The time is approaching fast when Australia [and NZ] must decide where our best interests lie, both short term and long term.
Unfortunately, politicians are woefully versed in history and thus a rational short term approach is out of the question. Insightful long term approaches are anathema to political realities and thus they attract short term solutions [if solutions they are].

North of Australia are vast and virgin resources of energy over which China is asserting control. The East and South China seas are eyed with envy by the bordering nations, each having uncharted but legitimate claims.

In past centuries, China exerted suzerainty over most of S.E.Asia at one time or another. East of the Urals its influence frequently prevailed and throughout much of its history it was the greatest civilisation in its hemisphere.

The days of the upstart civilisations, fomer colonies unfettered by historical inhibitions, entrenched class systems and "old" wealth, must take account of a resurgence of a reconstituted Middle Kingdom in the garb of, say, the New Republic. Ever conscious of heritage as a tool of propaganda, the Chinese leadership has inculcated its citizens with the notion of natural suzerainty over its hemisphere.

What can former European colonies and smaller indigenously ruled nations in this hemisphere expect from a China, deeply enculturated to the rule of emperors, asserting its rightful control and/or influence over much of the eastern division of the Eurasian continent and a large chunk of the western Pacific Ocean?

We must not forget old friends! Human rights are insignificant points in the big game. Remember “Pig iron” Bob Menzies. We were soon to be dodging the bullets of the rising sun empire of Japan, made from our own scrap metal sales.

Remember the sacrifices of the Americans during the Pacific war won against Japan in 1945, without which we would not be basking in the sun of success as we are now.

My personal feeling is we must stand with the Americans through thick and thin to the end; whatever and whenever that may be. We owe them! Balance that ethic with the other historic chapter of the time when our most trusted friend GB abandoned the same Pacific, including Australia, to the will of the Japanese.

God bless America.

Extropian,

"a China, deeply enculturated to the rule of emperors, asserting its rightful control and/or influence over much of the eastern division of the Eurasian continent and a large chunk of the western Pacific Ocean ... "

"rightful control" ? China has the right, like any other nation, large or small, to control its own territory. It has no right to control the territory of any other country. The days of colonial power are over, not just for the British and the Tsars and the Emporer of the Rising sun, but for the Chinese too. They don't 'have a turn' at it.

As for the Paracels and the Spratleys, why not internationalise them, and form joint companies to exploit the oil and gas underneath them ?

Joe

Joe [Loudmouth] writes;

<"rightful control" ? China has the right, like any other nation, large or small, to control its own territory. It has no right to control the territory of any other country...... As for the Paracels and the Spratleys, why not internationalise them, and form joint companies to exploit the oil and gas underneath them?>

I should have used inverted commas in my own attribution of "rightful control" for I was expressing it from a Chinese POV. I was not asserting it as my opinion.

Internationalising the fields in the East and South China Seas is a worthy suggestion.

But if China [and one or two other protagonists like Japan and Vietnam and Taiwan] retort with an adamant NO!, then what are the options? A graceful exit from failure and plan B must follow.

I believe that the USA will offer all support short of active participation in a hot conflict in the western Pacific. Its ventures into East Asia have not met with the success it had hoped for. In China, it failed with the Kuomintang; in Korea it was forced to a humiliating compromise; in Vietnam and Kampuchea it failed utterly.

Question: Following WW2, why did the USA fight communism in the smaller nations bordering China rather than in a China utterly exhausted by a century of internal and external conflict and a deeply ingrained ineptitude in its political institutions?

Taking a pragmatic view............China now treats external attempts
at influence with a hauteur it has not been able to adopt for around 200 years. It has its own way of politicking and the metaphorical muscle to insist so. Disrespecting that will get you nowhere.

An acceptance of the status quo and deepening engagement in trade, cultural exchange and sport will bring peaceful transition to a more open society.

Question: Can the USA wait that long while maintaining mutuality of respect? IMHO, they've shown little inclination since WW2.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana