Who is the Greater Threat: Russia or China ?

 

In Europe, we also have had the ‘pleasure’ of hearing about President Trump’s two-hour meeting with Putin, and the subsequent press conference.  We have also heard about his advice to UK Prime Minister Theresa May to “just sue the EU,” and that garnered a few laughs, especially here in Switzerland.  We have our own problems with the European Union.

But, here is my humble question: Shouldn’t China’s behavior be getting more of the media’s attention than Russia?

If you start to look at some of the information made public from only the last twelve months or so, then you can only come to one conclusion:  The number of serious challenges to Western Civilization and its democratic allies is probably a hundred times greater from the People’s Republic of China than from Russia.

Take a piece of paper, and quickly jot down current issues dealing with China.  No doubt you will list “huge trade imbalance” near the top.  Keep writing.  Personally, after about fifteen minutes, I came to this conclusion: The trade imbalance is a mere manifestation of a very large number of issues and causes.  China has destroyed much of our industrial base and is now eating our lunch.

Consider just these points, and they are by no means exhaustive:

  • The original assumption in allowing China into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001 was that it would lead to their smooth and peaceful integration into the global trading system, and thereby cause their democratization.  False assumption.  Also false: the assumption they would follow WTO rules, e.g., about currency manipulation and worker human rights. In fact, China is in violation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) rules.
  • The Chinese population is sealed off from the rest of the Internet by a censorship apparatus that is the most sophisticated the world has ever seen. About 800 million Internet users are in China, except they really are using more of a China Intranet.
  • Facial recognition technology is becoming a key method to control who is meeting with whom, where and when in China.  These are communists.  Remember?
  • Technologies, both military and civilian, of our latest aircraft, shipping and communications systems have been and are continuously compromised and used to shorten the time for the Chinese to build the same equipment faster and at far less cost.  The fact that the US has 300,000 Chinese students in the USA, many earning technology degrees and then going to work for large US firms, is very likely a contributor to the problem.
  • Take a look at the artificial islands China has built in the South China Sea, in spite of the International Court of Justice ruling in July 2016; now these seven islands are armed with surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles and the Chinese have declared others must seek their permission to fly near the islands.   All of this is in violation of international law.
  • China’s “New Silk Road” will become an advanced mercantile system of Chinese-controlled roads and seaports between China and Europe, the Americas and Africa…all to make the future purchase of Chinese manufactured goods ever more advantageous than those from other industrialized countries.
  • China is the largest manufacturer in the world of synthetic opioids, like several versions of fentanyl.  These chemicals have killed about 64,000 Americans in 2017 resulting from 142,000 overdoses.  Most come through the mail from China and pass over the US-Mexican border.  Should this be considered an Act of War?
  • Chinese prisoners are producing goods exported to the USA and Europe: their use of slave labor is highly problematic.
  • Chinese citizens, working, living and marrying in factories, including with their children who go to factory schools, produce many of the common household articles you buy every day.  Example: Eüpa Factory City in Shenzhen.
  • Human organ harvesting appears alive and well in China.  Prisoners are often involved.
  • China has a number of ways it secretly supports North Korea, including factories in China across “Sino-Korean Friendship Bridge” from Sinuiju.  North Korean workers make products, e.g., for the NFL, stamped “Made in China”.

So now, look at what Russia is engaged in:  Meddling in US and others’ elections, including spreading disinformation via social media.  Bad, and it must be countered, perhaps in kind until Vladimir gets the point.  Then there is the Crimea and issues with Ukraine.  There is a potential threat, as yet unrealized, to the Baltic states.

But, who is a greater short and long-term threat to our Western civilization and our allies:  China or Russia?

Published in Foreign Policy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 57 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Spin (View Comment):

    I don’t think China want a war, not in the traditional sense. They make too much money off us Americans and they aren’t about to disrupt that. Having said that, they are now, and have been for some time, engaged in an economic war, trying and succeeding at stealing our technology.

    I see Russia and China as equal but different “threats”.

    That the Chinese are so economically dependent on the US (and many other Western countries) keeps me from getting too worried about their threat potential. On the other hand, if the Chinese convince enough useful idiots like NYTimes columnist Tom Friedman and academic know-nothings that a centralized command and control world is a good idea, China may be able to take over in practice without the formalities of going to war.

    Russia is a risk in that it has little to lose by becoming overtly aggressive. On the other hand, my understanding that its internal economy is a mess leaves me doubting that Russia could maintain enough of an external aggressive campaign to have much long term effect.

    Actually China has become much less dependent on the US over the past decade.  Their exports to the rest of Asia now dwarf exports to the US (and, for that matter, are now greater than to the US + Europe).  And, as to Europe, the EU, in response to Trump’s tariff war on it, has just negotiated a closer trade agreement with China.

    • #31
  2. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Zafar (View Comment):

    CB Toder aka Mama Toad (View Comment):

    Fantastic post. Thank you.

    Also the ChiComs have nukes.

    Also they are extending their influence all over the world, throughout the Pacific and Africa especially.

    I upset my graduate student nephew a lot this summer when I mentioned that one should expect all Chinese students studying in this country with the permission of the PRC to be expected to spy for the PRC, or they wouldn’t be allowed to be here. He was very upset and defended his Chinese national friend, and I let it go pretty quickly because I didn’t want to cause distress at a family thing.

    I’m sure the PRC would like to have 350,000 spies in the US and however many thousands more in Australia, Canada etc. but I just don’t see them being able to pull it off. Even just training 350k spies to send to grad school doesn’t seem feasible?

    I, of course, profess no real knowledge of the situation but would assume that, by their own definition of spy and their own not-to-be-shared accounting of the actual staffing levels, 350K would be a substantial cut to current levels.  But I could be wrong…

    • #32
  3. Arnold Falk Inactive
    Arnold Falk
    @acfalk

    Steve C. (View Comment):

    In the cold light of day, Russia is a problem for Europe. In theory, the EU has the resources to oppose Russia. In practice they don’t appear to have the will. Sadly, it seems to fall to the US to support the countries in Eastern Europe who should, in theory again, benefit from membership in the EU.

    In Asia the Chinese threat is serious because while Japan, Taiwan and South Korea are important economic powers, their combined military forces are relatively small. And more importantly, not organized into a military alliance. Plus we are the only ones with the trump card of nuclear weapons. (Britain and France have independent nuclear forces.)

    This is not an either or situation. It’s a question of priorities and resources. If I look closely enough I can see the outlines of a Trump strategic policy.

    Force the Europeans to create and resource a strategy to manage relations with Russia while maintaining US involvement through NATO.

    Confront Chinese adventurism indirectly through economic actions. Maintain a strong US naval presence to reinforce the idea of free navigation and reassure our regional allies.

    Reduce the importance of the Middle East by increasing the free world supply of energy resources.

    It is, to put a name on it, a foreign policy strategy for the 21st Century.

     

    • #33
  4. Arnold Falk Inactive
    Arnold Falk
    @acfalk

    Arnold Falk (View Comment):

    Steve C. (View Comment):

    “If I look closely enough I can see the outlines of a Trump strategic policy.

    Force the Europeans to create and resource a strategy to manage relations with Russia while maintaining US involvement through NATO.

    Confront Chinese adventurism indirectly through economic actions. Maintain a strong US naval presence to reinforce the idea of free navigation and reassure our regional allies.

    Reduce the importance of the Middle East by increasing the free world supply of energy resources.

    It is, to put a name on it, a foreign policy strategy for the 21st Century.”

     

    I think you have it exactly right.  The only thing I would add is that it appears that Trump wants to make Russia 90% Europe’s problem so that the US can concentrate on the Pacific to bolster those allies’ wills and common defenses, which appear far weaker than even those of underfunded NATO in Europe.  The most dangerous aspect of China: The New Silk Road, both by land and sea.  Everything that they do fits into the scenario of dominating the commercial world, using their military to protect those routes.  The South China Sea episode is right in the middle of their strategy.

     

    • #34
  5. DonG Coolidge
    DonG
    @DonG

    Russia wants to be a superpower.  China wants to be the superpower.

    • #35
  6. Simon Templar Member
    Simon Templar
    @

    CB Toder aka Mama Toad (View Comment):

    Trafficking of women from neighboring countries into China for marriage within the context of gender imbalance

    Could not open your link but I know from personal experience that this is happening.  Also have heard that many of the women (girls really) who eventually escape these “marriages” are used as little more than “baby ovens” and domestic slaves.  I’m led to believe that the majority of the women who return to the countries of their birth are crushed by the fact that they had to leave their children in China.

    Don’t hear the feminists talking much about this either.

    • #36
  7. CB Toder aka Mama Toad Member
    CB Toder aka Mama Toad
    @CBToderakaMamaToad

    Simon Templar (View Comment):
    Could not open your link but I know from personal experience that this is happening.

    So sorry. It appears to be working for me. It is a pdf of a scholarly paper, written by:

    Quanbao Jiang, Institute for Population and Development Studies, Xi’an Jiaotong University (China) Ying Li, Institute for Population and Development Studies, Xi’an Jiaotong University (China) Jesús J. Sánchez-Barricarte, Carlos III University of Madrid (Spain) This work is jointly supported by the Project of National Social Science Foundation of China, and the 985-3 Project of Xi’an Jiaotong University. This work has been also supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation.  

    • #37
  8. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Spin (View Comment):

    I don’t think China want a war, not in the traditional sense. They make too much money off us Americans and they aren’t about to disrupt that. Having said that, they are now, and have been for some time, engaged in an economic war, trying and succeeding at stealing our technology.

    I see Russia and China as equal but different “threats”.

    Why would China want or care about money in the long term? They’re communists. Isn’t it enough to acquire the means of production, the best technology, and to cripple any competition (preferably just by the capitalist running dogs being themselves and eating their own seed)?

    • #38
  9. David Foster Member
    David Foster
    @DavidFoster

    China is devoting considerable efforts–largely successful efforts–to influence the content of American movies and the politically-related behavior of American corporations.  I wrote about this subject here:

    So, Really Want to Talk About Foreign Intervention?

    • #39
  10. cirby Inactive
    cirby
    @cirby

    Spin (View Comment):
    I don’t think China want a war, not in the traditional sense. They make too much money off us Americans and they aren’t about to disrupt that.

    Germany’s biggest trading partner in 1914: France.

    Germany’s biggest trading partner in 1939: France.

    Japan got most of their iron and steel and 80% of their oil from the US before WWII.

    “Making too much money” has seldom been a deterrent, especially if the aggressive country decides that they can get a better deal by owning the resource in question.

    • #40
  11. David Foster Member
    David Foster
    @DavidFoster

    Ed G. (View Comment):
    Why would China want or care about money in the long term? They’re communists.

    But they’re not, really, whatever they call themselves.  Their actual economic system is Corporatism or Economic Fascism.

    • #41
  12. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    David Foster (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):
    Why would China want or care about money in the long term? They’re communists.

    But they’re not, really, whatever they call themselves. Their actual economic system is Corporatism or Economic Fascism.

    Could be. I don’t think it changes my point that they don’t need our money. They need the means of production, the knowledge, the capital, the resources, the access. They don’t need consumers hanging on.

    • #42
  13. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    David Foster (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):
    Why would China want or care about money in the long term? They’re communists.

    But they’re not, really, whatever they call themselves. Their actual economic system is Corporatism or Economic Fascism.

    Could be. I don’t think it changes my point that they don’t need our money. They need the means of production, the knowledge, the capital, the resources, the access. They don’t need consumers hanging on.

    They do.  Continuing the remarkable economic growth and explosion of the Chinese middle class of the past 30 years is important to maintaining their legitimacy.  Thinking about this as Soviet style communism or anything related to actual Marxist theory takes you in a wrong direction in analyzing the situation.

    • #43
  14. barbara lydick Inactive
    barbara lydick
    @barbaralydick

    The number of Chinese nationals in the US is only going to increase.  My good friends in Irvine, CA, live in a very nice neighborhood and at least 3 of the homes  in just their small neighborhood are places where Chinese mothers come to bear children – at the expense of our tax dollars by the way.  There are many, many more such homes throughout CA, each one housing at least 10-15 expectant mothers.  This goes on, no doubt, in other states as well.  Friends who are nurses find these women to be very difficult, rudely demanding this, demanding that.

    The children of course have US citizenship status and therefore have access to welfare benefits, etc.  They do return to China and when the kids are old enough, they return to go to college here (at in-state rates as they have addresses set up for them).  After the kids are established, then because of chain migration laws, the rest of the family follows.

    Multiply these homes across the country and the potential number of Chinese here in the US will begin to increase exponentially. 

    My friends and their neighbors have reported these goings on to no avail.  CA officials (in whatever sector of gov’t) don’t seem to care, or more troubling, are abetting those who have come here to bear children.

    One needs to question what the Chinese government’s end game really is in this instance.  We know that obtaining a passport and travel visa does not go unnoticed by Chinese officials…

    • #44
  15. David Foster Member
    David Foster
    @DavidFoster

    One major reason for the media focus on Russia as opposed to China is that it fits the political interests (at the moment) of the Democratic Party and its media supporter…note that there has been far less interest in Russian attempts to manipulate opinion concerning fracking and GMOs, as discussed in one of the links to the blog post I linked a couple of comments up.

    Another reason, though, is the nature of the kind of people who tend to work for the news media.  They have a strong propensity to want to talk about whatever all the others of their kind are already talking about,

    • #45
  16. Simon Templar Member
    Simon Templar
    @

    barbara lydick (View Comment):

    The number of Chinese nationals in the US is only going to increase. My good friends in Irvine, CA, live in a very nice neighborhood and at least 3 of the homes in just their small neighborhood are places where Chinese mothers come to bear children – at the expense of our tax dollars by the way. There are many, many more such homes throughout CA, each one housing at least 10-15 expectant mothers. This goes on, no doubt, in other states as well. Friends who are nurses find these women to be very difficult, rudely demanding this, demanding that.

    The children of course have US citizenship status and therefore have access to welfare benefits, etc. They do return to China and when the kids are old enough, they return to go to college here (at in-state rates as they have addresses set up for them). After the kids are established, then because of chain migration laws, the rest of the family follows.

    Multiply these homes across the country and the potential number of Chinese here in the US will begin to increase exponentially.

    My friends and their neighbors have reported these goings on to no avail. CA officials (in whatever sector of gov’t) don’t seem to care, or more troubling, are abetting those who have come here to bear children.

    One needs to question what the Chinese government’s end game really is in this instance. We know that obtaining a passport and travel visa does not go unnoticed by Chinese officials…

    Yep, and not only the Chinese.  I think that the ‘anchor baby’ is a threat to our national security.  I know that many (Ricochet members) – probably most people do not.

    • #46
  17. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    barbara lydick (View Comment):

    The number of Chinese nationals in the US is only going to increase. My good friends in Irvine, CA, live in a very nice neighborhood and at least 3 of the homes in just their small neighborhood are places where Chinese mothers come to bear children – at the expense of our tax dollars by the way. There are many, many more such homes throughout CA, each one housing at least 10-15 expectant mothers. This goes on, no doubt, in other states as well. Friends who are nurses find these women to be very difficult, rudely demanding this, demanding that.

    The children of course have US citizenship status and therefore have access to welfare benefits, etc. They do return to China and when the kids are old enough, they return to go to college here (at in-state rates as they have addresses set up for them). After the kids are established, then because of chain migration laws, the rest of the family follows.

    Multiply these homes across the country and the potential number of Chinese here in the US will begin to increase exponentially.

    My friends and their neighbors have reported these goings on to no avail. CA officials (in whatever sector of gov’t) don’t seem to care, or more troubling, are abetting those who have come here to bear children.

    One needs to question what the Chinese government’s end game really is in this instance. We know that obtaining a passport and travel visa does not go unnoticed by Chinese officials…

    There is an alternative explanation.  Many middle and upper class Chinese are worried about the direction of that country’s government, and concerned about society stability, and are trying to protect their families and well-being for the long term.  Many are preparing escape routes, whether by the route you mention or by directly seeking citizenship elsewhere.  The US is not the only country seeing this phenomenon.

    • #47
  18. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    David Foster (View Comment):

    One major reason for the media focus on Russia as opposed to China is that it fits the political interests (at the moment) of the Democratic Party and its media supporter…note that there has been far less interest in Russian attempts to manipulate opinion concerning fracking and GMOs, as discussed in one of the links to the blog post I linked a couple of comments up.

     

    It’s telling that the same January 2017 intelligence analysis that started the furor over alleged Russian election interference in favor of Trump also stated, without equivocation, that the Kremlin supported anti-fracking movements in the U.S., as well as Occupy Wall Street.  I never saw any media coverage of the latter points.

    • #48
  19. barbara lydick Inactive
    barbara lydick
    @barbaralydick

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    There is an alternative explanation. Many middle and upper class Chinese are worried about the direction of that country’s government, and concerned about society stability, and are trying to protect their families and well-being for the long term. Many are preparing escape routes, whether by the route you mention or by directly seeking citizenship elsewhere. The US is not the only country seeing this phenomenon.

    This of course is possible.  But how are these people obtaining passports and visas without the knowledge of Chinese officials?  Why would the gov’t let them do this if their reasons are gov’t direction and society stability.  Certainly the gov’t doesn’t want to advertise problems.

    • #49
  20. Simon Templar Member
    Simon Templar
    @

    My impression is that the ‘middle class’ in China is not growing at a rate anywhere near like one would expect.

    • #50
  21. Simon Templar Member
    Simon Templar
    @

    barbara lydick (View Comment):
    Friends who are nurses find these women to be very difficult, rudely demanding this, demanding that.

    Am not in the least bit surprised.  At he risk of being called racist (again), I find the Chinese to be simply the most rude people on Earth.  Perhaps it has something to do with their society or that not enough men there are getting ‘any action.’

    • #51
  22. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    barbara lydick (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    There is an alternative explanation. Many middle and upper class Chinese are worried about the direction of that country’s government, and concerned about society stability, and are trying to protect their families and well-being for the long term. Many are preparing escape routes, whether by the route you mention or by directly seeking citizenship elsewhere. The US is not the only country seeing this phenomenon.

    This of course is possible. But how are these people obtaining passports and visas without the knowledge of Chinese officials? Why would the gov’t let them do this if their reasons are gov’t direction and society stability. Certainly the gov’t doesn’t want to advertise problems.

    I’m not speculating about this being in the reason, at least in some cases – I have direct knowledge.  They already have passports and the visas they need are from the countries they are going to.  There are many possible explanations, including the government seeing this as a safety valve, or a way to get rid of troublesome people.  Unlike the old Soviet Union, it is comparatively easy for Chinese citizens to travel abroad.  However, it would not surprise me to eventually see the Chinese government try to step in an interfere with this giving Xi’s increasingly authoritarian bent. 

    • #52
  23. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    Simon Templar (View Comment):

    My impression is that the ‘middle class’ in China is not growing at a rate anywhere near like one would expect.

    I’m not sure what one would expect, but the improvement in material well-being for hundreds of millions between the 1980s and today is dramatic.  However, the sheer numbers involved, along with the demographic time bomb (the average age China’s population is rapidly getting older because of the one-child policy) makes it impossible to predict future trends.

    • #53
  24. Simon Templar Member
    Simon Templar
    @

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):

    Simon Templar (View Comment):

    My impression is that the ‘middle class’ in China is not growing at a rate anywhere near like one would expect.

    I’m not sure what one would expect, but the improvement in material well-being for hundreds of millions between the 1980s and today is dramatic. However, the sheer numbers involved, along with the demographic time bomb (the average age China’s population is rapidly getting older because of the one-child policy) makes it impossible to predict future trends.

    I would expect a bigger ‘bulge’ in the middle but (obviously) I am not a college educated economist.

    • #54
  25. Simon Templar Member
    Simon Templar
    @

    I have read that ~30 million Chinese are living in caves.  The wealth does not seem to ‘trickle’ there like it does in the US.

    Those 30 million could become a problem for the Chinese leadership at some point.  I’m hoping and betting that it will.

    Nevertheless, in the long run China is the greater threat.

    • #55
  26. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    cirby (View Comment):

    The problem isn’t “could China start a war with the US?”

    The problem is “could China start a war with the US in the Pacific, while Russia starts their own war with Europe, and the Islamic countries start fighting everyone else?”

    Admittedly, the biggest single threat to Russia is that China might decide to go north and take Siberia (for the resources there) – but if China’s going to be fighting the US and the rest of the nations in the Pacific, it would free up a lot of Russian power to look west.

    One of the smartest things we could do would be to ramp up the Russia vs China paranoia, so China won’t get a free pass in that regard.

    Our biggest long-term aim is to keep China stalled until their old-age demographic bomb hits in the next decade or so, and their surplus of males gets old enough to want stability instead of war.

    My neighbor’s son is majoring in Chinese and traveled there this year. I mentioned what do they think of the Chinese premier appointing himself ‘leader for life’?  A huge deal – he said the older people are scared, and the young people are very angry.  I feel like history is getting ready to repeat in many areas of the world….

     

    • #56
  27. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    David Foster (View Comment):

    China is devoting considerable efforts–largely successful efforts–to influence the content of American movies and the politically-related behavior of American corporations. I wrote about this subject here:

    So, Really Want to Talk About Foreign Intervention?

    Does that explain the crappy movies being made today??

    • #57
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.