Chinese Security and Geopolitics

China can never become a superpower like USA.

China's geographical position is not favourable for her to develop into such a power.

China is encircled by Russia to the north, India to the south and Japan in the east.

If China starts to aspire to be the hegemon and seeks to call the shots to these three states, they will naturally form an alliance against China.

Due to these factors, China can only be a great power in asia but not hegemon of asia.

USA is the first and will be the last superpower.

In the future, there will be no more superpowers but many strong powers.

great subject Pike.

Originally posted by pikeshot1600 China has been ordained as a great power by the contemporary media.  But is she really?   Let's discuss the "traditional security concerns" China has with her perceptions of state security.  These are concerns as seen by China's ruling elites (those elites are primarily the PRC Communist Party aparatus and, maybe just as important, the leadership of the People's Liberation Army).

This is how understand their concerns.

1. Remaining in power. The CCP will always put itself first and do anything to remain on top.
   
2. Securing their periphery. Strong centralist understanding of power. Otherwise it could lose territory. Think Taiwan and Qing legacy (non Han) holdings on their periphery.
   
3. Securing resources and their transport routes. South China sea <> Straights of Malacca <> Bay of Bengal <> Indian ocean and as well as the Pacific.
4. Projecting regional power/influence, via economic, diplomatic and militray means. So to neutralise any other competing power *1 USA 2 India 3 Russia*and help all of the previous points remain so
   

 

Originally posted by pikeshot1600 1)  As far as traditional security concerns, perhaps Russia is the least of them these days, although Russia can never be discounted.  Chinese weight of population, strategic depth along the western border regions (including Kazakhstan) and the modernization of Chinese industry, technology and military forces have changed the balance that favored the USSR until the 1990s.  Russia, longer term, seems to have more to be concerned with in this bipolar relationship.

concur, i think right now the US bogey keeps them together in the CA region. Though Russia should watch its east as well as their west/south. To me Siberia is more vulnerable than the CA region.

The nuclear advantage should keep Russia territory secure for now, though it needs to try a little harder in keeping in with the Indians (and learn toshare this relationship with the west). joint work on 5th gen fighters for instance will help them keep ahead or at least up with the Chinese who haven't over taken them yet but certainly can.

Originally posted by Bankotsu The "China threat" theory is probably propagated by USA to serve their own political agenda. This is similar to the "Iraq threat" propaganda put out by Bush regime. ...Manning wrote that Bush was so worried, so upset, over the failure of the UN inspectors to find weapons of mass destruction, that he talked about three ways to, quote, “provoke a confrontation with Hussein,” one of which, Bush said, was to, quote, “fly U2 aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft, over Iraq, falsely painted in United Nations colors,” and Bush said if Hussein fires upon them, this will be a breach of UN resolutions and justify war. So here we have George Bush telling the American people, telling the world, that Hussein was an imminent threat to the security of this country, so we had to strike first in self-defense, but behind closed doors, this very small man was talking about how to provoke Hussein into a war... http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/13/citing_iraq_war_renowned_attorney_vincent

Edited by pikeshot1600 - 14-Jun-2008 at 14:38

Read the first post in the topic.

Originally posted by Bankotsu China has been ordained as a great power by the contemporary media.  But is she really? So my view is the "China threat" theory is probably propagated by USA to serve their own political agenda.

There doesn't seem to have been much attention to the development of Chinese influence in Burma.  The old Burma Road and the "Stillwell Road" are routes along which China can export manufactured products and also import oil from the Middle East.  The access to the Indian Ocean afforded by Burma presents both opportunity and problems for China.

The China-India rivalry is always there, but there is also room for cooperation.

India takes the high ground against China
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JF14Df02.html

For a new order
http://www.flonnet.com/stories/

India essentially dose not control half of its territory at any given time it should be remembered. Any many of them are near the Chinese border.

Originally posted by Sparten With respect to India, its like the Patton-Monty rivalry, it existed only in Patton (who is in this case India) mind. Geography precludes India or China from influencing each other except on the periphery, India sees Chinese influence in the insurgencies in the North East, and the China threat as a convinient excuse to raise new formations which are for Pakistan.

they had a border war and haven't resolved it yet. What they seem to have agreed to do, is not bring it up. To Delhi's north  Nepal is coming under PRC influence, to the east Burma is already there, and of course Pakistan on the west side. IIRC Maoist rebels are quite strong in Bihar, though i don't know how much they have to do with the PRC. If i was them i would try and hedge out some of that and be worried about Sikkim, Assam. India didn't go nuclear because of Pakistan.

Originally posted by pikeshot1600   3)  India is seen by the Chinese elites as a direct threat to Chinese interests both in the high Himalayas and in Burma.  Both these regions are of interest to China primarily for geopolitical reason alone.   The physical problems are very great, but despite the natural barrier posed by the Himalayas, modern technology can project power both by air, and airlift capability; and there are numerous passes that, while high and very difficult, could be developed for transportation at least some months of the year.  The most likely transportation use would be military.  Control of much, or all, of this geography, in that case, would facilitate military movement - for positioning or for influence - both out of, and down into the subcontinent.  (The geopolitical logic for Chinese control of Tibet, and for Indian control of much of Kashmir, thus becomes more clear.)  This development is not likely short term, but it could be at some later time.

yes the Indians are a potential threat in Tibet though that is one hard piece to grab. Beijing see the Tibetan exiles being protected and underhandedly helped by the Indians.

The Indians compete/threaten on many levels,
they have the demographics to match them (only they can do this)and in fact are growing quicker in this regard. they will need more resources
They are now an emerging economy, just behind the Chinese on the growth path, and will compete for resources, investments and business ($$$).
They have the Russians on one hand and the USA all of a sudden on the other, either way with one or both as allies it gives;

1. the two 'other' big powers access to its Tibetan periphery and Indian ocean sea routes (Burma inc), if India chooses to. Even a potential partner in a future war
   
2. vis versa it gives the Indians access to technology and a better edge to do that themselves
   

Competition in the bay of Bengal would be the most damaging to the chinese and threaten a key supply route for commodities.

Leonidas, the Indo-China border has always been of a secondary nature to India. of 45 divisions in their army, only 5 are earmarked for China. The rest are all for Pakistan or CI.

Edited by Sparten - 14-Jun-2008 at 17:45