The Once and Future
The Once and Future Superpower
Why China Won’t Overtake the United States
By and
After two and a half decades, is the United States’ run as the coming to an end? Many say yes, seeing ready to catch up to or even surpass the United States in the near future. By many measures, after all, China’s economy is on track to become the world’s biggest, and even if its growth slows, it will still outpace that of the United States for many years. Its coffers overflowing, Beijing has used its new wealth to attract friends, deter enemies, modernize its military, and aggressively assert sovereignty claims in its periphery. For many, therefore, the question is not whether China will become a superpower but just how soon
the core view and the core message are: the USA will remain to be the world's sole superpower for a very long time, hence, everyone should be careful not to take the wrong side.
the authors have gone a long way to belittle China's progress in science & technology, especially on defense related technology.
this reminds me of another once influencial paper on the Foreign Affairs by Gerald Segal in 1999.
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
Does China Matter?
By
About the Author:
Gerald Segal is Director of Studies at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London and co-author, with Barry Buzan, of Anticipating the Future.
MIDDLE KINGDOM, MIDDLE POWER
Does China matter? No, it is not a silly question -- merely one that is not asked often enough. Odd as it may seem, the country that is home to a fifth of humankind is overrated as a market, a power, and a source of ideas. At best, China is a second-rank middle power that has mastered the art of diplomatic theater: it has us willingly suspending our disbelief in its strength. In fact, China is better understood as a theoretical power -- a country that has promised to deliver for much of the last 150 years but has consistently disappointed. After 50 years of Mao's revolution and 20 years of reform, it is time to leave the theater and see China for what it is. Only when we finally understand how little China matters will we be able to craft a sensible policy toward it.
DOES CHINA MATTER ECONOMICALLY?
China, unlike Russia or the Soviet Union before it, is supposed to matter because it is already an economic powerhouse. Or is it that China is on the verge of becoming an economic powerhouse, and you must be in the engine room helping the Chinese to enjoy the benefits to come? Whatever the spin, you know the argument: China is a huge market, and you cannot afford to miss it (although few say the same about India). The recently voiced "Kodak version" of this argument is that if only each Chinese will buy one full roll of film instead
By
About the Author:
Gerald Segal is Director of Studies at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London and co-author, with Barry Buzan, of Anticipating the Future.
MIDDLE KINGDOM, MIDDLE POWER
Does China matter? No, it is not a silly question -- merely one that is not asked often enough. Odd as it may seem, the country that is home to a fifth of humankind is overrated as a market, a power, and a source of ideas. At best, China is a second-rank middle power that has mastered the art of diplomatic theater: it has us willingly suspending our disbelief in its strength. In fact, China is better understood as a theoretical power -- a country that has promised to deliver for much of the last 150 years but has consistently disappointed. After 50 years of Mao's revolution and 20 years of reform, it is time to leave the theater and see China for what it is. Only when we finally understand how little China matters will we be able to craft a sensible policy toward it.
DOES CHINA MATTER ECONOMICALLY?
China, unlike Russia or the Soviet Union before it, is supposed to matter because it is already an economic powerhouse. Or is it that China is on the verge of becoming an economic powerhouse, and you must be in the engine room helping the Chinese to enjoy the benefits to come? Whatever the spin, you know the argument: China is a huge market, and you cannot afford to miss it (although few say the same about India). The recently voiced "Kodak version" of this argument is that if only each Chinese will buy one full roll of film instead
I agree with your approach of being selective. I would do the same. It's just sometimes I think if everyone ignores it, it would be like locking up a prisoner in solitary cell without window and even a peephole, psychologically it is more horrifying than taking the life.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
The belittling of China is all about their own insecurity. We see it in the US Presidential election where the establishment is in panic over the threat to their own existence. They lived in denial. And now true democracy in action frightens them. Same thing with how they see China. All they believed that secured their superiority is in question. These articles are purely for domestic audiences only. It's not China that will change it. The greatest threat to the establishment is their own people bringing them down because their system is being challenge by China. Naturally in a democratic society, people will think they have a right to change the system that doesn't work and only serves the few the most. People in control don't like change so they want everything to remain the same.
It's just like a recent article about someone in China who used Baidu to find some alternate medical treatment to treat cancer and the person died. The US media was declaring the end of Baidu and how all of China was outraged. Back to their Arab Spring wishful thinking tactics... Like US search engines don't have results of medical quackery? Only Google in China would be responsible enough to look out for what's best for the Chinese people... Just like what happens in the US, they want to tell people what to think. The old message that the Chinese people can't take care of themselves so it's their altruistic justified duty to take over China.
Why would the New York Times publish an article on how DJI gives customer data in China over to the government. If you follow the stereotypes this shouldn't be surprising. iPhones are made in China. Aren't they worried that the Chinese inserted stealthy spyware? It's because DJI is a successful Chinese company dominating the international commercial drone market that it started that's hot and popular in the world. What they said was impossible for China has happened. It was an industry that China didn't jump on the bandwagon and copied. DJI started it and the world embraced it. Like I've said before, as Chinese companies and technology rise, watch how they will work to undermine it.
If their superiority was assured, why would they need work to undermine China's business and technology inroads. And it doesn't help when the establishment is threatened by the domestic political earthquakes as the rise of non-establishment Presidential candidates are a threat to the status quo.
It's just like a recent article about someone in China who used Baidu to find some alternate medical treatment to treat cancer and the person died. The US media was declaring the end of Baidu and how all of China was outraged. Back to their Arab Spring wishful thinking tactics... Like US search engines don't have results of medical quackery? Only Google in China would be responsible enough to look out for what's best for the Chinese people... Just like what happens in the US, they want to tell people what to think. The old message that the Chinese people can't take care of themselves so it's their altruistic justified duty to take over China.
Why would the New York Times publish an article on how DJI gives customer data in China over to the government. If you follow the stereotypes this shouldn't be surprising. iPhones are made in China. Aren't they worried that the Chinese inserted stealthy spyware? It's because DJI is a successful Chinese company dominating the international commercial drone market that it started that's hot and popular in the world. What they said was impossible for China has happened. It was an industry that China didn't jump on the bandwagon and copied. DJI started it and the world embraced it. Like I've said before, as Chinese companies and technology rise, watch how they will work to undermine it.
If their superiority was assured, why would they need work to undermine China's business and technology inroads. And it doesn't help when the establishment is threatened by the domestic political earthquakes as the rise of non-establishment Presidential candidates are a threat to the status quo.
I agree with your approach of being selective. I would do the same. It's just sometimes I think if everyone ignores it, it would be like locking up a prisoner in solitary cell without window and even a peephole, psychologically it is more horrifying than taking the life.
Ahh ... Papillon. Yes each tool has its own use given the context. Totally agreed.
That's a reasonable position to start. So we have to fact check to see if China is going down that path.
US base money, or monetary base in technical terms, is $38.69 trillions two weeks ago.
Now let's see Japan's monetary base end of April 2016. At today's rate, it stands at $32.40 trillions. Mind you Japan's economy is roughly only a quarter of US economy.
Now lets see what's China's money base, which is more than half the size of US and twice as big as Japan's. Her end of Feb 2016 standing , at current rate, is at 0.9855 trillion.
So now we have a clear picture of who is printing out money like crazy and who is acting responsibly.
For all those naysayers, there are a lot of firepower in China's toolbox that can literally shake the earth you are standing on. If you know what details to look for, you won't count China out, she is just warming up. So let's keep all things in balanced perspectives shall we?
Almost all of your post, fellow members of this board, Chinese enthusiasts might be wrong extrapolating current trends into the future decades. All of you are examples of 'Western thinking' - once you see a straight line on the graph you're extrapolating it into infinity.
But...
China is going to reach it's peak soon population wise. After that it will start to collapse. This process will be much faster than Japanese model. I think it will be closer to South Korean peak where there are LESS babies born today per 1000 people than in Japan ALREADY for few years! All of that in just what? 20 years? 25 years? Japan enjoyed that process for more than 100 years with a slight detour after WWII thanks to smart people who governed the country (similar to Germany, France and GB did much worse in that aspect recently). All of that time span compressed 5-6 times! That's a real model - more money doesn't mean exponential expansion or progress. Many scholars predict the trend not only for China but ENTIRE Asian continent.
What does it mean? China of course won't become Vietnam by the year 2050. It still will be one of the two most potent countries in the world. But their contenders won't be US by that time. Thanks to US policies of today the American population should grow steadily but of course US in transition time right now where it should become one of the leading powers, not the only one.
Who will be the main competitor of China by that time? Of course India. They're far behind China which is half between 'devoloping nation' and 'Western countries' (closer to the latter now I suppose). So it will be slower progress but it should last much longer. So China-India 'dynamism' in the future decades should be the main effort for Chinese diplomacy.
Just try to think out of the box about the future. Numbers predicted by many sciencists might be wrong but the trends should fall into the pattern. How the world superpowers will look in 30 years? First China, closely followed by second India, third US? In Asia? China, India and Japan (still), Indonesia? Philippines? What do you think about future?
But...
China is going to reach it's peak soon population wise. After that it will start to collapse. This process will be much faster than Japanese model. I think it will be closer to South Korean peak where there are LESS babies born today per 1000 people than in Japan ALREADY for few years! All of that in just what? 20 years? 25 years? Japan enjoyed that process for more than 100 years with a slight detour after WWII thanks to smart people who governed the country (similar to Germany, France and GB did much worse in that aspect recently). All of that time span compressed 5-6 times! That's a real model - more money doesn't mean exponential expansion or progress. Many scholars predict the trend not only for China but ENTIRE Asian continent.
What does it mean? China of course won't become Vietnam by the year 2050. It still will be one of the two most potent countries in the world. But their contenders won't be US by that time. Thanks to US policies of today the American population should grow steadily but of course US in transition time right now where it should become one of the leading powers, not the only one.
Who will be the main competitor of China by that time? Of course India. They're far behind China which is half between 'devoloping nation' and 'Western countries' (closer to the latter now I suppose). So it will be slower progress but it should last much longer. So China-India 'dynamism' in the future decades should be the main effort for Chinese diplomacy.
Just try to think out of the box about the future. Numbers predicted by many sciencists might be wrong but the trends should fall into the pattern. How the world superpowers will look in 30 years? First China, closely followed by second India, third US? In Asia? China, India and Japan (still), Indonesia? Philippines? What do you think about future?