Backgrounder. Many good comments, too.
The National Interest
China's Legalist Revival
David K. Schneider | associate professor of Chinese at University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and a Wikistrat senior analyst
See also
How China Sees World Order
Richard Fontaine, Mira Rapp-Hooper
A rant, but it makes a point. The US had industrial and population superiority over Nazi Germany and Japan, but it doesn't relative to China. China has about a billion more people than the US and it is the "world's factory." In addition, China strategy emphasizes swarming.
One Big Reason America Isn't Ready for World War Three
See also
How China Sees World Order
Richard Fontaine, Mira Rapp-Hooper
A rant, but it makes a point. The US had industrial and population superiority over Nazi Germany and Japan, but it doesn't relative to China. China has about a billion more people than the US and it is the "world's factory." In addition, China strategy emphasizes swarming.
One Big Reason America Isn't Ready for World War Three
Peter Navarro | Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the Paul Merage School of Business, University of California, Irvine
Is America Willing to Wage War Against China to Save the Status-Quo?
Hugh White | Professor in the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at The Australian National University
Is America Willing to Wage War Against China to Save the Status-Quo?
The article by Peter Navarro is a howler. WWW3 wouldn't be fought like WW2 was. He should just be honest and present economic arguments for bringing back manufacturing to the US.
ReplyDeleteI decided to save this to my start screen on my mobile phone because it looked too important to let it disappear. There's plenty to read here.
ReplyDeleteThe US not ready for WW3, that's good news. I've been bricking it some lonely nights thinking WW3 is about to start. Like Tom, I find stuff that other people don't, and it's not always nice.
Peter Navarro is also wrong even about bringing manufacturing back to the USA. The US will never be able to match the ability of China to churn out conventional weapons and transport them across the Pacific to fight a land war in Asia. "An army runs on its belly." It's not only a manufacturing issue but also a logistics problem.
ReplyDeleteIt's also a strategy issue. The US military could not even beat the Viet Cong dressed in pajamas, nor has it been able to prevail in securing Afghanistan or Iraq after years of turmoil. Now fronts are opening in Syria and Libya, and planning on "doing Iran." What are these people thinking?
Preparing the US to fight a conventional land war in Asia on both eastern (Russia) and western fronts (China) is a pipe dream of armchair warriors and a gift to the US military-industrial complex.
The question now is who is going to develop a first strike nuclear capability. All parties are now developing hypersonic MIRV guided missiles, ABM systems, electronic jamming capability, and space weapons.
War is always insane, but this is really getting insane.
Of course it's a pipe dream, so why write articles about events that will never happen?
ReplyDeleteEven if China and the US came to blows, it's of no concern unless it goes nuclear. It's unfortunate that resources will be wasted on armaments when there are other priorities facing our species.
The logic of MAD still holds, even when our brain-dead leaders refuse to acknowledge it.
It's important because the US is provoking an arms race that neither China nor Russia want but perceive themselves forced into, giving the US "reason" to ramp up further and further.
ReplyDeleteThis is for two reasons — politically to maintain and expand US global hegemony and economically to benefit the US military-industrial complex. It is reckless and craven.
Also, it’s the US that is building offensive capability. China and Russia are focused on defense. That is pretty telling.
ReplyDeleteIf it will save them money (resources) by focusing on defense then that is the route they should follow. Important yet there is not a damn thing the peasantry can do about it.
ReplyDeleteIf it will save them money (resources) by focusing on defense then that is the route they should follow. Important yet there is not a damn thing the peasantry can do about it.
ReplyDeleteI think that Chinese are aware that government's cost of capital is zero and the only concern is allocation of available real resources but they also have to keep an eye on inflation and the fx rate since they peg to the USD. I think the Russians also understand this but they are committed to supporting the ruble float with conservative monetary and fiscal policy. But I suspect they have rounds-about ways of funding military expansion, too.
It really comes down to allocation of available real resources to domestic use, foreign use (exports) and military use.
Since security trumps order and order trumps liberty in governance, governments are going to allocate funds in that order or priority.