China's Place as an Emerging Power

[Blitzo]

Ever heard of the korean war?

Yeah isn't that the one when they went to war because their didn't want american/un forces pushing all the way up to the yalu river (which would give it no buffer against hostile forces)?
Pretty conservative if you ask me, espicially considering that China didn't really have a hand in the North's initial invasion south.

when you consider a large chunck of their population is starving there are better things they should be focusing on then "flexing".

A large chunk being what? in 2004 10% of the population lived under the poverty line, compared to 64% in 1981 -- and that's why there was such a stagnation in military development around the eighties -- the PRC knew they couldn't afford the kind of military they wanted when the majority of their population was "starving".

Fastforward to 2010/2011, china is now the second largest economy in the world so it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that they want to grow their military to suit their much changed needs, needs which their current military can barely handle. China's navy in future should/would definitely be larger than Japan's simply due a greater economic size, not to mention the lack of instigating a world war which they lost and subsequently was forced to de-militarize (implying China is more justified to flat tops than Japan would be).

PS: Also if you believe 10% of the population in poverty (now probably less) doesn't justify "flexing" then I suggest you look to a certain south western neighbour to China, a certain India? They've got... what 37% of the population in poverty while they're planning at least two aircraft carriers and they are undergoing a naval and air force expansion as radical as China's own. I don't want this post to spark A vs B, but really man you have to be less biased...

(rant over )

 

[Wall83]

Can I just re-state the need for civility here, as GF did on the previous page, before this into an all-out derailing of the thread. If people want to take not-so-veiled shots at the foreign policies and government behaviour of various nations, Western or Eastern, please don't do it here. It's not a political forum, nor is it the topic of discussion, so if we can steer it back to the Chinese Navy, thanks guys. I'm not taking sides here - rather pre-empting any further disagreement.

Hear, hear

 

[rip]

Have you ever thought China is always the quite one. They don't mess in other people's affairs or assert too much. That has been Chinese culture. Chinese people are placid race. Just cause they don't want to bully another country or stick their nose into other people's matter doesn't make them weak, scared or pushover. They will only act when its in their nations interest. Unlike some other countries who go to war over some imaginary generated threat that they made up themselves. Its easy to talk when the country isn't armed with nukes and is smack bang right beside you (China).

Your comments have left me confused and bewildered and they make no since to me. Pursuing the art of civility is not always easy but I will try.

As to you question and I quote “Have you ever thought China is always the quite one?” The answer is simply No. As to your statement “Chinese people are a placid race.” Again I disagree. Have you ever meet a Chinese person? In my experience if they pretend to be placid, it is only as a ploy to take advantage of you is some way; it is a tactic they sometime use, it is not a state of mind. The Chinese and oriental people in general, are just the very opposite of being serene or placid. There is nothing weak, mild, or unfocused about them. This is not to say that they are in anyway bad or are they unnecessarily dangerous but just a statement of who they are and what their culture demands from them. I don’t want to get in to any ethnic profiling or stereotyping here but to assume that they are in some way significantly very different from anyone else is not only unproductive but just silly. They are just people after all; expect them to act just like people always act both good and bad.


As to you statement “They don't mess in other people's affairs or assert too much” Again I disagree. They do not at present have the same world ranging interests that the US and Europe have but that is changing. But where they do have an interest they are willing to interfere in other peoples business, they just do it more stealthily. Transparency or even open honesty in ether their aims, goals, or their actions is not a notable Chinese virtue. As China extends its interests in the world they will put their noses in new peoples business more often. Why because it is a consequence of the ever shrinking world of business, communications, and politics we all have to live with. Soon everybody will be in everybody’s business if we like or not.

As to your statement “Just cause they don't want to bully another country or stick their nose into other people's matter doesn't make them weak, scared or pushover” is more complicated issue.

First, yes they do want to bully others and they think it is their right because of their increased world stature. They also think that other people do not have the right to criticize them or their actions. If you were to make the case that many of those criticisms were invalid or unfair I could agree with you just as I would state that many of the criticisms made of my country are not valid but we don’t get our panties all in a wad about it. Take the example of the current Nobel peace prize as a case in point. Personally I think the Nobel committee for the peace prize, all live in fantasy land of their very own creation but there is no reason to claim that they are interfering in China’s internal affairs. The greater the country, the more prominent they are in the world the more criticisms they will receive if it is justified or not. Live with it. It comes with territory.

But there is another more fundamental issue that needs to be discussed. We in the West believe that with increased power in the world comes with it increased responsibility for the state of the world. In the East they have traditionally believed that with power comes nothing but more privilege. The US created a system after World War II which allowed for and even encouraged the advancement of other peoples, a system that would not have to be overthrown so as to allow others to advance and hence make the future always unstable and full of inevitable conflict. A system that China has used effectivly up to this point.

The US did not pursue the historical policy of previous great powers like (Great Brittan and others before it) of trying to keep all possible rivals to its position kept down. China still thinks it is living in the old world and not in the new one and it doesn’t know how to behave properly. If the US had perused the historical policies of great powers did in the past it would have fallen long before now. The world will not allow that attitude ever again and will turn against any who tries, as I think we might be seeing right now if China does not learn to think differently.


Second, I am not the foolish boy who claim that China is scared or a push over. Nor do I think that is inevitable that there must be uncontrollable conflict as China takes a more prominent place in the world. It does hold within its borders one out of four people alive on the planet today after all. That is a very hard thing to discount. The next ten years we will see if China's world view of how to act grows up to be moderen one and it find its proper place in the world based upon its economy, science, and its sustainable political ideas, but not based primarily because of its military power.

China has every right to have a navy. It has every right to have a large and modern navy. It is what it intends to do with that navy that has the world on edge. Since it is not democracy and its internal political affairs are always murky at best, we outside of china will take prudent precautions untill we are sure.

 

[Blitzo]

]As to you question and I quote “Have you ever thought China is always the quite one?” The answer is simply No. As to your statement “Chinese people are a placid race.” Again I disagree. Have you ever meet a Chinese person? In my experience if they pretend to be placid, it is only as a ploy to take advantage of you is some way; it is a tactic they sometime use, it is not a state of mind. The Chinese and oriental people in general, are just the very opposite of being serene or placid. There is nothing weak, mild, or unfocused about them. This is not to say that they are in anyway bad or are they unnecessarily dangerous but just a statement of who they are and what their culture demands from them.

Thanks a lot, now I finally know why I am so placid, it's to take advantage of those around me!

Seriously that's as bad a generalisation if not worse than HKDSUs... I won't say that all Chinese people are placid or quiet, but in terms of the actual conflicts the PRC has been in... it's fairly limited (though that could also relate to their military capaiblity but also has to do with policy.)

I don’t want to get in to any ethnic profiling or stereotyping here but to assume that they are in some way significantly very different from anyone else is not only unproductive but just silly. They are just people after all; expect them to act just like people always act both good and bad.

But there is another more fundamental issue that needs to be discussed. We in the West believe that with increased power in the world comes with it increased responsibility for the state of the world. In the East they have traditionally believed that with power comes nothing but more privilege. The US created a system after World War II which allowed for and even encouraged the advancement of other peoples, a system that would not have to be overthrown so as to allow others to advance and hence make the future always unstable and full of inevitable conflict. A system that China has used effectivly up to this point.

I'm not sure if that's ethnic profiling or stereotyping but it's certainly a generalisation. Espicially " In the East they have traditionally believed that with power comes nothing but more privilege"

I'm not sure which traditions you're talking about.

First, yes they do want to bully others and they think it is their right because of their increased world stature.

By bully, do you mean diplomatic pressure, or something like sending future aircraft battle groups to train of the coast of a far off country to project power?
(And I don't think any country thinks "yay we're powerful/strong now, we now have the right to bully others". It's more like "yay we're powerful/strong now, we have the option to pursue our national interests".)

They also think that other people do not have the right to criticize them or their actions. If you were to make the case that many of those criticisms were invalid or unfair I could agree with you just as I would state that many of the criticisms made of my country are not valid but we don’t get our panties all in a wad about it.

It's hard to say whether the reaction of China and Chinese people to criticism is justified when they share different present situations and historical baggage to your country (whichever it may be, no offense).
It's also hard to say whether a criticism is unfair or not.... Always.

And where did the statement "They also think that other people do not have the right to criticize them or their actions" come from? Sure they don't like being criticized (who does?) but when has the PRC ever said or implied your belief? (In some areas -- if i draw a few from the top of my head -- such as military expenditure and human rights, China may believe this (I certainly do), and that is because the accusing/critic country wouldn't have particularly good track records on the subjects of criticism therefore it is basically hypocrisy. But everyone is a hypocrite... so yeah the argument is generally moot either way)

The US did not pursue the historical policy of previous great powers like (Great Brittan and others before it) of trying to keep all possible rivals to its position kept down. China still thinks it is living in the old world and not in the new one and it doesn’t know how to behave properly. If the US had perused the historical policies of great powers did in the past it would have fallen long before now. The world will not allow that attitude ever again and will turn against any who tries, as I think we might be seeing right now if China does not learn to think differently.

Can you please give examples of how China believes it is living in the old world and also how it should behave properly? (Re "historical policies of great power": if you're talking about imperialism I can assure you China definitely does not have that in mind)

Actually on second thought, don't. We're off topic enough as it is.

Second, I am not the foolish boy who claim that China is scared or a push over. Nor do I think that is inevitable that there must be uncontrollable conflict as China takes a more prominent place in the world. It does hold within its borders one out of four people alive on the planet today after all. That is a very hard thing to discount. The next ten years we will see if China's world view of how to act grows up to be moderen one and it find its proper place in the world based upon its economy, science, and its sustainable political ideas, but not based primarily because of its military power.

... What? A few posts before we were talking about the PLAN's capability now the PRC's future place in the world?

---------------------------------------
EDIT:

Wow. Wonderful off-topic. If we want to continue the discussion of Chinese geo-politics, we have an Intros and Off-Topic forum just for that sort of thing. Take it there. This is a thread about the Chinese navy.

Whoops sorry. I was composing the reply while you posted that. I won't go anymore off topic if anyone else doesn't (or as mod you could move our posts to another thread, but it may be easier just to threaten banning).

 

[Feanor]

Split and moved. You may continue your discussion here.

 

[advill]

Are you sure? That was a Japanese slogan in the late 19th century.

You are correct SWERVE it was a Japanese (Meji) slogan "Fukoku Kyohei" (Rich Country Strong Military), now followed by the Chinese - I have read an article on it. It's only a natural consequence and there is also nothing wrong for other parties wanting to balance this power. After all weoften read "strong words" in the media uttered by all parties who are not hypocritical. Better for them to come out in the open and be direct. Eventually the right senses and compromises could be the outcome.

 

[rip]

Thanks a lot, now I finally know why I am so placid, it's to take advantage of those around me!

Seriously that's as bad a generalisation if not worse than HKDSUs... I won't say that all Chinese people are placid or quiet, but in terms of the actual conflicts the PRC has been in... it's fairly limited (though that could also relate to their military capaiblity but also has to do with policy.)





I'm not sure if that's ethnic profiling or stereotyping but it's certainly a generalisation. Espicially " In the East they have traditionally believed that with power comes nothing but more privilege"

I'm not sure which traditions you're talking about.



By bully, do you mean diplomatic pressure, or something like sending future aircraft battle groups to train of the coast of a far off country to project power?
(And I don't think any country thinks "yay we're powerful/strong now, we now have the right to bully others". It's more like "yay we're powerful/strong now, we have the option to pursue our national interests".)



It's hard to say whether the reaction of China and Chinese people to criticism is justified when they share different present situations and historical baggage to your country (whichever it may be, no offense).
It's also hard to say whether a criticism is unfair or not.... Always.

And where did the statement "They also think that other people do not have the right to criticize them or their actions" come from? Sure they don't like being criticized (who does?) but when has the PRC ever said or implied your belief? (In some areas -- if i draw a few from the top of my head -- such as military expenditure and human rights, China may believe this (I certainly do), and that is because the accusing/critic country wouldn't have particularly good track records on the subjects of criticism therefore it is basically hypocrisy. But everyone is a hypocrite... so yeah the argument is generally moot either way)




Can you please give examples of how China believes it is living in the old world and also how it should behave properly? (Re "historical policies of great power": if you're talking about imperialism I can assure you China definitely does not have that in mind)

Actually on second thought, don't. We're off topic enough as it is.




... What? A few posts before we were talking about the PLAN's capability now the PRC's future place in the world?

---------------------------------------
EDIT:


Whoops sorry. I was composing the reply while you posted that. I won't go anymore off topic if anyone else doesn't (or as mod you could move our posts to another thread, but it may be easier just to threaten banning).

The moderator is right we are way off topic. The topic is the developments of the Chinese navy which like all navies, exists as nothing more than the extension of a national policy, so one subject easily leads to the other. But I leave the subject with one last question I cannot answer and I know no one who can answer it for me. As China rises in the world it seems to want to change the world economic and political system that was created after World War Two. A system that was designated specifically to allow the advancement of (at that time) less advanced people so that their needs could be meet and their lives could be improved without resorting to the historical methods of conflict.
China seems, to me and to many others, to want to change the system more than it seems to want to join it, as one of its senior partners. Is that perception wrong? What does it want to change and why?

 

[Blitzo]

The moderator is right we are way off topic. The topic is the developments of the Chinese navy which like all navies, exists as nothing more than the extension of a national policy, so one subject easily leads to the other. But I leave the subject with one last question I cannot answer and I know no one who can answer it for me. As China rises in the world it seems to want to change the world economic and political system that was created after World War Two. A system that was designated specifically to allow the advancement of (at that time) less advanced people so that their needs could be meet and their lives could be improved without resorting to the historical methods of conflict.
China seems, to me and to many others, to want to change the system more than it seems to want to join it, as one of its senior partners. Is that perception wrong? What does it want to change and why?

What "system" are you talking about and what makes you believe that China supposedly wanting to change it?

You say China wants to change the system which allows advancement of people without conflict... Isn't that what China is adhering to? They've gone through three decades of economic growth without real conflict (better than some other countries I may add...) and the PRC certainly does not want conflict in the future to unsettle it's economy.

I can't answer your question because I have no idea what system you're actually talking about.


(PS: Also we can continue this discussion because our posts have been shifted to a new thread. I'm just pointing this out because you seem to have neglected to reply to all my points and questions in my previous post).

 

[Sampanviking]

Yes I am rather curious to learn about what this "system" actually is as its a new one on me as well.

 

[rip]

What "system" are you talking about and what makes you believe that China supposedly wanting to change it?

You say China wants to change the system which allows advancement of people without conflict... Isn't that what China is adhering to? They've gone through three decades of economic growth without real conflict (better than some other countries I may add...) and the PRC certainly does not want conflict in the future to unsettle it's economy.

I can't answer your question because I have no idea what system you're actually talking about.


(PS: Also we can continue this discussion because our posts have been shifted to a new thread. I'm just pointing this out because you seem to have neglected to reply to all my points and questions in my previous post).

It will take me several posts to delineate all of your assumptions of which I dispute, so this is only an incomplete answer to be followed by other comments later when I have time.

It is so amazing to me that you think that the worldwide economic system we see today is some kind of big happy accident and is not a deliberate attempt to make a change in the way civilized humans do things from the bad old Days of Empire? Throughout the history of the world the rise of empires were pursued for the very reason of taking advantage of and or exploiting other people that were not capable of fully defending themselves. Power meant privilege and privilege meant exploitation. The original meaning of a sphere of influence was simply that (Their hunting grounds and no one else’s).

World War I and its later extenuation World War II, like all the calashes of empires before them was about the rising of a new power like Germany and established powers like Great Brittan, along with their various allies fighting for dominance in the world where dominance meant the control of natural resources (to secure their continued easy access to and to deprive their rivals access to) and markets for their manufactured goods. Sound familiar?

This is the exact opposite of the equality of nations and the world free trade model that was advance by the victorious allies after World War II in the hope that the historical pattern would not have to be repeated sadly yet again. Is it a futile Idealistic dream? Maybe, we will see.


True there were ideological and racial and historical factors in World War II but the primary underlining driving force was Germany rise in the world, where most of the spoils were already taken by others dominate under the old system. Under that old system for Germany to rise, someone else had to fall. There was no other way. The system of equality of nations (the end of colonialism and Empire where the threat of being conquere , so that someone could take your resources and then restrict your economic opportunities was meant to be ended forever), Free Trade (Free access to resources based only upon the ability to pay and free markets (the choice to buy and sell with whoever you chose for your best advantage), coupled with international instructions (the UN, World Bank, IMF, world court and others). This system did not exist before World War II.

Up until now the system has not been seriously tested for two reasons. First the people that did not participate in this system (The Communists) were bent on destroying the system as well as capitalism its self. They failed because Capitalism and free trade create more and better wealth and human comfort than any closed top down economic model can produce. Second the first new winners of this new international system, the defeated nations of Germany and Japan prospered by it rising in the world without the need of conquest, thus proving that the system works. There have been many other countries whom have taken advantage of the system and prospered without the need to dominate their neighbors like the Seven Tigers. At first they too wanted to change the system to one that they thought could be put to their advantage and there was and in some cases still is friction (intellectual property and trademark protection) being the biggest ones. Why buy it when you can steal it. But for the most part, the new active and advancing played have seen that the system dose work fairly well and provides mostly a level playing field where they can succeed if they work hard.

Like the other newer rising economies rising China wants to change the system that has been so good to them by changing the rules so as to give it additional advantage. Unlike the other before it with the same desire, it is big and powerful enough that it might succeed. But it is wrong if it thinks that it would be better for it in the long run. The most likely outcome of its actions is that it will destroy the system in place and the world will revert to the old historical model. It and everyone one else in the world would them be poorer and less safe and with additional conflict being inevitable.

 

[Blitzo]

^ I won't quote you because I don't exactly know how your reply is relevant to my questions...

You haven't answered what "system" you were talking about and how China is bent on destroying it.
And some parts of your post seem a bit alarmist if not conspiracy theory-esque.

You seem to imply that China is somehow wanting to colonize other countries for natural resources? (I'm sorry if I am incorrect but for all that you've written you haven't said a lot which is relevant) If you are implying at that then I can only say you are wrong. There hasn't been one example since the PRC's founding when they have colonized other countries for resources or what not and certainly they have no intention to build an empire.
Have you actually monitored the PRC's foreign relations and military conflcits over the past three decades? No empire building intentions at all and the comparisons to Britain and Germany is ridiculous. You say post war Germany and Japan prospered through this ambiguous "system" you speak of. Well hasn't China prospered through this same "system"? Why would they seek to destroy it? (whatever it is).

 

[Feanor]

Blitzo I'm fairly certain (though happy to be corrected) that there have been Chinese private security forces on the ground in Sudan guarding the oil pipe-lines... this is while China is actively inproting Sudanese oil, and selling weapons to the Sudanese government.

 

[Feanor]

Blitzo I'm fairly certain (though happy to be corrected) that there have been Chinese private security forces on the ground in Sudan guarding the oil pipe-lines... this is while China is actively inproting Sudanese oil, and selling weapons to the Sudanese government.

 

[Blitzo]

Blitzo I'm fairly certain (though happy to be corrected) that there have been Chinese private security forces on the ground in Sudan guarding the oil pipe-lines... this is while China is actively inproting Sudanese oil, and selling weapons to the Sudanese government.

I'm not sure about private security firms, but there are certainly PLA soldiers working there under the UN banner. May I ask where you heard of this? (It's the first time I've heard of it)
And the import oil/sell weapon thing is definitely true, but the PRC is certainly not the first or most visible country doing this in the world.

Let's say there were private security groups there for argument's sake -- what does it actually show?
It doesn't show China is working against this vague system, when similar arrangements occur between many countries (US/saudi arabia for one), and is far from the colonization of Sudan if that's what you meant.

 

[Feanor]

It certainly appears to be a step in the direction of colonization. Brian Steidle mentions it in his book The Devil Came on Horseback.

As for the system argument, I'm not even sure what it means so I'll leave that aside.

 

[rip]

^ I won't quote you because I don't exactly know how your reply is relevant to my questions...

You haven't answered what "system" you were talking about and how China is bent on destroying it.
And some parts of your post seem a bit alarmist if not conspiracy theory-esque.

You seem to imply that China is somehow wanting to colonize other countries for natural resources? (I'm sorry if I am incorrect but for all that you've written you haven't said a lot which is relevant) If you are implying at that then I can only say you are wrong. There hasn't been one example since the PRC's founding when they have colonized other countries for resources or what not and certainly they have no intention to build an empire.
Have you actually monitored the PRC's foreign relations and military conflcits over the past three decades? No empire building intentions at all and the comparisons to Britain and Germany is ridiculous. You say post war Germany and Japan prospered through this ambiguous "system" you speak of. Well hasn't China prospered through this same "system"? Why would they seek to destroy it? (whatever it is).

I am still amazed on how I can say one thing and you then hear something else completely different. But maybe this dialogue will have some good benefit if even just we two people out of all the billions in the world can understand each other just a little better. The question was asked “what economic system? Since you did not seem to know what economic system, I tried to answer the question in a detailed and comprehensive way. When a person in born into a society, it is often difficult for them to see why their society or economic system, is structured the way that it is. I was trying to help you understand, it was not meant to criticize. I did not say nor did I infer that China was looking for colonies or for empire, though historically China, in the distant past certainly has pursued empire and its neighbors still remember vividly that it once did but that is not to say that it is again upon that same path. I was only laying the ground work in trying to explain how the world’s current economic system works and the reasons why it was formulated in the way that it was. It was not a random event but has a purpose. And to point out why if it is to succeed in reducing one of the greatest historical causes of conflict and human suffering it must be defended and not abused. The stakes are higher than you seem to believe. The fragility of the World Trade System is not known, for in the sixty years of its existence it has never before been challenged from the inside as China appears that it might and can do. The World Trading System might be very resilient or it might not. This is unknown territory.

As to China’s long term goals and dreams I do not claim to know. Truly it is one of the biggest mysteries commonly contemplated in the world today. As far as I can make out, China has not made up its collective mind as of yet, as to what course it will eventually go. China is at a decision point in its history where many things are put at risk and the world is holding its collective breath waiting for the answers. Answers which will have great importance for everyone and not just China. Furthermore since the decision making process in China is not understood by outsiders, outsiders just like me, all of the rest of us must base our actions on what China does, since the reasons why it dose the things that does is so unclear to us. What we all need to have a happier world is more trust between all the parties but as long as China is so secretive about its internal political processes, which nevertheless have great consequences to others outside of China, trust is hard to achieve.

Note, I did not say that Chinas policies were bad or evil but confusing and I will use just one recent highly publicized case from many to point this out. Please try if you can, to see the events I will describe from an outsiders point of view and how we must then react to them. In the recent incident between China and Japan over the disputed islands they both claim, one of the results was that China stopped exporting Rare Earth Minerals to Japan and reduced their exports to the US. China later said that the reasons for its sudden, unexpected, unprecedented and undeclared actions were for environmental reasons, which might even be true but when perceived from the outside, it could only be seen as an act of economic warfare. Economic Warfare as it was commonly practiced in the bad old days before World War II and as such a direct attack upon the current World Trade System where access to resources are guaranteed at the ongoing price set by supply and demand, except under unusual circumstances. Usually those circumstances only come after long warning are given and after long debates in international forums are had, to be used as disincentives for bad behavior like making nuclear weapons after signing a treaty promising that you would not.

Chinas’ recent actions are not catastrophic to the Worlds’ Trading System but they do show a troubling trend and with nothing else to go on but its actions, because Chinas intentions are not clear, yes I am alarmed. So I guess that makes me alarmists. Remember there is unfortunately a lack of trust on both sides. Try to think what could happen if the World Trading System were to fail? Forget for the moment about Rare Earth Minerals they are not very important after all but how about food or drugs, especially in times of disaster. Do we want those things to become economic weapons too? But in system were one kind of economic warfare is permissible, a nation will use whatever it has as a weapon, when others do the same. I do not know about you but I had hoped that we as a species had evolved beyond the point where you could see any advantage in keeping your neighbors children hungry.

I will address the other issues that we disagree on in later posts.

 

[Blitzo]

^ I still don't know what system you are talking about -- "economic system" isn't very precise. Can you just have a sentence saying "the system I meant was <insert name here>"?
And again, how is China trying to destroy this system? (or the world's economic system or whatever)
(If you can give a sentence like "China is destroying <insert system's name here> by doing <insert action here>" to clear things up I would be very grateful)

On the rare earth thing -- much of that was media sensationalism, China's been talking about limiting its own rare earth exports for years now. Sampanviking had a post on the Chinas beefing navy thread a few days ago which is good. From an outsider's point of view without looking deeper you would think that China is resorting to use resources as leverage.
When all the proverbial excretion hits the fan then any country would use anything they can to their advantage and that includes economic warfare -- but we're not there yet and China hasn't done anything which other countries haven't done before them.

The problem here is that I don't know where we disagree at and your long sprawling posts don't actually answer my previous questions.. Other posters have also questioned what you mean by this "system" so please enlighten us..

 

[rip]

^ I still don't know what system you are talking about -- "economic system" isn't very precise. Can you just have a sentence saying "the system I meant was <insert name here>"?
And again, how is China trying to destroy this system? (or the world's economic system or whatever)
(If you can give a sentence like "China is destroying <insert system's name here> by doing <insert action here>" to clear things up I would be very grateful)

On the rare earth thing -- much of that was media sensationalism, China's been talking about limiting its own rare earth exports for years now. Sampanviking had a post on the Chinas beefing navy thread a few days ago which is good. From an outsider's point of view without looking deeper you would think that China is resorting to use resources as leverage.
When all the proverbial excretion hits the fan then any country would use anything they can to their advantage and that includes economic warfare -- but we're not there yet and China hasn't done anything which other countries haven't done before them.

The problem here is that I don't know where we disagree at and your long sprawling posts don't actually answer my previous questions.. Other posters have also questioned what you mean by this "system" so please enlighten us..

From Wikipedia; System (from Latin systēma, in turn from Greek σύστημα systēma, "whole compounded of several parts or members, system",

I am not going to try to teach a collage level course in global economics. It might be too long and a sprawling post for you. The world Trading System is a system of systems just like a Ecological system is a system of systems. There are systems; financial systems that govern the transfer of money, change currency from one kind to another, provide credit, insurance and mechanisms for loan recovery.

A system. There are systems; that govern import and report duties, safety regulations about the transportation of dangerous materials. There are international rules that govern the pricing for different customers, times, and locations. And at least a dozen more boards, commissions, trade associations, trade groups, standardssetting committees, and international governing bodies that I can think of and I do not know them all. Put together they form a system of systems that are intended to work with and then to reinforce each other.

A system. The world Trading System. Some of these associated groups were formed organically by people just trying to coordinate their efforts for mutual benefit for specific needs but others were designed to promote pacific political and international goals by governmental bodies. Just one of those goals was to create a “system” a universa world wide ecconomic systel, where new members could willingly join and then prosper. Wealth and prosperity was not to be an exclusive club of the current winners and the rich and powerful were not allowed to use their combined economic dominance, which they had in abundance at that time just after world War II, to keep themselves on top forever by closing out, and blocking new players from advancing but a system that allowed new players to prosper within the system they created.

This is the first time in human history where this kind of forward thinking has been employed in international affairs, if you see it or believe it or not. If this is not clear to you then it is beyond my power to show you. If you do not believe me read a few books from that time. It was publicly debated and after a great deal of resistance slowly adopted.

And as far as your statement that every bodies does it that is not true. Most of the time most people follow the rules most of the time if not just like any system of rules or laws or agreement of trust the system will die and all the benefits of the system which is based on mutual cooperation will be lost

 

[Blitzo]

^ Yeah you're right I can't make heads or tails of what you're on about and I have a sneaking suspicion that what you're saying doesn't have that much to do with China (I asked you explicity how China was destroying this system but you haven't even mentioned the country in your last post)...

I'll just end this part of our conversation here, unless other posters can clarify me on what rip is talking about, if they understand it themselves...

 

[godbody]

Blitzo I'm fairly certain (though happy to be corrected) that there have been Chinese private security forces on the ground in Sudan guarding the oil pipe-lines... this is while China is actively inproting Sudanese oil, and selling weapons to the Sudanese government.

I've heard that before too in 2001. I read it in a newspaper and heard about it from other military friends. There not to much out there about Chinese in Sudan. There must be a secret agreement with Sudan Government.