Why China might be a better superpower

[Banglar Lathial]

This is a very important point. Soviets never went anywhere- they were not allowed to leave.

This gave them a sense of pride that simply does not exist in China.

Don't know about Soviet students going abroad, but the Soviet Union was a major destination for foreign students from all around the (third) world, often on subsidized or free scholarships.

Besides, Soviets introduced new weapons.

Chinese weapons, for the most part, are imitations of Western or Soviet systems.

Soviets realized at least five Kirov class cruisers (above 24,000 tonnes displacement) way before 1990.

The Chinese are yet to induct any surface warship displacing more than 10,000 tonnes. [Edit: That's because there's no surface warship in USN arsenal displacing more than 12,000 tonnes, and the Chinese navy is basically trying to imitate but outnumber the US Navy in its development phase]


The Soviets tested the strongest nuclear bomb ever.

The Chinese are positioned firmly in third position, on this issue.


The Soviets built "monster" nuclear powered ballistic missile submarines (in excess of 20,000 tonne displacement), the Chinese are still trailing.

I could go on and on, but Chinese designs are "inspired" to put it mildly by either Soviet or Western designs.


This is not restricted to the military domain, but all aspects of lives.

 

[ChinaToday]

Cos your cheap labor works for peanuts!

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

see this is why india is so backward and poor you just don't have a clue what rich people do with their money, ghost towns is a stautus symbol just like rich people having several houses or a owner of a 10 bedroom houses he a or she can only sleep in one room do you call the other 9 rooms ghost rooms?

 

[Genesis]

How old are you? You wanted examples of 'unique policy' implemented by Americans, I provided examples.

Besides, it is true though, that only after 2001, did the extent of unipolar world order become more pronounced. Prior to that, the world was more stable and less conflict ridden.

Can you name any privately owned Chinese media criticizing the Chinese government and the West? Not People's daily, globaltimes, Xinhua or the others owned by the government, or toeing the government line?

Sina Corp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The biggest, can't name all of them, not enough time.

China also has massive social media that is pretty much impossible to block. Sina also contributes to that problem. Though there are crap tons of other media of different sizes and importance.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

Sina Corp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The biggest, can't name all of them, not enough time.

China also has massive social media that is pretty much impossible to block. Sina also contributes to that problem. Though there are crap tons of other media of different sizes and importance.

Although I never take Wikipedia seriously, if all that you can point to is sina Weibo, well, that is actually proving my point.

Where is your privately owned Television channel? Privately owned newspapers, weekly journals, economic journals, military magazines?

Sina - from what you have posted - is only a social networking site, like American Facebook, or Russian VK or whatever those russkies use nowadays.



Edit: I just noticed that all of the four 'key people' at Sina were educated in the USA, or Taiwan (basically an American protectorate).

 

[Genesis]

Although I never take Wikipedia seriously, if all that you can point to is sina Weibo, well, that is actually proving my point.

Where is your privately owned Television channel? Privately owned newspapers, weekly journals, economic journals, military magazines?

Sina - from what you have posted - is only a social networking site, like American Facebook, or Russian VK or whatever those russkies use nowadays.



Edit: I just noticed that all of the four 'key people' at Sina were educated in the USA, or Taiwan (basically an American protectorate).

I only listed wiki cause it's a chinese site and thus not widely known else where. It exists you can go to it. Why do you need to believe anything, you can see it for yourself.

go to it and see if it's just a social media site. you don't have to understand the language, you can at least tell the difference between a news site and a social media site right?

It's news, tv, and everything. As for newspapers, who still reads newspapers. Even my grandma has an tablet and smartphone.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

I only listed wiki cause it's a chinese site and thus not widely known else where. It exists you can go to it. Why do you need to believe anything, you can see it for yourself.

go to it and see if it's just a social media site. you don't have to understand the language, you can at least tell the difference between a news site and a social media site right?

It's news, tv, and everything. As for newspapers, who still reads newspapers. Even my grandma has an tablet and smartphone.

Well, you can always read newspapers, or read the online news sites.

But, do you have Chinese news media, not some social networking sites, that are privately owned and criticize the government, the Western world, and provide independent analysis and editorials/opinions?


Edit:

Here's their English "opinions" page, more than half of them are probably just copy -pasted from Xinhua (hint: search for the word "Xinhua").

http://english.sina.com/opinion/index.html

 

[Genesis]

Well, you can always read newspapers, or read the online news sites.

But, do you have Chinese news media, not some social networking sites, that are privately owned and criticize the government, the Western world, and provide independent analysis and editorials/opinions?


Edit:

Here's their English "opinions" page, more than half of them are probably just copy -pasted from Xinhua (hint: search for the word "Xinhua").

Opinion - SINA English

The english site doesn't do it justice because it is not a priority as you can imagine. But it does all of what you listed. Obviously not to the extent of foreign media, but it does address plenty of problems.

It will talk about problems, and issues as well as news. It won't probably use too harsh a word, but it will list it.

Though it is also true sometimes it doesn't.

But this is 100% private owned as is countless others.


I know what the west try to portray China as, but China officially and China in reality is very different. It applies to everything. For example about religion, true not as free as western world, but if you do it private it, don't have to go out of your way to hide it, just don't flaunt it, and you'll be fine and no body will care.


As to your innovation point, A lot of Chinese products exported are of Chinese design. It may have been a western idea, like a pen, but it has Chinese spin on it.

Unique policies, sure, China has it, South China sea, East China sea, Korea, last ASEAN meeting was the result of Chinese policy. China right now isn't a super power, it's policies are not as far reaching as US, but to claim China copies, it is impossible. Aside from China is in Asia, and US is in the Americas, the policies cannot be the same, our prestige, alliances, economy, military and things are not the same, what works for US definitely will not work for us.

Look at China in Africa, we invest regardless of leader, our lending of money no strings attached (sort of). These are not copies of Western ideas.

At heart, the Chinese still support the old Chinese system of Imperial Chinese tributary.

Imperial Chinese tributary system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For example, there are no calls for the conquest of Japan, Vietnam or Philippines. We won't occupy like US, or even create a new government.

Is that unique enough?

 

[Okemos]

Yes, China is still a backward, poor developing country with no innovation, no talents, no culture, nothing, nada. Only mindless slave labor, pollution, cheap and shoddy copycats. Therefore, I urge that our president should go to the United Nations and move that the international big mouths should stop "China threat" nonsense. It hurts the developed countries' ego. Our president should also move that for the benefit of the whole humanity, the developed nations should transfer all technology to China so we all may live in harmony happily ever after.

I have a dream that one day we the human race will all live in prosperity regardless of race, nationality and religion. Is that too much to ask?

 

[gambit]

see this is why india is so backward and poor you just don't have a clue what rich people do with their money, ghost towns is a stautus symbol just like rich people having several houses or a owner of a 10 bedroom houses he a or she can only sleep in one room do you call the other 9 rooms ghost rooms?

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.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

The english site doesn't do it justice because it is not a priority as you can imagine. But it does all of what you listed. Obviously not to the extent of foreign media, but it does address plenty of problems.

It will talk about problems, and issues as well as news. It won't probably use too harsh a word, but it will list it.

Though it is also true sometimes it doesn't.

But this is 100% private owned as is countless others.


I know what the west try to portray China as, but China officially and China in reality is very different. It applies to everything. For example about religion, true not as free as western world, but if you do it private it, don't have to go out of your way to hide it, just don't flaunt it, and you'll be fine and no body will care.


As to your innovation point, A lot of Chinese products exported are of Chinese design. It may have been a western idea, like a pen, but it has Chinese spin on it.

Unique policies, sure, China has it, South China sea, East China sea, Korea, last ASEAN meeting was the result of Chinese policy. China right now isn't a super power, it's policies are not as far reaching as US, but to claim China copies, it is impossible. Aside from China is in Asia, and US is in the Americas, the policies cannot be the same, our prestige, alliances, economy, military and things are not the same, what works for US definitely will not work for us.

Look at China in Africa, we invest regardless of leader, our lending of money no strings attached (sort of). These are not copies of Western ideas.

At heart, the Chinese still support the old Chinese system of Imperial Chinese tributary.

Imperial Chinese tributary system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For example, there are no calls for the conquest of Japan, Vietnam or Philippines. We won't occupy like US, or even create a new government.

Is that unique enough?

I would not object if you can provide me with any independent, privately owned media providing critical commentary, opinions, discussions, analysis - whether criticising the government or the West.

It's disingenuous to call Chinese policies in South and East Asia (island disputes) unique. China has disputes with its neighbours, and they too have disputes with you. Almost every country has some disputed border or island with its neighbours. There's nothing unique about it, because it's actually one of the most common causes of wars.

If you read through history (and read CIA analysis) one of the most common/convenient ways of inciting flare-up in any region is "sovereignty" issue over disputed border/islands/etc, ethnic tensions, economic disparity/class disparity, religious/sectarian wars.

Not only are these the most common causes of friction, but they are actively researched and made good use of by the Western intelligence agencies and think tanks. Sadly, China is just walking straight into the trap set up by the Western intelligence agencies (whether China wins in the end, or loses is another issue).

Of course, your policies can not be the same as USA. Who said they should be the same? I said the exact opposite should be the case because you are so different. And, I said that China's position, unfortunately, is derived from foreign experiences (in other words, imitations).


Mate, China's investment in Africa or elsewhere has also been countered with Western propaganda, and in case you did not know, long before China amassed its huge foreign exchange, Japan has been providing aid to many third world countries in all sorts of projects without any preconditions. Yes, that is exactly why so many Bangladeshis like both China and Japan because they are so similar on this issue, and that is why most Bangladeshis genuinely want a peaceful resolution of the two sides' disputes (it's got nothing to do with Imperial Japan's actions before 1945) because both these countries are quite friendly to many developing countries.

In this case also, as you see, China's position is nothing unique or ingenious.

Your Imperial tributary system is more or less what Americans have in place for many of its puppets around the world. GCC countries need American permission to make any foreign policy decisions, NATO members can not operate without American permission, South Korea needs American permission to extend its ballistic missile range, Japan needs American permission to 'normalize' its military.

More importantly, currently China does not declare that it wants to institute the Imperial tributary system. It says something quite different, isn't it?

Like, non interference in internal affairs of countries?

 

[Wholegrain]

@Banglar Lathial

Thousands of those students from third world countries who studied in the Soviet Union came home with Russian wives. Tons of Russian women still live in Syria after they were married to Syrian men. There were Russian wives in eastern bloc countries, Russian women married to Chinese, Black African and other male students. Li Lisan and Chiang Ching-kuo both had Russian wives. Very few or no Russian men married women from these countries. Either the Soviet Union was the worlds largest pimp or their cultural influence was nil according to your logic since alot of their women married foreign men while their men didn't marry foreigners.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

@Banglar Lathial

Thousands of those students from third world countries who studied in the Soviet Union came home with Russian wives. Tons of Russian women still live in Syria after they were married to Syrian men. There were Russian wives in eastern bloc countries, Russian women married to Chinese, Black African and other male students. Li Lisan and Chiang Ching-kuo both had Russian wives. Very few or no Russian men married women from these countries. Either the Soviet Union was the worlds largest pimp or their cultural influence was nil according to your logic since alot of their women married foreign men while their men didn't marry foreigners.

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.

 

[soaringeagle]

One more time: CN is not interested in becoming a superpower or world police.
The only CN troops on foreign soil now are UN peacekeeping force, the most of any single country sometimes if I may say, with their DongFeng trucks carrying food and medical supplies, to help people.
All CN's imports were paid for fairly with its hard earned US$.
All CN's export deals were done fairly, CN didn't force anyone to buy, did it?
Right now CN just want to solve its own problems,enhance society harmony, stay united, make full use of its infrastructure and manufacturing capacities, raise the level of education..........etc etc.
And CN do not have to follow anyone's political or social system. It has its own.
For those who don't like it, tough.

 

[JSCh]

Time to get an education !!

I found the following on what they taught at Columbia University about China foreign policy to educator.

The principles that guide China foreign policy is rather straight forward.
The following passage give you a NEGATIVE take of those principles.
I guess it is hardly surprising this is what they taught their educator.
How you think of the principles is really up to you.

Principles of China's Foreign Policy | Asia for Educators | Columbia University

Principles of China's Foreign Policy

China portrays itself as a Third World country that pursues "an independent foreign policy of peace." Third World means that China is a poor, developing country and not part of any power bloc such as that around the United States or the socialist bloc formerly associated with the Soviet Union. "Independence" means that China does not align itself with any other major power. Chinese spokesmen say that their country seeks peace so that it can concentrate on development.

China says its decisions on foreign policy questions derive from the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence: mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. The Chinese leadership originally enumerated these principles in 1954 when China, with a communist government, was trying to reach out to the non-communist countries of Asia.

Today, the Five Principles still serve a useful purpose. They offer an alternative to the American conception of a new kind of world order — one in which international regimes and institutions, often reflecting U.S. interests and values, limit the rights of sovereign states to develop and sell weapons of mass destruction, repress opposition and violate human rights, pursue mercantilist economic policies that interfere with free trade, and damage the environment. China's alternative design for the world stresses the equal, uninfringeable sovereignty of all states large and small, Western and non-Western, rich and poor, democratic and authoritarian, each to run its own system as it sees fit, whether its methods suit Western standards or not. Another Chinese term for such a system is "multipolarity." The Five Principles explain why America should not be able to impose its values on weaker nations. Thus the core idea behind the Five Principles as interpreted by China today is sovereignty – that one state has no right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state.

China says it "never seeks hegemony." In the 1960s hegemony was a code word for Soviet expansionism. Today Chinese officials use the term to refer to what they see as a one-sided American effort to enforce America's will on other countries in such matters as trade practices, weapons proliferation, and human rights. By saying it will not seek hegemony, China tells its smaller neighbors that China's economic development and growing military might, will not turn the country into a regional bully.

Chinese officials' position on most disputes around the world is that they should be solved by peaceful negotiations. This has been their view on the war between Iran and Iraq, the struggle between Israel and the Arabs, the rivalry between North and South Korea, and the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. At the U.N., China often abstains or refrains from voting on resolutions that mandate sanctions or interventions to reverse invasions, end civil wars, or stop terrorism. As a permanent Security Council member China's negative vote would constitute a veto, angering countries who favor intervention. By not voting or casting an abstention, China has allowed several interventions to go ahead without reversing its commitment to non-intervention.

Of course, these articulated moral principles do not mean that Chinese foreign policy is not realistic or strategic. In many cases, the announced principles actually fit the needs of Chinese strategy. Especially in places relatively far from China, such as the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America, a few simple principles actually reflect Chinese interests most of the time. To oppose great-power intervention and defend sovereignty and equality among states is not only high-minded but represents China's national interest in regions where China cannot intervene itself. The farther one gets from China's borders, the easier it is for China to match rhetoric with interests. Even when there are inconsistencies and tradeoffs in Chinese policy, the rhetoric is flexible enough to accommodate them.

The consultant for this unit is Andrew J. Nathan, professor of Chinese politics at Columbia University. The unit draws from Andrew J. Nathan and Robert S. Ross, The Great Wall and the Empty Fortress: China’s Search for Security (New York: W.W. Norton, 1997).

 

[Banglar Lathial]

Let's read the topic and address the specific points discussed.

China is far from being a superpower, as almost everyone agrees, not because of lack of economic or industrial might but lack of a unique domestic ideology of its own - to put it very simply.

There is nothing others would want to follow China's lead in. Is China a capitalistic or a Communist country? If it is either of the two, it is not the 'leader' of either of these two blocks, so why should anybody follow China's lead?

We could go on with the same line of arguments, and usually, the answers would be, China is far from being a superpower.