Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Many Topics Including The Oldest Dinar Community. Copyright © 2006-2020

Can China's rise be hampered?


Posts : 189356
Join date : 2012-12-21

Can China's rise be hampered? Empty Can China's rise be hampered?

Post by rocky on Wed 05 Jun 2019, 2:32 am

[size=55][size=35]Can China's rise be hampered?[/size]

  • [ltr] June 05, 2019 - 2:38[/ltr]
  • [ltr]0 [/ltr]
  • [ltr] Number of readings:[/ltr]

  The current escalation in the US-China confrontation comes as a natural and predictable development consistent with the strategy and vision of the administration of President Donald Trump since his campaign and before he took office. I have always pointed out that despite the explosion of several files in the East and West, including the Russian-American relationship, the main thrust of this administration's strategy is to confront China and stop its growing development or obstruct it at all levels. The new and stormy chapter in this escalation concerns the dispute over Huawei, the world's second-largest mobile phone company. It is about a fifth-generation threat, which is both understandable and logical, given the risk of owning China to the technology, the shift to the possibility of threatening US military security, as well as other details on this important issue, which also includes the question of justified doubts about China's lack of respect for intellectual property rights, which is well known and much has been written about. In connection with this pivotal issue, intellectual property rights, the US forgets that its allies in Japan, South Korea, and Israel preceded China in industrial espionage, including military operations, especially in the case of "pampered" Israel and spying on their first ally Washington. The economic progress of these three countries came from this path. However, the difference remains large, being allied, but excluding Japan, it posed no economic threat to Washington. Nor was it a military threat in any way after World War II, unlike China, whose economic threat alone exceeds any prospect of Japan's economic threat. The fact is that the files of competition and escalation between the two countries have been going on for years, but have risen to the strategic level with the Trump administration. The current attention on the issue of free trade may overlook other files that have been escalated for some time, including talk of conflict and competition in Africa, and the Western, not just American, concern about the legendary growth of Chinese economic and political influence in Africa. The Western side has essentially tried to counter this influence by counter-propaganda, while continuing Western policies themselves, with external interference and political conditions, which has strengthened China's position, which has simply continued its policy and continued penetration of the continent. Western political and media campaigns against China's policies and access to the African natural resources on which these propaganda focused have only succeeded in increasing China's soft loans and investments, thereby increasing Chinese influence and presence on the continent, The West looks weaker than before. For years, a polar conflict has been brewing around their new fortunes and shipping corridors due to global warming, and the opportunities for their exploitation, which will bring many Chinese gains in shipping to Europe, a vital area of ​​energy, minerals and hunting. But the fact is that China's investment and exploration in this region is only a quarter of the US investment, which is still relatively limited. A serious academic debate began over the years about the dimensions and future of this competition, although few have attempted to address specifically the fundamental question: Can the United States block Chinese growth and China's rise to occupation? The first economic position in the world? One of the most important things that complicates the intellectual vision of this competition has been and still may be related to the nature of the relationship of unprecedented economic interdependence in the history of imperial rivalry. The comparison here between what is happening and the situation of the Cold War - Soviet is not found. However, there is no parallel to the current situation in European post-Middle Ages models, including French-British. There is absolutely no similarity with ancient empires. We are facing a huge volume of trade and investment interactions between the two sides, which raise the question of the fate of the two countries in the event of a breakdown of the confrontation, even at the commercial and investment levels alone. Some are rushing to compare the military capabilities of the two countries, and China's efforts to try to bridge the gap between them, especially in the field of naval fleets, especially with US control over many of the maritime hubs of Chinese trade. However, they forget that the times of the European colonial maritime conflict are over, and that while China continues to build its military capabilities, it seems more aware, and has no desire for a destructive military confrontation on both sides, will only benefit the non-economic military superpower, Russian, which is not posed by anyone amidst this complex confrontation, which appears to be the main Russian beneficiary. US strategy to block China's rise, led by economic pressure, ultimately slowing economic growth. Not only is the issue of intellectual property, customs duties, or more Chinese acceptance of US imports, but also the obstruction of China's "belt and road" strategy, which serves as a strategic container for the rise of the empire in an unprecedented way, Economic and external penetration, as well as the American strategy does not lose some calculated military attrition. With regard to the forms and challenges of this strategy, it is worth mentioning all previous efforts in Africa or Asia that have led to further Chinese growth. The intimidation of the Chinese giant, without providing an alternative that respects African and Asian parties, has only led to further Chinese penetration, which has been more commercial in the past, and became the biggest day of investment and loans linking these parties to China. Today, China is not the same as in the past, it has been developing its education system very efficiently and its children are filling Western universities with unparalleled development experience. Beijing has become a major pole and a participant in the technology industry and has the financial and economic capacity to build an unprecedented scientific and technological renaissance. Huawei's sanctions are likely to lead to China's unprecedented pace of technological alternatives, which could lead to new confrontations in the fields of electronic jamming, technological and scientific competition that could strain both parties and perhaps the world as well. The question we posed in our title is not easy. However, the attempt to block Chinese growth is likely to succeed for a few years. But the ingenuity of American behavior in achieving this goal may accelerate China's rise in the medium term, which would not have happened decades ago.[/size]

    Current date/time is Sat 19 Sep 2020, 6:30 pm