Thought I’d just share this video by China Uncensored Chris Chapell talking at the Sydney Institute about China and it’s influence in Australia and New Zealand as well as the West as a whole. It’s basically a quick lecture (23 minutes), and so it’s not a deep dive into this subject but figured I’d post it anyway in case anyone was interested. This is the description from the page:
That is unsettling. The audience laughter was annoying though.
What is China’s end game? My impression is China really doesn’t care about domestic policy in nations they work with. Doesn’t matter to them if the nation is a dysfunctional dictatorship or a western democracy. As long as China gets wealthier by working with that nation they are happy. So why would China try to undermine democracy in Australia & New Zealand? What system do they want to replace it with?
Also most other east asian nations transitioned to democracy as they got wealthy. South Korea, Japan, Taiwan. I wonder if China will do the same, and if so if that’ll change their foreign policy.
Say rather, what is the CCPs end game? And that would be to hold onto power, expand their power and influence.
Not sure why you have that impression, to be honest. China (or the CCP) DEFINITELY cares about other nations domestic policies, especially their regional neighbors but not limited to that. However, again, you have to look at their core motivations. Think of it this way…why do you suppose they have built their Great Firewall of China(tm…arr)? It’s to control the message. However, even with all the effort they have put into it there have been a number of people who have access to the wider web. So…what do you do, if you are a totalitarian regime bent on keeping power and controlling the message? Why, you ensure that outside of your great well the message changes too. That way, when you have students or others leave you can control the message where ever they are.
I assume you watched the video. Consider what Chris was saying there about the Chinese students in Australia having other students report back to Chinese (CCP) officials, and the ramifications of that. Then consider…that happens in Canada, the US, in Europe, in Japan…
CHINESE are happy getting wealthier. But the CCP is in this for other reasons than just getting wealthier. Having the people get wealthier is certainly important, but so is maintaining control. In addition, having China get wealthier is in some cases mutually exclusive to having other countries get wealthier as well.
No, they don’t want to replace the governments in Australia or New Zealand (or the US, Canada, Japan or the various nations in the EU…probably not even South Korea). That’s not the goal here. The goal is to control the message, to change the narrative of the other nations so that it more matches that fabricated by the CCP, and basically to exploit other western nations (and just generally other nations…look at their actions in Africa for instance) to the betterment of China and the Chinese people. In some ways it’s a lot like the US, though with a harder sell and less of the velvet glove and more of the iron fist, but in other ways they (the CCP) just think differently about power.
Nope. At least there is very little sign that this is the path being taken. Of course, the CCP walks a knife edge right now and for many years now. They promise that, if they are allowed to rule as they like they will bring ever growing prosperity to the people. So, we see things like the real estate bubble and the stock market bubble, and now the debt and mega projects bubble. Can they keep ahead of disaster? Currently they are relying on foreign investment and vast loans for mega infrastructure projects in many 3rd world countries (using mainly Chinese labor and really bad terms for the 3rd world countries). In exchange, as Chris mentioned about Greece, they expect quite a lot, including political support.
China desires to be the regional superpower and return to the state of dominant hegomony that they’ve been in the East Asian region for the last five hundred years, the 20th century being (in their view) an anomaly of transient Western influence.
The change in their constitution and essentially indefinite rule of Xi Jinping suggests otherwise. While there are nascent movements within China for greater personal freedoms, strict government control of social media and news outlets represents a powerful and to date mostly successful effort to control impulses toward a more open society. We cannot say what the future will hold for Chinese domestic politics (and anyone who wants to prognosticate does so at their own peril) but from a cultural standpoint the Chinese ruling class have been pretty clear that they consider themselves to be the superiors in any disagreement.
Also, don’t fall into the trap of thinking of all “East Asians” or even all residents of mainland China as being slight variations of an otherwise homogenous culture; they are as radically different in thinking and values as any two random Western cultures. That South Korea or Japan might embrace ostensibly democratic principles does not mean that the China will also tend to do so.
Stranger
I feel China already is a regional superpower. They’re moving to become the global superpower.
That said I don’t see Australia and New Zealand as likely targets for them. China has been expanding its influence in East Asia, Central Asia, and Africa. It would probably expand its influence in Australia and New Zealand if it felt welcomed there but they’re not going to push their way in. Australia and New Zealand have strong cultural and historical ties with the western world. A conflict with them would be too likely to draw in other powers. China is not seeking to provoke the western world yet.
China’s policy has been to keep building up its strength - but to do so quietly so other countries don’t get worried about that growing strength.
I think that there is a key difference in the way China and the West see wealth. In the West, we see wealth as an endgoal. Western people and Western governments are in accord on that; we see getting wealthy as a goal to pursue.
In China, wealth is seen more as a resource. It’s not an endgoal in itself but it’s a useful thing to have in pursuing other goals. The Chinese government (which as noted is the CCP) looks at its citizens’ wealth the way the Saudi government look at oil; a resource they can tap for further their own goals.
You’ll note I said the Chinese government thinks this. I think the Chinese government is not giving enough consideration to what the Chinese people might be thinking about this issue. There are probably a lot of people in China who have started to think of their wealth as their own and not something to be used by the government. I think a lot of Chinese people are going to start thinking the government should be serving the people rather than the people serving the government.
They are basically three powerful posts in China. President, GS of the CCP and Chairman of the Central Military Commission. Since the late 1980’s its been the practice to have one man holding all three positions, but do note that i) this was not always the case and ii) the later two posts never had a term limit. So it as likely as not that they are going to return to a Trimative.
And that differs from the US…how?
It doesn’t, really, but we have Constitutional restrictions that (at least in theory, and largely in practice) internally prevent any one power base from becoming dominant over foeign affairs. We had eight years of Bush/Cheney that caused a lot of damage, both literal and in reputation with allies, but then eight years of Obama that at least partially undid some of that. China is set to have decades of Xi Jinping and likely his designated successor after that with no major policy shift.
I din’t think China desires to be a global superpower; they’re happy to control their sphere of Asia, and just make money hand over fist in trade with Europe and the Americas, and gain access to intapped resources in Africa. They aren’t building a navy that can patrol the Atlantic and challenge European powers, or forging strategic alliances with Mexico, Brazil, or Argentina. For China, dominance is security rather than an end unto itself, and that just means excluding Western (almost entirely American) presence in the Asia-Pacific regions, hence the construction of artificial “islands” (mostly just built-up reefs that won’t survive for more than a few years without constant maintenance) over which they can claim sovereignty and assert control of trade and naval presence of other powers. However, they are very focused on being a preeminant power in orbital space and perhaps beyond, and that most certainly will have global impact.
Stranger
When developed nations like the ones in western europe or North America work with other nations, they usually have strings attached. They want those nations to adopt neo-liberal economic models. They want those nations to crack down on corruption, or to improve human rights and civil rights.
Supposedly China doesn’t do any of this. They don’t really care about other nation’s domestic policies while western nations want other countries to adopt reforms before those nations can trade or form alliances with the west. As an example, the EU demanded Turkey end the death penalty before joining the EU. The IMF tends to demand privatization before loaning money. The US will demand human rights reform in some of its trading partners.
I look forward to the rise of China due to the impact of China on scientific innovation and technology. China is already technically the world leader in renewable energy, and are working on becoming the world leader in artificial intelligence. The more science, R&D, medical innovation and wealth the world has the better. The cure for Alzheimer’s disease is just as likely to come from China as it is to come from the US or Europe at this point.
But I’m unsure what all risks China will pose to the western world order when they have an economy worth 40 trillion PPP. If all China is doing is demanding other nations have a positive image of it, that isn’t terrible. When they start overthrowing democracies and establishing authoritarian states (and yes I know western nations have done this too), then it’ll be a bigger issue for me. If China starts trying to overthrow the democracy in Australia and replace it with a dictatorship so they can get better terms on mineral rights there, then that will worry me more.
of course if that happens, then it is just another cold war scenario where all the western nations ally against China.
That alone could get pretty terrible. The Chinese government already censors what people are allowed to discuss in China and some topics are prohibited.
What China starts demanding that other countries do the same? What happens when China tells the American government that it should stop Wikipedia from posting articles China deems offensive? Or even if they just tell companies like Time Warner or Viacom or Comcast that if they want to do business in China they have to follow certain rules about what they report in America?
I’m sorry, but I have to question your history here. Pre-war Japan was only nominally a sort-of democracy, and it was forced into real democracy after being disastrously defeated in war. It didn’t start to become prosperous until 15 years later (look at their movies made and set in the early 50s and see if that looks like prosperity to you). South Korea has gone back and forth between democracy and autocracy even after they became prosperous. Taiwan is closest to your narrative, perhaps, but I would argue that noticeable prosperity came well before democracy, depending on where you would mark the start of democracy there, maybe 1993, or 1996, or 2000.
I realize that was a minor part of your post but I didn’t think I should pass unremarked. As for China, I don’t expect the ruling party to change unless it suits them, and I don’t expect anywhere near enough internal pressure to build up unless their economy collapses completely. That would be what you might call a mixed blessing. They currently hold a huge amount of the US debt, and if they try to cash in very much of that, we will be in serious trouble.
Thats probably true about Japan, the democratic reforms were instituted from outside rather than arose organically. I thought South Korea transitioned to a democracy in the 1980s and has stayed there since.
Prosperity and democracy tend to go hand in hand (although nowadays with the rise of populism, that trend may be changing). Generally the healthier, wealthier and more educated a nation becomes the more they demand democratic reforms. But Singapore is a wealthy place and they aren’t democratic. But part of that could be that their underclass tend to consist of immigrants who have no rights so I don’t know if that kind of system would apply to China.
That’s a common misunderstanding. China loans money to the American government by buying Treasury securities. These securities have fixed terms; they can’t be called in early.
The main hold China has over America regarding our national debt would be to threaten to stop buying our securities. But it’s not a very effective threat. Most of the securities get sold within the United States. China is the largest buyer outside of America but other countries have always bought up American securities. If the Chinese government dropped out, other institutions would step in.
I don’t have the patience for a podcast right now, but all the stuff about China flexing its muscles over surrounding nations, including Australia and NZ, and putting the hard word on when we don’t toe the line is all completely true and a real worry. Especially in Australia, given that we have an annoying habit of looking for a Big Brother to tell us how high to jump. Used to be the UK, right now it’s America, but if Trump’s going to abrogate that job, the options for a new Great Leader to follow are limited. Germany’s a bit too far away…
Example: This year I’ve gone back to Uni to do a post-grad course. During the month that I’ve been doing it I’ve already seen a lecturer make an offhand negative comment on the Great Firewall, check himself, and then spend a five minute digression walking it back, by going off on a list of all the great things in China, and how many friends he has over there. Also, drag in a reference to Mao Zedong as a “great national leader who saved his country”. This is a very experienced, senior staff member, and not in any sort of political field, but he clearly has it in his mind that if a PRC student happens to report back about him saying “upsetting things”, he might not be allowed back into a Chinese university again. Which would be bad.
More well-known examples: probably I’d be repeating stuff from the podcast. There was a fairly notorious one about Chinese students getting up in arms about a lecturer’s deeply, deeply hurtful decision to refer to Taiwan as a place that had an actual government of its own. Pressure on government ministers not to meet with “undesirable” people on official visits to the country. Attempting to buy influence in the political system. (Mostly in the Labor party IIRC. At the moment. That we know of.)
Essentially, China could probably care less about what political system we practise here, at home, among our own people. But all this democracy floating about is a terribly bad example to their people, who might come here to study, or have cousins who emigrated, or even just come over on holiday. So it’s really important to them that we should be doing what we’re told on the stuff that they believe to be important. Which might be quite different from what we think ought to be important to them, but that isn’t necessarily going to cut any ice.
Sure, in some cases. The main thing is they don’t make investments that are unlikely to pay off. China isn’t following that model in a lot of cases, however. So, consider…why? What incentive do they have to make investments that the country in question is unlikely to be able to ever pay back even a fraction of what was lent?
Again, you should ask yourself and actually look into why this would be.
Do you look forward to the negative aspects that we’ve been discussing and what was touched on in the video? Also, you might want to look into why and how China supposedly is ‘already technically the world leader in renewable energy, and are working on becoming the world leader in artificial intelligence’…and how the reality contradicts your assertion that China is an emerging leader in ‘innovation and technology’. Really this is a much more complex issue than you seem to realize.
Again, it’s not ALL China is doing. You are glossing over the issues and putting lipstick and rouge on it enough to make a CCP propaganda department blush. They would be the last country right now too try and overthrow established states…they DEFINITELY don’t want anyone even thinking about that, especially their own people. So, that’s not even on the table, yet it’s something you are worried about. Really, you need to dig deeper into this subject because what you SHOULD be worried about is apparently not on your radar and what you ARE worried about isn’t happening nor is it likely to.
I don’t see why you have to be so arrogant and condescending in this discussion. China has rapidly been increasing their R&D funding, and in some more recent AI tests, Chinese devices are doing as good or better than AI devices built in the US. Nearly one third of all global spending on renewable energy comes from China, and in 2017 half of all global investment in AI startups went to China, more than the US.
So far the negative aspect is that China wants to make other nations have a positive impression of it. I don’t know if I see this working long term, mandating people not talk about your flaws generally doesn’t make them go away. If anything it reduces positive opinions of something. Plus not everyone will be intimidated, there will still be news reports and articles discussing the failures of China that will not be intimidated by revoking economic options in China. Plus it isn’t like the entire world will be intimidated by China. The rest of the world has economic and diplomatic power too.
Considering what other empires have done to weaker nations (overthrown governments, supported terrorists, established corporate oligarchies, robbed them blind, invaded them, etc) China trying to suppress criticism really isn’t the worst thing earth has seen. I’m not sure why I’m supposed to think this is horrible.
Also even if China’s economy continues to grow, nations that share western values are still an economic bulwark that can resist it. North America, Western Europe, Japan, South Korea, etc. have a GDP bigger than China’s will be even if China’s economy doubles again in the next 10-15 years. We will not live in a unipolar world, but a multipolar one. TPP was an effort to resist Chinese influence, and I’m sure other alliances will form to do the same thing.
I didn’t think I was. 
It certainly wasn’t my intention.
They have also ramped up their systematic efforts to steal everything they can, which they spend way more effort on that internal R&D. They do this in a variety of ways, including direct espionage and using leverage for foreign companies wanting to break into the Chinese market. It’s funny how a lot of their ‘innovation’ looks so much like technologies other countries companies have or use.
They want other countries to ignore their negative aspects or pretend like they don’t exist. They don’t want other countries to discuss or even acknowledge things like their human rights violations, or wide spread environmental damage or myriad other bad things that happen there. It’s a major issue that you seem to want to handwave away by defecting the true issue to something about image. It’s basically the same thing Russia tries to do. Are you ok with that wrt Putin?
Well, do you know what all they are trying to suppress? If so, then you should be able to answer that question. If not, then it might be a good thing to look into it. If you do know and you still have no issue, well, that’s certainly your prerogative. It’s kind of amusing to have you say something along the lines of ‘well, they all do it’ considering your past stances on this sort of thing when it was the US on the hot seat. 
I think this is more serious than you seem to realize, and that what China is doing has greater ramifications than you are acknowledging or taking seriously. I don’t think you realize how pervasive Chinese intellectual theft is, for instance, since you seem to think it’s Chinese R&D that is making the great strides in AI, electronics, rapid transit and green tech. Sadly, this isn’t the case in general, as the CCP has a whole government agency dedicated to intellectual property theft AND funneling that technology to Chinese companies.
I know, a lot of folks on this board seem to be relishing the thought that China will break the US monopoly on being the only hyperpower. I get it. One thing you may need to think about is, even where they are today, what happens if they hit the wall? They are the number two single economy in the world, even if a lot of their GDP figures are internally inflated and no one (even their own economists) REALLY know where they are at or how they are doing. They are still a monster wrt national GDP. What do you suppose happens if all these China dreams don’t happen and instead they go down? If something like the issue in Greece did what it did, and worries about Italy are ramping up, what happens if China tanks due to over extension of debt in their next ponzi scheme, namely One Belt One Road™?
Anyway, I appreciate your comments and I’m really not trying to be condescending (I can’t help the arrogance…just my nature) and really am just trying to make you think about some of the darker aspects of the CCP and how they are distorting a lot of what should be a good thing.