14 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Informative and Insightful!, February 19, 2010
This review is from: The Three Faces of Chinese Power: Might, Money, and Minds (Paperback)
The People's Republic of China (PRC) is the largest, most rapidly changing player on the world stage today. Lampton has not only studied the PRC for 38 years, but also visited and interviewed its top leaders. He believes that China will be fully occupied for the next 10-15+ years dealing with its domestic employment (providing employment to the 10 million labor-market entrants each year, plus the 300 million more leaving its farms between now and 2020), technology development, education, health care, natural resource, environment, and infrastructure needs and will not be a destabilizing force. Just its need for new cities to accommodate anticipated migration requires creating building new cities the size of New York every four months for 14 years.
Lambert begins "The Three Faces of Chinese Power" by carefully defining the term 'power' - "the authoritative ability to define and achieve objectives;" methods to achieve this include 'might' (coercive power though military action), 'money' (can obtain coercive power, influence others through potential purchases), and 'minds' (ideational, soft power reflected in quality of leadership and innovation). After studying China's approach to state power dating back some 2,500 years, Lampton concludes that their aim is to win domestic and international support for its agenda, see it through to implementation, utilize an optimum mix of power sources to maximize efficiency, and "desist from pursuing policies that prove ineffective or counterproductive."
China's military budget has been growing at double-digit rates for about 15 years (not adjusted for inflation), while cutting ground forces since the 1980s. Our Department of Defense (DOD) estimates China could currently have 60 ICBMs. China's most serious concern is that Taiwan might try to break away, and they have deployed 700-800 missiles within striking distance, upgraded their naval and air forces, and repeatedly discourage the U.S. from getting involved. Chinese sources claim its 2009 military spending was 1.7% of GDP; however, that's likely an understatement - akin to U.S. budget practice that separates considerable portions of DOD spending from its main budget line. Regardless, China despite its recent forays into space, is by no means a peer military competitor with the U.S., though it is in a league with the U.K. and Russia and even one ICMB merits serious consideration. Lampton sees its economic and ideational powers as much stronger, however, and likely to be the most important in the long run.
Economic power is the most convertible form of strength, and China has plenty of that. However, Lampton also points out that firms with foreign investment accounted for 57.3% of its total exports, and an even higher 85% of high-tech exports. Thus, it is easy to overestimate China's export power, and forget that trade barriers would punish both the U.S. and its allies. (China is now making investments in U.S. companies and building solar etc. plants here to further help defend against protectionism.) Conversely, Lampton sees a tendency to underestimate China's government-directed purchasing strength. Access to China's vast markets for eg. nuclear power, communications and transportation gear, backed up by equally vast currency reserves give it considerable power to negotiate prices, compel technology transfers, and influence policy (eg. embargo purchases from U.S. companies that impede its interests). It's infrastructure and resource investments in Africa, Australia, Latin America (planned $100 billion by 2014), and even Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq give China considerable world-stage political power as well.
Former President Jiang Zemin's "Three Represents" speech in 2002 emphasized the importance of representing the developmental needs and a majority of China's populace. This focus then led to allowing the formerly reviled entrepreneurial class to join its Chinese Communist Party (CCP) - broadening the mind-power within its leadership group while co-opting that group at the same time. By 2004 34% of private enterprise owners were CCP members. Other components of China's efforts to strengthen minds include a one-third increase in the proportion of GDP devoted to public education, large numbers of outstanding students sent abroad for university educations and scientific training (also increasing efforts to have them return), encouraging the establishment of some 750 foreign-backed R&D centers within China by 2006, and its intent to establish a world-ranked top-20 university by 2020. Lampton notes that China's foreign-service personnel are especially well-educated and trained.
Lampton served as an advisor to candidate Obama, and may still be contributing advice to President Obama. If so, Lampton would probably repeat his book's conclusions that China is too big and important, with too many other nations interested in cooperating with it, to be pushed around. We should stop seeing China principally as a military challenge, thereby squandering our own resources and possibly provoking the truculence we want to avoid. Instead, Lampton believes we should work together on the environment, global warming, pandemic prevention, etc. As for competing economically with China, Lampton points out that we cannot do so when our expenditures for health care so much higher (17.3% vs. their 4%), our largely unmitigated dependence on external foreign oil purchases, and an ineffectual (and more costly) K-12 education system. Lampton could also add that our much higher proportion of expenditures on defense is another impediment to economic competitiveness.
No major international challenge can be met today without China's assistance - witness current U.S. problems with Iran and North Korea, and note also that Afghanistan, North Korea, and Pakistan all border China. However, it should not be seen as a modern-day Eden - over half its citizens live on incomes typical of the world's poorest states, and its environmental problems are well-known. While straight-line projections of past performance can be wildly off the mark (eg. Japan in the 1990s, Russia's Sputnik in the 1960s), most believe China's power will continue to grow rapidly. Meanwhile, both China and the U.S. continue to gamble that the other will not be a disturbance.
Bottom-Line: Lampton's "The Three Faces of Chinese Power" is a thoughtful and informative resource that helps understand the motivation and direction of its leaders. Further, his recommendations are solidly grounded. However, I would suggest adding three:
1)That we become much more courteous vs. China and stop publicly lecturing it about human rights, Tibet, etc., especially within its own territory. (We have serious governance problems of our own, including a disproportionate emphasis on campaign cash, and an inability to resolve major problems.)
2)That instead of constantly criticizing China we instead learn from it. For example, why and how the Chinese save so much (30-40% over the years, vs. our recent negative savings), how they inculcate such strong respect for education and build upon it with high-stakes testing requirements to enter college, the potential advantages of a government industrial policy, and how they have used protectionism to nurture nascent and vital industries. In addition, we should take a page from Lampton's thinking and reconsider government policies that have proven counterproductive - eg. aid to Israel, stationing troops in 100+ countries, and providing corporate farm aid that allows our farms to undercut Mexican farmers and drive them northward in waves of illegal migration.
3)That we recognize the Tienanmen Square tragedy of 1989 could easily have escalated into something far worse. The demonstrations were replicated in major cities across China, had gone on for weeks, and were intensifying - possibly into a civil war and another disastrous Cultural Revolution. Thus, there was some justification to fear that all its recent reforms and improvements would quickly have been lost. I suspect its new middle and upper-classes, along with many of the aspiring lower class would now agree with the actions then taken.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No