China’s Second Round of Peaceful Economic Expansion


With a huge population full of diligent and clever people, China certainly shall expand abroad to export its people’s diligence and resourcefulness to cooperate with local people in developing their economy.

That is what a rising China shall do to benefit itself while benefiting others. I regard it as China’s economic expansion, an expansion of prosperity.

The US is a remote country from Asia so that however strong China becomes, it will not hurt US interests. What the US worries about is China’s rise to become its rival superpower or replace it as the only superpower in the world. However, China’s current leader does not seem to have intention to do so. What China wants is to be benefited by its relations with other countries. Acting as US rival or replacing the US as the only superpower will cost China a lot but bring back little or even no benefit.

The Lesson of the Collapse of the Soviet Union

The collapse of the Soviet Union is a very good lesson for Chinese leaders. The Soviet Union has a much smaller economy but has the ambition to be a rival hegemon to the US. Like the US it had to bear the heavy burden of protecting and supporting its subordinate countries. It has given huge aids to Vietnam to enable Vietnam to defeat the US but get no return at all form Vietnam. So were its aids to North Korea and Cuba to enable the communist regimes to survive there.

People wonder why the Soviet Union suddenly collapsed as there seemed no crisis in it to bring it down. However, it is very clear to Chinese leader that the Soviet Union was crushed by its heavy burden to contend with the US given its much inferior economic strength. Anxious to maintain Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s survival, Chinese leaders certainly would not repeat Soviet Union’s disastrous blunder.

Like the Soviet Union’s efforts to spread communism, the US wants to spread its democratic system the world over but has achieved nothing, the democracy it has established in Iraq and Afghanistan are difficult to survive without US military support. The much praised Jasmine revolution for the establishment of democracy has only replaced old autocracy with new autocracy such as the autocratic regime changes in Egypt and even chaos such as the chaos in Libya.

US failure to export its political system makes the Soviet lesson even more convincing.

China simply should not have any intention to export its ideology and political system as China simply cannot benefit from such export. What it should pursue is but win-win cooperation with other countries. Such cooperation will benefit not only China but also its cooperation partners and make China popular among them. Current Chinese leader Xi Jinping is precisely doing that in launching his Belt and Road initiative.

However the experience of Western colonialism and the two world wars tells other countries that a rising power usually bullies other countries and even tries to conquer other countries and turn them into its colonies. Can China be an exception?

China is a country with its own long history and the dominance of Confucianism characterized by benevolence, harmony and the doctrine of the mean quite different from the predatory Western colonialism. Therefore, China simply has a culture different from Western culture instead of being an exception of Western culture.

Westerners and those who have suffered from Western colonialism are scared of China’s rise because they do no understand Chinese culture so that they see China from a Western instead of Chinese perspective.

Another Lesson China Has Learnt from History

While colonists were having difficulties in maintaining their rule and interests in their colonies in Southeast Asia in spite of their military power, Chinese immigrants prospered there through their diligence and resourcefulness in developing local economy. They gradually became wealthy and control 50% or more of the economy in the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand.

History has taught China that colonialism is doomed to failure while having Chinese people in other countries to develop local economy in cooperation with local people will not only make the Chinese people there rich but also benefit China with their wealth. In Chinese history, overseas Chinese were the major source of funds for China’s 1911 democratic revolution and war of resistance against Japan from 1937 to 1945 and major source of investment in China’s three decades of reform and opening-up.

When China was weak and poor, it cannot help its overseas Chinese but had to rely on them for funds. Now, China is rich and strong. It shall help build the infrastructures to help overseas Chinese conduct win-win cooperation with local people.

We can foresee that facilitated by the infrastructures that Chinese government will build under its Belt and Road initiative, Chinese people will spread all over the world to cooperate with local people in developing local economy. They will become rich there due to their diligence, resourcefulness, and expertise. China’s peaceful expansion in the world, especially in underdeveloped countries and regions utterly cannot be stopped by the US with its military threat.

I would like to regard the immigration of Chinese to Southeast Asia in last century to gain economic dominance there as China’s first round of economic expansion. It was very successful when China was poor and weak unable to help those overseas Chinese.

The Belt and Road initiative is the beginning of the second round of China’s economic expansion that will be entirely irresistible as diligent and resourceful Chinese immigrants have the strong support from their homeland.

Article by Chan Kai Yee


17 Comments on “China’s Second Round of Peaceful Economic Expansion”

  1. go by nake says:

    Ha ha. This is rich. This blog stands for advancement of Chinks but you are not free here.

    Rule no. 1 : You should not believe any posting made in this blog.

    Rule No. 2 : You should not believe any posting on this blog but you should accept everything I say as true.

    Rule No. 3 : If you do not believe anything I say as true, you should not comment here even if you have a valid point.

    Rule No. 4 : This is not “Tiananmen”. Don’t expect to hold a viewpoint different from mine.

    Rule No. 5 : All you guys commenting here belongs to me. You have no life.

    Rule No. 6 : My blog is only for business. I intend to make a lot of money from it. And I have total control.

    So all you chinks, keep reading. Maybe there will still be many sycophantic and slavish commenters, heh heh

    Don’t go away now.

    Like

    • Steve says:

      This forum/blog don’t owe you a living, your points are invalid, you have no business here, it’s non discriminatory, your viewpoints are discriminatory and offensive, other than grovelling and flattering your own stupidity there are no slavish commenters here except your obsequious way in order to slander. Go join your clique of sycophantic friends elsewhere and get lost….!

      Like

  2. Steve says:

    Excellent Article.

    This article rightfully asked the question is there a need to fear a post Western world, since the US is no longer the defender of globalisation and one that is generally seen as chaotic, isolationist and lacking in discipline. Western democracy is divisive, bias, disruptive, invasive and untrustworthy, as clearly demonstrated by the leadership of Bush and Obama era. I believe Western democracy will collapse under the pressure of China’s Autocratic rule, as only the CCP understands Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.

    When William C, Kirby, a professor of Harvard university was asked whether China could lead the world global order, he responded and said, “Yes of course, China has led. China is home to the longest continuous civilisation in world history. Chinese moral and political models defined what is meant to be civilised. Little more than 200 years ago, the Qing empire presided over the strongest, richest and most sophisticated civilisation on the planet. Its economy was the largest and one of the freest in the world. (…) China survived – better than most parts of the world – the era of imperialism. China’s current rise, as its recent growth is often described, is not simply the result of the past 35 years. It has been a century and more in the making.”

    Clearly, China was hampered by the century of humiliation, followed by WW2, Korean and Vietnam war. For China to continue its rise to the Zenith, China’s elite military arms of Navy, Army and Airforce should be without peer or second to none. China’s future political and military alliance will be cemented in Asia not with Western powers. In many ways due to similarity of cultures and temperament, China will be well supported in Asia as a world Superpower economically and militarily. Historically, China has never invaded any sovereign nation and Thucydides Trap is non existential, at least by Chinese sophisticated civilisation on planet earth.

    China’s Autocratic political governance has already surpassed Western democratic powers and will continue to lead for decades. This is really scaring the US, UK and Australia as the future of their world is one of gloom and doom. When their taxes are unable to support the burden of social welfare, war seems to be the only answer at least by the standards of US policy makers. Therefore, China’s future 3 military arms must be unrivalled and unsurpassed, without it history will repeat itself.

    Like

  3. alking1957 says:

    i agree with CKY on China’s non interventionist policy, it is something the USA and the west needs to learn. We know that. But the problem is that their genetics is such that they will assme Chinese are like them i.e. As soon as China becomes a super power they will be bossing other countries all over the place like the west have been doing for last 300 years! Thus its no use just knowing it ourselves, it is more important to convince them chinese are not going to follow their footsteps. That would be tough as being scoundrels, they will always assume you are like them.

    Like

    • Stu says:

      If your neighbor is abusing his kid and wife, I can’t see how you can say you should close your eyes and not intervene or that you have no responsibility although you are right when the the kid and wife is dead. Whether you continue to live and die a thousand cuts or not, is entirely up to you. It’s your life. If India’s military commits genocide in Pakistan, China shouldn’t really intervene. And if in so doing, you assume there will be no repercussions, no consequences? I doubt it. Also, I wonder how grateful the Chinese felt when the Americans and British intervened to help China fight against the invading Japanese in WW II with arms and supplies through the Burma road and over the Himalayas. Where would China be today? Or how grateful the Syrians are when Russia intervened to help them against the American sponsored terrorists? Or if Russia did not intervene to help Crimeans and Donbassians? Where is the difference between intervention, responsibility and other similar words? If you are a major power, or see yourself as a majore power, there is no escaping responsibility and “policing”. Sooner or later, that reality will catch up with China. However, in saying that, it is not the same as “policing” or “intervention” as that committed by the U.S. whose intent is not genuiine but one to maintain their global hegemony. Quite different from one via a neutral and genuine UN with the collaboration of major powers of sincere intent.

      Like

  4. Han Yung says:

    This probably explains why “Wolf Warrior 2” was such a hit in China. It explains that something missing in Chinese life; Something they know deep inside which is right but taught as not right by the ignorant and cowardly adults. As human beings, they instinctively feel It is the natural right thing to do stand up for one’s family, friends, or in this movie, the Chinese family. It is the natural and right to show courage and not fear, and a sense of responsibility when danger beckons.

    To be a better person, a better Chinese, we need to be more like “Wu Jing”, the hero of the movie. Someone who gets involved because it is right and because of loyalty and protectiveness to own family and friends and what is right. Not someone who washes off responsibility socially to everyone else but himself – in essence, selfish, self-centred, stupid. Life is more than one dimension. Otherwise we end up just pursuing money and are gravely disliked for that. Overseas Chinese may be like that because of discrimination but for Chinese in China and SIngapore, there is little reason to be like that. We can all be “Wu Jing”.

    Like

  5. anon says:

    This theory sounds hollow to me. You want partners, you want allies, you want loyalty, you want friendship but you do not not know the meaning of them all.

    Whether friends or family, you stand by them in times of good and in times of trouble especially danger. Otherwise who needs you? You are no family, you are no friend that one can rely on. Who will respect you?

    Basially, it is the same old excuse for a lack of a sense of personal responsibility – a manifestation of that damaging and debilitating brainwashing by stupid fearful over-protective mothers – “Don’t get involved. It’s not our business, responsibility; Your business, your responsibility”. The reason why Chinese are disliked and disrespected. Men are turned into women, into wimps by stupid mothers. Strength of character is not taught but instead discouraged. Even Robert Kuok noticed that. He calls it disciplined.

    If that decadent simplistic theory of non involvement holds, Beijing would not waste time being Pakistan’s “friend for all weather”, not just “fair weather”. But fortunately, Beijing knows the difference and is ready to go to Pakistan’s aid if attacked. Same for Cambodians,, even Thais and Koreans. The same for its strategic allies – Russians and Iranians.

    Character is formed by how you stand by your family and friends. It’s why the individual Westerners (but excluding the 10-20% neocon types) are admired and respected by non westerners. They are loyal and protective towards the people around them in their life. It’s what it means to have a strength of character, and what it means to be a man, what it means to be a “superior” man and not an “inferior” man. It applies to Confucianist Easterners as much as it applies to Judeo-Christian Westerners.

    Like

    • alking1957 says:

      Non Intervention is not the same as lack of responsibility. Its like saying to be responsible you have to be worlds policeman. nope

      Like

      • anon says:

        The word is “non involvement”, not necessarilly “non intervention”. It is also different from being a “policeman”. They all have different meaning, connotation and context. I read CKY’s article as stressing quite a bit on “non involvement”. If that is the case, China is a dangerous “friend” or entity to befriend, especially in the presence of an antagonistic anti China America. Insofar as Russia is concerned, not matter what, I respect them more than China – if China were to continue or embark on this “non involvement” attitude. Respect is not won through extreme self interest. Yes, one can be a hero but a dead hero but total “non involvement” irregardless of any justification otherwise, implies cowardice. It says ascribing to the to motto – “better to be a live coward than a dead hero”. By extrapolation, better to sacrifice, to sell out, to betray ten, a hundred, a thousand, a hundred thousand lives than to be killed. Respect is not earned nor character formed by this kind of cowardly and negative if not rationalized behaviour.

        My comments also included the word “right”, which means if involvement is justified, one should not turn a blind eye. You can swim, there is a boat nearby and there is a little kid drowning and struggling in the water. What reason is there not to do something. We would be less than human, or civilized, if we remain aloof, cold hearted, stone hearted to everything happening around us; Just because there is a big aggressive bully nearby who says no one should do anything?

        This perhaps is one value that separates the “worshipped-as-gods-whitemen” Asians and Whitemen. You are welcomed to debate but it is a values and foreign policy debate from what I can see, and you are welcome to disagree.

        Like

        • chankaiyee2 says:

          Sorry I only talk about not exporting Chinese system. It has nothing to do with your non involvement. Please do not misinterpret my post.

          If you think you are clever about the topic of non involvemen, please set up your own forum on it instead of starting discussion here by misinterpreting my post.

          Like

          • M Graham says:

            “System”? Export of what “Chinese system”? “Foreign intervention” not a system but a policy.

            Like

            • Steve says:

              Its your usage of words – a policy can be referred to what needs to be done and a system or mechanism refers to how to do it or put simply a systematic rules based policy. Same thing.

              Foreign intervention can also be referred to a systematic invasion as in Iraq or Libya or Syria by foreign forces not necessarily abiding to UN policy, such as the US sponsored genocide in Iraq on the pretext of WMD, lies and deceit. Was it a policy to save the Petrodollar or a systematic slaughter of Iraqis. Which one do u prefer – policy or system.

              Another example: A US democratic system according to the rule of law or a decision making policy to enforce the rule law. What’s the difference.?

              Or a website requires users to login to the system or policy. Whats the difference.

              Like

            • chankaiyee2 says:

              Socialism with Chinese characteristics. That is the Chinese system now. Mao was exporting Chinese socialist system for quite a long time by providing weapons and funds for communists in other countries. China has stopped doing so since it began its reform and opening up.

              Like

          • Dominic Duval says:

            The issue is about “foreign interventionism” or “non interventionism”.

            The issue of “interventionism” or “non interventionism” is much more than just the carrying out of a global ideological war. It is more on a case to case basis – unlike America’s “democracy” and surreptitious “regime change” agenda – whether the world, especially the major powers, ought to intervene to prevent unnecessary carnage, deaths, and destruction on crisis spots around the world. Even though that can be a complicated and a quicksand hazard, one cannot hold an extreme position and not intervene in such a matter. One cannot turn a blind eye. No one said life is easy.

            Just as one cannot be the world’s “policeman” and get involved in every problem and even unnecessarily making matters possibly worse, neither should one abstain when external help or force is required or justified. Be it due to destructive internal wars, natural disasters, epidemics, or aggression conducted by one nation upon another.

            The UN Security Council was originally intended to play such a global guardian role until it was hijacked by Washington as part of its ambitious strategy to maintain a global empire. But now with the American empire waning and facing sober reality with China and Russia entering a new era, it is hoped the UNSC will play its intended and proper role.

            China can contribute much to the world’s peace and prosperity. There’s no way it can remain stand-offish as a major power. China has to be involved. It is part of the world’s community. It is no longer the weak, effete, decadent closed door “Middle Kingdom” of the 1800s.

            Like

            • chankaiyee2 says:

              Sorry I only talk about not exporting Chinese system. It has nothing to do with your non interventionism. Please do not misinterpret my post.

              If you think you are clever about the topic of non interventionism, please set up your own forum on it instead of starting discussion here by misinterpreting my post.

              Like

            • chankaiyee2 says:

              The practice of a country wants win-win cooperation to benefit itself as well as others when it becomes a superpower seems quite not understandable for some of my readers. They misinterpret my view that China shall not export its political system as non involvement or non intervention.

              They seem to believe that when a country has become a superpower, it shall involve or intervene in other countries’ politics or be world police. Some are so obsessed with military approaches that even regard economic cooperation as non involvement. They believe economic involvement to help other countries lift their people out of poverty is non involvement and only military involvement is involvement.

              However, it is natural that they do not understand me as what I hope a superpower shall do is unprecedented.

              Like

    • chankaiyee2 says:

      The practice of a country wants win-win cooperation to benefit itself as well as others when it becomes a superpower seems quite not understandable for some of my readers. They misinterpret my view that China shall not export its political system as non involvement or non intervention.

      They seem to believe that when a country has become a superpower, it shall involve or intervene in other countries’ politics or be world police. Some are so obsessed with military approaches that even regard economic cooperation as non involvement. They believe economic involvement to help other countries lift their people out of poverty is non involvement and only military involvement is involvement.

      However, it is natural that they do not understand me as what I hope a superpower shall do is unprecedented.

      Like