This discussion is interesting, and any "War" will be lukewarm, and more related to competition over resources, trade and influence toward such.
A Number of Points:
1. Weakness of Global Economy
2. Need for China to Alter its development model (far too dependent upon the demand of others; grave weakness not strength; and no India and Pakistan dont get all neo-colonial, neo-imperialist on me, a necessary evolution for China, as other evolutions required for SA; even SEA)
3. Weakness at present in Developed World Economies; likely evolutions of inverse relationship to Chinas needs from the past through present, rather than power into the future
4. India; needing to Break License Raj(as Pakistan, other SA countries), graft and corruption to move toward economic and development potentials
5. US Dollar is not a benefit to the US people or the US economy, but necessary for the development of the global peoples (despite much delusional banter to the contrary); a benefit that could be withdrawn were it to be required
6. Chinese Reserves is Not a Weakness for the US; it is the asset side of the Chinese Banking Systems Balance Sheet, against which debt has been issued, money growth has been encouraged (printing money), and savings and assets in the Chinese Economy have been enabled
Now for the real deal
1. Plethora of Development Partners on Global Scene
2. Great Regional Competition for Resources (NEA, SEA, and SA)
3. Issues related to Population India (400 Million over next several decades); otherwise in SA and Africa
4. Issues Related to Competition for Economic Development
5. Likely Evolution of Development in MENA due to recent uprisings (Yes, they and Africa and LA would like to manufacture; not simply consume and send natural resources; in a rather more real colonial manifestation than the fictions that abound otherwise)
6. Issues related to Water, Arable Land, Human Resource Development, Etc associated with the next point
7. Human population; growth unabated in Asia and, likely at unfortunate levels in Africa limiting potential, slowing pace of development
8. Strength in Markets, in demand; correspondent weakness where lacking in evolutions to enable it; not simply production, but domestic consumption, and services will be the real issue in the coming economic eras, it has to because of continued population growth and a plethora of development partners; otherwise reversions anti-thetical to many necessary foundations upon which some regions stability will depend; especially those with large populations.
So recent evolutions (recent being a couple of decades)
1. Growth In Energy Usage (likely future evolution)
2. Growth in Competition for Energy Resources (SEA, Africa, LA, NA, MENA, and Arctic)
3. Urbanization: Lessening Arable Land; people build on Flatlands, on Former farmlands
4. Growth in Need for Arable Land (China 2 Million Hectares being farmed abroad); India only producing 60% of its pulses, and likely need of similar
5. Water; Mekong: Energy, Livelihoods (36 Million People; most relying on it for Fish and Rice); Dams Upriver for Energy into Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, and SW China
6. Water: Himalayas; Similar Potential For Disruption; Water 3000Km to Beijing; and Regional Energy
7. Competition for Markets; Similar Levels of Development, Similar Comparative Advantages, Simples Types of Products
8. Increase in Tensions and Competitions for Resources across the Important SEA region (South China or East Sea, Myanamar)
9. Increase in Competition for Resources (India and China in Asia; Africa, LA, NA, and elsewhere)
10. Human Capital Development: Need for Increase in Quantity and Quality than time for the maturation of such to influence the practices for the alteration of systems; think generations not a single lifespan.
Ok, so, National Egos, Real and Lasting divergent strategic needs and perspectives, real and divergent variance in interests, and need for alteration to global economic development models.
So, yes, we are in an era of instability, and uncertainty, with growing regional capabilities and interests in Asia. But, this is an Asian issue. Pandering to notions of yesteryears, ancient dynasties, seeming insults, is but an indication of little maturity in these matters. One would hope, but for pandering to their populaces, which is very dangerous in such an environment, that your leaders perspectives would be very different than those posted on boards such as these.
Will there be a military build-up, likely and for very good reasons.
(String of Pearls, Chinese need for resources in juxtaposition to Indias, and South East Asias, as well as traditional players in such markets, where large swathes of traditional players needs have been met).
Movement of China to claim historical legacies (myths) and the natural posturing and actions of others in response. (South China Sea East Sea): maturity and joint development; heavy-handedness on Chinas part will not work; will only eventuate in the case of Chinas need to divert from domestic economic troubles and/or resource deficiencies, and will lead to very real counter-reactions; like military build-ups elsewhere. But moving its power closer to the Middle East and East Africa seems to have already set the course with ASEAN in the middle, and some shifting alliances resultant. This should settle as ASEAN realizes the need for unity in these matters; as toward common market for investment and trade, and for longer-term resource needs. The opening of Myanmar will create both opportunities and competition inter-regionally that could be beneficial toward such.
But the Question as to US-China Cold War is a Red-Herring. The countries, and one would hope their leaders, in the region, should not be seen as squabbling little children on the playground, choosing which team to play for, and whom to be against (in such terms as likely they will occur on other terms). There are real and existent threats that come from the similar nature of challenges and weaknesses in the region, experienced by countries in the region.
As usual, the US is a balancer in these matters, and will most likely be important toward such.
Things would be very interesting were it not to be however. (consider that for a moment; a possibility? Perhaps a better forum topic.)
I am sure there are levels of maturity in the leadership of your countries toward realizing such; if not at the grassroots level.
The interests of Russia in these matters is interesting. As so much of its foreign policy is based around the control of natural resources (while so much of it in its landmass is inaccessible and will remain such for many decades). Truly, an interesting next several decades.
A Number of Points:
1. Weakness of Global Economy
2. Need for China to Alter its development model (far too dependent upon the demand of others; grave weakness not strength; and no India and Pakistan dont get all neo-colonial, neo-imperialist on me, a necessary evolution for China, as other evolutions required for SA; even SEA)
3. Weakness at present in Developed World Economies; likely evolutions of inverse relationship to Chinas needs from the past through present, rather than power into the future
4. India; needing to Break License Raj(as Pakistan, other SA countries), graft and corruption to move toward economic and development potentials
5. US Dollar is not a benefit to the US people or the US economy, but necessary for the development of the global peoples (despite much delusional banter to the contrary); a benefit that could be withdrawn were it to be required
6. Chinese Reserves is Not a Weakness for the US; it is the asset side of the Chinese Banking Systems Balance Sheet, against which debt has been issued, money growth has been encouraged (printing money), and savings and assets in the Chinese Economy have been enabled
Now for the real deal
1. Plethora of Development Partners on Global Scene
2. Great Regional Competition for Resources (NEA, SEA, and SA)
3. Issues related to Population India (400 Million over next several decades); otherwise in SA and Africa
4. Issues Related to Competition for Economic Development
5. Likely Evolution of Development in MENA due to recent uprisings (Yes, they and Africa and LA would like to manufacture; not simply consume and send natural resources; in a rather more real colonial manifestation than the fictions that abound otherwise)
6. Issues related to Water, Arable Land, Human Resource Development, Etc associated with the next point
7. Human population; growth unabated in Asia and, likely at unfortunate levels in Africa limiting potential, slowing pace of development
8. Strength in Markets, in demand; correspondent weakness where lacking in evolutions to enable it; not simply production, but domestic consumption, and services will be the real issue in the coming economic eras, it has to because of continued population growth and a plethora of development partners; otherwise reversions anti-thetical to many necessary foundations upon which some regions stability will depend; especially those with large populations.
So recent evolutions (recent being a couple of decades)
1. Growth In Energy Usage (likely future evolution)
2. Growth in Competition for Energy Resources (SEA, Africa, LA, NA, MENA, and Arctic)
3. Urbanization: Lessening Arable Land; people build on Flatlands, on Former farmlands
4. Growth in Need for Arable Land (China 2 Million Hectares being farmed abroad); India only producing 60% of its pulses, and likely need of similar
5. Water; Mekong: Energy, Livelihoods (36 Million People; most relying on it for Fish and Rice); Dams Upriver for Energy into Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, and SW China
6. Water: Himalayas; Similar Potential For Disruption; Water 3000Km to Beijing; and Regional Energy
7. Competition for Markets; Similar Levels of Development, Similar Comparative Advantages, Simples Types of Products
8. Increase in Tensions and Competitions for Resources across the Important SEA region (South China or East Sea, Myanamar)
9. Increase in Competition for Resources (India and China in Asia; Africa, LA, NA, and elsewhere)
10. Human Capital Development: Need for Increase in Quantity and Quality than time for the maturation of such to influence the practices for the alteration of systems; think generations not a single lifespan.
Ok, so, National Egos, Real and Lasting divergent strategic needs and perspectives, real and divergent variance in interests, and need for alteration to global economic development models.
So, yes, we are in an era of instability, and uncertainty, with growing regional capabilities and interests in Asia. But, this is an Asian issue. Pandering to notions of yesteryears, ancient dynasties, seeming insults, is but an indication of little maturity in these matters. One would hope, but for pandering to their populaces, which is very dangerous in such an environment, that your leaders perspectives would be very different than those posted on boards such as these.
Will there be a military build-up, likely and for very good reasons.
(String of Pearls, Chinese need for resources in juxtaposition to Indias, and South East Asias, as well as traditional players in such markets, where large swathes of traditional players needs have been met).
Movement of China to claim historical legacies (myths) and the natural posturing and actions of others in response. (South China Sea East Sea): maturity and joint development; heavy-handedness on Chinas part will not work; will only eventuate in the case of Chinas need to divert from domestic economic troubles and/or resource deficiencies, and will lead to very real counter-reactions; like military build-ups elsewhere. But moving its power closer to the Middle East and East Africa seems to have already set the course with ASEAN in the middle, and some shifting alliances resultant. This should settle as ASEAN realizes the need for unity in these matters; as toward common market for investment and trade, and for longer-term resource needs. The opening of Myanmar will create both opportunities and competition inter-regionally that could be beneficial toward such.
But the Question as to US-China Cold War is a Red-Herring. The countries, and one would hope their leaders, in the region, should not be seen as squabbling little children on the playground, choosing which team to play for, and whom to be against (in such terms as likely they will occur on other terms). There are real and existent threats that come from the similar nature of challenges and weaknesses in the region, experienced by countries in the region.
As usual, the US is a balancer in these matters, and will most likely be important toward such.
Things would be very interesting were it not to be however. (consider that for a moment; a possibility? Perhaps a better forum topic.)
I am sure there are levels of maturity in the leadership of your countries toward realizing such; if not at the grassroots level.
The interests of Russia in these matters is interesting. As so much of its foreign policy is based around the control of natural resources (while so much of it in its landmass is inaccessible and will remain such for many decades). Truly, an interesting next several decades.
