|
|
May 24, 2013
|
|
|
|
 Enough G-2 Talk AlreadyPosted on Nov 19, 2009I have never understood the widely touted idea or assumption of China-U.S. equality or partnership or joint rule of the world or superpower partnership that has dominated the press coverage of Barack Obama’s trip to Asia. In what ways do any of these descriptions really fit the situation? Soviet Russia and the United States could reasonably be spoken of as the “two superpowers” because they provided the dynamic ideological core of the Cold War, the two fundamental and indispensable antagonists—or so it seemed in the beginning, back in the 1950s and 1960s. But even then there was more hyperbole than substance in the description, although the two sides perhaps did not think so, since both were gratified with being one of the Two Greats of this world. In the China-America case, there is Prime Minister Wen Jiabao’s modest final statement that China remains a developing country, far from ready to strike a partnership with the U.S. The Chinese nation has indeed awakened, a moment when “the world would be sorry,” according to a warning from Napoleon. But, under the regime of Mao Zedong and his colleagues, it was mainly the awakened Chinese themselves and their neighbors who were given cause to be sorry. The agitation about China’s supposed challenge to the United States comes mainly from Americans and American-influenced commentators, and from Asians within the Chinese orbit, and their measure is that of scale and statistical potential, which are not really the decisive measures of world influence. Population is the criterion mainly cited, and China is expected to have a population in 2010 of 1.365 billion. The estimation for the United States in 2010 is 315 million—a difference of a billion people. Population is an advantage when it is made up of active, qualified and productive people. Advertisement Though China is developing its military power and has the largest army on earth, it is difficult to see the utility of this army other than as an instrument of intimidation of important regional enemies, which China lacks. There are the Korean and Taiwan flash points, and disputes over historical frontier boundaries, but there is also a history of Pacific accommodation. Its military is irrelevant to the United States, except for the small Chinese nuclear deterrent force. The United States is dynamic and belligerent, with an expansive ideology. This is why the Chinese treat Washington with great circumspection. As recently as 1952, Gen. Douglas MacArthur was advocating nuclear attack on the Chinese mainland to “win” the Korean War, and in 1963, when the Pentagon was successfully pressing Lyndon Johnson to commit combat troops to the Vietnam War, some officers recommended nuclear attack on North Vietnam—presumed at the time to be an instrument of Chinese Communist aggression. The American military record over the years since the Vietnam truce, and particularly since 9/11, is an intimidating one. It would not be prudent to provoke the United States. China finances the American trade deficit and is heavily invested in American dollars and assets, but this is as much a matter of Chinese weakness as of strength. China’s economy still relies on Western outsourcing and Western technology in order to claim a front-rank role of world economic influence, and relies on the confidence of Washington. It is diversifying its assets, but in regard to Washington continues to walk a line. Visit William Pfaff’s Web site at williampfaff.com. © 2009 Tribune Media Services Inc.  TAGS:
|
Marching in Chicago: Resisting Rahm Emanuel’s Neoliberal Savagery
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By denk, November 23, 2009 at 9:56 am Link to this comment
make way china, here comes the real g2
Report thisthe perfect match
**“Not only do our vital national interests coincide, but we share common values as well**
http://tinyurl.com/65g45j
By gerard, November 22, 2009 at 5:06 pm Link to this comment
China and the U.S. have a lot in common with all the rest of the world’s people. It’s not how many, but how much they have to eat, how much gas and oil they use, how much pollution they create, how much or how little they try to push other people around, how well-educated their people are, how skillful they are at foreign relations, how many have adequate health care and a house to live in. how many are filled with a spirit of hatred and revenge versus how many are willing to get along together and cooperate for the common good. And above all, how creative they are at solving problems and how much they care about the future.
Report thisBy cognitis1, November 21, 2009 at 9:47 pm Link to this comment
Note the Bauer (German-Americans) to always degrade
Report thiseither China or Japan, such as Dower (“Anglicized
from Dauer), Scheer and Pfaff. The area today called
“Germany” has been the most raped, pillaged, and
wasted area on the planet going back to at least
Caesar’s effortless invasions and slaughter of 100s
of 1000s of primitive illiterate German savages. In
1242 Mongols effortlessly annihilated a primitive
German army at Liegnitz and Krakow, and they
consequently wasted all the villages, burned all the
huts, slaughtered all the Bauer, and raped all the
women. The Bauer have throughout their whole history
been hapless and feckless victims—usually not even
combatants—and Germans have always been losers.
Since Japan captured financial primacy from the US in
1987 and has de facto controlled US’ money supply
through yen-carry trades, Bauer such as Dauer Scheer
Pfaff of course sense their inferiority, the same
inferiority injected into these savages by Romans,
Mongols/Huns/Ottomans, French, Anglo-Americans.
History is destiny, and Germans have always and shall
always be victims and losers.
By Zhubajie, November 21, 2009 at 6:00 pm Link to this comment
The hubris never fails to shock and awe. Two generations of erroneous policies going on to a third, and there is still the blind insistence that “they need us more than we need them ....” The truth is that America today is ran SOLELY for the benefit of the modern day equivalent of the money changers of biblical days. Until these same are throw out from the temple (the ruling classes), America has no hope. It will only get in even more debt. More education is not going to bring back jobs. Antarkic moves (closing the Customs borders and insisting on manufacturing everything in country) might work for a short while, but that would be like a cocaine high.
Report thisBy berniem, November 21, 2009 at 3:30 pm Link to this comment
The U.S. of A. will continue to be top dog on this here planet no matter how many crimes against humanity we commit, how many economies we wreck, or how much crap we unleash into the environment ‘cause we got the most dooms-day devices and looking back at Bush & Cheney plus all of the whack-job republicans and at least half of the dems. plus any number of nuts in the pentagram, we have lots of itchy fingers near the BUTTON! Who gonna mess wi’ dat?
Report thisBy MvGuy, November 21, 2009 at 10:49 am Link to this comment
Hey Baby, We’d make a nice couple, I mean..You need ME, to buy yer stuff and I need YOU… I mean..You gots trillions and we owe even…more… With your energetic work force we would be able to werk this deal for ever an ever….baby…...our love could greet the new millennium…You & Me baby..It’s love….
Report thisBy gerard, November 20, 2009 at 3:53 pm Link to this comment
If we were not spendig so many billions on wars, we wouldn’t be so heavily indebted to China. If we had not been able to export so many ideas and so much technology to China, they could not have developed, created jobs and raised Chinese living standards so rapidly. For that they are heavily indebted to us.
Report thisIn today’s world it’s not either this nation or that, but both China and the U.S. and everybody else as well. Modern technology dictates that we replace weapons of mass destruction with methods of mass production and distribution, replace winning wars with winning friends. I doubt this statement:
“The United States is dynamic and belligerent, with an expansive ideology. This is why the Chinese treat Washington with great circumspection.” Probably China accurately reads present U.S. as over-extended, and suffering from the results of unregulated capitalism, perhaps even on the verge of economic collapse. The “circumspection” might better be interpreted as traditional Asian reserve, which Obama was wise to defer to, by the way, when he bowed politely, and which has caused the American right wing such an access of agony. Gracelessness is the usual hallmark of the “average American” who travels Asia in a flowered hat or hairy-legged shorts, laughing loudly and paying too much for everything. The idea of the US “intimidating” China is in itself insulting.
By tropicgirl, November 20, 2009 at 1:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
“China’s economy still relies on Western outsourcing and Western technology in
order to claim a front-rank role of world economic influence, and relies on the
confidence of Washington. It is diversifying its assets, but in regard to
Washington continues to walk a line.”
This is a strange statement. Hopeychange is faced with the edge of a cliff that
our country is about to go over, because of outsourcing, offshoring, and so
on…
Yet he is over there now, making plans for MORE outsourcing etc. Any ordinary
person can see that this is absolutely sick and diseased thinking. The very fact
that we hail China as doing so well, AT OUR EXPENSE, yes, at our expense, and
that our manufacturing jobs are handed over to them on a silver platter, as if
they were “kings” is a little more than we can all take.
Apparently, William, you (and hopeychange) are more impressed with China
than getting your own American kids jobs.
You guys need to get out of the Washington cesspool a little more often. And
Report thisdon’t go telling the American people they are crazies when this kind of
thinking drives them that way, into the streets, and rightly so. You haven’t even
seen crazy yet, with this kind of talk.
By diman, November 20, 2009 at 12:01 pm Link to this comment
China is a developing country? Typical Asian modesty and a little bit odd, considering China being the major creditor to the United States of Alzheimers.
Report thisBy Elaine Supkis, November 19, 2009 at 10:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
This is certainly a sad editorial! China doesn’t have any more ‘enemies’ on its
borders thanks to an amazing series of powerful diplomatic initiatives by both
Hu and Wen. They seldom travel abroad except to sign even more treaties or
make more deals.
The US Presidents are now wholly dependent upon China’s good graces and
note that neither Bush nor Obama has gotten anything from the Chinese and
both ended up apologizing for rising government debts and other issues. We
are beggars at the Gates of the Dragon’s Lair.
Our military is bankrupting us. It operates nearly entirely on funds provided by
dire trade rivals like Japan and China. If we could no longer ship our IOUs to
Asia, we would have to cut the budget by about 50%. Or just print money which
would cause the dying dollar to swan dive to the bottom of the lake.
We are already seeing our political, economic and military power greatly
diminished. Think China is impressed with our invasions of Afghanistan and
Iraq???
HAHAHA. Talk about insane.
Report thisBy gerard, November 19, 2009 at 10:22 pm Link to this comment
It is probably safe to guess that 9 out of 10 young people in the world are not thinking about or preparing for continuing wars between nation states. If they are able to get any kind of adequate education they are thinking in terms of how to work in and for an international milieu of complicated inter-relationships and inter-dependencies, how to cooperate, how to adjudicate issues fairly, how to anticipate difficulties and establish procedures to deal with them.
They begin to sense that war as a practical instrument of foreign policy is a dead duck, a remnant from the unsustainable past. They are concerned about poverty, exploitation of the environment, how to treat political and cultural differences and economic and social injustices. They are two or three jumps ahead of knee-jerk fears engendered by old ways of thinking in terms of This versus That.
They wonder about how to ameliorate and conciliate, what new ways of thinking will be required of them if they are to solve the problems they will inherit from their contentious, dangerously out-of-date parents.
Report this