Article

2004-12-13 China-Japan-Koreas

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-12-13 9:08:00 AM|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 It will be interesting to see the 'careful strides' the Central Committee takes when the first really nasty recession hits.

Posted by Don 2004-12-13 10:09:58 AM|| 2004-12-13 10:09:58 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Mark Helprin is unduly alarmist at times, but I am glad he has put the finger on the biggest threat on the horizon - not Islam, but China.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-12-13 10:15:14 AM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2004-12-13 10:15:14 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 What strategy do you recommend, ZF? Which China analysts/experts do you read?

Posted by lex 2004-12-13 10:23:38 AM|| 2004-12-13 10:23:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 ZF - I'd say they are equal, yet different threats. China's been facilitating Islam against the west as a weapon

Posted by Frank G 2004-12-13 10:23:39 AM|| 2004-12-13 10:23:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 The whole WoT, Afghanistan and Iraq are just sidelights to what China and the US have been preparing some 20 years for. However, there is a new angle: India. Ironically, China and India are shoulder to shoulder, both have exploding and unbalanced populations, and both are "2nd tier" and vying for a bigger piece of the pie--quite possibly at the expense of the other. Much of India's defense expenditure is going to defend against China--they see Pakistan as a gnat, correctly or not. And China, seeking alliance, has tried to court Pakistan, only to be nudged out by the US; whereas India is technologically supported by of all nations, Israel. There is some interesting stuff in the works right now.

Posted by Anonymoose 2004-12-13 10:23:51 AM|| 2004-12-13 10:23:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 US + Israel + India + Japan + Australia. Perhaps one day a more democratic Russia added as well. That's a pretty good basis for an alliance that can keep China off-balance.

Posted by lex 2004-12-13 10:25:42 AM|| 2004-12-13 10:25:42 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Imagine then if China, as it easily could, were to double its GDP in the next eight or nine years

Nope. Not gonna happen. China is booming bigtime right now. It's growing too fast. In a few years, it'll all come crashing down, and then they'll have unrest which will set them back a good bit. My guess is some time after the 2008 Beijing Olypmics.

There's so much opportunity here, it's crazy. Think dotcom boom circa 1997. It's stupidly easy to go in with nothing but a drawing on a napkin, and emerge with a fully-developed product. All you need are buyers and some cash.

Posted by gromky 2004-12-13 11:02:26 AM|| 2004-12-13 11:02:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 All the advances in China should lead to unmet expectations when the bubble bursts....

Posted by Frank G 2004-12-13 11:05:58 AM|| 2004-12-13 11:05:58 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Everyone should take economic data from China with a huge grain of salt. The odds that the data hasw been manipulated are near 100%.

Most observers, at least here in Rantbug, feel that China is riding an unsustainable economic bubble. How and when it bursts is debatable, but it surely will.

At the present rate of growth as stated by the IMF (9%+), China will double its GDP within a decade. I remain unconvinced that a growth level of 9% is sustainable for that long. Just two years ago the growth rate was nearer 30%. The central government has monkeyed with some interest rates, and tried to limit growth. The decline is more correctly due to lack of demand and the yuan's tie to the dollar. The reports of dozens of empty office buildings in cities could not be happening if the economy is growing 9% per annum.

The reality is more likely that the Chinese economy is already in recession. Power shortages, turnabout to a food importer, and trade deficits with every country but the United States suggest an economy that is not growing as the central government portrays. An unusually bad winter this year, or crop failures next summer in the U.S. and Australia, or China's debtors asking for payment in a currency other than the dollar...

Two, three years tops, China has a problem [my fearless prediction] Move against Taiwan by 2007. Russian incursions 2008 or 2009 [depending on who's running for President in the U.S.] Between then and now, reimposition of central government controls and consequential unrest from ethnic minorities and capitalist regions in SE China.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2004-12-13 12:30:21 PM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2004-12-13 12:30:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 CS: Power shortages, turnabout to a food importer, and trade deficits with every country but the United States suggest an economy that is not growing as the central government portrays.

The power shortages have to do with booming demand for subsidized energy that the government is reluctant to fill because, well, it's subsidized, i.e. there's a cost to the government. China is importing food - primarily grains - because its farmers are turning to cash crop farming - fruits and vegetables are much more profitable and are becoming a big factor in the produce export business, competing with traditional exporters in a big way. The trade deficits have to do with the fact that China* is importing inputs from a lot of countries, and assembling them for re-export.

* Not the Chinese government, but a large array of domestic and foreign manufacturers.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-12-13 12:45:04 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2004-12-13 12:45:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 lex: What strategy do you recommend, ZF? Which China analysts/experts do you read?

I think Uncle Sam needs to keep its strategic arsenal ready, continue research on and deployment of missile defense systems, keep its conventional arsenal up-to-date (yes, that includes the F-22) and match China's military expansion. Still, China is far away. Even if it kicks off any hostilities, American involvement remains largely optional. I think it might be instructive to use East Asia as a test case of what happens when Uncle Sam stays on the sidelines. (I personally think it might be interesting to see what would happen if we zeroed out the defense budget and let our friendly foreign neighbors protect us from external threats).

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-12-13 12:52:14 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2004-12-13 12:52:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Chuck, power shortages are a way of life in every high-growth emerging market economy. If anything they're a sign of economic health. I wouldn't be surprised if China's opaque banking sector is riddled with bad debts, but I doubt that China's economic growth is heavily dependent on cheap credits or foreign capital inflows, so I can't envisage an 1998-style meltdown anytime soon.

As to "Russian incursions", you've got it backwards. Putin cannot project much power, military or political, in the Russian Far East, which is basically a set of independent fiefdoms run by kleptocratic "governors" who are at one and the same time the main employer, lawgiver, media owner, judge jury executioner etc. It's very likely that most of the regions east of Irkutsk will be Chinese vassal states within a generation. Already, more and more Russians are teaching themselves Chinese in order to survive economically in border regions.

Posted by lex 2004-12-13 12:53:07 PM|| 2004-12-13 12:53:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 lex: Which China analysts/experts do you read?

Arthur Waldron, John Tkacik and Gerald Segal (deceased) are some of the China-watchers I've read. The national security issues in relation to China are the same ones that we had to deal with in relation to the Soviet Union. Chinese history (examined skeptically) is also useful as a indicator of future Chinese behavior - the Chinese are said to use historical interactions as a guide for current strategic and diplomatic issues. (John King Fairbank and Jonathan Spence have written creditable accounts of Chinese history). To put their hagiographies in context, think of China as a kind of Roman empire that never expired. The Germans merely dreamed of a thousand year Reich. The Chinese have lived it.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-12-13 12:59:02 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2004-12-13 12:59:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 [My fearless prediction] As China's economy grows and her people get wealthier they start demanding more and more political freedom. China eventually moves towards Democracy as Taiwan and South Korea did. As she grows wealthier the nation starts to be less beligerant and blustering and more calculating.

There is no war with Taiwan because its very bad for business and the chance of losing (and losing face) is far too high.

There is no war with Russia because Russia has oil and mineral wealth, two things China's industry will need as it expands. Close trade relations with Russia means China doesn't need a massive surface fleet to secure her trade routes (and she doesn't have to depend upon the US to do so either).

Posted by rjschwarz 2004-12-13 1:03:43 PM|| [http://rjschwarz.com] 2004-12-13 1:03:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Thanks, ZF. Have Fairbanks' book and will read it. RE security strategies what do you think of Jophn Mearsheimer's "offshore balancer" approach for us?

Posted by lex 2004-12-13 1:03:50 PM|| 2004-12-13 1:03:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 If an editor's reading this, they may want to correct the thread title, especially if the article was written by Mark Helprin rather than Mark Halperin; this may not sound like much, but you're not just misspelling Helprin's name; there's a Mark Halperin out there who's a political hack.

Posted by Phil Fraering 2004-12-13 1:28:30 PM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2004-12-13 1:28:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 lex: Yes, I meant Chinese incursions into Russia, not the other way around.

Power shortages are not just signs of a growth economy, or places like Haiti wouldn't have them. Power shotrages are a sign that the societal infrastructure needed for growth is failing to match growth. If you don't have enough power, you have zero growth, sooner or later.

Zhang: When your trade deficit is oil, wheat and rice, basic metals like copper, you have the same problem that pre-war Japan had. As for food exports, China is competing against other countries in the region who have discovered the same thing, Vietnam and India to name two. I just don't believe China will grow based upon agricultural exports in a competitive market. There are still too many inefficiencies in the general Chinese economy.

rjschwarz: We did these scenarios not too long ago. I generated a couple of ways that China could take Taiwan relatively easily.

China can easily take the resources that Russia has, even if Russia goes nuclear. If China spends a hundred million people to take Eastern Siberia, so what? From their perspective, it's cheap.

China is building a massive fleet, and not just to threaten Taiwan. Remember that from the Chinese point of view Japan, Korea, the Phillipines, and Southeast Asia are all Chinese by history and tradition. In Peking, China is three thousand years old. A decade is nothing.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2004-12-13 1:43:46 PM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2004-12-13 1:43:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 China could take Taiwan in a decade, not now, and I doubt it would be easy. Add to that the West inability to look the other way and allow it to happen. Sanctions, disinvestment, and the death of the Chinese economy would be the result.

I'm betting that success makes these things to painful for them to accept considering they might have to destroy Taiwan to take it over.

Posted by rjschwarz 2004-12-13 3:53:08 PM|| [http://rjschwarz.com] 2004-12-13 3:53:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Depends on time horizons. Immediate threat is Iran, Syria, and NoKo. Three to five year threat is the ChiComs. The Japanese and Aussies will throw sand in their gears for a while.

Posted by Capt America 2004-12-13 4:40:21 PM|| 2004-12-13 4:40:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 Depends on who's President. Some are bought good. If Hillary wins in '08, I predict an invasion in '09. I think there's enough Chinese in NYC to let the ChiComs know not to try if Rudy wins.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-12-13 4:46:17 PM|| 2004-12-13 4:46:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 The Chinese banking system is riddled with bad debts. Financial crises occur precisely because they are not anticipated. China will have a 1997 type crisis for the usual reasons - overbuilding the wrong things, condos, golf courses, airports, etc. My prediction is the crisis will hit in 2005 and will be substantially over by the end of 2006. Longer term China will be a great power and as someone said 'Great powers don't have friends. They only have interests."

Posted by phil_b 2004-12-13 5:44:53 PM|| 2004-12-13 5:44:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 You don't build truly great wealth without free markets. You can't have truly free markets without free people and the rule of law. China will have a good run for a while. Then the Chicoms will hit a wall because the feedback mechanisms in the economy are fundamentally impaired and the distortions will become overwhelming. They will either emerge from that crisis a better, more free nation, or they will retreat to statism and restriction of liberty.

Posted by Classical_Liberal 2004-12-13 10:42:04 PM|| 2004-12-13 10:42:04 PM|| Front Page Top