Chinese Dream Defensive Not for World Hegemony

American military expert Bill Gertz shows his dire misunderstanding of China in its new book “iWar: War and Peace in the Information Age,” (Threshold Editions).

He knows US infrastructures are poor and vulnerable but he utterly misunderstand China in describing what China demands from its cyber attack at the US: “withdrawal of all U.S. military forces from Asia to areas no farther west than Hawaii, and an end to all military relationships with nations in Asia”.

Is China so stupid as to have US withdraw of its forces from Asia and sever its military relationship with Asian nations? US forces and military alliance in Asia do China no harm as China’s strategy is active defense. Due to that strategy, if China regards the US as its enemy, it shall, on the contrary, welcome US forces and alliances in Asia because:

1. The US will waste its funds in maintaining its forces in Asia and protecting its Asian allies and thus have less financial resources in developing weapons that really threaten China.

2. If China regards the US as its enemy, it shall sow discord between the US and its allies in Asia. That is the strategy of subduing the enemy with diplomacy. It’s better than subduing the enemy with fighting according to Chinese gifted strategist Sun Tzu’s teachings. However, if the US maintains its forces in Asia, there will be discord even if China does nothing as due to US lack of financial resources, there will be growing discord between the US and its allies over the costs of maintaining US forces in Asia.

3. China is now able to destroy US forces in Asia by exploiting its geographic advantages. In a war between the US and China, the more US troops in Asia, the more China can annihilate them near China leaving less US navy to cut China’s trade lifelines in the oceans.

Gertz fails to really understand China’s Chinese dream. Chinese dream is defensive instead of offensive. It seeks the rejuvenation of China as a great nation from a century of humiliation by Western and Japanese powers.

It is not a new goal as almost all Chinese leaders from Sun Yet-sen, Chiang Kai-shek to Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao pursued that goal. None of those Chinese leaders have ever pursued world hegemony, nor has China in its thousands of years of history.

Maybe Gertz knows that but tries to demonize China with his book. So many media, China experts, analysts and scholars outside China have been doing things similar to Gertz’s. I do not know whether they all misunderstand China or are demonizing China.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on Washington Free Beacon’s article, full text of which can be found at


3 Comments on “Chinese Dream Defensive Not for World Hegemony”

  1. alking1957 says:

    Bill Gertz has alwys been demonizing china. This is because he is a typical Whiteman Scoundrel. A scoundrel will always think others are just as evil as themselves. Since they always think of dominating the world, they very naturally think china wants to dominate the world. You can only understand them from what they are.


  2. Steve says:

    President Xi’s Chinese Dream has little or nothing to do with Confucius teachings. In All Mahayana Han Buddhism, Confucius teachings are inculcated to the youth with a respect for Chinese culture. It’s part of the foundation for Han Buddhism teachings.

    Chinese Dream as promoted by President Xi is to rejuvenate the nation or simply put, to restore China’s lost national greatness. He wants the Chinese to seek out and take advantage of opportunities to improve one’s welfare and environment such as, innovations, initiatives and creativity, being independent and self motivated to achieve goals. In other words to maximise one’s potential for people and country.

    As for Bill Gertz and many other foreign scholars, will maximise their personal enterprise by demonising China. Is there a better way to maximise one’s profit other than demonising China.? The US are masters in the art of deceit, chaos and anarchy. Why shouldn’t it’s Western disciples follow the trend.


  3. Tyler reber says:

    War has to be sold to the public. People will only except it if it’s the right thing for the right reason. Like fighting ISIS in Syria is much more acceptable for the American people than it would have been to say removing Assad, even though it’s one of their stated goals and the only one they get upset over.

    Perhaps those people really believe what they say. But No war will take place while their is win win trade between countries. I often wonder if Russian sanctions were to make war possible with Russia, and a military build up around China is to deter them joining.

    The US is failing to convince Americans Russia is an enemy. And we will probably never know.