The rivalry between China and the United States remains virulent.
Those attending the Munich Security Conference had long since unanimously agreed with the irrepressible Henry Kissinger when he growled into the microphone that the relationship between China and the United States would not develop into another cold war. Both powers were far too mutually interdependent, and the world's economy had meanwhile become globalized. Neither Washington nor Peking had any interest in allowing differences between them to escalate. This point is reinforced by the Chinese National Bank's $2 trillion investment in U.S. securities.
The rivalry between the two nations remains nonetheless virulent. With that in mind, the two nations whose mutual relationship will define the 21st century will come face to face when Xi Jinping and Barack Obama meet in Washington, smiling cordially with bared teeth. Neither man trusts the other, but both have to find a way to coexist, at least temporarily.
Australia's Foreign Minister, Kevin Rudd, predicts that China will displace the United States economically by 2020, and by 2025 will have the world's most powerful military. Then the world will be without leadership by a democratic power for the first time in decades and without leadership by a Western nation for the first time in centuries. What that will mean to everyone involved – including both China and the United States – remains unclear. And because of that, they will smile cordially in Washington for now, even if the occasional harsh word is uttered.
Zähnebleckende Herzlichkeit
Von Christoph Prantner
15. Februar 2012 19:11
Die Rivalität zwischen beiden Ländern bleibt virulent
Als der unverwüstliche Henry „Dr. K.“ Kissinger ins Mikrofon brummte, aus dem Verhältnis zwischen den USA und China werde sich kein neuer Kalter Krieg entwickeln, stimmte das Publikum unlängst bei der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz einhellig zu. Zu sehr sind die beiden Mächte bereits voneinander abhängig, zu sehr ist die Welt(wirtschaft) inzwischen globalisiert. Weder Peking noch Washington haben Interesse, Differenzen eskalieren zu lassen – dagegen sprechen schon jene 2000 Milliarden Dollar, die Chinas Nationalbank in US-Anleihen investiert hat.
Die Rivalität zwischen beiden Ländern bleibt dennoch virulent. Aber vor dem oben genannten Hintergrund begegnen sich die beiden Großmächte, deren Verhältnis das 21. Jahrhundert definieren wird, bei Xi Jinpings Besuch in den USA mit zähnebleckender Herzlichkeit. Beide trauen einander nicht über den Weg, und beide müssen doch einen Modus Vivendi miteinander finden.
China, so schätzt der australische Außenminister Kevin Rudd, wird die USA 2020 als weltgrößte Wirtschaftsmacht abgelöst haben und 2025 als führende Militärmaschinerie. Dann wird die Welt erstmals seit Jahrzehnten keine demokratische und erstmals seit Jahrhunderten keine westliche Führungsmacht mehr haben. Was das bedeuten wird, ist allen Beteiligten – auch China und den USA – noch unklar. Weil das so ist, lächelt man heute in Washington höflich, auch wenn dazwischen gelegentlich harsche Worte fallen. (DER STANDARD, Printausgabe, 16.2.2012)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
[I]n the same area where these great beasts live, someone had the primitive and perverse idea to build a prison ... for immigrants in the United States without documentation
The US is suffering from the threat of threatlessness. It desperately needs a new Cold War. How else can it justify spending almost a trillion dollars a year on militarism? And since arms sales are what’s keeping the economy running (such as it is), it cannot afford peace.
As for China, which will have to open up a bit more for the sake of capitalist advantages, a Cold War might also prove useful in the long run — i.e., scaremongering could come to replace a lot of good old-fashioned communist oppression. Just look at how well it works for the US: it shifted public support for the Iraq invasion from negative to positive numbers. And it will do the same for the upcoming attack on Iran.
In sum, Cold Wars are indispensable to militarized states and those who want an excuse to militarize.
The US is suffering from the threat of threatlessness. It desperately needs a new Cold War. How else can it justify spending almost a trillion dollars a year on militarism? And since arms sales are what’s keeping the economy running (such as it is), it cannot afford peace.
As for China, which will have to open up a bit more for the sake of capitalist advantages, a Cold War might also prove useful in the long run — i.e., scaremongering could come to replace a lot of good old-fashioned communist oppression. Just look at how well it works for the US: it shifted public support for the Iraq invasion from negative to positive numbers. And it will do the same for the upcoming attack on Iran.
In sum, Cold Wars are indispensable to militarized states and those who want an excuse to militarize.