As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
China's Rise: Should the West be concerned?
Glyph
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
The People's Republic of China recently announced what most of the world has known for some time now, that it's nearing the completion of its first aircraft carrier, or to be more accurate, its first refitted Soviet-era aircraft carrier.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13692558
Of course this in and of itself isn't really a cause for concern so much as the several additional carriers they plan to launch over the course of the next twenty years. And then there's this:
http://www.economist.com/node/18586448?story_id=18586448
The PRC is literally mad-grabbing at raw materials like it's going out of style. Africa is rich in zinc, cobalt, copper, silver, timber, oil, aluminum, natural gas, iron - you name it. And if you're an industrialist or a manufacturing country, the entire continent might as well be a virginal maiden with smooth milky thighs and perfect round breasts. It's basically the Aphrodite of natural resources and China's mixing all the roofies. But unlike Western powers trying to invest in Africa, China has no humanitarian scruples or preconditions whatsoever, which is giving them an edge over their competitors.
All of these are signs of a rising regional power that's undergoing a massive industrial revolution without the necessary resources within its own borders to sustain it, with the exception of coal. A lot of people are hopeful that this will lead to political change and transparency, but what if it doesn't? There's actually evidence that China's emerging middle class, if anything, has every reason to fear democracy, support the CCP and preserve the "harmonious society" state of affairs for the fear of the 900 million hungry peasants and migrant workers living beneath them.
So assuming the worst case scenario where the Chinese economy actually doesn't collapse or slow down significantly enough within the coming decades, where its people don't see increasing political and innovative freedoms, what possible options does the West have to gradually but permanently contain this economic and military expansion short of outright destroying it?
How do we cage the Dragon?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13692558
The carrier was constructed in the 1980s for the Soviet navy but was never completed. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the rusting hull of the Varyag sat in dockyards in Ukraine. A Chinese company with links to the PLA bought the Varyag claiming it wanted to turn it into a floating casino in Macau.
Lt. Gen. Qi Jianguo, assistant chief of the general staff, told the Hong Kong Commercial Daily that even after the aircraft carrier was deployed, it would "definitely not sail to other countries' territorial waters".
"All of the great nations in the world own aircraft carriers - they are symbols of a great nation," he was quoted as saying.
Of course this in and of itself isn't really a cause for concern so much as the several additional carriers they plan to launch over the course of the next twenty years. And then there's this:
http://www.economist.com/node/18586448?story_id=18586448
Chinese expatriates in Africa come from a rough-and-tumble, anything-goes business culture that cares little about rules and regulations. Local sensitivities are routinely ignored at home, and so abroad. Sinopec, an oil firm, has explored in a Gabonese national park. Another state oil company has created lakes of spilled crude in Sudan. Zimbabwe’s environment minister said Chinese multinationals were “operating like makorokoza miners”, a scornful term for illegal gold-panners.
Employees at times fare little better than the environment. At Chinese-run mines in Zambia’s copper belt they must work for two years before they get safety helmets. Ventilation below ground is poor and deadly accidents occur almost daily. To avoid censure, Chinese managers bribe union bosses and take them on “study tours” to massage parlours in China. Obstructionist shop stewards are sacked and workers who assemble in groups are violently dispersed. When cases end up in court, witnesses are intimidated.
Tensions came to a head last year when miners in Sinazongwe, a town in southern Zambia, protested against poor conditions. Two Chinese managers fired shotguns at a crowd, injuring at least a dozen. Some still have pellets under healed skin. Patson Mangunje, a local councilor, says, “People are angry like rabid dogs.”
The PRC is literally mad-grabbing at raw materials like it's going out of style. Africa is rich in zinc, cobalt, copper, silver, timber, oil, aluminum, natural gas, iron - you name it. And if you're an industrialist or a manufacturing country, the entire continent might as well be a virginal maiden with smooth milky thighs and perfect round breasts. It's basically the Aphrodite of natural resources and China's mixing all the roofies. But unlike Western powers trying to invest in Africa, China has no humanitarian scruples or preconditions whatsoever, which is giving them an edge over their competitors.
All of these are signs of a rising regional power that's undergoing a massive industrial revolution without the necessary resources within its own borders to sustain it, with the exception of coal. A lot of people are hopeful that this will lead to political change and transparency, but what if it doesn't? There's actually evidence that China's emerging middle class, if anything, has every reason to fear democracy, support the CCP and preserve the "harmonious society" state of affairs for the fear of the 900 million hungry peasants and migrant workers living beneath them.
So assuming the worst case scenario where the Chinese economy actually doesn't collapse or slow down significantly enough within the coming decades, where its people don't see increasing political and innovative freedoms, what possible options does the West have to gradually but permanently contain this economic and military expansion short of outright destroying it?
How do we cage the Dragon?
Glyph on
0
Posts
But it cannot sustain its current growth and systematic problems. Adaptation is the only way to prosperity. China will cage itself, just like all countries do before they evolve and slip through the bars of the cage, or enlarge the cage itself.
The West should worry about itself. With the Euro crisis and the debt ceiling in the US... The mind boggles at the frightening possibilities.
Actually that is witty sarcasm, I am not startled at all!
Counting out the United States, I don't think that the rest of the West really has the clout or the military might to really do anything should China decide to expand aggressively, unless they commit to an all out World War scenario.
Would kill three birds with one stone, you increase the level of infrastructre in Africa whilst also emphasising the point of playing my the rules and ethical business practises to both China and Africa. Plus they go hand in hand with the concepts of sustainability as well, we're taking two of those birds we've killed and planting the third so it grows into a bush. Or so the saying goes.
The only people who really are going to have problems with China is the Africans (as Latin American governments, despite often shittiness, do stand up for their people) who are going to see their own governments bought out and used to exploit them.
@Tastyfish: all infrastructure is not equal, the stuff the chinese are building and europeans used to build is all about getting resources to ports, its not helping the economic productivity of the local population any.
Tough times, but not the toughest we've ever seen.
NATO is more than capable if you go on pure numbers alone, let alone their capacity to recruit further allies throughout Europe and west Asia, including Russia. Which in itself is presuming that the Chinese military is comparable to those of Western nations, which is patently not true by their first aircraft carrier being a refurbished soviet cast-off. Their military might would only become an issue were they to be invaded, it is not one designed for aggressive projection.
Not only that, but the countries that would be most threatened by an expanding China consist of a few nuclear states and a lot of incredibly wealthy economies with strong ties to the West. Making even the tiniest military action immediately inflammatory.
But all that is moot. China has absolutely no reason to expand, not militarily or any other way. They have everything they need right there. Huge quantities of food and labour, a robust manufacturing infrastructure, and the world's largest reserves of rare earths and minerals, the crude oil of the twenty-first century.
China's rise, which can be debated whether it is inevitable at all, will be economic. And it won't threaten Western countries as much as it will threaten Eastern ones. It is not America that should be concerned, but Japan, India and places like Singapore or South Korea. Nations which share markets, who sell to the same places and produce the same scope of goods and materials using similar technologies and methods.
America, Britain, Europe and everywhere else in the West are the consumers for cheap, East-Asian labour and manufacturing. Which China provides. In the immediate future, an expanding China is beneficial for us, because it provides a huge quantity of middle-class consumers for the goods we export.
I'm frightened that their entire country runs on coal.
China is really fucking forward thinking when it comes to energy independence. Right now, they're constructing a slew of thorium reactors - an easy to mine, plentiful mineral in China.
They're doing solid work on things like wind farms, solar panels, etc., I understand; in fact, sometimes I wonder if the only way to get an entire nation to switch to renewables hard and fast is by government fiat.
But they're still powering those historic growth figures largely on coal.
But China's biggest threat is growing unrest due to spiraling wealth inequities and a growing perception that the rich and party faithful are the new aristocracy of China
Oh snap!
How long until the next glorious revolution?
China is the same kind of paper tiger that nazi germany and soviet russia were. Plumped up with money from america and made to appear as a treat to make it easier to rally the american people together.
Domination of the market for rare earth elements is another ridiculous example of china's threat. In many cases rare earth elements are used to make lighter weight or more energy efficient goods. Substitutes for many of their uses exist and are easily obtained. Only countries like japan that need miniaturization to reduce shipping costs for their exports will be hurt by the lack of freely available REE but america can make due without lightweight power tools and longer life rechargeable batteries. Frankly I'd be more concerned about China's domination of the world's spice industries.
Then I watched this video in America of the police swarming around this dude in Miami and pointing guns at him, demanding that he turn over his video equipment - he only kept his video because he hid the SD card in his mouth. His crime? Filming the cops surrounding a vehicle and opening fire. He filmed a legitimate police shooting and they still demanded his phone at gunpoint. They then smashed that phone.
But herp da derp CHINAAAA I guess
China is growing rapidly, but it has more than its share of problems to go along with that. Their booming economy is having some very serious problems. Here is a video about how China built the worlds largest shopping mall.... which now stands almost empty.
http://video.pbs.org/video/1218530801/
Anyway, more broadly I think China's economic success is tied very closely to the US. As the US falls, so does China, and the US is falling very quickly indeed. Another big economic meltdown in the US will cause a huge decrease in consumer spending, and those consumer goods are almost all produced in China these days. China also holds vast quantities of US debt, which is a decent idea as a political move, but as the US dollar continues to lose value the Chinese lose money just by owning those treasury bonds. This "economic recovery" speak is nonsense, and as things continue to get worse for the US, they will for China as well. The next big crash, which I feel is looking closer and closer all the time will hurt the entire world economy, China included.
Technically, that already is a hat trick.
External threats are still threats even when internal corruption is rampant. I agree that the primary threat to American happiness and prosperity is actually Americans at this time, but Chinese prosperity is bad for the US. We have nothing to game and much to lose from runaway resource exploitation, military expansion, pollution, and R&D capabilities outpacing us.
I think the best offense in this case is actually good defense, such as improving infrastructure, education, health, living conditions, science, etc, etc. stateside so that we flourish more quickly than they do, but not being on top is not good for you.
I remember hearing in 2009-ish that wealth disparity in China was greater then than it had been just prior to the Cultural Revolution.
Yeah the Chinese Communist Party are probably realizing that their dreams of a thousand year dynasty are dead - at this point it is less "if" but "when" for their downfall.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPILhiTJv7E
Filming the police in any context is illegal in at least four US states.
Yeah not concerned.
It's a refurbished Soviet era floating money pit.
Yeah that's kind of what I was getting at. The amount of maintenance it takes to turn around an aircraft carrier is enormous. China certainly has the manpower, if not the experience, to accomplish it, but you can't keep it available for perpetual deployment unless you never take it out of the harbor.
So if they decide they want to use their aircraft carrier to assert some sort of strategic interest outside of their home waters, they have to sail it for two weeks, possibly arriving late, and then after accomplishing their objective, they have to sail it back and start refitting for their next deployment. At which point, congratulations, China! You have to go at least a few months without being able to assert any maritime interests while you fix whatever broke on your last deployment.
They get all of the costs of owning an aircraft carrier but none of the strategic benefits from operating one. Sun Tzu weeps.
Look we have an aircraft carrier too!
The West's biggest problem right now is the West.
China has fewer overseas interests than America, and especially Britain. Their need for a navy is less. However, aircraft carriers are the hallmark of a modern naval force and the cornerstone of American, British, French and other large and powerful navies.
Are they going to conquer the seas with one retrofit carrier? Absolutely not. What you should be concerned about is when China builds the infrastructure to handle this carrier. The support structure, the dockyards, the technologies to maintain them and the newer generation of carrier-based aircraft themselves.
Because when all that is in place, and it will be in place to support their first carrier, it will be quite easy (but costly) to simply make more carriers.
Remember, back in the day America only had one carrier. And people said the exact same things then : that it was an impotent gesture and ineffective in the light of the vast, overwhelming power of conventional battleship based fleets.
Building one carrier is not a cause for immediate concern, not that any expansion of the Chinese military should be taken as a warning anyway. But it is an indication that they intend, and are, modernizing their military forces to compete with modern opposing forces. Their army as it stands is geared toward land based insurgencies from splinter factions like Taiwan or Tibet (no seriously).
That kind of military has a use in the 1960s while they are still rapidly bringing infrastructure and development to the backwater Chinese villages. But it has no use should they intend to be a major player on the world stage. A carrier is a sign that they have longer term plans.
You're talking about the pinnacle of human science here. Under no stretch of the word is it "easy" to make a modern nuclear air craft carrier.
That was over 50 years ago. Things have changed.
...Also, not that it really matters, but that's not historically accurate. The Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 set strict limits on the construction of fleet aircraft carriers. We had one converted collier serving as a carrier at the time, U.S.S. Langley, and we were already in the process of converting more colliers, but the treaty prompted us to abandon that because we didn't want those collier conversions counting against our carrier tonnage.
Once we had a new program in place that was compliant with the treaty, we commissioned our first two fleet carriers, U.S.S. Saratoga and U.S.S. Lexington, within 30 days of one another.
I really wonder how they can continue to grow as a global power and continue that attitude as at its base it requires either a culture of anti-intellectualism or alarming amounts of cognitive dissonance to justify. So far their approach appears to be to woo western companies for just long enough to infiltrate them and then create their own entirely domestic copycats that fall along with the government in lock step. Look at what happened, and is still happening to Google for instance.
I really don't know if the Chinese will reject their government so easily. It'd take some kind of massive betrayal of trust to get enough of them to risk turning on it. It's not as bad as say, North Korea's indoctrination, but still seems pretty pervasive. I think the biggest threat China poses to the world is in showing a successful model for suppressing dissent and cultural liberalism under an iron fist without losing economic prosperity, and having that exported to other less savory political environments across the world that would love nothing more than to stamp out what they perceive as social deviance.
For instance - the move towards Thorium-based nuke plants over coal plants, in order to satisfy energy independence AND environmental concerns.
More recently, China's crackdown on drunk driving.
To some extent, aren't they hoping to channel frustration and discontent into nationalism?
I'd be less concerned about their materials and more concerned about their ability to design a naval platform that can outperform Soviet technology that's older than I am.