Ensuring China’s Peaceful Rise
Image Credit: White House

Ensuring China’s Peaceful Rise

0 Likes
76 comments

U.S. President Barack Obama’s recent trip to Honolulu to attend the APEC summit is merely the latest step in what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has dubbed a “pivot” or re-focus of U.S. interest in Asia. But as the United States looks to follow through on the pledge so clearly outlined by Clinton in her Foreign Policy essay in September, attention is again inevitably turning to Asia’s looming economic and military giant – China.  

There has been much discussion and speculation in recent commentary over China’s rapid maritime rise and strategy for dominating large swaths of the Pacific, including one I recently penned for The Diplomat. China’s maritime rise is symbolized by the sea trials this summer of its first aircraft carrier, the ex-Ukrainian Varyag, the launch of which is part of a ship building program not seen since Kaiser Wilhelm II ordered Imperial Germany’s High Seas Fleet at the turn of the last century.

China’s naval buildup will soon give Beijing the means to use military force to back up its expansive territorially claims to essentially the entire Yellow Sea, East China Sea and South China Sea. In response, Southeast Asian nations, Japan, India and Australia have all embarked on significant defense force modernization programs of their own, increasing their budgets for major air and naval platforms.  Submarines are in particular demand.

Despite using the term “peaceful rise” for almost a decade to describe its global diplomatic, economic and military growth, China hasn’t hesitated to support its territorial claims in the Pacific with what senior American officials have repeatedly labeled as “aggressive” naval action by the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLA Navy), Air Force and auxiliary forces.  While individual incidents at sea have been reported in regional, maritime, military or, on occasion, the mainstream press, the full extent of China’s efforts to exert control over nearby international waters hasn’t been widely covered in the West.  Governments, on the other hand, are increasingly concerned about China’s naval behavior in the region.  Indeed, Japan accused Beijing, for the first time, of “assertiveness” in an official government white paper issued in July. Japan’s characterization of Chinese action in an official government document is certainly blunt in “diplospeak.” 

As China asserts its claims in the Pacific, it has made no secret of its opposition to U.S. freedom of navigation operations in nearby international waters, and it hasn’t confined its unhappiness to mere diplomatic protests.  Instead, Chinese forces have confronted the world’s leading navy at sea in some well-publicized incidents.

Such challenges aren’t wholly new. The first major incident between U.S. and PLA forces occurred just several years after the fall of the Soviet Union.  In July and August 1995 and March 1996, in response to certain measures in Taiwan interpreted by China as moves toward Taiwanese independence, China conducted “missile tests and other military exercises” near the Taiwan Strait.  In March 1996, the United States responded by sending two carrier strike groups toward the region. China seemingly backed away from confrontation, but many analysts have suggested this was a turning point in PLA thinking.

Comments
76
Rey Oleo
August 4, 2013 at 06:19

China a bullish country, aggressor, intruder and does not respect international law specially the 200 nautical miles exclusive economic zone of it's neighboring countries. that's the reason china rising power must be contain to ensure peace and stability in the region.

Israel
May 6, 2012 at 15:45

I’m surprised the ASEAN conieruts are not criticized at home for not confining Obama to the APEC meetings and keeping the US out of the ASEAN, since it stands for Association of Southeast Asian Nations. He really did try to assert some weight at both meetings it looks like.I bet Roy will want to have something up for the Hillary Clinton visit to Burma. Which according to Google begins on Dec 1. I’m sure they’ll be rounding up all the dissents except for allowing Aung San Suu Kyi to meet with her

Yumi
May 6, 2012 at 11:08

Yes, the CCP today is not the CCP of Mao’s era, but is still the CCP. Its grip on power may not produce today the cremis of the past, but still produces cremis. It may also not brake the development of the country as it did in the past, but as pointed out by Xujun it is still break progress of in many areas, specially the development of a strong civil society and social moral values.The people today are not the same as in the past, neither they think as in the past, but the system basically remains, and there still not strong checks & balances to restrain its abuses on people.

Cecil
November 30, 2011 at 00:01

A prominent Chinese economist, Dr. Zhao Xiao was commissioned by his government to study the success of the American economy. He concluded that a moral foundation allowed the economy to flourish, argued that China’s economy would benefit from the spread of the Christian faith, and embraced Christianity himself. He continues to be a respected scholar and government advisor, speaking openly about the influence of Christianity on economics. Our first non-English speaking faculty member, he will lean on a gifted translator to share his thoughts on the relationship between morality and a market economy, the state of the Church in China, and the challenges of leadership as a Christian in a secular Communist country.

ozivan
November 27, 2011 at 14:18

@Observer. Still playing dump ? My reply to BP is in simple English. You understand them, but refused to acknowledge. That’s just you. Forever, twisting and miscomprehending blogger’s comments to your favour.

Isn’t you that is pathetic ?

Toni
November 26, 2011 at 11:44

The best way to ensure China’s peaceful rise is to make sure China be China, and not like the West.

ari
November 25, 2011 at 15:32

This article is nothing but a China hit job with the writer selectively quoting incidents to justify his intention. The question is – Why the need to ensure the peaceful rise of China? Ensure to whose benefit? What do you actually, really mean by “ensure”? Isn’t that actually doublespeak for the Anglo-Saxon White race like America to control China? Why don’t you assess and examine the bad behaviour of the risen power – America? Why don’t you contain it and shape its behaviour? Like a rat in a box, or your prisoners in a prison or concentration camp? Or in a reservation?

That, basically is what the bl**dy American’s strategy is – Put China in a prison and control his behaviour and activities. The kind of control freak and power mad racial American behaviour exhibited to the Japanese in their infamous detention centres for ethnic Japanese Americans.

Last but not least, Indian politicians are liars. They are who-ever-is-in-power anywhere’s fourth column. I am surprise beijing kept quiet on this instead of calling a press conference and threaten New Delhi with war if that Indian Minister – Jaswant Singh – was not sacked forthwith.

Observer
November 23, 2011 at 08:48

@ ozivan – did you read the article from BP? Do you see how stupid to brag as the largest debt holder? LOL.

I am still wating for you chinese posters to provide articles and stories from well know neutral sources to back up the statement that US F22s are made with chinese parts. I provided one with wiki. Where are yours? Keep on rambling about other things will NOT make you look any smarter but as a clueless moron.

How pathetic.

ozivan
November 23, 2011 at 00:51

@Drive By. Well said.

ozivan
November 22, 2011 at 20:21

@CaptainJohann. You noted : But why this phrase “peaceful rise”?Does other nations rise unpeacefully? …. it (read China)coined the word peaceful rise.

If you have followed closely past statements made by China’s President and Prime Minister , they assured the world that China’s modernisation and progress, so called ” Rise ” would be a peaceful one.

The word ” Peaceful Rise ” was coined by western mass media. Since then, some challenged and mispresent the label. Such is the power of the pen !

ozivan
November 22, 2011 at 19:55

@Observer spewed these words of China :….china is full of fake parts, LOL.

Fake, fake, fake, and more fake.

These are some of the meanings of the following words in order for its right, correct usage :

1. FAKE
========

Denotes something that is not real. Example: A toy gun is a “Fake” as compared to a real gun. Or a ” Fake Doctor ” is one who is not medically qualified by education and training.

2. IMITATION
=============
This is a replication of an item , product or behaviour which is not necessarily unworkable if it pertains to a product or goods; or must be equivalent in quality to an original. In my opinion, if quality is compromised because they are cheaper, then it’s a failure of quality control, not because they are fakes.

In arts or behaviour, they are at worst a flattery of the brilliant works of others.

3. COPIED
==========

A reproduction of the original (similar in many aspects to imitation) but not necessarily unworkable. Often of good and reasonable quality at cheaper prices.

4. GENERIC
===========

Most common in pharmaceuticals having the main active ingredients that does the job as the original, although not exactly the same as the original in BRAND/BENCH MARKING.

5. COMPATIBLE & COMPARABLE
===========================

The end products vary from poor quality to good or even remarkable quality as compared to the original, as seen in electronic spare parts, car and computer spare parts, etc.

So, when @Observer lashed out @Observer is doing out of blind hatred and consumed by emotions against China/Chinese.

Although, copying is not encouraged, it is a fact of life in the world for countries at various stages of their development. As for comparable, compatible or counterfeit spare parts installed in US weapons systems, @Observer deliberately and typically failed to take note of the following excerpts of a US report :

WASHINGTON — China is dumping counterfeit electronic parts into the Pentagon’s supply chain, two senior lawmakers alleged on Monday, putting U.S. troops at risk and undercutting the American economy.

One day before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the issue, Sen. Carl Levin, a Democrat, and John McCain, a Republican, offered details of the panel’s ongoing investigation…..

The committee hearing will examine three cases in which suspect counterfeit parts from China were installed in military systems made by Raytheon, L-3 Communications and Boeing.

Investigators traced more than 70 percent of the cases to China. Nearly 20 percent led to the Britain and Canada, the lawmakers said.

PS: Read the above last sentence of Britain and Canada.

Of course, typical of @Observer’s hatred, hurts caused by other more capable pro-China’s bloggers which he couldn’t handle and his obsession, he would only see China as the only evil on earth.

ozivan
November 22, 2011 at 18:55

@John Chan & @Observer. @Observer is not a serious or meaningful debater. He is merely tailing and riding onto comments made by others. Nothing educated or original from him except tauntings and insults. That is his forte and pillar of support for his replies.

He will boast of giving readers his links and articles, which he claims solidly support his arguments. The joke is that he doesn’t read his links carefully and he always..with his classic TWISTING by ommission, of facts , fabrication or sheer distortion…will misinterpret, misquote, misread and misunderstand the gist of articles/comments.

We both have similar experiences with him that inspite that we have answered his replies, he would unashamedly claimed he hasn’t got them.

ozivan
November 22, 2011 at 18:35

@BP. You are right, if you are talking of total US debts, including internal and external debts.

But China holds the single largest amount of external US debts, compared to other countries like Germany, Japan or Saudi Arabia, etc

I believe in debates and references in international forums, we talk more or the emphasis is on international finance or country to country debts. In the Euro crisis in Greece, much talk about Greek’s default in payments is of the cross border variety.

Observer
November 22, 2011 at 11:29

Per Gallup Poll, a well respected and well know company, the US is still way ahead of china from the people of ASEAN.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150830/leadership-approval-ratings-top-china-asia.aspx

Observer
November 22, 2011 at 09:33

One more thing, chinese posters are still unable to provide any articles to show that US F22s are made with chinese parts. Even the links from another clueless chinese shown that china is full of fake parts, LOL.

Fake, fake, fake, and more fake.

Observer
November 22, 2011 at 09:31

@ jc – see the link from BP above your post? That is how smart people debate, bring articles and links for support.

Conclusion = chinese need to stop bragging about the “we are holding the largest of US debt” and humiliate yourself. LOL.

Share your thoughts

Your Name
required
Your Email
required, but not published
Your Comment
required

Newsletter
Sign up for our weekly newsletter
The Diplomat Brief