BEAR on 18/11/2008 at 20:21

---

(http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16074-china-denies-attempting-to-get-us-space-data.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news)

Americans are very jealous of our 'superpower' status, and very suspicious of competitors (as the world is well aware). I try very hard to not let things like this bug me, because I'm trying to get away from knee jerk nationalism and mistrust of other nations that is so prevalent in America.

Loss of our superpower status might be inevitable, and economically it looks more likely all the time. Combine that with China's growing economy and our declining economy (though they've been hit by the recession as well obviously), and its not surprising that it makes some people nervous.

Historically its not hard to see a trend. Empires rise and fall (though neither china nor America are traditional empires), and in the long term its not seriously important. I think it would be better for America in the long term to let go of the need to be number 1, which is something I envy about European countries. You would think that our (waning) global dominance would make us more secure, but its the opposite, and the loss of that dominance terrifies us. We have this sense that we should be on top in everything, which historically is a scary mindset that often leads to bad things.

I've spoken to a number of Chinese citizens (usually meeting them playing some game or another), which has been an interesting experience because they aren't Chinese living in America or traveling abroad, and as such might offer a better insight towards the Chinese populations sentiments towards America, and in my experience its been nothing but good. But, for some reason I still have this nagging suspicion of the Chinese government. Seems like every so often I hear reports of "Chinese government accused of stealing x or hacking y" and my American tendency is to puff up my chest and jiggle my jowls (figure of speech, I don't actually have jowls) with indignation, but then I wonder whether there are those in America that want us to be suspicious of the Chinese. It seems so often in retrospect that there is not nearly as much of a conflict as we thought.

So basically what I want it someone to convince me this is just a plot by someone with something to gain by Americans being suspicious of China, and perhaps some Europeans can give me some tips on how to cope with being another countries bitch (ha, still got it! Just kidding I love you guys.)

Medlar on 18/11/2008 at 21:35

---

Jiggling jowls can be a mistake, I believe we lost India whilst jowl jiggling!

BEAR on 18/11/2008 at 22:13

---

Haha



Dammit, that's not what I wanted to hear at all! Though in all seriousness you are right. A Chinese guy that I chat with now and again had very little good to say about the government, possibly accounts for why he is in Australia now.

demagogue on 18/11/2008 at 23:35

---

Lol. Well, I tactically didn't talk about the other side of the coin of your post, about "superpower" status, what it means and all that. And that was really your main point. I just wanted to put things into context with China.

But on the "superpower" issue, in international relations theory, at least one strand of it, "superpower" status is not only a measure of the size of your military and economy, but also a measure of how "responsible" the state is in int'l and domestic governance, and its leadership potential. So like, when there's a crisis, which state is most capable of responsibly managing it; which state do other states turn to.

And on that, the U.S. still has a privileged status, especially on masses of tiny issues that don't make headlines. But recent history has clouded the picture also.

A recent example I can think of, recently Morocco and Spain were having a territorial dispute over a football-field sized island. And they called the US State Dept to help resolve it. Nothing to do with the US. But on so many micro-issues, states trust the US because of its track-record (which extends much deeper than just the last 8 years under Bush). You won't see as many states trusting China to responsibly help them manage some crisis, given how many times it has betrayed its trust (cf Russia, N. Korea, Vietnam ... China is a notorious double-dealer, although its growth into places like Africa is something to watch). China has a rising military and economy, but it'll be hard to translate into "superpower" status in int'l relations if they can't marshal it into leadership potential. States are buying more cheap Chinese goods, but they aren't asking China to resolve border disputes or take the lead on important initiatives, things like that. So it's a kind of toothless power; there, but hard to translate it into initiative.

But there have been some important changes like your post is suggesting, too. The end of the Cold War means there's less need for the US to police global order, and the "terrorist" threat doesn't match it ... Most states can be largely left in benevolent neglect with what they do, and there's not a fear of some domino-effect into totalitarianism.

Right at the same time there's been the rise of the EU, especially as an economic powerhouse, just as the US stopped caring about the future of Europe. But while it's gaining in power, the problem with the EU and "superpower" status is that it doesn't have a united political will. There's a division for EU-level int'l relations in EU law, but it's incredibly weak. They are having a much bigger impact with int'l economic and administrative law, like trade regulation, int'l IP protection, "apolitical" things like that. That's a big deal, but it's still compromised by a lack of political unity.

The third big development I think is that, right at this moment of change, the US has really dropped the ball in taking its leadership position seriously/responsibly during a flurry of int'l norms going on. Terrorism actually isn't the most important issue in the world in the grand scheme of things, maybe not even in the top 10. And the US has been squandering its leadership potential by not putting more resources into other important issues like climate change, the future of energy, int'l human rights, int'l trade (which really annoys me), smarter relations with Russia and China, etc, to say nothing of compromising its position with the whole Iraq fiasco (straining allies and giving the impression that it really can't responsibly run 2 wars at the same time, or bring an war/occupation to a responsible conclusion, etc). There may be developments on all of these fronts under Obama, though. I'm cautiously optimistic.

Generally, I think the U.S. still has a kind of privileged position in IR, esp since like I said other countries like China and the EU haven't been able (it seems) to leverage their new found power into actionable political will to give the US real competition on that front, like the USSR did back in the day. But it's a much more cloudy picture now ... It's not on every issue anymore (e.g., the EU's strength on administrative matters), it's not as mono-vocal anymore (there isn't just one canon "liberalism" to oppose Soviet communism anymore), it's not as imperative that every state fall into line in the same way with the benign-neglect phenomenon going on.

Or maybe to put it another way, the US still has a kind of privileged status, but maybe the concept of "superpower" itself has evolved (away from its Cold War context) and maybe we could use some new terminology that rank states according to their place in the int'l pecking order ... "leadership potential", "member in good standing", "exceptionalist", "responsible governance", "rogue states (potential members not-in-good-standing)", etc.

Rogue Keeper on 21/11/2008 at 08:48

---

This may be relevant for this topic : National Intelligence Council global trends review 2008

(http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2008/11/20/GlobalTrends2025_FINAL.pdf)