Tuesday, March 29, 2011

China gets Bellicose

BEIJING: Terming US attempts to woo India and other neighbors of China as "unbearable," an article in a Communist party magazine has said that Beijing must send a "clear signal" to these countries that it is ready to go to war to safeguard its national interests.
The article published in the Qiushi Journal, the official publication of the ruling Communist Party of China (CPC) said China must adhere to a basic strategic principle of not initiating war but being ready to counterattack.

"We must send a clear signal to our neighboring countries that we don't fear war, and we are prepared at any time to go to war to safeguard our national interests," the article said, suggesting an aggressive strategy to counter emerging US alliances in the region.

"Throughout the history of the new China (since 1949), peace in China has never been gained by giving in, only through war. Safeguarding national interests is never achieved by mere negotiations, but by war," it said.
Anyone who has read much about the rise of Germany during the late 19th and early twentieth century will see the parallels to the nationalistic language that comes out of China.  The Chinese military buildup also has parallels to Germany’s naval race with Great Britain:  bound to fail, but bound to antagonize at the same time.  Diplomatically, the German’s bellicose stance was often unsuccessful; China likewise today.

The Chinese News Report is alarming for a couple of reasons:
  1. With a press that has limits placed on what it says, new reports out of China can be viewed as policy statements or at least trial balloons of policy statements. 
  2. The parallel German aggressive stance was a major contributor to World War 1 and the crash of the first global economy.  World War 1 was certainly and “End of the world as we know it” event. 


Waldow said...

Preempt. Insert Japanese viceroys. JSC's a lesser evil than the CCP.

russell1200 said...

The Chinese lost something like 20 million people to the Japanese, and much like the Soviets did to the Germans, tied down the bulk of their divisions (51 seems to stick in my mind) through most of the war.

So they might disagree on the comparson.

I think an enlarged Japan would be a terrifying enemy. You are making me feel warm and fuzzy about China: LOL!

Waldow said...

OK this gets juvenile, but it is fun...

One way to win at Risk is to lure a weaker competitor into conquering most of Asia. This weakens that competetor while consolidating the interior. This makes it very easy for a reserved & prepared opponent from the periphery to sweep through, as a recently conquered area is easier to take from an imperialist than if u take it directly from "natives". Much as the Soviets came to control the Eastern Bloc.

Here's an entertaining example of an enlarged, honorable Japanese enemy defeated by an American.(This looks a bit like pro-wrestling but it is real.)

russell1200 said...

That is some fight. They were really hammering each other.

I don't remember those specific rules from Risk, but I do remember that Asia was foolish to take early in the game unless it was just handed to you. I vaguely recall that getting Australia or South America early on was much more obtainable and tended to keep you out of the Eurasian - North African struggle. A lot in Risk depends on how many people you have playing.