[Marxism] Declining US military superiority

DW dwaltersmia at gmail.com
Mon Dec 24 17:34:48 MST 2018


John, you didn't really read what I wrote: "The purpose of the Chinese and
Russian militaries, leaving aside nuclear WMD, is to defend their homelands
and a *limited* regional influence/domination."

I did NOT write what you said I did here: "David Walters cites the lack of
Chinese and Russian military bases outside of their immediate region as
evidence that their military is for self defense purposes only. "only"???
What "only"??? What I wrote still stands: their military deployments and
development internally is to defend their homelands and LIMITED regional
influence *AND* domination. I cited the example of Syria and Crimea as an
example of this. (the latter two do no follow investments). No one,
including me, argues that the Russian intervention in Syria was for self
defense of Russia.

Your citing of the Chinese involvement in the much delayed and hopefully
stymied Canal Project in Nicaragua is...quite open and not hidden. You
write like it's some kind of revelation. It's not a secret in Nicaragua or
anywhere for that matter. The Chinese papers were touting this a few years
ago. This is generally true for all of Chinese overseas STATE investments
that I'm aware of (I haven no idea about non-state Chinese investments or
they carry them out). But you write "As is inevitable, these investments
are also tied in with interference in the domestic politics of the
countries where the investments lie." Really? Do tell. The reason I want to
know is that I would like more exploration of the "no strings attached"
investment policies of the Chinese state (guiding both state and private
enterprises in their overseas investment patterns).

As you noted one of the talked about issues is asset staking and the
Chinese take over of the port in Colombo. This has arisen again under the
still being built port in Pakistan. Chinese investments in Pakistan I
believe are more than ALL the combined investments in Africa and other
parts of Asia. It is a big issue (the South China Morning Post, a
conservative daily of record published in Hong Kong covers this extensively
if you need to know) but it is not like as you write either "the classic
"debt trap" that US finance capital has used so often" .Yeah...no, it's
not. There is absolutley nothing "classic" about what the Chinese are
doing. What US capital does, that is transnational capital, is to demand
the state targeted for the infrastructure project roll back all state
subsidies, cut payments for health care, education, transportation and
anything that could suck up capital for "useless labor". The Imperialists
when selling such debt to developing countries do in fact include asset
forfeiture...so they can then cut it up the assets and sell them to recover
their costs. The Chinese, state nor private, appear to have ever done that
at all. Their investments are not for immediate return...which IS part and
parcel of every Imperialist bank loan ever made, bar none, even under
'favorable terms'. So this is more complex than just placing an
"Imperialist" label next to Chinese investment and expect everyone to
assume, as you clearly do, it's the "same" as traditional Imperialist
investments. It's not, not even close. For that matter, Imperilism doen't
even invest in infastructure anymore though they still demand roll backs in
state owned enterprises, reform of labor codes, public health, etc as I
noted above The Chinese do not do this, John. Why don't they?

Secondly, your breathless "...I've read, the port has very little
commercial potential, so what is the aim of the development of the port?
Isn't it likely that it will be used as a naval base? And we know that
China is advancing its naval
development in general." "likely"? Maybe not at all? One can write anything
I suppose but it is not necessarily logical either. Chinese navel assets
already have right of call at 3 dozens Asia/South Asian/African ports.
Again their only BASE  is in Djibouti. Maybe they will, maybe they wont
demand that this base turn into a navy base for them of the Sri Lankan
gov't. I just don't see a shred of evidence they will because they haven't
anywhere else that I'm aware of.

I think there are many nuances to Chinese State capitalism and they don't
fit neatly into previous cookie cutter molds. I recommend people explore
these nuances.

David


More information about the Marxism mailing list