China set to become largest global economy in near future, other countries have a choice now, and they need to make use of it

[xizhimen]

China set to become largest global economy in near future, other countries have a choice now, and they need to make use of it
Friday, 26 March 2021 4:33 PM

A political comentator has talked to PressTV about the future balance of power between the US and China. He says China is an economic superstar and has been performing spectacularly for the past four decades. Even following the coronavirus pandemic, China was among the first to bounce back but the United States is still struggling to recover from the aftermaths of the global calamity.

Ashok Swain, who is a professor at the Department of Peace and Conflict Research of Uppsala University in Sweden, told PressTV on Friday that China isnset to surpass the US by 2028.

"Although China was first to get into the crisis, it recovered fast and was the only major economy in the world to avoid a contraction in 2020. But the US economy is still struggling to cope with the pandemic despite a massive stimulus package of $1.9 trillion. Even if China has not surpassed the US in GDP terms, it is expected to do it by 2028. China has become world’s largest trading country, and its exports are more than imports which is not the case with the US," he said.

"However, we also need to remember that China’s population is more than four times the US population, so China's per capita income is still much lower than in the US. For China to reach that level will take much longer. Overall, it is easy to say that China’s economic influence has been massive, and in many parts of the world, it has pushed the US behind."

"There is no doubt that China is rising economically, militarily, and politically. In GDP terms, it will displace the US and become the world’s largest economy in a few years. China is still behind but on the way to surpassing the US in military power with increased spending on weapons technology and developing several secretive weapons.

"China’s political influence has increased manifold due to its growing economy and particularly with the Belt and Road Initiative's help, and it is a permanent member of the Security Council. Russia is now politically stable, doing well with arms industries, but economically it is stagnant to pursue and sustain its great power ambition," Swain added.

The analyst referred to the increasing cooperation between Beijing and Moscow as one of the challenges that Washington faces.

"However, the coalition of some sort between China and Russia in global power politics has become quite forceful and seriously problematic for the US and its European and Pacific partners. At the same time, it is important to remember that the US as a global power will continue to have more political and cultural influence even if it is struggling to cope with China's competition economically and militarily."

"China helps developing countries to build their infrastructure and assists other core sectors such as agriculture, water, health, and education. China’s economic rise has facilitated growth and development opportunities for developing countries through increased trade and infrastructural capacity. China’s lending, investment, and official development assistance are explicitly non-prescriptive and come with ‘no strings attached.

"Superpower China now provides an alternative to developing countries and regional powers to bargain well in this world economy's competitive landscape. If they can play good politics and smart diplomacy, they can manage to get the best possible economic benefit for their countries and people. The leaders of these countries have a choice now, and they need to make use of it," Swain concluded.

China set to become largest global economy in near future, pundit says

China is economically performing spectacularly for the last four decades. It was on its way to being the world’s largest economy anyway, but the Covid pandemic has accelerated that process. But the US economy is still struggling to cope with the pandemic despite its massive stimulus package.

www.presstv.com

 

[Kaptaan]

America has been the global power since nearly a century. This gives it incredible lead but China is closing in fast. The real swing date will be 2050. At that point Chinese GDP will be vastly larger than USA which will translate into massive economic influence and huge military. This is when all things equal China will exhaust USA in a arms race just like USA did to Soviet Union.

This is not a if but inevitable.

 

[Kaptaan]

One thing you will notice is all superpowers of their time end up with what can described as imperial hubris and sense of exceptionalism. The pharaohs of Ancient Egypt did this, the might Romans did this and so did Britain when it song Rule Britannia. Today the Americans carry this air of exceptionalism.

History tells is change is constant. Nobody stays at the top forever. So it is today. We are obsewrving the rise of a new superpower that will get to define the later part of this century.

 

[Jackdaws]

The only country which could and has challenged the USA as a superpower was the UK when its erstwhile empire was intact. A country's power is much about its culture and soft power permeating throughout the world. Everything that we consume / are used to in today's world has an American footprint. Apple, Android, Google, Netflix, Amazon, Twitter, Microsoft, McDonalds, Starbucks, Nike. Obviously there are exceptions and some Asian and European brands which are names to be reckoned with. But difficult to see China of all places ever compete with the US to occupy the top slot.

 

[Oublious]

LOL, didn't Iran gived the key of the country to China , in matter of time we will see a chinese port in middle east because of debt trap...

 

[Ravenman]

China has no oil. So they will never be the number one top player like the USA. Lets hope not.

China = technocratic communist society with social credit points, social distance, control freaked community, Gestapo-like security and Stasi-like police.

 

[Ardabas34]

China has no oil. So they will never be the number one top player like the USA. Lets hope not.

China = technocratic communist society with social credit points, social distance, control freaked community, Gestapo-like security and Stasi-like police.

It is always good for countries like us to have more than one global capital option.
We had to bow before US all this time.

 

[Costin84]

The US can still count on its global network of allies....Japan, Australia, S Koreea, Canada, EU and even India. After all said and done, to be a leader,you have to be a model to emulate and China isn't that, it will never be and that's why its best buddies are "forever autocratic,since Kievan Rus " Russia, "mullahs R'us" Iran, "we like to gun down our civilians" junta from Myanmar , "we have 1 fat guy in the entire country " N Korea and " blasphemy laws,best laws" Pakistan. Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are.

 

[xizhimen]

The article is more about economic power, not military power, the main takeaway is now the developing countries are having another option for money and investment, it's the first time in centuries they got a choice and they should use the choice to their utmost advantage.

China never wants to be an US style hegemonic super power, it's a western colonial mentality which never exists in our minds.

 

[Gary]

so what's China plan to tackle it's demographic problem ??

 

[Jackdaws]

The article is more about economic power, not military power, the main takeaway is now the developing countries are having another option for money and investment, it's the first time in centuries they got a choice and they should use the choice to their utmost advantage.

China never wants to be an US style hegemonic super power, it's a western colonial mentality which never exists in our minds.

Centuries? Lol.

 

[FalconSlayersDFI]

The US can still count on its global network of allies....Japan, Australia, S Koreea, Canada, EU and even India. After all said and done, to be a leader,you have to be a model to emulate and China isn't that, it will never be and that's why its best buddies are "forever autocratic,since Kievan Rus " Russia, "mullahs R'us" Iran, "we like to gun down our civilians" junta from Myanmar , "we have 1 fat guy in the entire country " N Korea and " blasphemy laws,best laws" Pakistan. Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are.

No not India, even our government doesn’t trust Uncle Sam, its only the current geo political scenario which brought us together, else USA is India’s adversary and history tells us that.

 

[ekemenirtu]

The US can still count on its global network of allies....Japan, Australia, S Koreea, Canada, EU and even India. After all said and done, to be a leader,you have to be a model to emulate and China isn't that, it will never be and that's why its best buddies are "forever autocratic,since Kievan Rus " Russia, "mullahs R'us" Iran, "we like to gun down our civilians" junta from Myanmar , "we have 1 fat guy in the entire country " N Korea and " blasphemy laws,best laws" Pakistan. Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are.

Similar lighthearted descriptions can be applied on the supposed "allies" of the USA. Those allies are mostly vassals of the USA in all but name.

Not sure what is that supposed to indicate since if the battle, or cold war, between China and the USA does persist for decades, then the cold war might assume an ideological twist. None of the US "allies" tend to pursue independent foreign policies.

China need not, and I am certain would not, want to follow the USA in this regard by cultivating a bunch of pliant vassal states that are mere extensions of Pentagon and White House.

Ideally, China would like to pursue a new model of interactions between countries given its much longer tradition of statecraft, civilization (which has no parallel in the USA), historical memory, traditions and beliefs. Some of these beliefs may be seen as offensive by outsiders and some of them may be seen much more positively.

 

[ekemenirtu]

The only country which could and has challenged the USA as a superpower was the UK when its erstwhile empire was intact. A country's power is much about its culture and soft power permeating throughout the world. Everything that we consume / are used to in today's world has an American footprint. Apple, Android, Google, Netflix, Amazon, Twitter, Microsoft, McDonalds, Starbucks, Nike. Obviously there are exceptions and some Asian and European brands which are names to be reckoned with. But difficult to see China of all places ever compete with the US to occupy the top slot.

If I may interject, I would argue that those are all accoutrements on the core that is military might, geopolitical influence, diplomatic power and perhaps, ideological attraction.

Many other countries that I will not name here also tend to influence, either globally or regionally, the residents of various countries through their dramas, movies or cultural exports.

Many other countries, too, have produced many consumer oriented brands and in fact, China within a short period of a few decades, has spawned not only imitators but also a few novel ideas and certainly, a not so inconsiderable number of consumer brands.

More important, I would argue, are technologies as measured not by sheer number of patents applied for or granted or measured by R&D personnel employed or R&D expenditures but by actual applications. Scientific breakthroughs and novel ideas are more important, arguably.

I would argue that manufacturing output plays a crucial part, without doubt, but in the coming decades, it may well be the novel technologies that the superpowers might be vying to master may well decide who gets to shape the world.

Another important aspect often ignored is the party that gets to write the rules often gets to win. If readers here are familiar with football, an apt analogy might be the following:

If I get to write the rules of the game, no matter how many players you have in your team or how skilful they are, I would win more often than you.

E.g. Everytime your team is about to score a goal, I might switch my goalpost with yours.

Since the current "international order" was underwritten primarily by the USA in the aftermath of WWII, with the establishment of the United Nations to replace the League of Nations, with the establishment of the "gold standard", the IMF, the World Bank (all based in the USA, not coincidentally) with the US$ as the world's reserve currency, and subsequently, with the dissolution of the Gold Standards at the Bretton Woods Conference (also held in the USA), it is unlikely that China - or any other competitor - can surpass the USA by playing according to American rules.

China needs to write the rules if it is going to supplant the USA.

So long as you play by the rules written in the USA, you are unlikely to defeat them in their own game.

 

[ekemenirtu]

America has been the global power since nearly a century. This gives it incredible lead but China is closing in fast. The real swing date will be 2050. At that point Chinese GDP will be vastly larger than USA which will translate into massive economic influence and huge military. This is when all things equal China will exhaust USA in a arms race just like USA did to Soviet Union.

This is not a if but inevitable.

Interesting that you have now shaved off 50 years from the cutoff period - when US lead over China in geopolitical matters expires.

Earlier, you said you believe China will surpass the USA by the next century, if I am correct.

It appears to be a defeatist mentality since much of this prediction is based on wishful thinking that imitative activities and population driven economic growth alone will propel China to a greater geopolitical standing than the USA. Let us not forget that the US's unshakable alliance includes the entire West as well as Japan, South Korea and perhaps Taiwan. Looser alliances might be said to include those with some Latin American countries, Arabic despots in oil rich countries propped up by them despite little popular support from the masses or some other countries in the Eastern European region still spooked by history of Russian dominance.

Somehow, it appears to be an article of faith among international relations experts or strategists, that the USSR collapsed under the weight of its economic burdens. Yet, this improbable conjecture is yet to be proven true in the case of such isolated or embargoed regimes as in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, current regime in Iran, the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, the junta in Myanmar, the regime in North Korea, the regime in Cuba or the regime in Venezuela or Bolivia.

I find it hard to believe any of the listed regimes had access to greater wealth of technology, scientific expertise, natural resources, monetary resources, human resources, military might, experienced espionage agencies or propaganda departments to match that of the USSR.

If the above is true, this conjecture would turn out to be inconsistent with facts: How come none of those "weaker" regimes/countries have collapsed under the weight of economic warfare or sabotage or embargo, yet somehow only the "mighty" USSR did?

Could it be that this article of faith among Western observers and strategists taken as unchallenged dogma might not be backed by facts? Could it be that this is a false characterization of inner political instability within the USSR for which the USA or its "allies" would like to claim undue credit?

Food for thoughts.

 

[Ardabas34]

Interesting that you have now shaved off 50 years from the cutoff period - when US lead over China in geopolitical matters expires.

Earlier, you said you believe China will surpass the USA by the next century, if I am correct.

It appears to be a defeatist mentality since much of this prediction is based on wishful thinking that imitative activities and population driven economic growth alone will propel China to a greater geopolitical standing than the USA. Let us not forget that the US's unshakable alliance includes the entire West as well as Japan, South Korea and perhaps Taiwan. Looser alliances might be said to include those with some Latin American countries, Arabic despots in oil rich countries propped up by them despite little popular support from the masses or some other countries in the Eastern European region still spooked by history of Russian dominance.

Somehow, it appears to be an article of faith among international relations experts or strategists, that the USSR collapsed under the weight of its economic burdens. Yet, this improbable conjecture is yet to be proven true in the case of such isolated or embargoed regimes as in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, current regime in Iran, the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, the junta in Myanmar, the regime in North Korea, the regime in Cuba or the regime in Venezuela or Bolivia.

I find it hard to believe any of the listed regimes had access to greater wealth of technology, scientific expertise, natural resources, monetary resources, human resources, military might, experienced espionage agencies or propaganda departments to match that of the USSR.

If the above is true, this conjecture would turn out to be inconsistent with facts: How come none of those "weaker" regimes/countries have collapsed under the weight of economic warfare or sabotage or embargo, yet somehow only the "mighty" USSR did?

Could it be that this article of faith among Western observers and strategists taken as unchallenged dogma might not be backed by facts? Could it be that this is a false characterization of inner political instability within the USSR for which the USA or its "allies" would like to claim undue credit?

Food for thoughts.

Dont be so sure of that ''unshakeable'' alliances shakeability.
Even right now US is greatly discontent with the loyalty of EU.
Same goes for Japan too, they bowed their heads and they profited from it after WW2 but dont forget US was the one that nuked two of their cities. Japan let such a thing slide solely because of profit, now why would Japan stay loyal to US, the country that committed such a war crime?
Yes, Japan had troubled relationships with China too but at least it was herself that committed the attrocities.
Even today in 2021 we see major EU countries giving zero ass to Bidens anti China alliance.

 

[ekemenirtu]

Dont be so sure of that ''unshakeable'' alliances shakeability.
Even right now US is greatly discontent with the loyalty of EU.
Same goes for Japan too, they bowed their heads and they profited from it after WW2 but dont forget US was the one that nuked two of their cities. Japan let such a thing slide solely because of profit, now why would Japan stay loyal to US, the country that committed such a war crime?
Yes, Japan had troubled relationships with China too but at least it was herself that committed the attrocities.
Even today in 2021 we see major EU countries giving zero ass to Bidens anti China alliance.

Most EU countries are formal allies of the USA. They are NATO members, which means they are allied with the USA irrespective of all the crimes committed by it or irrespective of how good or bad or evil or generous the Chinese or any other geopolitical adversary from any competing civilization may be.

You see so many European "allies" of the USA try to gang up on China over Huawei, over source of the pandemic, over abuses in Hong Kong or East Turkestan/Xinjiang against the hapless tiny community of ordinary peace loving everyday Uighurs.

Yet, none of these allies of the USA bat an eyelid over crimes committed by "Israel"/Zionist entity, by India, by Al Saud regime (e.g. Khashoggi assassination) and the oppression by the Emirati regime.

This leads me to believe that the concerns expressed by EU member states on these matters is mostly cosmetic in nature and with a geopolitical agenda behind it.

As for Japan, it is effectively occupied and has been under occupation since 1945. Their closest comparators might be Germany or Italy in this regard. They were not even permitted to pursue an independent fighter aircraft project and instead their American occupiers imposed a solution in the form of a modified F-16 aircraft called F-2 on the occupied Japanese.

It would take an outlier in the political scene such as Mr Shintaro Ishihara, a former Governor of Tokyo himself, to blurt out some unsavory truths. He authored a very candid book The Japan That Can Say No: Why Japan Will Be First Among Equals which addresses some of these issues quite well.

As the country that developed AESA radars first and also deployed them on air to air missiles, it was prohibited from pursuing an independent policy and developing an indigenous fighter aircraft along with associated subsystems and a comprehensive aerospace ecosystem to go along with it.

Still, it can be argued that Japan is home to probably Asia's most advanced aerospace sector, ahead of China in terms of quality and reliability but lacking in political independence.