To: Z268 who wrote (7342 ) 10/28/1998 7:49:00 PM From: Dayuhan Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 9980
Steve, In the bipolar world of the recent past, small countries had little choice but to become client states, and many suffered badly as a result, as each pole messed with the other pole's clients. In the emerging mutipolar Asia, is it possible that smaller countries might not have to become client states at all? There is obviously much speculation throughout Asia (and elsewhere) on the possible aggressive military intentions of the Chinese. They have rattled a number of sabres around the South China Sea; they claim ownership of a pile of rocks less than 200 miles from where I'm sitting now. Many people, especially Americans, feel that these aggressive tendencies, along with the general disregard for human rights and (perhaps most important) the at least nominally Communist character of their government are reasons for the Chinese to be excluded, for trade preferences to be reduced, for further military buildups to counter them. Personally, I think these would all be horrible mistakes, and would encourage the adventurism they are supposed to prevent. The more China becomes interdependent, the more they trade, the more money they make by trade, the less likely they are to rock the boat. It's been said that the fastest way to turn a radical into a conservative is to give him lots of money, and there is something to be said for that. I have to wonder, when I think how much has been spent trying to bludgeon radicals into conservatism, if it wouldn't have been cheaper to use this method. I don't mind at all if China and Japan slug it out for dominance of Asia, as long as they do it in an economic arena, rather than a military one. I just hope there is sufficient awareness of self-interest in both countries to make that happen. Steve