NEWS Is the pivot to China a bunch of bullshit?

[ChuckMK23]

The IR/Geopolitical expert Peter Ziehan, who routinely speaks at NPGS, NWS, Harvard Kennedy School, etc. Speaking at the Mexico Economic Forum recently - hypothesis that China is on the brink of economic, military, and societal collapse.

Was our strategic pivot to China as "the real fight" a huge mistake? Did the US IR community just get it wrong given that CENTCOM has again become the center of US military strategy in the last 6 months.

Do watch, and share your own reactions.

 

[Flash]

Is the pivot to China a bunch of bullshit?​

Was our strategic pivot to China as "the real fight" a huge mistake? Did the US IR community just get it wrong given that CENTCOM has again become the center of US military strategy in the last 6 months.

No.

Why? China is a very real and growing threat, and I think the next 5-10 years will be critical in our relationship with them and how we respond the threat. They, along with Russia, represent an existential threat to our country while the Middle East is not. It is true that China is facing some very serious internal challenges but I would not dismiss the very serious threat they represent now and will do so in the shorter term to us and their neighbors.

 

[taxi1]

...facing some very serious internal challenges

Sometimes those folks are the most dangerous.

 

[Griz882]

I concur with @Flash. China is a threat especially now that their economy is facing serious consequences. The best way to hold on to power is blame someone else for your problems and start a war.

 

[kejo]

I love reading his stuff and find it extremely interesting, but where I disagree with him is how he generally analyses cause and effect scenarios (socio-economic, population decline, etc) through the lens of rational actors making decisions. No matter what’s causing the crisis, never ignore an autocrat’s capacity to do something completely stupid.

 

[Fallonflyr]

That dude is a good talker…he must have a large $$s hole.

 

[Uncle Fester]

I love reading his stuff and find it extremely interesting, but where I disagree with him is how he generally analyses cause and effect scenarios (socio-economic, population decline, etc) through the lens of rational actors making decisions. No matter what’s causing the crisis, never ignore an autocrat’s capacity to do something completely stupid.

It's also part of Autocrat 101 to start a war - or at least generate a crisis - when you're facing a lot of internal problems to which you don't have solutions.

I would point out first that you don't make your name in academia by agreeing with the general consensus. Make big predictions like this, you get attention and engagement within and outside your professional circle. If you're wrong, easy enough to say that what you said didn't come true, it was because X or Y changed. If you're right, you've made your career.

The idea that a "economic, military, and societal collapse" of the PRC somehow wouldn't create the geopolitical equivalent of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs is...well, wishful thinking. If that were to happen (I seriously doubt it will) then our need to be engaged in the western Pacific is greater, not lesser, because it's going to be an absolute mess. The most likely result of such a collapse would be the country backsliding into warlordism, China's normal mode of government for most of its history, which is always fun when you've got an enormous army and a nuclear arsenal.

 

[Mirage]

It's also part of Autocrat 101 to start a war - or at least generate a crisis - when you're facing a lot of internal problems to which you don't have solutions.

I would point out first that you don't make your name in academia by agreeing with the general consensus. Make big predictions like this, you get attention and engagement within and outside your professional circle. If you're wrong, easy enough to say that what you said didn't come true, it was because X or Y changed. If you're right, you've made your career.

The idea that a "economic, military, and societal collapse" of the PRC somehow wouldn't create the geopolitical equivalent of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs is...well, wishful thinking. If that were to happen (I seriously doubt it will) then our need to be engaged in the western Pacific is greater, not lesser, because it's going to be an absolute mess. The most likely result of such a collapse would be the country backsliding into warlordism, China's normal mode of government for most of its history, which is always fun when you've got an enormous army and a nuclear arsenal.

I agree with most of this, but a couple counter points to play the devil's advocate.

Regarding the first bolded bit above, autocrats in history do not have a track record of starting wars with near peer competitors as a way out. They have (as far as the examples I can think of) traditionally picked on the little guys. IE, Hussein vs Kuwait, Putin vs Ukraine, Hitler vs Jews (and weak Euro neighbors), etc. Are there any examples that should make us fear China attacking us?

As for the second bolded bit, the only example I can think of that is similar to what Ziehan is suggesting might happen in China is the fall of the USSR. Before that happened, everyone also agreed with you that it would be catastrophic, yet they were all pleasantly surprised.

That said, I agree that China should remain our focus. The middle east is no existential threat, and as far as attaining our desired end states over there, I think time has proven our actions do as much harm as good. Meanwhile, Russia has proven to be a joke backed up by nukes, so our military is completely unnecessary in Europe. Focused on China is exactly where it should be, no matter what may come there.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Regarding the first bolded bit above, autocrats in history do not have a track record of starting wars with near peer competitors as a way out. They have (as far as the examples I can think of) traditionally picked on the little guys. IE, Hussein vs Kuwait, Putin vs Ukraine, Hitler vs Jews (and weak Euro neighbors), etc. Are there any examples that should make us fear China attacking us?

As for the second bolded bit, the only example I can think of that is similar to what Ziehan is suggesting might happen in China is the fall of the USSR. Before that happened, everyone also agreed with you that it would be catastrophic, yet they were all pleasantly surprised.

Starting a war with the US? No. Picking a fight with the PI over SCS islands or blockading Taiwan? Maybe. The biggest question for Xi is how the US would react to a kinetic fight against one or the other. A non-kinetic but strongly aggressive move that forces us to react somehow should tell them a lot without necessarily kicking off a shooting war.

The USSR wasn’t nearly the major player in the world economy in 1991 that China is today, and the GHW Bush admin did a lot of very good diplomatic and pol-mil work behind the scenes - much more than they’ve been given credit for - trying to at least make it a survivable crash-landing. In other words, it wasn’t as bad as it could have been because a lot of talented people helped make it so, not because it was never going to be bad to begin with.

Anyway, I dont expect China to collapse as this fellow is predicting. But I do think that a combination of a lot of factors, like collapsing birth rate, could very possibly throw the brakes on hard on the next 10-ish years. Like the economists say: anything that can’t go on forever - won‘t.

 

[Hotdogs]

That dude is a good talker…he must have a large $$s hole.

What makes you say that? His books are fairly informative and put a lot of context on how we got here today (Starting with references back to the ancient Egyptians, Ottomans, and British Empire). They are also on people’s short list/quick reads for a lot of advanced PME (Along with Tim Marshall’s material). Predictions aside, he’s been fairly accurate with regards to China for a couple years, but again it’s a complete coin toss on how individual actors react to internal and external forces. It’s very hard to predict personalities.

 

[Mos]

I always got the impression from Zeihan that China was dangerous precisely because of their increasingly bleak situation.

 

[Spekkio]

It's also part of Autocrat 101 to start a war - or at least generate a crisis - when you're facing a lot of internal problems to which you don't have solutions.

Our national security strategy and economic policies toward China starting in 2017 are also pushing them that way.

We've kind of reached the point of no return that won't change until Xi Jinping is no longer in charge.

 

[Brett327]

Kind of a chicken vs egg problem.

 

[taxi1]

Are there any examples…

Argentina in The Falklands?

 

[Griz882]

When people think about China collapsing they tend to frame it through a lens of western development. Thinking in very broad numbers, it took America (colonies to country) about 200 years to shift from agrarian to industrial and another 100 to shift from industrial to administrative thereby creating a lasting and tested “middle class.” China, as in little “c” communist China realized that the only way to compete in the modern world was to engage the modern world and to do that you need a stable middle class: and that depends on a rather capitalist flow of goods and money to function. What Ziehan is predicting isn’t the end of China as a nation, but the internal impact of the collapse of the Chinese middle class. The problem for China comes if and when this newly empowered middle class turn against the status quo leaving us wondering what “China Next” will be. Will the communists turn their army on the people? Will the army agree? Will the middle class push the communists out of power in the central government (as in Russia)? Will China become a new frontier of criminalism (like Russia) or be picked over by greedy regional powers (like the end of the Qing dynasty[which most of you can relate to via the Boxer Rebellion])?

China won’t go away, there will be certainly be a China in 50 or even 100 years…but the real worry is - at what cost? Too weak and China becomes dangerous. If Xi grows more desperate China becomes dangerous. In any case, China’s belt and road system will fail, the military will weaken and become insular. All of that, of course, leads to a reordering of the world order and all the dangers that entails.