Here
and
Now

opinions

Obama's China trip shows power shifting

56 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

56 Comments
Login to comment

President Barack Obama’s first visit to China underscored a shifting balance of power: two giants moving closer to being equals.

Not equals, China has clearly an upper hand, so? "If You Can't Beat Them, Join Them" and this holds true (at present) not only for the USA but the whole Int'l Community as well.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

some14some.

To say that China has the upper hand denies a great deal of reality. Yes China has invested heavily in the US. I would remind you that there was a time when Japan held a similar position at her peak.

Yes everyone is running to China to make money on the new economic frontier. But this negates the very real environmental, political and social issues that clearly endanger the long term outlook for the country as a whole.

China is still a local power despite her economic role on the current world stage. It has yet to fully develop viable global policies and this makes China far less than second place politically. Russia holds at least even ground and I would argue that must of the industrialized world holds more sway on the global political front than China.

The key thing to remember is that the China we are all so excited about is a fraction of the nation. The vast majority of Chinese still live in late Maoist worlds and with those expectations and realities as their world. There is considerable unrest over the role capitalism plays today and the tiny fraction of China that actually benefits from that success. Then you can add in the many nationalist and ethnic movements that threaten to fracture China if and when she opens her political world to be more democratic.

China is a gamble. And like Asia and Japan before the bubble crash, everyone is simply betting for an ideal outcome while largely ignoring the very real dangers that hang over that country.

US having the lower hand. No. US being opportunistic with the flavor of the moment economy. Yes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"One sign, albeit small, that people are growing weary with Obama’s pragmatic humility overseas: A mini-furor erupted in the U.S. when he bowed to greet the emperor of Japan in Tokyo on Saturday. Conservative commentators are calling it another instance of groveling before a foreign leader."

Since when is showing respect for the customs of the country that is hosting you "groveling?" These types of ignorant statements are why Conservative commentators have continued to alienate themselves from voters and the public at large.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In the U.S. that is

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I can't wait for China to be the new superpower!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Then you can add in the many nationalist and ethnic movements that threaten to fracture China if and when she opens her political world to be more democratic.

Are you suggesting China should not open her political world to be more democratic?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

syaka. You will eat those words I promise you. China has a dreadful record on human and political rights. Just ask any Uyghur, Tibetan or other minority group in China. Their military have countless weapons pointed at Taiwan who are an independent country held hostage by military threat. Something I am sure China could replicate when urging other Asian nations to comply with her will.

Add to that China's internal problems and the growing disparity between rich and poor and your "I can't wait" will likely turn into regret.

I would place my bet on one of two outcomes. 1. China remains insular and continues to repress her people and the minorities resulting in increasing unrest and internal instability. Thus forcing China to remain internally focused to fact political, social, economic and environmental challenges.

or 2. China finds a path to greater democracy and freedom for her people resulting in rising disconnections between the wealthy areas and areas that are still essentially Maoist hold overs. Unrest and growing desire by minority regions to separate will again drive China's attentions inward.

To be a super power, you must have control at home. Control that can be sustained and that is in line with your external political objectives. China does not have this and is unlikely to be anything more than an economic power of consequence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

some shifting of power. Walmart has been the People's Repulic of Shopping for decades?? Hardly sudden.

The USA uses the equivalent of 6 earth's worth of resources in order to function. That will go down. As well, China wants to live like the USA. That won't happen.

There are not enough resources ON EARTH for both China and USA to live outside the limit of 1 earth. the sooner they both understand that, the sooner we can get busy with peak oil and climate change.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Americans sold their country down the river for a $4 hair-dryer.

congrats

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For long-time Japan specialists the China conversation is tedious. We heard all this in the 80's. Japan was the greatest and everyone was willing to overlook there deep-rooted problems, until it all came to ahead and couldn't be ignored. Do we ever learn anything?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Do we ever learn anything?"

Seems history would answer that question with a resounding "NO".

Agreed, China is the new Japan. When it implodes everyone will react with shock and then start talking about how they had warned everyone this could happen. Bottom line, the powers that make China magical are the corporate lords of the world. They see near term profits to be made and have turned China into the new frontier. They don't see and don't want to see the dangers. That doesn't fall into their goals to make piles of money this year. As long as the money is there, they will keep the blinders on. When it blows up in their faces, they will blame others and move on to the next profit opportunity.

The real problem is that we let these corporations rule the world. They are the real super powers and they are the real enemy to be curtailed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China has a dreadful record on human and political rights. Just ask any Uyghur, Tibetan or other minority group in China.

You know what, in China, Minorities has priorities over Han Chinese.If one Minority Chinese marry one Han Chinese, they will definitely have their Children registered as Minorities, because Minorities have better chance to go to a better univeristy, can have more than one Child (Most Han Chinese Families are only allowed to have on child) and many other priorities.

Their military have countless weapons pointed at Taiwan who are an independent country held hostage by military threat.

I really don't want to start on this one, just please read more and talk to some taiwan friends if you have one.

or 2. China finds a path to greater democracy and freedom for her people resulting in rising disconnections between the wealthy areas and areas that are still essentially Maoist hold overs. Unrest and growing desire by minority regions to separate will again drive China's attentions inward.

We will see on this one

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am a frequent business visitor of china. I have never seen Chinese media or government is announcing they are super power or rising power or promising power. In my knowledge, China is hungry for prosperity, harmony and international standing. They have made some progress for their prosperity. However it is still a long way to balance the wealth distribution for such a huge population.

Social harmony is hardest thing to achieve because of the inequality and ethnic divisions. However China has survived for 5000 years like that. Mongolia and Manchuria conquered the china militarily in the history. However these people are absorbed by Chinese culture, art, literacy and they are more Chinese than real Chinese now. It will take many generation for all ethnic minorities live together in harmony and peace.

In term of international standing, china is making some grounds. However money alone can not buy love. Buying natural resources and US treasury bonds alone can not make China being loved. They have to be moderate in controlling the individual expression and freedom of press. They have to contribute more for international relief effort for natural disasters and peace.

Most Chinese I have seen just wanted to become rich. They do not want their nation to take responsibilities as super power. They also do not want foreigners to boss and lecture to them especially in financial management. They are richer, sophisticated and more confident now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tkoind2,

You make some excellent observations. Here's my take:

What we see coming out of China is indeed only a fraction of it's potential. Which means that the world should realistically see 8-10% growth rates in China for the next 10-20 years, desperately needed in order for China not to degenerate into chaos as we have seen her do throughout her history. Unfortunately, with growth comes income disparity, along with discontent in the countryside where there has been massive levels of corruption and abuse of power within the provincial layers of government.

So, what can China do? The answer is, exactly what she is doing now. China is a country of 1.3 billion people. Within the past 20 years, she has lifted 300 million people out of abject poverty, no small task. One needs to only look at a country of similar size, India, a democracy, and see what a terrible job they have done to uplift their people out of poverty. But here lies the central fact that leaves business people salivating. 1.3 billion people. A rising middle class numbered in the hundreds of millions, with many millions added every year. The profit potential for companies is endless and so are the opportunities.

To your point about ethnic minorities, China will indeed need to look 'inward' to pacify at least 2 of the regions, Xinjiang and Tibet. But the combined Uyghur/Tibetan ethnic populations are roughly 20 million people. That stands in stark contrast to the over 1 billion Han Chinese, of which millions have flooded both regions, which makes any succession attempt a pipe dream at best.

Lastly, let's talk about the current financial crisis. It's been pretty much a fact that China, with it's huge and effective stimulus package, was able to weather the economic storm much better than virtually every nation on earth. Her growth (and hunger for raw materials) is what drives the economies of Asia, Africa, and Latin America and her purchasing of US Treasuries is what keeps the United States afloat.

In closing, tkoind2, calling China the 'flavor of the moment' economy is best reserved to provincial types who can only look out the window as the world passes them by.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

swordfish2502: Your argument about preferential treatment of minorities sounds a lot like white arguments against benefits for poor blacks in the south during segregation. And it does not hold water.

Reality is that cultures are being suppressed if not outright erradicated. Likewise rights groups are seen as separatists and are arrested. And the list of injustice goes on.

I have friends in Kashgar who tell pretty dark stories. And know many people who have seen the degredation of the Uyghur home region and their loss of political, economic and social power to the Han majority.

Tibet was taken by China by force and is not China. They have the right to their own autonomy. Similarly the Uyghurs have been promised autonomy that is being erased by immigation of Han into their area.

It is just wrong to say that Han are somehow compromised by the few benefits that go to minorities. You should a considerable lack of knowledge about the real condition of minority groups in China.

As for Taiwan, of course there are pro-China Taiwanese who wish to unify with China. But they are not the majority. If they were, China would not need the military build up facing Taiwan, now would they?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mushroomcloud. I think your appraisal is highly optimistic. Especially when looking at the issue of ethnic minorities.

The Uyghur and Tibetan minoritire are hardly alone in their desire for change. And we have already see in both the modern world and history that a small minority can cause considerable disruption to a far larger majority. And rightly so when that minority is repressed and abused by the majority.

It is very likely that extremism will be introduced more into the Uyghur struggle if China does not find ways to stem the tide of unrest. And this is before we consider the ethical considerations of a nation that uses force of migration to wipe out the ethnic culture of regions within its borders. It is understandable that any culture faced with forced extinction by a ruling majority would rebel against that attempt which may leave NW China looking very much like NWFP Pakistan if managed poorly.

Likewise Tibet will continue to have the support of much of the world in her struggle against Chinese agression. While far more peaceful, even this area is subject to considerable disruption of China's internal affairs.

On the economic front your arguments negate the issues surrounding environmental consideration. There will be far greater pressure on China to reduce emissions and thus slow her indistrialization. Failure to do so already has impacted many rurual regions and turned her major cities into nearly unbearable environmental nightmares. This will not get better before it gets considerably worst.

Likewise your argument avoids the very real fact that rural Chinese are largely still Maoist in political leaning and heritage. Combined with their obvious lack of inclusing in Chinas very isolated prosperity, these groups are likely to cause considerable disruption as their expectations (political and economic) fall more and more out of step with China's development.

As for flavor of the month. Japan was the undeniable center of the economic universe in the 1980s. To the point that most Americans feared a take over of our interests by Japan. You need only read anything from the period to draw connections between the reaction to China today and to Japan then.

Like Japan everyone ignored the warning signs until the bubble burst and the fall out was devastating. The same will happen to China. Her growth is not sustainable for 20 years. Nor is her political situation stable enough to endure what is coming. The risk of China imploding has been explored by many very well informed analysts and I expect this view will continue to grow in both confidence and tangible examples.

Then the corporate world will shift attention to the next big thing. My guess is a resurgent Russia with a vast supply of natural resources and a government far more in a position to impose its will long term over a population who are ready to regain their position as a global power.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The "China as lender writes the rules" argument is fundamentally flawed - just as it was flawed when it was supposed to be "Japan as lender writes the rules". Key to being a good lender and enforcing rules is evaluating risk. Japan was lousy at it in the 80's and China is lousy at it now (by all accounts). How good a bet are dollar denominated USGB right now for a foreign country? China keeps buying them....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Reality is that cultures are being suppressed if not outright erradicated. Likewise rights groups are seen as separatists and are arrested. And the list of injustice goes on.

They can just learn from Japan. I mean, how many Okinawans today know that Okinawa used to be a seperate nation?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Uyghur and Tibetan minoritire are hardly alone in their desire for change. And we have already see in both the modern world and history that a small minority can cause considerable disruption to a far larger majority. And rightly so when that minority is repressed and abused by the majority.

That's true, even today Okinawans suffer because Japanese and United States have decided to use half their island as military outposts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Likewise Tibet will continue to have the support of much of the world in her struggle against Chinese agression. While far more peaceful, even this area is subject to considerable disruption of China's internal affairs.

I think you are exaggerating a bit there, there are certainly Tibetans who don't like chinese, but there are also many Tibetans who consider themselves chinese such as Tibetan-Japanese singer Alan Dawa Dolma.

On the economic front your arguments negate the issues surrounding environmental consideration. There will be far greater pressure on China to reduce emissions and thus slow her indistrialization. Failure to do so already has impacted many rurual regions and turned her major cities into nearly unbearable environmental nightmares. This will not get better before it gets considerably worst.

solution is to improve energy efficiency and increase the use of alternative energy, if done effectively, it should cancel the growth of CO2 emissions. Besides, if you look at photos from Japanese cities in the 1940s-1950s, most people had to wear masks when traveling outside because of the air pollution. They no longer need to do it today.

As for flavor of the month. Japan was the undeniable center of the economic universe in the 1980s. To the point that most Americans feared a take over of our interests by Japan. You need only read anything from the period to draw connections between the reaction to China today and to Japan then.

The difference in the level of development between china and united states today is more similar to the difference in the level of development between japan and united states in 1945. So china still has lots of space to grow. Compare china today with japan in 1980 is idiotic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The difference in the level of development between china and united states today is more similar to the difference in the level of development between japan and united states in 1945. So china still has lots of space to grow. Compare china today with japan in 1980 is idiotic.

Actually, financially the situation is the same. Do you know that the US government's measurement of inflation is fundemenatally understated and has been so for 30 odd years? Do you know that means USGB pay a negative rate of return? (meaning China pays the US for the right to lend money to them). Think about that when you tell me how shrewd China is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Actually, financially the situation is the same. Do you know that the US government's measurement of inflation is fundemenatally understated and has been so for 30 odd years? Do you know that means USGB pay a negative rate of return? (meaning China pays the US for the right to lend money to them). Think about that when you tell me how shrewd China is.

then why is Japan holding $800 billion worth of US bonds.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

then why is Japan holding $800 billion worth of US bonds.

Exact same reason as China.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Actually, financially the situation is the same. Do you know that the US government's measurement of inflation is fundemenatally understated and has been so for 30 odd years? Do you know that means USGB pay a negative rate of return? (meaning China pays the US for the right to lend money to them). Think about that when you tell me how shrewd China is.

you saying that US dollar will hyper-inflate?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mizutofu. Your comparsison to 1945 is flawed. 1945 did not have the warming issues we face today or the same level of CO2 output that we will see as China continues to grow. Equally 1945 did not have the declining oil reserves post peak that are also a key to sustained growth.

Plus 1945 saw the rebuilding of Japan from nearly zero as most major cities had been fire bombed into non-existence. And it is important to remember that the motivaton for rebuilding Japan had far more to do with balancing perceived Soviet and Communist spread than it did as economic benevolence of the US for Japan.

Your reasoning is extemely flawed as is your insight to the period's history. Japan in the 80's is far more relevant. But again, even here we don't have the extensive environmental issues.

Improved efficiency is expensive and takes time to bring into production. Growing economies don't want those expenses or the loss of momentum. So thinking that China will become green now are extremely unrealistic. More likely her consuption and output will skyrocket resulting in global impact that first tier nations will start to resist more and more. It is imaginable that it may come to sanctions and boycotts to assure China's compliance with new emissions standards and that will impact her growth.

It is pretty clear that we are seeing similiar reactions to China that Japan formerly elicited. And it is highly likely that a long list of obvious complications are likely to overpower the overly optimistic views that the corporate world want us to digest about China.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Actually, financially the situation is the same. US government's measurement of inflation is fundemenatally understated and has been so for 30 odd years?

Because of the Reganomic economic theory during last 30 yrs, their financial situation is different now. US stock markets were driven by humors and speculation. According the Reganomic, market has own magic. Let 's markets wild, prosperity will fell from sky. It was just a fantasy. Current US interest rate is almost nothing. It has no room for lower again. If it is lower, the rate should be 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 and so on.

If the interest rate rise again, economy will shrink and unemployment will rise. Because of china, japan and gulf nations purchasing of treasury bonds, inflation has not sky rocketed. Over circulation and printing of money will make inflation higher and higher.

On the contrary, China bankers are very prudent about their lending. Their markets do not tolerate the speculations and excessive risks. China can control their property prices with regulation. Not with over heated market. Fundamentally, their monetary policy and banking system is sounder and superior.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

After China implodes and breaks down into four or five countries, what will people say then?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

On the contrary, China bankers are very prudent about their lending. Their markets do not tolerate the speculations and excessive risks. China can control their property prices with regulation. Not with over heated market. Fundamentally, their monetary policy and banking system is sounder and superior.

Well they're lending to the US at a negative rate of return for oh say 1 trillion dollars or so. Doesn't sound superior to me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

you saying that US dollar will hyper-inflate?

Remains a possibility. Even now though the true rate of inflation for the US is higher than reported.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

well, thanks to the 2008 financial collapse, crude oil price has dropped by 50%. Japan was already fairly industrialized in the 1940s, it was able to build an advanced(at the time) military that includes aircraft carriers and submarines. china today still doesn't have an aircraft carrier.

Improved efficiency is expensive and takes time to bring into production. Growing economies don't want those expenses or the loss of momentum

energy improvement is always done incrementally. Also improve energy efficiency is not always expansive, use less energy means saving more money.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Well they're lending to the US at a negative rate of return for oh say 1 trillion dollars or so."

China will get 50 billions interest for investing 800 billions in US bonds. The main reason of China buying is boosting the US consumer spending through lower inflation and making US dollar stable. US dollar was the safest investment before. A few weeks before, India is converting gold instead of green backs from their reserves. The reason is they do not want their asset value going down. If all nations holding the treasury bonds follow this way, it will become the disaster.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China will get 50 billions interest for investing 800 billions in US bonds.

4.5% return is standard on 30 year USGB. True US inflation is higher than that. What will that 800 billion be worth when the balance is paid?

Want to go a different route and invest much elsewhere, you end up reducing the value even further. Quite a nasty little trap. That's high finance. The complaining by the PRC about US deficits is only the sound of them realizing they've got a problem. Again this all sounds very familiar to Japan specialists.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"energy improvement is always done incrementally. Also improve energy efficiency is not always expansive, use less energy means saving more money."

But this is a major problem. See as environmental regulations and concerns grow globally the expectation that China will comply will grow too. But they will be stuck in a pattern of incremental change and unwilling to sacrifice development for the environment. I guarantee you in 10-15years time this will be one of China's undoings. And a source of substantial conflict between Europe, the US and China.

As for crude oil prices dropping. Prices are not the problem. Peak supply is the problem. As production capacity declines, prices will rise again and demand will become more and more competitive. Remaining oil reserves cannot keep pace with the forthcoming demand of developing nations in Asia. Period.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

4.5% return is standard on 30 year USGB. True US inflation is higher than that. What will that 800 billion be worth when the balance is paid?

50 billions interest is for annually. Not for 30 yrs. I do not think if someone is holding the green backs for another 30 yrs with current value, he or she will be from another planet. I do not think they do not wish to hold for that long for safety reason. It is fair enough!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Go outside a few of the big cities in China and its like stepping out of a time machine into the 19th century. China also spends over a trillion dollars a year to support state-run, inefficient industries just to keep people working. And their army's main function is to keep the populous in line. They may be in a relatively strong financial position with a large foreign currency reserve, but when the US sneezes, China gets the flu...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course, when US sneezes, China gets the flu because their economies are intertwined like Bonsai plants. US got the swine flu and China flu was normal one. Before US was the largest consumer and China was the supplier and financier.

Now US wanted China needs to open the market more. This is not easy. Because China is still relatively poor except for some booming cities. Even their government encourage the people, the older and less well off people will be reluctant to spend.

They had the unpleasant memory of famine, chaotic power struggle and bad history. If China has the safety net, universal health care and social security system, it will become the reality. It is still a long way to go to implement like US new health care system. China is still not a super power. US is a military superpower however not in the economic anymore.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

<After China implodes and breaks down into four or five countries, what will people say then?>

Please enlighten us and tell us how this is going to happen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

<Go outside a few of the big cities in China and its like stepping out of a time machine into the 19th century.>

That is very scary and to think that the US already owes China $1 trillion. Imagine what the figure will be when these 19th century people move into the 20th or 21st century.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mao Tse Tung was Obama's kind of guy. Let's hope any so-called power shift is limited to temporary economic and commercial rivalry which will wake America up, and not an ideological fast one Obama and his far left goons pull on our country with China's assistance.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

While there are many out there that are hoping/waiting for China to be the new/sole superpower, there are many things that come with that, that China just can't handle right now. Like for one, being able to maintain a war far from it's shores. China just doesn't have the logistical capability just yet, and it is many years away rom being able to do that. Number two, China has too much internal instability, and thirdly, China still lags as far as weapons technology. Now I am basing most of this on opinon, but there is a small ring of truth to it. What does the pro China faction think the Chinese will be able to do, that the former Soviet Union couldn't do, who had much more capabilities militarily to wage a war far from it's shores? As far as President Obama, bowing to the emperor, and emperess of Japan, which is clearly perfectly normal culturally, given the country he was in. Are these same naysayers as upset, or outspoken over the late/former President Richard Nixon, or "Tricky Dick" as some liked to call him, bowing to the late/former emperor Hirohito, that wartime emperor? I'm guessing not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The complaining by the PRC about US deficits is only the sound of them realizing they've got a problem. Again this all sounds very familiar to Japan specialists.

did Japan's holding of billions of US bonds cause Japan's asset bubble collpase?

China also spends over a trillion dollars a year to support state-run, inefficient industries just to keep people working.

That's actully preferable to privatizing all the state-run industries like Russia and India did, now Russia and India is ruled by a small group of business oligarchs.

Like for one, being able to maintain a war far from it's shores. China just doesn't have the logistical capability just yet, and it is many years away rom being able to do that. Number two, China has too much internal instability, and thirdly, China still lags as far as weapons technology.

Military power is not that important. SOviet Union had a massive, technologically advanced military, however it was hollow inside, it did not have the economic strength to support its military power. After WW2, Japan has no military, yet it was able to become a great power through economic strength alone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But they will be stuck in a pattern of incremental change and unwilling to sacrifice development for the environment. tkoind2:

I disagree. Certain factors make it likely that the environmental issues will be increasingly received with great interest in China. First, most of the largest Chinese corporations are still state-owned, and many of those that are apparently private are still subject to state influence and guidance. The central government's ability to decide on a policy, and then carry it out, makes China significantly different from other emerging economies.

Chinese corporations are also busy globalizing, and they are aware of the need to comply with norms and standards overseas. The concept of corporate social responsibility is now taking off in China, following a number of environmental and health incidents, and scandals. What's more, China is consciously seeking to upgrade its industrial technology, and to promote greater investment in high-tech research and development, including sustainable development. It will no longer be possible for anyone in China to simply dismiss climate change issues as they were able to just a decade ago.

Taken as a whole, these national characteristics and this record suggest that China has both the will and the political structures to enable it to address environmental issues successfully. Chinese regulations pertaining to environmental matters are becoming ever stricter. There may still be a problem of enforcement at the local level, but the trend is towards more effective implementation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama's pledge to treat China as a trusted global power is a belly laugh. China is not, should not, and cannot be trusted so let's hope the old boy was merely spouting some nice words or we're in real trouble.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama's pledge to treat China as a trusted global power is a belly laugh.

Obama is highly intelligent and sensible person. He is not dumb and out of touch. He respect the others and different culture. He will be a legend in the history as the most admirable US president.

As a borrower, he treated China and Japan as bankers with great respect. If the bankers are not financing anymore, he is not able to bail out the failed US co-operates. He can not reform the new health care system. he can not create the new jobs for unemployment. He can not stimulate the economy for growing again. He can not afford to implement the security in Afghanistan and Irag and pay the wages to the marines.

At the end Money talk! We have to be sweet and humble instead of arrogant and proud.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China holds $2.1 trillion in U.S. Securitys. It's not hard to imagine they can gradually assume a more equal role in any sort of government-level talks with the U.S.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

did Japan's holding of billions of US bonds cause Japan's asset bubble collpase?

The bubble collapse and USGB issue were sympomatic of the same problem: inability to assess risk when lending.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It seems the article is emphasizing the lack of significant influence on the part of the US in that part of the region - I assessed as such several weeks ago. The US lacks non-military power players.

I am using an analysis not common. I believe the PRC will surprise many by their resilience in times of trouble - time will tell.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

'Obama's pledge to treat China as a trusted global power is a belly laugh. China is not, should not, and cannot be trusted so let's hope the old boy was merely spouting some nice words or we're in real trouble.'

usaexpat,

What's more of a belly laugh about your comment is that you claim China cannot be trusted, yet the United States is begging China to loan it money. If you can't trust them, write to your fellow congressman and demand that the US not borrow Chinese money. Further, ask your congressman to work out legislation for the US to quickly pay back the $1 trillion that the US currently owes the Chinese.

Otherwise, your comment is one of a hypocrite.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mushroomcloud: Why do you thinking we have to go begging China for money? Could it be that Obama is spending more than he should? By the way, I'm not a hypocrite I think every overspending politician in the US ought to be tossed out and all the free trading that has decimated the US workers needs to end now. I don't blame dems or republicans they have been equal opportunity when it comes to the gutting of the middle class and selling our futures to China. One more time, China can't be trusted and the US needs to get its financial house in order because the national debt is a national security risk.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

'One more time, China can't be trusted and the US needs to get its financial house in order because the national debt is a national security risk.'

usaexpat,

Hate to break it to you, but the national debt already is a national security risk. Further, Geithner, Pelosi, Clinton, and of course Obama have all gone to China, begging for money, and it's equally about Obama spending more than he should and the Bush Administration wrecking the US economy with wreckless economic policies while financing 2 wars simultaneously.

You don't have to trust China. But certainly the US needs to clean up it's act, otherwise, it will continue mortgaging it's future to present and future competitors.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

free trading that has decimated the US workers needs to end now

Free trade keeps cheap oil flowing into the US from it's neighbors, NAFTA obligates Mexico and Canada to sell thier oil to the US at below market value. I suppose the rest of world should just give the US their raw resources and not worry about lossing all those employed by value adding manufactoring. The US consumes why more raw materials then the actually have, so if you want isolationist trade practices, you would have to be willing to take a big hit in the average standard of living level.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Goo Jorb: Not isolationist but fair free trade. America doesn't manufacture anything because of the cheap oversees labor. A country that is supposedly a world power can't survive only on banking and fast food jobs. American companies need to be taxed on their oversees operations and CEO compensation needs to be aligned to further job growth instead of just cost cutting. I'm getting a little off track here but the point is selling out to China has gotten us exactly this a two tiered society of millionaire CEOs and everyone else hoping they don't have their job outsourced.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mushroomcloud: We agree on that the debt already is a security risk. We also agree that both aprties are too blame.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In the final analysis, the economic situation was inevitable. The PRC is the largest beneficiary of the changes. A critical decision was developed and implemented in the 1950's, resulting in the famous Eisenhower's Farewell Speech to the Nation. Former Prof. Chalmers Johnson sounded the alarm w/ his piercing Trilogy. The situation is beyond "finger pointing".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What was Prof. Chalmer's Johnson's trilogy? The only thing I know about Pof. Johnson is that he was labeled a reviosionist, namely anti-Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To Hirota56:

Prof. Chalmer's Johnson's trilogy: “Blowback", "The Sorrows of Empire", “Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic”.

I am not well versed in his label, "reviosionist, namely anti-Japan", but his writings are well researched, strong arguments and not very "pro-Japan". The Cold War submerged many issues, and only in recent times has the US weaknesses in manufacturing and incredible dependence on "military Keynesian" have become pronounced. These are factors involved affecting the actual US economy - PRC has assumed the role Japan held.

During the 1990's, I was in discussion w/ very high US Govt. personnel, warning of artificially boosting the PRC economy, because they REALLY did not understand the situation in Asia, but they felt they knew what they were doing. Their ignorance caused me to not go into detail WHY they should not boost the PRC economy, especially if they are not going to pay me big bucks for a professional analysis. Their ignorance was overwhelming.

Japan, in the late 1980's and early 1990's, played their cards incorrectly, thus the subsequent problems. W/out outside intervention, Japan was facing an economic collapse, but it was averted.

What is occurring in the Asia Pacific is the conscious, deliberate policies from the US in the 1990's. I may be the only person who understands why things are the way they are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites