- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 3506 Hour
- Reading permission
The US used an economic weapon, its debt to China, to create an indirect security shield around itself. |
As has been said before, if someone owes his banker a dollar, he will have to call on his banker but if he owes the banker a trillion dollars, the banker will be so concerned that he will have to call on the loan-taker.
Right now, China holds too much of US bonds; China has become the banker to the US. It's not likely that a banker will go to war with his biggest debtor. So China will not wage preemptive war on the US.
On the other hand, no one will disagree that the US has less to lose if it wages preemptive war on China, should it come to that some day. Superpower and all, it has nothing to lose except to erase all those debts. It has in fact thumbed its nose at the UN, a body which it has used to suit its own interest from time to time so what's to stop it from creating a flareup now and then, here and there, in order to raise tensions and force China's hand at protecting its own sovereignty?
Yet, knowing all this, China has bravely said she will not attack unless provoked. In other words, she will not execute preemptive first strike. When you think of that, it is indeed brave but risky. Brave because the other side may just accept it and proceed to test waters or even launch an obliterative first strike.
What China has been doing is to reduce the risk. That is why she is strengthening her military forces. Because she has said she will not preempt.
In much the same way the US has security guarantee through economics, China must also develop her own security guarantee through military reinforcements. On a per capita basis, China's military spending and accumulation is too small for the present geopolitical situation. On the other hand, the US has enough armaments to destroy every living thing on this planet many times over. So far the US has shown adventurism without regard for others which has only led to destruction and mayhem. Is there another 'guarantee' she won't? The answer is hard to find.
One therefore hopes that just as the US and Chinese peoples are friendly as brothers and sisters to one another, so too the US government of the day will reflect that mutual grassroots-to-grassroots affinity that will pave the way for a more peaceful and prosperous century this time.
If anything, China's government has been a constant in what it says it will do and not do. Elements inside the US should not take advantage of this to posture the type of recklessness that will only result in unnecessary blood-letting, suffering and loss.
Looking at the arsenals around, for every second of peace, one must constantly invest in every day of goodwill.
America and China should be the best of friends, people and country.
Meanwhile, one must also be wary of the anglo-saxon equation. Now that the light of the UK is dimming, it will no doubt do its utmost to disrupt any development of better relations between the two superpowers. It has as usual started in the media section. Look at what the anglo journalists of the Economist and Far Eastern Economic Review have been writing. Even the american-based Foreign Affairs has not been above the below-the-belt. The anglo-saxons may be down but not out. Elements in Australia have also been active.
What one hopes for this century will not be the transplantation of the seeds of conflict from nations to tribes. The motto 'We are one' would be a better way to lay the cutlery at the negotiating table.
But for now, China must grow stronger. Unlike others, she has no guarantees. She has only painful lessons from history.
[ Last edited by markwu at 2009-5-1 11:21 AM ]