Remembering Tiananmen, 20 years on

[SaintessHeart]

I feel that China will probably be the superpower of the 21st century, just like how the British Empire used to be in the 19th and early 20th century, then superseded by the US (British SAS is still the granddaddy of all Special Forces though).

If you take a look at their military, it is pretty much built to counter US and NATO forces in general. Their new assault rifle QBZ-95 is designed to chamber the DP-10 round, which is slightly larger than the 5.56 x 45mm round used by the standard NATO rifles (M16, L85, etc), meaning it can chamber and fire the 5.56 x 45mm, albeit with less accuracy. Their J-10 fighters needed the Lavi technology (which is supposed to be slightly inferior to the one used by the F35) to match US's air superiority, and submarines to hunt down aircraft carriers.

With the US low on funds and material, it wouldn't be surprising of China supersedes US as the world's leading military and economic power.

Regarding China's young generation, I am pretty much convinced that they are not like the oldies in Lincoln suits after the "grass mud horse" incident*. They have their own thoughts and are more willing to accept the "democratic reforms" more readily than the CCP members. The media is already taking the step forward with the "Cow Yoghurt Super Girl's Voice" TV programme (something like a China version of American Idol, but for pretty girls only), so we can look out for more change in the future.

What they need to do is to be less audacious in their way of doing business. I mean, that melanine in milk and lead in paint bullshit has to stop.

Spoiler for * = vulgar and NSFW:

It is a phonetic synonym to "f*** your mother" in Chinese. PLEASE do not use it on your Chinese friends, you still need your hands to type the next post.

[yezhanquan]

Countering foreign armies is the aim of any national army worth its salt. However, China should know better than to build up their military without anticipating international worries. International trust in this respect is still low. While they will pursue their military strategies, I don't see them matching the Pentagon's budget anytime soon.

As for economic power, both the US and China need to get their houses in order. Internal consumption is still freaking low, and reliance on the US as its main export market is clearly not as viable now.

The young join the party for convenience's sake. Ideology can't fill stomachs, as those who lived through the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution realised.

[Thingle]

China will NOT be the next superpower. It will crumble on itself in 30-40 years when their population goes old. It will outmatch the demographic problems the west and Japan is currently facing. How will they support 500+ million pensioners with half the labor force to make up for it? I think India will eventually win the race. I hope they do.

[yezhanquan]

Originally Posted by Thingle

China will NOT be the next superpower. It will crumble on itself in 30-40 years when their population goes old. It will outmatch the demographic problems the west and Japan is currently facing. I think India will eventually win the race. I hope they do.

The demographic issues are a serious one, but China is opening its doors. If the Party knows what's good for them, we'll have a lot more non-Chinese Chinese citizens in the years to come.

[Claies]

See the Olympics, that was fake as hell. No "genuine" spirit and all show. Those smiles are fake. I am almost sure of that.

They're not fake. They're just irrational. Nationalism at work.

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

I feel that China will probably be the superpower of the 21st century, just like how the British Empire used to be in the 19th and early 20th century, then superseded by the US (British SAS is still the granddaddy of all Special Forces though).

If you take a look at their military, it is pretty much built to counter US and NATO forces in general. Their new assault rifle QBZ-95 is designed to chamber the DP-10 round, which is slightly larger than the 5.56 x 45mm round used by the standard NATO rifles (M16, L85, etc), meaning it can chamber and fire the 5.56 x 45mm, albeit with less accuracy. Their J-10 fighters needed the Lavi technology (which is supposed to be slightly inferior to the one used by the F35) to match US's air superiority, and submarines to hunt down aircraft carriers.

The thing about the Chinese military is while they do showcase new technologies, most of their troops are still using old stuff. They also have less machinery than their US counterparts. Less tanks, less fighters, way less ships, and they're 90% antiquated. They're not going to attain imperialistic power anytime soon. So far, they're just a very good conventional defense.

I seriously don't think they're trying to fight a military war. It's something they can't win. The moment they start a war on somebody, the world will shut its doors on them. What I see them doing is conquering the world through economic power. They're building up massive amounts of foreign reserves for this, and if you just take a look at its zealous businessmen, you can see why this can be very powerful.

Their military's there to make shooting wars a non-issue. They politically will not win if they fight one country, they militarily will not win if they fight the world. Meanwhile, there's no way the world can militarily win against China. Besides, it really helps with propaganda.

Originally Posted by Thingle

China will NOT be the next superpower. It will crumble on itself in 30-40 years when their population goes old. It will outmatch the demographic problems the west and Japan is currently facing. I think India will eventually win the race. I hope they do.

It's not like India doesn't have its own massive problems. Their economic imbalance is utterly disgusting. They certainly can attain a status of great power, but they have a long way to go.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

we'll have a lot more non-Chinese Chinese citizens in the years to come.

Hmmm.... that's extremely unlikely. The Chinese aren't the most cosmopolitan of people if you notice their entire history. They're more likely to shut themselves off than be like Brazil.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by Claies

It's not like India doesn't have its own massive problems. Their economic imbalance is utterly disgusting. They certainly can attain a status of great power, but they have a long way to go.

As long as their population's median age stays pretty low, the growth potential is limitless. Sadly that's the thing one must balance with economic growth.

[yezhanquan]

It's better the PLA stays that way. The last thing China needs is a war which distracts them from their internal problems. Besides, "imperialistic" power = high costs.

I do see China loosening the 1-child policy to deal with the gray population. Combined with other measures, it should tide them past the silver tsunami. And they want foreign talent. There are many things they themselves cannot come up with yet.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

I do see China loosening the 1-child policy to deal with the gray population. Combined with other measures, it should tide them past the silver tsunami. And they want foreign talent. There are many things they themselves cannot come up with yet.

It takes at least 20 years to see the results if they do that, so they don't have that much time to waste. Making use of foreigners can be an alternative, but that's only when you talk about highly skilled people. They still have a lot of native born labourers at this point.

[Kylaran]

Originally Posted by Thingle

China will NOT be the next superpower. It will crumble on itself in 30-40 years when their population goes old. It will outmatch the demographic problems the west and Japan is currently facing. How will they support 500+ million pensioners with half the labor force to make up for it? I think India will eventually win the race. I hope they do.

The fall and rise of China has always been associated with great rulers; the current CCP was unifying force for a China that was far too disorganized. As long as there is a powerful enough unifying government, China will be able to grow as they have been assuming they develop ways to maintain a flow of natural resources.

India the world's largest democracy, and that's about the only good thing they can boast about. Income disparity, poverty, natural resources - in all of these areas India is lacking behind China. China has more land in general, and even if the majority of it is not farm land, it's still possible to use that land somehow.

I see India crumbling sooner than China. Like most democratic countries, its government is stuck in gridlock 90% of the time. The Chinese can't be fed with words thrown around by politicians.

Originally Posted by Thingle

Hmmm.... that's extremely unlikely. The Chinese aren't the most cosmopolitan of people if you notice their entire history. They're more likely to shut themselves off than be like Brazil.

The Chinese are not currently the most advanced nation in the world; they have no need to revert back to old political strategies. The old Sinocentric world view of the world as a realm （lit. below the Heavens 天下） under the rule of the　divinely ordained emporor (皇帝) of China being the center of civilization has faded from the modern political scene in China. Granted, it may manifest itself in political rhetoric or parts of Chinese culture, but the CCP is not stupid enough to think that closing off its doors will help its country grow in an era that features increased amounts of globalization.

[Lathdrinor]

India is a puzzle. It is one of the most divided societies in the world (along the lines of caste, skin color, language, ethnicity, religion, region, politics, etc.), yet manages to keep itself together. I don't know whether it's really the government form (parliamentary democracy), or the simple acceptance among the populace that this is as good as it gets. Either way, it will be interesting to see what comes out of it, given that India, historically, was not one country until the British came.

As for superpower, I don't think there will be another superpower like the US, at least not in the near future. Economically, both India and China might rise to become giants, but militarily, they don't and won't have the same sort of dominance European empires and the US had for the last five hundred or so years. They'll be able to throw their weight around, to be sure, but subjugate the globe, probably not.

As for demographics, it's not yet clear to me that India's birth rate is a good thing. Certainly, the country's got the food resources to support it (India has *more* arable land than China, despite being much smaller), but a bigger population does not necessarily mean a stronger country. It really depends on India's ability to provide *quality* jobs and education for its people. Failing that, a bigger population could become a burden. Quality, not quantity, is important in this day and age.

As for the pensioners' plight in China, I'd say it's not as bad as people claim. The savings rate of the average Chinese is something like 40-50%. That's a lot of money for rainy days, and I don't necessarily think that the average single child is going to end up having to provide most of the support their parents need in old age (though in rural areas, the shortage of young farmhands vis-a-vis retired farmers might require the government to restructure agriculture). That said, this is one reason why China cannot be depended on to replace the West as the engine of consumption - most of its people cannot afford to spend as much money on luxuries, since they have to save for retirement.

To be more on topic, Tiananmen Square, twenty years on, has unfortunately proved Deng Xiaoping's point - that if the CCP cracked down in 1989, they'll be able to hold on for at least twenty more years. Not only was he right, but it looks as though the CCP will hold on for even longer - maybe another twenty, or more. Capitalism has proved an useful distraction for the average person in China, who now worries less about the government's ideology and more about how he or she's going to make money. The biggest challenges facing the CCP now are corruption, income inequality, and environmental degradation. Going forward will require flexibility, and it's not clear that the CCP is capable of that flexibility. Still, this is a party that's gone from Maoist communism to market capitalism within sixty years of its inception, so who knows.

[SaintessHeart]

Just to let you guys know :

1. India has 4,700 tanks, but only 1,300 are operational.

2. The best weapons go to the special forces regiment (FN 2000, AG36). The rest of the army are still using AK-47s, and reserve brigades are given the Lee-Enfield MKIV / Sten.

3. Their helicopters are hardly working, rarely used and are usually rented to Bollywood.

4. Their intelligence agencies are unprofessional and totally suck.

Now you know why the Pakkies are able to fight them close to a standstill in Kashmir despite having a smaller, fragmented and irregular armed force.

China, on the other hand :

1. Has phased out most of its old Soviet-era fighters and replaced most of them with J-8s, a third generation fighter (A-4 Skyhawk types, with proper upgrades it can match 4th-gen fighters due to its manuverability).

2. Is slated to replace their Type 81s completely with QBZ-03/95s by 2010-2011.

3. Has outdated T-72s mods, but has alot of them.

4. Has immature NV technology, ill-equipped for CBRE, but has excellent troop training (they are significantly fitter than the US Spec Ops troops!)

[risingstar3110]

Back to the topic, given how terrible the Russia (Soviet? Russia? oh well you guys know what i means...)'s economy and society fell like stones after 1989 when China do not. I believe many Chinese out there pretty much feel that the Tiananmen Square "incident" was justified (yeah you heard it, whether that the true cause or whether the propaganda kicked in).


Sad but true

[yezhanquan]

Truth be told, it's probably more accurate to call the event "the Chinese 4th June incident". Most eyewitnesses agree that the killings were not in the square itself, but in the surrounding areas. The students who were in the square did get out largely unmolested after negotiations.

[LeoXiao]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

Back to the topic, given how terrible the Russia (Soviet? Russia? oh well you guys know what i means...)'s economy and society fell like stones after 1989 when China do not. I believe many Chinese out there pretty much feel that the Tiananmen Square "incident" was justified (yeah you heard it, whether that the true cause or whether the propaganda kicked in).


Sad but true

Making some economic reforms and killing thousands of people who are just asking for some freedom of thought are two different things. It's not like the CCP had to do both; its just that doing both was more convenient for holding on to absolute power. The CCP was only going to concede what it really had to in order to survive, and that was domestic economic dominion. Even though China might be more successful today if more political freedom had been allowed, it might have reduced the CCP's power beyond an acceptable point and so therefore the June 4th event was needed to ensure its grip on power.

It's somewhat annoying when people don't think clearly and assume that CCP=China.

Granted, it may manifest itself in political rhetoric or parts of Chinese culture, but the CCP is not stupid enough to think that closing off its doors will help its country grow in an era that features increased amounts of globalization.

China is letting in foreigners to a certain extent. But if it made it even more lenient, think about it: How many foreigners would you expect to emigrate to China? Probably some, but not a significant amount and definitely not enough to actually change anything.

You're confusing the Party structure under Mao, and today. The great killer events can be put down to Mao. GLF is his idea, along with the CR. It was after those total disasters that the Party decided to enforce the "first among equals" rule more rigidly.

Had there not been Mao, I think the Party still would have initiated something similar to the CR, and done some other death programs. Why? Because Stalin had done those with success. Also, the very atmosphere that the CCP under Mao developed in Chinese society has made things convenient to control for the CCP now. Otherwise, without such drastic measures, the CCP could not have been able to get so much power because lots of the values of the Communist ideology (which is inherently a Western invention) could not coexist with Chinese culture. So it had to be rooted out, and this was accomplished by Mao. Had there been no Mao, either the CCP would've done what he did anyway or they would've collapsed after a decade or so.

[yezhanquan]

Now, I'm not a top expert on the CCP leaders, but not all the top leaders of the Chinese Politburo are Stalinists. They may be hardliners, but the organisation is still seen as Leninist by many observers.

Also, I must stress again that Mao is not the whole CCP leadership. He may have dominated the Party in his later years, but in the early years, other top leaders were also very prominent.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Just to let you guys know :

1. India has 4,700 tanks, but only 1,300 are operational.

2. The best weapons go to the special forces regiment (FN 2000, AG36). The rest of the army are still using AK-47s, and reserve brigades are given the Lee-Enfield MKIV / Sten.

3. Their helicopters are hardly working, rarely used and are usually rented to Bollywood.

4. Their intelligence agencies are unprofessional and totally suck.

Now you know why the Pakkies are able to fight them close to a standstill in Kashmir despite having a smaller, fragmented and irregular armed force.

China, on the other hand :

1. Has phased out most of its old Soviet-era fighters and replaced most of them with J-9s, a third generation fighter (A-4 Skyhawk types, with proper upgrades it can match 4th-gen fighters due to its manuverability).

2. Is slated to replace their Type 63s completely with QBZ-03/56s by 2010-2011.

3. Has outdated T-72s mods, but has alot of them.

4. Has immature NV technology, ill-equipped for CBRE, but has excellent troop training (they are significantly fitter than the US Spec Ops troops!)

While India has Su-30's which will just blow out those J-series fighters the PRC has. While the T-90 is somewhat lower ranked than the T-80, who needs those kinds of weapons in such mountainous terrains? India has a decent navy, though.

[yezhanquan]

For something different, I point everyone to this rather famous pic of Zhao Ziyang. If I'm not wrong, it was the last photo of him being seen in public.



However, today's attention is not him, but on the rather stern looking man at the extreme right (with the pressed lips). You might recognise him as...



The current Chinese PM, Mr Wen Jiabao.

[LeoXiao]

Zhao Ziyang could've been a Gorbachev. But they arrested him instead.

Originally Posted by Thingle

While India has Su-30's which will just blow out those J-series fighters the PRC has. While the T-90 is somewhat lower ranked than the T-80, who needs those kinds of weapons in such mountainous terrains? India has a decent navy, though.

Guess what China also has? J-11s (pretty much a better Su-27), and about 400 of them. It also has Su-30/33s (i cant remember which), and naval power probably won't matter too much in a China/India confrontation, and even so, China has many more ships than India, and nuclear subs.

[Shadow Kira01]

Isn't the Tiananmen Incident merely a failed rebellion attempt? And that it was caused by poor coordination and horrid strategies that don't even make senses?