I'm not so sure, Mr Lewis.

>>I have no problem with any nation rising. All I am arguing is that one nation, especially a communist one, should not receive most of the benefit while most others struggle.<<

Simply because in economic terms, we are powerless to do anything about it. Just as seventeenth century India, after allowing the East India Company to develop its export market, was powerless to halt the exploitation of its resources, and ultimately its domination by a foreign power.

Once the barbarians are inside the gates, all bets are off.

China's stalking horse was of course our willingness to put ourselves in hock to buy its increasingly sophisticated baubles. As has always occurred throughout history, the country - or business - that sets out to dominate a market in this way is able to squeeze out its competitors.

For recent examples, study the post-war economies of Germany and Japan, both of whom became technological powerhouses at the expense of industry in less afflicted countries.

>>Sure democracies have relied on some dodgy policies in recent years rather than hard policy decisions, but this does not rule out the need for policy adjustments in the future.<<

Not entirely sure what you refer to here. It was largely complacency that got us to where we are now.

>>I do believe there will be a public backlash against China should it benefit most without playing by the same rules.<<

Which "public" is that?

It will be many years before the Chinese public repeats Tienanmen Square. Prosperity - even relative prosperity - is a very powerful political sedative.

Any ideas that involve introducing them to western-style democracy are pretty pointless. Let's face it, we're becoming increasingly dirigiste ourselves, each day bringing in yet another nanny-state law, and giving the "authorities" ever-greater powers to slap our wrists for trivial acts.

Not a great incentive for mass political upheaval.

Our task should be to learn to conserve the things that are important to us, while living with the fact that we have little ability to have an impact on the way China evolves.

although i agree with much of the article, mainly to do with the continued expansion and domination of china; i was left with an underlying wariness about the pretext of much that was written.

it seemed to me that this article contained much antagonism towards a rising china as though it was a bad thing. much of this antagonism seemed to be directed at the fact that china is communist. is it not true that as the standard of living and participation on the world stage increases, so will the democractisation of the country. would it be more sensible to quell the economic prosperity of china or embrace it?

yes, china has monopolised the rare earths sector, holds a majority of US Treasury debt among other things, but with a country of that size it is inevitable that some results of its rise isn't going to be perfect.

just a last point, would the growth of this country be as it was without the continued demand from china? would we have staved off recession during the GFC? members of the resources sector has stated that at times the only demand was from china. without foreign people participating in our economy, could we ourselves at the moment hold up demand especially in the housing sector, and closer to home (and not to mean any offence), would our universities be as well off and able to hire as many people, without the direct fees from foreign students?

Why should anyone or any country fear the rise of China as the world's dominant economic or even military power?

China buys lots of iron and other resources from Australia.

Australia doesn't need a military to sell iron to the Chinese government.

China is not a belligerent nation. One can look at its track record with its surrounding neighbors since the end of WWII. Korea, Vietnam, Kashmir; even its internal states like Tibet, Taiwan or Mongolia.

The Han majority in China is a peace-loving culture interested in the betterment of humanity and the world.

No other culture has spent so much to try and foster understanding and tolerance among its people or treated the threatened earth's environment with care, concern and respect as much as China.

Even the US benefits economically from the high-quality, high-value goods fairly produced in China.

The best thing that Australia could do would be to deepen its economic and political ties with China.

That way Australians can sleep peacefully at night.

So long as Australia stays nuclear-free and avoids any involvement with America, Australians are safe.

Australia can only stay safe from Chinese threats by making sure not to have any military force, and to stay away from the domineering Americans.

Chinese nukes or military power can only be used against Australians if America is involved, never in any other scenario. Australia needs China. Otherwise it can't sell its iron and can't have a better life.

China needs Australia as a friend and ally because it is the only way it could ever have the resources it needs to develop. Hopefully China will invest more in Australia as it has in Africa thereby improving the free and independent nation of Australia.