Former ambassador to Beijing and former presidential candidate Jon Huntsman has some useful points to make in the Wall Street Journal about how America must deal with China. But his prescriptions are curiously incomplete.
He argues, convincingly, that “the U.S. must deal with China from a position of strength”; “we should be pursuing free trade agreements with Japan, Taiwan and India, and allowing American businesses to enter Burma”; “we should renew our ties to key allies, focusing on joint endeavors that hedge against some of the more difficult contingencies we could face in the region from an aggressive China and People’s Liberation Army”; and we must make clear that, while “values matter,” “in today’s China those values we share are found mostly among people like Mr. Chen, and not in the Communist Party or the government.”
What’s missing here? Any mention of military strength. Huntsman is right that we need to get our economic house in order (presumably by reducing the burden of government on the economy and reducing the ridiculous federal budget deficit). But we also must make clear to China that there is no sense in a military challenge to the U.S. and our allies because we will be strong enough to resist any Chinese adventurism. That deterrence is in the process of being lost today, unfortunately.
As former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman pointed out in a previous Journal oped, a bipartisan commission chaired by Stephen Hadley and William Perry determined that the Navy needs at least 346 vessels in the future. But today, the Navy has only 286 ships, and it is shrinking. Based on the present trajectory, it will be down to 240-250 ships at best. That is hardly a signal of strength to China at a time when its own military is expanding at breakneck pace.
The fact that Huntsman makes no mention of this important expression of national power is a reminder that he ran for the Republican nomination as a quasi-isolationist–and reason to be thankful his campaign gained so little traction.
The only signal of American strength the Chinese would take notice of is the removal of Obama from Office come November.
We have a president, who is not only a quasi socialist but as such he desires to see the USA no stronger, no wealthier and no more independent than any other nation. Radical egalitarianism. Conseqjuently, Barry Soetoro has been reducing the US Armed Forces, our weapons and space programs (NASA),. He must have more money for his social programs, which are mostly a way to buy the voting loyalty of the "masses".
I believe China's military is decades away from competing. I also believe China is in a long-war strategy, or perhaps a 100year plan, doing away with 5-years. They have expediently built infrastructe, no matter how terribly it was constructed. The one-child policy should start reducing numbers shortly, perhaps halved by 2100 or sooner; thinking a third less around 2050. Easier to distribute to less persons. Their foreign policy has expanded. Cyberwarring, trade wars, intentional poisoning commerce (my opinion). When they catch up to where they pretend to be, imperialism and conquest anew. Authoritarians do not suddenly grant freedom.
Peace thru strength, I concur with the article. Also, Huntsman is a wannabe paper tiger.
America like all evil empires before it will surely fall, for decades you have been invading other countries and killing people.