Here is some more fodder for the discussion:

 

Destined for War: Can China and the United States Escape Thucydides’s Trap? - The Atlantic

 

Very interesting article, on many levels.

 

I think that the world has a fear of China getting too powerful. When push comes to shove, India, Russia and several Islamic states, as well as SE Asia and Japan, could be counted on. Obviously that's a worst-case WWIII scenario.

Very interesting article, on many levels.

 

I think that the world has a fear of China getting too powerful. When push comes to shove, India, Russia and several Islamic states, as well as SE Asia and Japan, could be counted on. Obviously that's a worst-case WWIII scenario.

 

Just out of curiosity, what makes you think this about Russia? Aren't they one of China's biggest allies?

Just out of curiosity, what makes you think this about Russia? Aren't they one of China's biggest allies?

 

Russia has always frothed at the mouth over the prospect of acquiring and keeping Manchuria.

Just out of curiosity, what makes you think this about Russia? Aren't they one of China's biggest allies?

 

I don't think they've been allies since the 70's.

I don't think they've been allies since the 70's.

 

I am relatively certain they still hold very close ties with each other. Such can be seen through economic agreements between the two, voting tenancies when an issue comes to the UN P5, and a mutual desire to remove the US out of their side of the pacific.

Japan's recent push to amend their pacifist constitution could make this situation stickier.

I am relatively certain they still hold very close ties with each other. Such can be seen through economic agreements between the two, voting tenancies when an issue comes to the UN P5, and a mutual desire to remove the US out of their side of the pacific.

 

They'll help each other when it's mutually beneficial. Like when the US wants the Security Council to get involved in Ukraine or during the Georgian conflict several years ago. As long as Russia frames it as an issue of national sovereignty (even if it's a front for international muscle), China wants the UN to butt out of numerous things it's up to even though it's signed certain treaties and agreements, so they stand on a platform of "This is a domestic issue."

I am relatively certain they still hold very close ties with each other. Such can be seen through economic agreements between the two, voting tenancies when an issue comes to the UN P5, and a mutual desire to remove the US out of their side of the pacific.

 

I still don't know if I would call them allies. We have the Free Trade Act in Asia and it doesn't seem to make us allies with the Chinese.

They'll help each other when it's mutually beneficial. Like when the US wants the Security Council to get involved in Ukraine or during the Georgian conflict several years ago. As long as Russia frames it as an issue of national sovereignty (even if it's a front for international muscle), China wants the UN to butt out of numerous things it's up to even though it's signed certain treaties and agreements, so they stand on a platform of "This is a domestic issue."

 

Right, and I think both would agree the a smaller US influence in the pacific would be mutually beneficial to them. As was mentioned before, I don't think we can count on Russia to try to dissuade China from really doing anything that would benefit the US.

Here is some more fodder for the discussion:

 

Destined for War: Can China and the United States Escape Thucydides’s Trap? - The Atlantic

 

Great article, but the comments section makes an excellent point that they don't remotely touch on nuclear weapons. You can't apply old world logic to these things. No one (other than maybe North Korea) wants a nuclear war. And if these two truly came to blows, how long before that becomes part of the equation?

Great article, but the comments section makes an excellent point that they don't remotely touch on nuclear weapons. You can't apply old world logic to these things. No one (other than maybe North Korea) wants a nuclear war. And if these two truly came to blows, how long before that becomes part of the equation?

 

That's an interesting point. There's been a "nuclear peace" since the US first used the weapon on Japan. No nuclear powers have gone to war against one another. The logic is intuitive: Knowing the ultimate destruction a nuclear war would have, countries are averse to even a small conventional war for fear it will escalate to a nuclear one.

 

The other side is that nuclear weapons haven't been around very long in the grand scheme of things and besides the US/USSR and maybe India/Pakistan there haven't been major tensions between nuclear powers that would have tested the logic. There were also a lot of close calls where a nuclear war was narrowly avoided during the Cold War, sometimes due to things as random as miscommunication or faulty technology. Who can tell if in another tense situation someone doesn't make a mistake?