Is China a big threat to US?
Recently, China President Xi Jinping gave a speech about China's place in the world.
To what extent China can challenge the US for it's Asian regional and perhaps also global leadership depends on how the US solves the issues it is facing, and on whether China can solve it's political issues. China has already overtaken the US economically in PPP terms, and had some success pushing back US hegemony in its back yard, but lags far behind in soft power, military power, and global alliances to be able to mount a real challenge for global leadership. It's hard to believe that a country as unpopular as China, i.e. with so little soft power, so few allies, could challenge the US globally for supremacy, but then no one expected the US to inflict the self-harm of electing the Donald Trump. But at least Trump has the legitimacy of having being elected; the CCP does not even have that. Trump will soon be history, and China will continue to be a rather isolated country with few allies and a government whose weakness is displayed by its lack of the confidence to allow any organised dissent.
Nevertheless, the election of Trump gives China a chance to challenge the US. China now appears statesmanlike, as it champions green energy, while Trump makes climate denial statements. As China builds its alternatives to US led regional leadership on trade and finance, Trump pulls the US out of TPP. These are opportunities for China.
A United States at war with itself, as it has been over recent years, when Congress tried to stop Obama from doing anything, can not be sure of leading the world. And Trump's leadership is a work in progress, with no one can be sure what will happen, but the US if facing a huge test of its institutions, political system and ability to exercise a coherent leadership role internationally.
However, the CCP rule of China is also fragile, and the leadership knows that if it gets involved in a conflict with the US, patriotic protests could end up developing into revolt against one party rule, so China will tread cautiously. The end of fast economic growth is leading to increasing social unrest in China. China is also less ambitious than the US; it's present goals are more local and regional, rather than global. The world economy is also still more fragile than before the financial crisis, undermining both US and China's strength.
That said, China has a long history and it's government is playing a long game, developing strength in global trade and commodity extraction in Africa which has been compared to neo-colonialism. Its state-run banks fund infrastructure projects at zero interest to gain market share for strategic goals. It uses business strength to silence opposition voices, not just at home but abroad. So far the voices are speaking out on China's internal affairs, but China could use its clout in future for other purposes. We don't know how these changes will shift the balance of power in the long run. Another thing which is hard to gauge is the power of China's cyber warfare capabilities, and the extent to which these could shift the balance of power, as we have not yet experienced a full blown cyber conflict. Nevertheless, China has successfully challenged the US in the field, gathering huge advantages in intelligence and it's not clear how far the US can counter-challenge on this.
In summary, both super powers are not in a strong position right now to confront one another, and we will have to wait and see what happens. My hunch is that Trump will be impeached, and the US will return to "normality" under Pence. After that, China will continue to work mainly on local and regional goals, to unite with Taiwan, control the South China Seas. These are challenges to the US in Asia, but not on a global level. But while the US is going through the Trump phase, some opportunities exist for China, and surprises could happen.
In terms of economics: No.
The US industries are becoming less competitive not because of China, but of US allies.
The era of Kodak was terminated by Canon/Nikon. Ford/GE and Detroit lost the automobile industry because of German and Japanese cars (when the high-end one started to lookdown and the bottom one started to look up). Medical devices are also losing competitive advantage because of non-US tech companies located in EU. Other examples include: Boeing vs Airbus. Harvard vs Cambridge. WesternDigital/Sandisk vs SamsungSSD. EsteeLauder vs L'Oreal/LVMH. JBL/BOSE vs Focal/B&W/Denon. It's just too many similarities to mention.
And Chinese factories does not have unique competitive advantage. It's simply accumulation of labor. It is not cloth factories who are taking US jobs and mainly compete with US. (but, the US voters and media still need to blame a blamable object)
In terms of ideologies: Yes.
But it's not the reason to stop trade and cooperation. Chinese pay trillion for tech products from US, and produces the cheapest labor-intensive products for the US.
In terms of millitary: Not really.
When it comes to national security, Chinese millitary force lack the capability to project power to half of its closeby countries (like India). It spend far less than US on millitary forces.
But if you are talking about US forces around China, then yes. Because US are currently trying to strenthen its millitary forces around China and against China, like what it did to USSR. China will soon be forced to protect itself agains certain threats to its national security, one example is AN/TPY-2 radar spying the whole China's sky.
It would be a long branched debate to decide whether a country is a threat to another. Because there are many factors we need yo consider here, specially when we are speaking about Strong countries such as US & China.
I don't promise a difinite answer, but I will provide a way of analyzing the issue.
First of all, you need to define what you refer to as "threat".
- Are you concerned about the growing economy of China, that makes it dominnant in the international markets?
- Are you only pointing to the massive military powers of china?
- The possibility of cultural and social inflation that would follow if china opens up 'greatly' to the world ? And the fact that it might affect the western cultue that took so long to spread in the world.
I am not an expert, I am just trying to give an example or a way of analyzing.
But generally, what is considered as threat is usually the growth of econonmy and military. Then, I would say China and the US are in compition in those areas.
Lastly, I would like to point out that what actually is a point out of question, and an area worth studying : that is the growth of china has happened through Industry. And most of the products of this industry are marketed and sold in the developing countries. Which has led to China's domination in most ( if not all) the third world countries' markets.
So, conclusion is : The growth of China economically, industerially is a Theat to the economy of the developing countries.
Those countries has developed a liability on China to bring various kinds of products. And that has prohibited their ability to establish local industry to produce the same products china provides. Because china is already dominations, and it brings products of lower prices.
Sorry for the very long answer'' my first". HHopfully, I've had helped.
China is not a threat to the United States.
China has existed for thousands of years and has maintained itself in a territory. It has not used warfare to dominate other countries, and it is opposed to this within it's philosophy.
The civil war of 1949 remains to be resolved so eventually there must be a political solution to uniting China, so the Peoples Republic of China represents a threat to the Republic of China covering Taiwan.
Broadly speaking, Chinese intend to raise their financial status to that of a first world country. It intends to do this by raising the economic status of the countries it deals with, and not by bringing down western countries, which most have a great deal of respect for.
China only represents a challenge to many national myths of the United States, namely that it deserves to be the leading nation and the most successful in all domains. Of course, truth is more important than myth.
America can still fight and win two major wars at the same time, or at least come near enough to winning that neither Russia nor China would see much hope in the gamble. The United States can do this because it continues to maintain the world's most formidable military, and because it stands at the head ofan extremely powerful military alliance. Moreover, Russia and China conveniently pose very different military problems, allowing the United States to allocate some of its assets to one, and the rest to the other.The United States discarded its oft-misunderstood "two war" doctrine, intended as a templatefor providing the means to fight two regional wars simultaneously, late last decade. Designed to deter North Korea from launching a war while the United States wasinvolved in fighting against Iran or Iraq (or vice versa,) the idea helped give form to the Department of Defense's procurement, logistical and basing strategies in the post–Cold War, when the United States no longer needed to face down the Soviet threat. The United States backed awayfrom the doctrine because of changes in the international system, including the rising power of China and the proliferation of highly effective terrorist networks.But what if the United States had to fight two wars today, and not against states like NorthKorea and Iran? What if China and Russia sufficiently coordinated with one another toengage in simultaneous hostilities in the Pacific and in Europe?