A change of SOE leaderships is what's needed. I don't see why POE's money are required. China can print money and filter down to SOE.
Having seen so many POE in the west selling their souls to make a buck regardless of national security, Chinese leadership must do more to prevent these greedy POEs from gaining control of the economy. THis has already happened in the US and Europe.
That is essentially the crux of the matter. The basic problem is the current shape and form of corporate structure (that holds coporate profit as a priority above all else) and the relationship between large multinational corporations and national govt.s. This trend was started by Milton Friedman, one of the first Free Market ideologue:
Milton Friedman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After Friedman's death in 2006,
Keynesian Nobel laureate Paul Krugman praised Friedman as a "great economist and a great man," and acknowledged his many, widely accepted contributions to empirical economics. But Krugman criticized Friedman, writing that "he slipped all too easily into claiming both that
markets always work and that only markets work. It's extremely hard to find cases in which Friedman acknowledged the possibility that markets could go wrong, or that government intervention could serve a useful purpose."
[97]
Main article:
The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism
In her book The Shock Doctrine, author and social activist Naomi Klein criticized Friedman's ideology and the principles that guided the economic restructuring that followed the military coups in countries such as Chile and Indonesia. Based on the extent to which the application of what she calls "neoliberal policies" has contributed to income disparities and inequality,[98] both Klein and Noam Chomsky have suggested that the primary role of what they call "neoliberalism" was as an ideological cover for capital accumulation by multinational corporations.[99]
Chilean economist
Orlando Letelier asserted that Pinochet's dictatorship resorted to oppression because of popular opposition to Chicago School policies in Chile.
[100] After a 1991 speech on drug legalisation, Friedman answered a question on his involvement with the Pinochet regime, saying that he was never an advisor to Pinochet (also mentioned in his 1984 Iceland interview
[76]) but that
a group of his students at the
University of Chicago were involved in Chile's economic reforms. Friedman credited these reforms with high levels of economic growth and with the establishment of democracy that has subsequently occurred in Chile.
[101][102]
So China must not fall into the same trap that the West fell into. POE's, must not be driven by profit as the sole motive, but must be subservient to the state and must follow the geostrategic direction prescribed by the state.
The question is what would be the geostrategy for China then. For that also we can look at the US example, what it did to secure its economic and strategic spheres. It helped to create a NAFTA and it helped Europe create an EU and of course there is NATO.
Following the EU as an example, what China should do is expand the scope of SCO to make it an Asian economic alliance zone with the following subregions:
- North East Asian region (China, Japan, Koreas)
- South East Asian region (ASEAN, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and Bangladesh)
- Eurasian region (Russia and former soviet states in Central Asia)
- Mid-east region (Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan)
Chinese investments should go to these regions rather than to India which will remain outside of this economic alliance group.
Ironically these regions roughly translate into areas that were once (around 1300 AD) either occupied by or were vassals of Mongol empire under early Yuan dynasty:
Political divisions of the Mongol Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Initially the focus must be economic and infrastructure integration. Military alliance should be pursued only with the nations who are currently ready. For the rest, these nations should be wooed for future inclusion.
At the same time China should partner with GCC to integrate the Arab League region and a sub-saharan North Africa region. A mostly Christian South African area I think will become a separate region. China and the West should partner to integrate this region. As for Latin America, China should help the countries here to integrate their economies into a functioning Latin American Union, in the model of EU. An effort is already there called UNASUR that is moving in that direction.
I hope the US will partner with China in all these efforts, as it will create a stable geopolitical order in the future for most parts of the world and build a strong foundation for peace and future economic growth and human development. Knowing history of the US and West in general, it is possible that these ideas will be looked at with mistrust and viewed as power grab. My argument will be that if there can be an EU and NATO, why can't others follow these examples? Once they are convinced that this reorganization is not targeted to counter or harm the West or India, they will accept such concepts eventually.
