Analysts need to stop acting like panty-flinging fanboys (and girls) when discussing Chinese growth in power.
China has a "long game" to displace the American-designed global order?
You know what I think of China's purported long-range thinking instincts. Not much.
I think a lot of this talk of China's rise is Chinese propaganda designed to conceal Chinese weaknesses with an air of inevitable success. I suspect we'll add China to the list of the USSR, Japan, and the European Union which were all touted in turn as ending American economic primacy.
So I'm skeptical of arguments that America needs a "grand strategy" to oppose China (What? The Chinese didn't anticipate that and plan around it?). Isn't this desire for a grand strategy just an expansion of the false wisdom of state planning for the economy to a wider diplomatic, cultural, economic, espionage, and military effort?
Why should "strategic socialism" work any better? Hasn't America made more progress in 250 years of unplanned effort than China has achieved in thousands with their so-called long-range thinking abilities in the hands of many emperors?
Yet somehow China's growth means America has to replace what got us here with ways that emulate China's recent rise (which ignores the massive and bloody decline Mao inflicted on China).
I guess this is made more urgent by America being distracted by killing jihadis the last twenty years. I think this take on America's 21st century wars as a sign of America's coming defeat by China is nuts:
The Sicilian Expedition as it became known is arguably the best example of imperial overreach in history. Is history repeating itself? Thus far this century, America, like Athens, has depleted its strength by throwing vast resources at non-essential wars in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. These were distracting conflicts where even victory would have provided modest benefits. In hindsight victories in Iraq and Syria were largely pyrrhic while the war in Afghanistan seems all but lost. Meanwhile China has grown its economy, built a world class navy and leveraged its strength to co-opt regional allies.
Athens' Sicilian Expedition was surely a massive mistake in concept to defeat Sparta. But it was a massive commitment of Athenian ships and troops--which were annihilated in the end, crippling Athens' military power--that made major mistakes in execution that denied Athens victory in Sicily despite the error of starting the campaign.
There is absolutely no truth that Iraq and Syria (the war on ISIL, I assume) victories (at least the author admits victories) are "Pyrrhic"--or battlefield victories so costly that they represent strategic defeats.
That is, in our CENTCOM wars the prices in lives and money were strategically trivial given the duration of the fights and the size of our economy. Our deaths were tragedies, of course. But they were never so high that the military could not recruit volunteers to fight them.
Don't blame the casualties or expense of those wars. Wokeness is what is threatening to hollow out the American military. Have you seen the size of so-called Covid-19 response spending plans just over the last year, which dwarf spending on fighting those campaigns over two decades?
And if we lose Afghanistan, it is from walking away and abandoning victory.
Further, the author overstates China's undermining of America's allies. Burma (Myanmar) has long been a client of China. China's influence has waxed and waned there depending on local events, such as whether there is democracy (when the country reaches out to America) or military rule (when it relies on China).
As for Vietnam, is he serious? Forty-five years ago North Vietnam was China's wartime ally and America's enemy. Now Vietnam is cooperating with America to resist Chinese efforts to dominate East Asia and the South China Sea.
And despite waffling, the Philippines decided to firmly side with America with a signed agreement. How is it possible to use those examples to prove China is gaining diplomatic ground at America's expense?
When countries like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Australia, and India are all gearing up to oppose China in cooperation or alliance with America?
I'm just stunned at this way of looking at China and seeing only super genius at work; while looking at America and only seeing blunders.
