We will miss US hegemony

anymore

The curious thing about Gerge Bush's wars, is that he was elected initially on the foot of a foreign policy that was committed to bring the troops home and to a more isolationist US.
As the reality dawns that the age of US hegemony is slowly but surely drawing to a close, the reality is that we already know which country is destined to be the world's next superpower. Already third largest economy on earth, China, with it's one billion plus population will in the next 30/40 years eclipise the US militarily and economically.
When China's aircraft carriers are parked off Africa and the middle east, will we miss the years when the US was the world's superpower ?

Overheal

anymore wrote: »

When China's aircraft carriers are parked off Africa and the middle east, will we miss the years when the US was the world's superpower ?

Even I have to question if China really has such ambitions. Everything about their Culture and History seems to indicate they are happy to be isolationists, much to an extent.

johngalway

Overheal wrote: »

Even I have to question if China really has such ambitions. Everything about their Culture and History seems to indicate they are happy to be isolationists, much to an extent.

They're developing a blue water fleet to project power. There is the obvious Taiwan issue, but also some Islands in the neighbourhood claimed by China, Vietnam and one or two other countries, their name escapes me. We'll see how isolationist they are when the fleet is built and resources become scarce.

BluePlanet

anymore wrote: »

The curious thing about Gerge Bush's wars, is that he was elected initially on the foot of a foreign policy that was committed to bring the troops home and to a more isolationist US.
As the reality dawns that the age of US hegemony is slowly but surely drawing to a close, the reality is that we already know which country is destined to be the world's next superpower. Already third largest economy on earth, China, with it's one billion plus population will in the next 30/40 years eclipise the US militarily and economically.
When China's aircraft carriers are parked off Africa and the middle east, will we miss the years when the US was the world's superpower ?

Unlike the USA, China is not an exporter of it's doctrines.
China does not engage in far-flung military adventures.
And they won't.
They will observe whatever dictatorship, democratic government or theocracy takes office in whatever country and not particularly care.

They've suffered the boot of foreign military intervention enough times in their history and have no appetite for doing the same.

With the exception of Taiwan i suppose, but that has always been part of China in my opinion anyway.

johngalway

I suppose they didn't need a navy to invade Tibet, and it's not far flung

BluePlanet

johngalway wrote: »

I suppose they didn't need a navy to invade Tibet, and it's not far flung

Tibet has been part of China since bleedin Marco Polo "discovered" the Orient.

Scofflaw

BluePlanet wrote: »

Tibet has been part of China since bleedin Marco Polo "discovered" the Orient.

Not really. Tibet has spent much less time under Chinese sovereignty than Ireland spent under British sovereignty. You're free to argue that makes Ireland British if you wish.

cordially,
Scofflaw

FlutterinBantam

Fooker has a point.

China is very big in Africa and i could very well see them as the world #1 superpower in a few decades.

Not learning Chinese just yet.

anymore

BluePlanet wrote: »

Tibet has been part of China since bleedin Marco Polo "discovered" the Orient.

Its a pity someone doesnt tell the Tibetians that ! Still we know fron our own history that the natives always tend to be a bit ignorant about their own history and that it takes an outsider to civilise them !;)

China has good reason to concentrate on building its resources and not being overly aggressive internationally. However as johngalway says, when resources become scarce it may be a case of ' Might is right'.
If you accept global warming, peak oil and that a growing global population will put increasing pressure on resources such as water, then the future 50 years could turn out to be quite traumatic.

jonsnow

its a myth that china doesn,t have a history of expansionism just ask the vietnamese.China has been expanding its borders for thousands of years by both conquest and settlement.The chinese have traditionally had a system of tributary states that jump to its tune and since it has regained its standing it seems to be following this old pattern (in africa for example).

If you think americans can be arrogant the chinese can be even worse.Many han chinese have an incredibly deeprooted sense of cultural superiority-5000 years of culture and all that(you,ld think that they had personally invented gunpowder themselves are something)

I,m reading a fascinating book on this topic at the moment called "When China rules the world" by martin Jaques and it is a great exploration of this topic.It highlights both the positives and negatives to Chinas rise but the bottom line is that the US for all its faults is a democracy and I for one want a democracy to be the most powerful nation on the planet.If china becomes one great but that doesn,t seem likely at the minute.

And finally even if China doesn,t have a history of aggressive expansionism (which it does) in todays interconnected world if you want to be a superpower you are going to be involving yourself in other nations affairs.And china very much wants to be a superpower.

anymore

This site has an intersting exchange of views on the pros and cons of Chinese investment in Africa :
http://www.cfr.org/publication/12622/is_chinese_investment_good_for_africa.html

I suppose future nationalist objections to what might be percieved as Chinese colonialism might cause a flash point for Chinese aggression in the future.
China has one advatage in pursuing a ' no questions asked' investment policy abroad and not being militarily invloved. It does not have to waste resources on military interventions in the same way that US and Uk are wasting so much of their resources in conflicts abroad.

ei.sdraob

interesting article here from Niall Ferguson

America, the fragile empire
Here today, gone tomorrow -- could the United States fall that fast?

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ferguson28-2010feb28,0,7706980.story

Overheal

anymore wrote: »

However the more you invest abroad, the more the pressure will be to protect those investments.

Which pretty much sums up US involvement in the mideast.

Soldie

I have large doubts as to China being "destined to be the world's next superpower". Their economy appears to be built on a house of cards, and the cracks are already showing. Lest we not forget, there was a considerable amount of huffing and puffing from the late USSR before it imploded.

I don't think people really consider how big the US economy/military is when they weigh up China becoming the next big superpower. Isn't the US Navy larger than the next 13 combined?

For China to get to that stage will take an awful long time and it would take an awful lot of money away from the (poor) people of the country who might not stand for it.

Overheal

Soldie wrote: »

I have large doubts as to China being "destined to be the world's next superpower". Their economy appears to be built on a house of cards, and the cracks are already showing. Lest we not forget, there was a considerable amount of huffing and puffing from the late USSR before it imploded.

Could you please explain how China is sitting on a house of cards?

Sand

Re: House of cards - there appears to be warning signs that China is sitting on what is looking suspiciously like a rather big property bubble with price rises of up to 20% a month (!?) in some areas.

As already noted, whilst China is surely growing in power and stature, those predicting it becoming a superpower to rival the US are underestimating to a fairly large degree the exceptional lead the US has in military power. Plus the US has repeatedly demonstrated it is willing to use that military power should it feel its in its national interest to do so, so its not just a theoretical power.

China may end up as isolationist or expansionist as events allow it to be. But regardless, it will be far more disinterested in paying any attention to happy clappy ideas like the fight to save the polar bears, poverty in africa or so on.

anymore

Sand wrote: »

Re: House of cards - there appears to be warning signs that China is sitting on what is looking suspiciously like a rather big property bubble with price rises of up to 20% a month (!?) in some areas.

As already noted, whilst China is surely growing in power and stature, those predicting it becoming a superpower to rival the US are underestimating to a fairly large degree the exceptional lead the US has in military power. Plus the US has repeatedly demonstrated it is willing to use that military power should it feel its in its national interest to do so, so its not just a theoretical power.

China may end up as isolationist or expansionist as events allow it to be. But regardless, it will be far more disinterested in paying any attention to happy clappy ideas like the fight to save the polar bears, poverty in africa or so on.

The western world is committing very significant sums for investment in China. It is significant that the only sector of GM that has been profitable is the chinese sector. The reality is that there is an inevitability about Chinas economic growth and its military power will grow as well. The US's long term military strategy recognises that China's military power will continue to grow and is relying upon its technological advantages continuing for a number of decades.
There is a a limit to what China can do to inhibit Chinas economic growth given that China is almost the lender of last resort for the US. Perhaps we are heading towards a situation where the two economies are so intertwined that each will have a vital interest in the economic health of the other - a form of Mutual Assured Economic Destruction if either does anything stupid to unbalance the other's economies.
Many commentators now refer to the the G2 in an acknowledgement of their ability to influence global economics.

anymore

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

I don't think people really consider how big the US economy/military is when they weigh up China becoming the next big superpower. Isn't the US Navy larger than the next 13 combined?

For China to get to that stage will take an awful long time and it would take an awful lot of money away from the (poor) people of the country who might not stand for it.

In posting the thread, I was thinking in terms of decades, 40 mor 50 years, though some speculate that Chinas economy will reach parity with the US sooner than that. If you take people like Niall Ferguson's prediction about the end of the US empire seriousily, then the US will be relegated to no 2 role sooner than later.
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/357319/Niall-Ferguson:-U.S.-Empire-in-Decline,-on-Collision-Course-with-China

" Putting a finer point on it, Ferguson says America today is comparable to Britain circa 1900: a dominant empire underestimating the rise of a new power. In Britain's case back then it was Germany; in America's case today, it's China.
"When China's economy is equal in size to that of the U.S., which could come as early as 2027...it means China becomes not only a major economic competitor - it's that already, it then becomes a diplomatic competitor and a military competitor," the history professor declares "

Soldie

Overheal wrote: »

Could you please explain how China is sitting on a house of cards?

I'd tend to believe that China is in a gargantuan property bubble -- a bubble they continue to inflate with their underperforming stimulus package. In addition, it appears as though the Chinese officials are cooking their books: dramatic increase in car sales compared to flat gasoline consumption. Not to mention the well documented ghost cities and empty shopping malls.

anymore

I wonder if Peking will be intersted in having bowls of shamrock presented to its Premier on St Patricks day ?
Or what the idea of Chinese takeaway will be ?

Lanaier

anymore wrote: »

Perhaps we are heading towards a situation where the two economies are so intertwined that each will have a vital interest in the economic health of the other - a form of Mutual Assured Economic Destruction if either does anything stupid to unbalance the other's economies.
M.

This is what I see as the most logical approach for things.
Lets hope that the powers that be think so too.

anymore wrote: »

I wonder if Peking will be intersted in having bowls of shamrock presented to its Premier on St Patricks day ?
Or what the idea of Chinese takeaway will be ?

There was a St.Patricks day parade around Wangfujing in 2007, apparently the first foreign parade of any kind in Beijing since the country's founding .

jonsnow

anymore wrote: »

. Perhaps we are heading towards a situation where the two economies are so intertwined that each will have a vital interest in the economic health of the other - a form of Mutual Assured Economic Destruction if either does anything stupid to unbalance the other's economies.

Chimerica

Sand

Nah, the Alliance

I think the thing to remember is that back in the 1980s, Japan played the role that China is currently playing. The assumption that China will rise to superpower status assumes it will simply continue to rumble along on its current path, uninterrupted by events, history or all those little accidents that trip people up.

Thats not to say that the US is now all powerful, so it will always be all powerful, but its got to be remembered what it took to break the UKs dominance (the last, near unchallenged "superpower"): two world wars in short succession, conflicts of a scale and cost previously unknown in history which caused such debt, loss of life and prestige (even though the UK was on the winning side) that the Empire and the navy was no longer seen as worth the price vs. the demands of the people for a new welfare state and rising nationalist opinion across the world.

I just dont see the US being under similar stress currently...its fighting two wars, yeah, but its lost more men in a single day than it has in years of the current conflicts. Its in debt, yeah, but its been more heavily (vastly so) in debt in the immediate aftermath of WW2 compared to its GDP.

Its still perhaps the most attractive destination for high skilled immigrants, it has the best universities and research facilities, highest level of population growth in the industrialised societies (China is going to run into some issues here, given its one child policy) with its population predicted to grow at roughly the average global growth whilst Italy, Germany, Russia, Greece and so on get greyer and smaller, its population is young (25% under the age of 20) and getting younger (see immigration) vs. the age profile of Europe, and theres no indication yet that it is less willing to use force as and when it feels it needs to. Its still Rome as far as the rest of the world is concerned (The Republicans electoral college map of Europe ( 0 votes...) reflected the rabid interest of Europeans in the politics of the US (as did the hilarious effort of the Guardian sponsoring pen friends to US voters in swing states in 2004 trying to persuade them to vote against Bush....given the natural "**** off!" response to interference in domestic affairs, if the Guardian had told the Republicans their plans, theyd probably have coughed up the costs of postage)....there simply isnt as much interest in Chinese politics - US policy affects us directly...Chinese policy...doesnt. Not on the same scale.

Its still probably got the best mix of hard (military) and soft (general good feeling towards them, Americans tend to be pretty decent overall, plus their vast cultural projection - TV, cinema, music, books and so on) power.

Again, dont get me wrong - the US is not the eternal empire, but theres going to be need a significant shift in the underlying causes of its lead in economic, military, cultural and political power before I'll start learning Chinese.

anymore

Sand wrote: »

Nah, the Alliance

I think the thing to remember is that back in the 1980s, Japan played the role that China is currently playing. The assumption that China will rise to superpower status assumes it will simply continue to rumble along on its current path, uninterrupted by events, history or all those little accidents that trip people up.

Thats not to say that the US is now all powerful, so it will always be all powerful, but its got to be remembered what it took to break the UKs dominance (the last, near unchallenged "superpower"): two world wars in short succession, conflicts of a scale and cost previously unknown in history which caused such debt, loss of life and prestige (even though the UK was on the winning side) that the Empire and the navy was no longer seen as worth the price vs. the demands of the people for a new welfare state and rising nationalist opinion across the world.

I just dont see the US being under similar stress currently...its fighting two wars, yeah, but its lost more men in a single day than it has in years of the current conflicts. Its in debt, yeah, but its been more heavily (vastly so) in debt in the immediate aftermath of WW2 compared to its GDP.

Its still perhaps the most attractive destination for high skilled immigrants, it has the best universities and research facilities, highest level of population growth in the industrialised societies (China is going to run into some issues here, given its one child policy) with its population predicted to grow at roughly the average global growth whilst Italy, Germany, Russia, Greece and so on get greyer and smaller, its population is young (25% under the age of 20) and getting younger (see immigration) vs. the age profile of Europe, and theres no indication yet that it is less willing to use force as and when it feels it needs to. Its still Rome as far as the rest of the world is concerned (The Republicans electoral college map of Europe ( 0 votes...) reflected the rabid interest of Europeans in the politics of the US (as did the hilarious effort of the Guardian sponsoring pen friends to US voters in swing states in 2004 trying to persuade them to vote against Bush....given the natural "**** off!" response to interference in domestic affairs, if the Guardian had told the Republicans their plans, theyd probably have coughed up the costs of postage)....there simply isnt as much interest in Chinese politics - US policy affects us directly...Chinese policy...doesnt. Not on the same scale.

Its still probably got the best mix of hard (military) and soft (general good feeling towards them, Americans tend to be pretty decent overall, plus their vast cultural projection - TV, cinema, music, books and so on) power.

Again, dont get me wrong - the US is not the eternal empire, but theres going to be need a significant shift in the underlying causes of its lead in economic, military, cultural and political power before I'll start learning Chinese.

Britain was in decline from the end of WW1 - her share of world commerce fell from 14.15% in 1913 to 9.8 in 1937 (The Rise and fall of the Great Powers, Paul Kennedy)
China is financing a big chunk of the US now and if it can do this when it is only third biggest economy in the world, then that suggests that the US, the biggest economy is not in good shape and that does not take into account the emermous pension liabilities falling due to the baby boom generation in the not too distant future.

anymore

[.

Above is US public debt figures from 1940. As you can see debt after 1950 fell dramatically despite the Korean and Vietnam wars.
China is now in a position, should it want to, to manipulate US interest rates. Waht does that say about the US's position as a Superpower ?

Here is link for chart :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

anymore

Sorry about above table of figures - didnt turn out the way it should :(

Sand

China is financing a big chunk of the US now and if it can do this when it is only third biggest economy in the world, then that suggests that the US, the biggest economy is not in good shape

It suggests China is quite confident in the US ability to meet its debts, which expresses a deeper confidence in the economic strength of the US tbh.

EDIT - Can you adjust the above table btw, its breaking the forums with its width...cheers.

Heres the US debt charted vs. GDP btw...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png

Oh well, the forum isnt idiot proof it seems. EDIT2 - Before anyone gets mod happy, that was self referential and my inability to get the image to display. Dont ban me, kthxbye.

anymore

Sand wrote: »

It suggests China is quite confident in the US ability to meet its debts, which expresses a deeper confidence in the economic strength of the US tbh.

.Perhaps China has ambitions to replace the dollar as the world's currency of choice !

Sand

Nah, it seems pretty rabidly deteremined to keep its currency artificially (as opposed to its actual economic strength) weak, to the annoyance of the US amongst others.