Game of Thrones: “Shut Up,” China Explained
show comments
  • Luke Lea

    I hope the U.S. and our allies have contingency plans for cutting back our trade with China. Why not advertise them?

  • Jim.

    What I haven’t seen so far on VM is any proposal for a fair (or at least mutually agreeable) principle that could be used by all parties to help divide up claims.

  • Anthony

    “China’s state-run media ramped up condemnation of the United States on Monday over tensions in the South China Sea, with the Communist Party’s top newspaper telling Washington to “shut up” and charging it with “fanning flames” of division in the region.”

    Chinese sovereignty and Asian neighbors…

    Grand Strategy may not be only a Western concept…

  • Hu Ngu

    Inasmuch as the US has been willing to cede major swaths of our manufacturing sector to China without a shot being fired, why would the US not cede dominance of China’s own east asian waters to them without a shot being fired? With a bit of on-going bluster, China will ultimately reduce the US and our junior Asian allies into little more than a lesser east asia commiseration sphere.

  • Luke Lea

    Trouble down the road:

    When the regime loses legitimacy, look out!

  • Kevin

    I think the 1930s Japan analogy is both likely and frightening. The Japan analogy has two branches though. The USSR under Zhukov checked adventurous Japanese generals in 1939 without provoking a wider war. But the US attempts to sanction Japan over China united (reluctantly in some cases) the Japanese regime to pursue war against the US. I suppose the moral might be that attempting to use economic sanctions as a weapon can signal opponents that one lacks resolve and will fold if it comes to blows. In any case we should not think that using economic sanctions will be a way to avoid war, they may well provoke the other side.

  • Engineer

    I think one other possibility between the pro forma protest and the Japanese scenario is that the Chinese government has determined that they will push for maximal sovereignty in the South China Sea as a matter of policy.

    The Soviets often had such a superficial policy that was opportunistic and push back produced a climb down by the Soviets. That is an unknown, I think, for China. If nations push back hard will the Chinese back down or risk a conflict to translate their claims into “spear won” titles? (And so dismiss the Law of the Sea Treaty to a “scrap of paper.”)

  • Corlyss

    ” “Shut Up,” China Explained”

    OMG! Someone else who appreciates the iconic Ring Lardner quote!

  • Eric

    This may be a trade. Bo Xilai was apparently seen as the PLA’s guy. His disgrace may have necessitated the incoming leadership compromising with the PLA that they have a freer hand in the South China Sea in return for letting the leadership transition go through smoothly.

    Both groups would also find a bit of nationalistic flag waving a useful distraction right now given the manufacturing slowdown, real estate price falls and widespread low level unrest and demonstrations over land confiscations and the like.

  • Luke Lea

    Is this the regime we want to build up?

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to and affiliated sites.