THOUGH MR was friendly will all nations including INDIA PAKISTAN AND ARAB NATIONS MR allowed physical presence of chines in SRI LANKA WITH MAMMOTH PROJECTS. HE DID SO FOR THE SLOE REASON OF CHINA BEING THE ONLY NATION CAPABLE O FINANCING SUCH GIANT PROJECTS.
EVEN THE PRESENT US PUPPET REGIME has gone back to China pleading to re start staled projects Being unable to pay compensation for illegal suspension of the projects present regime has paid with more free free land to china in the Indian Ocean.
they manged to Buy all parties all nations all media to nail MR with non existing charges TODAY SRI LANKA IS BURRED WITH NO DEVELOPMENT AND INTERNAL TURMOILS ,CHAOS WITH A TWO TOUNGED PRESIDENT AND BONELESS PM . CHAOS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RESOLVE FOR THE NEST CENTURY. SINHALA MODAYS WITH NO MEMORY ARE DESTINED TO BE SERVANTS TO ANOTHER. KEEP EATING AND SLEEPING AND OBSERVING SIL
US ‘grand strategy’ towards China
Posted on 10 January 2016 - 07:02pm
Gurdial Singh Nijar
THERE has been much speculation over the US-China relationship ever since Obama announced the "tilt towards Asia" policy. Discussion has ranged around several concerns: that the US wants to keep China in check – hence the TPPA comprising most Pacific Rim countries but excluding China; the military alliances with Japan and South Korea and others aligned against China and so on. What really is US strategy towards China?
At long last we get an insight through a March 2015 study (Revising US Grand Strategy Toward China) approved by the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), described as "the world's most powerful private organisation". It's a private think-tank comprising key members with great influence on US policymakers. It comprises such notables as Paul Wolfowitz and James Steinberg – who served as deputies to secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld and to secretary of state Hillary Clinton respectively. Wolfowitz is adviser to Jeb Bush, a serious Republican presidential contender. Wolfowitz is also well known as a strategic planner for former president Bush and his father. He was instrumental in the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.
The gist of the study: China is a threat to the superpower status of the US. It must be aggressively faced head on, despite the "dangerous circumstances" this entails.
The central objective of "US grand strategy in the 21st century" is to maintain US "primacy". And the study views China as representing an existential threat to US hegemony. Because only China is seen as being in a position to challenge the US, there is a need to devise policies to "aggressively balance China's rise".
Understanding China's grand strategy
How may this be accomplished?
The study says the first task is to fully understand China's own grand strategy – seen as striving to accumulate "comprehensive national power" – in economic, military, technological and diplomatic aspects. Once it achieves this power, it will embark to reclaim the primacy it once enjoyed in Asia as a prelude to exerting global influence in the future as a world power.
The study identifies four means by which China is doing this.
First, preserving the legitimacy of China's internal order through increasing prosperity for its masses; supported by a coercive internal security force.
Second, fostering a high economic growth rate, which also ensures that neighbours fall in line for fear of economic losses if they politically oppose China. This would gradually erode the US's key economic, political and military allies.
Third, "pacifying the periphery" to entrench China's dominance in the Indo-Pacific region. It will do this by: establishing deep economic ties to Asian neighbours, making common cause with Russia, modernising its military forces and seeking to undermine the legitimacy of the US alliance system in Asia, labelling it as "outdated".
Fourth, consolidating its status as a central actor in the world system as a member of the UN Security Council; and as the organiser of international economic ventures that rival the global institutions set up by the US after World War II – such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
The study requires the US to abandon trying to "integrate" China into the liberal international world order; and instead aggressively "balance" (curtail) its rise.
'Aggressive balancing'
There are five aspects of this grand "balancing" strategy.
First, revitalise the US economy in the technical and economic areas. The US grand strategy towards China depends strongly on getting the countries, including Malaysia, to sign the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement.
Also China should be denied access to any critical technologies. US allies are expected to do likewise especially with regard to dual-use technologies.
The oil and gas output expected from the US "fracking" endeavours will be spread to its Asian allies excluding China.
Second, increase even more substantially its military budget and maintain its dominance over China in nuclear arms, drones and undersea warfare. Already the US "offence budget" represents 37% of the total world military spending. The US spends more on its armed forces than the next nine military powers.
The study argues for the military force to be redesigned to "blunt China's military advances" and accelerate US ballistic missile defence network and posture in the Pacific Ocean. It recommends aggressive postures against China's navigation and overflight rules, including in its economic zones; and proposes intensifying naval and air presence in the South and East China Seas.
Third, get tough on China's alleged "incessant cyber-attacks" by imposing costs on China that are in excess of the benefits it receives from its violations in cyberspace.
Fourth, defeat China's "corrosive" efforts to undermine the relations between the US and several Asian nations. Specifically, the US must reinforce its alliances in the Indo-Pacific region especially with Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and Taiwan. Six other Asean nations are also included: the Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam and Myanmar.
Central to this is the US-Japan relationship followed by South Korea, Australia and India. The quick resolution of the World War II Japan-South Korea comfort women issue removes any impediments to this alliance against China.
Taiwan and the six Asian nations are targeted as deserving military power build-up "since they are the primary targets of China's expansion into the South China Sea". Measures include joint military exercises with Malaysia, Indonesia and others; as well as improving air force fighters for Singapore.
Fifth, focus on diplomacy to "mitigate the inherently profound tensions as the two nations pursue mutually incompatible grand strategies". Else there could be negative consequences domestically relating to the world economy, climate change and controlling nuclear weapons.
Conclusion
Conclusion
The study is alarming in that it recognises the dangers its grand strategy involves but says that the stakes are simply too high for the US to leave China alone.
China, it stresses time and again, must be prevented from exercising power even on a regional level, within its own surrounding environment.
Else China's "threat" to US hegemony will determine the international order for decades to come. And dislodge it from its primacy status – a position that the study suggests the US simply will, and must, never accept.
Next part: China's response
Gurdial is professor at the Law Faculty, University of Malaya. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
the weak always get battered-no one listen-- till.......eg north korea iran
world is never level
No comments:
Post a Comment