Why China might be a better superpower

[JSCh]

Richard C. Bush III | June 4, 2013 4:03pm

Obama and Xi at Sunnylands: A New Pattern of Relations?

During the extended conversation between President Obama and China’s President Xi Jinping, the topic of a “new pattern of major-power relations” is sure to come up. Xi will be the one to raise it, because he and his predecessors have been calling for a “new pattern” in recent years. Obama will be ready with some sort of response, because his senior officials have already but generally endorsed the idea.

“New pattern of major power relations” is one of those phrases that Chinese leaders initiate, both as a tool to bring coherence to their increasingly unwieldy system and as a means to engage their foreign counterparts. The concept seems arcane, but it could have profound strategic significance – if it gains some content.

That China is focused on a “new pattern” reflects its concern about the old pattern. That pattern, in the Chinese understanding, is that when a previously weak country quickly accumulates power, it ends up challenging the existing international order and the principal countries that defend that order and then finds itself in perpetual conflict and major war.

China today does not wish to repeat the old pattern. It benefits a lot from the international system that the United States created after World War II, even if it dislikes some of the rules and the U.S. forward deployment in East Asia, its home region. And Beijing understands that it is far from ready to fight a war with America. So it’s a good thing that the Chinese are “using history as a mirror” and seek to understand how the dynamics of the past might hurt their national interests in the future. As long ago as 2006, official Chinese television did a documentary series "The Rise of Great Powers” on this phenomenon of power transitions. And the United States, the defender of the current international order, is right to welcome China’s desire to avoid the tyranny of history.

The problem is that the “new pattern” idea is so far just a slogan. It has no content. Among the many questions that would have to be addressed in order to infuse the concept with content are the following:

• What in fact was the old pattern of major power relations? Was it simply a case of an irresistible forces meeting an immovable obstacle over and over again? Or was something more complex going on to produce major conflict and war?
• In the current era, who are the major powers? China clearly has itself and the United States in mind. But what about Japan? What about Germany, Britain, and France, or the European Union as a whole? What about Russia, India, and Brazil? One can only figure out the pattern when one knows the players.
• What is the relationship between the major powers and Tier 2 powers? South Korea, South Africa, and Israel come to mind.
• How should major powers manage their relations in the complex situation where they all are present in the same region, where conflicts of interest are most likely? In East Asia, for example, China, Japan and the United States are the key actors.
• What issues will be the substantive heart of the new pattern? Is it the relatively easy global issues which are ripe for multilateral cooperation? Or will it be the truly hard issues that threaten the greatest danger to international peace and security?
• Should the new pattern be formed by identifying a set of over-arching principles (probably the Chinese presence) or to build the pattern by learning lessons from interaction on specific issues (probably the American inclination)?

Presidents Xi and Obama will not answer these questions and define the “new pattern” at Sunnylands. That’s not the purpose of their meeting. But they have a unique opportunity to agree that this concept is important (which it is) and to initiate a process to invest it with serious content (which they should).

Obama and Xi at Sunnylands: A New Pattern of Relations? | Brookings Institution

 

[JSCh]

Time to Update the Major Power Relations Between China and the US

Tao Wenzhao, Researcher, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
June 13, 2013

Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Barak Obama held "ranch talks" on Saturday in California. The meeting lasted more than eight hours, in which the two heads of state thoroughly exchanged views and reached common understanding on a wide range of big issues of strategic importance in a candid and straightforward manner. What is most important is that the two heads of state made a firm pledge to build a new type of major power relations between the two countries and discussed pragmatic ways to realize the new positioning of the bilateral ties, pointing the direction in which the two nations should develop their relations.

President Xi reiterated that China would follow the path of peaceful development no matter what. President Obama welcomed China's commitment to peaceful development as a major power. Xi emphasized that China and the US should be able to forge a new type of major power ties that is not all about confrontation and rivalry and cited five reasons, which are all convincing and also explain sufficiently why it is not a passing thought to bring up the new major power relations issue now. Obama agreed with Xi's summary of their talks. He said the two countries are looking at a unique opportunity to take their bilateral relations to another level and he would try his best not to miss it. The pledge is of historical significance to China-US relations. It marks a new chapter in the history of Sino-American relations and will inspire future generations.

The two leaders also discussed the connotation of the new type of major power relations. Xi summed it up in three incisive phrases: no confrontation or rivalry, mutual respect and cooperation for win-win results.

The new type of major power relations is meant to blaze a new trail away from the tragic path the world has seen repeated time and again in major power politics where an established major power competes against and later clashes with an emerging power but ends up fighting each other in war. No confrontation or rivalry naturally is the essence of the new major power relationship. To achieve it the two sides must first understand each other as best they can, regarding each other's strategic objectives rationally so as to avoid misunderstanding or misinterpreting them. Currently, the two countries have more than 90 platforms for exchanges and communication that should be able to facilitate deeper mutual understanding well. However, there is the need to manage and control differences. Confrontations are invariably caused by differences, but differences do not necessarily trigger clashes. Differences should be resolved through dialogue to prevent confrontation. When an unexpected incident occurs the two sides should do their best to keep it from damaging the integrity of their bilateral ties and keep its impact as brief as possible. Also, it is always the best to turn differences into cooperation. The two nations have already seen success in joint efforts to respond to climate change. On the issue of cyber security President Xi told his US counterpart that the two countries have formed working groups and should put aside their differences and focus on cooperation in making Internet security a new highlight of Sino-US cooperation. The two countries should be able to achieve no confrontation or rivalry by handling differences properly.

Mutual respect is crucial in any bilateral relationship. For China and the US, whose social systems and ideologies are so different, it is particularly true. Mutual respect in this case includes respecting each other's core interests and major concerns as well as respecting each other's social system, value set and development path. Since President Nixon's ice-breaking visit to China, the two countries have reached the understanding that China and America have very different social systems and ideologies and do not like the other's system or values, but both recognize the other side's system and value set will stay in the foreseeable future and their ability to influence the other side is limited. This common understanding still stands today.

Cooperation for win-win results is an outstanding characteristic of foreign relations in the era of globalization, as opposed to those of yesteryear. The 19th century was the era of carving out spheres of influence and national interests when China was divided into several spheres of influence by some major powers. Much of the 20th century also saw major powers or superpowers vie for global domination. Since the Cold War ended the world has entered the era of peaceful development and globalization has gradually led nations to a new form of foreign relations characterized by cooperation for win-win results. Now, China and the US find themselves relying on each other more than ever. Building a new type of major power relations requires continuous efforts to break new grounds for cooperation and develop common interests so that both peoples can benefit from their countries' bilateral relations.

Tao Wenzhao is a Researcher for the Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

Time to Update the Major Power Relations Between China and the US | CHINA US Focus

 

[Wholegrain]

Do you know there are other forms of relationships beyond marriage? I don't want to divulge too much in the public, but if you are an adult, or even a teenager, you should know.

Secondly, Soviet Union can not be compared to China in its independence of thoughts, ideology, spread of culture and weapons, economic system and (false) intellectual concepts.

Did you read my posts thoroughly?

Although what you have said about the Soviet Union is not entirely true, even if it were (hypothetically) true, the conclusion that you have drawn still would not follow.

Syrians are Middle Easterners, we all know that. Quite naturally, Russian women will flock to them as they do to .... but you know that it's the East Asian women that flock to Western looking men?

Anyhow, read all of my posts and address my points if you like.

Chiang Fang-liang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Li Lisan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chinese in Eastern Europe and Russia: A Middleman Minority in a ... - Pál Nyiri - Google Books

China Learns from the Soviet Union: 1949 - Present - Google Books

Anyuan: Mining China's Revolutionary Tradition - Elizabeth J. Perry - Google Books

Encyclopedia of Diasporas: Immigrant and Refugee Cultures Around the World ... - Google Books

Administering the Colonizer: Manchuria's Russians Under Chinese Rule, 1918-29 - Blaine Roland Chiasson - Google Books

Why Are Siberian Russians Drawn to China? - Slate Magazine

Last paragraph

Americans Marry Russian Women. What For? - English pravda.ru

 

[ChinaToday]

That is just pathetic. If what you say is true, then the capitalist countries would be filled with empty cities and towns just to show off.

Amazing...China is a groundbreaker and trendsetter. Forget about making money from living and thriving cities. Just build them and let them stay empty for status symbols.

you are the pathetic and stupid one here capitalist countries government never have the kind of money Chinese government have to enable them to build ghost cities

 

[MeshFree]

well, that's really depend on how you get your figure....

And not the American who murder the 100 millions American Indian, you are looking at a combine British, Spanish, French and American Effort, oh, don't forget Indian kill other Indian during the time. We may still be sitting on their ground but no way we alone can murder 100 millions of them, I would say British get the max as they used to hand out small pox inflected blanket to Indian when they settle.

We did not colonize the American Indian, British Did, we fought a war, they may lose millions or a few millions in the process, but no way we kill more than the Brits. Whom actually colonize American Indian.

You really believe what you said? You think British killed the Indians, not American?
When you got independence, you only had 13 states, out of the states lived millions of Indians. Indian population decreased very rapidly between 1770-1850, please don't tell me British still killed people in America during this period.

Yes, European colonists killed many Indians, but you Americans hands were also stained with Indian blood that you could not wash away.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

Let's get back to the topic.

France is not reliant on sending its students to America.

Russia is not reliant on sending its students to America.

These are developers of original weapons, weapons that had never been developed in America or elsewhere.


-----

China is reliant on sending its students to America.

China is joined in this "eminent club" (sarcasm intended) by Saudi and Hindustan (ill renowned for low IQ, low consumption of iodized salt, consumption of cow dung, etc).

Therefore, China is ill known for developing weapons that are structural imitations, at least, of Western/Soviet systems.



Edit: Data for interested readers

2010/11 - 2011/12

INTERNATIONAL STUDENT TOTALS BY PLACE OF ORIGIN, 2010/11 & 2011/12
Place of Origin 2010/11 2011/12 % Change

AFRICA 36,890 35,502 -3.8

East Africa 8,863 7,827 -11.7
Burundi 123 103 -16.3
Djibouti 11 8 -27.3
Eritrea 120 110 -8.3
Ethiopia 1,392 1,334 -4.2
Kenya 4,666 3,898 -16.5
Rwanda 457 465 1.8
Seychelles 6 10 66.7
Somalia 26 34 30.8
Sudan 236 180 -23.7
Tanzania 1,006 906 -9.9
Uganda 820 779 -5.0

Central Africa 2,831 2,778 -1.9
Cameroon 1,659 1,530 -7.8
Central African Republic 29 28 -3.4
Chad 99 84 -15.2
Congo, Rep. of the 240 249 3.8
Congo, Dem. Rep. of the 252 320 27.0
Equatorial Guinea 119 164 37.8
Gabon 431 402 -6.7
São Tomé & Príncipe 2 1 -50.0

North Africa 5,420 5,456 0.7
Algeria 158 177 12.0
Egypt 2,181 2,201 0.9
Libya 1,494 1,328 -11.1
Morocco 1,201 1,305 8.7
Tunisia 386 445 15.3

Southern Africa 5,330 5,196 -2.5
Angola 699 779 11.4
Botswana 229 175 -23.6
Comoros 23 9 -60.9
Lesotho 51 46 -9.8
Madagascar 146 133 -8.9
Malawi 269 258 -4.1
Mauritius 247 205 -17.0
Mozambique 76 67 -11.8
Namibia 73 63 -13.7
Reunion 7 1 -85.7
South Africa 1,669 1,610 -3.5
Swaziland 146 154 5.5
Zambia 560 535 -4.5
Zimbabwe 1,135 1,161 2.3

West Africa 14,446 14,245 -1.4
Benin 289 313 8.3
Burkina Faso 626 631 0.8
Cape Verde 55 87 58.2
Côte d’Ivoire/Ivory Coast 904 955 5.6
Gambia 385 383 -0.5
Ghana 2,900 2,769 -4.5
Guinea 139 104 -25.2
Guinea-Bissau 12 12 0.0
Liberia 172 159 -7.6
Mali 481 402 -16.4
Mauritania 60 61 1.7
Niger 247 279 13.0
Nigeria 7,148 7,028 -1.7
Saint Helena 4 1 -75.0
Senegal 600 681 13.5
Sierra Leone 183 130 -29.0
Togo 241 250 3.7


ASIA 461,790 489,970 6.1

East Asia 286,925 319,515 11.4
China 157,558 194,029 23.1
Hong Kong 8,136 8,032 -1.3
Japan 21,290 19,966 -6.2
Macau 497 505 1.6
Mongolia 1,259 1,423 13.0
North Korea 16 15 -6.3
South Korea 73,351 72,295 -1.4
Taiwan 24,818 23,250 -6.3

South and Central Asia 128,845 124,392 -3.5
Afghanistan 429 371 -13.5
Bangladesh 2,873 3,314 15.3
Bhutan 115 100 -13.0
India 103,895 100,270 -3.5
Kazakhstan 1,890 1,938 2.5
Kyrgyzstan 279 254 -9.0
Maldives 34 29 -14.7
Nepal 10,301 9,621 -6.6
Pakistan 5,045 4,600 -8.8
Sri Lanka 2,965 2,902 -2.1
Tajikistan 249 298 19.7
Turkmenistan 210 209 -0.5
Uzbekistan 560 486 -13.2

Southeast Asia 46,020 46,063 0.1
Brunei 66 69 4.5
Cambodia 340 333 -2.1
East Timor 48 40 -16.7
Indonesia 6,942 7,131 2.7
Laos 49 43 -12.2
Malaysia 6,735 6,743 0.1
Myanmar 796 807 1.4
Philippines 3,604 3,194 -11.4
Singapore 4,316 4,505 4.4
Thailand 8,236 7,626 -7.4
Vietnam 14,888 15,572 4.6


EUROPE 84,296 85,423 1.3
Albania 697 659 -5.5
Andorra 14 24 71.4
Armenia 350 363 3.7
Austria 1,019 989 -2.9
Azerbaijan 440 460 4.5
Belarus 347 358 3.2
Belgium 904 880 -2.7
Bosnia and Herzegovina 356 341 -4.2
Bulgaria 1,957 1,694 -13.4
Croatia 583 552 -5.3
Cyprus 470 438 -6.8
Czech Republic 765 701 -8.4
Denmark 1,149 1,233 7.3
Estonia 228 241 5.7
Finland 639 640 0.2
France 8,098 8,232 1.7
Georgia 460 481 4.6
Germany 9,458 9,347 -1.2
Gibraltar 2 4 100.0
Greece 1,874 1,922 2.6
Hungary 670 655 -2.2
Iceland 369 391 6.0
Ireland 1,167 1,106 -5.2
Italy 4,308 4,284 -0.6
Kosovo 121 114 -5.8
Latvia 324 308 -4.9
Liechtenstein 5 14 180.0
Lithuania 338 288 -14.8
Luxembourg 59 68 15.3
Macedonia 257 222 -13.6
Malta 19 41 115.8
Moldova 411 416 1.2
Monaco 22 43 95.5
Montenegro 85 112 31.8
Netherlands 1,833 1,975 7.7
Norway 1,822 2,016 10.6
Poland 1,852 1,838 -0.8
Portugal 981 970 -1.1
Romania 1,883 1,607 -14.7
Russia 4,692 4,805 2.4
San Marino 2 3 50.0
Serbia 1,067 1,068 0.1
Slovakia 419 424 1.2
Slovenia 178 171 -3.9
Spain 4,330 4,924 13.7
Sweden 3,236 3,926 21.3
Switzerland 1,287 1,362 5.8
Turkey 12,184 11,973 -1.7
Ukraine 1,583 1,535 -3.0
United Kingdom 8,947 9,186 2.7
Vatican City/Holy See 4 1 -75.0
Europe, Unspecified 31 18 -41.9


LATIN AMERICA 64,169 64,021 -0.2

Caribbean 11,644 10,987 -5.6
Anguilla 43 29 -32.6
Antigua and Barbuda 193 183 -5.2
Aruba 94 67 -28.7
Bahamas 1,720 1,737 1.0
Barbados 332 267 -19.6
British Virgin Islands 94 116 23.4
Cayman Islands 165 181 9.7
Cuba 62 57 -8.1
Dominica 256 261 2.0
Dominican Republic 1,393 1,610 15.6
Grenada 189 261 38.1
Guadeloupe 14 15 7.1
Haiti 888 889 0.1
Jamaica 3,172 2,694 -15.1
Martinique 8 3 -62.5
Montserrat 8 2 -75.0
Netherlands Antilles 201 155 -22.9
St. Kitts and Nevis 217 269 24.0
St. Lucia 526 352 -33.1
St. Vincent and the Grenadines 105 95 -9.5
Trinidad and Tobago 1,882 1,689 -10.3
Turks and Caicos 82 55 -32.9

Mexico and Central America 20,361 20,432 0.3
Belize 388 370 -4.6
Costa Rica 1,105 1,078 -2.4
El Salvador 1,157 1,151 -0.5
Guatemala 1,042 1,048 0.6
Honduras 1,349 1,407 4.3
Mexico 13,713 13,893 1.3
Nicaragua 434 363 -16.4
Panama 1,173 1,122 -4.3

South America 32,164 32,602 1.4
Argentina 2,105 1,888 -10.3
Bolivia 977 1,025 4.9
Brazil 8,777 9,029 2.9
Chile 2,164 2,203 1.8
Colombia 6,456 6,295 -2.5
Ecuador 2,150 2,160 0.5
French Guiana 28 1 -96.4
Guyana 272 224 -17.6
Paraguay 322 342 6.2
Peru 2,939 2,702 -8.1
Suriname 94 92 -2.1
Uruguay 389 360 -7.5
Venezuela 5,491 6,281 14.4


MIDDLE EAST 42,543 56,664 33.2
Bahrain 409 438 7.1
Iran 5,626 6,982 24.1
Iraq 616 809 31.3
Israel 2,701 2,490 -7.8
Jordan 2,002 2,062 3.0
Kuwait 2,998 3,722 24.1
Lebanon 1,462 1,350 -7.7
Oman 313 538 71.9
Palestinian Territories 331 331 0.0
Qatar 716 979 36.7
Saudi Arabia 22,704 34,139 50.4
Syria 526 458 -12.9
United Arab Emirates 1,871 2,097 12.1
Yemen 268 269 0.4


NORTH AMERICA 27,941 27,210 -2.6
Bermuda 395 389 -1.5
Canada 27,546 26,821 -2.6


OCEANIA 5,610 5,697 1.6
Australia 3,777 3,848 1.9
Cook Islands 4 6 50.0
Fiji 138 122 -11.6
French Polynesia 30 42 40.0
Kiribati 31 48 54.8
Marshall Islands 52 39 -25.0
Micronesia 131 98 -25.2
Nauru 11 7 -36.4
New Caledonia 13 8 -38.5
New Zealand 1,164 1,204 3.4
Niue 8 8 0.0
Palau 31 21 -32.3
Papua New Guinea 50 60 20.0
Samoa 49 51 4.1
Solomon Islands 7 13 85.7
Tonga 103 104 1.0
Tuvalu 2 3 50.0
Vanuatu 8 8 0.0
Wallis and Futuna 1 7 600.0

Stateless 10 8 -20.0

WORLD TOTAL 723,249 764,495 5.7

 

[Viet]

Fail. The current great wall was built during the Ming dynasty 500 years ago. The others were just earth ramparts.

Vietnam love Champa so much they invaded their country and killed tens of thousands of people. They also love Khmer Krom so much that thousands of them flooded into the Mekong Delta.

come on, that´s a different story, read careful the history. The Champas and Khmers were too stupid, they dared to challenge and invade ancient Vietnam. They were warned.

 

[David James]

The reality of china

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/260722-now-china-sets-up-camps-hoists-flag-bhutan.html

 

[gpit]

Gulf War 1990 is a war waged by a UN authorized Coalition force.
Iraq War 2003 is a invasion waged by a non UN authorized US-led force
See the difference,
A UN authorized policeman versus a self-appointed policemen, judge and jury that acted for her own selfish self interest.

Agreed.

Bush Jr. is a war crime in this aspect.

China has been an expansionist power throughout its history. The building of the great wall of china from the pacific coast to the gobi desert for over 20000yr is a testament to this. As china extended, the wall was also expanded. What started as small states in todays central China has grown to exand almost all of East Asia.

Funny logic!

An expansionist is expanding by building a wall to limit its expansion?

You need serious education, buddy.

 

[gpit]

Considering how many Chinese related threads, the mods may rename this section from China & Far East to China the Mighty.

China can this and that, Chinese are here and there. One day we will see Chinese can fly over the water and turn water into wine. I´m bored. Where are other countries and their contributions?

Now jealous and envious?

Suggest you being a part of China.

So it will be you this and you that, you here and you there...

 

[gpit]

The political system that have killed millions of its own people and still dictator.

Who don't provide any choice and freedom to their citizens.

who have invaded each and every neighbor or had dispute with.

Sound very much like an India where 2 million children starved to death every year, and a repressive regime promotes business hostility and massive corruption, not to mention sectarian violence and a paradise of raping and caste practice.

Why not provide its own citizen the choice of free from starvation, illiteracy and raping?

Why invade Goa, Sikkim and Hyderabad? Why not free the people in Kashmir?

60+ year of repressive regime rule results in a country poorer than Sub-Sahara Africa...

 

[gpit]

Cos your cheap labor works for peanuts!

Check out the ghost towns and cities of the "better superpower"

Isn't India labor cheaper?

Just look at the salary of the two countries.

Why the others won't even give you a peanut?

Because you don't even deserve a peanut.

Ghost city? Your foolish nearsightness can't understand a city planed for next 3-5 years.

 

[Wholegrain]

1. Wikipedia is not a source.

2. Do you want me to list tens of thousands of links of Chinese girls getting ****** by Western/Western looking men? Not unless you pay me $500 for my effort, at least

3. Do you know the difference between marriage and ****, which is what I am talking about?

Also, have you heard about "mail order brides"?

I won't take this discussion any further, mate. There is no reason to expose some Chinese girls' ***** in a public forum, only for some online discussion. You can search for it yourself.

1. If you are ******** over people using wikipedia articles (for important and famous people or events) then I can provide other sources.

Chiang Fang-liang remembered - Taipei Times

Historical Dictionary of Modern China (1800-1949) - James Z. Gao - Google Books

Anyuan: Mining China's Revolutionary Tradition - Elizabeth J. Perry - Google Books

3. Bali is a third world island full of AIDS infected people with a reputation surpassing that of Thailand in the realm of partying and whoring. Japanese women tourists flock down there to have sex with the local Balinese men, the Balinese don't need to go to Japan.

Japanese gals flock to Bali's Beach Boys for lots of Fun, Fun, Fun - The Tokyo Reporter | The Tokyo Reporter

Japanese Women Travel to Bali for Sex with Local Beach Boys – indoBOOM

What does this have to do with Japanese cultural influence or power?

 

[longyi]

1. If you are ******** over people using wikipedia articles (for important and famous people or events) then I can provide other sources.

Chiang Fang-liang remembered - Taipei Times

Historical Dictionary of Modern China (1800-1949) - James Z. Gao - Google Books

Anyuan: Mining China's Revolutionary Tradition - Elizabeth J. Perry - Google Books

3. Bali is a third world island full of AIDS infected people with a reputation surpassing that of Thailand in the realm of partying and whoring. Japanese women tourists flock down there to have sex with the local Balinese men, the Balinese don't need to go to Japan.

Japanese gals flock to Bali's Beach Boys for lots of Fun, Fun, Fun - The Tokyo Reporter | The Tokyo Reporter

Japanese Women Travel to Bali for Sex with Local Beach Boys – indoBOOM

What does this have to do with Japanese cultural influence or power?

Don't bother with the troll. I think so many Chinese girls refused his advances in Singapore or elsewhere and that's why he's bad mouthing them in public forums. I guess if you can't get them destroy them.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

1. If you are ******** over people using wikipedia articles (for important and famous people or events) then I can provide other sources.

Chiang Fang-liang remembered - Taipei Times

Historical Dictionary of Modern China (1800-1949) - James Z. Gao - Google Books

Anyuan: Mining China's Revolutionary Tradition - Elizabeth J. Perry - Google Books

3. Bali is a third world island full of AIDS infected people with a reputation surpassing that of Thailand in the realm of partying and whoring. Japanese women tourists flock down there to have sex with the local Balinese men, the Balinese don't need to go to Japan.

Japanese gals flock to Bali's Beach Boys for lots of Fun, Fun, Fun - The Tokyo Reporter | The Tokyo Reporter

Japanese Women Travel to Bali for Sex with Local Beach Boys – indoBOOM

What does this have to do with Japanese cultural influence or power?

Looks like you are losing your cool.

It was only a few weeks or months ago that the Chinese were fuming about what the Japanese did in Nanking and elsewhere.

Do you know the population of Shanghai, or Beijing? Providing two or four examples does nothing to address the facts I mentioned - you (if you are a Westerner/Western looking person) can go to Shanghai, Beijing etc and **** as many Chinese girls as you like because they flock towards you (again, only if you are a Westerner/Western looking person).

Now, repeat this situation all over the cities of China.

More importantly, is this thread about "Why Japan might be a better superpower" or something else? So why are you discussing about Japanese girls?

Don't bother with the troll. I think so many Chinese girls refused his advances in Singapore or elsewhere and that's why he's bad mouthing them in public forums. I guess if you can't get them destroy them.

What's wrong? You had earlier claimed that my posts were reasonable.

Which of my posts are unreasonable? And what has my post got to do with Singapore?