Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Blowback Effect: The World in 2020
As the second decade of the twenty-first century begins, we find ourselves at one of those relatively rare moments in history when major power shifts become visible to all. If the first decade of the century witnessed profound changes, the world of 2009 nonetheless looked at least somewhat like the world of 1999 in certain fundamental respects: the United States remained the world's paramount military power, the dollar remained the world's dominant currency, and NATO remained its foremost military alliance, to name just three.
By the end of the second decade of this century, however, our world is likely to have a genuinely different look to it. Momentous shifts in global power relations and a changing of the imperial guard, just now becoming apparent, will be far more pronounced by 2020 as new actors, new trends, new concerns, and new institutions dominate the global space. Nonetheless, all of this is the norm of history, no matter how dramatic it may seem to us.
Less normal -- and so the wild card of the second decade (and beyond) -- is intervention by the planet itself. Blowback, which we think of as a political phenomenon, will by 2020 have gained a natural component. Nature is poised to strike back in unpredictable ways whose effects could be unnerving and possibly devastating.
What, then, will be the dominant characteristics of the second decade of the twenty-first century? Prediction of this sort is, of course, inherently risky, but extrapolating from current trends, four key aspects of second-decade life can be discerned: the rise of China; the (relative) decline of the United States; the expanding role of the global South; and finally, possibly most dramatically, the increasing impact of a roiling environment and growing resource scarcity.
Let's start with human history and then make our way into the unknown future history of the planet itself.
The Ascendant Dragon
That China has become a leading world power is no longer a matter of dispute. That country's new-found strength was on full display at the climate summit in Copenhagen in December where it became clear that no meaningful progress was possible on the issue of global warming without Beijing's assent. Its growing prominence was also evident in the way it responded to the Great Recession, as it poured multi-billions of dollars into domestic recovery projects, thereby averting a significant slowdown in its economy. It spent many tens of billions more on raw materials and fresh investments in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia, helping to ignite recovery in those regions, too.
If China is an economic giant today, it will be a powerhouse in 2020. According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), that country's gross domestic product (GDP) will jump from an estimated $3.3 trillion in 2010 to $7.1 trillion in 2020 (in constant 2005 dollars), at which time its economy will exceed all others save that of the United States. In fact, its GDP then should exceed those of all the nations in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East combined. As the decade proceeds, China is expected to move steadily up the ladder of technological enhancement, producing ever more sophisticated products, including advanced green energy and transportation systems that will prove essential to future post-carbon economies. These gains, in turn, will give it increasing clout in international affairs.
China will undoubtedly also use its growing wealth and technological prowess to enhance its military power. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), China is already the world's second largest military spender, although the $85 billion it invested in its armed forces in 2008 was a pale shadow of the $607 billion allocated by the United States. In addition, its forces remain technologically unsophisticated and its weapons are no match for the most modern U.S., Japanese, and European equipment. However, this gap will narrow significantly in the century's second decade as China devotes more resources to military modernization.
The critical question is: How will China use its added power to achieve its objectives?
Until now, China's leaders have wielded its growing strength cautiously, avoiding behavior that would arouse fear or suspicion on the part of neighbors and economic partners. It has instead employed the power of the purse and "soft power" -- vigorous diplomacy, development aid, and cultural ties -- to cultivate friends and allies. But will China continue to follow this "harmonious," non-threatening approach as the risks of forcefully pursuing its national interests diminish? This appears unlikely.
A more assertive China that showed what the Washington Post called "swagger" was already evident in the final months of 2009 at the summit meetings between presidents Barack Obama and Hu Jintao in Beijing and Copenhagen. In neither case did the Chinese side seek a "harmonious" outcome: In Beijing, it restricted Obama's access to the media and refused to give any ground on Tibet or tougher sanctions on key energy-trading partner Iran; at a crucial moment in Copenhagen, it actually sent low-ranking officials to negotiate with Obama -- an unmistakable slight -- and forced a compromise that absolved China of binding restraints on carbon emissions.
If these summits are any indication, Chinese leaders are prepared to play global hard-ball, insisting on compliance with their core demands and giving up little even on matters of secondary importance. China will find itself ever more capable of acting this way because the economic fortunes of so many countries are now tied to its consumption and investment patterns -- a pivotal global role once played by the United States -- and because its size and location gives it a commanding position in the planet's most dynamic region. In addition, in the first decade of the twenty-first century Chinese leaders proved especially adept at nurturing ties with the leaders of large and small countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America that will play an ever more important role in energy and other world affairs.
To
what ends will China wield its growing power? For the top leadership
in Beijing, three goals will undoubtedly be paramount: to ensure the
continued political monopoly of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), to
sustain the fast-paced economic growth which justifies its dominance,
and to restore the country's historic greatness. All three are, in
fact, related: The CCP will remain in power, senior leaders believe,
only so long as it orchestrates continuing economic expansion and
satisfies the nationalist aspirations of the public as well as the high
command of the People's Liberation Army. Everything Beijing does,
domestically and internationally, is geared to these objectives. As
the country grows stronger, it will use its enhanced powers to shape
the global environment to its advantage just as the United States has
done for so long. In China's case, this will mean a world wide-open to
imports of Chinese goods and to investments that allow Chinese firms to
devour global resources, while placing ever less reliance on the U.S.
dollar as the medium of international exchange.
The question that remains unanswered: Will China begin flexing its growing military muscle? Certainly, Beijing will do so in at least an indirect manner. By supplying arms and military advisers to its growing network of allies abroad, it will establish a military presence in ever more areas. My suspicion is that China will continue to avoid the use of force in any situation that might lead to a confrontation with major Western powers, but may not hesitate to bring its military to bear in any clash of national wills involving neighboring countries. Such a situation could arise, for example, in a maritime dispute over control of the energy-rich South China Sea or in Central Asia, if one of the former Soviet republics became a haven for Uighur militants seeking to undermine Chinese control over Xinjiang Province.
The Eagle Comes in for a Landing
Just as the rise of China is now taken for granted, so, too, is the decline of the United States. Much has been written about America's inevitable loss of primacy as this country suffers the consequences of economic mismanagement and imperial overstretch. This perspective was present in Global Trends 2025, a strategic assessment of the coming decades prepared for the incoming Obama administration by the National Intelligence Council (NIC), an affiliate of the Central Intelligence Agency. "Although the United States is likely to remain the single most powerful actor [in 2025]," the NIC predicted, "the United States' relative strength -- even in the military realm -- will decline and U.S. leverage will become more constrained."
Some unforeseen catastrophe aside, however, the U.S. is not likely to be poorer in 2020 or more backward technologically. In fact, according to the most recent Department of Energy projections, America's GDP in 2020 will be approximately $17.5 trillion (in 2005 dollars), nearly one-third greater than today. Moreover, some of the initiatives already launched by President Obama to stimulate the development of advanced energy systems are likely to begin bearing fruit, possibly giving the United States an edge in certain green technologies. And don't forget, the U.S. will remain the globe's preeminent military power, with China lagging well behind, and no other potential rival able to mobilize even Chinese-level resources to challenge U.S. military advantages.
What will change is America's position relative to China and other nations -- and so, of course, its ability to dominate the global economy and the world political agenda. Again using DoE projections, we find that in 2005, America's GDP of $12.4 trillion exceeded that of all the nations of Asia and South America combined, including Brazil, China, India, and Japan. By 2020, the combined GDP of Asia and South America will be about 40% greater than that of the U.S., and growing at a much faster rate. By then, the United States will be deeply indebted to more solvent foreign nations, especially China, for the funds needed to pay for continuing budget deficits occasioned by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon budget, the federal stimulus package, and the absorption of "toxic assets" from troubled banks and corporations.
Count on this, though: in an increasingly competitive world economy in which U.S. firms enjoy ever diminishing advantages, the prospects for ordinary Americans will be distinctly dimmer. Some sectors of the economy, and some parts of the country, will certainly continue to thrive, but others will surely suffer Detroit's fate, becoming economically hollowed out and experiencing wholesale impoverishment. For many -- perhaps most -- Americans, the world of 2020 may still provide a standard of living far superior to that enjoyed by a majority of the world; but the perks and advantages that most middle class folks once took for granted -- college education, relatively accessible (and affordable) medical care, meals out, foreign travel -- will prove significantly harder to come by.
Even America's military advantage will be much eroded. The colossal costs of the disastrous Iraq and Afghan wars will set limits on the nation's ability to undertake significant military missions abroad. Keep in mind that, in the first decade of the twenty-first century, a significant proportion of the basic combat equipment of the Army and Marine Corps has been damaged or destroyed in these wars, while the fighting units themselves have been badly battered by multiple tours of duty. Repairing this damage would require at least a decade of relative quiescence, which is nowhere in sight.
The growing constraints on American power were recently acknowledged by President Obama in an unusual setting: his West Point address announcing a troop surge in Afghanistan. Far from constituting a triumphalist expression of American power and preeminence, like President Bush's speeches on the Iraq War, his was an implicit admission of decline. Alluding to the hubris of his predecessor, Obama noted, "We've failed to appreciate the connection between our national security and our economy. In the wake of the economic crisis, too many of our neighbors and friends are out of work and struggle to pay the bills.... Meanwhile, competition in the global economy has grown more fierce. So we simply can't afford to ignore the price of these wars."
Many have chosen to interpret Obama's Afghan surge decision as a typical twentieth-century-style expression of America's readiness to intervene anywhere on the planet at a moment's notice. I view it as a transitional move meant to prevent the utter collapse of an ill-conceived military venture at a time when the United States is increasingly being forced to rely on non-military means of persuasion and the cooperation, however tempered, of allies. President Obama said as much: "We'll have to be nimble and precise in our use of military power.... And we can't count on military might alone." Increasingly, this will be the mantra of strategic planning that will govern the American eagle in decline.
The Rising South
The second decade of the century will also witness the growing importance of the global South: the formerly-colonized, still-developing areas of Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Once playing a relatively marginal role in world affairs, they were considered open territory, there to be invaded, plundered, and dominated by the major powers of Europe, North America, and (for a time) Japan. To some degree, the global South, a.k.a. the "Third World," still plays a marginal role, but that is changing.
Once a member in good standing of the global South, China is now an economic superpower and India is well on its way to earning this status. Second-tier states of the South, including Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, and Turkey, are on the rise economically, and even the smallest and least well-off nations of the South have begun to attract international attention as providers of crucial raw materials or as sites of intractable problems including endemic terrorism and crime syndicates.
To some degree, this is a product of numbers -- growing populations and growing wealth. In 2000, the population of the global South stood at an estimated 4.9 billion people; by 2020, that number is expected to hit 6.4 billion. Many of these new inhabitants of planet Earth will be poor and disenfranchised, but most will be workers (in either the formal or informal economy), many will participate in the political process in some way, and some will be entrepreneurs, labor leaders, teachers, criminals, or militants. Whatever the case, they will make their presence felt.
The nations of the South will also play a growing economic role as sources of raw materials in an era of increasing scarcity and founts of entrepreneurial vitality. By one estimate, the combined GDP of the global South (excluding China) will jump from $7.8 trillion in 2005 to $15.8 trillion in 2020, an increase of more than 100%. In particular, many of the prime deposits of oil, natural gas, and the key minerals needed in the global North to keep the industrial system going are facing wholesale depletion after decades of hyper-intensive extraction, leaving only the deposits in the South to be exploited.
Take oil: In 1990, 43% of world daily oil output was supplied by members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (the major Persian Gulf producers plus Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Libya, Nigeria, and Venezuela), other African and Latin American producers, and the Caspian Sea countries; by 2020, their share will rise to 58%. A similar shift in the center of gravity of world mineral production will take place, with unexpected countries like Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Niger (a major uranium supplier), and the Democratic Republic of Congo taking on potentially crucial roles.
Inevitably, the global South will also play a conspicuous role in a series of potentially devastating developments. Combine persistent deep poverty, economic desperation, population growth, and intensifying climate degradation and you have a recipe for political unrest, insurgency, religious extremism, increased criminality, mass migrations, and the spread of disease. The global North will seek to immunize itself from these disorders by building fences of every sort, but through sheer numbers alone, the inhabitants of the South will make their presence felt, one way or another.
The Planet Strikes Back
All of this might represent nothing more than the normal changing of the imperial guard on planet Earth, if that planet itself weren't undergoing far more profound changes than any individual power or set of powers, no matter how strong. The ever more intrusive realities of global warming, resource scarcity, and food insufficiency will, by the end of this century's second decade, be undeniable and, if not by 2020, then in the decades to come, have the capacity to put normal military and economic power, no matter how impressive, in the shade.
"There is little doubt about the main trends," Professor Ole Danbolt Mjøs, Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said in awarding the Peace Prize to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Al Gore in December 2007: "More and more scientists have reached ever closer agreement concerning the increasingly dramatic consequences that will follow from global warming." Likewise, a growing body of energy experts has concluded that the global production of conventional oil will soon reach a peak (if it hasn't already) and decline, producing a worldwide energy shortage. Meanwhile, fears of future food emergencies, prompted in part by global warming and high energy prices, are becoming more widespread.
All of this was apparent when world leaders met in Copenhagen and failed to establish an effective international regime for reducing the emission of climate-altering greenhouse gases (GHGs). Even though they did agree to keep talking and comply with a non-binding, aspirational scheme to cut back on GHGs, observers believe that such efforts are unlikely to lead to meaningful progress in controlling global warming in the near future. What few doubt is that the pace of climate change will accelerate destructively in the second decade of this century, that conventional (liquid) petroleum and other key resources will become scarcer and more difficult to extract, and that food supplies will diminish in many poor, environmentally vulnerable areas.
Scientists do not agree on the precise nature, timing, and geographical impact of climate-change effects, but they do generally agree that, as we move deeper into the century, we will be seeing an exponential increase in the density of the heat-trapping greenhouse-gas layer in the atmosphere as the consumption of fossil fuels grows and past smokestack emissions migrate to the outer atmosphere. DoE data indicates, for example, that between 1990 and 2005, world carbon dioxide emissions grew by 32%, from 21.5 to 31.0 billion metric tons. It can take as much as 50 years for GHGs to reach the greenhouse layer, which means that their effect will increase even if -- as appears unlikely -- the nations of the world soon begin to reduce their future emissions.
In other words, the early manifestations of global warming in the first decade of this century -- intensifying hurricanes and typhoons, torrential rains followed by severe flooding in some areas and prolonged, even record-breaking droughts in others, melting ice-caps and glaciers, and rising sea levels -- will all become more pronounced in the second. As suggested by the IPCC in its 2007 report, uninhabitable dust bowls are likely to emerge in large areas of Central and Northeast Asia, Mexico and the American Southwest, and the Mediterranean basin. Significant parts of Africa are likely to be devastated by rising temperatures and diminished rainfall. More cities are likely to undergo the sort of flooding and destruction experienced by New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. And blistering summers, as well as infrequent or negligible rainfall, will limit crop production in key food-producing regions.
Progress will be evident in the development of renewable energy systems, such as wind, solar, and biofuels. Despite the vast sums now being devoted to their development, however, they will still provide only a relatively small share of world energy in 2020. According to DoE projections, renewables will take care of only 10.5% of world energy needs in 2020, while oil and other petroleum liquids will still make up 32.6% of global supplies; coal, 27.1%; and natural gas, 23.8%. In other words, greenhouse gas production will rage on -- and, ironically, should it not, thanks to expected shortfalls in the supply of oil, that in itself will likely prove another kind of disaster, pushing up the prices of all energy sources and endangering economic stability. Most industry experts, including those at the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, believe that it will be nearly impossible to continue increasing the output of conventional and unconventional petroleum (including tough to harvest Arctic oil, Canadian tar sands, and shale oil) without increasingly implausible fresh investments of trillions of dollars, much of which would have to go into war-torn, unstable areas like Iraq or corrupt, unreliable states like Russia.
In the latest hit movie Avatar, the lush, mineral-rich moon Pandora is under assault by human intruders seeking to extract a fabulously valuable mineral called "unobtainium." Opposing them are not only a humanoid race called the Na'vi, loosely modeled on Native Americans and Amazonian jungle dwellers, but also the semi-sentient flora and fauna of Pandora itself. While our own planet may not possess such extraordinary capabilities, it is clear that the environmental damage caused by humans since the onset of the Industrial Revolution is producing a natural blowback effect which will become increasingly visible in the coming decade.
These, then, are the four trends most likely to dominate the second decade of this century. Perhaps others will eventually prove more significant, or some set of catastrophic events will further alter the global landscape, but for now expect the dragon ascendant, the eagle descending, the South rising, and the planet possibly trumping all of these.


50 Comments so far
Show AllNice Klare analysis, but if there is one thing we have learned over the past few decades it is that trends only provide a context for history. Trends do not really make history. I also think diminishing resources itself is a trend, especially water. This fact may confound the simplistic rising vs. falling paradigm by causing extraordinary efforts by all major players. Think an American "Mein Kampf." Think World War III, war with China, breaking it up, canceling its three trillion dollars in U.S. holdings.
Think the Heisenberg effect. Klare's poking into reality will help change it. The U.S. center-left will have to go along with a right wing effort to re-establish American dominance through whatever means are concocted even just three years from now after the 2012 presidential race. Imagine counter-trends, now, in order to really predict the future. Imagine rigged incidents and better excuses for bigger wars. Anyone that says the U.S. cannot even fight the wars it is already in doesn't remember how it grew itself to fight WWII from the depths of depression.
Noting prevailing trends is a good base for predicting the future. Then, comes the hard work.
While Michael Kare makes important points regarding the emergence of China as a world power and the decline of the United States, Steven Hill makes the persuasive argument that it is Europe that will be the influential entity that will dominate in the years ahead. In his well written book Europe's Promise: Why the European Way Is The Best Hope In An Insecure Age Mr. Hill states that it is Europe that has been the one that has led the way and set the example in the world today as well as in the years ahead.
As Mr. Hill points out, the:
* "European Union, with its twenty-seven member nations and half-billion people, has become the largest, wealthiest trading bloc in the world, producing nearly a third of the world's economy-almost as large as the United States and China COMBINED."
* Not China but more European businesses in 2004, as Mr. Hill notes, accounted for "nearly 75 percent of all foreign investments in the United States, being the top foreign investors in forty-five states, with more than $1.4 trillion in investments."
* It has been in Europe that money has been redirected from the military and shifted to things like "universal health care, education, pensions, various family-support measures [such as paid parental leave, sick leave, child care and "kiddie stipends"] housing, and transportation." This "workfare" state has contributed greatly to European prosperity while China, like the U.S., continues to struggle in attempting to find ways to help its citizens overcome economic and social inequality.
* European countries such as France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, etc, are rated the best in health care while America's broken-down health care system manages to rate 37th in terms of quality health care as judged by WHO.
* The notion of democracy in alive and well in Europe as the citizens of those countries engage in political debate while allowing many different parties to participate in the democratic process as the United States still continues to languish in its antiquated winner-take-all system.
In 2020 when Obamacare will have been in place for over 5 years, the US will rank much lower than its 2009 rank of 37th in healthcare. We will be paying more money for less health care and the US will be a third world nation.
Things that are predictable: In 2020 US corporate profits will be at record high levels and US corporate taxation will be the lowest its ever been.
The United States is already a third-world nation. All one has to do is go to any airport, any hospital, or any bus or train depot to see that. The state of our healthcare system, too, is a good indication of that. Many people are already paying more money for less and/or poor-quality healthcare, and that can only get worse, not better.
Indepedentminded
Well said. My comment regarding health care at Sick With Terror by Amy Goodman also helps to support your point.
I think Europe will thread the 'middle-way' as its been doing for some time. An economic powerhouse, for sure, but hardly a military one. What's impressive about China are the growth rates in both economy and military. I think Europe's the example we should be following, but this article is about regional powers. On military matters, that's U.S. for some time to come. On economic matters, that will increasingly be China.
"Enroll" makes a good point, too, about Europe as the premier trend setter. After WWI and WWII, the European Union is like a political miracle. Nevertheless, climate change and the rapid capitalization and internal conflicts of the "3rd world" may have greater historical impact and represent a greater trend than Europe's miracle. Europe's prevailing trend of appeasement if not partnership in the current wars of the U.S., for me, places Europe as a facilitator of my own vision of a U.S. striking out to destroy, not hinder or delay, Klare's U.S. falling vs. China rising trend. I think Europe will lend itself to making events and alliances determine history rather than trends.
Marcos
I agree. I also wish that more European countries would withdraw their military forces from Afghanistan and Iraq though that should do nothing, as Steven Hill notes in his book, to lessen how much more successful Europe has been in caring for its citizens than either the United States or China and observing how Europe can be the dominating entity in the world in the years ahead.
Also, I am at a loss as to understand where you come up with the name Enroll. The name that comes up on my computer screen clearly states the word Erroll [that is, with two rs instead of one] as in the former great jazz pianist Erroll Garner.
Sorry, Erroll, great name, the rr just looked like an nr on my computer to me. I wasn't even sure you had actually put "Enroll" as your name. I agree that much of Europe has produced a very impressive social welfare model, much better than the U.S., and China is only beginning to give progressive attention to universal health care, free basic education, or workers rights to collect poverty level back salaries from some unscrupulous employers that even include some state companies and institutions, etc.
enroll has it right on the money..very well argued. why are books advertised here?
his final section on the planet fails miserably the way so many do these days...
he limits his discussion to climate and warming...
one third of the Yellow River's water is not unusable for any purpose because it is warm, it is because it is chemically toxic...
all of the predictions within this article utterly ignore the very real industrial and chemical impacts of human activity...
China is already incredibly damaged by the recent industrial revolution there...this will only get worse if industrial actions are pursued into the future...this will become an impossible natural hurdle, as vital sections of the living planet begin to die off...
we are biological creatures, and cannot exist on a diet of plastic and metal...
combined with the cellular horrors of radioactivity, how can one ignore industrial and chemical devastation when writing of the future? from where will China create all of these wonders? to simply address temperature, and assume all other factors remain in some fantastic, historically-comparable state of functionality is infantile...we are already seeing the effects of these issues, they will only grow, unless we change directions...
China's environmental situation today is much like the US before the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act and certainly no worse in intensity than that of most other nations in the midst of undergoing rapid industrialization in the past (in scale it is worse simply because the industrialization is so much greater in scale as it is such a populous country). China is mostly singled out in the US press for political reasons.
As for the labor situation, the Chinese government passed sweeping labor reform laws a couple of years ago but in response the US-based transnational corporations with operations in China threatened to leave en masse if the reforms were implemented so the government watered them down. The Chinese government has cut corners and favored expediency in its rapid industrialization with the justification that without such a rapid rate there would remain an opportunity for the US and US-based transnational corporations to dominate China in the 21st Century as it was dominated by Western powers in the second half of the 19th and the first half of the 20th. And the Chinese know that a nation and a people totally dominated by US-based transnational corporations face a future worse than death, with unlimited toxins in the ground, air, and water, slavery of the population, and absolutely no concern for human welfare.
In spite of the pollution and other problems, the standard of living has dramatically improved for the majority of the Chinese population in the last couple of decades and it could continue to improve if the Chinese find it economically and politically feasible to expel the US-based corporations in the near future as they hope to do. The Chinese governmental elites (who still are not under the domination of the financial or other economic elites), unlike many of the US elites, have great pride in their own country and plan on living the rest of their lives there, in the largest cities there. So I find it unlikely that they will fail to address the most significant problems brought about by the dramatic changes in China over the past couple of decades.
The US and the transnational corporations it supports are the great threat to the future of the human race, not China.
thank you, kivals...this is good info...
you say:
"In spite of the pollution and other problems, the standard of living has dramatically improved for the majority of the Chinese population in the last couple of decades and it could continue to improve if the Chinese find it economically and politically feasible to expel the US-based corporations in the near future as they hope to do."
the standard of living is key...if this is the western definition, the connotation, to my mind, is the acquisition of 'stuff'...while I can't fairly begrudge anyone the desire for 'stuff', I also can't help but, personally, see a direct connection between the very manufacturing of 'stuff' for anyone, chinese, american, or other, who can afford it, the entire process of energy generation, storage and supply\delivery, and increasingly widespread industrial devastation and toxification...
if the chinese prove to be more enlightened, and are content to settle on some standard of living that doesn't impact the planet this way, yet provides them health, happiness and peace, then what can I say but more power to them, and may we learn to be more like them...I hope their government is more representative of their people's wishes than ours...
someone else was commenting on trends and future events elsewhere...trends are my concern, as I haven't seen much going on anywhere that demonstrates primary respect for the environment...on the other hand, while I have been a number of places, I have not been to China...
I certainly hope things work out, globally, closer to your scenario than mine, but I am further concerned that the extensive damage already done to our world has rather made smaller any margin for ecological error in the near future, so the idea of this incredibly populous country, among others, exploding with wealth and industry looms a bit dire, to me...Earth-Rocky's already been beat on for 14 rounds...he ain't a fresh Italian Stallion no more, Adrian, he's bruised and bloody and half-blind...Rocky's heart, and a favorable script, and a goal of survival, rather than victory, allowed for positive outcome in his case...the script for the planet is not so favorable, the ending far from guaranteed to be a cheery one...
I appreciate your posts, sir...peace...
I appreciate your response. I have been to China many times and have traveled through the country as my wife is Chinese and she grew up there. She is constantly educating me about the history, culture, political situation, and other current conditions of China.
For thousands of years the Chinese have valued harmony within human society and with nature. There is a huge struggle going on in China right now as the Communist Party (CP) grapples with the effects of rapid industrialization and the problematic concentration of wealth by China's capitalists and the conflict created by those phenomena with traditional Chinese values. It is my understanding that the CP still has control and the capitalists do not yet have significant influence over policy-making. And so the Chinese media still promotes a value system emphasizing the importance of achieving harmony and promoting Chinese culture, art, and other intellectual pursuits. However, with the much greater material affluence, consumerism has made some inroads though it remains far from the dominant mindset. And in spite of the consumerism that does exist, on balance the Chinese quality of life has improved significantly with shorter work hours, better living conditions, and better medical care. To a Westerner the 6-day a week, 12-hour per day conditions for the Chinese working class in the factories sound atrocious, but the poor farmers who migrated to the cities to do this work had been working 7 days per week, 12 hours per day for less remuneration (I spent a little time in a Chinese farming village once to see what it was like -- extremely hard and primitive with dirt floors, no plumbing, no heating, no electricity, etc..., and that is how most Chinese lived as few as 10 years ago). And the new Chinese middle class is much better off than it had been, with regard to educational opportunities, job opportunities, health care, and in a great many other ways.
If the capitalists do start exerting significant influence then China will likely go the way of the US, to the detriment of the Chinese people, the human race, and the rest of life on this planet. It is extremely politically incorrect to say this, but the CP is currently acting as a significant obstacle in the way of the capitalists turning China and the world into a hellhole.
Peace to you as well.
such wonderful information and comments, Kivals.
================
one might add a little-known part of history:
that under Mao Zedong - China actually accomplished the world's greatest health care project generations ago - one which is successfully adopted in Iran of using ordinary folk - trained in preventive medical care and emergency - to swarm the countryside and produce healthier citizens. it was also under MAO - who dreamt of china become a vast "green land" - that the agricultural system of modern times was developed - as well as gigantic reforestation projects...
ALL OF THEM GREEN economy...
LONG BEFORE we are now talking about "the environment".
in the west that was of course painted as "the brutal re-education slave camps"
when in fact that was actually a project to ensure that china was not to become DEPENDENT on foreign FOOD or have its environment sacrificed in what was ALREADY a global financial and economic system run by the British Empire and then The US empire
of countries having to sacrifice themselves for the sake of teh ALMIGHT DOLLAR!
s0 -- with all these talk about what china "MUST DO" --
exactly which country is RESPONSIBLE for FORCING other countries to REACT as THEY HAVE?
it is NONE OTHER than the USA that has TERRORIZED the entire globe, econmically, militarily, culturally , monetarily, industrialy
from a culture of exploitation , manipulation, plain thievery of the treasures and resources and labor of other countries and their independence ....
which country exactly has now perhaps tens of thousands of hectares maybe even millions projected for wind and solar power?
it is NOT the USA - it is CHINA.
which country NOW produces the world's biggest wind farm propellers ? it is NOT the USA - it is CHINA
which country NOW produces the greatest concentration of SOLAR {POWER? it is NOT the USA - it is CHINA.
which country is using its vast agricultural acument and developing advanced technology to USE it as non-polluting , renewable, self-sustaining energy - right down to the VILLAGE level which economically helps the ordinary folk with support and encouragement from the government?
it is NOT the USA - it si CHINA.
which country exactly is poised to DOUBLE the SIZE of its greatest "technology City" -- just oustide Beijing - the "Silicon valley" of china....which as of this moment is the world's ALREADY biggest technology producer.....
but THIS TIME based on non-polluting industrial production? it is NOT the USA
it is CHINA.
and what exactly is the USA doing?
why ---- accusing china of "manipulating it currency to keep chinese goods competitive"
when in fact --the USA's OWN
FEDERAL BANK's DECADES of "cheap money" policies , 0f near-zero overnight bank to bank interest rates IS responsible for the PROFLIGATE - on the cheap - wasteful lifestyle of the USA.
when in fact the CHEAP LABOR in china has been imposed BY the US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, entrapping china , in its quest to modernize and THUS strengthen its EVENTUAL defense against MORE USA intimidation null and void, into providing cheap labor
in order for the Chinse to ACCUMULATE enough "DOLLAR DENOMINATED" funds to use for ITS international transactions....
IN ITSELF a USA scheme to "own the world"
which it has NOT EARNED the RIGHT to do so!
the excellent writer, HENRY CK LIU for Asiatimesonline puts it - after his numerous excellent, thoroughly historical accounts of the state of things...puts it very well in a few words:
I paraphrase:
"the world economy is entrapped by the DOLLAR HEGEMONY - of fiat money UNSUPPORTED by real wealth , gold, metals or productivity and usefulness....forcing other countries to SACRIFICE the viability of their own economies and currencies - cheapening themselves in order to BUY DOLLAR treasury notes and DOLLAR currency in order to have a Dollar RESERVE for their payments...but this also eventually ends up IN the USA treasury ..thus forcing other countries to pay TWICE to support the USA's UNEARNED and UNJUSTIFIED financial hegemony. ".
he adds:
"the solution is for GOVERNMENTS to begin to convert their currencies towards usability in other countries and in order to get rid of the middleman US DOLLAR...which , in order to EARN that US dollar for their Reserves, countries WASTE much needed currency to develop Their OWN domestic economies without dependence ON EXPORT to earn such dollars. EXPORT need NOT be the main source of income for the domestic population of ANY economy...but Dollar hegemony - created by the world's MAIN CURRENCY MANIPULATOR - the USA - forces the world, as the British Empire once did , but on a far larger scale today, serves to keep economies from arriving at their TRUE potential of development and with that WITHOUT the need to SACRIFICE their own WELFARE and that of their environment - in the race for the Almighty Dollar".
the CHINESE understand THIS very very well...
thus - they have suggested to have a "BASKET OF WORLD CURRENCIES" - NOT subject to "fluctuations" as the dollar often demands - and in which regime :
as Liu also writes - "it is ENTIRELY POSSIBLE, QUICKLY and without chaos, to RAISE the Labor and Wage standards of EVERY citizen of every country - where a dress maker in china earns as much as a dress maker in new york city....but the DOLLAR HEGEMONY - a function of US imperialism and western imperialism and imposed upon the continents for centuries - is the culprit for preventing this..it is what allows the USA to gain wealth and power -- even if it has not earned it or justified it ....as the expense of other nations and their people and their resources and their labor".
and it perfectly repeats what
GENERAL SMEDLEY BUTLER - US marines, 1933 - who led some of the intrusions INTO china for her oil in the 1930's...:
"OUR FOREIGN policy has ALWAYS been geared towards gathering as much of the world's resources unto ourselves at the expense of others....it has nothing to do with Democracy or Freedom or human rights...the trouble with US americans is:
when our own Dollar can't buy more than 6% of its value at home == we get UNEASY and we go abroad so it can buy 100 percent MORE...and where the DOLLAR goes the flag follows, where the flag goes, our ARMY follows...we are really a nation of MONEY and WAR Racketeers and Gangsters for Capitalism....and our Armed Forces's TRUE purpose is to make the world safe for our BIG BOSS: our Supernationalistic Capitalism and for our Cultural and Economic ASSAULT".
Good info. Thanks for that. Most in the USA, after being subjected to government propaganda their whole lives, have trouble understanding that most governments that are assigned the label "evil" by the USA are actually labeled as such because they are trying to achieve independence from the USA and other Western powers.
Excellent points by Kivals.
to be sure - China's rise HAS come with the price of the immense pollution of industrialization .
but as Kivals pointed out:
==================
kivals:
The Chinese government has cut corners and favored expediency in its rapid industrialization with the justification that without such a rapid rate there would remain an opportunity for the US and US-based transnational corporations to dominate China in the 21st Century as it was dominated by Western powers in the second half of the 19th and the first half of the 20th. And the Chinese know that a nation and a people totally dominated by US-based transnational corporations face a future worse than death, with unlimited toxins in the ground, air, and water, slavery of the population, and absolutely no concern for human welfare.
"
=========
THAT is the crux of the matter.
without having to ignore that entirely possible scenario that countries would have polluted ANYWAY - we have NO idea for sure how economies might have evolved HAD THE USA
primarily - not accelerated the trend towards "industrialization at the cost of the environment" - MERELY for countries to even find ANY presence in the face of USA-led assaults on countries, economies, cultures and the environment.
people should NOT forget:
the Communist revolution - and its attendant attempt to "modernize" china - was a REACTION against western domination.
what were the chinese supposed to DO? surrounded by hostile countries of the west - that primarily were so because CHINA succeeded in REPELLING them after almost 2 centuries of raping china - behave politely - knowing that by continuing to remain "backward" the USA particularly will NEVER stop to try to conquer china for her "markets?" and DO to china what the USA has done to other countries?.
NO civilization that has generally kept to itself - as china had - for thousands of years - and by so doing, before western intrusions ...become the world's most prosperous country for thousands of years ....
i repeat: "MOST prosperous country for thousands of years"....
would put up with THAT scenario .
China's reaction - industrialization, acceleration and haste - even at the cost of the environment in order to DEFEND HERSELF from more western domination - was the most natural reaction.
ALL of it - even the pollution attending china's rise - CAN be laid down at the FEET of the USA , its chamber of commerce, its multinationals, its corporations, its FEDERAL BANK manipulating the world currency, its armies and invasions and provocations.
ALL OF IT.
-----
for that matter - even as we speak about china's greatly polluted environment....the chinese - above all - who love their land and have MORE to prove for it through their own 5-6 thousand year old civilization compared to the MERE 300 year old USA -
have stronger reasons than ANY foreigner to want their land to be CLEAN.
even as we speak -- there is already a national project wherein the traditional ways of subsistence...such as most rural folk having pigs in teh backyard - to eat or sell =-= have been attached and adapted to the latest possible technologies of using METHANE from pigs to energize their homes and small provincial industries..without letting the methane escape to the air. PERFECT combination of
"living organism" and technology to produce NONpolluting alternative , efficient, cheap energy.
the question always comes - despite what china is "guilty" of in pollution to industrialize in order to catch up with the modern world and thereby have SOME defense from the inevitable obsession by the USA and the WEST to colonize china and pollute her some more just the same -
what EXACTLY is the USA -- the LEADING producer of PER CAPITA pollution doing?
why --- thinking up more scenarios on how to make the REST of the world PAY for ITS sins against the environment while demanding that the rest of the world SUSPEND its own development - the better to keep them WEAK ENOUGH for the USA to "recover" and do the exact same thing it has done for nearly 2 centuries now:
EXPLOIT them for "US INTERESTS".
why would a nation - thousands of years old that basically went about its way, grown to be the world's most prosperous until 200 years ago before the west, with its industrialization and pollution messed up china -- PUT UP WITH THAT NONSENSE?.
I posted here a number of articles, one recently about investors beginning to pour stakes in china's technologies AND projects BECAUSE china - and china ALONE of all the biggest nations is showing that, despite the pollution, it is VERY , VERY serious about "industrializing" and reaching its potential as a great power -
THROUGH alternative, pollution-free, sustainable energy projects.
again -- what is the USA doing for ITS side?
COMPLAINING that china "has polluted the yellow river".
the chinese will take care of that - no one knows BETTER than THEY what its consequences are if they DON'T.
just as much as they KNOW that their overdependence on exports at the expense of domestic development and consumption of what are becoming better and better products and technologies , INCLUDING environmentally conscious products , is NOT to their long-term interest.
even in the world of STUPIDS ....
NOT ALL STUPIDS are created the same.
the NUMBER ONE STUPIDS don't reside in china...they are in the USA.
Sorry teddy,
A lot of what you wrote is not the real picture. China throws a dirty new coal power plant on line EACH WEEK. Ever been to an Industrial Chinese city? The industrial waste goes straight into the rivers and Oceans. I've seen it with my own eyes. There is no real EPA in China. While their culture waxes poetic about nature, their Capitalists are spewing toxins that cover whole neighboring countries. Ever seen a chinese boatyard? It's a shocker. The motor oil and toxic lead based paint goes right into the harbor. They have eclipsed the US as the leading producer of Carbon (but not per capita).
You think they put lead paint only on Chinese toys? Think Again.
Most countries are cursed with a Central Reserve Bank. It's an invention by Israeli Bankers (the rothchilds and British royalty) to charge a whole nation's people interest for printing THEIR own (citizen's) money.
China is not some Utopia unless you're a robber baron or a Captain of Industry with a fleet of Motor Yachts. I've seen the hotel limo bounce old men riding bicycles right off the road into the gutter. Not a place I would ever want to live.
The US is bad lately, but human life has NO value in China.
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
I have spent some time in China and my experiences were completely contrary to yours (of course it is a huge, complex country, offering widely varying experiences). I would love to live there and my wife and I are thinking of moving there when I retire in a few years.
If you have seen the USA criminal justice system up close or examined US federal budgets or foreign policy, then you know that human life has no value in the USA. In China, it is a much more mixed picture. The capitalists have an effect, and there is a danger they could take over the country, but for now the Communist Party maintains control and does promote humanist values, unlike the corporatist dictatorship in the USA. China has problems with pollution as does any other rapidly industrializing country, and because its industrialization is on such a massive scale its problems are too, but the USA ignored similar problems for decades even though it had plenty of resources to mitigate them.
As long as the Communist Party is in control of China, there is a good chance they will adequately address the environmental, labor, and other issues that have been brought about my rapid industrialization (a policy the Chinese felt necessary to avoid bullying and domination by the USA and a hellish future). But if the capitalists of China or the capitalists of the USA ever gain control there, all bets are off and China will almost certainly descend into a nightmarish place with consequences for the rest of the world.
dubet, You said everything I would have said if had your facts in hand. I think you are too quick to be reassured by kival. Your dire warnings have the ring of inconvenient truth.
I second dubet as well. The Three Gorges Dam disaster shows that the Chinese rulers respect Nature as little as they do protesters. I would only add that Klare presumes much in projecting smooth sailing for the dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party: The capitalism that they are expanding like a cancer will demand commensurate political changes. (Think of the decline and fall of the PRI in Mexico with the "success" of Mexico's capitalist road.)
It is difficult to predict what will happen in China. However, if the capitalists do manage to begin to assert more control over the Chinese economy and society than the Communist Party does, then China will likely follow the path of the US and become a corporatist dictatorship, and the whole world will suffer as a result. I just hope that the corporatist dictatorship in the US collapses in time to serve as sufficient warning to the people of China so that they develop the determination to limit the power of their own predatory capitalists.
Yeah. As much as I agree with the analyses that appear on CD, there seems to be an assumption of economic normality that underlies most of them.
I highly recommend Clusterfuck Nation by James Kunstler as a viewpoint that harbors no illusions about the "American Way of Life".
Never mind the Euro. In places like Cuba, 1 USD buys you about 80 Chavitos (if you're lucky!). 1 Chavito is the equivalent of 1 US Cent.
This analysis is why I love CD, and I intend to forward it to family and friends. There is no question that we're all going to need a 'crystal ball' to get through the next 10 years, and this kind of analysis is helpful.
I agree with marcos, though, our curse is to 'live in interesting times'. In particular, War is nonlinear and I think poised as never before to define history for some time to come. In 'South rising', Klare notes how the south's population will increase by 50% while the North 'builds walls'. I don't see such a benign outcome, especially when resource problems and global warming are included. Iran and Afghanistan are already 'resource wars': expect more, much more.
Historically, nations in decline look to other cultures for governmental/economic models they can copy. China did this with Russian Marxism, which has been adapted to changing circumstances quite successfully. And as China overtakes the US as a world power, there will be a great temptation in the US to copy the Chinese model of a single coherent oligarchy directing economic and political policy within a largely free market system. Such beloved US institutions as our super-rich bankers and stock traders, our non-representative 60-vote-rule Senate and our appointed-for-life Supreme Court may be consigned, as Marx used to say, to the trashbin of history. But we will be sure to keep our elected presidents and congress, just as China keeps all the colorful paraphernalia of Mao's old Red fantasyland.
The Republicans and the Democrats already constitute our version of the Communist Party of China. Obama and Hu Jintao could trade places and no one would ever know. China's mercantile tyranny is our future. Our constitution will disappear simply by being ignored. The public will sit back and do nothing. In the words of Calvera, the bandit chief in "The Maginificent Seven", "If God did not want them sheared, he would not have made them sheep."
"If God did not want them sheared, he would not have made them sheep."
Or, in the words of Zantar, supreme leader of the Crab Nebula Federation, "If human brains weren't supposed to be harvested, we would not have made them taste so good".
"Obama and Hu Jintao could trade places and no one would ever know."
Least of all, Obama and Hu Jintao!
Unfortunately there is a darker version than this and we are headed right for it.
That version is that faced with an ascendant China and economic, military and political degradation here at home the US will lash out and create a truly regional military conflagration in the middle east and central Asia.
The pieces and players are already in place for the declaration of war against Iran and the destabilization of Pakistan to the point where it becomes a failed state with nuclear arms.
The whole region will go up in a fireball of war. This is the endgame the neocons were counting on and has a good chance of taking place.
Unless and until we, the United States, voluntarily dramatically downsize our Empire the forces of economic and political crisis will take the form of ever larger and more violent military adventure ...
We already see the war mongers discussing the cuts to Social Security and Medicare to pursue ever higher military budgets for these adventures ... We will bankrupt ourselves while the Military Industrial Complex and the Banksters gorge on the money and debt they will extract from the American people ...
Unfettered growth, panacea or cancer?
If the US spent all of its money on her people, no one would ever have to worry about us again. If China spent all of her wealthy on her people, we'd never have to worry about the Chinese. If every nation spent all of its money on their own people, on bettering the human condition and cleaning up the planet, would there be any more wars?
If every nation simply used its wealth to take care of their own and others when needed...
beautiful
it was also the word that came to me immediately :
BEAUTIFUL statement.
even if they are are "IF" -- THAT ought to be what nations should be - that ought to be ,so long as there are nations, the "TRUE DESTINY" of nations ...to be at peace by seeing to the welfare of their people...and by THAT be able to share the planet in peace with other people...recognizing the uniqueness of each without NEED to "want" what others have because they are SUFFICIENT in their prosperity and happiness living within what their LANDS gave them and by finding ways , creative ways to be happy with what the land gives.
after all - where there are no wars - in places - the citizens of any nation , having lived their way of life, peacefully and within their means or the means the earth gave - are happy in their peace.
the tribes in south america - when left to live with nature as they have - NEVER needed airplanes or jet skis or this or that modern accoutrement. they were or are happy because they are among their loved ones...and their land.
you stated such beautiful thoughts, indeed.
What you say is true and false at the same time.
The paradox of human beings is that they are transcendent in their ability to envision paradise but utterly incapable of implementing it no matter how simple, practical and worthwhile that vision might be.
Maybe it's because human intelligence is inversely proportional to the number of humans in the group.
Maybe it's because the gray aliens screwed some monkeys on the way to some other planet.
Oh, the answer to your question is probably no, except for civil wars (an oxymoron if there ever was one).
"Nature is poised to strike back in unpredictable ways whose effects could be unnerving and possibly devastating."
"Under a Green Sky"
"With speed and Violence"
"Storms of my Grandchildren"
"The Great Iceage", Drury, Chapman
and one can surmise the answer to the question: "What type of climate phenomena caused the defeat and reversal of the previous 4 interglacial temp/CO2 spikes depicted on the IPCC/Gore chart of ice core data in Inconv Truth??
The one thing for sure about the 10 year look out is that almost everything thing in it will be wrong. I often wonder why people write these pieces. Is it some form of therapy?
"The one thing for sure about the 10 year look out is that almost everything thing in it will be wrong. I often wonder why people write these pieces. Is it some form of therapy?"
They write them as a sort of reverse barometer so that you, dear reader, can simply deduce the opposite of what is written and... !SHAZAM! instant wisdom!
Your Welcome.
I find it interesting that Klare mostly ignores Russia and the EU from his geopolitical power shuffle discussion. He also ignores the US goal to militarize space by 2020 for the purpose of Full Spectrum Domination. Perhaps he was limited by space, time and/or info. As noted, he also omitted mentioning the threat posed by the chemical poisoning of the ecosphere which is already taking its toll.
I predict the estimates of US and Chinese future GDPs to be grossly inflated (USA) and too low (China), with its massive debtload constraing the USA while China will likely continue its 10%+ GDP growth rate with a GDP close to 9 Trillion by 2020. Given that USA GDP contains meaningless financial transactions amounting to several trillions that only serve to inflate GDP, the USA is already much worse off than what is written on paper.
I do not foresee conflict between China and the USA as the latter's elite are getting very wealthy from China's rise and will be unwilling to kill their Golden Goose (This is why it's very unlikely that Iran will be attacked, for, as Klare noted, it's a strategic ally of China). However, at some point Chinese growth will drasticly slow as it becomes clear that it's time to reseek balance with the natural world--the Yin/Yang of Confucian thought that even Mao and Chou couldn't exorcise from Chinese culture.
Russia is again the largest exporter of oil as well as the largest extractor, passing Saudi yet again. It's quite possible the energy and natural resouces powerhouse will form a more overt bloc with China than the already existing Shanghai Cooperation Organization, especially if NATO keeps pestering.
Unless radical political change occurs soon in the USA able to redirect the priorities of the US economy away from war and empire to mitigating energy depletion, Global Warming and economic decline, the USA will emerge at the end of the decade a shadow of its former self--especially if the stuggle for political change becomes violent, which is very likely.
Ultimately, unless people of good will act soon, the coming decade will continue to evolve into a dystopia if Business as Usual remains the norm.
Karlof1....those are very thoughtful and sensible comments. in some of them :
no conflict between USA and China - i hope you are right.,...whatever else the problems are ...but I hope not because the US "elite" like it that way ...but by force of circumstance for all -- that SENSE comes into people.
as for Russia ...whatever her own motives are ..until recently -- China has been rather frustrated, according to reports , that Russia was "dragging" its feet on completing gas and oil delivery to china ..even as their already substantial economic "bloc" has kept firming up.
but apparently -- something "decided" Putin this week: maybe the need for china's money, maybe other things also - and "with a mere touch of a computer button...send the instructions" to finalize and begin delivery of agree-upon gas to china (in addition of course to existing ones) ...after having already long completed another pipeline across siberia to the Far East ....thus signaling that Russia is now committing - through china - an even greater acceleration of development in "FAR EAST ASIA"..
while russia alone can not supply all the energy needs of the voracious "developing" asian countries -- it certainly firms up their claims as a new power and economic bloc -- enough, perhaps to counteract ANY
American or European "old games" of intimidation or diktats.
clearly -- the central drawing magnet is China...around which at least SOME part of the developing nations' economies, including russia's are now intimately tied -- which , in some way , through this "infusion of energy blood" from russia (partly though it may be) -- rather than sending it to EUROPE or the USA - firms up a power bloc that in the future should be able to resist any FURTHER imperial attempts by the USA...since we all should know that
IF the USA continues to and never has abandoned its policy of "cold war" to see russia or china as "inherently" threatening to be "conquered" or dominated...and maintained as "junior" partners if that ...
THEN TOO - Russia - by history would be within its reason to ALSO never "have abandoned" looking at the USA as exactly what the USA has behaved like:
a THREAT to Russia's sovereignty -- considering that the USA has habitually undermined the sovereignties of nations...including russia's. ...most recently in the attempts to feed on the carcass left by the collapsed soviet union in the 1990's when the USA and western multinationals practically had an ORGY of feeding on russia's national treasures.
what I think is:
while russia and china are NOT exactly bossom buddies - but have mostly entered into a partnership of convenience or tolerance - they DO have a common history of having been nationalist defenders FROM western domination -- having both arrived at communism or socialism, albeit with different way or success. and it is after all FROM russia under Lenin - that China took its first inspirations of fighting foreing imperialism by the west.
further - their geographic locations make them , even within their rivalry as powers, natural Allies - in commerce and trade, and exchanging their needs from each other - as well as being a common bloc - like with the Shanghai Cooperation..
to ensure that NEITHER will ever need to suffer the previous imperial threats from the USA as they "back each other" up in such times...and present to the USA - and IMPLICIT if unspoken warning:
"DO NOT ATTACK or MEDDLE"
each - for it also means meddling or attacking the interests of the OTHER.
it would then be like NATO's OWN principles:
"AN ATTACK ON ONE is an attack on the WHOLE".
in this case - an attack on china , in any manner, is an attack on Russia and vice versa.
with that implicit sign...does the USA REALLY want to challenge TWO powerful countries, each of which can also destroy the USA , even if they also go down in flames? does the usa REALLY want to "isolate" , or "threaten" or undermine , or openly attack or provoke RUSSIA alone or China alone...where the consequence will promote the implicit partnership of the two ....
involving the USA having to try and dominate and control and "isolate" or attack
literally TWO GIANTS with all that landmass to conquer - and all that population :
CHINA and RUSSIA - nearly 1.6 BILLION people who -- if even only a small percent of them can be mobilized in a war -- would simply overwhelm the USA's ENTIRE population?. WHILE CHOKING the USA's energy ?
such a scenario will see the complete destruction of what we recognize as the "USA"...
IF it even reaches that point before China, in tandem with Russia
with a few computer strokes
Blind the USA's computer connected, satellite dependent War machine ...leaving american forces stranded everywhere , open to attacks and far from replenishments of energy, armor and manpower...
and of course - if they so really wished and threw it in as "cost of doing business"
sacrfice their dollar holdings, DUMP them and thus - effectively DESTROY the entire US monetary system ...
while STILL LEAVING INTACT -- deep within their own borders THEIR very real , MATERIAL GOODS and Energy as is now established in these pipelines...FAR from any USA intrusions.
in an all-out conflict - whether primarily military or economic...i think the USA will not survive against either or both of these countries so long as Russia and China maintain their "cooperation".
but even without , they each, especially china have now far too many other options:
economic, as well as military and political - to bear on what THEY can call their "allies" or partners (south american countries, central asian, far east asian..even african)
to make life VERY VERY difficult for the USA...anywhere in the world.
Hey teddy--Thanks for your reply. Like it or not, the EU is dependent on Russian and asian energy supplies until they cease exporting in 20-30 years. Naturally, the EU wants stability in the region so it can get its energy supplied at prices not driven higher by social unrest or war.
Part of the equation in trying to determine future events is the likely timeline for the cesation of oil and NatGas exports, and you'll note that I've written 20-30 years above. That will impact future planning for the developing Asian countries. India is currently the loser in that respect as the Iran-Pakistan-India "Peace" pipeline is stalled at the border between Pakistan and Iran and is unlikely to reach India for another 2-3 years at best. Both the Indian and Pakistani economies are dying for greater enegy supplies and generating capacity. Chinese and Indian relations are rather cold because of long unresolved border issues and a bit of longstanding historical emnity. This emnity provides an inroad for US hegemony in South Asia that would probably not exist because of longstanding US favoring of Pakistan during the Cold War. The point is there is very little time to build up your economy so you can produce the non-fossil fuel energy generation systems needed in the near future. For the USA, what is known as the Hirsch Report details the dire straits faced by the US if it doesn't aggressively act to mitigate the effects of peak oil specificly and peak energy in general--efforts that would also lower carbon emissions and greatly stimulate the real economy.
Planetary blowback has already effected the global food market through increasing drought, flood and wildfire. I just finished watching a news clip about the final evaporation of the glacier that provides a large percentage of La Paz's water supply, making Bolivia's capital one of the first major cities to be impacted by vanishing water supply caused by global warming (Sydney and Melbourne were the first two). The Philippenes got wracked by 5 different tropical cyclones this past summer, while Taiwan, China and Vietnam were assaulted by three. And so it goes.
Actually karlof1,
The Philippines usually gets about 20 typhoons a year. What's different is not the number of them, but the shear intensity. 61 inches of rain fell in LESS THAN ONE WEEK, destroying Manila. Followed a shortened rainy season. Trees chopped down for fuel (cooking charcoal) since LP cooking gas is too expensive now for most people, has caused deadly mudslides in many parts of the country.
Personally, I think you guys are right. We are in a runaway thermal event here which has all the hallmarks of a global extinction event written all over it. I think I'll start building an Ark.
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
Thanks for your reply TJ.
I met my first serious "ark" builders in 1998 at SolFest, folks who formed what became the Post Carbon Institute and its affiliate Global Public Media. Over the first decade of these organizations's existence, they have sparked what is termed the "transition" movement, which is associated with the spawning of several "arks" in the US and Europe. http://www.transitionus.org/get-involved provides info for starting your own "ark." The overall effort is based on the idea of Relocalization; a paper about this idea is here, http://globalpublicmedia.com/relocalization_a_strategic_response_to_peak_oil_and_climate_change
Another great informational site is http://www.energybulletin.net/
The United States may finally become what your moniker envisioned: a decentralized democracy populated by Yeoman farmers and artisans. I expect it will be at least another century before that would begin to occur. The best book I've found for planning my own ark is "Five Acres and Independence. Good Luck.
Just remember that when you predict World War 3, Amerika with China, there is no chance of World War 4. There is only mutually Assuried Destruction. So knowing this, world leaders are likely to only fight the limited wars that Amerika is so fascinated with.
As lots of atomic bombs, and just a few hydrogen bombs will 'Kill the Trend altogether now'. And maybe just maybe maybe, the Fat Cats know this. And that's why the Chinese Bosses only spent 10% of the USA budget on Military. Whoops let's not forget, Cheney Neo Conservatives still dreaming of those Amerikan Laser cannons flashing from the Sky.
And there we have it, another Trendy Fendy Race to Ungrace All Creatures face. Mind a Lie, Try Try Try.
So keep up the Age Old Good Works (Not Trendy) Peace, Peace & more Peace. Talk peace to as many as will listen.
"So knowing this, world leaders are likely to only fight the limited wars that Amerika is so fascinated with."
Ain't funny how Amerika only picks fights with the little guys? The ones that they're assured to win and make them look more fearsome, powerful and indistructible? And, please, don't anybody tell me "how about WWII"? Those powers that were comparable to the US (Japan, Germany) were ganged upon. Notice how the mighty USA never did go nose to nose with the mighty USSR. There's a Cuban saying "dos narizones no se pueden besar" - two people with big noses can't kiss - that applies well here.
From the article:
"...Chinese leaders are prepared to play global hard-ball."
Know what?
Water shortages are prepared to play global hard-ball.
Food shortages are prepared to play global hard-ball.
Bank failures are prepared to play global hard-ball.
The oil companies are already playing global hard-ball.
Even nature itself is about play global hard-ball.
The softball has been left to the journalists.
I think that Earth should be renamed "Hard-ball".
love this
"Momentous shifts in global power relations and a changing of the imperial guard, just now becoming apparent, will be far more pronounced by 2020 as new actors, new trends, new concerns, and new institutions dominate the global space. Nonetheless, all of this is the norm of history, no matter how dramatic it may seem to us."
-----------------
And at the rate we're going, they will all be "mental" institutions.