Hi Knarfo
Be assured Gloabal Strategic Competition is very real and here! The targets of it primarily are the various despots in the developing world, who are being offered to different models for ecconomic and social development.
Of course the competition works on may levels - as many in fact in each country, where any ministry operate any particular policy. The philisophical level, promoted; albeit cynically, provides a popular and morally righteous platform, with which a government can persue its more important and practical policies.
Most despots are most concerned with keeping and exercising power. China's non critical approach to world trade, offers a very real alternative to the Wests "reform or enjoy a colourful revolution" strategy. The key to the competition is of course which sides policy will previal in any contested, target country.
I rather fear that the notion that China and its SCO allies are moving anywhere towards Western Liberal Democracy has more grounds in wishful thinking than reality. What changes thier may have been are probably little more than window dressing or a local solution to little local difficulties.
Journalists do screw up, we will have to wait and see just how accident prone they are becomming.
Now obiously no politician is going to stand up and say I wish China was a basket case, as the trade issue is just too important. Recently however a number of commentators have openly discussed the threat of China as an Authoritarian alternative to the succesful economic model. These tend however to be late night highbrow radio programmes on the BBC.
To reiterate Despots enjoy power and dislike challenges to it. This was the point of French unrest points, simply to compare the Uzbek response (or the Chinese Tianamin Square response) to that of the French (or any other Western nation). As most Despots are not Sociologists from Helsinki, I think the point is clear.
To put this in context then, this has been about a particulat symptom of "Arrogance and Vanity" in which the West might believe it can effect regime change at will on developing nations (China included) and delude themselves; based on the scantiest of evidence, that their policy is succeding, whilst ignoring a great welter on contrary evidence, that clearly demonstrates that it is not.
If todays current political climate in the West is business as usual, do not be surprised if many developing nations take their business elsewhere!!
Be assured Gloabal Strategic Competition is very real and here! The targets of it primarily are the various despots in the developing world, who are being offered to different models for ecconomic and social development.
Of course the competition works on may levels - as many in fact in each country, where any ministry operate any particular policy. The philisophical level, promoted; albeit cynically, provides a popular and morally righteous platform, with which a government can persue its more important and practical policies.
Most despots are most concerned with keeping and exercising power. China's non critical approach to world trade, offers a very real alternative to the Wests "reform or enjoy a colourful revolution" strategy. The key to the competition is of course which sides policy will previal in any contested, target country.
I rather fear that the notion that China and its SCO allies are moving anywhere towards Western Liberal Democracy has more grounds in wishful thinking than reality. What changes thier may have been are probably little more than window dressing or a local solution to little local difficulties.
Journalists do screw up, we will have to wait and see just how accident prone they are becomming.
Now obiously no politician is going to stand up and say I wish China was a basket case, as the trade issue is just too important. Recently however a number of commentators have openly discussed the threat of China as an Authoritarian alternative to the succesful economic model. These tend however to be late night highbrow radio programmes on the BBC.
To reiterate Despots enjoy power and dislike challenges to it. This was the point of French unrest points, simply to compare the Uzbek response (or the Chinese Tianamin Square response) to that of the French (or any other Western nation). As most Despots are not Sociologists from Helsinki, I think the point is clear.
To put this in context then, this has been about a particulat symptom of "Arrogance and Vanity" in which the West might believe it can effect regime change at will on developing nations (China included) and delude themselves; based on the scantiest of evidence, that their policy is succeding, whilst ignoring a great welter on contrary evidence, that clearly demonstrates that it is not.
If todays current political climate in the West is business as usual, do not be surprised if many developing nations take their business elsewhere!!
