It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2008: The year a new superpower is born

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 03:45 AM
link   

2008: The year a new superpower is born


news.independent.co.uk

Here comes the world's newest superpower. The rest of the world is gloomily contemplating economic slowdown and even recession. Not in Beijing. China is set to make 2008 the year it asserts its status as a global colossus by flexing frightening economic muscle on international markets, enjoying unprecedented levels of domestic consumption and showcasing itself to a watching world with a glittering £20bn Olympic Games.

The world's most populous nation will mark the next 12 months with a coming-of-age party that will confirm its transformation in three decades from one of the poorest countries of the 20th century into the globe's third-largest economy, its hungriest (and most polluting) consumer and the engine room of economic growth.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 03:45 AM
link   
First off, it would mean so much to me if this thread isn't trashed by childish comments about China and so called "economic" articles from WorldNutdaily. Blind patriotism is NOT welcomed in this thread.

Now, of course China won't become an offical superpower for at least 20 years, but in 2008 (this year) it will be the start.

The Chinese will start to flex power.

news.independent.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 04:28 AM
link   
hrmmm, China is going to be the place to watch hey... It will be interesting to see how everything turns out.

-fm



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Indeed, China excelled last year, and will blossum this year, especially with western economies faltering.

My worry is, will China abuse this power, and implement its strength through military or even physical force?

Tawiann comes to mind.

A nuclear bomb here or there would 'assist' china in depopulation.
No one would dare nuke beijjing.. but a smaller city?

2008 is going to be scary, not because of war, not because of the economy.. but because the world is going to change.

As much as I destest the American government.. I admire American leadership this past few decades.

You learn the reality of what youve lost when its gone, and I miss the Old America already.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 05:31 AM
link   
The olympic games this summer will be there very own showcase - of china in the 21st century and will probably be an eyeopener to most of the sheeple in the world - the question will be though , how will the likes of fox spin this? they`ve been trying to down trod china for the last few years.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 05:35 AM
link   
My thoughts too

There is no question of them being on the rise, and some day becoming a super power, but as mentioned... will they become a bigger threat?

Of course they will. They always have been in the back of everyone's minds, but with more wealth coming to an already over-populated country can only mean more property is required.

Unfortunately, Taiwan seems like an likely target in the not so distant future. My worries are for the upcoming targets in the coming years.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 06:36 AM
link   
Interesting article. A couple of points to make. One is that being an economic super power and having the olympics does not make China a threat to anything much. The reality is that there are several world economic superpowers, China is one, the US is another, the loose conglomeration of states that calls itself Europe is another. None of them "threaten" each other.

China's biggest threat is not to the US but to its own people. Its Human Rights record is generally perceived to be appalling. I won't start a debate on them here - but suffice to say that a simple google of China Human Rights ought to give you sufficient information to take your breath away. In practical terms the US has its status on the world stage to a large extent as a consequence of its supposed moral authority - ie, it can lead the way in international policy because it has a philanthropic history - at least since World War 2. Soviet power crumbled partly as a result of the absence of such history.

A large part of the debate over American (and British) foreign policy since the 60s ought really to centre around the idiocy of throwing that moral authority and sense of moral purpose away on pointless campaigns that benefitted the US so little. That the US still has the moral high ground on China and Russia says as much about Chinese and Russian inadequacy as it does American (or British) "superiority".

Put in simple terms, if it had been Russia or China that chose to invade Iraq without the mandate of the UN, it simply wouldn't have been able to. International pressure on such an invasion would not have come in the form of relatively mild diplomatic protest, it would have meant trade sanctions, economic threats and probably big guns pointed at the Kremlin. Any super power's actual power can reasonably be measured by its ability to wage illegal wars without a great deal by way of self-damaging consequences...


Grailkeeper, I'm not sure if I misinterpret what you say, but any suggestion that Taiwan is a target because of needing somewhere to colonise to facilitate a growing population is farcical. You may as well suggest that Britain's interest in the Falkland Islands was down to concerns about over-population. Taiwanese sovereignty is debated because of political confusion and idiocy, not territorial expediency.

LW



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 07:04 AM
link   
So to achieve peace,
USA and China should collaborate to stop the trouble maker--Taiwan
from implementing their evil ambition to split China.

[edit on 2-1-2008 by gs001]


apc

posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Considering China has been hiding backstage for a couple thousand years, it will be interesting to see how they handle being a main character in the global theater. I wonder if they'll forget their lines.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
It is unlikely that China will reach superpower status by 2008. They must accomplish things such as this:

1. Have an economy near the size of the US economy.
2. Create original consumer brands that are household names everywhere in the world
3. Have a military capable of waging wars anywhere in the globe.
4. Have major universities that are household names, that many of the worlds top students aspire to attend.
5. Attract the best and brightest to immigrate into China, where they can expect to live a good life in Chinese society.
6. Be the leader in entertainment and culture.
7. Be the nation expected to thanklessly use its own resources to solve many of the world's problems.
8. Adapt to the under-appreciated burden of superpowerdom - the huge double standards that a benign superpower must withstand in that role.

These things have to happen to become a true Superpower in the world today. The chances of China accomplishing this in 2008...impossible.

[edit on 2-1-2008 by CaptGizmo]



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 08:51 AM
link   
I had a friend who did a lot of work for Lockheed back in Hong-Kong during the 80's tell me in no uncertain terms: China's economic accent will make the US's rise during the industrial revolution look like a temporary summer job in comparison. I didn't believe him at the time (about 15 years ago) but since 2001 his predictions for China have been obviously dead-on.

Why is that a problem? One must understand that, in a world of limited resources, every country competes with every other at all times. With a similar level of technology a country with 400 million people could NEVER hope to compete globally with a country of a cool billion people.

Let that sink in for a second.

Any idiot can figure out how to make one bomb. It is the guy who can mass produce them that wins the war. Just look at WWII.

Where will the US make all bomb she needs? The polluting chemical plants that make explosive precursors have all moved to Mexico or China. For the US to compete militarily with China, the US would have to rebuild the necessary infrastructure and all China has to do is re-task their already existing infrastructure.

What keeps China technologically inferior to us? Right now the only thing is our head-start. For those of you that think a head-start is all you need, consider that Europe had a multi-century head-start over the colonies and we all know how that ended up. Head-starts cost vast sums of money and manpower to maintain. Where is the US currently spending to ensure their technological dominance? Google? LOL.

What do we do about this? My friend's only suggestion was to shift our eggs from the Chinese basket into the India basket. It is pure numbers. We need an ally with geographic proximity to China that is culturally distinct with a history of separate governments and a roughly equivalent population. Just moving our focus from China elsewhere should reduce some %-age of its growth.

Jon



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 09:13 AM
link   
there is a more important Bloc of 4 economies coming together

they are 'BRIC' which encompases "Brazil-Russia-India-China"


China will hold back on their wealth bludgeon until after the August Olympiad... a goodly portion of their U.S. treasury hoildings will be
diverted into Soverign Wealth Funds as they buy up U.S. banks etc

china will also strut their newly found space prowess, both in lunar
mapping etc And their satellite killing technology after those Olympics are over.
A Taiwan crisis will follow the show of technological and monetary power they hold.

china will flood the gold coin & medallion market with +500,000,000
olympic gold-coins & gold-medallion, seeking to capitalize on the falling USD....if your buying gold into the olympic runup you should have waited
till after the olympic issue gold coin market frenzy for investing.



but China is being strategically countered with the developing Pakistan
issue where the US Forces are going to enter the country long term to 'stabilize' the nuclear forces in that nation--- which is considered by USA strategists as a containment-of-China nation


China, in my view, can be seen as a giant dragon, yes indeed !

....but a dragon which is blindfolded and has a leash on it...
until the powers-that-be decide otherwise.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
It is unlikely that China will reach superpower status by 2008. They must accomplish things such as this:

I disagree, you are using an old definition of superpower that is based on the evolution of a tiny impotent European colony or country into a superpower. Many of these things just don't matter when your country is 18% of the global population.



1. Have an economy near the size of the US economy.
2. Create original consumer brands that are household names everywhere in the world

I agree with the first point but what Soviet brands were ever global? Did Pepsi or Coke ever actually win a war or end a embargo? One thing you haven't considered is that "Made in China" is a global brand that everyone knows.



3. Have a military capable of waging wars anywhere in the globe.
4. Have major universities that are household names, that many of the worlds top students aspire to attend.
5. Attract the best and brightest to immigrate into China, where they can expect to live a good life in Chinese society.

I agree with number 3 but numbers 4 and 5 aren't that important for a country like China. Why? Remember that China has 1/6 of the world's population of thinking apes. Who cares if you attract great minds from elsewhere? You already have 1/6 of all the great minds in the world - you just have to find them.


6. Be the leader in entertainment and culture.

That is only true if you buy the old "Export our Culture for the Win!" view of international politics. I thought the last century proved that most cultures successfully graft our technology on top of their existing culture while mostly ignoring our "culture."


7. Be the nation expected to thanklessly use its own resources to solve many of the world's problems.

I don't see where this is a requirement. In fact, it seems to me to be an extension of the "Export our Culture for the Win!" attitude that has failed both the US and Europe in the last couple of centuries.


8. Adapt to the under-appreciated burden of superpowerdom - the huge double standards that a benign superpower must withstand in that role.

Who said they have to pretend to be a benign superpower like the US does?

Jon



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   
People tend to use the word superpower to point out the weaponry might of a nation over other nations in the world.

China's superpower status is economical status and thanks to he US free markets and outsourcing they already have that status.

Their Olympics will be a treat to all around the world to see, because money is not a problem for them to do their best and they will be the best.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Wasnt there a world economist and reporter that did an interview with Rockefellar in Japan? Think he claimed to be protected by the Asian Illuminati etc and that the EURO Illuminati were going to have to bow down to a different way of doing things in world affairs?

[edit on 2-1-2008 by fastwalker23]



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Voxel
I had a friend who did a lot of work for Lockheed back in Hong-Kong during the 80's tell me in no uncertain terms: China's economic accent will make the US's rise during the industrial revolution look like a temporary summer job in comparison. I didn't believe him at the time (about 15 years ago) but since 2001 his predictions for China have been obviously dead-on.


With respect, I think your friend misled you a little bit, because his/her point takes the potential for advance out of the context of its time. Any emerging development by any power would make the industrial revolution seem tame - the industrial revolution was about as fast as it could possibly have been. So will China's economic emergence be, if it happens. But the develop of most western countries will also put the industrial revolution to shame, so the relative advance is not so great.

I don't think there's as big a correlation between population and economic booming as you suppose - particularly as the next economic revolution is likely to be played out on computers rather than by people power per se. China's over population is as likely to be a hindrance as an aid. The population of the UK at the time of its industrial revolution (in 1800, before it got a massive empire into which it poured the fruits of that revolution) was about 9 million. The Chinese had 60 million by the 14th century. So it's taken a while...

I also think you undervalue the importance of cultural influence on the emergence of "super power". Russia's coke can branding may not have been universal, but its artistic power certainly was, even in the face of repression by the governments of the time. Ultimately it is that artistic power, Dostoyevsky, Rachmaninov, Nureyev that formed the Russian brand, despite (or perhaps even as a consequence of) defection.

It might be argued that the fact that the US made the coke can an icon says more about the standard of American culture, or at least the kind of culture that the US chooses/chose to promote, than it does about super power cultural theory. Do not judge other books by the US' cover.

Further to that point, China's cultural power will not be measured by the standard of its Olympic games, but by lasting cultural phenomena with global reach and universal appreciation. Just like Dostoyevsky. And Coke.

Finally, a word about super powers generally. A superpower, like a super car, is only as good as the planet/road it's driving along. The reason that China struggles internationally is because its regime and policies do not always have universal support. The population of China is about 1.7bn - which I believe is about a sixth of the world's population. In which case, there's still 5/6ths of the world left to argue with. America may have a smaller population but more of the world agrees with it more of the time. Hence its ability to make unilateral decisions on the world stage. China does not have that ability, despite its massive population.

LW



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 11:28 AM
link   
I don't think it will all happen in 2008, but we will see a large scale of what Japan went through in the 70s early 80s.

That was back when the Japanese worker was basically owned by the corporation and the government was subsidizing its industries by the billions. Just look at the steel industry of that era and how the Japanese underbid the world with government help. Japan also tried to buy up the world one acre at a time.

This all came tumbling down when the population of Japan wanted a better life that this new prosperity had brought them. This caused wages to go up, work hours to decrease and government subsidizes to go away.

We will soon see the same thing in china but on a greater scale. If we are smarter than we were in the 70s we can gain great advantage from this with China’s 1 billion new worldwide consumers.


[edit on 2-1-2008 by Xtrozero]



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Yes China is the new superpower but the question is what will she do with its ever growing military and population, past history tells us that it would mean war so thats not good for any of us. Taiwan will almost certainly be swallowed up by China and no one will be able to do anything about it and then there is the relationship between China and Japan which has never been really good.

I'm sure the Chinese would like to settle a few old scores with Japan and would China's ambitions stop there or would they seek to expand further.
Again given the mindset of the ruling body in China and its record on human rights I think we may be in for a stormy time.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom
I'm sure the Chinese would like to settle a few old scores with Japan


I've said this before.

The nationalists want to take revenge on Japan, and it will probably happen at some point in the future. Some even predict Japan becoming apart of a future federal China, along with North Korea.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 12:28 PM
link   
One question is, that if China becomes the major world superpower with power projection/military might and all, would they be expected to become the 'world police' like the USA seem to be today? and would they take up that responsibility?

or on the other hand would they abuse their ability to produce numberless soldiers and technology advancements and force themselves upon the world militarily.

People complain about the USA abusing their military power around the world, but China could end up the same, even worse?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join