Skip to content

There’s no need to panic over China

The Washington Post warns us that China is a serious threat to the US:

Those who worry that hawks in Washington are drumming up an unnecessary and dangerous new cold war with China ought to take the time to read the address delivered in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square on Thursday by Chinese President Xi Jinping. As military jets flew overhead and a large crowd roared its approval, Mr. Xi boasted of the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”; he said China had “created a new model for human advancement” that it intended to spread through the world, while raising its armed forces to “world-class standards.”

"Mr. Xi’s speech," they conclude, "is a reminder that his regime’s soaring ambitions, and its belligerence in pursuing them, are a genuine threat to world order, and perhaps world peace."

Maybe. But let's get real. An American president could have delivered those lines almost verbatim on July 4th:

As military jets flew overhead and a large crowd roared its approval, Mr. Biden boasted that "America is back"; he said the United States "is dedicated to democracy and free markets" that it intended to continue spreading throughout the world, while warning others that "we have the most powerful military in human history."

Nobody would even blink at a speech like that. It would be taken for the routine patriotic blather that it is.

China has a lot to answer for, including its crackdown in Hong Kong; its treatment of the Uyghur minority; its behavior in the South China Sea; its routine theft of intellectual property; and more. That said, China really isn't a destabilizing presence worldwide. Its most aggressive instincts are almost exclusively aimed either internally or at its near neighbors.

Every big power has competition, and it's only natural that China would end up being ours after the fall of the Soviet Union. We need to take them seriously, but that doesn't mean desperately looking for provocations where none exist or ginning up panic over things like a little red meat tossed out for public consumption. That means as little coming from Xi as it would coming from Joe Biden.

45 thoughts on “There’s no need to panic over China

  1. rick_jones

    I would think that “democracy and free markets” would be a rather salient difference between the two. The “new model for human advancement” isn’t the same thing. Even beyond the theoretical to the actual.

    1. golack

      China has lifted millions of its citizens out of poverty, mainly by getting rid of full state control at the local level, and even at the national level--though it is cracking down on some of that now.
      How they deal with there consumer society will be .... interesting. Alas the crack downs show that the leadership thinks it is weak. That does not bode well.

      1. rick_jones

        I doubt the CCP gas a problem with consumerism. They do however have a problem with anything which might show them in a bad light or threaten their control.

      2. Spadesofgrey

        Dude, China has always been very decentralized. It's what heavily lead to CCP fights during the great leap forward and cultural revolution, with the latter finally consolidated around Man's Daoism.

        1. TheWesson

          Awesome. I had no idea China finally centralized around Daoism rather than the personality cult of Mao and (after that) obeisance to the Party.

          "Nature does not hurry, but everything is accomplished."

      3. ProgressOne

        The rulers are permanently afraid of another Timanin. That suggests they fear China could not survive democracy. Actually, it's the rulers who could not survive democracy. They would be in jail or exiled. Their crimes are many.

  2. aldoushickman

    I agree there's no need to panic over that quote. But nearly 1/5 of humanity living under a one-party authoritarian state headed by a president-for life who says things like that isn't exactly something that puts one at ease, either.

      1. HokieAnnie

        China is making noises about their "wayward province of Formosa" and Japan is saying that attacking Taiwan will cause them to use their self defense forces to aid Taiwan.

        So yeah young Kevin Bacon it is.

        1. galanx

          China has making noises about Taiwan (not Formosa, that's the old Portuguese name which Beijing would never use) for at least sixty years now. Japan vowing to defend Taiwan is a shot across the bows at China.

          1. HokieAnnie

            Yeah your right, it's "Taiwan province of China" or something like that. Really creepy to see that circa 1990s in the PeopleSoft install my employer had when I was inputting the data for a new visiting scientist from Taiwan.

            I think though that China has upped their rhetoric and flyovers of late, causing Japan (who is feeling feisty at the moment) to vow to defend their old colony.

  3. GrzeszDeL

    “ China has a lot to answer for, including… its routine theft of intellectual property… .”

    Please forgive my nitpicking, but I am a patent lawyer, and the above trespasses against one of my pet peeves; what exactly is “theft of intellectual property”? I do not think that this is a thing. One can infringe IP, but it is well nigh impossible to steal IP.

    1. Austin

      One can infringe IP, but it is well nigh impossible to steal IP.

      Hollywood would beg to differ, with DRM buried in every digital copy of movies and TV shows they "sell" that keeps you from choosing any media player to watch it or reselling it to someone else when you're done watching it or bequeathing it to your heirs when you die... you know, like you can do with physical VHS tapes and DVDs.

      1. D_Ohrk_E1

        A company that manufactures things in China has one of its dies copied (because someone snuck it out to a competitor and allowed them to measure and match it) so that knockoffs of a brand can be made and sold for cheaper.

        Would you call that stolen IP or infringed IP?

    2. aldoushickman

      "One can infringe IP, but it is well nigh impossible to steal IP."

      From one lawyer to another, I'll tell you you're splitting hairs. But setting that aside, as you're aware patented tech can't really be "stolen" in a strict sense since you have to publish the tech to get patent protection. But as you're probably also aware, not all IP is patents, and other IP can indeed be stolen. For example, example, as regards trade secrets, the relevant USC section (18 U.S.C. § 1832) is titled "Theft of Trade Secrets." And criminal infringement of copyright (18 U.S.C. § 2319) is, I believe, housed in the code section for "stolen property."

  4. Justin

    “All politicians tell lies from time to time, some venal and some mortal. Your alarms should go off, however, when the politicians convince themselves that their lies are true to relieve their consciences from the guilt of lying. Because when that happens, they will be able to use the lie to justify anything, be it foolish, or self-serving, or wicked.

    Today Republicans have convinced themselves that their big lie about the existential threat of the Democratic party is true, and so they have justified a great many actions which are, at best, ignoble. They believe their own lie so deeply that they have become an existential threat to the republic themselves.”

    https://thebulwark.com/do-they-really-believe-the-lies/

    The Chinese, like the republicans, believe their lies and so they really are an existential threat.

    1. Spadesofgrey

      Zionism is a real thing. Zionist troops backed by Russian Intel staged a mock rally in Philadelphia. Follow FBI drops. The Mueller report is good for background info as well. This also plays into China's Asian power grab. Can't wait in Indonesia when US businesses start collapsing during dollar collapse. Bye bye McDonald's.

    2. ProgressOne

      "They believe their own lie so deeply"

      Actually, I think few if any Republicans in Congress really believe it. They are just being too cowardly to stand up and admit Trump is full of crap.

      Also, it's not so much a Republicans lie, but a massive lie that Trump made up and then got millions of his low-education followers to believe. They believed in Trump, and people can be fooled by a malignant narcissist. His followers just can't comprehend that Trump could be blatantly lying to them. They have too much faith in him. Trump proves the danger to democracy of a malignant narcissist who is a master demagogue. We are lucky our institutions were strong enough to contain him. And it's not over yet.

      1. Spadesofgrey

        Wrong. Many of his most vocal supporters were educated Zionist movement slobs. Keep on spouting myths.

  5. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

    China not a destabilizing force in the world? What about the intentional People's Liberation Army Wuhan lableak of the altered-DNA SARS-CoV-2 virus?

    Are you saying Jon Stewart, Matt Yglesias, & Nate Silver don't know what they're talking about?

  6. Spadesofgrey

    I see China as a rival right now. They are quickly catching up technologically to the US, which has been living off debt, past accomplishment. When markets lose faith in the dollar, the US party will be over. China realizes that as much as anybody. Cutting the US off from debt will force a per capita GDP contraction that everybody knows is overdue. Then China's control over East Asia rises. Making it a literal regional superpower, which is the real goal.

    1. J. Frank Parnell

      China’s problem is it is run under a single authoritarian party. Any programs run under the government tend to digress to a form of crony capitalism. The managers are not the best and the brightest, but rather the ones who have an uncle highly placed in the party. They are good at stealing and copying existing technology, but often run into issues when trying to do state of the art. The C919 (a program to create what is a copy of the 30 year old 737) is an example of this.

  7. ProgressOne

    Xi: “created a new model for human advancement”

    Right, everyone really wants to live in a totalitarian paradise.

  8. pjcamp1905

    But then what will the Post write about? The Cycle must be fed. It is a primal law of nature, Mr. Beale.

  9. Jasper_in_Boston

    Kevin's completely, 100% correct. America has periodic freakouts, and this is the latest iteration. Believe me, China is not nearly as formidable as people think*. It's true America could partner with the CCP in making the world a much more dangerous place. We could even give ourselves a nuclear war if we wanted to badly enough. But really bad outcomes like this would flow only from our own stupidity. If we have the good sense to concentrate on our strengths, get our own house in order as much as possible**, cultivate our alliances, and not be dragged into a war, we'll be fine over the long term. It sucks that 1.4 billion people live under an authoritarian system, but, in fairness, a lot (likely most) of them are fine with the status quo for the time being given the massive increase in living standards they've experienced, and moreover, there's never been a single minute during the USA's 250 year lifetime when substantial numbers of humans haven't lived under authoritarian systems. I believe democracy is the wave of the future, but its global progress has always come in fits and starts, and right now democracy is in a fit.

    *Like, 99% of its geopolitical power is based on sheer size, and now that China is on the verge of shrinking -- the shrinkage may have already started -- Beijing's in for a rough ride. Give it another 5-7 years. The dreaded "middle income trap" is staring Xi in the face.

    **MAGA/GOP is a much more immediate and dangerous threat to our national well being than the CCP. We could be a literal authoritarian system ourselves in as little as four years if things don't go well.

    1. Spadesofgrey

      Chinese are not as historically lazy as the Russians. They aren't itching for a fight. South Korea and Japan can keep their unmasculine democracies as long as they serve China in the end.

  10. kenalovell

    America has single-mindedly tried to 'contain China' for 71 years. Its latest bipartisan freak-out seems to have been triggered by the realization that not only had China declined to remain contained, but the glories of capitalist free market globalization had resulted in America coming to depend on China for all kinds of manufactured goods.

    China was exploited and humiliated by other countries for hundreds of years, after being the most advanced nation in the world in an earlier era. Of course it is not going to accept remaining a second-rate power now it has the capacity to dominate its region. If the US tries to contest that regional dominance in pursuit of a discredited neoliberal agenda, it will end badly for the US. But if it accepts that it is no longer the only global superpower, there is no need for that to be framed as an inevitable source of rivalry and conflict.

    1. ProgressOne

      "China declined to remain contained"

      They have been contained so far. They have taken over no new territory.

      "If the US tries to contest that regional dominance in pursuit of a discredited neoliberal agenda, it will end badly for the US."

      We have an obligation to watch out for the security of democracies in the region. Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, and New Zealand are all in the neighborhood. And yes, we want trade relations with low trade barriers. The conditions for trade agreements can of course be debated.

      1. kenalovell

        The objective of containment was not primarily to prevent China taking over territory, but to stop it becoming an influential regional and global power. It failed miserably in that respect.

        The only "obligation to watch out for the security of democracies" is one which the US voluntarily assumed by treaty. In any event, there is no reason to suspect China of having any hostile intentions to other countries in the region, unless they choose to join America in its policy of containment.

  11. Munsrat

    Maybe so but a lot of people who know China who are not panickers were very concerned by Xi's speeach. Take Bill Bishop of Sinocism for example: "I watched the speech live, between the content of the speech and the overall setting I am now more concerned than ever about where things are headed. I also heard the speech as perhaps the most coherent argument for more pervasive and painful decoupling than anyone has yet made. Depressing." And, I think you are underrating efforts to change the world, not just its neighborhood. I talk about this in my new book, Challenging China (https://www.tuttlepublishing.com/china/challenging-china). I hope you might give it chance and read it. I do agree there's no reason to panic and China has as many or more challenges as America and other countries but there is plenty of room to be concerned and to take smart steps to deal with a more authoritarian, more expansionist China.

  12. illilillili

    An American president could have bragged about our military strength on July 4th, but an American president didn't. That's kind of the point.

  13. ScentOfViolets

    Tell me, I'm curious: what does it mean for a country to be a 'world power', whatever that is, and why should I care (within a wide -- but not universal -- latitude, that is) which country is 'dominant'? War of the old-fashioned bullets-and-bombs kind is just so pre-21 C; what else should I be worried about?

    TL;DR: All this talk about who's in charge of the world seems like so much derp to me. It gets the rubes riled maybe, but that's about it.

  14. Martin Stett

    "What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state -- Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do."

    Ditto China. They won't do a thing to risk trade with the US.
    When you look at the two great fascist aggressor of WW2, Germany and Japan, the decision-maker(s) were delusional if not borderline insane. I don't think the Chinese are anywhere near that.

    1. ScentOfViolets

      Agree 100%. This is just tired old nation-state rhetoric designed to apply leverage to our decision-making apparatus via the rubes.

      OTOH, there is something to be said concerning who controls what 'strategic resources', e.g. lithium (Bolivia/Argentina/Chile, China comes in at number seven), oil (China doesn't even make the top ten), etc. IOW and in most cases, China is at best a tier II player. The one exception I can think of off the top of my head would be the lanthanides (the so-called 'rare earth' elements) that are used in the production of catalysts, high-performance magnets (and therefore electric motors), batteries, pigments/phosphors ... in short, everything we popularly deem hi tech.

      But that's something they would have controlled anyway, leading world power or not.

  15. Jasper_in_Boston

    I think it's clear the Chinese are no longer overly worried about their trade relationship with the US. They only export a few points of GDP to America, and the US has been growing less important as a trade partner for Beijing for quite a while now (that's the problem with starting a trade war: you lose your leverage as time passes). They also know full well that, even if the Sino-US relationship were to decline precipitously, further, the US is no position to simply cease all trade with China: an accompanying decline in purchases by the US wouldn't be swift or large enough to derail China's economy. Beijing's strategy is to cultivate their economic relations with other, more reliable partners so as to grow even less dependent on trade with America over the long term. They're succeeding at this effort. And China makes no secret of this strategy: the Communist Party's mouthpiece, the Global Times, constantly features stories praising this or that (non-US) trade partner, while hurling bitter invective at Washington on a daily basis.

Comments are closed.