Opinion: U.S.-China relations -- how they are managed will impact all of humanity

It may be a good time to read Sun Tzu’s 6th century Chinese military treatise, “The Art of War.” This book is considered one of the gems on military strategy to this day.

Sun Tsu’s philosophy is to make fighting a war unnecessary, to instead accomplish the most with minimal risk -- in essence, to win without fighting.

The economic rise of China is well documented. The Economist magazine recently predicted China’s economy will surpass the U.S.’s by 2019 if this ‘see-saw’ (China rises as the U.S. declines) effect continues.

China’s educational wave, making vast improvements to their system of education, is another reminder of China’s desire to regain its prominence as the “Middle Kingdom.”

 A third wave, that of military expansion, has the potential for a build-up that may ultimately swamp America, but perhaps not in the way some expect. The threat may come from within.

According to Pentagon officials, China is not yet capable of competing militarily with the U.S. and are at least a generation or more behind the United States in military technology.

Perhaps the real threat is what President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a WW II hero and Army general, warned about in his farewell presidential speech. It was 50 years ago that Eisenhower warned the nation to beware of the “Military Industrial Complex” -- an “iron triangle” of intertwined relationships between government, the Armed Forces and the industrial sector that manufactures arms and profits from them.

Americans must be careful that we do not allow recent China saber rattling, an expansion of their military prowess, evidenced by a testing of their first stealth jet and the construction of their first aircraft carrier, to draw us into an extended arms race that we can ill afford.

Should we protect our national interests? Absolutely! However, the policy question moving forward will be: At what cost? And do we win the battle only to lose the war?

Our military budget, like all aspects of U.S. spending, has recently come under fire in this new era of budget austerity.

China has used its evolving economic strength to gain enormous strategic geopolitical advantage in a number of areas, spending the better part of its stellar economic rise to build its country: Roads, bridges, air and seaports, bullet trains, schools, and universities. All have benefited the Chinese people and kept the Communist Party in power.

All the while, the U.S. has disinvested in our people and domestic priorities, allowed our infrastructure to decay and building up our military only to police the world, spending trillions overseas. It shows, too, as we struggle economically -- we are also crumbling, literally, from within.

Clearly, China is also spending militarily as well as on domestic needs. If we try to keep pace with an arms race with China could we, like the USSR, go broke? Or will the American people become fed up with high unemployment, declining wages, aging infrastructure and a concentration of wealth in the hands of a few to demand changes in spending priorities?

The Soviet Union spent its focus and economy on an arms race with the West (primarily the U.S.). Economically, communism was part of the problem but the spending on arms ultimately bought down the former USSR.

Watch out for the MIC and it trilogy of political hardliners, U.S. military, and defense contractors bringing America down -- without a shot being fired.

As China grows militarily, there will be a continued cry from our military and congressional and defense contractors to reverse the beginning of reductions or at least slowing the increases in military expenditures here at home. Just as the old USSR bankrupted themselves in an escalating arms race, China could do the same to us.

Many in Washington with a Potomac view see China’s growing military might as a strategic threat to the Pacific region if not our homeland. There have already been hot words over the South China Sea, with the Pentagon claiming that China has an “operational” ballistic missile able to sink aircraft carriers at long range.



Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he was not surprised by China’s recent Stealth fighter test. In the New York Times, Mullen pointed to China’s development of anti-satellite and anti-ship technologies saying, “Many of these capabilities seem to be focused very specifically on the United States.”

There is also fear in some circles that China’s current civilian leadership may not have the absolute control over China’s military it once commanded. What might a rogue People’s Liberation Army (PLA) be capable of?

China is intent on catching up and surpassing the U.S. in space and high tech superiority, communications systems and cyberspace weaponry. The PLA has successfully demonstrated advanced anti-satellite weapons systems, blowing one of its satellites out of the sky for the world to see.

During his visit to the U.S., Chinese President Hu signed business deals totaling over $45 billion worth of American exports to China, supporting 235,000 American jobs in 12 states.

One major agreement is a joint-venture in commercial aviation with G.E. This joint agreement/partnership with a state-owned Chinese company calls for the sharing of America’s most sophisticated airplane electronics. While creating jobs at home today, this deal and could result in the technology being used by our Chinese counterparts to out-compete G.E. and other U.S. companies in the future by producing better and certainly cheaper consumer aviation products.

The greater fear is these same technologies could help China fast forward militarily.

Despite billions of dollars in proposed Pentagon budget cuts, outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently announced that Chinese development of its first radar-evading fighter jet, as well as an anti-ship ballistic missile that could hit American aircraft carriers, had persuaded him “to make improvements in American weaponry a priority.”

So before we even have begun the slowing of military expenditures, we have a rationale for expanding the industry.

Christina D. Romer, an economics professor at the University of California-Berkley and former chairwoman of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisors, pointed out in a New York Times story that the bi-partisan National Commission of Fiscal Responsibility and Reform “recommended that military spending, which has risen more than 50 percent in real terms since 2001, grow much more slowly in the future.”

Timothy Geithner, U.S. Treasury secretary, in a speech to Johns Hopkins University School for Advanced International Studies, his alma mater, recently pointed out: “It is imperative for the U.S. government to invest more in education, infrastructure and research and development, and to improve the incentives for business investment and to restore fiscal responsibility.”

In his State of the Union address, President Obama called for investments in rebuilding America to help get our country working again.

The future will belong to the nation that invests in its people. Investing in research and development, innovation, knowledge, creativity with a can-do spirit will propel us forward. The president has repeatedly said, “A nation that out educates us today, will out compete us tomorrow.”

The question remains, will our expenditures match our rhetoric?

Can we afford both “bread and arms” when we have a deficit in excess of $14 trillion, borrowing 40 cent for every dollar spent and owing China over $900 billion?

 When it comes to the U.S. spending wishbone, domestic vs. military spending going forward, who will be the ultimate winner?

---

“If you know both yourself and your enemy, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.” — Sun Tzu, The Art of War

---

A new nationwide poll by the Pew Research Center shows a major shift in how Americans perceive China. Americans now see Asia, not Europe, as the region of the world most important to U.S. interests. Yet by a margin of 60 percent to 27 percent, Americans think China’s economic strength is more of a problem than its military might.

China has a rich, 5,000-year history of its being the ruler of the universe, aka the “Middle Kingdom.” China was the preeminent world power during most of this time with the exception of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th. Recent flexing of China’s economic, educational and military now represent to China’s nationalistic masses, a historical norm not an abnormality. Today, Chinese Netzens are abuzz with China reclaiming its historical mantle.

China watchers believe China is simply biding its time until it once again regains its “rightful place” as the “Middle Kingdom” of the world. They believe that China will not be as satisfied as when Chou En-lai, Deng Xiaoping or President Hu Jinato claim to deal with the West “on a basis of equality and reciprocity.”

With a population now in excess of 1.3 billion, China’s nationalism will be the glue that will bind the country together as the 21st century unfolds. Riding high historically, China has seen no limit to its power and influence and, some claim, its arrogance.

Just as President’s Obama and Hu begin a relationship, in 2012 we will see President Hu begin to phase out of power from the Chinese Communist leadership scene passing the baton to his expected successor, a former provincial leader and descendant of high ranking revolutionary officials -- Xi Jinping, now China’s vice president. Xi has been known to show impatience with foreigners wary of China’s new power in the world. Yet he has extensive experience with the West and his daughter is a student at Harvard.

Could China’s military build up be a Chinese Trojan fortune cookie? Will China drag the U.S. into greater military spending, borrowing money from China to do so, enabling them to stoke both their domestic and military spending thus accelerating the economic see-saw, with America occupying the declining position?

Our leaders and the American public need to watch this building storm, protect our national interests, and be careful that our own preparation for the coming waves do not become our undoing.

Sun Tzu, reminds us: “The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.”

The ancient Chinese Philosopher, Lao-tsu captured the essence of the recent Chinese state visit to the U.S. with this statement, “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”

The Chinese and U.S. leaders vowed to build “a cooperative partnership based on mutual respect and mutual benefit.” Time will tell how this will play out.

As we continue this journey with a rising China, we will need leaders of great wisdom to make sure it is “harmonious” for us both. How our mutual leaders manage and lead in the 21st century will impact all of humanity.

Tom Watkins has a life long interest in China and has traveled extensively and worked there for more than two decades. He serves on the University of Michigan’s Confucius Institute, and the Detroit Chinese Business Association advisory board and is honorary professor and educational consultant to K-12 schools and a university in China. He served as Michigan’s state superintendent of schools, 2001-05, and president and CEO of the economic council of Palm Beach County, Fla., 1996-2001. He can be reached at: tdwatkins88@gmail.com.