China Apologist : U.S. Must Decline as China Returns to Former Greatness

US Business & Industry Council ^ | April 6, 2007 | William R. Hawkins

[Paul Ross]

China Apologist : U.S. Must Decline as China Returns to Former Greatness

By William R. Hawkins
Friday, April 06, 2007

The CNA Corporation is a non-profit organization that is best known for operating the Center for Naval Analysis, which for over 50 years has worked closely with the U.S. Navy to develop strategies and weapon systems to defend American security.  It opened a new China Study Center on March 27, which seems like a natural evolution of its work given Beijing’s rise as a global geopolitical rival to the United States.  China has the world’s third largest shipbuilding industry and its rapidly expanding its navy.  However, by choosing devoted Beijing apologist Chas Freeman to deliver its inaugural lecture, it raised doubts about the direction its research will take.  

Chas Freeman was Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs during the first term of the Clinton Administration, and had been Director for Chinese Affairs at the State Department at the end of the Carter administration.  In between, he had been ambassador to Saudi Arabia under President George H. W. Bush.  He is Co-Chair of the United States-China Policy Foundation, a group “founded to ensure the continued improvement of U.S.-China relations.” Freeman embraces this mission, even though he was the diplomat chosen in October 1995 by Chinese General  Xiong Guangkai to convey a threat to use nuclear weapons against the United States over Taiwan.  

Freeman is also on the board of Projects International, Inc., a Washington-based firm that has helped broker a cross-investment agreement between major Chinese and Brazilian oil companies; set up joint ventures for American firms in China; and has provided advice to Chinese venture capital funds.  In his remarks to CNA, Freeman stressed business over any other consideration in China relations.  He argued, “Contrary to repeated forecasts, the many imperfections of China's legal system have neither prevented it from developing a vigorous market economy nor inhibited foreign investment – of which China continues to attract more than any other country, including our own.  China's failure to democratize and its continuing censorship of its media, including the Internet, have not stifled its economic progress or capacity to innovate, which are increasingly impressive.  China's perverse practices with respect to human rights have not cost China's Communist Party or its government their legitimacy.  On the contrary, polling data suggests that Chinese have a very much higher regard for their political leaders and government than Americans currently do for ours.”

If Freeman was polled, he would say the same.  Indeed, his speech was filled with criticism of the United States along side praise for China, taking on bizarre dimensions at times.  He claimed, “At the birth of the United States of America, what some then called ‘the Celestial Kingdom’ loomed large in our imagination....We knew little of China itself, but we had inhaled the European idealization of it as the most ethically advanced and orderly, as well as the most populous, realm on the planet.  As they designed our system of government, the brilliant political engineers who were our founding fathers drew on Leibniz' and Voltaire's musings on the secrets of the good society China exemplified to its Jesuit admirers.”

In Freeman’s view, “our founding fathers' ambitions to build a better system of government than those in Europe” led them to look to China for guidance! What an absurd notion! While there is mention of several European states in The Federalist Papers, there is no mention of China, which for all its opulence and stability, was ruled by a Emperor far more brutal than the British monarch against who the Founders rebelled.  The musings of the foolish Voltaire should be swept into the same dustbin as those of Hollywood dimwits like Shirley MacLaine, who once gushed over the blood-soaked reign of Mao Zedong for creating a more egalitarian and happy society than America.

But it is China’s future which beguiles Freeman.  “China had a couple of bad centuries, but it is back, and it is on the way to the center of global affairs.  As China restores itself to wealth and power, its leaders display a resolute confidence in the future,” he proclaims.  And in what should be a warning, he intones with optimism: “Our country came into being as the age of Atlantic dominance and the industrial revolution began to eclipse China and India.  Americans therefore have no experience with the more normal condition of human history, in which Asia was for millennia the global center of gravity.  One way or another, in the 21st Century, China and its neighbors will determine what the resumption of Asian leadership in more and more fields of human endeavor means for an emerging post-industrial world, including for us Americans.”

Anyone who might think there is danger ahead for the United States is treated disdainfully by Freeman.  “Sometimes, for example, in the matters of Taiwan, Tibet, or the democracy movement in Hong Kong, Americans are enlisted by lobbyists acting on behalf of separatist or dissident movements in greater China.  Those who wish America to go abroad in search of monsters to destroy can always find one worthy of our attention there.  China has become a screen on which Americans can project both our reveries and our nightmares,” he says.

On the question of China’s “authentic aspirations,” which Americans need to understand, looms the national security issue.  Freeman told his audience, “No one still dismisses the PLA as a ‘junkyard army.’ China's recent anti-satellite test, growing participation in UN peacekeeping missions, and near tripling of defense spending since 2000 mark its emergence as a considerable military power.” Yet, we should not react to this.  Indeed, he urged the CNA, whose job it is to worry about such things, to reject “our apparent nostalgia for the aggressive expansionism of our now inconveniently vanished Soviet rivals” and to avoid “writing narrowly focused and highly tendentious reports mandated by Congress to justify the single-issue agendas of our military-industrial complex or, for that matter, our humanitarian-industrial complex.”

He believes China is behaving as a “responsible stakeholder.....This is already the case with respect to the world monetary system, in which the Renminbi yuan is poised to emerge as a major trading and reserve currency within the coming decade.” This assessment flies in the face of reality.  Beijing sets the value of its currency by fiat, undervaluing it by 40 percent or more to gain competitive advantages in world trade.  It is not a convertible currency like the dollar or the euro.  China has built up a trillion dollar hard currency reserve through its trade surpluses, but maintains control of these funds for purely national purposes.  

“I am optimistic,” Freeman proclaims. “China's leaders are trying hard, in connection with the 17th Chinese Communist Party Congress to be held this fall, to develop a restatement of ideological principles that emphasizes the imperatives of societal and international harmony and the sinicization of Western-originated theories of innovation in science and technology.” Toward that end, the U.S. should not try to restrict the transfer of technology to Beijing, but welcome China’s further success.

Freeman seems to have fallen into that school of dissident thought that is looking for a foreign alternative to what his liberal sensibilities find distasteful about American preeminence.  

In a speech to other retired diplomats in February, he launched a marathon assault on every aspect of American policy and society.  “We have sought to exempt ourselves from the jurisdiction of international law.  We have suspended our efforts to lead the world to further liberalization of trade and investment through the Doha Round.  We no longer participate in the UN body charged with the global promotion of human rights.  We decline to discuss global climate change, nuclear disarmament, or the avoidance of arms races in outer space.”

His talk was in accord with his position as head of the Middle East Policy Council.  His twisted view of that region of the world matches his view of Asia.  He denounced the U.S. provision of “military support and political cover for Israeli operations entailing intermittent massacres of civilian populations in Lebanon and Gaza.”  No mention is made of the China-Iran-Hezbollah terrorist connection that is pushing Lebanon towards civil war, and which not only Israel and the U.S., but also most of the Arab world, are trying to contain.

Freeman also told his audience, ”There will be no American imperium.  The effort to bully the world into accepting one has instead set in motion trends that threaten both the core values of our republic and the prospects for a world order based on something other than the law of the jungle.”  Freeman is hopelessly deluded, however, if he thinks China’s rise under its current Communist regime will not continue to be conducted by the law of the jungle.  That is the nature of both economic and geopolitical competition, which Beijing’s leaders know very well from China’s long and violent history.

---

William R. Hawkins is Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the U.S. Business and Industry Council.

---

[jveritas]

Agree 100%.

[AppyPappy]

People who live in Communist countries are a funny lot. They are quick to complain about the US but if you point out an error from their country, they are incredulous. They can’t fathom that anyone would dare to question their country. It is simply not allowed.

When religious groups knock on my door, I see the same treatment. I always start off by asking “What don’t you like about your church?”. Sometimes they leave skid marks.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

That the United States will remain on top shouldn't be taken for granted. It definitely isn't a given.

China has much more potential than the United States on account of its much larger population.

Back to the first point:

• Sumer was great, and then torn down.
• Egypt was great, and then torn down.
• Rome was great, and then torn down.
• China was great, and then torn down.
• Western Europe was great, and then torn down.

All nations, including the United States, serve at God's whim, and God decides which nation will be great and for how long.

Americans should still work to try to keep American dominance as long as they can. Enlarged United States of America.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

I disagree with the statement that Asia has been dominant in the world except for a couple of hundred years. China was on par with the Roman Empire two thousand years ago. China has not been a central world power for half a millieum. Western Civilization has led the way since the Reformation. China is coming out of its Mao, self induced collectivist torture. China has adopted free enterprise as a means of economic expansion. Its leaders still maintain a parallel and increasingly worthless state sector. China has many more growing pains to work through. Hopefully, its people will demand some measure of political freedom to go with its economic policies.
Also, China has a huge problem within a generation of a huge imbalance in its male-female ratio. Also, its population will decline.
The anti-American statement in the post presumes an American imperium. There is no such imperium. Our country seeks only to confront those that threaten its existence: NAZISM, JAPANESE MILITARISM, COMMUNISM and ISLAMIC TERRORISM. We may be the only superpower now, and may not be the only superpower in 30 years, but we can only destroy our selves if we lack faith in our system.

[sticker]

” China’s recent anti-satellite test”

Perhaps “mr fraser” could tell everyone which group has fought tooth and nail against America having anti-satellite capability

[Pete from Shawnee Mission]

Rather christian, republican and Christian.

[Paul Ross]

The Chinese will never surpass the US. They have neither the technology nor the ability to think outside the box like we can.

Actually, it appears with our continuing hemhorraging of industrial...and military...secrets to Red China, it is likely that it is our own people that refuse to think outside the box and recognize a serious threat.

Remember the Cox Commission and the loss of the W-88 design, the Neutron Bomb, and God only knows what else [perhaps even Excalibur]? The loss of the SuperMagnet industry (Magnequench)? The Loss of our Aegis Phased Array radar technology? The loss of a wide range of ship-queiting motor and electronics technology? The loss just recently of our operational technology or missile interception on the Aegis ships? The loss of our B-2 thermal stealth technology? The loss of the passive radar technique for stealth-plane-detection? The loss of the science behind detecting our submarines by satellites using Synthetic Aperature Radars. The loss of the Terfenol-D technology (superior sonars, and a wide variety of immensely valuable other uses). The loss of our GPS technology? And oh, the loss of our manufacturing, not just the technology of our "Night Vision" equipment [ITT fined $100 million]?

And the attempted "poaching" of the Metal-Storm inventor...and his family for a paltry $100 million.

These are just some things which have surfaced to the MSM. What do you want to bet that they are simply the Tip of the Iceberg?

They routinely "Flood the Zone" of our vital-advantage technologies with thousands upon thousands of their "technology students" ...and they waltz off with it Scot-Free.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

Asia pinglist.

[MBB1984]

If America continues its moral slide into complete decadence, it will also be torn down or more likely, rot from within.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

So, Freeman is a little wacky--but Hawkins ain't so rational himself (though more so than Freeman--not typing much).

China poses a huge risk to this country.

Freeman takes the point of view that China isn't a threat because it will be generally peaceful.
Hawkins recognizes the threat, but primarily from a militaristic (rather than an economic and cultural along with militaristic view).

Freeman does point out that Asia is the "natural" leading continent, Europe only taking the fore in the last half millennium or so, and North America for a some measly sixty years (Rome probably gave Han China a run for its money, though--still some of the Roman Empire was in Asia, and that continent included some of Rome's wealthiest provinces).

[Paul Ross]

No self respecting US Submariner would ever set foot in a Rickshaw Rick or Ruskie submarine, they are just plain too dangerous.

Wether less-well-made or not...the seriousness of the threat is what has to be understood.

E.g., regarding "dangerousness" ...Not half as dangerous as being on the ships within the range of their torpedoes...as the U.S. carrier flagship of the Panda-Hugging Admiral who was suitably embarrassed....and demanded to know, in effect, "What's the Meaning of this, don't you know we're trying mighty hard to appease you Chi-Comms???"

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

Asia pinglist .

[GOP_1900AD]

There is a very obnoxious PRC bootlicking, anti Taiwanese, anti Japanese, and ostensibly, anti Western, forumite who goes by “freeman” over at the Asiawind “Our World” forum. Based on what this cat stated in the above article, I am inclined to think he’s the same Freeman.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Those who wish America to go abroad in search of monsters to destroy can always find one worthy of our attention there. China has become a screen on which Americans can project both our reveries and our nightmares,” he says.

What do you mean our nightmares?

A search revealed that there were references to corruption, unemployment, revolution, pollution, or unrest. Which China is this guy writing about?

One more unemployed, one more ton of pollution, one more yuan pocketed by a corrupt Party cadre village leader and -- it could happen -- KA-BOOM!

We've lived through sagging dollars, recessions, inflation, stagnation, stagflation -- that's our "nightmare." The Chi-Coms' nightmare is KA-BOOM! All the things and more that brought Mao's revolution to power and ended the Nationalist government are there. Tick, tick, tick. . . .

[Fee]

Rome was not democratic, but it did achieve greatness and dominance. China will not achieve greatness if she cannot eliminate nepotism and corruption. Two weaknesses in her society that lead to the downfall of all her dynasties with the exception of Chin and Yuan and Communist Rule is a dynasty. China is not ready for democracy because 90 percent of her people are rural poor and only 10 percent are middle class or better and they live in the coastal cities. If China became democratic, she will go the way of Venezeula because the pent up resentment of the well to do by the majority rural poor will lead her to “mob” socialism. China’s expansion will be limited by energy and a large elderly population that will be a burden on the smaller younger population (due to elderly longevity and the one child policy). All the Asian Tigers (except Japan) had authoritarian governments that presided over economic expansion and modernization, and once a large middle class is established, the authoritarian government either relinquished to democracy or were driven out. Democracy without a large middle class will lead to Venezeuala mob rule.

[GOP_1900AD]

Until Japan did it in the late 1800s, no Asian power has ever, in history, been able to exploit technology, commercialize and mass produce it, the way the West has done. We now see a few imitators of the Japanese success but that’s all they really are. This flaw has been the demise of the long term power of would be Asian hegemons. This is what makes the current era so troubling. Now, would be Asian hegemons seem to have, in a Germany or Stalinist Russia like manner, treated both military and non military technology. We face things never before experienced, the outcome of which is not likely to be good.

[RightWhale]

Rome was not democratic

Over the course of its 1000+ years it was just about everything one time or another.

[RightWhale]

Ancient empires do not as a rule return. They don’t entirely go away, but the conditions of their ascendancy would be near impossible to replicate.

[Scotswife]

China can only sink into depravity as they murder their young and rid themselves of their females.

[glorgau]

“China had a couple of bad centuries, but it is back, ..."

Sounds like the Chicago Cubs...