This article's whole premise is based on one border incursion and some building of roads. And I wouldn't expect the latter to be something that a nation's leadership would have to approve. Not to say that the premise of the article is necessarily wrong, but the author really needs to add some more facts to prove his point.
> whole premise is based on one border incursion and some building of roads
They used those as examples, but there are more listed on the second page of the article.
From the article: "In some cases, the military may have been acting on its own. "Due to a lack of control by the commander-in-chief, those farthest from the center have committed provocative acts in some cases" said a Japanese national security official."
I'm not trying to guess what is really happening, but I want to point out that projecting instability is often necessary when playing brinkmanship game.
"The ability to get to the verge without getting into the war is the necessary
art. If you cannot master it, you inevitably get into war. If you try to run away from it, if you are scared to go to the brink, you are lost." – John Foster
Dulles
If Chinese give the impression that some of their provocative actions are not intentional, they have more room to maneuver and pressure others without the risk of escalating the conflict.
Sounds like Sun Tzu applied to geopolitics. I can see you being right. But I can also see this all just being too large to be anything other than what it evidently is.
His books "The Strategy of Conflict" and "Arms and Influence" are essential reading. They were influential bringing game-theory into the nuclear strategy, disarmament and foreign policy.
I think there is a lot of Brinkmanship and chest beating going on at the moment.
I also think things like making one's term indefinite and cracking down on the populace is actually more likely to encourage a 'challenger' to have their revolution, rather than otherwise just waiting it out.
It's not necessarily about Xi though. It's more about having someone as a consistent and strong leader at the head of the country.
Xi has chosen to appoint himself, but his philosophy is not one of Xi Authoritarianism but rather Authoritarianism in general. It's not about him stroking his own ego but rather establishing a strong central authority at the head of the Communist Party.
Suppose you are in a standoff with a rival power. If you do nothing and tiptoe around them as if you’re afraid of confrontation, you look weak. You want to look like the rider of a raging monster, keeping it under control but always at risk that you will slip it off the leash and cause havoc, and the only way to stop that is by being nice to you and asking you for help. “Oh, did my raging monster step on your toes? I’ll be sure to pull it back and keep it under better control”.
There are hints about Chinese society and economy that are fragile, but the party and Xi’s Grip on the military isn’t one of them.
11 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 30.2 ms ] threadThey used those as examples, but there are more listed on the second page of the article.
From the article: "In some cases, the military may have been acting on its own. "Due to a lack of control by the commander-in-chief, those farthest from the center have committed provocative acts in some cases" said a Japanese national security official."
"The ability to get to the verge without getting into the war is the necessary art. If you cannot master it, you inevitably get into war. If you try to run away from it, if you are scared to go to the brink, you are lost." – John Foster Dulles
If Chinese give the impression that some of their provocative actions are not intentional, they have more room to maneuver and pressure others without the risk of escalating the conflict.
His books "The Strategy of Conflict" and "Arms and Influence" are essential reading. They were influential bringing game-theory into the nuclear strategy, disarmament and foreign policy.
I was thinking Sun Tzu: appear weak when you are strong.
I also think things like making one's term indefinite and cracking down on the populace is actually more likely to encourage a 'challenger' to have their revolution, rather than otherwise just waiting it out.
Men and their egos.
Xi has chosen to appoint himself, but his philosophy is not one of Xi Authoritarianism but rather Authoritarianism in general. It's not about him stroking his own ego but rather establishing a strong central authority at the head of the Communist Party.
There are hints about Chinese society and economy that are fragile, but the party and Xi’s Grip on the military isn’t one of them.
-----
Modi: "Today is actually my birthday, but I never thought I would receive such a present."
Xi: "What do you mean?"
Modi: "Don't you know that your troops have crossed the border and moved on to the Indian side?"
-----