MS

US and China are already in a full economic war and this battle for global hegemony is a little bit frightening

Recommended Posts

1. Both United States and China are in full war for global hegemony and both countries are using all the resources at their disposal to pursue the Goal.

2. The fight for supremacy will be very long (20 years at least) and it will go very nasty&brutal, all but the direct nuclear confrontation is possible.

 

First I try to explain why Hegemony is so important ?

Being the Global Hegemon is the Ultimate Prize for any very large country

as the main privileges are: the reserve currency status & unlimited access to resources (natural and other) because of dominant military.

It usually comes this way:

largest economy->strongest military->the reserve currency,

For The United States the timing of achieving the status from British Empire was:

- 1870s the largest economy or about 1900s if all the British Empire is counted,

- early 1940s the strongest military,

- 1940s USD becomes dominant reserve currency.

 

 

Who could be or were contenders after 1945 for US hegemonic position ?

 

Soviet Union after 1945: Never had a chance, below described why

Population 1/4 larger than US, large area, good access to natural resources, placed in Eurasia, since 1950s sophisticated military

but due to inefficient economic model (isolated&centrally planned economy) and political model (very limited civil liberties, no rule of law, isolated society) Soviet Union never was even close.

Soviet Union was a problem for the world as evil, militaristic empire but its development model was only attractive for a few dictators. It was always a dangerous outsider.

At present with less than 150m population it would never be candidate.

Japan was never a contender. Small population (40% of US), isolated islands with no natural resources, limited sovereignty (subordinate country of United States).

European Union – never was or tried to be a contender.

Significant population&economy, but power of EU is much smaller than sum of its constituent countries due to divergent interests, lack of important natural resources, limited sovereignty of important countries: Germany and United Kingdom. Important countries are: Germany (economy) and both UK and France (economy, military, status at UN)

Any other candidates on Earth ?

By population only: China and India other countries are way too small and have bad geography (like Brazil or Indonesia).

India – could not be contender in the foreseeable future, because: third world country, less than 10% of population engaged in sth we could call meaningful economic activity.

This lefts us with China.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately China is different than countries assessed in previous post.

I would try to explain why it is a very dangerous candidate for the Top Spot. Candidate with very limited weaknesses.

I would list and characterize a bunch of metrics, could call it Key Performance Indicators that will be used to compare chances of both United States and China in global race for world hegemony.

Geographical location and potential connectivity

China is located in Eurasia (Europa+Asia), 73% of world people live (5.3 billion) there and it has land borders with 14 countries. On the other hand United States is located in North America, 8% of global population (0.6 billion) live there with land borders with 2 countries.

Over 30% of world people live as close neighbours of China (not more than 1000 miles off its borders), and 3% of world people live as close neighbours of United States.

Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines are within 48 hours journey by ship from major Chinese cities, it is less than 1000 miles. Such proximity is crucial to build close, reliable supply chains.

On the other hand it takes about 20 days to cross Pacific from West Coast to East Asia

(5500 miles from Los Angeles to Tokyo, over 6000 miles from West Coast to East Asia coast).

US East Coast is much closer to European shores 3000-4000 miles but it is still a long way.

 

Any geographical location could be both blessing and obstacle.

In the past United States location in North America, bordered by 2 weak countries and 2 vast Oceans was the best of all Great Powers, very safe as it was automatically immune against practically all threats to motherland.

China with very long land borders with strong countries and maritime proximity to Japan, Korea and Western colonial possessions in East Asia was very vulnerable, it was very bad geographical location.

Since the development of nuclear weapons it does not make much difference. There is currently no reliable defence against ICBMs with MIRVs and it takes 20 minutes of flight to strike any point on the globe.

Large area countries like United States, Russia or China will be always capable to launch land based retaliatory strike against attackers even if marine part of nuclear triad is destroyed by first strike.

So at present Chinese location is better than United States. Chinese location gives it much more opportunities to create close economic ties with Asian countries.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm speechless. That's all I got. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2019 at 11:14 PM, Marcin said:

Unfortunately China is different than countries assessed in previous post.

 

I would try to explain why it is a very dangerous candidate for the Top Spot. Candidate with very limited weaknesses.

 

I would list and characterize a bunch of metrics, could call it Key Performance Indicators that will be used to compare chances of both United States and China in global race for world hegemony.

 

Geographical location and potential connectivity

 

China is located in Eurasia (Europa+Asia), 73% of world people live (5.3 billion) there and it has land borders with 14 countries. On the other hand United States is located in North America, 8% of global population (0.6 billion) live there with land borders with 2 countries.

 

Over 30% of world people live as close neighbours of China (not more than 1000 miles off its borders), and 3% of world people live as close neighbours of United States.

 

Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines are within 48 hours journey by ship from major Chinese cities, it is less than 1000 miles. Such proximity is crucial to build close, reliable supply chains.

 

On the other hand it takes about 20 days to cross Pacific from West Coast to East Asia

 

(5500 miles from Los Angeles to Tokyo, over 6000 miles from West Coast to East Asia coast).

 

US East Coast is much closer to European shores 3000-4000 miles but it is still a long way.

 

 

 

Any geographical location could be both blessing and obstacle.

 

In the past United States location in North America, bordered by 2 weak countries and 2 vast Oceans was the best of all Great Powers, very safe as it was automatically immune against practically all threats to motherland.

 

China with very long land borders with strong countries and maritime proximity to Japan, Korea and Western colonial possessions in East Asia was very vulnerable, it was very bad geographical location.

 

Since the development of nuclear weapons it does not make much difference. There is currently no reliable defence against ICBMs with MIRVs and it takes 20 minutes of flight to strike any point on the globe.

 

Large area countries like United States, Russia or China will be always capable to launch land based retaliatory strike against attackers even if marine part of nuclear triad is destroyed by first strike.

 

So at present Chinese location is better than United States. Chinese location gives it much more opportunities to create close economic ties with Asian countries.

 

Sounds good! Let the games begin!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

China appears to be warning it's citizens that there will be 'difficulties ahead'. Presumably these 'difficulties' will include economic retrenchment, partly due to an overextended government and partly do to external backlash, whether the US 'trade war', increasing restrictions on capital acquisition in Europe, or Belt and Road participants that have gotten caught up in debt traps and are flushing out acquiescent political kingpins.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YENMDYEU9s

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.