The China Thread

[Josquius]

I've read the Chinese government is upset that hardly anyone in china gives a shit about the moon lander despite the media bombardment about it

[Monoriu]

If any of you care about Chinese rumours and the attempts to read the tea leaves, the Epoch Times has a pretty good summary of events thus far; albeit with the usual heavy focus on Falun Gong - http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/393118-reporting-zhou-yongkang-s-arrest-a-primer-on-the-power-struggle-in-beijing/

This broke an unspoken rule - that current and former members of the Politburo Standing Committee (Standing Committee only, not the larger Politburo) will not be prosecuted, regardless of what crime they may or may not have committed. 

[Razgovory]

Did we ever send his insurance company a bill for repairs?

No, we ate the cost when Bush sent an apology fruit basket.  They did eventually send back the plane, in a bunch of little boxes though.

[CountDeMoney]

From today's NYT Op-Ed page

Contributing Op-Ed Writer
Africa and the Chinese Way
By MURITHI MUTIGA
Published: December 15, 2013

The Kamba people of Kenya claim they were warned about the evils of colonialism long before the first colonialist arrived. The legend goes that the prophet Syokimau, back in the early 19th century, told her people of "a long narrow snake spitting fire" that would make its way up from the East African Coast, bringing with it "red people" who would take away their land. She was right; it was the railroads more than anything else that enabled European colonialists to exploit Kenya's people and extract its wealth during the first half of the 20th century.

The 1,000-kilometer track stretching from the Kenyan port of Mombasa to Uganda was Britain's most ambitious project in Sub-Saharan Africa. The railroad, begun in 1895, was famously disrupted by the so-called man eaters of the Tsavo, two lions that stalked and attacked construction workers. More than 130 people are said to have been killed — the exact number is uncertain — before the animals were finally hunted down. Within the next five years the railroad was completed and the way opened to British domination of the region.

Although portions of the original railroad are still in use, the British no longer call the shots. The Chinese are the new game in town. Beijing has signed off on rail projects across the continent, from Angola in the South, Ethiopia in the East and Nigeria in the West, heralding an infrastructure-expansion boom on a scale never seen in Africa.

On Nov. 28, presidents of four African nations gathered in Mombasa for the inauguration of what was billed as the largest single project in the region's history: a $13.8 billion standard gauge rail line that is expected to link five East African countries and replace the line built by the British. The massive rail networks, almost all of them leading to the sea, will doubtless reinforce the image of a resource-hungry China eager to extract as much as possible from the continent.

In a June 2011 interview in Zambia, Hillary Rodham Clinton, then the U.S. secretary of state, warned Africans to beware of colonial powers that "come in, take out natural resources, pay off leaders and leave." Yet this focus on China's appetite for raw materials misses a more subtle challenge.

In the 20 years since the Cold War's end, free-market, multiparty democracy has been held forth as the ideal form of government (and a key to obtaining support from Washington). But now, drawn to the example set by the fast-growing economies of Asia like China, Singapore and Malaysia — all of which achieved phenomenal growth under modernizing authoritarian governments — a group of African leaders has emerged that openly declares its admiration for this mode of government.

Meles Zenawi, the Ethiopian leader from 1995 until his death in 2012, was perhaps the most forthright advocate of a system that emphasizes economic advancement over democracy. Speaking at the opening of the African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa in January 2012, Mr. Meles was effusive in his praise of China. Lauding Beijing for its aid in building the center, he declared that "the people of China and Africa share similar backgrounds that helped them to stand for one goal today, which is economic development."

Other African leaders, from Rwanda's Paul Kagame to Ali Bongo in Gabon, now speak in similar terms. Yet the growing appeal of the statist model has not drawn nearly enough attention in the West. In a talk in June sponsored by TED, the nonprofit organization that holds conferences on ideas, the Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo warned that Western powers need to pay attention to the growing admiration for the Chinese economic miracle.

Pointing to Beijing's success in moving millions of people out of poverty, she added: "It's not just in economics, but also in terms of living standards. We see that in China 28 percent of people had secondary school access. Today it's closer to 82 percent."

The statistics are impressive, but not everyone buys the idea that Africans should follow China's path. Critics note that while the leaders of Rwanda and Ethiopia have delivered considerable improvements in their people's livelihoods, neither Mr. Kagame nor Mr. Meles brooked any dissent and the repression in both lands is notorious.

Besides, other countries, notably Botswana and Mauritius, have demonstrated that economic progress does not necessarily come hand in hand with authoritarian rule.

Perhaps no country sums up the clash of ideas more clearly than Kenya, the commercial and transportation hub of East Africa and one of the most open nations on the continent. Yet Kenya's new president, Uhuru Kenyatta, who counts China as a top ally, has a clear authoritarian streak.

His allies in Parliament have moved to restrict press freedom and are seeking greater control over the judiciary. But Mr. Kenyatta, who faces trials for crimes against humanity in The Hague for his alleged role in the political violence of 2007, confronts a strong and vibrant media and an activist civil society. How Kenya resolves its tensions will have strong influence on its neighbors.

Africans are often reminded that Malaysia and Singapore had roughly the same G.D.P. 40 years ago as Kenya and Ghana have today. What is less often noted is that the Asian economic miracle was achieved by market-savvy rulers who were nonetheless authoritarian in every sense. The counterargument is that Africans will secure equitable economic growth only by replacing kleptocratic, power-hungry rulers with the checks and balances that democratic systems provide.

Will this be China's century? The answer won't be found by toting up trade figures or measuring the length of railroads. The great prophet Syokimau may have been right about the coming railroads when she predicted that the fire-spitting snake would have its tail in the Indian Ocean and its head in Lake Victoria, but alas she said nothing about how Africa's battle of ideas would play out.

Murithi Mutiga is an editor at the Nation Media Group in Kenya.

[Jacob]

If any of you care about Chinese rumours and the attempts to read the tea leaves, the Epoch Times has a pretty good summary of events thus far; albeit with the usual heavy focus on Falun Gong - http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/393118-reporting-zhou-yongkang-s-arrest-a-primer-on-the-power-struggle-in-beijing/

This broke an unspoken rule - that current and former members of the Politburo Standing Committee (Standing Committee only, not the larger Politburo) will not be prosecuted, regardless of what crime they may or may not have committed.

Yeah, but if Zhou Yongkang and his crew were trying to pull off a bona-fide armed coup, they broke some rules too.

[Razgovory]

Honest question, because I don't know the answer:

What would the USN do if the roles were reversed?  That is a PLA ship is approaching a US carrier in international waters, not listening to requests to turn around?

This is the big problem with Chinese crisis management in the rush :  they have no real operational experience in the cat-and-mouse bullshit that goes on on the high seas.  The USN has decades of experience dancing with the Russians, and it's reflected in everything from JO training to operational guidelines.  They don't sweat this stuff.  Inexperienced Chinese officers under immense political pressure to "do the right thing", though?  That's when things go wrong.

I remember reading a book, that argued that government decisions are dictated by pre-existing plans and organization.  The author used the Cuban missile crisis to illustrate his idea.  The soviets didn't really have any experience for military actions in Latin America and so they used ones for operating in Eastern Europe when setting up their missile bases, which allowed them to be easily spotted.  They really didn't have any fall-back plan for what to do if they met American resistance so after a bit of blundering about, withdrew.

I imagine the US navy has lots of plans on what to do when a hostile ship comes toward them.  The Chinese, not being a strong naval power probably lack the experience to have a bunch of detailed plans (not to mention the freedom of action that comes from being the stronger power).  So I wonder if the Poliburu is giving orders to show the flag while the Navy and Airforce are sitting around coming up with creative ways to tell them that they haven't trained for this, while lower ranking officers are expected to make shit up on the spot.

[CountDeMoney]

I remember reading a book, that argued that government decisions are dictated by pre-existing plans and organization.  The author used the Cuban missile crisis to illustrate his idea.  The soviets didn't really have any experience for military actions in Latin America and so they used ones for operating in Eastern Europe when setting up their missile bases, which allowed them to be easily spotted.  They really didn't have any fall-back plan for what to do if they met American resistance so after a bit of blundering about, withdrew.

Thing is, Chinese power strategy is predicated on a wholly different dynamic than that of the West, or even the Russians.  With the exception of pouring over the Yalu, Chinese demonstrations and the use of force since '49 has always been targeted at weaker powers, or at least weaker powers as the Chinese perceive them.  While the Cuban Missile Crisis was a fantastic display--probably the best display--of the concept of graduated pressure by the US, the Chinese system of crisis management and risk runs on a wholly different set of variables:  it is always scripted to a fault, with every event and outcome expected to follow form from beginning to end, because that's the way it's supposed to turn out.  And when I mean to a fault, I mean they don't insert contingency planning into the decision tree because they've never really practiced brinksmanship, not even with the Soviets after the Mao-Moscow schism.  They never had to;  they've always been able to be the bully on the block with their neighbors. 
Unfortunately for them, the 7th Fleet doesn't play those reindeer games, and the Japanese are quickly coming to the realization they don't have to anymore, either.

[jimmy olsen]

Good

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25411653

Japan's cabinet has approved a new national security strategy and increased defence spending in a move widely seen as aimed at China.

Over the next five years, Japan will buy hardware including drones, aircraft and amphibious vehicles.

The military will also build a new amphibious force capable of retaking islands.

The move comes with Tokyo embroiled in a bitter row with Beijing over East China Sea islands that both claim.

It reflects concern over China's growing assertiveness over its territorial claims and Beijing's mounting defence spending.

"China's stance toward other countries and military moves, coupled with a lack of transparency regarding its military and national security policies, represent a concern to Japan and the wider international community and require close watch," the national security draft said.

'Transparent'

Japan first increased defence spending in January, after a decade of cuts.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who was elected a year ago, has called for Japan to broaden the scope of activities performed by its military - something currently tightly controlled by the post-war constitution.

He has also established a National Security Council that can oversee key issues.

Approving the national security strategy made Japan's foreign and security policy "clear and transparent - for both the Japanese people and all the world to see", he said.

The announcement comes weeks after China established an air defence identification zone (ADIZ) over a swathe of the East China Sea, including islands controlled by Japan.

It says all aircraft transiting the zone must obey certain rules, such as filing flight plans, or face "measures".

Japan, US and South Korea - which claims a rock that lies within China's declared zone - have strongly criticised the move, with the US calling it a unilateral attempt to change the status quo in the region.

China, meanwhile, says it is "closely watching Japan's security strategy and policy direction".

Mr Abe's government says the strategy is a measured and logical response to a real and increasing threat, reports the BBC's Rupert Wingfield-Hayes in Tokyo.

But others point out that Japan's security is already guaranteed by the US, which has tens of thousands of troops in Japan.

Many on the left here think Mr Abe is using the threat from China to pursue his own nationalist dreams, our correspondent adds.

[crazy canuck]

Good

Yeah, militarization in Japan always goes well.

[Valmy]

Samurai Swords for everyone!

[Ed Anger]

Samurai Swords for everyone!

COOL

[Crazy_Ivan80]

with a bit of "luck" things go tits up there just in time for a re-enactment of WW1. But in the far east. Think of the money that could be made by the west.

(rather not cause war is crap, of course)

[KRonn]

Japan should be able to re-arm. Their political system is far different from what it was in WW2 days. Same for Germany. The world has changed, those nations have changed. They aren't the bogeymen anymore.

[crazy canuck]

Japan should be able to re-arm. Their political system is far different from what it was in WW2 days. Same for Germany. The world has changed, those nations have changed. They aren't the bogeymen anymore.

The thing about military build ups is no one can predict how stable (or not) a government will be in the future.  Nobody can predict or stable or not Japan will be in the future.  We have a bad enough time worry about how stable the US is 

For historical perspective people were saying for similar things about Japan prior to WWI. 

[CountDeMoney]

Japan has about as much chance of reverting back to militarism as Germany does, unfortunately.  Enough with the hype.  You're all listening to the bad vibes Beijing constantly puts out.  Seoul, too.