Another cold war ? China and U.S.

[thorium1010]

Like the title, has another cold war begun between China and U.S.. There are some indications and developments or Am I stating the obvious ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16423881

Appreciate comments and discussion on the topic.

[phinds]

Do you think China and the US are deeply concerned that we will have a nuclear war with each other?

[Ryan_m_b]

The BBC reporting on the speculation of a magazine about whether or not a classified technology is being used to spy on another nation as a precursor to a period of intense covert operations and nuclear stand-off is not any firm indication to me that we are going to have another cold war.

[thorium1010]

Do you think China and the US are deeply concerned that we will have a nuclear war with each other?

Well, they are concerned about domination or influence around the world, with or without the nuclear arsenal.

[MarcoD]

I don't think so at the moment. But I still have this -rather private- annoying doom-and-gloom scenario how the world will respond to less energy resources. And, personally, since I don't think the US has a real problem, I think Europe should double its efforts in transitioning to a (what do I know) hydro based economy, such that well can all slide comfortably into a next century.

[Jimmy Snyder]

This is going to make dinner conversation at my house rather awkward. Would you pass the salt dear. Yes, but not unless you pass me the pepper darling. OK, simultaneously at the count of three.

[thorium1010]

I don't think so at the moment. But I still have this -rather private- annoying doom-and-gloom scenario how the world will respond to less energy resources. And, personally, since I don't think the US has a real problem, I think Europe should double its efforts in transitioning to a (what do I know) hydro based economy, such that well can all slide comfortably into a next century.

The cold war between russia and america ushered in a lot of spending in science and technology . Perhaps the competiton between china and west to succeed could bring in new technology and maybe some viable solutions to energy problems.

[MarcoD]

The cold war between russia and america ushered in a lot of spending in science and technology . Perhaps the competiton between china and west to succeed could bring in new technology and maybe some viable solutions to energy problems.

I don't think it'll work that way. Competition will probably mean increasing tensions in an effort to gobble up as much of resources as possible while sticking to the old-manner of doing bussiness - and starvation after that. We have never experienced a scenario where there is no growth; or rather, you have to time the transition to an economy which will perform less than the preceding, or other, economies. This is a problem which is solved by planning ahead for decades (international cooperation too) and I don't think there are a lot of nations which still do that. Well, maybe except for Chinese and Germans.

(Personally, I think that is what will happen. The Germans transition, the US will let the old economy go bust, and then copy the model of the Germans. But I do feel a bit crackpottish with that prediction.)

[John Creighto]

I wonder what deep secretes they would obtain by spying on a space laboratory? ( Or even what area of technology). Would it be biological technology, computer technology (ultra pure silicon crystals), material technology, robotic technology (self replication nano-teck) , etc.

Moreover, if the United States was concerned about china leading in one of these areas, would it be more economical to directly invest in them rather than trying to steal the technology through espionage?

To me the article seems like a lot of much to do about nothing.

[Ryan_m_b]

Moreover, if the United States was concerned about china leading in one of these areas, would it be more economical to directly invest in them rather than trying to steal the technology through espionage?
Or if you were going to steel a technology why invest in a big expensive spaceplane? Why not just send a team to China that can bribe, blackmail and steal the research data?
To me the article seems like a lot of much to do about nothing.
My thoughts exactly.

[Antiphon]

Begun?

Before you were born there were a few people like Mao, MacArthur and Chiang Kai-shek. They would say it started prior to 2012.

[tooth]

A war between the U.S. and China would be unlikely since both economies are linked and any problem would damage the global economy.

[klimatos]

A war between the U.S. and China would be unlikely since both economies are linked and any problem would damage the global economy.

Neither links nor the possibility of global economic damage has ever stopped power-hungry nations or leaders in the past. I doubt if it would in the future.

You seem to be an idealist. As a counter-balance, might I suggest you read Mearsheimer's The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.

[Ryan_m_b]

Neither links nor the possibility of global economic damage has ever stopped power-hungry nations or leaders in the past. I doubt if it would in the future.
I'd contest that by pointing out that there has never been such an intertwoven, global economy in the history of the world and it will probably only get more so. The only caveat I make to this observation is that total war tactics may allow a country to untangle themselves from any economic ties by becoming industrially self-sufficient.

[MarcoD]

W.r.t. global powers and tensions, a funny thought for the completely paranoid: We all might just be governed by the Rockefellers. Look here: the trilateral (http://www.trilateral.org/download/file/EU_list_12-11.pdf) committee, then look at the Italian and Greek members.

But it probably ain't true, since that committee seems to exist of do-good-ers.

For US/Chinese relationships and their dominance in Africa, there is a nice documentary on Al Jazeera, but I didn't find the link again. In short, the US (H. Clinton) retorts nationalistic to Chinese in Africa, whereas Chinese sometimes fail to take responsibility w.r.t. black worker's rights, a lot keep to themselves, but some also integrate nicely into African societies.

Seems we, the public, are just stuck with nationalistic and humane tendencies in the world. Maybe the Internet will serve as a pacifier, we may certainly hope so.

[PhysicsMonk]

Neither links nor the possibility of global economic damage has ever stopped power-hungry nations or leaders in the past. I doubt if it would in the future.

You seem to be an idealist. As a counter-balance, might I suggest you read Mearsheimer's The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.

This dude is crazy. This argument presume there is no MAD, but the reality is, in the modern world, no countries wants to use MAD, and conventional weapons are not going to be used if China, and US engage in a war.

[MarcoD]

This dude is crazy. This argument presume there is no MAD, but the reality is, in the modern world, no countries wants to use MAD, and conventional weapons are not going to be used if China, and US engage in a war.

You cannot use MAD, it's both an hypothesis and a doctrine, not a tool.

[skippy1729]

How can we have a cold war with China? Who will buy their plastic dog-crap? Who will but our monopoly bonds?

Skippy

[PhysicsMonk]

You cannot use MAD, it's both an hypothesis and a doctrine, not a tool.

Seriously? NUKES

[PhysicsMonk]

How can we have a cold war with China? Who will buy their plastic dog-crap? Who will but our monopoly bonds?

Skippy

This shows serious lacking. China also buy **** load of stuff, and a source of demand for the bric, and their markets. Without china, the whole markets of Africa, Brazil, Russia etc will fall, and so will US exports to those markets, and Chinese markets. The US companies are depend on sales in China. China also make export civil engineering, and capital goods like bridges etcs. The quality of Chinese products are actually getting really better, much faster than say Japan, and Germany when they started.

[MarcoD]

Seriously? NUKES

My comment was on terminology. I agree that you can use nukes, but I disagree that you can use MAD. MAD is a theory that countries will not nuke each other. IMO, so far, it has proven correct, but I am one of the people who don't believe in it.

When you say that a China/US conflict may escalate to using nukes (which actually is what MAD doesn't predict), I agree with you.

Personally, if you look at the strategic advantages of a China//US conflict, there are none, or rather, the disadvantages are greater than any advantage. So I expect conflict not with China personally, but with an Arab, African, or Southern Americas nation (there where the resources are).

[Evo]

This shows serious lacking. China also buy **** load of stuff, and a source of demand for the bric, and their markets. Without china, the whole markets of Africa, Brazil, Russia etc will fall, and so will US exports to those markets, and Chinese markets. The US companies are depend on sales in China. China also make export civil engineering, and capital goods like bridges etcs. The quality of Chinese products are actually getting really better, much faster than say Japan, and Germany when they started.Post the research from reputable sources that back you up before you post again.

[edward]

IMHO opinion we are tagging along with what satellites China has launched and what their capabilities are for reasons other than a cold war nuke situation.

China recently began operating their own version of a GPS navigational system. Up until recently they had to rely on ours. Ironically most of our hand held systems are made in China.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203479104577123600791556284.html

We would never nuke China. They have reverse engineered our manufacturing and now make our underwear:wink:

I think this will be about technology and not nuclear one upmanship.

[shashankac655]

I would love to see another cold war but not the Arms race part of it only the Space race part of it but i doubt whether it would happen in the same scale.

[jduster]

I don't see a hot war as a possibility, but a cold war, very likely. In fact, we may be already in a cold war with China, depending how you want to define it.

[Pattonias]

In all seriousness, I see the Chinese/American conflict as an economic war. Neither the US or China have anything to gain from armed conflict, quite to the contrary they both have a lot to lose. The Chinese are using their sudo-socialist/capitalist direct manipulation to maintain a stable economy while most of the capitalist countries are suffering under a credit driven economic collapse.

If you are looking for a true cold war, look to the middle east. Iran is posturing to become a nuclear power and the war-weary west is trying figure out what to do.

[CaptFirePanda]

I would say agree, somewhat, with Pattonias. The tension between the US and PRC is not so much caused by ideology - it is more based on economics and natural resources. Resources are the key, imho.

China has a significant amount of very important resources and, in some cases, is able to significantly control global supply (they currently hold ~95-97% of the supply of rare earth elements (http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/98836/20110108/rare-earth-mineral-us-department-of-energy-china-s-ministry-of-commerce-institute-for-defence-studie.htm)). This is where most, if not all, of the difficulties will lie. The US hasn't had this kind of competition for resources and, with a shaky economy, the country is not well-positioned to fend off PRC interests.

[mheslep]

Do you think China and the US are deeply concerned that we will have a nuclear war with each other?Right, something like that is the prerequisite for a cold war: the threat of a catastrophic nation destroying hot war that would be so costly not only to the principals but the entire world, so that both sides resort to vicious small proxy wars and covert actions instead. What we have here with the US and China is mild disagreement by comparison.

[SHISHKABOB]

China isn't anywhere near as powerful as the Soviet Union was. I think that the phrase "cold war" should be reserved for competitions between regional superpowers. At the moment the USA is the only superpower on the regional scale of the entire planet.

I could see it happening some day, but it's not going on right now.

[mheslep]

True for Chinese Navy, Air Force and equipment. Chinese military strength has always been in man power and as one might guess today they have the world's largest active army by man power.

[CaptFirePanda]

China isn't anywhere near as powerful as the Soviet Union was. I think that the phrase "cold war" should be reserved for competitions between regional superpowers. At the moment the USA is the only superpower on the regional scale of the entire planet.

I think the 1960's-1980's definition of superpower no longer applies. We've come through huge economic, technological and social "booms" so to speak. The global culture is very different now than it was then. Resources and not firepower will determine the ultimate winners and losers.

You significantly under-estimate the PRC and it's ability to influence global stability.

[SHISHKABOB]

I think the 1960's-1980's definition of superpower no longer applies. We've come through huge economic, technological and social "booms" so to speak. The global culture is very different now than it was then. Resources and not firepower will determine the ultimate winners and losers.

You significantly under-estimate the PRC and it's ability to influence global stability.

if "superpower" has been redefined, then so has "cold war"

I don't disagree that China is a big player, but I do disagree that it is the kind of player that could tango with the USA in the same way the USSR did.

I'm being a little nit picky I guess, but when I think cold war I think of THE Cold War. The situation between the USA and China is NOT the same as the situation was between the USA and the USSR.

[CaptFirePanda]

"The Cold War" between the USSR and the USA involved two military superpowers. A cold war, however, just requires the two sides to engage in political/economic actions against each other. Military aid to other nations (in order to carry out proxy wars) and/or espionage are also aspects of a cold war.

North Korea and South Korea, as an example, have been involved in a cold war for quite some time now.

[SHISHKABOB]

"The Cold War" between the USSR and the USA involved two military superpowers. A cold war, however, just requires the two sides to engage in political/economic actions against each other. Military aid to other nations (in order to carry out proxy wars) and/or espionage are also aspects of a cold war.

North Korea and South Korea, as an example, have been involved in a cold war for quite some time now.

Right, I see what you mean now.

[DrClapeyron]

I only have data up to 2009, so bear with me here.

China consumed 4.795 million bpd of oil in 2000; they produced 3.248 million bpd. In 2009 they consumed 8.324 million bpd of oil; they produced 3.798 million bpd.

China's 2000-2009 annual oil consumption growth: 6.32%
China's 2000-2009 annual oil production growth: 1.75%
China's 2000-2009 annual oil net import growth: 12.66%

In 2015 this is what the numbers could look like:

Consumption: 12.023 million bpd
Production: 4.214 million bpd
Net Imports: 7.809 million bpd

In 2020 this what the numbers could look like:

Consumption: 16.334 million bpd
Production: 4.596 million bpd
Net Imports: 11.737 million bpd

It will be interesting to see what this decade will have in store considering world oil production has peaked since 2005; though many analysts believe this will lead to increased production from nonconventional sources such as tight oil and tar sands.

Source:

http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=cn&product=oil&graph=production+consumption
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=has-peak-oil-already-happened

[CaptFirePanda]

In 2015 this is what the numbers will look like:

Consumption: 12.023 million bpd
Production: 4.214 million bpd
Net Imports: 7.809 million bpd

In 2020 this what the numbers will look like:

Consumption: 16.334 million bpd
Production: 4.596 million bpd
Net Imports: 11.737 million bpd

It will be interesting to see what this decade will have in store considering world oil production has peaked since 2005; though many analysts believe this will lead to increased production from nonconventional sources such as tight oil and tar sands.

I don't want to come off as nit-picker, but those numbers are projections so they could look like that in 3-8 years.

Overall, I agree with the increased demand from unconventional sources and this has many implications.

[shashankac655]

Like the title, has another cold war begun between China and U.S.. There are some indications and developments or Am I stating the obvious ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16423881

Appreciate comments and discussion on the topic.

I feel that there is definitely a small scale Cold war between US and China...you know things like cyber warfare (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17231695)
and militarization of Space
“whoever controls space controls the Earth.” (http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1970/1)

some say that China might be having around 3000 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2067984/Chinas-nuclear-arsenal-seven-times-bigger-previously-thought-students-discover-year-study-secret-documents.html) Nuclear bombs.

The question is not whether there is a cold war ,it whether it is going to intensify or not ,i don't know whether the countries can afford it.