Issues Navigator

Global Challenges

Strategic Regions

Domestic Debates

Tag cloud

See All Tags

May 21, 2008 |  14 comments |  Print | E-Mail Your Opinion  

Andrew D. Bishop

Is China the New Japan?

Andrew D. Bishop: As it becomes - supposedly - obvious that China might one day “rule the world,” it’s urgent we take a look at the facts behind the fears, and reassess our expectations.

Here is a list of factors that might seriously impede China's rise:

The price of oil: As a recent Stratfor piece explained, service-based economies like those of the West are actually relatively impervious to the rise of oil prices. Those who will suffer most if this rise continues are actually highly industrialized countries, such as China. So it turns out, there might not be that much to China's boom and the country's future might not be quite as promising as it may seem.

Separatism: Tibet has become atypical example, but in fact the Xinjiang region and its Uighur population might be China's real nightmare.

Social inequalities: There are currently hundreds of thousands of formerly rural workers literally floating around and within China's main urban powerhouses. Add to this the fact that those who've decided to remain in the country aren't necessarily better off or more satisfied with their situation, and you get a pretty explosive mix, especially given that China is no stranger to civil wars.

Lack of freedom and of more menial liberties: Though I am among those who argue that since the end of the Tiananmen movement in 1989, Chinese citizens have been far more focused on improving their life standards little by little than on overthrowing their government, I've got to admit I'm not sure exactly how the Chinese Communist Party intends to manage its -ultimate- fall (though I've hinted they might manage, here).

Regional instability: What will China do the day North Korea collapses, or the day Pakistan and India fight again? How will the Chinese face these earthquakes at their borders?

Balance of power: It has been argued that China is too smart to let enemies surround it. This is why -it is said- Chinese leaders have engaged their neighbors with free trade agreements and injected loads of cash into the country's most Westward provinces. "China's prosperity will be your prosperity" -its leaders seem to be saying to those countries that might otherwise fear such a boom.

But it seems to me that there is a limit as to how much any given country can be reassured and/or bribed. At one point or another, some countries will either grow too powerful to be petty vassals (India?), see better opportunities elsewhere (Burma? the Philippines? Mongolia?), or just dislike the spread of the "Chinese way".

These are just a few of the many hurdles that might one day impede China's ultimate rise (a rapidly aging population could be another one). Note that these are the kind of hurdles faced by a range of other countries as well, and that my purpose is not to "wish" any of them to China.

My point is rather the following: in the 1980s, we feared Japan (to the point that a book title such as The Coming War With Japan was shock to no-one); today, we "fear" China. We were wrong to fear Japan; so I think we should ask ourselves: are we wrong to fear China?

Andrew Bishop is a graduate student of European politics. He is also an active blogger and commentator on international affairs. Read more of his work at his blog WhatYouMustRead

 

  • 9
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this Article! What's this?

 
Tags: | China | Asian integration | Japan |
 
Comments
Donald  Stadler

May 21, 2008

  • 3
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
This piece seems a bit of a grab-bag of 'what *might* go wrong for China', but I think it makes a valuable point generally that there are inherent limits to the economic and poklitical systems pursued by China.

The Chinese thenselves seem to see this, as the piece about hwo many are turning to internal consumers to fuel further growth. I think they will ultimately find that sweated labor makes a poor market.

I thinjk they have two options - to go upmarket or to seek to serve internal markets. Going upmarket can be politically perilous, as that will require masses of highly educated/skilled workers, and these have a way of insisting upon political rights and freedoms not currently offered. I think if China goes that route they may wind up facing a similar situation to that Germany did a century ago - and that ended in WWI and tears.

Perhaps producing mass goods for the domestic market will allow them to put off the crisis for another decade - because there is a mass market right now despite low wages in much of the Chinese economy. But high prices for oil and other materials threaten even that - the market is there but can it be profitable with high resource costs? Or will chinese labor need to be sweated even harder than it is now, shrinking the domestic market and raising political pressures?
 
ilyas m mohsin

May 22, 2008

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Despite all the 'insurgencies', so far, the Chinese appear to be doing well. It is like India that way wherein there are many more insurgnecies in the South/ East but the Indian democracy is enabling the country to making considerable headway despite the known internal glitches as well as Kashmir.
To my mind the real danger is the energy-crunch at the Global level. This may affect China like all other big consumers including US. Accordingly this factor is going to influence the upmarket/ domestic market in a big way for China. Being conscious of their conern, the Chinese have already made pacts with oil-producers in Africa etc which do not suffer from any bad-history vis-a-vis China. However, this may not be enough
considering the current crisis of supply/demand.
If matters go out of hand, the Chinese may embrace the Russians warmly as the Russo-Chinese relations are already on the mend. That may provide some relief and the arrangement may be cost-effective.
However, if a desperate situation develops, China could court Caspian neighbours alongwith Afghanistan, alraedy a quagmire for US, to start exploiting those fabulous reserves. It can be a co-existential arrangement with the US or it could be some other arrangement depending on US' power/credibility at the given time. Nukes and the bluster would not figure unless some loonies want to destroy the planet.
 
Donald  Stadler

May 22, 2008

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I don't recall anyone discussing this as a nuclear crisis, Ilyas. I think some see an economic crisis coming for China, and would expect a serious economic crisis to transmute itself into an internal political crisis within the authoritarian chinese political system. The closest parallel in recent history might be the trajectory German history took during the 20th century, but would hesitate to predict more closely than that because the situations differ too much.

Why do I predict an economic crisis for China? Because I think their growth strategy is reaching some natural limits and will have to hange in a big way for China to continue it's trajectory of growth. If oil prices continue to rise the West will fell the pain as well as China, but the West has much higher value-added per unit of commodity sued than China has and will therefore find it easier to remain profitable. China enterprises may be pushed into the red by soaring commodity prices, or the traditional Chinese cost advantage may be seriously eroded. One possibility that Chinese enterprises may attemtp is to lower already extremely low wages; but doing that may well increase the social pressures in that country to potentially explosive levels.

All this is extremely speculative of course, and based completely upon readings of historical patterns observed when Europe and the US industrialised. All I'm ready to assert with any certainty is that China WILL face a major economic crisis in the next 20 years (and it may be upon us now). I think that certain measures which China could take to react th the crisis may well induce social and political crisises, and finally that shoud these crisises materialize the Chinese political system is ill-equipped to find peaceful answers to these crisises.
 
Andrew D. Bishop

May 22, 2008

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Hey, it's a pleasure seeing the article has stirred some debate...

If you're interested, I suggest you read a few of the following post and related articles from my blog (whatyoumustread.blogspot.com) :

- On the Chinese vs Indian economy: http://whatyoumustread.blogspot.com/2008/05/two-giants-are-on-boat-...

- On Russia's place in Asia: http://whatyoumustread.blogspot.com/2008/04/russia-has-it-all.html

- On democratic prospects in China: http://whatyoumustread.blogspot.com/2008/04/why-cant-we-just-all-ag...

- On Chinese internal political debates: http://whatyoumustread.blogspot.com/2008/03/do-you-speak-chinese.html

 
ilyas m mohsin

May 23, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I do not offer this as the dominating aspect of the issue, Donald. However, as supply crunch aggravates demand or vice versa, some tensions appear most likely to develop inrelation to oil.
My prognsis may be far featched as yet but it remains a remote possibility. Its remoteness would be controlled by the ground realities.
I have, at times, read some silly comments from our naive friends asking why US should not nuke this or that country right away.
Caspian resources like the Arctic are subject to controversy. If we behave like decent human beings heeding the International Law, the optimal exploitation of such resources could help save the Globe. However, if some loonies had their way, a nuclear issue can emerge.As all parties have over-kill capacity MAD, they may destroy the Globe. It is a fair warning but, luckily, now even neo-cons in the US are looking the other way after world-bashing through Bush which has damaged the US' credibility/ goodwill, almost irretrievably. Better sense and knowledge of the world, reportedly denied to the incumbent Adminstartion, may heal the wounds over a long period of time.
 
Donald  Stadler

May 23, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I'm not sure what you are getting at, ilyas, but let me tender a guess. Possibly you are implying that as China starts overtaking the US economically in a major way and starts to catch up militarily those madhouse warmongers in Washington begin to brandish nuclear warheads at Beijing and everything ends in a grand nuclear battle.

Permit me a certain skepticism about this notion - there are nuclear powers on Chinese borders who will feel far more immediately threatened by such a development than the US will. Russia and India for a start, and potentially even Pakistan - assuming that china's vast muslim minority becomes a problem going forward for China. Nor has the US set any precedent of using it's nuclear arsenal as a means of economic defense. It may do so in future of course, but one could assert of ANY nuclear power including China. Until it happens such theories seem more than a little far-fetched.

As for disputations abotu artic resources or mining sea bottoms or such - I haven't seen too much cause for concern. Rissia has been a tifle agresssive but until one can name a nation likely to try to nuke Russia into submission on the issue - well it might make a good plot for a blockbuster disaster flick - not much more.
 
ilyas m mohsin

May 26, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
China was an underdog till US/allies lost Vietnam. Another ten yeras of peace, if allowed, will make it different in developmental terms despite the glitches. As against that too much damaage has been done in the last 7 years to US power/ credibility/ goodwill. Is it difficult to corelate these factors? come on man, it is no Space Engineering!
 
Andrew D. Bishop

June 3, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I have a new post on my blog about this issue. It's mainly based on excerpts from the Asia Times which -I think- are particularly enlightening:

http://whatyoumustread.blogspot.com/2008/06/revolution-or-no-revolu...
 
Donald  Stadler

June 4, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Bestselling US author Tom Clancy wrote about a US-Japan war in "Debt of Honor". http://www.amazon.co.uk/Debt-Honour-Tom-Clancy/dp/000647974X/ref=sr...

The plot of 'Debt' postulates an alliance between a powerful Japanese industrial combine (Zaibutsu), and the governments of China and India, although the latter two countries don't actually go to war in 'Debt'. India ties up a US carrier task force by threatening Australia while Japan cripples the US Pacific Fleet. China remains benevolently neutral to all this while readying statge II of the war - the conquest of Siberia, where Japanese prospectors have located vast new stores of oil and strategic minerals, which Japan will exploit by agreement with the Chinese conquerors. India will get Australia, I think.

A sequel to 'Debt' actually tells the story of the Chinese invasion of Siberia "The Bear and the Dragon". The US enters the war allied with Russia and the allies win. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bear-Dragon-Tom-Clancy/dp/0140274065/ref=rc...

Good potboillers both. I recommend Mr. Clancy's books - just don't take them seriously.

 
Donald  Stadler

June 4, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
AnI find the China Times piece rather unlikely although I agree that China isn't quite the irresistable force that most people in the West seem to consider it. It's true that China has had two major civil wars since the 1850's, but assuming that another one is somehow possible depends upon the assumption that the Communist Party/oligarchy is somehow similar to the Manchus. I think the modern Cp is far more broad-based and less brittle than the Manchus were.

I think a crackup would require a major external event like a war. A short term scenario might be an opportunistic war to grab Taiwan which goes horribly wrong when the US intervenes and horribly damages the Chinese economy and transportation infrastructure. Possibly destroys the big dams on the major rivers, creating disasterous flooding and famine in Chinese cities.

I think it's unlikely that China would start such a war unless extremely confident of victory - which surely msot of the Chinese leadership is not.

A longer term scenario might loosely follow the course of German history. China begins to lose it's economic and technical lead over India after going through a big recession, and starts looking over it's shoulder. Coalitions begin to form in Asia, and a spark (like the assasination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914) sets off WWIII. In the case of something like this all bets are off, especially if neither side wins quickly. And in coalition wars that is the way to bet, neither WWI nor WWII was a swift war. Both were decided by the exhaustion of one of the coalitions.
 
Donald  Stadler

June 4, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
One final comment: The 'some American hardliners' whom 'Bleicher' mentions in the Asian Times piece are decidedly not in power now and are unlikely to gain power under any Bush's likely successors.

US policy toward china has been and remains pragmatic - I see no major surge which could change that within the forseeable future. Only something like an Asian war could change that, I think.
 
Andrew D. Bishop

June 6, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Interesting -thanks. I particularly like your comments about Clancy. A friend of mine likes to say Clancy's always a step ahead of our fears... Maybe he has the solutions too ;)
 
Donald  Stadler

June 6, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
'Debt of Honor' postulates a highly unlikely scenario to create a plausible near-term US-Japan war to write about. It's an entertaining read but struck me as far less plausible than many of Clancy's earlier books like 'Red Storm Rising', 'Cardinal of the Kremlin' and even 'Hunt for Red October'.

'The Bear and the Dragon' I thought a more plausible scenario, although I don't believe the current Chinese oligarchy thinks or behaves in the way the book shows. Should a Chinese Napoleon arise it could do however.
 
Andrew D. Bishop

June 7, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Thanks for the references. I'll see if I can get around to them.
 

Create Comment

Type the characters shown in the image below into the textfield.
Captcha

What are tags?

Community

Jobs / Internships

Call for Papers

Atlantic Events

Partners

User of the day

Rachelle Kamba Ilenda
Rachelle Kamba Ilenda
Member since
June 20, 2007

Poll