Overtaking the US in manufacturing doesn't make China a military superpower

[xchrom]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/policy/overtaking-the-us-in-manufacturing-doesnt-make-china-a-military-superpower/articleshow/8983386.cms

At the Cold War's end, some pundits proclaimed that 'geo-economics' had replaced geopolitics. Economic power would become the key to success in world politics, a change that many people thought would usher in a world dominated by Japan and Germany.

Today, some interpret the rise in China's share of world output as signifying a fundamental shift in the balance of global power, but without considering military power. They argue that a dominant economic power soon becomes a dominant military power, forgetting that the US was the world's largest economy for 70 years before it became a military superpower .

Political observers have long debated whether economic or military power is more fundamental. The Marxist tradition casts economics as the underlying structure of power, and political institutions as a mere superstructure, an assumption shared by 19th-century liberals who believed that growing interdependence in trade and finance would make war obsolete.

But while Britain and Germany were each other's most significant trading partners in 1914, that did not prevent a conflagration that set back global economic integration for a half-century. Military power, which some call the ultimate form of power in world politics, requires a thriving economy. But whether economic or military resources produce more power in today's world depends on the cont

[ixion]

1. perhaps, although as superpowers go

they're certainly a player.

and having a manufacturing base is most certainly efficacious, as opposed to not having one.

[Sherman A1]

15. Can they project power?

That is the question? If so and they have the military might then they might be on the road to being a military superpower.

I suspect that is not necessarily the case, but whatever.

[ixion]

16. They certainly project power in their hemisphere

Just as Japan and Thailand. Their projection of power in the Western Hemisphere is financial, more than military. I think that's their strategy.

[opihimoimoi]

2. The USA owes 13 trillion $$....them Chinese owes 0.....we got debts...they don't

[Warren Stupidity]

3. The debatable 70 year lag between economic and military

'super power' status is mostly because the US was geographically isolated from europe, and thus with the military technology of the time, faced no military threat from other great nations. Those conditions certainly do not apply to China, situated in the Eurasion mainland, and with the global reach of current technology. Having our navy bobbing offshore protecting the former Chinese province of Taiwan doesn't help.

At some point in the near future we are going to lose our singular position as king of the hill, mostly because we can't afford to stay there. The decline is already in progress, and the political fallout is already rather ugly. The forecast is not so good.

[xchrom]

4. have you been following china's investment in africa & areas that literally surround india?

very, very interesting things afoot there.


we could save ourselves a good deal of heart ache by dismantling our 'empires' many military bases the world over & start with different approaches to the world.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. The Idiots in Charge are continuing the expansion.

We are adding bases all around the world, not pulling back. The fact that this is not sustainable and will lead to ruinous conflicts doesn't appear to have sunk in. It will. China has the wisdom of a culture with a 1000 year perspective on things. They have seen Great Nations build and lose vast empires over and over again. I don't think they view global military hegemony as a useful goal. They will build the military they need to protect themselves and their economic interests while avoiding conflict and growing economic alliances.

[xchrom]

6. i do believe you are correct.it'll be interesting to watch the china & pakistan

relationship & how they develop that.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

7. And what does being a military superpower make you besides broke and looking for

more places to destroy what's there.... constantly looking over your shoulder, searching for ways to prop up your economy by spreading corporate influence as far as you can. It's time for the MIC to grow up and put away its toys.

[Demeter]

8. The only battles won today are economic ones, not military

And in that respect, we've lost, hands down. Furthermore, we're stuck as the Corporate Mercenary for the world...

[HysteryDiagnosis]

10. What did we learn from history? Nothing....

[Demeter]

11. Summer School!

Cram course, remedial lessons, tutoring, all for the low, low price of $14T!

[Rosa Menti]

13. You are correct in asking that question.

Though I am no scholar, I do remember that Spain in its heyday was the world's military power pre-eminent. They had an extensive empire in the new world and hoped to exploit all the gold they were going to find in fabled El Dorado, and their empire would stand forever...reality set in when there was no gold to return to Spain and the crushing debts undid their military influence in a relatively short time. I, personally, have not missed the similarities between now/here and there/then. Shame really, considering the promise that once was America.

[bemildred]

9. There are no military superpowers, and it's stupid to want to be one. nt

[Demeter]

12. Umpteen nukes trump just about anything.

It's one of those facts that stupid doesn't help, and knowledge can't cure.

[bemildred]

14. Indeed, superpowers are technologically obsolete. nt

[ohbill]

17. "Overtaking the US in manufacturing"?

Wasn't this statistic disproven at least twice this year?