One area overlooked in the article is China’s low rating in the Environmental Performance Index, at 121 in 163 countries.

http://epi.yale.edu/Countries

Australia has little to celebrate either, at 51.

Should China be doing more with its massive monetary surplus to improve its environmental performance?

Yes.

Are countries who export to China also reducing their own Environmental Performance Index figure, by speeding up the depletion of their natural resources?

Quite possibly.

Now let's see.The USA and NATO have invaded 7 countries for oil and resources,then creates a monetary crisis and Mr Lewis accuses China of being aggesssive? The imperialists are on our side.

Fair points, Mr Lewis.

Although I personally wouldn't categorize them as "immense barriers", there are certainly pitfalls to be avoided. I remember doing the research myself many years ago when setting up an agency operation to deal with China through Hong Kong. Having a trustworthy local partner was absolutely essential, if one wanted to avoid disaster.

But I found that there were equally complex issues to overcome when dealing with India. The bureaucracy there, coupled with the still-rife requirement to grease palms (although they never called it that), needed to be studied and planned for.

So do you fear the rise of Indian economic power in the same way that you fear the Chinese? It is just a feeling I get, but you seem to have more of a problem coming to grips with China than with anyone else, even though the problems tend to be universal, rather than restricted to the Chinese.

Would I be right?

Pericles, i don't know as much about India, probably because i have much less concern with India.

I recognise that it is important that we have a trading system that does allow poorer nations to develop and use their various advantages.

My belief is that if all participant nations behave in a similar way, within reason given different levels of wealth and strategies, then the extent of decline in the West will be less so as we have more time to adapt and adjust through appropriate reform. Then there is more likely to be a win-win situation which has less to do with our reliance on debt and the Chinamaerica dependence.

As i suggest, the time may have come for the West to be more assertive in its expectations from China. I am not against freer trade, although there will always be some concerns.

Pericles, I think we all agree that fairness, corruption and transparency (of rules, regulations and opportunities) are all issues that need to be addressed in terms of the behaviour of any nation seeking to benefit from interaction with the international economy.

BTW, there are many aspects of policies by Western nations which are also problematic, including ridiculous wages for CEOs. I just feel that pluralist societies are most capable of bringing attention to domestic and foreign issues with a hope of them being more adequately addressed

Pericles, further to Chris's comments regarding differences between China and India. One of the key differences, is accountability. This, in essence is the key function of democracy. I don't tend to think it actually functions as a way to choose the best leaders, rather, it works as a release valve. Leaders are restricted to a short time in power and when the public grows annoyed with them they can be fired.

The Chinese government operates under a distinctly different set of principles. It's not just the democracy issue, I think that comes second to the fact that there isn't really any rule of law.

Take the recent imprisonment of the famous Chinese artist Ai Wei Wei. When he was arrested, the Chinese government breached their own constitution, but it didn't really matter.

http://www.englishpen.org/writersinprison/wipcnews/chinaprominentartistandcriticaiweiweidetainedfearsforsafety/

Since then, the Chinese government has set about remedying this, so people can be arrested at any time and held without charge, for charges as nebulous as subverting state power. Ok, so you may want to draw parallels with American anti-terrorism laws. I'd argue that the American laws are more explicit in relation to there needing to be some kind of violent intent, but I concede there's room for disagreement there.

This does lead however, to the example of Liu Xiaobo - imprisoned for 11 years, for authoring a document, Charter 08, which suggested a gradual separation of powers and the rule of law.

India on the other hand, does have the rule of law. Granted, corruption is rife, but the government does not hold all of the cards in the same way the Chinese government does.

It's instructive to compare the case of Anna Hazare and Liu Xiaobo. Hazare remains free in India, lauded by many.

Liu Xiaobo remains unknown to most Chinese citizens, because the government has blocked out all news relating to him - despite the fact that he's China's first recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Quite a feat.