3 ms·

I would agree with you except for the fact that the Chinese economy will be large enough to support a military equalling or surpassing that of the US. That's ba

by exelius 11y ago

I would agree with you except for the fact that the Chinese economy will be large enough to support a military equalling or surpassing that of the US. That's basically what the article is saying: economic ascendancy often results in a military build-up, and when it does, conflict often follows. China is spending heavily on their military to exert their will, and given current trends will be able to overtake the US on military spending in the next decade or two. Whether that results in conflict is largely up to the US, in my mind. Also, post-WWII Japan was more or less a vassal state of the US, so we kept their military ambitions in check. We don't have any US military bases in China, so we can't do that there.

ende 11y ago
Again, it remains to be seen whether the Chinese economy meets the expectations of earlier forecasts. I think a more realistic view is that the Chinese economy assumes a role in the region comparable to Germany's in Europe. Military ascendency is not just a simple product of economic ascendency however. Geography plays a large role, as well as military history and institutional knowledge. For example, one does not simply build a blue water navy. China is practically starting from scratch when it comes to naval tradition, and when combined with geography will likely never pose a serious challenge to US naval primacy in the Pacific - regardless of comparative economic might. Even at the height of its power the USSR never posed a serious threat to that primacy. Bounded to its own regional theatre, the Chinese military will likely continue to be structured around anti-area access denial strategies. However, increasing economic co-dependence is likely to make this entire topic moot. Call me an optimist but I predict the extent of US-China naval engagement 20 years from now to consist of joint security exercises and disaster relief missions.

by exelius 11y ago

ende 11y ago

Again, it remains to be seen whether the Chinese economy meets the expectations of earlier forecasts. I think a more realistic view is that the Chinese economy assumes a role in the region comparable to Germany's in Europe. Military ascendency is not just a simple product of economic ascendency however. Geography plays a large role, as well as military history and institutional knowledge. For example, one does not simply build a blue water navy. China is practically starting from scratch when it comes to naval tradition, and when combined with geography will likely never pose a serious challenge to US naval primacy in the Pacific - regardless of comparative economic might. Even at the height of its power the USSR never posed a serious threat to that primacy. Bounded to its own regional theatre, the Chinese military will likely continue to be structured around anti-area access denial strategies. However, increasing economic co-dependence is likely to make this entire topic moot. Call me an optimist but I predict the extent of US-China naval engagement 20 years from now to consist of joint security exercises and disaster relief missions.