US, China Vow to Improve Cooperation

[LeveragedBuyout]

Chinese borders have had more or less peace during most of our time on top. Look at Europe, that's what actual not stable look like. Sure China expanded now and again.

There are European wars all the time, while Chinese wars against foreign powers are small and far between.

1000 Spanish had plans to conquer Ming China allegedly, not sure how truthful, while Zheng He's most powerful fleet almost never went to battle, and certainly took no lands.

China prefers the peaceful tributary system, which is only doable with a country like China, or Rome.The Chinese mindset even now is your land sucks, ours is great. We don't want Vietnam and we certainly don't want Philippines and Japan. Even South Korea is unsure of unification and we want to jump on that grenade?


19th and 20th century was a special case, no Asian hegemon existed, and Europe as it always is, is a war zone.

The only reason the world is more or less peaceful between the great powers right now is because of America's vast strength, not because America is peace loving, which decade did you not go into battle, name one? Just one?

Your attitude of American superiority is both true and false, it's a peace based on fear, not of good judgement. Thing is fear works for China too. I very much doubt come 2030 when the Chinese modernization project reaches a milestone, nations will continue to think they can go to war, without you know, getting their nuts blown off. And so peace is achieved.

Believe me, if all that changed were the replacement of the US with China, and otherwise, the liberal trade order remained in place, there would be few complaints. The fear is the unknown: what kind of hegemon will China be? It benefits from the liberal trade order now, but once it is the hegemon, will it continue that regime? Or will it institute a closed system? US power projection isn't welcome by all, but when we are asked to leave, we leave; will China do the same?

You mentioned America's war-like nature. It's true, but even if you think America's wars have been misguided, after 1898, those wars have been fought to protect an ideology (liberal trade order), not for territorial gain or for resources. After the wars, we have left, unless asked to stay. Barring the recipients of US military force (who tend to be small and fit a specific profile), the vast majority of the world has gained from Pax Americana. If it were left up to Europe, no such order would have been enforced, and the world would be poorer for it (and more Communist, and more authoritarian).

We don't know if the world will be similarly stable and prosperous under China, because we don't know what kind of hegemon China will be.

 

[Genesis]

Believe me, if all that changed were the replacement of the US with China, and otherwise, the liberal trade order remained in place, there would be few complaints. The fear is the unknown: what kind of hegemon will China be? It benefits from the liberal trade order now, but once it is the hegemon, will it continue that regime? Or will it institute a closed system? US power projection isn't welcome by all, but when we are asked to leave, we leave; will China do the same?

You mentioned America's war-like nature. It's true, but even if you think America's wars have been misguided, after 1898, those wars have been fought to protect an ideology (liberal trade order), not for territorial gain or for resources. After the wars, we have left, unless asked to stay. Barring the recipients of US military force (who tend to be small and fit a specific profile), the vast majority of the world has gained from Pax Americana. If it were left up to Europe, no such order would have been enforced, and the world would be poorer for it (and more Communist, and more authoritarian).

We don't know if the world with be similarly stable and prosperous under China, because we don't know what kind of hegemon China will be.

I understand your concern and I'm sure it's one that a lot shares, but it is one that is born out of fear of the unknown, of age old prejudice, a superiority complex and a blind spot to themselves.

America never stayed because America doesn't need to, America is resource rich as it is, but yet American military bases are every where. This is actually very destabilizing, but you don't see it because no one can challenge it even if it is. But that will change.

Liberal trade is what China was about for thousands of years, so we had a Manchu rule for a while and Communist ideology for a while, now we are not about trade? The silk road is not a road of war.

China wants the China seas and prestige to go with regional hegemon and global power player for the exact thing you fear China will destroy. Chinese military has been called paper tiger, weak, dangerously weak and everything else. It isn't so, with no facts backing it up and with some minor evidences that pops up here and there, it shows how much perception is worth.

Chinese brands are still seen as cheap and worthless, though I can assure you the opposite is true, but because of our weakness right now, we can't change that perception.

With an advancing space game, a few victories here and there, massive economy and rising living standards, as well as a role in the global leadership, liberal economy will benefit us far greater than any thing.

Even now Japan, and Korea has more restrictions on imports than we do, we just out perform you, if you are better fine, we will go harder, but we don't ban it. TPP won't succeed for this exact reason, they fear a truly liberal world, we don't. Only the weak fear competition.

A less talked about fact is with almost 100 type 56 corvettes and hundreds of advanced, heavy Coast guard ships, that will match US coast guard in strength by no later than 2020, we can keep the sea lanes in the China seas safer than America. Unless America has plans to deploy coast guard and 100 warships to patrol the China seas.


China doesn't interfere with internal politics of other nations, not because we are nice, but because we are not delusional, or rather we are more experienced, but it can also be said, America knows exactly what its doing and it has other motives.

Countries needs to work themselves out, any intervention is as useless as anything. You can keep a people down, but you can't make a people progress. China's civil wars, and Communist rule has been brutal, but the total abolishment of the old and the establishment of the new made China what it is today.



So to sum up, China is all for global trade, global security will be better if China is part of it, we got cash and toys, usually that counts, even America can't be everywhere at once. Also, we are not really expansionist like America, because we are not about expansion anymore and anywhere that's up for grabs is crap and we got our own problems.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

I understand your concern and I'm sure it's one that a lot shares, but it is one that is born out of fear of the unknown, of age old prejudice, a superiority complex and a blind spot to themselves.

America never stayed because America doesn't need to, America is resource rich as it is, but yet American military bases are every where. This is actually very destabilizing, but you don't see it because no one can challenge it even if it is. But that will change.

Liberal trade is what China was about for thousands of years, so we had a Manchu rule for a while and Communist ideology for a while, now we are not about trade? The silk road is not a road of war.

China wants the China seas and prestige to go with regional hegemon and global power player for the exact thing you fear China will destroy. Chinese military has been called paper tiger, weak, dangerously weak and everything else. It isn't so, with no facts backing it up and with some minor evidences that pops up here and there, it shows how much perception is worth.

Chinese brands are still seen as cheap and worthless, though I can assure you the opposite is true, but because of our weakness right now, we can't change that perception.

With an advancing space game, a few victories here and there, massive economy and rising living standards, as well as a role in the global leadership, liberal economy will benefit us far greater than any thing.

Even now Japan, and Korea has more restrictions on imports than we do, we just out perform you, if you are better fine, we will go harder, but we don't ban it. TPP won't succeed for this exact reason, they fear a truly liberal world, we don't. Only the weak fear competition.

A less talked about fact is with almost 100 type 56 corvettes and hundreds of advanced, heavy Coast guard ships, that will match US coast guard in strength by no later than 2020, we can keep the sea lanes in the China seas safer than America. Unless America has plans to deploy coast guard and 100 warships to patrol the China seas.


China doesn't interfere with internal politics of other nations, not because we are nice, but because we are not delusional, or rather we are more experienced, but it can also be said, America knows exactly what its doing and it has other motives.

Countries needs to work themselves out, any intervention is as useless as anything. You can keep a people down, but you can't make a people progress. China's civil wars, and Communist rule has been brutal, but the total abolishment of the old and the establishment of the new made China what it is today.



So to sum up, China is all for global trade, global security will be better if China is part of it, we got cash and toys, usually that counts, even America can't be everywhere at once. Also, we are not really expansionist like America, because we are not about expansion anymore and anywhere that's up for grabs is crap and we got our own problems.

What can I say? If this is truly the case, I welcome our new Chinese overlords.

 

[Zsari]

I'm not a military strategist, but having forward bases seems to be a good beachhead upon which to base aircraft and area denial weaponry, at the very least. Of course the navy will be necessary for transport and patrol, but an island base seems to operate like a static aircraft carrier in several regards. At least, that's my assumption based on the US island bases that have been in existence for several decades--they must be there for a reason. Maybe that's a bad assumption.

Agreed about the SCS, but the US can closely approximate China's logistical advantages with our alliances in the area.

Post-world order: China was the hegemon in Asia for a long time, no doubt about it. But I would not call Asia stable during China's hegemony, either, and technology and the sheer destructiveness of war, and the advent of terrorism, since China was last hegemon make me wonder if China can really achieve the paradise it seeks once the US is gone. Certainly the rest of the world (including China, of course) has seen near-unprecedented levels of stability and prosperity under Pax Americana. The 19th century was the most recent period before US hegemony, and it wasn't great for world stability or for China.

US island bases have been serving the navy well, being forwarding and logistic post that enable its navy to reach and operate anywhere in the world. Afterall, when you are running a full size carrier group with fighters flying frequent sorties, you'll need to resupply them pretty much constantly. But as being static, they are easy targets in a war, especially if you are facing China which has the most comprehensive collection of ballistic missiles. Its greatest asset is like I said in supporting the naval operation.

Spare parts, ammunition have to be supplied not locally but from continental US, even food often time has to be shipped in. There is no refinery either to supply you oil. What can you get from them? Other than Japan and maybe S.Korea, the rest can't even provide enough money to cover your operation.

There were plenty of wars under China's hegemony, but all are small, contained single theatre wars. Asia Pacific really hasn't seen the world wars the Europeans has brought with them via colonization. I do not forsee a paradise in the coming era as Chinese approach will mainly be that of hands off one, but I do think the frequency and scale of conflict will only reduce. Afterall, many of the major wars in the region are western inflicted, like the split of Vietnam and Korea which saw the Vietnam & Korea war.

 

[Aepsilons]

What can I say? If this is truly the case, I welcome our new Chinese overlords.

LOL, well said, my friend.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

US island bases have been serving the navy well, being forwarding and logistic post that enable its navy to reach and operate anywhere in the world. Afterall, when you are running a full size carrier group with fighters flying frequent sorties, you'll need to resupply them pretty much constantly. But as being static, they are easy targets in a war, especially if you are facing China which has the most comprehensive collection of ballistic missiles. Its greatest asset is like I said in supporting the naval operation.

Spare parts, ammunition have to be supplied not locally but from continental US, even food often time has to be shipped in. There is no refinery either to supply you oil. What can you get from them? Other than Japan and maybe S.Korea, the rest can't even provide enough money to cover your operation.

There were plenty of wars under China's hegemony, but all are small, contained single theatre wars. Asia Pacific really hasn't seen the world wars the Europeans has brought with them via colonization. I do not forsee a paradise in the coming era as Chinese approach will mainly be that of hands off one, but I do think the frequency and scale of conflict will only reduce. Afterall, many of the major wars in the region are western inflicted, like the split of Vietnam and Korea which saw the Vietnam & Korea war.

Both you and Genesis have presented a reasonable and balanced view. Even when I don't agree, I appreciate the opportunity to learn another perspective and round out my knowledge base without rancor. Thank you.

 

[Genesis]

What can I say? If this is truly the case, I welcome our new Chinese overlords.

Don't, power corrupts, America and China as well as other powers must all partake in the global game, MAD is very important, I'm a simple person, not a politician, political dominance means nothing to me. I'm much more comfortable knowing someone is keeping someone else in check, rather than someone having free reign and we have to hope he chooses the best option.

 

[Aepsilons]

Don't, power corrupts, America and China as well as other powers must all partake in the global game, MAD is very important, I'm a simple person, not a politician, political dominance means nothing to me. I'm much more comfortable knowing someone is keeping someone else in check, rather than someone having free reign and we have to hope he chooses the best option.

This always has been the case, since time immemorial. There always has been a ying to the yang.

 

[Aepsilons]

When ever i see Chinese state functions, one thing comes to mind: GRAND

Impressive, and beautiful, Zhongguo!

 

[tranquilium]

Statement by the President to the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue | The White House

Statement by the President to the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue
"It is an honor to greet the American and Chinese delegations to the sixth round of the United States-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED). I want to thank President Xi, Vice Premier Wang, State Councilor Yang, and the entire Chinese delegation for hosting this year’s S&ED and for their warm reception of the American delegation.

This year marks a special milestone in the U.S.-China relationship—it is the 35th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties between our two great nations. Today, instead of living detached from each other as we did 35 years ago, the United States and China embrace the benefits of strengthening ties and acknowledge the growing interdependence of our economic destinies. This anniversary provides an opportunity to take stock of the deepening exchanges between our two peoples, the range of cooperation between our two countries on shared security and economic challenges, and dealing forthrightly with our differences. It is also an opportunity for the United States and China to reaffirm our commitment to working jointly to build a positive, more secure, and prosperous future for all our citizens.

As the premier mechanism for dialogue between the United States and China, the S&ED offers us a chance annually to exchange views on a diverse range of bilateral, regional, and global challenges critical to both our countries. Building on the accomplishments of the previous five rounds of the S&ED, this year’s dialogue promises to further advance our cooperative efforts to identify solutions to problems that no country can address on its own. Our efforts to promote economic prosperity, cooperation in Asia, energy security, and security in cyberspace, including at the G-20, APEC, and the Nuclear Security Summit, have a significant and positive impact for our citizens and for the broader international community.

The United States welcomes the emergence of a stable, peaceful, and prosperous China. We are committed to the shared goal of developing over time a “new model” of relations with China defined by increased practical cooperation and constructive management of differences. We should use the S&ED to demonstrate to the world that—even in a relationship as complex as ours—we remain determined to ensure that cooperation defines the overall relationship.

President Xi and I have worked hard, including in meetings at Sunnylands, St. Petersburg, and The Hague, and in communications between meetings, to make sure that our relationship is stable, resilient, and delivering results for our peoples.

We have significantly enhanced our cooperation on climate change in the past year, including through our commitment to phase down hydrofluorocarbons, the launch of five initiatives under the U.S.-China Climate Change Working Group, and our policy dialogue on the international climate negotiations. Over the past year we also found new ways to collaborate on shared energy security and sustainability interests, ranging from advancing the safe development of shale gas and renewable technologies to initiating a G-20 fossil fuel subsidy peer review and enhancing our ability to respond to oil market emergencies. On regional security issues, we are working to realize an international solution to Iran’s nuclear program, just as we are working together to achieve the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and to bolster political stability and economic revitalization in Afghanistan. And on economic issues, we are working to establish a level, competitive playing field for our firms that is based on internationally agreed upon rules of the road on trade, investment, intellectual property, and cybersecurity. I look forward to addressing all of these issues with President Xi when I visit Beijing for APEC in November. That trip will be my second visit to China, and I can think of no better time to advance our relationship than when we are celebrating our 35th anniversary.

The United States and China will not always see eye-to-eye on every issue. That is to be expected for two nations with different histories and cultures. It also is why we need to build our relationship around common challenges, mutual responsibilities, and shared interests, even while we candidly address our differences. From my meetings with President Xi, to the S&ED meetings you will be holding over the next two days, to the growing number of student exchanges supported by organizations like the 100,000 Strong Foundation, all of these interactions underscore the promise of a resilient and cooperative United States-China relationship."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PS. We are still going forward with our asian pivot.

Pretty much. The accord essentially comes down to this:

1. We are not going to get a resolution to the major politic conflicts,
2. But we agree that we are not going for direct conflicts (since that will weaken both countries and give opportunity to others)
3. We are not going to get a resolution to the major economic conflicts,
4. But we agree there are plenty of minor issues we can cooperate on.

The results is pretty consistent with the current global political climate. Neither China nor US is looking to be significantly stronger than the other in the near future, as a result, there is no way either country will give ground on major interests. However, be it economic tie or nuclear stalemates, both countries also decided not heading to direct confrontation. It makes sense because direct conflict between China and US would only benefit other countries. Since neither country can gain a decisive advantage in the near future, we may as well just sit down and cooperate on issues that we don't conflict on.

 

[somsak]

The only thing I fear about TPP is the drug price.
Currently Thailand and many poor country imports drug from U.S
Drug price is life and death of your love one. It's not patriotic. Its survival of your love one!!
I read some TPP, there is a very high protection of Drug patents.
I am not sure whether this is a fair trade or free trade or not.
Im only sure the hospital price will skyrocket.