Why is China increasing its assertiveness towards Taiwan? Why the Belt and Road initiative? Why the oppression of Uighurs? Why the occupation of Tibet? Why the creation of islands in the South China Sea? It all comes from the Hu Line.Source: Tomaatje12
The historical dangers to China are really internal, I believe. The "Mandate of Heaven" is earned and kept by the ruler(s) who are strong enough to enforce policies and activities that require a central governing authority that can, for example, raise huge levees of laborers (in the old days) to keep the big rivers within their banks. Some parts of the Yellow River run 50-60 feet of the surrounding land owing to the steady deposition of silt that gives the river its name. The banks of the river are really huge earthen levees built and maintained through the authority of the central government. When the ruler(s) become corrupt or incompetent and catastrophe ensues, hundreds of thousands can and have died. The Chinese have never been good at projecting power beyond their borders. The Europeans made inroads in the 1800s because of Chinese weakness. The Communists are just the latest in a parade of internal conquerors who claim the Mandate over the weakness of the Nationalists who had completely exhausted themselves fighting the Japanese. Now, the world is paying a terrible price for the Chinese hubris and overreach with the Corona virus experiments gone awry. This release of such a monstrous killer on the people of the earth -- including China -- not only makes Chernobyl relatively inconsequential as an example of deadly incompetence, but it is a shadow that will never leave the Chinese people. And soon, the inevitable demographic decline will begin taking a toll on the plans of an expansionist overlord class of some 80 million CCP members in a country of 1.4 billion that is growing old before it got rich. It is only a matter of time till the Mandate passes from these terrible men.
China's concern with Taiwan has a lot more to do with the fact that they have a historical claim on the country's title, rather than geography alone. If Taiwan were not the exiled previous government, you'd see only as much chinese posturing as against Vietnam or the Philippines. Which while certainly not friendly, would not be at the level of an existential threat (politically) that it treats Taiwan as.
China will hit a wall soon and suddenly. 1. Their growth was fueled by vast numbers of young people moving off the farm. They are running out if those. 2. They have built so much infrastructure so fast that it will all start to need repair & replacement at the same time. 3. They are building a vast military, which takes wealth away from productive uses. 4. They will need more social spending since there are a higher percentage of elderly people than before, & familes can't support them. 5. They are starting to regulate industry more because people won't tolerate the pollution & bad working conditions. In other words, the reckless growth of recent decades will come to an end. The U.S. has the same problems, but I think they will hit China harder.
Jan 4, 2022·edited Jan 4, 2022Liked by Tomas Pueyo
If we take the assumption that Chinese people aren't any different from other people and are rational-optimizers geopolitically, we run into many counter-examples of countries (including global powers) being geographically vulnerable from land and sea and yet not having the same compulsion to close all the gaps.
First example: The United States' Gulf and Caribbean coasts. Taiwan is about as far from Mainland China as the Normandy Coast of France is from the Allied staging grounds in England used to invade it during WWII. And the Taiwan Strait, like the English Channel, is notoriously hostile for sailing. The Florida Straits, by contrast, leave the Continental US a stone's throw from Cuba (which was an explicit ally of both the Soviet Union and China during the Cold War), with calm, easily navigable waters between. Staging an invasion across those mere 93 mi (150 km) would be exponentially easier than crossing double that distance across the stormy English Channel or Taiwan Strait. The United States has invaded Cuba its fair share and even run the place for a while after the Spanish-American War, but it hasn't tried such forays since the disastrous Bay of Pigs Invasion. Why?
Another example: Japan. China keeps trying to peel away Japan's nearest islands. It has historical reasons to be wary of its former invader, certainly. But why isn't Japan similarly focused on securing more buffer zones against China? The insecurity should be mutual. If anything, China is now more of a risk to Japan's territorial integrity than the other way around.
Last example: India. India and China have fought real-actual hot wars in the second-half of the 20th Century, far more recently than Japan and China's WWII fighting. If you count minor border skirmishes, India and China are still drawing blood in the Himalayas today. China is also allies with India's sworn enemy and primary geopolitical adversary, Pakistan, which is nuclear armed, to boot, making that triangular conflict all the more existential. So why isn't India venturing out into the Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean, Andaman Sea, and South China Sea?
I heard that China acquired (or tried to acquire) lands in the North-East of Iceland (thus resolving the Icelandic banking fiasco), as it seeks to secure a deep-sea port on the rim of the melting Artic Sea, at the gates of the Atlantic Ocean towards Europe and the Americas. Is this correct ?
A molten ice cap will create a new Mare Nostrum : a Mediterranean 2.0 between the richest countries in the world, with ultra-short shipping lanes, short-circuiting the Suez and Panama canals.
Russia stands to be the greatest winner of climate change, as it controls over half of the Arctic perimeter, and a molten permafrost in Siberia will over time create the largest fertile plains on Earth, with plenty of rivers disclosing it to the new Наше море for exporting its mineral and forestry riches.
China desperately needs a strategic counterweight.
That's also the most immediate reason why Trump tried to buy Greenland.
Super-interesting how much of a loooong play China is making with the Belt/Road. Americans too busy in-fighting. China's economy was already going to surpass USA's but this is just...
Really enjoyed reading this. Although, I respectfully disagree with your categorisation of Indus and Ganges civilisation as distinct as they are connected by same Indus-Ganges Plain. Creation of Pakistan is a recent phenomenon in India's millennium old civilisation. Geography is destiny and maybe we will see reconciliation between India and Pakistan as they are more alike than unlike.
"The same thing happens with the border with Burma and Thailand: China has a buffer there that is mostly full of mountains and jungle, so it’s very hard to invade. It’s safe." China doesn't have a border with Thailand.
Wow! What a piece! Never have I ever taken notes while reading a substack and I did it for this! Mentioning this in this week's edition of my newsletter!
The historical dangers to China are really internal, I believe. The "Mandate of Heaven" is earned and kept by the ruler(s) who are strong enough to enforce policies and activities that require a central governing authority that can, for example, raise huge levees of laborers (in the old days) to keep the big rivers within their banks. Some parts of the Yellow River run 50-60 feet of the surrounding land owing to the steady deposition of silt that gives the river its name. The banks of the river are really huge earthen levees built and maintained through the authority of the central government. When the ruler(s) become corrupt or incompetent and catastrophe ensues, hundreds of thousands can and have died. The Chinese have never been good at projecting power beyond their borders. The Europeans made inroads in the 1800s because of Chinese weakness. The Communists are just the latest in a parade of internal conquerors who claim the Mandate over the weakness of the Nationalists who had completely exhausted themselves fighting the Japanese. Now, the world is paying a terrible price for the Chinese hubris and overreach with the Corona virus experiments gone awry. This release of such a monstrous killer on the people of the earth -- including China -- not only makes Chernobyl relatively inconsequential as an example of deadly incompetence, but it is a shadow that will never leave the Chinese people. And soon, the inevitable demographic decline will begin taking a toll on the plans of an expansionist overlord class of some 80 million CCP members in a country of 1.4 billion that is growing old before it got rich. It is only a matter of time till the Mandate passes from these terrible men.
China's concern with Taiwan has a lot more to do with the fact that they have a historical claim on the country's title, rather than geography alone. If Taiwan were not the exiled previous government, you'd see only as much chinese posturing as against Vietnam or the Philippines. Which while certainly not friendly, would not be at the level of an existential threat (politically) that it treats Taiwan as.
China will hit a wall soon and suddenly. 1. Their growth was fueled by vast numbers of young people moving off the farm. They are running out if those. 2. They have built so much infrastructure so fast that it will all start to need repair & replacement at the same time. 3. They are building a vast military, which takes wealth away from productive uses. 4. They will need more social spending since there are a higher percentage of elderly people than before, & familes can't support them. 5. They are starting to regulate industry more because people won't tolerate the pollution & bad working conditions. In other words, the reckless growth of recent decades will come to an end. The U.S. has the same problems, but I think they will hit China harder.
If we take the assumption that Chinese people aren't any different from other people and are rational-optimizers geopolitically, we run into many counter-examples of countries (including global powers) being geographically vulnerable from land and sea and yet not having the same compulsion to close all the gaps.
First example: The United States' Gulf and Caribbean coasts. Taiwan is about as far from Mainland China as the Normandy Coast of France is from the Allied staging grounds in England used to invade it during WWII. And the Taiwan Strait, like the English Channel, is notoriously hostile for sailing. The Florida Straits, by contrast, leave the Continental US a stone's throw from Cuba (which was an explicit ally of both the Soviet Union and China during the Cold War), with calm, easily navigable waters between. Staging an invasion across those mere 93 mi (150 km) would be exponentially easier than crossing double that distance across the stormy English Channel or Taiwan Strait. The United States has invaded Cuba its fair share and even run the place for a while after the Spanish-American War, but it hasn't tried such forays since the disastrous Bay of Pigs Invasion. Why?
Another example: Japan. China keeps trying to peel away Japan's nearest islands. It has historical reasons to be wary of its former invader, certainly. But why isn't Japan similarly focused on securing more buffer zones against China? The insecurity should be mutual. If anything, China is now more of a risk to Japan's territorial integrity than the other way around.
Last example: India. India and China have fought real-actual hot wars in the second-half of the 20th Century, far more recently than Japan and China's WWII fighting. If you count minor border skirmishes, India and China are still drawing blood in the Himalayas today. China is also allies with India's sworn enemy and primary geopolitical adversary, Pakistan, which is nuclear armed, to boot, making that triangular conflict all the more existential. So why isn't India venturing out into the Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean, Andaman Sea, and South China Sea?
Tibet gives China control of the headwaters of the Mekong river, hydroelectric power and some control of the flow to downstream countries.
Very interesting, and masterly done !
I heard that China acquired (or tried to acquire) lands in the North-East of Iceland (thus resolving the Icelandic banking fiasco), as it seeks to secure a deep-sea port on the rim of the melting Artic Sea, at the gates of the Atlantic Ocean towards Europe and the Americas. Is this correct ?
A molten ice cap will create a new Mare Nostrum : a Mediterranean 2.0 between the richest countries in the world, with ultra-short shipping lanes, short-circuiting the Suez and Panama canals.
Russia stands to be the greatest winner of climate change, as it controls over half of the Arctic perimeter, and a molten permafrost in Siberia will over time create the largest fertile plains on Earth, with plenty of rivers disclosing it to the new Наше море for exporting its mineral and forestry riches.
China desperately needs a strategic counterweight.
That's also the most immediate reason why Trump tried to buy Greenland.
Super-interesting how much of a loooong play China is making with the Belt/Road. Americans too busy in-fighting. China's economy was already going to surpass USA's but this is just...
您分析的很到位，中国为了自己的利益为这么做的，就像当年的美国西进运动一样 不过我不喜欢各种强权，我是理想化的无国界人士
Really enjoyed reading this. Although, I respectfully disagree with your categorisation of Indus and Ganges civilisation as distinct as they are connected by same Indus-Ganges Plain. Creation of Pakistan is a recent phenomenon in India's millennium old civilisation. Geography is destiny and maybe we will see reconciliation between India and Pakistan as they are more alike than unlike.
This is wonderfully put together, thank you!
So much thanks you! This was very interesting and useful to understand a little more about China.
This was such a good post! Thanks for writing it, and really looking forward to the follow-up!
"The same thing happens with the border with Burma and Thailand: China has a buffer there that is mostly full of mountains and jungle, so it’s very hard to invade. It’s safe." China doesn't have a border with Thailand.
Muchas gracias. Very pedagogic!
Again, a great piece! I really enjoy your GeoHistory articles. Thanks!
Wow! What a piece! Never have I ever taken notes while reading a substack and I did it for this! Mentioning this in this week's edition of my newsletter!