China Plans for Greater Aggressiveness

This week, from October 26-29^th, China held its “Fifth Plenum of the 19^th Communist Party of China Central Committee.” While the name of the meeting may sound dull, what it reveals about the country’s pivot to national security, technological independence and reforming global trade and governance is not….

The CCP released its new five-year plan covering the years 2021-2025 and what it deliberately hides, as well as what it reveals, of the communist giant’s plans should cause concern to the Western free world. China’s leadership is calling for an increasingly aggressive foreign policy agenda and an implicit domestic growth target of 5% annually. The communique released at the end of the four-day meeting states that China’s the core strategy going forward is one of “dual circulation.” In reality, however, this is an going, long-term, economic growth paradigm to guide how China relates economically to the world. Ostensibly the current version of the document is labeled as a new program to cut dependence on overseas markets, brought on by challenges from the Trump Administration’s holding Beijing accountable for its economic, military, and political actions. Its roots, however, go back over a decade.

The current document expects China to face a challenging external environment in the coming years which it characterized as filled with geopolitical flashpoints, heightened distrust among capitals in the post-Cold War era, trouble in the US-China relationship, and investment trade-offs between efficiency and resiliency for large Chinese companies. Beijing hopes economically to achieve a 70% self-sufficiency rate by using credit subsidies, intellectual property acquisitions and public sector enterprises by 2025. By 2049 it intends to dominate these areas globally.

An analysis of the plan indicates that China is shifting its strategy further away from one of state support for its failing businesses to protection for its next wave of industries. China says it is attempting to rebalance the global supply chain during what it expects to be a “protracted conflict” in a “complex international environment.” The industries China is choosing to support indicates that the world not only is going to face a trade war with the communist giant but also one that is technology-based. The plan is designed to move China’s 1.4 billion population away from a labor-based economy and put it in direct competition with India and the United States. The accelerated domestic orientation is intended to help China ride through rough global economic shocks.

Numerous young people never get treatment for their condition, online levitra look at here in spite having obvious symptoms of ED. Kamagra tablets are available in many different forms but the most effective herbal remedy for this disorder is viagra no doctor 10mg. Unhealthy food rich in saturated fat, and other cholesterol-laden or -inducing foods and I eat loads more grains, seeds, vegetables, salads, fruit and fish, which is no easy thing in the middle of the Nevada.’ ‘While it is true that with age, our body gets tender and also less energetic. selling here cialis canadian generic Here, we have come up generic sildenafil with the cheapest kamagra pill to whacks the ED issue.

As China becomes more assertive on the external front it expects to “reshape” global governance and trade as it expects the United States to become weaker and have less influence in the world. To reinforce this movement the plan calls for a greater emphasis on its military build-up and an expansion of its civilian-military fusion program. The CCP document also claims “the relative strength of global power has shifted” in a reference to conflicts in the US-China relationship. It is interesting to note that the timeframe China says this refers to is “the last 100 years.” This is important in that China still operates as if it is recovering from the Unequal Treaties period in the last 19^th and early 20^th centuries. The CCP is calli ng for a more aggressive foreign policy and increased military competition and influence.

This moves Deng’s Xiaoping’s famous 1987 statement about reaching the level of a “moderately developed country” by 2050 back to 2035. New strategies that supplement those already in place reinforce that the Chinese leadership intends an aggressive agenda moving forward, one slowed only by the Trump Administration. The United States can expect to see increased intellectual property theft and other illiberal trade policies to escalate in the coming years. The CCP and President Xi Jinping do not show an indication of living within the international norms-based system which has brought the world relative peace a stability. It is, perhaps, more important than ever that the United States and the Western world hold China accountable for its trade infractions, human rights abuses, and militarily aggressive moves at it modernizes its economy. Only time will tell if China has the ability to become a responsible player on the world stage.

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government. Each Friday, she presents key updates on China.

Illustration: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Why the Electoral College is Vital

Proposals for radical alterations in the way Americans vote are dangerous concepts that would have dramatic consequences for the nation and its Constitution. Some, such as ranked choice voting, are an unblushing bid to prop up fringe, leftist candidates. Others. if adopted, would essentially disunite the nation and overturn its Constitution. As they consistently have after each election loss, Democrat spokespeople have flooded the airwaves with complaints about the Electoral College. Why, they ask, can’t we have a “popular vote,” and let it be done with. Since the Electoral College process is part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution, it would be necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change this system. The National Archives notes that over the past 200 years more than 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject. The answer is as simple as the name of the country: The United States of America. The incredibly successful nation created almost two and a half centuries ago was a union of separate states. Fresh off of dealing with a monarch, it was intentionally set up that way to both prevent the possibility of having an all-powerful dictator, and to prevent larger states from bullying smaller ones. Abolishing the electoral college would essentially disenfranchise smaller states from having any say in the presidency. Indeed, even less populated areas of large states would lose influence. A collection of large cities, (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, Austin, Jacksonville, etc.) would decide the outcome in who gets the White House. Considering how badly many of those urban centers are run, that would not bode well for the future of the country! Beyond the practical policy implications, it would alienate the populations of those not living in California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, who would, for the most part, be reduced to bystanders in the race for the only nationally-elected position. A Heritage study analyzed the concept of a “National Popular Vote” (NPV) this way: “The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan is the latest in a long line of schemes designed to replace the Electoral College. Imbued with the ideals of this nation’s Founders, the Electoral College has proved itself to be both effective in providing orderly elections for President and resilient in allowing a stable transfer of power of the leadership of the world’s greatest democracy. Therefore, while it would be a mistake to replace the Electoral College, replacing this system with the NPV would be a disaster. The NPV would devalue the minority interests that the Founders sought to protect, create electoral administrative problems, encourage voter fraud, and radicalize the U.S. political system. It also would likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Compact Clause while directly contravening the Founders’ view of federalism and a representative republic. In an age of perceived political dysfunction, effective policies already in place—especially successful policies established by this nation’s Founders, such as the Electoral College—should be preserved.” Trent England, writing for the National Conference of State Legislatures outlined key reasons for the institution: “At the Constitutional Convention, the primary concern of delegates opposed to direct election was that big states would dominate presidential politics. By using a two-step election process, the Electoral College prevents one region, or a handful of major metropolitan areas, from controlling the White House. Support must be geographically distributed around the country in order to win enough states to capture an electoral vote majority. This was particularly important after the Civil War. The nation remained divided, and Democrats became dominant in the south. A combination of intense popularity with some voters and violent suppression of others allowed Democrats to receive the most popular votes in 1876 and 1888 even though they lost the Electoral College and thus those elections.” Eliminating the Electoral College would be a disaster for the United States/