tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post112046629911263553..comments2024-03-01T16:32:41.076+08:00Comments on Sun Bin: Is China a threat? (III)Sun Binhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-76182959389165400512009-08-29T07:41:06.563+08:002009-08-29T07:41:06.563+08:00You wrote: "In its 4000 years of recorded his...You wrote: "In its 4000 years of recorded history, China has been defending its country by building a Great Wall."<br />That is correct. The Great Wall should be the border of China because the Chinese have proved by building this wall that every piece of land inside the wall belonged to them and the territories outside the wall belonged to others, in this case to Mongols. <br />You said, "...When China expanded most in territory during the Yuan (Mongolia) and Qing (Manchurian)period, China was conquered by neighboring nomad tribes. The expansion was initiated and accomplished by the aggression of these nomad tribes, not the Han Chinese..."<br />Nomad tribes? This kind of contemptuous attitude is one of the reasons why Chinese are disliked by other nations, especially by those who had or still have neighborhood relationships with them. When Chinggis Khaan started to launch a campaign against China, Mongolia was no more "nomad tribes". Temujin has united all Mongol tribes and built a country named "Hamag Mongol" which means "All Mongol" and he was chosen as the Great Khaan. But it was his Grandson Khubilai who could complete the occupation of China.<br />You said, "...As soon as these nomads moved into Beijing and assimilated with the Han Chinese culture, their drive for expansion were submerged..."<br />Wrong again. In their ruling period in China Mongols never assimilated in Chinese culture, unlike the Manchu people who "disappeared" totally after their 300 year-rule in China. Maybe it was Khubilai's mistake to move his capital to now Beijing, only to be called later "Chinese" and claimed by Chinese. The Chinese distortion of history by claiming Mongol Khaans as "Chinese" and the 2 foreign occupations (Yuan and Qing) as their own dynasties, are really ridiculous. But still I see such propaganda everywhere. Do the Chinese people have no shame at all? Don't they understand that this nonsense makes them look funny and ignorant? In regards to mentioning of "submerging of drive for expansion", just want to remind you that Mongols have made many attempts to invade Japan and Vietnam etc. <br />You said, "...But China does not post a threat to the rest of the world or its neighbors just because it inherits Tibet from the Manchurian Empire (Qing)..."<br />China does not have the right to "inherit" Tibet, East Turkestan and so called Inner Mongolia. Why? Simple. China is not the successor of Manchurian Empire which was overthrown by Chinese in 1911. China declared independence and formed another type of state, so did Mongolia. Every country included in any forceful created empire has the right to gain independence if it wishes, after this empire collapses. Yeah, I know. The world lacks of justice and that is why we cannot live in peace.<br />You said, "...China does not claim any territory of its neighbor, even Mongolia which was also once ruled by Qing..."<br />Mongolia does not claim for China even it was ruled once by Mongols (Yuan). This kind of statements are just ridiculous. Like I said, any forceful annexation is illegal and to claim to be the successor of a foreign ruler is the most ridiculous thing on earth. If the Manchus have had conquered Korea and Japan, would the Chinese have claimed for their territories too? I am sure, you know about the occupation of Korea during the Yuan empire and annexing it to this empire. Mongols tried to invade Japan too, but it didn't work out. So Yuan empire consisted many countries, including the mainland Mongolia and so Yuan was just a part of Mongol Empire. <br />Lastly, the world is unfortunately still not enough "civilized" and certain countries still play by the rule "Those who have the most power are right". If it does not stop someday soon, in the long run we destroy ourselves by destroying the world. Then there will be no use of any wealth or land anymore.Pagmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14413473282308608227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-62414447322335894592007-08-02T19:14:00.000+09:002007-08-02T19:14:00.000+09:00SCO will not be in the equation.China has genuine ...SCO will not be in the equation.<BR/><BR/>China has genuine concern about the terrorism from the Xinjiang separatists. Dozens of bombs were detonated in late 1990s in various parts of China, responsibility claimed by the terrorists.<BR/><BR/>US released some of the terrorists caught in Al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan. China has good reason to seek anti-terrorism partners in the area.Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-83719492499875336022007-08-02T11:19:00.000+09:002007-08-02T11:19:00.000+09:00What about the SCO? How does that enter into the e...What about the SCO? How does that enter into the equation?stevesadlovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00963662049314546494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-55737069741012554152007-02-10T08:39:00.000+09:002007-02-10T08:39:00.000+09:00augustine,Thanks for your response.augustine,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your response.Jay@Soobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12208597218366281778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-65547368045853671672007-01-30T15:26:00.000+09:002007-01-30T15:26:00.000+09:00sudabei,
I am sorry to interupt but I personally t...sudabei,<br />I am sorry to interupt but I personally think its unlikely for China to fracture like the Solviet Union because the majority of the Chinese has been ruled by highly centralized states. Take a look at Chinese history, you will realize that the China always struggles to be "united". (Unification means peace, seperationism means conflict) As a matter of fact, after the death of Communist-idealogy, the newer generation (1978~) are binded together by the desire to prosperity and nationalism. <br />I personally favor decentralization because I am afraid that China will become homogenized culturally. However, decentralization is a long, long way to go and I do not see it happening anytime soon. <br /><br />sunbing, <br />Agree on your analysis but I am not as positive over the Taiwan, Tibet and liberalization issues. As one member of the new generation, I think that some of the issues(ie, Tibet) have to be tackled before the older generation wither away. The recent books-ban show how sensitive CCP is about its past and it could be extremely dangerous.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-24338692737584379792007-01-15T06:15:00.000+09:002007-01-15T06:15:00.000+09:00I read your 3 part essay having followed your link...I read your 3 part essay having followed your link to it on your 1/12/07 post and so wasn't sure where I should leave my comment.<br /><br />At any rate, your analysis is excellent. I'm certainly no strategist but I've found the mainstream American vision of China's "threatening, hegomonic rise to power" to be both short sighted and intellectually spastic. I guess for some the old Cold War roots run deep and their want for a global foe brings them some perverse sense of comfort.<br /><br />You mention Chinas gradual shift to a more liberal government and a greater democratic presence. My question:<br />In the long term as this phenomena manifests (assuming it does) itself do you see a possibility of fracture in the same sense the Soviet Union fractured? I understand the two are hardly alike (economic collapse as opposed to economic boom)but as the last generation of communists fades into obscurity is it fair to say it takes with it some degree of national cohesion?<br />ThanksJay@Soobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12208597218366281778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1128406007677689492005-10-04T15:06:00.000+09:002005-10-04T15:06:00.000+09:00good analysis on Zhu Chenghu and NFU<A HREF="http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/677/china-and-no-first-use" REL="nofollow"> good analysis on Zhu Chenghu and NFU</A>Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1124728376563309832005-08-23T02:32:00.000+10:002005-08-23T02:32:00.000+10:00Wang Jisi's article in Foreign Affair: China's Sea...<A HREF="http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84504/wang-jisi/china-s-search-for-stability-with-america.html" REL="nofollow">Wang Jisi's article in Foreign Affair: China's Search for Stability with America</A>Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1123903941708966972005-08-13T13:32:00.000+10:002005-08-13T13:32:00.000+10:00Der Spiegel link for Lee KY interview "It's Stupid...<A HTTP://SERVICE.SPIEGEL.DE/CACHE/INTERNATIONAL/SPIEGEL/0,1518,369128,00.HTML HREF="" REL="nofollow">Der Spiegel link for Lee KY interview </A><BR/><BR/>"It's Stupid to be Afraid"<BR/><BR/>Singapore's first-ever prime minister, long-time government head and current political mentor Lee Kuan Yew talks about Asia's rise to economic power, China's ambitions and the West's chances of staying competitive.Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1123802830752516222005-08-12T09:27:00.000+10:002005-08-12T09:27:00.000+10:00NYT editorial Aug 11<A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/11/opinion/11thu1.html" REL="nofollow">NYT editorial Aug 11</A>Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1122860396213839792005-08-01T11:39:00.000+10:002005-08-01T11:39:00.000+10:00Richard Fisher's speech:"The World Economy: Sharpe...Richard Fisher's speech:<BR/><A HREF="http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/fs050729.html" REL="nofollow">"The World Economy: Sharpening Our Peripheral Vision" </A> has a insightful comparison of China and US, from his first hand experience.<BR/><BR/>also <A HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/29/AR2005072902172.html" REL="nofollow">WaPo</A> and <A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/31/business/yourmoney/31every.html" REL="nofollow">NYT </A>both ran good opinions today.Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1122532265848928002005-07-28T16:31:00.000+10:002005-07-28T16:31:00.000+10:00"China's development is an opportunity instead of ...<A HREF="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=586&e=3&u=/nm/20050727/wl_nm/china_usa_adviser_dc" REL="nofollow">"China's development is an opportunity instead of a threat to the world. That is becoming the consensus of the international community," Foreign Minster Tang said.</A><BR/><BR/>Now Tang used the word "development". Yahoo still obstensible use "rise" in its title.Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.com