The future of China's relationship with the West.

Drewcifer

Agent of Karma
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
3,748
Location
Minneapolis
It seems that over the next 20 to 30 years China's relationship with the west will become more complicated. This issue seems to be on the back burner right now but that could easily change over night. China has tremendous economic problems to solve but at the same time has one of the highest economic growth rates in the world. It suffered great humiliation at the hands of the western powers in the last 300 years but appears to be slowly working towards regaining the status it had for most of the history of civilization.

I think the Communist party is in a very difficult position. They have liberalised much of the economy but are unable to reform the unproductive state sector because that would mean that huge numbers of people would become unemployed. I think they fear that mass unemployment could lead to social chaos. I think it's leaders probably fear something as chaotic and deadly as the Cultural Revolution returning. Though I am a strong supporter of democracy I really can't blame them for those fears. In many ways they are riding a tiger - as soon as they dismount they will be eaten by the thing that has carried them this far. Even if they wanted to institute democracy it could be suicide for them to do it.

We in the west like to think of democracy as the great uniter of people across national borders. But it is possible that a greater democratization in China could stoke the fires of an assertive nationalism given China's previous place in the world and the role the western powers played in reducing it? How will it's neighbors react to a newly assertive China?

Personally I hope that we can deal with the problems in a low profile way so that we don't back China into a corner where it feels like it must do something catastrophic to save face. Though I firmly support people's right to democratic self determination I fear that Taiwan may become needlessly bold and percipitate a war. Currently we have the fiction of one China but the practical reality of two. Under this system they both get to determine their own policies but nobody is embarassed so war is avoided. It is a messy, smelly and unpleseant solution that works. Will a Taiwanese declaration of independence push the region over a precepice? Since Taiwan is a democracy and an ally, the US would certainly defend it if it were attacked. I hope that China, Taiwan and the US can come to a behind the scenes agreement on this issue. For Taiwan the best solution is probably just to wait the decades it will take for China to become a full fledged liberal democracy and to not do anything foolish before. If that happens will two Chinas become one under some very loose federal system? I think so. I could be wrong.

Also, what is the European role? Is it anything beyond investment and commerce?
 
Ultimately China will have to democratize and will have to undergo some painful moments, like India did with partition, the American and British Civil Wars, etc. It is a fact of history that democracy does'nt descend silently and behind the scenes, but comes out of a strong desire of the people backed by action.
The Chinese right now are happy to maintain a quid pro quo vis-a-vis democracy, but in a society where more and more people are making money, yet more and more people are also falling into poverty, without democracy, is a catalyst for disaster.
It is a choice between gradual democratic changes with the obvious birth pains or the sudden catastrophic revolution.
 
Today (coincedence????), there is Chinese delegation in Paris. Rumours go the sanctions (weapon embargo, due to 1989 student protest ending in Beijing) versus China will be lifted. The EU ministers have not yet made a decision,but it is expected soon.
 
Originally posted by Stapel
Today (coincedence????), there is Chinese delegation in Paris. Rumours go the sanctions (weapon embargo, due to 1989 student protest ending in Beijing) versus China will be lifted. The EU ministers have not yet made a decision,but it is expected soon.
I agree Stapel.
I really don't like at all the behaviour of the French President and the Mayor of Paris about it. Just to sell few Airbus planes, we are ready to make a huge celebration of the chinese New Year on the Champs-Elysées and we even enlightened the Eiffel Tower in Red.

Well my main trouble about it is that we don't need warmer relations with China right now, but with the United States. Instead of celebrating the Chinese New Year on the Champs-Elysées, we should have celebrated Thanksgiving on the Champs-Elysées.

However, many members of the Parliament will boycott the speech of Hu Jintao in the French National Assembly. That just proves some people still remember Hu Jintao is a dictator and not an elected Chief of State.
 
Originally posted by Marla_Singer
However, many members of the Parliament will boycott the speech of Hu Jintao in the French National Assembly. That just proves some people still remember Hu Jintao is a dictator and not an elected Chief of State.

Just a word on an off-topic area: I don't mean to pick on you or the French government, but I wish they'd do the same with Robert Mugabe.

China will eventually become integrated into the West. The Communist Party will fall, and it's only a matter of time until it does. However, the collapse of the Communist Party will lead to true democratic reforms rather than a kind of half-democratic authoritarian nationalism that we see (sadly) in Russia today.
 
I'm afraid the west will eventually be at war with China, probably within our lifetimes.

I would like to be optimistic, but the Chinese leadership will not allow any reduction of their powers, so they trample human rights, do not allow any freedom of the press, and silence any form of religious choice. In addition, they have no labor laws to speak of, are extremely nationalistic in their high tariffs (try to import any goods to China), and do not allow any form of dissent.

Add to this the fact that the Chinese government is building the world's largest OFFENSIVE military. What other purpose(s) does a million+ man standing army have other than war? And what purpose does building technology that has no other purpose than to defeat the western advance towards high-tech weapons? Surely China is not concerned that the west will attack them!

They are not building a massive military for self-defense purposes. To believe that is the definition of naive.

No, they are building a massive army for war, plain and simple.
 
Originally posted by rmsharpe

China will eventually become integrated into the West. The Communist Party will fall, and it's only a matter of time until it does. However, the collapse of the Communist Party will lead to true democratic reforms rather than a kind of half-democratic authoritarian nationalism that we see (sadly) in Russia today.

I doubt the ability of democracy to work in China due to the largly uneducated masses.
 
The Chinese government is a far more serious threat than is commonly portrayed. They make weapons deals with virtually any and every state that will dole out the cash or trade something back.

Rogue, anti-Western, and terrorist states receive huge amounts of weapons from China. China-Iran-Pakistan form an arms linkage and weapons technology trading bloc. In addition to all this they have definitely stolen thermo nuclear technology from the United States. An observation of some of China's nuclear weapons can reveal this is almost certainly the case. They openly define the United States as their number one enemy.

The government has been investing huge effort into police forces and anti revolution forces. This occurs apparantely to prevent anything like what happened to the Soviet Union from happening within that area. The Tawain issue may be solved peacefully however that is probably only if Tawain eventually decides it can join China, which is unlikely unless they are willing to go for an autocracy. The nuclear arsenal continues to grow fairly rapidly although it is still aways back from the United States and Russia.

It is very likely they will become more virulently opposed to the West, and particularly to the United States as they gain military power. The already are very friendly with anti-Western governments and vigoursly work with many. The big question is what will happen with Russia in this situation? Will they oppose, remain neutral, or join with China?
 
I still see the Taiwan Issue as one of the Major potential International Conflicts that could lead to WW3, I think with Nato, etc on one side, vs. China, and some smaller surrounding countries. It is a very dangorous situation. I know for sure that we should not difuse this situation by arming Taiwan, but by negotiating, but being prepared for War should negotiations fail. This is truly the best way to conduct business. I also think that China's Communist government has been a good thing for the country. China needs a strong Central Government to avoid being split along old cultural and ethnic lines. The Chinese people would be MUCH worse off is Democracy was implemented, and sisn't work, as in Warlord trying to chop up China and make their own country. On the other hand, Democracy might work fine, and be good for the Chinese people.

Another note of interest is China's massive population, and how the Chinese Authorities are trying to curb that population. Under a Democratic Government, is would be undemocratic to try to force the Chinese people to have only 1 or 2 children, but having more then 2 children would also be ruinous to China. So, In a way, China needs to be Communist, as much of a bad system that may be. Tje West should realize that the Chinese Authorities haven't done all that bad a of a job governing the country. They have instituted reforms to the economy, which is good. The West should just try to accept China as she is, and stop trying to change China into a Democratic nation, rather wait until the timing is better.
 
Communist countries are well known for inflating the officially reported literacy rates. Many smaller towns in China has a man or group of men who write all the outgoing letters and reads people's incoming letters to them.
 
Most Chinese kids go to primary school. So they are literate. But at primary school level whehter they'll care who is the president is another matter.

China has 1 million soldiers vs 1 billion people. That's 1 protects 1000. What's the ratio for America? or Britain or Japan?

On one hand people say Chinese millitary is too advanced and aggressive, on the other hand they say their equipment are in the 50's and can't beat an island so close to it. Pretty interesting.

Taiwan's real name is 'republic of China', Taiwan's constitutions says 'one China', their sole purpose is to 'unite China', 97% of people live there are Chinese. Mr Sun, who is the father of modern china, they hang his picture in their paliament. Even communist don't hang his or Mao's picture in the paliament. And also, Taiwan's democracy was achieved in a peaceful way. Before that, Jiang was a dictator just like Mao, and he passed his power to his son, even Mao didn't do that.
 
Originally posted by Double Barrel
I'm afraid the west will eventually be at war with China, probably within our lifetimes.

Add to this the fact that the Chinese government is building the world's largest OFFENSIVE military. What other purpose(s) does a million+ man standing army have other than war? And what purpose does building technology that has no other purpose than to defeat the western advance towards high-tech weapons? Surely China is not concerned that the west will attack them!

They are not building a massive military for self-defense purposes. To believe that is the definition of naive.

No, they are building a massive army for war, plain and simple.

I won't argue with the first part but I found this one not funded. The US spend much, much, much more than China on military. So, by your logic, they seek to conquer the world?

I mean, USA has border with Canada and Mexico.
China has border with Russia, India, North Korea, Mongolia, Viet Nam, Laos, Burma, Buthan, Pakistan, etc.

I ask you: who need a bigger army?
 
Originally posted by tonberry
I won't argue with the first part but I found this one not funded. The US spend much, much, much more than China on military. So, by your logic, they seek to conquer the world?

I mean, USA has border with Canada and Mexico.
China has border with Russia, India, North Korea, Mongolia, Viet Nam, Laos, Burma, Buthan, Pakistan, etc.

I ask you: who need a bigger army?

Nice try at a straw man, but you missed the point. :rolleyes:

You say by my logic, but what point of my logic do you not understand? China has a 1.2 million man standing army! The U.S. does NOT have a military even close to that size. My point was NEVER about the amount of money spent, because that is irrelevant (especially considering that the U.S. has an extremely high tech military, and that fact alone accounts for most the massive budget).

Furthermore, you do not seem to realize that a 1.2 million man army is built solely to be offensive in nature, as it can absorb massive losses that no other military in the world could match man-for-man.

And I'll ask it one more time (but I'll type really slow this time so you can understand ;)): what purpose does building technology that has no other purpose than to defeat the western advance towards high-tech weapons?

China's research into high-tech military equipment is focussed on ways to defeat U.S. weapons, so we would be forced to fight a conventional war that we could not possibly win.
 
From what I have read the Chinese army the, People's Liberation Army, has a large degree of freedom from the government (though not totally independent). Supposedly they have set up various front companies to be used in arms transactions with various states and "elements".
 
Top Bottom