What China learned from Vladimir Putin

Posted By Steve LeVine Friday, September 24, 2010 - 10:02 AM Share

Call it the Georgia lesson. In 2008, Russia informed the United States and the rest of the West that the former Soviet Caucasus and Central Asia were no longer their playland, but rather Moscow's sovereign sphere of influence. How did it do so? By going to war with Georgia.

Now we have China informing Japan -- and the rest of Asia -- that the Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea are its territory in which to fish and whatever else it wishes. Like Russia, Beijing did so by demonstrating that it was prepared to go to almost any extreme -- in this case short of war, but including the crippling of several Japanese industries -- to press its territorial claim. This includes rights over the big oil and gas reserves in the islands. Today Japan blinked. After this, will Japan continue the presumption that it is in charge of what it calls the Senkaku islands? Not if it wishes to continue to manufacture the Prius, as Andrew Leonard notes at Salon.

The difference of course is that, with all due respect to Russia and Georgia, this case concerns truly serious players. The breathtaking part is China's readiness to dismissively take on Japan, the world's third-largest economy.

Today, President Barack Obama is to meet with the 10 worried member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. In a joint statement and with Obama behind them, they will suggest that China is bad, bad, bad to have forced its way with Japan, and wrong, wrong, wrong if it thinks it will get away with it again. But, as with the Georgian incident, is the U.S. prepared to go to war to press its case? Are any of the ASEAN nations? That was Russia's bluff in 2008; it is China's now.

A smart oilman told me yesterday over lunch that the rise of China was never going to be like the rise of Japan in the 1980s. Japan was a commercial power without imperial pretensions; China is both.

At the Financial Times, Geoff Dyer says this is not just the caprice of Chinese rulers, but the prodding "of powerful groups within the party-state system." This includes China's oilmen and other industrial leaders, Linda Jakobson of the Stockholm International Peace Institute tells Dyer, "new actors [who think] it is time for China to take its place on the world stage."

China's leviathan brawl over a single fishing boat captain over the last few days is a territorial issue: China's red line. In 2008, Russia signaled that it could be friends with the West, as long as no one presumptuously trod on its turf. China is saying the same thing now. That, in addition to the value of the yuan, marks out the new arena of tension between it and the West.

ALEXEY DRUZHININ/AFP/Getty Images

EXPLORE:CAUCASUS, CENTRAL ASIA, EAST ASIA, BUSINESS, CHINA, DEVELOPMENT, DIPLOMACY, ECONOMICS, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, OIL, RUSSIA, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, TRADE, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY

(13)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

6:24 PM ET

September 24, 2010

'with all due respect to

'with all due respect to Russia and Georgia, this case concerns truly serious players.'

I can understand georgia not be considered a 'serious player', and indeed it is true. However, Russia is a very serious player and only the US is more so. Let's not run with the China hype. They have a very long way to go before they can reach the status of a global power such as the US now and the USSR 30 years ago.

FINALEXODUS

7:25 PM ET

September 24, 2010

are u serious?

I'm sorry but are you serious? China definitely has a long way to go before matching US in terms of power but if you consider a USSR a superpower 30 years go, then definitely China is a superpower already. In every respect, population, geography, economy, cultural, and military, china has all the hallmarks of a superpower (but definitely not as advanced as the US). the only thing that the USSR have an advantage over today's China is in terms of military, which China is trying to play catch up. Economy-wise, China is much stronger than the USSR and much more integrated into the world economy.

NORBOOSE

6:13 PM ET

September 25, 2010

What I think the Author meant

Both Russia and China are obviously "serious players". Lets not get comparative, but the fact is that Russia and China are two of the three countries (us being the third) that have the ability to END HUMAN CIVILIZATION. If that alone isnt enough to make for a "serious" player, what the hell will? I think the author meant that Russian-Georgian relations just arent highly important in the grand scheme of things. China and Japan are both immensley powerful and influential nations, so their bilateral relations alone can have strong reverberations around the world.

8:34 PM ET

September 24, 2010

Point proven

The fact that you have to compare China to country that has not existed for 19 years now, and which was at the height of its power 30 years ago says something about China, does it not?

China not only has not met the military level of the USSR and won't for a while, nor has it met the scientific and educational level either. And one thing it will never match, unless they conquer some new lands or drastically decrease their dependence on fossil fuels, is the energy capacity of the USSR. Not to mention all the other raw materials the Soviets had at their disposal.

As for being integrated into the world economy, do you mean the western controlled world economy? the one that is in deep shit right now, and will likely not exisit in 20-30 years?

BILL888

7:41 AM ET

September 25, 2010

China military: I think it is estimated the speed it is going

AR & FINALEXODUS: I agree with everything what you had said about China except for military capability. When you said "China not only has not met the military level of the USSR and won't for a while...". I wondered how long are you refering to. 20 years ? I think you underestimate China's military capability development. It has been rumoured that China will have rebuilt one aircraft carrier by 2013 and it will built another 2 by 2015. It will also produce its own 5th generation aircraft with 10 years. It is also building large transport aircraft within 10 years. Just to make the list short: China will catch up within 10 years. It is not needed to catch up in everything in a limited war scope. Of course I am not comparing China's military with that of the USA's military world wide. I am talking China having war within the Asia region and not too far into the Pacifica region ( within 3000 kilometers.) So the development of China's military capability may match the USSR or the USA in a regional war to be earlier than you had refered.

SLIGHTLY_OPTIMISTIC

8:19 AM ET

September 25, 2010

Expansion

Russia is voluntarily helping to satisfy the needs of a growing China.

For example, China takes Russian land on lease to grow crops

EMILYGTF

9:47 AM ET

September 25, 2010

a chinese civil organization is planning a peace prize

China is working very hard to raise its soft power and build a good international reputation, from the government to civilians. I've learnt that a Chinese civil organization is planning to build a Silk Road Peace Prize, give the prizes to some people who contributed to world peace, including organizations, individuals, and diplomats etc, like what Nobel Peace Prize did, and maybe more. It's committee members include prominent diplomats, politicians and art celebrities. Here is the link http://chinageeks.org/2010/09/peace-prizes/. Any thought?

MARTY MARTEL

11:02 AM ET

September 26, 2010

China will 'Finlandize' Japan

First order of business for China right now is to ’Finlandize’ Japan after this spat between the two over the capture of a Chinese captain. So China is trying everything it can to ’demonize’ Japan. And US has adopted a hands-off approach to that spat, admonishing both to settle their dispute amicably. So clearly US does NOT accept Japan’s claim to disputed islands even though US knows that Japan has owned those islands since 1895 and US itself had handed those islands over to Japan in 1972.

Japan can NOT depend on US nuclear umbrella because US, having become weak after Iran/Afghan wars, is in no position to challenge China or go to war with China over Japan‘s claim to some islands.

Poor Japan, the economic giant but military midget has to buckle under Chinese pressure. Having allowed its economy become so dependent on Chinese imports and exports, Japan is increasingly going to ’Finlandize’ and come under China’s domination unless Japan develops its own nuclear weapons arsenal to match that of China or even surpass it since China is so much bigger and mightier than Japan.

Does Japan have the stomach to meet this Chinese challenge on its own? The way Japan behaved over this incident doesn’t sound much reassuring.

STEVE LEVINE

1:43 PM ET

September 26, 2010

Findlandization

Marty -- that's a compelling analogy. It seems that this confrontation, deliberately escalated by China, will be increasingly seen as a benchmark for the "new Beijing," a far more sharp-edged, in-your-face and threatening force than we have seen thus far. And Finlandization is one of the local responses.

TOMHE

2:03 PM ET

September 26, 2010

there are other options

An European Union typed organization is one of the alternatives. Both China and Japan need to change their mindsets. For instance, even if China does the actual drilling in the disputed East China, Japan should be able to purchase the oil at a price which is better off than Japan’s own drilling, just as Japan purchases rear earths from mainland of China. Of course, China should treat all Asia customers(Chinese customers included) equally. There is a way, we may reach the end of it.

ZKP20977

5:28 PM ET

September 26, 2010

Bluff

I would definitely say this a bluff by China and agree with your assessment. Why is it a bluff? Besides the reasons mentioned in your article, China is not in the position to take on the "west," militarily, and the reverse is also true. China right now, and perhaps for years to come is too interdependent with the United States economically. Any military engagement between the two countries would cripple the domestic economies as well as the global economy. Then the question would have to be asked by China: What did we gain? No answer needed.

MGA-975

6:44 PM ET

September 27, 2010

advice to the author

Mr. LeVine, if you're going to lie you need to be more convincing.

It is common knowledge that the 2008 war over South Ossetia was started by Georgia, not Russia.

STEVELEVINE

7:59 PM ET

September 27, 2010

MGA-975

Hi MGA -- my piece does not say who started the war, only that the two countries went to war. As for common knowledge, that will be a matter of historical judgment. Thanks, Steve