Chris,
I would like to agree with your viewpoint. Unfortunately I don't see things working out in any sort of orderly manner. The US is an empire in decline. As happened to the British Empire, the Roman and all other empires that have declined in the past, once the forces of decline take over there is nothing that can be done to stop it (although a lot can be done to make it worse). I would argue that the actions taken by the US Government, Federal Reserve etc have made the United States situation much worse, through its interference in the housing market, low interest rates and quantitative easing etc. It appears that it has now resorted to debasing its currency, something that did not work for the Romans and difficult to see working for the US. These factors make the US a very dangerous beast. Those in power, who have benefited immensely from the spoils of empire, are not going to relinquish this power lightly - as has been seen by US responses to the GFC. Indeed it would not surprise me if the US resorted to military adventurism to try and prolong their hold on power.
Personally I think we are entering a very new world where many of the old rules no longer apply. How it will unfold is anyone's guess, but I doubt that it will be peaceful or orderly

leckos,

Interesting times. I hope in 20 years time we can look back and marvel at how the world made a transition without another major conflict.

I am optimistic, but we need a new wave of Western leaders prepared to make hard decisions, including a willingness to inform the public of the need for extensive reform rather than more of the madness occurring through more and more stimulus and a hope for the best.

The Chinamerica economic reliance is not going to last forever.

Chris, I pretty much concur with what you've written here.

There was a brilliant piece in the Australian by Greg Rudd recently. Despite the provocative title, there was a great deal of wisdom:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/chinese-way-is-here-to-stay-so-get-used-to-it/story-e6frg6zo-1225935112902

"China is not the enemy. To some that will sound like appeasement. China is simply different. Treat them the way Chinese treat each other: with suspicion. They are the best at dealing with themselves. Learn from them. Australia needs a stable China.
How does the West deal with corrupt countries? The same way it has always done. They tick their probity boxes and hire brokers who don't have probity boxes to tick."

I am gradually coming to the conclusion that we won't be able to pressure China to change. It is more crucial that we don't allow China to change us, and we remain defiant when their demands are ridiculous.
To them, censoring the media and detaining those with divergent political views are reasonable measures.

We still need to remain vocal that these measures are not. Not because we're trying to change China, but because these measures are indeed outrageous.

Similarly, we need to remain steadfast in refusing to allow China to expand their territory purely from historical information.

China's borders have expanded and contracted, shifted and moved many times over their thousands of years. If we went by the Yuan dynasty, they'd own most of Asia. If we went by the three kingdoms period, China's borders would only encircle a chunk of China's interior, about the size of Queensland.

Unsurprisingly, you don't hear them advocating that as the template. My point is, this idea that they can annex the South China sea or the Diaoyu islands based on history will only lead to more conflict. It's a hollow argument, based on material gain, insecurity and wounded pride.

Somebody has to have the courage to say this out loud, and to say that the other smaller nations around China won't be bullied in this way.

Chris, perhaps you haven't heard of Imperial America. Perhaps you haven't noticed the number of military bases America has around the world. Perhaps you haven't noticed the invasion and occupation strategy of the U.S. especially where there are valuable and scarce resources to be had.

Perhaps you haven't noticed the use of torture by the U.S., and rendition, and cluster bombs and depleted uranium. You may have missed the situation in Guantanamo and the American threat to nuke Iran and the patrolling of drones which daily kill people in Pakistan or the U.S. military incursions into Pakistan.

Why the hell would Australia want to align itself with America with its policy of endless war, of achieving global domination, of killing uncounted numbers of innocent civilians, of supporting all manner of despots and Royal Tyrants.

Iraq and Afghanistan show clearly what the U.S. achieves. It leaves total destruction, decimated, warring people, and dangerous political instability. Israel also shows what the U.S. is capable of as it arms them with nukes and the latest military hardware and supports imperial Israel's every atrocity.

The Imperial U.S. versus the free world is the real issue that should be occupying your mind and those of the Australian people.

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

Throughout its history the US has outlasted or defeated its rivals. Now America is in the rather bizarre position of being financed by its main rival, China,I can't think of any similar situation in history. Even the Romans, in their imperial decline, didn't borrow large sums from the Persians.
Even if we accept that many Chinese admire the US as an aspirational model, China is not a democracy and the mandarins of the new Middle Kingdom might have different plans, such as restoring China to its 'natural' hegemony in the Asia-Pacific.
There's probably some unfinished business with Japan over that country's brutal invasion and occupation of China in the 1930s and 40s.

I agree that Australia is going to need to employ some very nimble diplomacy in the the coming period of transition,unfortunately, we have usually relied on our 'great and powerful friend' to set the diplomatic agenda.

Mac, with friends like America, who needs enemies?

For too long Australians have been taken in by U.S. propaganda. If anyone cares to look at what America DOES rather than what it claims to do, a very different and rather horrifying picture emerges.

By the way, what Chinese hegemony are you referring to? Unlike the Americans, the Chinese seem to have a long history of staying within their own borders (Tibet excluded).

David G.

People in China aren't given news critical of the government. Liu Xiaobo dared to propose a model of government with a separation of powers. He was jailed for 11 years.

Say what you will about America, but Fox news is free to criticise the government. For better or for worse.
The Tea Party would be brutally snuffed out if a Chinese incarnation dared arise.

In the US, people openly debate the government. I've lived in China. People don't discuss such matters.

And, the final proof in the pudding is you yourself. You're free to criticise the US. In China, such comments are blocked.

Corruption runs free, the separation of powers don't exist and the disparity in wealth is far worse than in the US.

Yes, the US has done shady things. But democratic governments and authoritarian ones are still two different beasts.

And when people like yourself fail to see that, you give ammunition for the thugs in the CCP to crack down on dissidents. It is this that makes me angry.

Honestly. If you actually lived in China for a significant amount of time and experienced the two different models, you wouldn't be so cavalier.

As for 'staying within their borders' China has recently announced that the South China Sea is their own territory and nobody else's. Damn shame for a country like Vietnam which has this sea as their shoreline. Or perhaps we should go back to the Yuan Dynasty which ruled most of Asia.

They haven't branched beyond that, because by and large, there have always been huge internal struggles. Internal struggles caused by the corrupt imperial governments and their unwillingness to share power.

Funny that.

Though enjoy your freedom to comment about how evil the US is compared to China. Shame that the Chinese people aren't free to propose alternatives to their own government.

Well, unless they're willing to face an 11 year jail sentence.

Dear TRTL,
several points if I may:
1. You say that the Chinese people are not given news critical of the Government. Neither are the Americans. Their MSM is an arm of the government and most American citizens are ignorant of what their Government is doing.
2. You say that Fox News is free to criticize the American Government. Fox News is an arm of the Republican Party.
3. You say that government corruption runs free in China. There is no more corrupt government in the world than that in America. Politicians there are bought and sold like slaves by the corporations.
4. You say, if I lived in China.... My wife was born in China and experienced Mao. I do not see the Chinese Government as the epitome of liberalism and freedom but neither do I see the American Government as faultless. Its quest to dominate the world by military force while pretending to advance the cause of democracy and human rights is disgusting and evil!

America, and its sidekick, Israel, is a real danger to the world. Perceptive people who do their homework can see it.

Most don't!

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

China is pumping lots of money into defence with good reason.Corporatism has now taken control of the USA and most of the West.Our Govts no longer act in our best interests.911 and the war on terror is a lie.I can prove it with a short video on youtube and a few basic scientific facts.

Currently the USA is antagonising China by being in Afghanistan,conducting military exercises off it's coast and threatening to invade Iran which provides 10% of China's oil.The USA/Israel are the prime aggressors.No country comes close to the USA in terms of weaponry and nuke capacity.

The neo-cons in Israel/USA are now pushing for war as a means of escape from their treachery of 911.see the evidence http://ae911truth.org/ http://patriotsquestion911.com/

The scientific evidence is absolute and over whelming.Anyone care to debate the evidence?

David G,

I agree with 'TurnRightThenLeft' in regard to China's expansion. The idea that China has historically remained within its borders is perhaps based on its isolationist policies during modern times. The Chinese have invaded neighbouring countries throughout their history and behaved as badly as any other superpower. For example what is now NW China was once inhabited by Indo-European speaking Caucasians, a rather unfortunate historical fact for Chinese nationalists. China certainly never developed an overseas colonial empire on the European model, this was partly due to one Emperor's decision in the 15th century to abandon his predecessor's policy of maritime expansion.

Hegemony was, indeed, the policy of the Imperial Chinese, they had little idea of the Western notion of 'diplomacy' between equals,the 'outer barbarians' were expected to show subservience to the Middle Kingdom and play by China's rules. The modern mandarins in Beijing seem to have a similar attitude to the rest of the world. So there's no reason to believe that China has some long-term cultural imperative to 'stay within its borders'.

Quick lesson: China are not expansionist. They just want all of what they believe is historically the real China to be part of China again. This included Tibet and includes Taiwan.

Sure, they use their economic might to influence their neighbours, allies and adversaries to get their own way. And they have some serious human rights issues that need addressing. But, you may ask, is this paragraph about China or the US?

And they do need a significant military as an insurance policy. And the more wealth you have, the more you need to spend on insurance. This is particularly the case when a greedy neighbour over the road/ocean is rapidly losing his wealth and power.

Personally, I like China. I think the world will actually be a more peaceful place when they gain ascendency over the US.

I've posted on the forum recently about the currency skirmish taking place between the U.S. and China.
The U.S. voted recently in the House of Reps to allow for the possibility of tariffs to be imposed on Chinese goods in response to what the U.S. sees as China artificially devaluing its currency.
Many commentators, however, have pointed out that access to cheap Chinese manufacturing by ordinary Americans is helping to keep interests rates low and also to assist the economy to keep ticking over during America's faltering recovery in the wake of the GFC.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/10/06/the_enemy_is_not_cheap_goods/

For more evidence that 911 was a false flag event,see http://www.homepagedaily.com/ in the blogg section of OLO.
More evidence that Bush knew about 911 and the USA using current false terror alerts to increase military presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The European countries are growing tired of the lies and endless wars of imperialism.Who benefits? Not the tax payer but Global Corporate elites who have control over our Govts.

CHRIS LEWIS... as Festus said to St. Paul at Caesarea

"You are out of your mind, Paul!" he shouted. "Your great learning is driving you insane."

Keep well away from China!

It's simple.

a) They are replacing original manufacturing in Western Countries.
b) IF... we don't have innovative and ORIGINAL manufacturing and value adding... we are going broke by the minute, and no amount of 'digging stuff out of the ground' will save us in the long run.
c) "Service" based economies will only last until BIG China catches up, and we all suddenly find we cannot cope unless we speak Mandarin.

I was just given a machine by a local manufacturer who's products are increasingly being made in China. That machine does a particular job FULLY automatically thus the 'labor' content is almost zero. If you wish to buy such a machine today it will cost you $200,000 ! ! !
So....why would this company 'give' it to me ? This is symptomatic of the China situation. Even though they don't use such machines there, they can still produce stuff with direct labor at competitive prices.

I know of a product that is being sold here for $6.00 ea, made in China and delivered here for $0.50c wow.. what a markup... what a profit... 8000 units a month... not bad. But over time, more companies will go direct rather than through a local agent.

Heck...I'm doing it myself.

Anyone who thinks we need to review our closeness to the USA and snuggle up to China, does not know the Chinese or history very well.

Back to laboring Chris :)

ALGOREisRICH

I am a bit confused by your response.

You state "Anyone who thinks we need to review our closeness to the USA and snuggle up to China, does not know the Chinese or history very well...Back to laboring Chris :)

I am actually critical of China, so am not sure if you are critical of my article or not.

My point is to argue we cannot go on this way; Western societies cannot compete with China.

China is making a mockery of free trade, how can trade be free when the playing field is unfair.
USA has put up the idea of beinging back trade barriers to even the score somewhat.
All this free trade is not good for internal manufacture.
Manufacturing goes off shore for cheap manufacture costs alone.
Unfair and unfair.
The whole system wants pulling back, and barriers putting in place to protect our own.
We now have cheap Chinese cars. You can't blame people from wanting them, but it does nothing for our own.
Whith a communist govt; of China labor is going to be cheap for a long long time, By then every other country will be broke, and China will be flourishing. Unfair.

The other fascinating irony, of course, is that many of the "cheap" goods imported from China to the U.S. are manufactured "offshore" by American owned companies.

Chris Lewis,
"Western societies cannot compete with China"

Why?

Labor costs are not that great. In general, about 20% of costs are labor costs, so reducing labor costs by 1/2 only reduces total costs by 10%.

However I cannot imagine the Chinese government handing out large sums of money to government departments and education systems who then spend every cent on imports, as is the case in Australia.

Chris Lewis,

'Western societies cannot compete with China', that's certainly true if the West allows China to continue with its merchantilist policies,but as you pointed out, there are signs of resistance,so hopefully China won't have a free ride much longer. I'd agree that the 'adjustment' period might lead to disaster,given China's autocratic system of government.
We could certainly prevent the Chinese from controlling our natural resources, they don't play fair, so we shouldn't either, our policies towards Chinese economic penetration seem remarkably naive. Our politicians are more influenced by 'free trade' fantasies than political economy.

vanna,

As i have indicated before, we need extensive studies to show cost and benefit, especially in terms of competing with such a well-organised giant such as China, at least in terms of its communist leadership to do what it wants given recent policy trends.

My gut feeling agrees with you, and I would like nothing better to test these thoughts in some kind of fair dinkum institution. You would think such an issue is of critical importance. I for one, though a supporter of liberalism and freer trade, does not wish to rest on the laurels of past assumptions.

Chris Lewis,
In some ways China could be duplicating the US.

They built everything up from the ground, but eventually they become fat and lazy and start importing everything and lose their innovation and desire to produce anything.

Some other country or race then takes over.

Here's an interesting article on the currency manipulations and the U.S. trade deficit with China by American Manufacturing. org.

http://www.americanmanufacturing.org/node/73

Vanna,

Yes, I have no problem with new nations rising and using their advantages. After all, without free trade and greater interdependence the world does not have much at all if wants to find common ground and deal with all the big issues.

What i do have a problem is with a rise of a mercantile nation which undoes much of the good work of the 20th century, although the West too is simply avoiding making the necessary reforms to enhance their productiveness and innovation.

Nevertheless, finding the appropriate balance between freer trade and protectionism; production and consumption; and national and international considerations, remains a goal of scholarship yet unfulfilled. That is why Western nations have experienced such extremely different trends over the past century, especially since the 1970s. Just look at the many former marxists who are now free trade capitalists as they often go from one extreme to another in our ongoing search for "the" answer.

The key, I would for hope for Australian policy makers, is always what is the best balance. That is why your thoughts about government have some merit and should always be explored, not studied once and assumed wrong or right.

Australia, because of our visionless, small-minded politicians, is playing a dangerous game when it continues to follow the Imperialist Americans into war after war.

America already is the most hated country in the world and its policy of 'endless war to gain resources and profit' will guarantee that those who hate it will increase even further.

Besides, China is our major trading partner and, eventually, will not take kindly to us supporting America and neither will our neighbours with whom we must co-exist.

Put your indoctrination aside and see America for what it is: a warmongering nation trying to control the world for its own exclusive benefit!

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

This is an interesting link, Hugh White is commenting on
his Quarterly Essay "China,America and Australia's future in Asia".

http://www.apo.org.au/video/quarterly-essay-china-america-and-australias-future-asia

Thanks mac,

Had a listen. What did you think?

Chris Lewis,

I didn't find anything significant in Hugh White's comments to disagree with--essentially Asia is returning to 'normal' with(probably) China as eventually, the world's largest economy. I was interested in his comments in regard to China's past humiliations by the West and Japan, I've long suspected that the Middle Kingdom has some scores to settle, particularly with the Japanese, perhaps that process has already started.
The 'golden staitjacket' doctrine could lead to some very serious miscalculations by either the US or China, and the Americans, in White's opinion, might take a long time to see the 'writing on the wall'. The next decades will be by far the most difficult, diplomatically, for Australia in its history.

I'll certainly read the article in the 'Quarterly Essay'.

Mac,

Yes, the evidence is pretty straightforward in terms of history and recent trends.

My only point of difference with White is the assumption of sharing power.

If we look at history, very few powers give up their dominance easily. I find it hard to believe that the West (led by the US) will do so either, although I do not see war.

Therefore, key is reform to maintain influence while adhering to principles that have wider appeal.

Easier said than done, but I hope that Western societies can rise to the challenge, which will also mean major reform within such societies.

"If we look at history, very few powers give up their dominance easily. I find it hard to believe that the West (led by the US) will do so either, although I do not see war," says Chris, Phd.

America has been waging wars ever since WW2 finished and building evermore military bases. What makes you think it won't engage in a war with China?

Why have you chosen to ignore all the points I have raised about the warmongering of the U.S. and its blatant imperialism?

Are you an American apologist, a lover of capitalism, a flag-waver for Western domination (led by America) of the world?

Or is it that you just don't know much and what you do know came from a university textbook?

David,

I do not believe the US is perfect. It does have many imperfections, as do all mighty nations in history.

It may even be that the US will prove incapable of overcoming its own domestic shortcomings to deal with its situation.

However, I do believe that international relations will be worse if Western influence declines.


For all of its faults, the US remains the nation with the most potential to uphold Western ideals over mercantile tendencies.

In any case, I would argue that you play down many of the achievements by US hegemony. Remember China would not be where it is now if not for US support for freer trade.

Chris, could I urge you to read some of the articles on Information Clearing House, Common Dreams, Daily Kos, Truthdig, etc. It will give you a better idea of what many Americans think about their own country, views which contrast dramatically with your own.

Calling an almost bankrupt, warmongering, torturing, brutal, civilian-killing, imperial country 'mighty' is rather a large stretch, wouldn't you say?

David,

I don't mind attacks on PhD, and so on. I agree, they don't really mean much. In fact, I was lucky to pass my PhD, so you may have a point. Also, my Phd was not on China or security issues, so my qualifications are not really relevant in regard to your comments.

My advice to you is to attack the points rather than the man. As many comments made on OLO proves, one does not need a degree to make points of immense significance. I take notice and learn from all OLO comments, including from yourself.

If you take my points just on board, you may realise why I am so passionate about western leadership. I, for one, do not want to live in a world where communist goons, and know alls in the West who always rave on about the primacy of government, rule the roost.

I respect all views, even those that vehemently oppose my thoughts.

I don't want to live in a world run by Communists either, Chris, but neither do I want to live in a greed-driven fascist world run by corporations, crooked politicians, militarists, and religious fundamentalists.

The problem is we have two extreme ideologies competing with each other for supremacy. Neither one is interested in peace, freedom, human rights, equality, or justice. They are only interested in power, money and domination!

David G,

I doubt very much if the present rulers of China are 'Communists' in anything but the name, China is essentialy a mechantilist,capitalist state governed by an authoritarian oligarchy. Rather like Europe in early modern times, really.

David - earlier I made the point that at least in the US, Fox News is free to criticize the government.

You said it's because Fox news is an arm of the republican party. My response is: so what?

Absolute power equals absolute corruption. The only way to avoid absolute power is to have a system in which competing systems are permitted to exist. Such is the case in the US. You can argue it's controlled by corporations, or the left wing media, or the right wing republicans, or the religious fundamentalists, or the big oil companies, or the war manufacturers, or the rockefellers, or the Kennedys...

The fact is, there are competing interests.

Not so, in China. The CCP has the final say. On all aspects of society. The judiciary. The press. The executive. The legislature. They are all the CCP.

You argue in favour of a utopian society not ruled by corporate or commercial interests.

Instead you want to emulate a government that puts it all under one roof.

You claim you don't like the Chinese system either, but you don't criticise it at all, in fact, you say the American system is worse.

Yet, the American system permits you to comment about how bad it is. The Chinese system does not.

Saying the Chinese system is better, frankly, is dumb.

(As is saying the US system is more corrupt than the Chinese system. Again, read up on the separation of powers and at least acknowledge how crucial it is to a functioning society).

Ultimately, you're never going to have the utopia you describe. You will always have people trying to seize control.

The CCP doesn't accept contrary viewpoints, just ask Liu Xiaobo or any one of hundreds of dissidents under house arrest around Beijing.

Say what you will about the US, in contrast to other potential superpowers, they have always had a relatively strong devotion to Free Speech. Political agitators aren't imprisoned. People are free to speak their own views.

Yet you say a system that would deny you the chance to criticize it, is better.

TRTL, obviously you haven't heard about the CIA raiding the homes of American anti-war advocates, taking their computers, trying to frame them as terrorist supporters.

Obviously you haven't heard about the FEMA camps or the U.S. Government tracking emails and bank accounts of private citizens.

And what about rendition to foreign countries and the use of torture? Sorry to disillusion you but the truth is the truth whether you like it or not!

The U.S. is a pariah nation that is seeking world control via military force, (much like Hitler did!).

Cheers.

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

I am not a historian nor economist but the more I read the more I come to see the similarities between the US and China though their differences aren't lost on me either. It seems to be a case of Tribal issues and power struggles neither of which are going to leave us. I feel our best bet for a solution would be to find common understanding.

As an Australian my main concern for siding with China in any form is what that means to human rights in the future. Now I am not attacking China's human rights as I'm sure they are justified in their own minds (running such a large country is probably ugly work) such as are ALL countries self justified. But I would hope that a sense of truth can be brought about. I would be lying if I said that I'm ok with it either. I can say the same for the US and Australia, though I feel safer that any human rights would be more justly treated in the latter.

To me the discussion is not about Western values overthrowing Chinese imperialism but rather a universal discussion that affects us all on this planet.

China has a right to NOT want to become 'democratic' if it means what the West calls democracy. But China shouldn't avoid any form of democracy if it could help the Chinese people either. But who has the right to define and enforce 'democracy'?

In the end those who have power are not going to let go of it easily, whether US or China. Nor probably would I. I think the best thing we could do is understand human behavior when it comes to power and help the powerful (whether Chinese or US) see just what their use of power is doing to people all over the world, as these days we live in an ever more increasingly unified world. Maybe we could help each other in this respect as I feel the consequences of such help would have far reaching global implications towards a safer planet for all.

Snowtiger,have a look at the human rights abuses in the USA.Supension of habeaus corpus,Obama's preventative dententionetc.FBI agents are now smashing down the doors of peace activists,puttung guns in their faces and taking personal items.If the USA is almost a facist state,then we are not far behind.

I have noticed you write this on a number of occasions, Arjay.

>>human rights abuses in the USA.Supension of habeaus corpus,Obama's preventative dententionetc<<

I was not aware that habeas corpus has been suspended. Could you provide details?

The last I heard was that Obama had issued an executive order stating precisely the opposite:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantanamoDetentionFacilities/

"The individuals currently detained at Guantánamo have the constitutional privilege of the writ of habeas corpus."

This effectively annulled part of GW Bush's Military Commissions Act of 2006, which stated that

"No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination."

I am aware that the situation changes quite quickly, so there may be some later information that you can provide.

But I'm pretty sure that habeas corpus is alive and well - at least in theory - right now in the United States.

Pericles,If you are a suspected terrorist in the USA,then all bets are off in terms of personal liberties.Bush brought in the Patriot Act which allows supected terrorists to be detained indefinitely, without trial or legal council.This presidential order negates habeas corpus for supected terrorists.Have you evidence to the contrary?

Obama has brought in 'Preventative Dentention'.I've seen no order from him that recinds this either.Obama now wants to make assassination of suspected terrorists legal.Can you provide evidence that he wants to recind this edict also?

TurnRightThenLeft, you mentioned the Diaoyu Islands. I posted three comments to Nicholas Kristof/Look Out for the Diaoyu Islands/the New York Times. My comments are 317, 318 and 319.

The Chinese traditional tributary system was China's security system. The Chinese could not and cannot conceive of any other international relations and security arrangement like NATO, the US-Australian, -Korean or -Japanese Security Treaty. They see these bilateral or multilateral arrangements as the tools for American domination.

When the Western Powers thrust into East Asia in the nineteenth century, China did not take the responsibility of protecting what it had long deemed its vassals or proteges. Generally, on the contrary, it wavered, evaded and disavowed. Each of these "vassals" had to protect itself separately on its own in a way it thought best. Today the Chinese think they have an inherent, natural title to what they disavowed. Unnan City, Japan

Mac, you know a lot about China. You said you have long suspected that the Middle Kingdom has some scores to settle, particularly with Japan, perhaps that process has already started. Australia and Japan cannot see eye to eye on everything, but does Australia have unfinished scores with Japan after it signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan in 1951?

There have been three waves of antiforeign sentiments in post-war China. The first wave arose around 1950; it was against the United States, not against Japan. The second wave was around 1960 against the Soviet Union, not against Japan. These waves were all artificially made by the Chinese Communist Party.

China was isolated in international affairs with its economy completely devastated because of Mao's bigtory. It made a kind of rapprochement with the United States to alleviate its isolation. Mao and other leaders had another aim in this rapprochement, which was to draw economic assistance and cooperation from Japan. They calculated, quite correctly, that Japan would not dare to have formal, good relations with Beijing if they did not have fences first mended with the United States.

China and Japan agreed to normalize relations in 1972 and signed a peace treaty in 1978.
The third wave was directed against Japan after 1978. It was started by Chairman Jiang Zemin in 1995 with the aim of deflecting people's discontents which were attendant on economic liberalization.

Japan sent billions of dollars as gestures of apology but the Chinese people have been kept in the dark about this as about many other things.

Michi,

I've never claimed to 'know a lot about China', who does?

Australia needed to improve relations with its former enemy for significant economic advantage, so NARA was the result, Australia and Japan needed each other, we had little choice other than reconciliation. We didn't have the luxury of 'settling scores'. Many Australians haven't forgotten Japan's atrocious war time record and the regular reports of Japanese 'selective amnesia', nor have the Chinese. China was invaded, devastated and humiliated by the Japanese in the 1930s and 1940s. A resurgent China might calculate it can punish the Japanese with, not invasion and devastation, but humiliation, at little cost to itself. Please note, I'm not making any moral judgements and suggesting that Japan should be punished, simply that I suspect that the Chinese might have just that intention.

There's an immense difference between the economic insignificance of Mao's China and its foreign policy and the foreign policy of the new Middle Kingdom.

Watch the video I linked on page 5, particularly in reference to Hugh White's comments on China-Japan relations.

You might be interested in this, Prof. Galtung's lecture is on the broad topic of a peaceful world-he mentions Germany's success in coming to terms with its past and Japan's failure.

http://peoplesgeography.com/?s=johan+galtung

Mac,
In "does Australia have unfinished scores with Japan after it signed" the peace treaty with Japan "in 1951?" substitute China for Australia and in 1978 for in 1951. That is what I wanted to mean.

The Chinese communist leaders cannot make typhoons and earthquakes, but they can make anti-foreign movements. They do this for their political and policy convenience. The Chinese people dance to the tunes without knowing it.

The first wave of anti-foreign songs was because Mao was furious with the United States. The U.S. had been assisting Chiang Kaishek and the two peoples started to fight in the Korean Peninsula. President Truman said Taiwan was the only legitimate government representing China.
The second wave was engineered and manipulated because Mao disageed to Moscow's policy of peaceful coexistence with the West. Mao was mad because Russia "backed away" in the Cuban missile crisis; Mao said U.S. atomic bombs were paper tigers; the Chinese communists did not respect Moscow as the Holy See of international communist movements, etc.

If the anti-Japanese feelings had come before 1978, that would be understandble. As they came after 1978, I feel it a little bit unfair.

As for our selecive amnesia, I feel as if you had been reading, say, the Peoples's Daily.
There are certainly Japanese who do not learn at all. But the war-guilt education in post-war Japan has gone so far, coupled with strong leftist thinking, that a lot of Japanese, if not most, feel very small and cannot say,for example, if I may speak figuratively, "Tokyo is a Japanese city" when the Chinese Communists say, "the Japanese are saying Tokyo is a Japanese city. They are not remorseful yet."

When I say, "Tokyo is the capital of Japan," do not blame me for amnesia.

There is a deeper, older, and more historical reason for the Chinese disdain of the Japanese.

China is Australia's largest merchandise export market, accounting for $46.4 billion in calendar year 2009-10 (free on board, value terms). This is followed by Japan ($37.1 billion), the Republic of Korea ($16.5 billion), India ($16.2 billion) and the United States ($9.5 billion).
The Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics - Bureau of Rural Sciences (ABARE-BRS) forecasts that earnings from Australia’s commodity exports will increase by 26.0 per cent in 2010–11 to around $214.9 billion. For energy and minerals, export earnings are forecast to increase by 29.9 per cent to around $179.9 billion in 2010–11, higher negotiated contract prices for coal and higher export shipments and prices for iron ore are the main reasons for the increase. ABARE-BRS forecasts that export earnings for farm commodities will be around $31.4 billion in 2010–11, up from $28.5 billion in 2009–10.
The $A has traded over a large range since the global financial crisis. Throughout 2010, the $A has fluctuated between 81 and 96 US cents, During the past few months, the $A has gained strength against the $US following improvements in Australia’s trade position.

China reciprocates: 'trades' in the full connotation of the term.

According to most financial commentators, the Australian Dollar is massively overvalued at present and its position is mainly a reflection of the U.S.'s current problems.

Michi,

You're saying that anti-Japanese sentiments in China are the result of cynical propaganda campaigns by the Communist Party and not due to any underlying resentment of Japan by the Chinese people. That's certainly plausible given the Chinese government's control of the media. However that doesn't account for anti-Japanese sentiment in other East Asian nations which is attributed to Japan's historical record. Only time will tell which opinion is correct.

Your comments in regard to Japanese 'selective amnesia' are interesting,and in contrast with the way the local media report on Japanese attitudes to the past. There are regular reports here in Australia of attempts by the Japanese educators to "whitewash the record of their armed forces during WW2. I don't know how accurate such reports are, however they are definitely not favourable to the international image of Japan.
I think that you're saying that the Japanese,from the Chinese point of view,will never be allowed to put the past behind them.

You said "There is a deeper, older, and more historical reason for the Chinese disdain of the Japanese" but did not explain what it is.
Are you referring to the fact that Japanese culture is partly derived from China,or to some other reason?

Mac,
I think the present anti-Japanese feelings in China are largely the product of manipulation by the Communist Party.
Ask why these feelings did not come earlier than than anti-American and anti-Russian feelings. Ask when the last two subsided. Ask how China is ruled by the Party. Believe it or not, there were rather strong pro-Japanese sentiments in China after 1972 when the relations were normalized and 1978 when the peace treaty was signed. Though I was too young to understand at that time, these feelings were manipulated, too.

Undoubtedly, as you said, there is a historical basis for anti-Japanese feelings not only in China but also in other East Asian nations including Australia. This is, needless to say, due to the records of the Japanese armed forces.

I posted a comment to Dan Twinig/Chrysanthemum or Samurai?, Foreign Policy(www.foreignpolicy.com).

Mac,
About the whitewashing of the war records in Japanese schools. We are trying to talk to each other, but I feel as if we may be talking in monologues in a thick fog or through a dark window. It is because we are not exchanging concrete details instead of talking in abstract generalizations.

In order to know even a little bit about Japan today, we need to go back in Japanese history. If you go back to and start from 1930s' Japan, you might have the impression Japan is full of rightwingers. If you start from 1920s' Japan, you might feel it is filled with leftists.
There has been a very strong Marxist-leftist thinking in post-war Japan, though this is waning. This is traceable back to the 1920s' inflow into Japan of Marxism-Leninism. This influence was very strong among the intelligentsia and made an intellectual climate in post-war Japan after about ten years's forced hibernation. To add, Japan in the 1930s was an emotional or moody reaction to the 1920s.

People caught in this climate thought as a general tendency that the United States was a dangerous warmonger in subservience to capitalists; the Soviets and Commnisit China were peace-lovers; teachers said clearly or insinuated in classrooms that Chairman Mao was a great leader who lifte up China, through the Great Leap Forward and the Great Cultural Revolution, from poverty to the paradise of people's democracy in which people lived in equality and freedom; that it was a bad thing to pay respect to the Japanese anthem and the flag which were smeared with violence and blood, etc.

This is being rectified. The Japanese people call it whitewashing, brainwashing or cleaning up, depending on their political philosophy if they have anything like that.

I think there is no whitewashing of the war records. How can we do it when the world knows about them already? How can we do it when we know?
There are differences, however, in different school textbooks, for instance about the numbers of Chinese murdered in Nanking or about comfort-women. The Japanese lefts are generally angry.

Michi,

Thanks for the interesting discussion,a different perspective is always informative.