The moderator’s rebuttal remarks
Apr 20th 2012 | Matthew Symonds
A number of discernible themes are emerging from those of you who have joined the debate—some of which have also been picked up by our two protagonists. Among the commenters arguing against the motion, the point made most often and most vehemently is that Andrew Krepinevich (and anyone who broadly agrees with him) is guilty of hypocrisy and double standards. It is a view also expressed by Shen Dingli in his rebuttal. Essentially, the argument goes like this. Given that it is America that spends about twice as much of its (far greater) national wealth on its military than China does and given that it is America that appears to have a far greater appetite than China for fighting foreign wars, surely it is America that is the threat to stability rather than China.
Mr Shen is a bit more nuanced than some of you, saying that despite its “mixed record” and its unmatched military capabilities it is nonsense to suggest that America is a constant threat to the rest of the world. By extending the same logic to China, he suggests that it is also nonsense to claim that China, whose military build-up is primarily aimed at being able to defend its own territorial sovereignty (ie, Taiwan), is somehow a greater threat to stability. WnZfufaRdz reflects the view of quite a few commenters: “I see no threat from the Chinese. Only when they start talking and acting like the United States will I see them as a threat. Chinese arms spending would and should be expected to grow and modernise as its economy does, perhaps even a bit faster, considering the low technical level it has to rise from. The real country of concern for most people of the world is the US with its doctrine of pre-emptive war, interventions and invasions of other states, genocides of many peoples over the past sixty years etc. The alarmist proposition is an echo of earlier American fantasies and hysterias such as the Missile gap, the Domino theory and lately their Anti-terrorist campaign.”
The Term Paper on Chinas Threat Or Peaceful Rising
... armaments, China claims that the country feels threat from the side of the U.S.(especially after the military operation the Desert Storm when America ... Japan is considered to be the initiator of the Chinas threat concept. Actually, Japan was the country that pursued a ... slackened; After the collapse of the Soviet Union China remained the only great socialist country in the world and became the ...
A number of you who don’t see China as a threat pointed out that keeping the economy motoring and dealing with its many internal problems was a much higher priority for both the country’s leadership and ordinary Chinese than military adventurism. The claim was made succinctly by peace0out: “I hate to point this out, but if you have any idea how much the Chinese are obsessed with money and fame, you wouldn’t ever think about China as a threat to stability. Leaderships care more about economic growth than anything. She wouldn’t do anything that will harm her economy. That is the biggest reason why Taiwan is still not forced to return.” Others felt that after the humiliations and invasions of the 19th and 20th centuries it was only to be expected that China would want its economic success to be reflected in strong defence forces.
Another view expressed by several commenters was that unless one’s definition of stability was a Pax Americana that everyone kowtowed to (Headlessly Running Around), then China’s military rise was actually helpful to stability in the region because it would balance American power. America, at least two of you suggested, was the real destabilising force because it was trying to get its allies to gang up on China and thus provoke China into reacting.
Many of those commenting in favour of the motion were, however, unimpressed by the idea of moral equivalence between China and America, believing that while the latter was far from perfect, China’s behaviour in a number of areas made it untrustworthy and inherently threatening. glc1973 wrote: “Does America have self-interests? For sure. But the track records between the nations aren’t even close. Does America actively crush dissent, routinely flout international agreements and conventions on human rights, trade, intellectual rights or methodically threaten neighbors (Taiwan) or internal free political expression? Um, no. Does China? Yep. China’s actions speak as loud, if not more loudly than its soothing words conveying its peaceful intentions. There are few checks and balances within its opaque decision-making process to assure neighbors of its intentions or strategic goals, while plenty of its actions around the globe that are cause for very reasonable people to worry.” Others drew attention to China’s troubling record as a proliferator of nuclear-weapons technology and its support for brutal regimes, such as North Korea, Iran and Syria. The concerns about China’s absence of democracy and lack of any transparency in its policymaking worries a lot of you and is reflected in Mr Krepinevich’s reply to Mr Shen that having faith in China’s good intentions would mean ignoring the old adage that “capabilities change slowly, but intentions can change overnight”, especially in non-democratic states where power rests in the hands of an unaccountable elite.
The Essay on How China became Chinese
Jared’s Diamond’s “Guns, Germ and Steel” is an historical narrative that focuses on alternate explanations to the rise and fall of civilizations and the development of cultures and societies by tracing evolutions and nuances in world and human history dating as far back as 13,000 years ago to the present. It is an historical treatise that moves away from a largely Eurocentric model of the world ...
Quite a number of you, especially some of those from the region itself, took issue with Mr Shen’s picture of a China that works hard to find peaceful and just resolutions to disputes with its neighbours. compass2k wrote: “In practice the Chinese reliably seek confrontation—backing drunken fisherman against the Japanese coastguard (and embargoing rare earths as a follow-up) and provocations against the Philippines (right now) Vietnam and against unarmed US vessels—that’s real behaviour not the cherry-picked examples of the Chinese mouthpiece. The Chinese Communist Party has talked peace and walked confrontation and bullying. When that stops the region might start to listen.”
During the next stage of the debate, it would be good if Professor Shen and those of you to see who are convinced that China is not a threat to regional stability address why it is that such a large proportion of its neighbours appear to think otherwise and what China could and should do to change their minds. Those on the other side of the debate and Mr Krepinevich need to deal more convincingly with the charge that America’s commitment to maintaining its ability to project power in East Asia is less about nobly reassuring nervous allies than the old-fashioned realpolitik of keeping down a competitor for influence.
The Term Paper on Tony Wang China Chinese Kfc
... can be divided into two major periods, Imperial China and Communist China. The modern Chinese society can be defined as a combination of ... were strengthened with communism and used into the development of China. The Chinese society had become a combination of strong family and ... manager for KFC experienced during his venture with the Chinese. KFC in China In 1986, Tony Wang was Vice President of the ...
