Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Claire Berlinski ·
September 8, 2012 at 3:56am
Good morning, Ricochet--miss me yet?
I'm in Delhi, where I'm puzzling over the state of the world. I'd like to have a rational, polite, debate with people whose politics might best be described as center-right, conservative or libertarian. Fortunately, I know just where to find that.
Here's the proposition I'd like to debate:
This photo represents the biggest foreign policy blunder of the 20th Century.
A Ricochet glory badge will be awarded to the member who helps me to think about this in the most useful way.
- Comment (141)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (17)
Comments:
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Claire, Claire! Welcome back!
And as for the picture, well, hm. We know that Nixon's opening to China kept the Soviets nervous, off-balance, and on the defensive for the remainder of the Cold War. And some four decades later, the Soviet Union no longer exists, while China has embraced free markets. A win-win, no?
Oct '10
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
I'm struggling to see the counterfactual. No Nixon no globalisation? Really?
Jul '10
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Pseudodionysius
I was about to use the phrase "curry favor" and then stopped myself. · 1 hour ago
Thank goodness!
Apr '11
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Welcome back Claire!
It is late here in Chicago so I have not had time to read all of the comments. So I apologize if I am repeating any observations.
The question with respect to Nixon's diplomacy with China is do we think our culture is dominant and enticing enough to transform China into a liberal Occidental power? Of course the catch may well be that like the Germany of old while being western industrially, scientifically, and economically, it does not mean they will not be also belligerent, and aggressive.
So far China has become quite western from an economic stand point. Will their popular culture though come to embrace our other values through osmosis? I don't know. How committed is the Chinese Communist party to maintaining control of the culture? Right now they are very committed as witnessed by their vast censoring.
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
"You always should ask yourself, How is this going to look to the guys in camps?" They get news quicker than you think."
No kidding.
Everyone gets news about what's happening in their neighborhood and what might affect it way faster than people far away realize.
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Peter Robinson: Claire, Claire! Welcome back!
And as for the picture, well, hm. We know that Nixon's opening to China kept the Soviets nervous, off-balance, and on the defensive for the remainder of the Cold War. And some four decades later, the Soviet Union no longer exists, while China has embraced free markets. A win-win, no? · 1 hour ago
Short term, yes.
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
I'm not debating very actively because I'm too busy trying to master Sanskrit--hard to do in 24 hours, but I have a leg up because of all that chanting I wished would just go away in yoga classes!--but I'm realizing that I just don't have a sufficiently informed opinion about some really important questions.
Jul '11
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
No, not a blunder - a triumph. At least to this point.
It cleaved China completely away from the Soviet Union, which at the time, was a bigger threat to the West, and was a domino in bringing it down.
Two, we don't know where China is going yet. There's a lot of anger just under the surface, and a lot of economic problems that are being hidden, because it would be self-destructive to the careers of those in charge.
If the communist government collapses in the next few months (and it wouldn't shock me; it seems inevitable at some point), that picture will have a completely different context.
The history of that photo is still being written.
Edited on September 8, 2012 at 10:06amOct '11
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Claire Berlinski:
This photo represents the biggest foreign policy blunder of the 20th Century.
It is probably not a blunder.
As of that time Chinese went as far as it could in east Asia, by establishing its sphere of influence in North Korea and Vietnam, we could even say that China won both engagements against the US and managed to establish a secure perimeter from US encroachment.
Further Chinese adventures against Taiwan or the Australasian Archipelago would be just insane at that point because China had no Navy to speak off, also expansion against Russia or India would be too difficult. So having managed to create a breathing secure space, it was all but reasonable for the Chinese to seek a peaceful agreement with the Americans.
As for the Americans, taking the Chinese out of the pool of resources readily available for Communist subversion around the world would make sense, but the problem is that China had already reached its maximum expansion and its foreign adventures in Africa were dwarfed by Cuba. So the only strategic importance of detente would be to prevent it to help Moscow.
Or either by defeatism or greed, some powers desired to invest in PRC.
Sep '10
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Didn't China fight a war with Russian backed Vietnam after we left? l think I agree with Peter on the subject. Much will ultimately depend on how the Chinese government changes. One question I wish I had an answer for, is the current Chinese government a less repressive dictatorship today than it was under Mao? My guess is that it is but Virginia is far away. There is overt political oppression and there is oppression via socialist policy that keeps the populace in poverty.
Sep '10
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Oh duh, welcome back Claire!
Oct '11
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
It is officially known as the Defensive Counterattack against Vietnam in China ... I guess it makes sense.
If Communism never existed, we would have to invent it so Humanity could enjoy the best of naming comity madness.
Edited on September 8, 2012 at 1:47pmJun '11
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
First, welcome back Claire! Second, the realpolitik considerations -- ie, we set two traditional enemies against each other again -- remove this from the Top 10 blunder list. Finally, a sovereign China was much more likely to revert to its long-standing civilization than Russia. Russia may have had plenty of culture, but barely any civilization (but a corresponding inferiority complex).IMO, this distinction is why we were more likely to get positive results from detente with the Chinese. Our current rivalry with China is exactly that: a normal rivalry with a rational great power. I don't believe we'll have that with the Russians for a long while.
Sep '10
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
I'm having trouble working a Led Zeppelin reference in to this thread.
Aug '10
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Claire Berlinski
Peter Robinson: Claire, Claire! Welcome back!
And as for the picture, well, hm. We know that Nixon's opening to China kept the Soviets nervous, off-balance, and on the defensive for the remainder of the Cold War. And some four decades later, the Soviet Union no longer exists, while China has embraced free markets. A win-win, no? · 1 hour ago
Short term, yes. · 5 hours ago
Claire, the term is is over 40 years - not short by any standard and much more affected by by intervening decisions than the single one 40 years ago.
Mar '11
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Of course Claire has to return (hooray!) during a weekend when I'm at sea and don't have the time to reply properly on the topic at hand. :(
Seems to me the question Claire ends with is how to think about a foreign policy decision like this. That doesn't require us to affirm or deny the proposition in bold, and is itself a very good question. Off the cuff thoughts:
Mar '11
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Feel free to add your own....
Jun '12
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
You cannot shake hands with Evil, it will always come back to bite you.
May '10
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Missed you Claire
Jun '12
Re: Weekend Debate: Nixon, China
Claire Berlinski
Peter Robinson: Claire, Claire! Welcome back!
And as for the picture, well, hm. We know that Nixon's opening to China kept the Soviets nervous, off-balance, and on the defensive for the remainder of the Cold War. And some four decades later, the Soviet Union no longer exists, while China has embraced free markets. A win-win, no? · 1 hour ago
Short term, yes. · 6 hours ago
I agree with Claire. Majority of the Chinese population are still suffering. The prosperity benefits first the Chinese Communist Party, their cronies, a middle class of Shanghai, Beijing and a few other bigger cities. But the rest of the country is still suffering. Corruption is out of control and a younger generation brainwashed to believe a mutant form of Communism-Secular Materialism is more powerful than democracy. If this handshake never happened, Communism in China would have crumbled like Russia. Personally, I would rather die in hunger than to be forced to abort my babies or send my daughter to become a prostitute in the city so she can survive.