Senkaku/Diaoyu/Tiaoyutai/Pinnacle Islands dispute

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by ReddyRedWolf

Japan, South Korea, Philippines and Australia already has mutual defense treaties for decades.

Are you sure Japan is included? South Korea Government couldn't even pass a bill to share intelligence with japan.

Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan

I think the CCP is due for being overthrown with all the scandals piling up like sandwiches and with the people starting to distrust the CCP.

No body ever trust the CCP but it will take more then a few scandals to topple the CCP.

Also be careful what you wish, a Democratic China might even be a worst neighbor then the CCP China.

With all due respect to what Cherudim Arche wrote earlier today, I still view India as the next main source of cheap labor to look after and quite a well of untapped market that looks great the next 10-15 years. By that time frame, India's population will already exceed China's and India are just asking Western countries to look at them more seriously. After all, where was China before all those companies came in? The same could be said about India's current situation.

Problem with India it is politicians are as corrupted as China's but more incompetent.

[Ithekro]

Quote:

Are you sure Japan is included? South Korea Government couldn't even pass a bill to share intelligence with japan.

Treaties with the United States. Most of them going back to the 60s or 70s, if not earlier. Most originally to counter Communist expansions in Asia and the Pacific.

[KiraYamatoFan]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

No body ever trust the CCP but it will take more then a few scandals to topple the CCP.

Also be careful what you wish, a Democratic China might even be a worst neighbor then the CCP China.

Like what? Massive strikes/boycotts? Rebellions? Filing for separation? Anarchy? For some reason, I can see Uyghur people (for example) end up going the Chechen way at some point in the future.

What would be the problem with a Democratic China anyway?

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan

Like what? Massive strikes/boycotts? Rebellions? Filing for separation? Anarchy? For some reason, I can see Uyghur people (for example) end up going the Chechen way at some point in the future.

What would be the problem with a Democratic China anyway?

It will take a pretty substantial push to topple a government as entrenched as the CCP. Fact of the matter is, the general population doesn't tend to want to revolt if the economy is good. For all the hype surrounding the Arab Spring, the undercurrent that triggered the whole deal was the poor state of the economy, not ideology.

The Uyghur remains very much a minority, while it's possible it could devolve into a Chechnya, they would have to find more support in their own population first, along with more external support elsewhere.

[ReddyRedWolf]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

Are you sure Japan is included? South Korea Government couldn't even pass a bill to share intelligence with japan.

http://www.learner.org/workshops/pri...s/usjapan.html

You didn't read the one I quoted was asserting the US is encircling China when in fact the mutual defense treaties with the US goes back decades.

What are mentioned are traditional allies of the US in the region.

[sa547]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Fact of the matter is, the general population doesn't tend to want to revolt if the economy is good.

And a strong economy translates to solidified nationalism; nothing else generates greater national pride and support to the government than unprecedented prosperity (even if the Chinese countryside still has some citizens living in marginal poverty).

[Kokukirin]

Originally Posted by sa547

And a strong economy translates to solidified nationalism; nothing else generates greater national pride and support to the government than unprecedented prosperity (even if the Chinese countryside still has some citizens living in marginal poverty).

Nationalism was strong in China when it was a dirt poor third world country, perhaps stronger than today. IMO it has more to do with the "patriotic education" fed to their children in school.

Thank god Hong Kong fought off the "patriotic education", for the moment at least.

[LeoXiao]

Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan

Like what? Massive strikes/boycotts? Rebellions? Filing for separation? Anarchy? For some reason, I can see Uyghur people (for example) end up going the Chechen way at some point in the future.

As said above, the Uyghurs are not about to become another Chechnya. The government isn't trying to actively destroy their culture any more than they are other peoples', and the residents there are about as satisfied as anyone else in China is or isn't.

For the CCP to give up its dictatorial power or collapse it would have to either undergo some massive economic failure (which is possible, but I don't think likely for at least the next decade), or reform as the result of internal struggle. I think this is possible but it requires the people to demand more political liberalization, more rule of law, etc. so that officials in the CCP will pick up on it. Right now most people don't care too much about not being able to vote, but they are pissed about government corruption and things like poisoned products. If the CCP or certain parts of the CCP recognize that fighting corruption can be done better by making itself more accountable to the people, then it is also possible for it to recognize that more plurality (i.e. scrapping the one-party state) can better guarantee that the government is accountable.

What would be the problem with a Democratic China anyway?

There is a fear that China would end up like Russia, with even higher corruption, a breakdown of infrastructure and so on. This may have been true in 1980 but now it's a complete excuse to stay a dictatorship. China is at the point where its lack of democracy is hindering it, not keeping it "unified" or "stable". The CCP's dictatorship is simply a dead weight on Chinese growth. Right now, so much money and resources are wasted on cracking down on dissent, or freedoms that in democratic nations would be perfectly normal. International relations are jeopardized because of internal political shifts (the trial of Wang Lijun, 18th party Congress, etc). And the rule of law is effectively ignored because the CCP can and does do illegal stuff all the time due to its dictatorial status, which has created an atmosphere of corruption and ethical void.

Nationalism was strong in China when it was a dirt poor third world country, perhaps stronger than today. IMO it has more to do with the "patriotic education" fed to their children in school.

Thank god Hong Kong fought off the "patriotic education", for the moment at least.

Keep in mind that there is "patriotic" education and the there is "respect the Party" education, they are two different things...

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

For the CCP to give up its dictatorial power or collapse it would have to either undergo some massive economic failure (which is possible, but I don't think likely for at least the next decade), or reform as the result of internal struggle. I think this is possible but it requires the people to demand more political liberalization, more rule of law, etc. so that officials in the CCP will pick up on it. Right now most people don't care too much about not being able to vote, but they are pissed about government corruption and things like poisoned products. If the CCP or certain parts of the CCP recognize that fighting corruption can be done better by making itself more accountable to the people, then it is also possible for it to recognize that more plurality (i.e. scrapping the one-party state) can better guarantee that the government is accountable.

my worried is less on corruption (it really can't get more corrupt) but populism. i think a democratic china is more likely to get into a shooting war then the CCP.

[Kokukirin]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Keep in mind that there is "patriotic" education and the there is "respect the Party" education, they are two different things...

There is no such distinction in China.

[LeoXiao]

Originally Posted by Kokukirin

There is no such distinction in China.

A country includes the land, the people living on it, and their culture, whereas a party is simply the ruling structure managing it. You are patriotic or nationalistic for a country, not a party. "Patriotism" for a party is believing that it is making the right decisions as a management bloc, and as such it is incorrect to call it "patriotism", merely that one agrees with the party. And since "patriotism" implies a kind of devotion reserved only for things that one will follow unconditionally, like one's family (which is where the word comes from), "patriotism" in a political party means to follow it blindly.
But even if you are following the party blindly, it is still not patriotism. If you call yourself a patriot just for following the party, you are simply misusing the word.

my worried is less on corruption (it really can't get more corrupt) but populism. i think a democratic china is more likely to get into a shooting war then the CCP.

I disagree. Democracy never meant that crazy opinions like "let's attack Japan" will gain more traction than in a dictatorship. All modern democracies are representative democracies, which means that even though they or their parties are elected, public leaders will generally act rationally. Just because a bunch of young punks are burning Japanese cars doesn't they have to attack Japan to stay in office.

I bet that if the police actually did their job, the riots would have been put down easily and you wouldn't have significant anti-Japanese outbursts throughout all major Chinese cities.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

my worried is less on corruption (it really can't get more corrupt) but populism. i think a democratic china is more likely to get into a shooting war then the CCP.

Eh, generally speaking, the population of a democratic state tends to be anti-war. While the more hawkish ones will always be there to spout off their talking points, the silent majority tends to not want to fight in it and pay for it, China would be no different.

[ReddyRedWolf]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

my worried is less on corruption (it really can't get more corrupt) but populism. i think a democratic china is more likely to get into a shooting war then the CCP.

About shooting wars, the CCP and the PLA.

http://news.yahoo.com/chinese-milita...150654870.html

Some Chinese military officers, hawkish and outspoken on graft, a challenge for leadership
By Christopher Bodeen, The Associated Press | Associated Press – 13 hrs ago



BEIJING, China - China's government has demanded talks with Japan in their latest dust-up over a set of tiny islands, but a high-ranking Chinese military officer has suggested drastically more belligerent responses.

Dispatch hundreds of fishing boats to fight a maritime guerrilla war, says Maj. Gen. Luo Yuan. Turn the uninhabited outcroppings into a bombing range. Rip up World War II peace agreements and seize back the territory, now controlled by Japan but long claimed by China.

"A nation without a martial spirit is a nation without hope," Luo declared at an academic forum this month in the southern city of Shenzhen while officials in Beijing continued to urge negotiations.

Luo's remarks reflect a challenge for China's leadership from a military increasingly willing to push the limits of the ruling Communist Party's official line on foreign relations, territorial claims and even government reforms. It's a challenge that will need to be carefully managed if a once-a-decade leadership transition beginning Nov. 8 is to go smoothly, with China's global reputation and the party's credibility both at stake.

Backed by what is now the world's second-largest military budget behind the U.S., the People's Liberation Army is bristling with new armaments and is becoming increasingly assertive. That has distressed neighbours such as Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines, all locked in disputes with China over island territory potentially rich in oil, and has prompted the U.S. to send more military assets to the region.

Presiding over this force will be a new generation of military leaders taking power at the same time as the new crop of political leaders.

Up to seven of the 10 uniformed members of the Central Military Commission, which oversees the armed forces, are set to retire. Members of the new panel are expected to demand an even greater say in decision making — and a tougher line in disputes with other nations.

While President Hu Jintao's absolute command over the armed forces had at time been questioned, his presumed successor — Vice-President Xi Jingping — may have an easier time keeping officers on-message because of his closer ties with many top military figures as a fellow "princeling" — those with ties to communist China's founding fathers.

He may have to wait, though: Hu will likely seek to hold onto his position as chairman of the military commission for another two years, as his predecessor did. Also, five officers generally considered loyal to Hu were promoted this week to top posts such air force commander and chief of the general staff, meaning they will sit on the new commission once it is appointed next month.

Officially, China espouses a "peaceful rise" philosophy that stresses a defensive military posture and the negotiated resolution of disputes. But the PLA's newest generation of ships, submarines, stealth planes and the development of its first aircraft carrier suggest the capability for operations far from home.

Hawkish officers such as Luo have a broad audience in the PLA and in a Chinese public that has grown more stridently nationalistic and increasingly impatient with a ruling party seen as bloated, unresponsive and corrupt. Luo, whose father was a top security officer for Mao Zedong, has at times openly questioned the legitimacy of the "peaceful rise" philosophy and warned that it doesn't preclude China from using force to assert its interests.

Their sentiments find a ready audience via books, online sites and even in state media.

There's a "continual tug-of-war between the party and the PLA," said Denny Roy, an expert on the Chinese military and senior fellow at the East-West Center in Hawaii.

"The party may not want to appear to be trying to stifle a popular nationalistic position expressed by a military man, (which could) turn public anger against the civilian leadership," Roy said.

The 2.3 million-member PLA is technically the house army of the Communist Party, ultimately loyal to the party rather than the Chinese nation. Its chief mission is ensuring the party's hold on power, as it did in 1989 in the bloody suppression of pro-democracy protests centred on Beijing's Tiananmen Square.

No military officers are openly challenging party control. But some have railed against official corruption and called for a degree of political openness that makes party leaders nervous. Among the boldest has been Gen. Liu Yazhou, whose works espousing greater democracy have been privately published and placed in coffee shops in Beijing's university district.

"Senior officers feel entitled to raise their voices because they believe that the party's corruption has elevated the relative standing of the PLA," said Washington-based military strategist and historian Edward Luttwak, who knows Luo personally.

In the 2009 book "China Dream," senior colonel and National Defence University professor Liu Mingfu called for China to upend U.S. dominance in international relations, saying China had a stark choice between becoming the pre-eminent power or one that has "been left behind and eliminated."

Those sentiments were echoed in the introduction to a 2010 scholarly work by Gen. Liu Yuan, whose father, Liu Shaoqi, was a Chinese head of state in the 1950s and 1960s. The younger Liu called for China to cast aside restraint and praised warfare as a foundation of modern culture.

"Those involved in warfare are the most glorious, wonderful, and mournful," wrote Liu, a full general in the PLA who serves as a political commissar.

Requests to interview Luo and the three Lius, who are not related, were declined.

Many observers see a pronounced gap between the headline-grabbing views and bombastic statements of these kinds of officers — most often based in academia — and those of unit commanders who are much more cognizant of the PLA's limitations, as well as top military leaders considered staunchly loyal to the party.

"I would emphasize that, overall, the party leadership wields ultimate decision-making power on key national security issues," said Sarah McDowall, a China analyst with IHS Janes in Britain.

The PLA also has shown the world a friendlier side in recent years, co-operating in anti-pirate patrols off Africa's coast, joining in UN peacekeeping operations and sending a hospital ship to the Caribbean. However, some of that may be as much about testing the ability to operate far afield as about diplomacy.

Xi, the incoming leader, is seen as representing a strain of firm, though not shrill, nationalism. His ties to the military are smoothed by his years in uniform as secretary to former Defence Minister Geng Biao from 1979-1982 — as well as his being the son of a leading communist guerrilla.

The military will continue to yield major sway through its outsized representation on major bodies. It will have 251 delegates at the national party congress opening Nov. 8, three times the number from China's most populous province, Henan.

Its influence has ensured robust spending on such new assets as the prototype J-20 stealth fighter.

McDowall of HIS Jane's said the PLA's influence has been growing in recent years "owing to the increasing resources allocated to it" and that it has a major, behind-the-scenes say in this year's political leadership transition.

"High-ranking military men may feel they have slack in the leash and can speak boldly" when the country's political establishment is in flux, said Roy, the East-West Center senior fellow. "For many in the Chinese military, these outspoken guys are patriotic heroes."

Makes you wonder who is in charge of foreign policy? The CCP or the PLA?

I remember one state visit where the PLA pulled a stunt that surprised and embarrassed the CCP.

[Tom Bombadil]

I stopped reading that article as soon as it mentioned General Luo Yuan. To put it mildly, general Luo is the "bad cop" in a "good cop, bad cop" style game. He holds no real power in the military at all (despite the "general" title).

[Ithekro]

I wonder if they know that "ripping up the World War II treaties" will basically end the dispute in Japan's favor as that would mean leave the islands under Japanese control by even older treaties that are not debated.

And doing so in addition to force will almost certainly cause a reaction from the United States and the JSDFs. If the treaty is void, that also means Taiwan's claims are also void. Means there might be irony if the US and Japan request Taiwan's aid in the conflict as the gloves might be off (short of nuclear strikes I imagine), thus opening a hole for Taiwan to become legitimately independent from China

Who knows...maybe the Japanese would offer the islands a carrots to the independent Taiwanese for aid against China.

(I'm dreaming I suppose, relations in Asia don't work like that, and a shooting war involvinh China and the United States directly will likely result in a nuclear exchange at some point unless the two parties are only fighting over the islands...since the US has no real desire to invade the Mainland, just defend Taiwans and Japan in this instance).

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Tom Bombadil

I stopped reading that article as soon as it mentioned General Luo Yuan. To put it mildly, general Luo is the "bad cop" in a "good cop, bad cop" style game. He holds no real power in the military at all (despite the "general" title).

What about outside the military? All of these "generals" and "party officials" are known to have amassed a plethora of wealth and contacts that could easily translate to power anywhere in a place like China, where money talks.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by Tom Bombadil

I stopped reading that article as soon as it mentioned General Luo Yuan. To put it mildly, general Luo is the "bad cop" in a "good cop, bad cop" style game. He holds no real power in the military at all (despite the "general" title).

I wouldn't put it past the son of Luo Qingchang to not have unofficial power outside of his nominal position as deputy secretary-general of the China Society of Military Science. After all, as long as a princeling is not completely incompetent, he would have some measure of power.

[willx]

Second stealth jet puts China on path to top regional power: expert

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8A107O20121102

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

A country includes the land, the people living on it, and their culture, whereas a party is simply the ruling structure managing it. You are patriotic or nationalistic for a country, not a party. "Patriotism" for a party is believing that it is making the right decisions as a management bloc, and as such it is incorrect to call it "patriotism", merely that one agrees with the party. And since "patriotism" implies a kind of devotion reserved only for things that one will follow unconditionally, like one's family (which is where the word comes from), "patriotism" in a political party means to follow it blindly.
But even if you are following the party blindly, it is still not patriotism. If you call yourself a patriot just for following the party, you are simply misusing the word.

A country is just as much an abstract concept as a party. As I see it, the CCP does equate loyalty to the country with loyalty to the party, and that's how the education is conducted. Of course, loyalty to the country but not the party would be problematic...

Some have said earlier that the CCP won't fall while the economy is good, and I'd tend to agree with that. However, I think the CCP's autocratic nature will in the long run lead to the economy's downfall and ultimate stagnation, leaving ripe conditions for revolution. Corruption is already bad enough in China, as I see it the situation will only get worse as more and more Princelings end out entering the power structure. While many of the first and second generation of CCP leaders were dedicated and talented, I don't see the same qualities in the Princelings. The Princelings are just aristocrats, and have all the same hedonistic flaws that all aristocrats have. As their power becomes more entrenched they'll stop caring about the country, and only care about fulfilling their own desires and filling their own pockets.

Also, I think the Chinese economy could collapse in the next 10-20 years. There's a lot of talk of property bubbles and vast unoccupied apartment blocks going around. It's not a sure thing of course, but if that doesn't get china then the stagnation of the CCP will.

[Tom Bombadil]

I sense a disturbance in the force. Heightened tension in south China sea in the coming month.
Just a hunch.