What's new

A Chinese Empire Reborn

jetray

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 23, 2016
Messages
2,715
Reaction score
-7
Country
India
Location
India
A Chinese Empire Reborn

The Communist Party’s emerging empire is more the result of force than a gravitational pull of Chinese ideas.

查看简体中文版
查看繁體中文版
By EDWARD WONGJAN. 5, 2018

I am the son of two empires, the United States and China. I was born in and raised around Washington in the Nixon-to-Reagan era, but my parents grew up in villages in southern China. My father was a member of the People’s Liberation Army in the 1950s, the first decade of Communist rule, before he soured on the revolution and left for Hong Kong.

So it was with excitement that I landed in Beijing in April 2008 to start an assignment with The New York Times that stretched to almost a decade. I had just spent nearly four years reporting on the bloody failure of the American imperial project in Iraq, and now I was in the metropole that was building a new world order.

China had entered a honeymoon phase with other nations. For years, anticipation had built for the 2008 Summer Olympics. Though China had suppressed a Tibetan uprising that spring, it earned international good will after a devastating earthquake.

People flocked to Beijing for China’s “coming out” party. Foreign leaders gawked at gleaming architecture and opening ceremonies that signaled the nation’s ambitions. After the festivities ended, the world arrived at another inflection point — the implosion of the American financial system and the global economic crisis. China’s growth buttressed both the world economy and a belief among its officials that its economic and political systems could rival those of the United States.

Photo
merlin_107001671_f0f2e50b-7c0c-4c73-b182-db369f12d6c7-master675.jpg


President Xi Jinping onscreen at the parade. The event was seen as an effort to showcase the nation’s rising military might to a global audience. Credit Ng Han Guan/Associated Press
Though unabashedly authoritarian, China was a magnet. I was among many who thought it might forge a confident and more open identity while ushering in a vibrant era of new ideas, values and culture, one befitting its superpower status. When I ended my China assignment last year, I no longer had such expectations.

From trade to the internet, from higher education to Hollywood, China is shaping the world in ways that people have only begun to grasp. Yet the emerging imperium is more a result of the Communist Party’s exercise of hard power, including economic coercion, than the product of a gravitational pull of Chinese ideas or contemporary culture.

Continue reading the main story


Of the global powers that dominated the 19th century, China alone is a rejuvenated empire. The Communist Party commands a vast territory that the ethnic-Manchu rulers of the Qing dynasty cobbled together through war and diplomacy. And the dominion could grow: China is using its military to test potential control of disputed borderlands from the South China Sea to the Himalayas, while firing up nationalism at home. Once again, states around the world pay homage to the court, as in 2015 during a huge military parade.

For decades, the United States was a global beacon for those who embraced certain values — the rule of law, free speech, clean government and human rights. Even if policy often fell short of those stated ideals, American “soft power” remained as potent as its armed forces. In the post-Soviet era, political figures and scholars regarded that American way of amassing power through attraction as a central element of forging a modern empire.

China’s rise is a blunt counterpoint. From 2009 onward, Chinese power in domestic and international realms has become synonymous with brute strength, bribery and browbeating — and the Communist Party’s empire is getting stronger.

Photo
merlin_121901555_d96468e1-c427-44e7-8e38-ac8d5b1d01ea-master675.jpg


A poster for a Chinese high-speed train at the construction site for a bridge spanning the Mekong River near Luang Prabang, Laos. Credit Adam Dean for The New York Times
At home, the party has imprisoned rights lawyers, strangled the internet, compelled companies and universities to install party cells, and planned for a potentially Orwellian “social credit” system. Abroad, it is building military installations on disputed Pacific reefs and infiltrating cybernetworks. It pushes the “One Belt, One Road” infrastructure initiative across Eurasia, which will have benefits for other nations but will also allow China to pressure them to do business with Chinese state-owned enterprises, as it has done in recent years throughout Asia and Africa.

So far, Chinese soft power plays a minor role. For one thing, the party insists on tight control of cultural production, so Chinese popular culture has little global appeal next to that of the United States or even South Korea.

No nation knows China’s hard ways better than Norway. China punished it by breaking diplomatic and economic ties for six years after the independent Nobel committee in 2010 gave the Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, a pro-democracy writer imprisoned in China (he died of cancer in July).

President Xi Jinping is the avatar of the new imperium. The 19th Party Congress in October was his victory lap. Party officials enshrined “Xi Jinping Thought” in the party constitution, putting him on par with Mao Zedong. Mr. Xi said China had entered a “new era” of strength and the party would be the arbiter of public life. Mr. Xi holds appeal for foreign leaders aspiring to strongman status — President Trump openly admires him.


Many Chinese people told me they still believed the country’s top leaders looked out for ordinary people, even if the party was rotting. This belief was rooted in abstract hope rather than empirical evidence. It was like peering through the toxic air enveloping Chinese cities in search of blue sky.

The culture of hard power goes from top to bottom. In the provinces, party officials move quickly to suppress any challenges to their authority. When they sense rising mass resistance, they buy off or imprison the leaders.

I saw this in my first year in China, when officials separately broke the will of parents furious over deadly tainted milk and ones grieving over thousands of children who had died in shoddily built schools during the Sichuan earthquake. I learned this was typical of the approach taken by Chinese officials. Most Chinese do not run afoul of the party, but those who do pay a high price.

The abuse of power is frequent, and many Chinese say corruption is their top concern. All other issues, from environmental degradation to wealth inequality, are linked to it. Mr. Xi is canny enough to capitalize on the discontent: He leads an anticorruption drive that allows him to oust rivals and enforce party discipline.

None of that results in the rule of law. And China’s domestic security budget has exceeded that of its military in recent years, even as both grow rapidly, highlighting the nation’s investment in hard power.

Latest Video Times Documentaries By JONAH M. KESSEL 9:32
Tashi Wangchuk: A Tibetan’s Journey for Justice
Video
Tashi Wangchuk: A Tibetan’s Journey for Justice
Worried about the erosion of Tibetan culture and language, one man takes his concerns to Beijing, hoping media coverage and the courts can reverse what he sees as a systematic eradication.

I learned in 2016 that Tashi Wangchuk, a young entrepreneur who had spoken to me about his advocacy for broader Tibetan language education, had been detained in his hometown, Yushu, by police officers. In microblog posts, Mr. Tashi had asked local officials to promote true bilingual education, and he had appeared in 2015 in Times articles and video.

Mr. Tashi is the kind of citizen China should value — someone working within the law to recommend policies that would benefit ordinary people and ease tensions. But two years later, Mr. Tashi remains imprisoned. A court tried him on Thursday for “inciting separatism” despite criticism from Western diplomats and human rights groups.

The party’s style of rule threatens to turn sentiments against China even as the empire grows in stature. History teaches us about an inevitable dialectic: Power creates resistance. While the state can bend people to its will, those people meet it with fear and suspicion. The United States learns this lesson each time it over-relies on hard power.

I traveled often to the frontier regions because it was there that the dynamic of power and resistance was most evident, and that I got the clearest look at how China treats its most vulnerable citizens, those outside mainstream ethnic Han culture. No other areas better embody the idea of imperial China. Conquered by the Manchus and reabsorbed by Mao, these lands make up at least one-quarter of Chinese territory. Party officials fear they are like the Central Asian regions under Soviet rule — always on the verge of rebellion and eager to break free.

Photo
merlin_115748438_977d4f82-27d5-47aa-98ee-211d08bf586e-master675.jpg


Police officers on patrol in Kashgar, Xinjiang, in northwestern China. Beijing fears unrest among the Muslim Uighurs of the region. Credit Gilles Sabrié for The New York Times
In October 2016, I quietly entered the sprawling Tibetan Buddhist settlement of Larung Gar and watched the government-ordered demolition of homes of monks and nuns. In parts of Xinjiang populated by ethnic Uighurs, the tension is even greater, fueled by cycles of violence and repression. Uighurs speak in hushed tones of restrictions on Islam and mass detentions. Signs across Xinjiang forbid long beards and full veils, and surveillance cameras are everywhere. On my last reporting trip in China, to the Silk Road oasis of Kashgar, I saw police patrols in riot gear rounding up young men.

An important bellwether is Hong Kong, the former British colony from which my parents emigrated to the United States. On this southern frontier, as in the west, the party works to silence the voices of students, politicians and other residents critical of its rule. Agents have even abducted booksellers. But those moves have actually led to more resistance and strengthened Hong Kong and Cantonese identity. They have also stoked greater fears of Beijing among citizens of Taiwan, the self-governing island that the party longs to rule.

It is not a stretch to say the party’s ways of governance perpetuate a lack of trust by the Chinese in their institutions and fellow citizens. And its international policies light the kindling of resistance overseas, from Australia to Ghana.

Chinese citizens and the world would benefit if China turns out to be an empire whose power is based as much on ideas, values and culture as on military and economic might. It was more enlightened under its most glorious dynasties. But for now, the Communist Party embraces hard power and coercion, and this could well be what replaces the fading liberal hegemony of the United States on the global stage.

It will not lead to a grand vision of world order. Instead, before us looms a void.

Photo
merlin_113579932_cd6805a2-c22f-4d1d-ab3e-732d2c412dc6-master675.jpg


Nuns and monks in Larung Gar, a monastic settlement in Sichuan Province.


Credit Gilles Sabrié for The New York Times
Edward Wong, a New York Times international correspondent and former Beijing bureau chief, is on a Nieman fellowship at Harvard.
 
That's funny, everyone in the world right now is talking about that psychopath Donald Trump and his constant boasting of nuclear war. "My nuclear button is bigger than yours!" :lol:

Yet this American author Edward Wong took some time out of his schedule to start complaining about China.

Well, for his reference, here are the results of the last United Nations vote to condemn the USA for moving their embassy to Jerusalem, despite Trump and Nikki Haley threatening the world multiple times not to vote against them:

DRmAgBVVAAASk47.jpg:large


One only needs to read the headlines of all the global news outlets on a day to day basis, to see that people are talking about the dangers of Donald Trump and the USA. As much as this author would like the world to be worrying about China instead.

Whatever "values" the White House used to have (if they even had any), well the mask has come off. Donald Trump is not of the Washington political elite, he speaks with the voice of the American everyman, and their values are shining through to the entire world as we speak.
 
That's funny, everyone in the world right now is talking about that psychopath Donald Trump and his constant boasting of nuclear war. "My nuclear button is bigger than yours!" :lol:

Yet this American author Edward Wong took some time out of his schedule to start complaining about China.

Well, for his reference, here are the results of the last United Nations vote to condemn the USA for moving their embassy to Jerusalem, despite Trump and Nikki Haley threatening the world multiple times not to vote against them:

DRmAgBVVAAASk47.jpg:large


One only needs to read the headlines of all the global news outlets on a day to day basis, to see that people are talking about the dangers of Donald Trump and the USA. As much as this author would like the world to be worrying about China instead.

Whatever "values" the White House used to have (if they even had any), well the mask has come off. Donald Trump is not of the Washington political elite, he speaks with the voice of the American everyman, and their values are shining through to the entire world as we speak.
do you understand english?
hegemony of the United States on the global stage.
 
Yes I do, and here is what you just quoted:

"hegemony of the United States on the global stage."

Can you explain what you are trying to say?
would you mind explaining where the author supports US?

Hard power based on economic power is all that matters. Get this right and everything else follows.
It does not apply to all the cases, europe has economic power but they can hardly push anything without US help.
Same is the case of UK.
 
That's funny, everyone in the world right now is talking about that psychopath Donald Trump and his constant boasting of nuclear war. "My nuclear button is bigger than yours!" :lol:

Yet this American author Edward Wong took some time out of his schedule to start complaining about China.

Well, for his reference, here are the results of the last United Nations vote to condemn the USA for moving their embassy to Jerusalem, despite Trump and Nikki Haley threatening the world multiple times not to vote against them:

DRmAgBVVAAASk47.jpg:large


One only needs to read the headlines of all the global news outlets on a day to day basis, to see that people are talking about the dangers of Donald Trump and the USA. As much as this author would like the world to be worrying about China instead.

Whatever "values" the White House used to have (if they even had any), well the mask has come off. Donald Trump is not of the Washington political elite, he speaks with the voice of the American everyman, and their values are shining through to the entire world as we speak.
This Chinese pawn unfortunately has no choice. It's his job to write about China. It's that or work for China Uncensored lol
 
would you mind explaining where the author supports US?

For decades, the United States was a global beacon for those who embraced certain values — the rule of law, free speech, clean government and human rights. Even if policy often fell short of those stated ideals, American “soft power” remained as potent as its armed forces. In the post-Soviet era, political figures and scholars regarded that American way of amassing power through attraction as a central element of forging a modern empire.

This.

The Author is basically a propaganda machine that Washington use to demonize Beijing.

At the other side, A Chinese Strategist also has some talk about US.

http://chinascope.org/archives/6458/76
PLA Strategist: The U.S. Uses Its Dollar to Dominate the World

I will only quote some of the articles.
C. Now, It Is Time to Harvest China

It was as precise as the tide; the U.S. dollar was strong for six years. Then, in 2002, it started getting weak. Following the same pattern, it stayed weak for ten years. In 2012, the Americans started to prepare to make it strong. They used the same approach: create a regional crisis for other people.

Therefore, we saw that several events happened in relation to China: the Cheonan sinking event, the dispute over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands in Chinese), and the dispute over Scarborough Shoal (the Huangyan Island in Chinese). All these happened during this period. The conflict between China and the Philippians over Huangyan Island and the conflict between China and Japan over the Diaoyu Islands, might not appear to have much to do with the U.S. dollar index, but was it really that case? Why did it happen exactly in the tenth year of the U.S. dollar being weak?

Unfortunately, the U.S. played with too much fire [in its own mortgage market] earlier and got itself into a financial crisis in 2008. This delayed the timing of the U.S. dollar’s hike a bit.

If we acknowledge that there is a U.S. dollar index cycle and the Americans use this cycle to harvest from other countries, then we can conclude that it was time for the Americans to harvest China. Why? Because China had obtained the largest amount of investment from the world. The size of China’s economy was no longer the size of a single county; it was even bigger than the whole of Latin America and about the same size as East Asia’s economy.

Since the Diaoyu Islands conflict and the Huangyan Island conflict, incidents have kept popping up around China, including the confrontation over China’s 981 oil rigs with Vietnam and Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” event. Can they still be viewed as simply accidental?

I accompanied General Liu Yazhou, the Political Commissar of the National Defense University, to visit Hong Kong in May 2014. At that time, we heard that the “Occupy Central” movement was being planned and could take place by end of the month. However, it didn’t happen in May, June, July, or August.

What happened? What were they waiting for?

Let’s look at another time table: the U.S. Federal Reserve’s exit from the Quantitative Easing (QE) policy. The U.S. said it would stop QE at the beginning of 2014. But it stayed with the QE policy in April, May, June, July, and August. As long as it was in QE, it kept overprinting dollars and the dollar‘s price couldn’t go up. Thus, Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” should not happen either.

At the end of September, the Federal Reserve announced the U.S. would exist from QE. The dollar started going up. Then Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” broke out in early October.

Actually, the Diaoyu Islands, Huangyan Island, the 981 rigs, and Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” movement were all bombs. The successful explosion of any one of them would lead to a regional crisis or a worsened investment environment around China. That would force the withdrawal of a large amount of investment from this region, which would then return to the U.S.

Unfortunately, this time the American’s opponent was China. China used “Tai chi” movements to cool down each crisis. As of today, the last straw to break the camel’s back has yet to occur and the Camel is still standing.

The camel didn’t break. Therefore, the Federal Reserve couldn’t blow its horn to increase the interest rate, either. The Americans realized that it was hard for them to harvest China, so they looked for an alternative.

Where else did they target? Ukraine, the connection between the EU and Russia. Of course there were some problems under Ukraine President Yanukovych’s administration, but the reason that the Americans picked it was not simply because of his problem. They had three goals: teach a lesson to Yanukovych who didn’t listen to the U.S., prevent the EU from getting too close to Russia, and create a bad investment environment in Europe.

Thus, a “color revolution,” took place, which the Ukrainians themselves appeared to have led. The U.S. achieved its goal unexpectedly: Russian President Putin took over Crimea. Though the Americans did not plan it, it gave the Americans better reasons to pressure the EU and Japan to join the U.S. in sanctioning Russia, adding more pressure to the EU’s economy.

Why did the Americans do this? People tend to analyze it from the geo-political angle, but rarely the capital angle. After the Ukraine crisis, statistics showed over US$1 trillion in capital left Europe. The U.S. got what it wanted: if it couldn’t get dollars out of China, it would get dollars out of Europe.

However, the next step didn’t occur as the Americans planned. The capital out of Europe didn’t go to the U.S. Instead, it went to Hong Kong.

One reason was that the global investors preferred China, which claimed the world’s number one economic growth rate, despite the fact that its economy started to cool down. The other reason was that China announced that it would implement the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect. Investors over the world wanted to get a handsome return through the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect.

In the past, Western capital was cautious about entering China’s stock market. A key reason was China’s strict foreign currency control: you can come in freely but you can’t get out at will. After the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect, they could invest in Shanghai’s market from Hong Kong and leave immediately after making a profit. Therefore, over US$1 trillion stayed in Hong Kong.

This is why the hand behind “Occupy Central” has kept planning a comeback and has not wanted to stop. The Americans need to create a regional crisis for China, to get the money back to the U.S.

Why does the U.S. economy rely so desperately on capital flowing back to its market? It is because, since 1971, the U.S. has given up producing real products. They called the real economy’s low-end or low-value-creating manufacturing industries garbage industries or sunset industries and transferred them to developing countries, especially China. Besides the high-end industries, such as IBM and Microsoft, that it kept, 70 percent of its people moved to finance and financial services industries. The U.S. has completely become a hollow state which has little real economy to offer investors a big return.

The Americans have no choice but to open the door of the virtual economy, which is its three big markets. It wants to get the money from the world into these three markets so that it can make money. Then it can use that money to harvest other countries.

The Americans only have this one way to survive now. We call it the U.S.’s national survival strategy. The U.S. needs a large amount of capital flowing back to sustain its daily life and its economy. If any country blocks that capital flow, it is the enemy of the U.S.

So Ladies and Gentlemen, United States will attack China again in near future. I don't know what it is, but I'm sure that it will be serious. So don't be surprise if you see a drama with China as the devil in near future.
 
Last edited:
would you mind explaining where the author supports US?
The basic thrust of this article. The fact that he works for NYT. The fact that he terms US hegemony "liberal" and the Chinese "hard power". Iraqi's would be to differ !

Communist Party embraces hard power and coercion, and this could well be what replaces the fading liberal hegemony of the United States on the global stage.
 
Soft power, hard power, at the end of the day it's still power. I don't think America can command its international influence today with purely the application of soft power. They didn't get to where they are today by the power of Hollywood or "freedom".

I used to be against the notion of "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" but the more I study international relations, international finance, and political systems the more I realise the "gun" is at the core of all current major political systems. Of course its unwise to be "shooting" everyone but the ability to apply that kind of force is very important in statecraft and having the ability often leads to less violence and more stability. Hard power and wisdom are both important, soft power comes later, learn to walk before you run. Countries that doesn't have that kind of internal power monopoly can be easily destabilised like Syria and Ukraine, try something similar in USA and overwhelming state force will be applied to eliminate any destabilising forces.

From the perspective of state craft much of these trends seem positive.
  • Suppression of separatist movements. Many countries are tackling their own internal stability issues but less successful to varying degrees, countries like Turkey, India, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Pakistan and Ukraine. I don't think soft-power will help them much, hard-power is key and China just has more hard power. Don't you think with greater state power relative to separatist movements their respective countries will be more stable and can develop faster?
  • Common language, local language and customs will be maintained but there needs to be a common language or these minorities will always have difficulty in getting upward mobility. Common language can help alleviate extreme poverty and to create more opportunities. Some think the Chinese government is tackling Tibetian culture when in fact their monasteries and books published in Tibetan are all over China.
 
It does not apply to all the cases, europe
Europe is not a country anymore then Asia is or Africa is. Try not to get your melons mixed with rocks please. Lots of disjointed countries pushing in differant directions.

Same is the case of UK.
UK has insufficient aggregate economic clout. It is too small. If UK was bigger, say 6 times bigger you would see the oceans again flying the Union Jack.

Right now two capitals - Washington and Beijing hold massive economic leverage and attendant military capability.
 
Soft power, hard power, at the end of the day it's still power. I don't think America can command its international influence today with purely the application of soft power. They didn't get to where they are today by the power of Hollywood or "freedom".

I used to be against the notion of "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" but the more I study international relations, international finance, and political systems the more I realise the "gun" is at the core of all current major political systems. Of course its unwise to be "shooting" everyone but the ability to apply that kind of force is very important in statecraft and having the ability often leads to less violence and more stability. Hard power and wisdom are both important, soft power comes later, learn to walk before you run. Countries that doesn't have that kind of internal power monopoly can be easily destabilised like Syria and Ukraine, try something similar in USA and overwhelming state force will be applied to eliminate any destabilising forces.

From the perspective of state craft much of these trends seem positive.
  • Suppression of separatist movements. Many countries are tackling their own internal stability issues but less successful to varying degrees, countries like Turkey, India, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Pakistan and Ukraine. I don't think soft-power will help them much, hard-power is key and China just has more hard power. Don't you think with greater state power relative to separatist movements their respective countries will be more stable and can develop faster?
  • Common language, local language and customs will be maintained but there needs to be a common language or these minorities will always have difficulty in getting upward mobility. Common language can help alleviate extreme poverty and to create more opportunities. Some think the Chinese government is tackling Tibetian culture when in fact their monasteries and books published in Tibetan are all over China.
10/10
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom