Friday, January 10, 2025

The Rise of the Chinese Dragon and Decline of the United States

Somehow its seems appropriate that the Chinese astrological symbol for 2025 is the Snake, specifically the wooden snake, The Snake is sometimes referred to as the "Little Dragon" which follows the Dragon symbol in the Chinese astrology, and is associated with Earth (it's also occasionally called the "Serpent") and is the sixth of the twelve zodiac signs. The Snake, it is said, is intelligent, cunning, and patient. At the same time it can be narrow minded, judgmental, vain, sneaky, and petty. Why is that significant?

Well, in the world of mythology, which not so surprisingly, still exerts a influence, albeit mostly symbolic, on our lives. We name pieces of technology, procedures, and even name planets after mythological gods and goddesses. Many of us still read our horoscope with at least a passing curiosity. Even when we go out on dates we often get asked "what's your sign" in the hopes that it will reveal a possible compatibility. 

As anyone who follows politics, economics, or current events should know, China has become a major economic power. In 2022, we imported $536.3 billion dollars worth of goods from China. That represents 16.5% of all U.S. imports. Most of that ranges from cheap toys, tools, and miscellaneous items to sophisticated technical hardware, computer chips and processors, computers, batteries (especially lithium), display monitors, and video games. 

Meanwhile, we ship some $195.5 billion dollars in goods back to China, accounting for 7.5% of China's total imports.  We are indebted to China to the tune of just over $1 trillion dollars. That's roughly 7% of our national debt. Still, the United States still has the largest economy in the world, larger than China's by nearly a third. However, among the top industrial nations, China has the fastest growing economy, and may surpass the U.S. in ten or so years.

 Our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is currently $30.4 trillion compared to China's with $19.6 trillion. While much is made of Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland, in fact China owns just under 1% of American farmland (Canada owns the most). That accounts for about 380,000 acres.  

However, there's another key factor to be considered. Along with having the fastest growing economy in the world among the top industrialized nations, China is also rapidly expanding its economic reach. China has been aggressively buying up control of natural resources around the world, exceeding that of the United States. 

China has been acquiring rights not just to farmland, but mineral rights as well, especially strategic minerals used in computer and missile technology like cobalt and platinum.  However, perhaps one of the most essential of resources, potable water, has been high on China's "buy" list. With 20% of the world's population, it has just 6% of its drinking water. In addition, because of its rapid "hellbent" economic growth, minimizing pollution has not been high on the government's list of things to do. 

According to a study done by the Lowy Institute, somewhere around 85% of China's groundwater is not fit for consumption (over 40% of the groundwater in Beijing is unusable). Worse still, nearly half of China's groundwater isn't safe to be used in the production of crops. On the upside (if there is one) is that China's water pollution isn't the worse. India's is.  What this means is that the two most populous countries on the planet have critical need for scarce usable water, making it perhaps the single most critical natural resource. Many military strategists believe that useable water may become valuable than gold or oil, and thus making its control of primary importance, especially given climate change. What cannot be bought or bartered for will be taken by force as a matter of national survival.   

Another serious factor has been China's growing aggressiveness over control of the South China Sea, which has traditionally been used as a international shipping lane. However, China is now claiming territorial control of the channel, and threatening to use force to hinder or stop all international shipping, including the passage of U.S. military ships. China has even threatened to fire on or seized any vessels traversing the channel. Why the sudden interest in control of a waterway which has long be seen as open?

One possible explanation could be China's recent growth in its navy and its ability to protect whatever it claims. By the end of 2025, China is expected to have 395 ships, including three aircraft carriers, and 435 by 2030. as of 2024, China possessed 234 warships compared to 219 belonging to the U.S. Navy, which makes the Chinese navy this largest---and most modern---in the world. It's should be noted that not only are China's navy newer, it has more shipyards and drydocks than the U.S.. In addition, several recent wargame scenarios have shown China's navy as the victor. This is due to both the newness and quantity of their ships (meaning China's navy can afford to lose more than the U.S. can). 

China has been making use of its new found naval power not only in the South China Sea, but also reenforcing its claim of expanded territorial fishing rights in areas once considered international waters, as well as impinging on waters now claimed by South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Indonesia, and even India. China has also been stepping up it claim of national sovereignty over the island nation of Taiwan in addition to strengthening its ties with North Korea and Iran. 

A Pentagon report on U.S. military readiness didn't help. According to the report provided to the Department of Defense, the United States military was in serious need of a general overhaul, running the gambit from rifles and bullets to tanks, personnel carriers, artillery to aircraft, combat and support ships. In its present condition, according to the Pentagon, the military wasn't capable of fighting a sustained conflict on multiple fronts. 

Thanks to the 20 year war in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as propping up the Zelensky regime in Ukraine and U.S. support of Israel, the U.S. military is also running critically low levels on spare parts, and technicians to maintain and operate various systems. This is due to the massive hemorrhage of personnel getting out of the military (many of whom have done numerous deployments). For instance, in 2022, the Army missed its infantry recruitment goal by 50%. 

Since 2013, the number of males enlisting has dropped 38%. Enlistment from 1980 through 2020 dropped 59%. To make matters worse, according to the DoD, 77% of individuals of military age (17 - 24) are unfit to serve due to issues like obesity, drug use, mental or other physical reasons. As of November 2023, the Navy was 20% of it annual recruitment goal. The Army was 23% short, and the Air Force was 11% shy of its recruitment goal. Only the Marines and Space Force reached their recruitment numbers.  

Another issue facing the military is the Defense industry's focus on weapon systems that are either not wanted or needed. Following Nazi Germany's example toward the end of WWII, many of the weapons systems have become overly complex and prohibitively expensive (the Wehrmacht adopted equipment which were so complex, they were difficult to maintain such as the "King Tiger" tank or V2 rocket, plus the expense resulted in the production of relatively few numbers).

Per the "2024 Index of U.S. Military Strength"  published by the Heritage Foundation, China is listed as a "formable" threat in Asia  along with Russia. North Korea is considered worth watching. So, how does our military stack up? Again, according to the "Index", the U.S. Army's capacity for waging war is categorized as "weak".   Its capability is listed as "marginal", while its readiness is excellent. Overall, it's rated as "marginal". The Air Force faces similar problems. Its capacity and capability are both "marginal" while its readiness is "very weak" as is its overall rating. 

The U.S. Navy, facing reduction in the number of ships and shipyards, had a capacity rating of "very weak". It capability is rating is "marginal". As for its readiness and overall ratings, both are "weak". As an aside, its projected that with the growth of the Chinese navy, the U.S. Navy will likely not recover its previous naval dominance for at least the next decade. The Marine Corps has a  "weak" capacity rating, while capacity, readiness, and overall score were all "strong".  

The newest member of the military services, the U.S. Space Force, is still looking for its mission. It has yet to establish its fighting credentials (perhaps if aliens invade...). Nevertheless, it maintains satellites, drones, and related technology which are still emerging as unique military systems. But, they're not quite there yet. The U.S. Space Force was rated "marginal" across the board.   Next is our nuclear abilities. In terms of stockpile, delivery modernization, and "allied assurance" the rating was "very strong". 

When it came to delivery platform reliability, warhead modernization (heck, slap a coat of paint on there. Truth me, it won't matter), lab technicians, and weapons complex, the score was "marginal" as was the overall rating.  So, when we add it all up, the U.S. military came out with a overall score of "weak". The question then, is this good enough of a deterrent to stop China, North Korea, Iran, Russia, or a outside player, such as ISIS or Al Qaeda?   

There's no question China is playing the long game. While its economy is growing rapidly, it has also been promoting the Yuan as the alternative currency to the U.S. dollar (or even a possible replacement) which is unlikely, at least in the near future. It has joined Russia, India, South Africa, and Brazil as one of the principal members of "BRICS", which is poised to become a serious competitor to the U.S. dominated "New World Order". While BRICS has aways to go yet, its already showing promise as the number of applicants, especially among less developed countries, continues to grow.  

China's military, like its economy, has been growing and exerting its influence ever wider. With a weakening United States internally and externally, there is a quiet but growing question starting to be asked in serious but hushed tones throughout the nations of Asia, Africa, and even South America, and that question is whether they should continue to place all their political and economic eggs into one "Made in America" basket or is it time to accept the new role of the Chinese "Dragon" as we being the year of "Snake", or as it's also known, the "Little Dragon"?  

 

 Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you found our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free thinking individuals. We do ask, however, that you be sure to "like" us on whatever site you found us on in order to keep our articles available for others, and that you please pass our post along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 


China's Ownership of US Federal Debt

 

China's dominance of strategic resources


How Much U.S. Farmland Does China Really Own? More Than Bill Gates ---And Less Than 17 Other Countries


The Top Ten Largest Economies in the World in 2025


The Global Impact of China's Water and Related Environmental Problems


How Does Water Security Affect China's Development? 


Executive Summary of the 2024 Index of  U.S. Military Strength


CFR: What Is the BRICS Group and Why Is It Expanding?


Is military enlistment down?


Our Military Is in a Dangerous Decline and This Is the Reason Why



No comments: