Someone is taking someone for a walk: Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
Posted on 03/10/2006 11:37:04 AM PST by gogoman
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- Chinese influence is increasing in Latin America and Africa, a phenomenon that could have substantial bearing on America`s foreign policy on these regions, say analysts.
'America`s influence could be seriously eroded,' while Chinese influence will only increase, said Stephen Johnson, senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation in Washington.
Referring to the 'plantation economy' being created in Latin America as a result of China`s substantial influence on the economy, he said that the United States should rely more on competition in order to get a foot back in the door as a major player.
China, the world`s fourth largest economy, with the third largest deficit budget and the largest growing population, needs to increase currently insubstantial domestic resources to feed a growing economy.
According to Johnson, Latin America is 'ripe to be exploited by some major power,' as a result of much social and economic upheaval. 'Powerful presidents impose public agendas that are out of touch,' he said, 'allowing for arbitrary rule with a democratic veneer.'
The People`s Republic of China, still functioning as a non-market economy, is the United States` second largest trade partner after Canada.
Says Johnson, the advantage of trading with China is that 'China makes deals on the spot, without a lot of strings.' Additionally, the novelty of frequent visits from high-level Chinese officials elevates a small country into 'big leagues' -- while ranking American officials tend to ignore many of the Latin American countries.
'The instrumental nature of Chinese ownership means that many of China`s loans are really not direct investment,' said R. Evan Ellis, an associate at Booz Allen Hamilton.
'The clash of Chinese management practices and cultural expectations of Latin American workers,' is one problem that is already showing face, said Ellis. With the displacement of the manufacturing sector in Latin America -- the region has lost export opportunities to the United States and European Union as China bears increasing influence on domestic markets -- social unrest will be a huge issue.
According to him, the threat to the United States from China may not be a matter of an evolving military threat, but more an undermining of U.S. security needs. This may be played out in the increased cultural migration to the United States from Latin America.
As China looks across the world to secure its economic growth and national security, there will be both advantages and disadvantages of its increased foray into not only Latin America but also Africa.
'No other nation in the world is more in need of economic development than sub-Saharan Africa,' said Brett D. Schaefer, Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs at the Heritage Foundation, 'and commitment to democracy is fairly shallow.'
Yet in an era where radical terrorists have an evident foothold in the African subcontinent, the 52 countries that make up the nation suddenly have sizeable relevance. 'You can`t separate China and Africa out from these overall broad concerns,' he said.
China is active in natural resources -- oil, water and timber -- all over the continent. Exemplified by its 'protection over rogue states,' Schaefer said that military cooperation has grown largely in terms of protecting Chinese investments -- such as majority control over Sudan`s oil resources.
'China pursues its own self-interests without regard for a lot of African governments, countering western influences who would like to see improved government and greater transparency,' among other things, he said.
However, China is, to some extent, also good for the developing regions of Latin America and Africa, say the analysts. Investment in hard infrastructure and agriculture, among other things, are neglected by the west and much needed. In Africa, China also has peacekeeping operations and a number of doctors serving.
Africa`s history with China dates back to colonial times. Josh Eisenman, Fellow in Asia Studies at the American Foreign Policy Council, said that many Chinese made investments have a political basis.
Additionally, Chinese companies are nearly always under state control -- giving them broad leadership powers, which nations find useful in being able to proverbially 'kill two birds with one stone.' One hand determines investment opportunities and the other discusses matters of state -- such as military cooperation.
This, says Eisenman, is especially helpful for African nations, while also enabling China to 'use and leverage its seat on the Security Council.' Increasing goodwill has also extended to hosting upcoming leaders in Chinese military academies, providing interpersonal ties for influence at a later time.
'United States policy should make competition a true priority,' said Johnson. By increasing trade relations, America can and will open up market access, he said. At the same time, cutting strings on assistance to the greatest extent possible and pressing harder for reforms will enable the United States to dodge the fear of China`s looming shadow.
'I think the jury`s still out; we don`t know if these investments will play out,' said Eisenman, 'China`s values are not U.S. values and we`ve got to remember that.'
Taken as a whole, the SCO is the greatest threat ever to emerge against the West in all of history. Look at the collective capabilities and the trajectories of its trends. While America sleeps .....
But SCO has Russia and China as "anchor" powers, these guys hate each other. Whatever alliance they are in right now is a matter of convenience. It's like the the Soviet-Nazi alliance.
I beg to differ. Quite unlike the Molotov - Riebentrop Pact, the SCO has a great deal of collective transparency and secret coordination amongst its member states. A new spirit of "Eurasianism" guides their strategy. The fact is the CIS members realize they need the PRC warm bodies and execution excellence in order to accomplish certain things, and meanwhile, the PRC realize that they need the cover of Russian strategic weapons and friendly access to Russian raw materials. It is actually a complete win-win situation viewed from the SCO's perspective. Any "Barbarossa" type scenarios will probably not occur until after global conquest has been acheived. Hitler and Stalin were rather brutish, unprofessional and in many ways, stupid men, whose aggression propelled them, but for whom true long term stragtegic thinking was evasive. The current generation of SCO leaders are orders of magnitude more sophisticated.
Someone is taking someone for a walk: Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
The Russians dont trust the Chinese one little bit, IMO. First chaance they get, theyll mess em up. Same goes vice-versa.
Well said.
There is a lot of mutual racism though. Many Russians still view the Chinese as "yellow peril" and perceive them as inferior (a relic of Russia being "Big Brother" to China days), while many Chinese view the Russians as "slavish drunkards" and wannabe Westerners. I would argue that there is a fundamental mistrust on the people level, not just between governments. This sentiment is particularly strong along border towns.
Consider this. You are the don of one branch of the Mafia and there is a rival don. So, there is this opportunity that if the two of you can resist fighting each other for a certain period of time, the two of you can "conquer" a certain racket. Do you?:
A) Try to kill the other don ASAP and then go on to conquer it all by youself?
B) Pretend to partner with the other don but in the midst of conquest you stab him in the back?
C) Partner with the other don, then, only after the conquest is complete, consider your competitive stance vs him?
This is a test of strategic excellence.
A relic in fact, of russias history. Theyve never trusted anyone that looks mongoloid. Dont dorget, for much of its history, Russia was ruled by the Horde. And even after, it remained a vassal state to the Khans for a long time.
Recent history made the Russian vassal state grow powerful and conquer central asia. So that makes them view the Chinese, by correlation, as inferior.
theyve also had mass immigration by chinese into border areas. Theyre pretty suspicious of that as well.
I won't deny those sentiments, especially amongst those with lower levels of education. But we also must consider the realities of history. There was a time of past political fusion of the majority of what is now the lion's share of the SCO. There was even intermarriage of the nobility. The Russians are quite uncomfortable discussing it, and seek to pretend to be pure Kievan Rus. No doubt, in the far NW of the country, such people do indeed exist. But let us look at reality. There is a racial / ethnic continuum if one draws a line between Moscow and Beijing. In terms of views about the euphemism "a multipolar world" there is perfect agreement regarding the nature of such a world, namely, the exclusion of Western influence from Asia and a vast reduction in the overall geopolitical power of the traditional Western great powers. This is unique in history. Even Hitler and Stalin did not share such an obective. Heck, even Hitler and Mussolini did not share such an objective!
We are also losing Latin America to the Russians. The SCO is the banner under which Russia, China, and the rest of the Former USSR do business.
Not to mention that they are ALL communists, which unites them on a ideological level. The USSR broke up, but the Communist Party Soviet Union/KGB leaders stayed in power, usually under different party names. Their love for Leninsm and world domination did not leave, though.
If china dumps it's current Communist government and destroys it's ablilty to hold power, then China could be a very important ally. China would even get Taiwan as a state, because that is one of the conditions for reunification.
Russia and China are allies for many reasons
1. They hate America and the West
2. They are Ideological brothers (Communism)
3. Each has something important to the other
4. They both seek world domination
"Not to mention that they are ALL communists, which unites them on a ideological level. The USSR broke up, but the Communist Party Soviet Union/KGB leaders stayed in power, usually under different party names. Their love for Leninsm and world domination did not leave, though."
Name ONE, just ONE current Russian leader who was a leader in the Communist Party. Do you just make this stuff up on the fly, or is "Red Dawn" stuck in your dvd player?
BTW, if you were to judge Poland, Ukraine, Romania, Georgia, etc., using the same criteria you have for Russia (.."stayed in power, usually under different party names.") you'd have to call all of those countries "communist" as well. Take a look at their "leadership" (Executive, Judicial, and Legislative).
China/Russia: Any half-knowledgable student of international relations and world history knows that the mutual distrust of each other has always cut short any periods of cooperation. Russia deals with China because they a.) know China is stronger, and b.) are scared witless about losing the Far Eastern regions. Russian military officers don't trust the Chinese one bit. Russian citizens not only don't trust the Chinese they go out of the way NOT to buy Chinese products. Something I wish our countrymen would do.
PS - "World Domination" was more of a "Trotskyism" than "Leninism", but they were both thugs.
Response to your post (feel free to discuss and refute),
1. Both countries respect the West. The Chinese and the Russians don't respect each other.
2. The Chinese ideology today is Money, not Communism. Mao's face and the grass-green shoulder bags that people used to carry during the Cultural Revolution have become fashion symbols today for the Chinese indie rock music movement, sold for profit.
3. True. But Russia is *unwilling* to allow China to give Russia what Russia needs... that is, economic investment and unlimited labor to power up the Russian Far East. Russia fears that that would be the end of its control in the region.
4. What do you mean by world domination? I don't foresee Chinese troops stationed around the world anytime soon. They have no blue-water navy and the Russians aren't willing to help them besides a few isolated weapons deals (they fear being swallowed by China first). There is no precedent for Chinese troops to piggyback on Russia's military, the Chinese just buy military equipment from Russia.
So, basically everyone likes the US, and Russia and China won't fight us but each other? That does not make sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.