What does China want?

[betonamujin1902]

Modi as leader = India becomes stronger
=>
Stronger India = greater challenge for China.

Right wing leaders of rival nations are no friends of China.
Modi, Abe, etc are right wing and highly anti-China.

China could be more comfortable with richer neighbors. No need to worry when others get rich.

 

[Beidou2020]

Wrong.

India has 200 million Muslims, the 2nd most out of any country in the world.

And Muslims HATE Modi. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.

There is zero chance that those 200 million Muslims will follow Modi's idea of India. Zero.

India as a country is made up of a vast number of different ethnic and religious groups. Unity in diversity is the only reason they were able to stay united, now that a Hindu Extremist is in power, all of that will be shattered. It might even result in Partition 2.0, Indian Muslim leaders are already declaring that they do not recognize his authority.

If he succeeds in breaking India, then that is one potential competitor gone.

That's a big assumption to make that all 200 million muslims hate Modi and most importantly that they will do something to counter Modi.

What if they don't and India continues to get stronger?

Then what?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

That's a big assumption to make that all 200 million muslims hate Modi and most importantly that they will do something to counter Modi.

What if they don't and India continues to get stronger?

Then what?

Impossible.

Just follow the news that comes out of that part of the world. The 200 million Indian Muslims will not follow Modi, tell me why would they follow a Hindu Extremist?

It's impossible. They will push back, that is simply how the world works. You can already see the news of communal riots escalating out of control, all over India. Check any of the articles being posted on this forum.

Not to mention, it ruins the reputation of the so-called "world's largest democracy", when they willingly voted for a mass murderer to become their President. That's their sole "trump card" gone.

Once Indian Muslims reach a large enough number, they will demand another partition, which will be inevitable with a Hindu Extremist in power. Iraq and Syria will be nothing in comparison.

Large countries cannot be broken from the outside. Only from the inside, and Modi is the vehicle which will achieve it, given his unique history of mass murder against Indian Muslims (and yet he was still chosen by the majority of Indians to lead... doesn't that say a lot).

 

[betonamujin1902]

nothing to do with that. That's the India internal affair.

 

[Jlaw]

wonder how the great samurai nationalists see this ?

U.S. Navy sailors convicted in Okinawa rape

social engineering?

This samurai warrior is pro America. Not even two nukes will make him change his mind about America.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

While your recommendation is good, if entire culture can be understood with a few paragraph or even just a few books, we would all be culture experts. It only take me a few days to read a few million words and the only cultures I am familiar with are the ones I have personal experience with.

I remember discussing with you in another post and at the end we have to agree to disagree and admit there is a barrier that we can't cross. Considering that you are one of the more reasonable ones on this forum and you can see why my best recommendation is actually spending some time in China.

I am not too worried about misunderstanding though. While smaller nations are often cursed to have their fates decided by powerful outsiders, large nations are at least fortunate enough that their success and failure is mainly determined by their own effort. As long as we understand our own and that is often enough.

Don't worry, we've circled around this issue enough that I won't press it. I found the article posted by the OP to be a very interesting examination of the question ("what does China want?"), and the conclusions appeared to be reasonable from a non-Chinese perspective. It may not be reasonable from a Chinese perspective, but as you pointed out, we as foreigners will probably never be able to understand the Chinese perspective, so we'll just have to manage the relationship as best we can without understanding. I can only tell you that from an American perspective, examining China's actions, listening to what its leaders declare to Chinese citizens, and reading the posts of Chinese users here and elsewhere, there is a clear direction, and as humans, we tend to extrapolate along existing lines.

Without understanding, mistakes will be made, of course, but hopefully both sides have enough restraint that the relationship will survive such mistakes. Depending on the leadership in place at the time, I am not sure another that in 15 years, another Hainan Island-type of incident will be contained in the diplomatic arena. China is far more inscrutable to the USA than the USSR ever was, and as the saying goes, fear derives from a lack of understanding.

I am cautiously optimistic, for the same reasons you are in your last paragraph. The status quo benefits both of us, for the most part, so I hope it continues. The problem is that both of our countries have been governed by incompetent leaders in the past, so there is no guarantee that more incompetents will not again rise to the top. G-d help us if such a misfortune affects both of our countries simultaneously.

 

[Aepsilons]

@Chinese-Dragon

I do hope that the Indians who happen to practice the Islamic faith can see through religious lines -- and find solidarity with their fellow Indian citizens. An economically vibrant and prosperous India will be of benefit to everyone, i think. They are a large market for Chinese consumer goods. And i think it is possible to have nations with nationalist leaders -- promoting regional peace and stability.

This beidou character is a nuisance troll that is breeding dissent. I'm beginning to think that he is doing this in purpose.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

@Chinese-Dragon

I do hope that the Indians who happen to practice the Islamic faith can see through religious lines -- and find solidarity with their fellow Indian citizens. An economically vibrant and prosperous India will be of benefit to everyone, i think. They are a large market for Chinese consumer goods. And i think it is possible to have nations with nationalist leaders -- promoting regional peace and stability.

This beidou character is a nuisance troll that is breeding dissent. I'm beginning to think that he is doing this in purpose.

Beidou2020 has already admitted he is not Chinese, but an American foreigner. So he is harmless now, his game is already up.

And take a look at Iraq to see how a divisive leader (Maliki) or Syria (Assad) to see how easily they can turn on each other in that situation. And from what I can tell, Indian Muslims hate Modi far more than Maliki or Assad.

These states are leftovers of British colonial rule, pushing together groups, religions and ethnicities that hate each other. They are held together by a very fragile string of communal harmony, that frequently shatters, take Sudan for example. Or Iraq and Syria now. Or India during Partition. The British pushed together what was not meant to be, and it shattered.

This is not the same as China, in which the vast majority of our population are ethnically/culturally/religiously similar. Tibetans and Uyghurs combined make up less than 1% of the population, they do not have the numbers to pose a problem, even in their own provinces there are Han majorities. Whereas Iraq is almost evenly divided between ethnicities and religious sects, same as the situation in South Asia.

But they are the ones who elected such a leader, I did not. The consequences are theirs to bear, just like I will bear the consequences of supporting CY Leung become Chief Executive during elections.

 

[xunzi]

Don't worry, we've circled around this issue enough that I won't press it. I found the article posted by the OP to be a very interesting examination of the question ("what does China want?"), and the conclusions appeared to be reasonable from a non-Chinese perspective. It may not be reasonable from a Chinese perspective, but as you pointed out, we as foreigners will probably never be able to understand the Chinese perspective, so we'll just have to manage the relationship as best we can without understanding. I can only tell you that from an American perspective, examining China's actions, listening to what its leaders declare to Chinese citizens, and reading the posts of Chinese users here and elsewhere, there is a clear direction, and as humans, we tend to extrapolate along existing lines.

Without understanding, mistakes will be made, of course, but hopefully both sides have enough restraint that the relationship will survive such mistakes. Depending on the leadership in place at the time, I am not sure another that in 15 years, another Hainan Island-type of incident will be contained in the diplomatic arena. China is far more inscrutable to the USA than the USSR ever was, and as the saying goes, fear derives from a lack of understanding.

I am cautiously optimistic, for the same reasons you are in your last paragraph. The status quo benefits both of us, for the most part, so I hope it continues. The problem is that both of our countries have been governed by incompetent leaders in the past, so there is no guarantee that more incompetents will not again rise to the top. G-d help us if such a misfortune affects both of our countries simultaneously.

I will say this. It is the US job to stay on top if they want to maintain global hegemony. And it is our job to catch up and regain the control over our region either the US willingly give up its position or share the leadership role or we will take it once we reach parity. It is really that simple. That is the competition we have with America and the only one to speak of. The US wouldn't expect us to mingling in America and likewise, we have the same expectation.

 

[Aepsilons]

Beidou2020 has already admitted he is not Chinese, but an American foreigner. So he is harmless now, his game is already up.

And take a look at Iraq to see how a divisive leader (Maliki) or Syria (Assad) to see how easily they can turn on each other in that situation. And from what I can tell, Indian Muslims hate Modi far more than Maliki or Assad.

These states are leftovers of British colonial rule, pushing together groups, religions and ethnicities that hate each other. They are held together by a very fragile string of communal harmony, that frequently shatters, take Sudan for example. Or Iraq and Syria now. Or India during Partition. The British pushed together what was not meant to be, and it shattered.

This is not the same as China, in which the vast majority of our population are ethnically/culturally/religiously similar. Tibetans and Uyghurs combined make up less than 1% of the population, they do not have the numbers to pose a problem, even in their own provinces there are Han majorities. Whereas Iraq is almost evenly divided between ethnicities and religious sects, same as the situation in South Asia.

But they are the ones who elected such a leader, I did not. The consequences are theirs to bear, just like I will bear the consequences of supporting CY Leung become Chief Executive during elections.

Fair enough, my friend.

There are indeed challenges in governing a nation that is as vast and multicultural , multi-religious and multi-ethnic as India. Never the less I still will wish them the best and hope that India progresses. The same as I wish the best for China, irregardless of my position regarding our governments' views. The Indian government has an added area to consider: the cultural, ethnic, religious sensitivities of its constituencies. Japan and China are fortunate that we do not have this issue since Japan and China are overwhelmingly homogenous.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Don't worry, we've circled around this issue enough that I won't press it. I found the article posted by the OP to be a very interesting examination of the question ("what does China want?"), and the conclusions appeared to be reasonable from a non-Chinese perspective. It may not be reasonable from a Chinese perspective, but as you pointed out, we as foreigners will probably never be able to understand the Chinese perspective, so we'll just have to manage the relationship as best we can without understanding. I can only tell you that from an American perspective, examining China's actions, listening to what its leaders declare to Chinese citizens, and reading the posts of Chinese users here and elsewhere, there is a clear direction, and as humans, we tend to extrapolate along existing lines.

Without understanding, mistakes will be made, of course, but hopefully both sides have enough restraint that the relationship will survive such mistakes. Depending on the leadership in place at the time, I am not sure another that in 15 years, another Hainan Island-type of incident will be contained in the diplomatic arena. China is far more inscrutable to the USA than the USSR ever was, and as the saying goes, fear derives from a lack of understanding.

I am cautiously optimistic, for the same reasons you are in your last paragraph. The status quo benefits both of us, for the most part, so I hope it continues. The problem is that both of our countries have been governed by incompetent leaders in the past, so there is no guarantee that more incompetents will not again rise to the top. G-d help us if such a misfortune affects both of our countries simultaneously.

In my personal opinion, I do take issue with the article, especially the conclusion here:

3. Conclusion

The history of every nation has its low time. The history of every nation has its own wounds. Strangely, China wants the world to suffer the same wounds and to accept that those bleeding wounds will never heal.

This is untrue, and also impossible. We were on the receiving end of multiple genocides, how could we force the world to suffer the same wounds as we did? Only nuclear weapons could accomplish that, and that would lead to nuclear winter, so it is obviously not an option.

The Vietnamese here talk about the dangers of "Chinese nationalism", however as I pointed out... the Vietnamese nationalists recently rioted and killed several Chinese people in Vietnam.

But Chinese nationalists did not riot and kill Vietnamese in China? There are plenty of Vietnamese in China who could have been on the receiving end of retaliatory nationalist violence, but there were none.

The official policy of the Chinese government is "China's peaceful rise". Yes, our Century of Humiliation will never be forgotten, but the Chinese government is not responding with nukes and missiles and millions of soldiers. They are pursing China's peaceful development, just like their policy says.

There is plenty of cross-border bloodshed all over the world. But not here, the most that will happen here is someone getting sprayed with a water cannon.

 

[xesy]

Thank you, my friend. Please allow me to respond to you.

You are right that we seek total control over our turf. We want the US's Monroe Doctrine but we also know in order to achieve that doctrine, we must grow to be an invincible power. Does that answer your concern why we build our military up? Irresponsible power is relative. Was the US a responsible power in the 19th and 20th century during their rise? They bulldog their ways toward supremacy in Latin America. Whether we are responsible or not, is not important. We feel we are very responsible considering the provocative caused by some of the troublemakers. Currently there are too many puppets in Asia who feel inferior to the West (namely the US) that they don't seek to challenge it. They don't accept our lead. We understand that. The US is military superior and they fear US retaliation. So we have to test it. Will there be challenge to the goal? Of course! We expect challenge. We embrace it, we love it!

Ideal society based on harmony is the same as restoring the former glory. It is mutually exclusive, my friend. We have an opportunity. Why shouldn't we pursue it? Nationalism is a cute word that you used because you don't understand us. Japan used nationalism to re-militarize again. You, Vietnam, used nationalism to keep away from color revolution. Likewise, the CCP will use nationalism to motivate Chinese people to achieve the "Chinese Dream". I suppose you know that "Chinese Dream" right?

You are the Chinese mem I have been waiting for in this thread. Most others are like TL;DR or just blatanly say this article is just another anti-China propaganda.
Like you said China is building up military power, I see it as a sign of China insecure. China feels uncomfortable with US making friends with its neighboring countries and creating an invisible barier around China. It's alright for China to be cautious against US. US and the West might want a powerful China, but not powerful enough to challange their rules over the world order. And with power comes ambition. China can't use US in the 19-20th century as a comparision because 1 word: globalization. No one was around with power to judge, to contain US when they took total control of America. China has US around to do it now.
"Chinese dream" is for the good of Chinese only. I have no problem with that. However when Chinese dream get bigger and bigger, it starts crushing dreams of others, starting by those close to China. Is China at fault? No, that's my personal belief. But those whose dreams are being crushed by China should have the right to fight back. They are also not wrong. They are fighting against the odd, fighting against the tide.
So China should take an easy look at VN and Philippines. The conflict happens because each country tries to protect its interest.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Like you said China is building up military power, I see it as a sign of China insecure.

You know China only spends 1.4% of GDP on defence, nearly the lowest in the whole world?

America and Russia spend around 5% of GDP on defence.

The Soviet Union spent 30% of GDP on defence, Nazi Germany spent 20% of GDP on defence.

Yet we are only spending around 1%.

That is hardly insecurity. No country can defeat us in land war in our own country, we proved that when we fought the US + 16 of her allies in the Korean War.

When we reach the highest GDP in the world (in nominal terms), we will finally have the flexibility to increase our defence spending to 3-4% of GDP. Now that will be a sight to behold, it would surpass even America's current defence budget by a big margin.

Peace is maintained by strength. Our Peaceful rise doesn't mean we won't protect ourselves by all means necessary.

 

[xesy]

In my personal opinion, I do take issue with the article, especially the conclusion here:



This is untrue, and also impossible. We were on the receiving end of multiple genocides, how could we force the world to suffer the same wounds as we did? Only nuclear weapons could accomplish that, and that would lead to nuclear winter, so it is obviously not an option.

The Vietnamese here talk about the dangers of "Chinese nationalism", however as I pointed out... the Vietnamese nationalists recently rioted and killed several Chinese people in Vietnam.

But Chinese nationalists did not riot and kill Vietnamese in China? There are plenty of Vietnamese in China who could have been on the receiving end of retaliatory nationalist violence, but there were none.

The official policy of the Chinese government is "China's peaceful rise". Yes, our Century of Humiliation will never be forgotten, but the Chinese government is not responding with nukes and missiles and millions of soldiers. They are pursing China's peaceful development, just like their policy says.

There is plenty of cross-border bloodshed all over the world. But not here, the most that will happen here is someone getting sprayed with a water cannon.

I beg to differ. Remember the sign "No dog and Chinese allowed" that was used in movie Fist of Fury to potray how Japanese and Westerners humiliated Chinese. China did have a similar sign in a Beijing restaurant a few year back "No dog, Vietnamese and Philippines allowed". I heard that your govt took that down within a few days, but the sign made it way to the internet. My point is that China does not want the world to suffer its loss in population, in property, but rather suffer the same humiliation that it went through. A while back I saw a thread in PDF named "Is Thailand 'Sick man of Asia'?". Same things happened there. It's like the selfishness nature of human: if I can't have it, you can't have it; if I am dieing you are dieing too.

 

[Spring Onion]

They want to bully others & criticize west mostly

Yeh by making slow and steady progress peacefully. I would love to see this kind of bullying by China.

Go China go