deepening amid twists and turns. New changes are occurring in the balance of power among the major international players, with the process of their realignment and the redistribution of their interests accelerated."
Granted, this is hardly a ripping read - but within the refined art of the defense brief, this is equivalent to a middle-finger salute. The argument is essentially that the United States is a slipping superpower, leading to a "multipolar" world in which Beijing's interests will be given great weight. The paper goes on to note that "the developing countries"--meaning most importantly China--"have become important players in promoting a multipolar world and"--I guess the Chinese have little ear for irony--"democratized international relations."
To be sure, in the Chinese view, "tendencies of hegemonism and unilateralism"--that means us--"have gained new ground, as struggles for strategic points, strategic resources and strategic dominance crop up from time to time." Not satisfied merely with attempting to transform the greater Middle East, "the United States is realigning and reinforcing is military presence in [the Asia-Pacific] region by buttressing military alliances and accelerating deployment of missile defense systems."
Thus, Beijing frets, Japan is on the verge of restoring its old imperial ways at Washington's urging, "stepping up its constitutional overhaul, adjusting its military and security policies and developing the missile defense system for future deployment." But the biggest threat remains the separatists on Taiwan. Beijing is alarmed in particular by the "vicious rise" of Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian and Taiwan's yearning for freedom. The Bush administration needs a good talking to, especially regarding arms sales, for "U.S. action does not serve a stable situation across the Strait."
The "Chinese people" are resolutely opposed to all "separatist activities in whatever manifestation" and "to arms sales to Taiwan or entrance of any form with Taiwan by any country in the world." Lest the message be unclear: "We will never allow anyone to split Taiwan form China through whatever means. Should the Taiwan authorities go so far as to make a reckless attempt that constitutes a major incident of 'Taiwan independence,' the Chinese people and armed forces will resolutely and thoroughly crush it at any cost."
Them's fighting words. No doubt, the chorus of American Sinologists will argue that such rhetoric is par for the course with Beijing. But China's language is both unmistakably blunt and coursing with a self-confidence that reflects the successes of Chinese strategy over the past several years. As one very savvy and experienced U.S. East Asia expert--and one not known for particularly bellicose views--recently told me, Beijing is "kicking our asses all over the region."
And alas, it's true. If the Bush administration is serious about preserving American hegemony, it needs to devote greater attention in its second term to balancing against China's rise in Asia, rather than simply appeasing it. Witness the weak response by the State Department to Beijing's recent passage of an "anti-secession" law that provides the legal "justification" to attack Taiwan. Trading Taipei for Baghdad isn't much of a deal.
Tom Donnelly is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a contributing writer to The Daily Standard.
Got to consider who wrote this and who it was intended for. Our own assessments by many of our strategic scholars say that it is very likely that this century will be an "American" century, with the US dominating world affairs militarily and economically for some time to come. Its a matter of which soothsayers you believe.
Yo, Mullah, get that last kiss from your scattered pearls...
We are sending you a one way ticket to Paradise.
"the United States is realigning and reinforcing is military presence in [the Asia-Pacific] region by buttressing military alliances and accelerating deployment of missile defense systems."
Doesn't sound to me like we've "forgotten" about China...and yes the Chinese have indeed noticed!
So long as we can get stuff cheaper at Wal-Mart, we don't need to worry about little things like this.
If we don't wake-up to the growing menace of the Commie Chinese, it's going to be too late.
It's curious as to where the 'insurgents', i.e. murderous terrorists, are getting continued funding and logistical support. From Syria? Yes. From Iran? Yes. From N. Korea? From Russia? Most likely. From China? For one, I think so, because of their relationships with many of the other players.
Better they spill US blood in a surrogate war than to confront us head-on until a time of their choosing.
We need to cut to the chase, and get serious, both economically and militarily and crush the Great Dragon before they grow any more powerful.
If Bush fails, we'll be on the glide slope to ruin.
So what do you suggest? Declare war now? Don't just wave your fist and shout. Tell me your plan. Do you know what we already do, how we've prevented war in the TW straits for half a century?
I suggest discussing the white elephant in the room and declare what China really is...a sponsor of terrorism
Good ahead. You first. :^)
What garbage. When the elections are held it will be the crossroads, not for us but for Iraq. If the country is then ready to back its new government and begin the process of becoming a coherent country then we will more than likely stay and help. If the country decides to devolve into civil war then I see us withdrawing to the north to protect the Kurds and let the rest fight it out. These elections are Iraq's last chance to put up or shut up and we will act accordingly.
"Beijing is "kicking our asses all over the region"
I hate to say it, but there is some truth in that statement. The Chicoms are slowly, but surely gaining a serious foothold over the Americans on the international stage and uless the Bush adminstration wakes up to face the threat posed by Beijing, it's only going to get worse.
I did.
I boycott products made in China.
pikecountyrepublican is right. We need to stand up to China. They way we do that is through far more aggresive support of Taiwan. We need to be the ones forcing the issue and playing on offense. That's the way we do it. The author is absolutely right: trading Baghdad for Tapei isn't much of a trade at all, in fact, if I had to choose one or the other, I'd MUCH sooner go with Taipei.
I do not believe this to be true. China has not yet ever been in a position to attack Taiwan -- with or without our presence.
But the policy has actually had the exact opposite effect -- it has fed and sustained the possibility or such a miscalculation on the part of the Chinese that they could start a war. We have kept the war rhetoric alive for half a century and the current chest pounding is a staple of Chinese policy after 50 years. It has kept the Chinese threat alive for 50 years to a point where they may be in a psoition to launch a completely self destructive war over what should have become a non-issue 40 years ago.
Rather than prevent war in the straits it has prolonged the possibility for 50 years when it could have and should have been settled at least 40 years ago.
Me too. And this is from AEI, a very staunch conservative non-sensationalist academic institution. They are very pro-Bush adminsitration. I am the same way. I am very pro-Bush and greatly supportive and appreciative, but in this area they are letting the communist play them like a drum and it is not good.
What's worse about this is that initially the Bush administration did not act in this manner. The strategic competitor label was actually quite apt and well described the situation.
Absolutely.
China can and will do little about it. The people of China are not interested in kicking Taiwan's butt and the communist PR to the contrary is heavy.
The time to have done this was immediately after 911. We should have docked a carrier in Kaohsiung, quietly with little fanfare.
After 911 China needed to be told that their obsessive brinmanship with regard to Taiwan was a luxery the US and the world no longer has the time or patience to put up with -- that there are now actual serious issues to address that affect all nations participating in the world wide economy.
The same comments were made about Taiwan in 1972 and even more so in 1979.
I've seen commentaries from those time periods after Kissinger and Nixon made friends with Mao and after Carter officially dropped diplomatic relations with Taiwan that it was obvious and inevitable that within a few years Taiwan would make a deal with China etc...
Didn't happen.
No didn't happen but the writting was on the wall. There is the small matter of transporting a large number of troops over the 100 miles of open seas, something that the US Navy used to be able to prevent with ease, not so any longer, the Chicom Navy is very powerful in and around Tiawan. Now it would be a real fight, and the US can no longer afford a real fight with as powerful a force has China. Nope Tiawan is gone and yall had better start worring about Japan. I am pretty sure some face saving deal similar to the Hong Kong deal will be worked out, unless China feels like rubbing our noses in the dirt.
I agree totally....read "Unrestricted Warfare" http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/0971680728/ref=dp_primary-product-display_0/102-2651329-6380951?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=507846&s=books
It gives some insight as to China's long term thinking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.