On 3 July 2024, I spoke with Judge Napolitano on his podcast — “Judging Freedom.” The main focus was on China, which is one of the few issues that the Judge and I — as well as a good number of his followers — disagree on.
John thanks for being open and frank about this issue. Still, I disagree with you on some key points, though I remain open-minded as always.
What I see happening now is a struggle between the US and China to choose the battleground for their great power competition. If China is able to choose its battleground, it will be trade/business, the arena in which it can clearly out-perform all of its rivals in the world so long as there is a truly free market for Chinese products around the world. The US, on the other hand, has a very different battleground in mind, one that plays to its position and its perceived strengths, which is to use its massive imperial machinery to sabotage China's investments and trade around the world using whatever means necessary (color revolutions, regime change, pressure on vassals, stoking civil wars/military conflicts, etc.).
We can see this struggle over the terms of the competition very clearly. Both sides understand it perfectly well. The US knows they cannot compete with China in business hence two consecutive presidential administrations with tariffs and trade war, the global war on Huawei (including kidnapping the CEO's daughter), attempts to sabotage trade relations with Europe, banning certain imports (e.g., lithography) to China, lately accusations of "over-production" by the US, etc.. On the other hand, China has little experience projecting hard power around the globe to protect its own far-flung investments, and this is an area where the US has a distinct advantage. This is why the US is doing everything it can to stoke China into attacking Taiwan...if Beijing does so, then the US will have won a key fight in the struggle to choose its preferred battleground, China will have damaged its reputation and this will impact its ability to conduct trade. The US is also trying to lure China into some dirty fights in Africa, but China is playing smart thus far.
You made a point in the interview regarding the ability for the US to defend Taiwan in the case of a military conflict with China. That is, if the US prevails in choosing the battleground, will it actually be an advantage for the US, as the US itself apparently believes? First of all, Taiwan is a small island, right next to the mainland. There are no land borders via which to send support, and China has total dominance over the seas around Taiwan. All they have to do is sink any ship or submarine that gets anywhere near Taiwan, and it is game over. This is entirely different than Ukraine, and I don't think many people understand how easy it would be for China to impose a total blockage on Taiwan. Then we have to look at the state of the US military itself, which is an outrageously expensive paper tiger. Events in Ukraine and Gaza show a stunning lack of industrial surge capacity for US/NATO munitions, including many that would be relevant to a Taiwan conflict. China, on the other hand, has an unprecedented vast industrial surge capacity. They can also draw upon supply by Russia, N Korea, and others, which have developed large capacities in recent years. US bases and support in the region are politically fragile, for example if the US launches attacks on China from Okinawa we may very well see a mass uprising on that island. The US military is incredibly inefficient in all respects, and costs up to ~10x more to operate than an equivalent Chinese force. China has a much larger population to draw upon in a fight (largest in the world), including many single males of fighting age (thanks to the one-child policy). US military leadership competence has also been called into question in recent conflicts in which the US is a key player. Note that in the two main conflicts the US was directly involved with in this century, the US either leaned very heavily on allied forces/coalitions (Afghanistan) or bribed enemy generals to surrender without a fight (Iraq). There is more to say on this issue, but to me it seems clear that the US cannot possibly hope to win a shooting war with China in the vicinity of China, there is no hope of "defending Taiwan," and I would encourage you to study the issue. (The only way the US has any chance is if the shooting war happens far from China, but it is difficult to imagine a circumstance in which China could be lured away from its home base.) Finally, I haven't even mentioned the main point in this respect: Mutually Assured Destruction. If the US were to attack China directly, and if it begins to show any sign of success and threatens China's sovereignty...China has the option to nuke the US, and will do so if its survival is at stake.
Anyways, I always enjoy hearing what you have to say John, and look forward to more in the future!
PS: I think your version of realist theory works quite well for many nations, but may run into consistency problems when applied universally, such as in China. Anyways we should be cautious about projection of western-style motives and behaviors on a culture that is really quite different in many fundamental ways.
I worked on infrastructure projects as an advisor in PRC for 14 years..... Americans just don't understand them....worse they don't even want to try.... I'm a very patriotic American and they know this....but never ever threaten them....or anybody else for that matter
I might add that you answered the question posed by Judge Napolitano during your interview with Robert Wright when he posed the question as to whether you’d be in favor of containing China within the first island chain including Taiwan and you said probably not if we weren’t already there.
- - And that reminds me of the fact that I wish I could run for and become president of the United States. Our leadership has been really, really bad. I’m sure I could run circles around the idiot that’s currently running the show and the facist that looks like he might win in November. I would get John Mearsheimer to be Secretary of State. Steven Walt would be his undersecretary. Daniel David and Douglas MacGregor would be Secretary of Defense. Jeffrey Sachs would be Embassador to China, Russia, Ukraine, Iran and North Korea. Chad Freeman would be Embassador to Israel and Saudi Arabia. My press secretaries would be Arron Mate, Max Blumenthal and Katie Halpert. I would have the people from the Electronic Intifada, Mondoweiss be advisors along with other smart, reasonable and intellectually curious people. I would use my “course” as my political platform and in the words of Georg Kennan I would try to have the US lead be example. This is what we should be trying to do rather than engaging in nastiness which tends to beget more nastiness. Lead by Example - Help Ourselves - Help Others if we Can - and try to start to manage all of the problems we’re faced with as a species so that we don’t self destruct. And by the way, not only is my course an excellent political platform. It also makes for an excellent basis for a non-religious religion, given the fact that it has some spiritual elements to it, and maybe most importantly it itself should become the operating system for artificial intelligence, so that artificial intelligence is long term objectives are aligned with that which is in the long-term most beneficial interest of the human race is a species. My “course” is a one stop shop…
I might add that anyone who is interested in understanding how the international system works, and the best way to navigate it given the realities of how it works would be would do well to watch everything that John Mearsheimer has had to say on YouTube for the last 30 years. The investment of the 50 to 60 hours that it would take to watch everything that he’s had to say would be a very good use of people’s time. This is especially true for those who are our world leaders.
The term "liberal democracy", frequently used by the Prof., strongly reminds me of the term "Corinthian Leather".
The problem with US is, it is economically in an uncontrollable sinking pattern. Deficits can never be balanced again, etc. in an era where the US share of GDP is declining. Also, US not operating on a deficit (domestic, and trade) is no longer imaginable. Of what does the US GDP consist anyway? This is in all likelihood also the reasons for the forever and then some wars.
As literature I recommend
- Prof. Bas van Bave (NL)l: "The Invisible Hand? - How Market Economies have Emerged and Declined since AD 500"
- Prof. Peter Turchin: "End Times" (also has interesting blog entries on his web site)
A huge amount of interesting ideas is offered by
- Emmanuel Todd (FR): "La défaite de l’Occident" ("The defeat of the West" - which I might translate real soon now)
To find out more about China I recommend the insights by
- Prof. Kishore Mahbubani (SG): "Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy"
-- freely available: "The Asian 21st Century"
Reviews should be out there.
A broader knowledge of issues may inject new interest into a format which gets repetitive and tired.
The U.S. is provoking China. I appreciate all the geopolitical analysis of Professor Mearsheimer and in all the comments but this is not a hard question to answer and the complexities should not obscure this basic obvious fact from which all others about the situation proceed.
The U.S. is a flailing empire in decline and is acting just like every prior empire did at this point. The persons and organizations in charge of that empire are shoring up its decline with reckless use and threats to use military power, which is all they have left, to offset that decline and prolong its global supremacy in perpetuity. It is stupid, wrong, unimaginative, and arrogant to the nth degree and is threatening everyone with nuclear annihilation.
Lest one think that the situation is more complicated at root than what I have just described, here is an authoritative source, from the horse’s mouth, about what the U.S. is up to with China (from https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/08/04/erpq-a04.html):
“The US geopolitical motivations for going to war with China were laid out by Elbridge Colby, the principal author of the 2018 National Defense Strategy, who declared on Twitter Tuesday that a conflict with China over Taiwan ‘makes sense for Americans’ concrete economic interests.’
Unless China is contained militarily, Colby warns of a future in which ‘China will have a controlling influence over more than 50 percent of global GDP. It will be the gatekeeper and the center of the global economy.’ And, ‘the yuan will be the dominant currency.’
In his 2021 book The Strategy of Denial, Colby advocates a policy of goading China into military action. ‘Perhaps the clearest and sometimes the most important way of making sure China is seen this way [as the aggressor] is simply by ensuring that it is the one to strike first. Few human moral intuitions are more deeply rooted than that the one who started it is the aggressor and accordingly the one who presumptively owns a greater share of moral responsibility.’”
Needless to say, this attitude toward the world must be opposed without surcease, before it’s too late.
I wish more Americans could maintain this sense of combination of curiosity and caution. It underlines that Chomsky was not being entirely facetious when calling Nixon the last liberal President. I look forward to more from Professor Mearsheimer.
People benefiting from business with China never understand the CCP's goals and become naive about history. The idea the CCP embraces is hazardous for Western civilisation, as we have witnessed in the past and now even in the US. CCP aspires to dominate Asia and then, from that position, become globally preeminent. We must prioritise a denial defence against China.
Here is a leak of Xi JinPing's supposed recent speech. According to the speech China and Xi are getting ready for a civil war. You can make your own judgment about whether the leak is authentic or not. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hShXpqnDd4
I have a tremendous amount of respect for you and your insights into the US hegemony
Hello,
I want to say I have great respect for your insights, in particular the US hegemony and resulting role in the Ukraine/Russia war.
Question:
Do you think the current China-Taiwan tensions arose when the US realized just how reliant they were on Taiwan’s microchips and feared loosing access to China?
The chip shortage brought about by COVID seems to be neglected in the media. Is this not really a microchip war and doesn’t the US still have a signed agreement to respect the one-china, one country policy?
"Stoltenberg's first steps into politics came in his early teens, when he was influenced by his sister Camilla, who at the time was a member of the then Marxist–Leninist group Red Youth. "
The West's trade with China and Russia is mutually advantageous - but it's more so for the West. How stupid can we be? Is there a limit? Americans, Canadians, Australians, Brits , the French, Germans and others already pay much more for energy, and therefore for everything, because of this strange predilection to cut off their noses to spite their faces - whenever their elite keepers give them the sign.
John thanks for being open and frank about this issue. Still, I disagree with you on some key points, though I remain open-minded as always.
What I see happening now is a struggle between the US and China to choose the battleground for their great power competition. If China is able to choose its battleground, it will be trade/business, the arena in which it can clearly out-perform all of its rivals in the world so long as there is a truly free market for Chinese products around the world. The US, on the other hand, has a very different battleground in mind, one that plays to its position and its perceived strengths, which is to use its massive imperial machinery to sabotage China's investments and trade around the world using whatever means necessary (color revolutions, regime change, pressure on vassals, stoking civil wars/military conflicts, etc.).
We can see this struggle over the terms of the competition very clearly. Both sides understand it perfectly well. The US knows they cannot compete with China in business hence two consecutive presidential administrations with tariffs and trade war, the global war on Huawei (including kidnapping the CEO's daughter), attempts to sabotage trade relations with Europe, banning certain imports (e.g., lithography) to China, lately accusations of "over-production" by the US, etc.. On the other hand, China has little experience projecting hard power around the globe to protect its own far-flung investments, and this is an area where the US has a distinct advantage. This is why the US is doing everything it can to stoke China into attacking Taiwan...if Beijing does so, then the US will have won a key fight in the struggle to choose its preferred battleground, China will have damaged its reputation and this will impact its ability to conduct trade. The US is also trying to lure China into some dirty fights in Africa, but China is playing smart thus far.
You made a point in the interview regarding the ability for the US to defend Taiwan in the case of a military conflict with China. That is, if the US prevails in choosing the battleground, will it actually be an advantage for the US, as the US itself apparently believes? First of all, Taiwan is a small island, right next to the mainland. There are no land borders via which to send support, and China has total dominance over the seas around Taiwan. All they have to do is sink any ship or submarine that gets anywhere near Taiwan, and it is game over. This is entirely different than Ukraine, and I don't think many people understand how easy it would be for China to impose a total blockage on Taiwan. Then we have to look at the state of the US military itself, which is an outrageously expensive paper tiger. Events in Ukraine and Gaza show a stunning lack of industrial surge capacity for US/NATO munitions, including many that would be relevant to a Taiwan conflict. China, on the other hand, has an unprecedented vast industrial surge capacity. They can also draw upon supply by Russia, N Korea, and others, which have developed large capacities in recent years. US bases and support in the region are politically fragile, for example if the US launches attacks on China from Okinawa we may very well see a mass uprising on that island. The US military is incredibly inefficient in all respects, and costs up to ~10x more to operate than an equivalent Chinese force. China has a much larger population to draw upon in a fight (largest in the world), including many single males of fighting age (thanks to the one-child policy). US military leadership competence has also been called into question in recent conflicts in which the US is a key player. Note that in the two main conflicts the US was directly involved with in this century, the US either leaned very heavily on allied forces/coalitions (Afghanistan) or bribed enemy generals to surrender without a fight (Iraq). There is more to say on this issue, but to me it seems clear that the US cannot possibly hope to win a shooting war with China in the vicinity of China, there is no hope of "defending Taiwan," and I would encourage you to study the issue. (The only way the US has any chance is if the shooting war happens far from China, but it is difficult to imagine a circumstance in which China could be lured away from its home base.) Finally, I haven't even mentioned the main point in this respect: Mutually Assured Destruction. If the US were to attack China directly, and if it begins to show any sign of success and threatens China's sovereignty...China has the option to nuke the US, and will do so if its survival is at stake.
Anyways, I always enjoy hearing what you have to say John, and look forward to more in the future!
PS: I think your version of realist theory works quite well for many nations, but may run into consistency problems when applied universally, such as in China. Anyways we should be cautious about projection of western-style motives and behaviors on a culture that is really quite different in many fundamental ways.
I worked on infrastructure projects as an advisor in PRC for 14 years..... Americans just don't understand them....worse they don't even want to try.... I'm a very patriotic American and they know this....but never ever threaten them....or anybody else for that matter
You're right! Refer to Kissinger's 2012 essay in Foreign Affairs 'The Future of U.S. - Chinese Relations. David Stern
I might add that you answered the question posed by Judge Napolitano during your interview with Robert Wright when he posed the question as to whether you’d be in favor of containing China within the first island chain including Taiwan and you said probably not if we weren’t already there.
- - And that reminds me of the fact that I wish I could run for and become president of the United States. Our leadership has been really, really bad. I’m sure I could run circles around the idiot that’s currently running the show and the facist that looks like he might win in November. I would get John Mearsheimer to be Secretary of State. Steven Walt would be his undersecretary. Daniel David and Douglas MacGregor would be Secretary of Defense. Jeffrey Sachs would be Embassador to China, Russia, Ukraine, Iran and North Korea. Chad Freeman would be Embassador to Israel and Saudi Arabia. My press secretaries would be Arron Mate, Max Blumenthal and Katie Halpert. I would have the people from the Electronic Intifada, Mondoweiss be advisors along with other smart, reasonable and intellectually curious people. I would use my “course” as my political platform and in the words of Georg Kennan I would try to have the US lead be example. This is what we should be trying to do rather than engaging in nastiness which tends to beget more nastiness. Lead by Example - Help Ourselves - Help Others if we Can - and try to start to manage all of the problems we’re faced with as a species so that we don’t self destruct. And by the way, not only is my course an excellent political platform. It also makes for an excellent basis for a non-religious religion, given the fact that it has some spiritual elements to it, and maybe most importantly it itself should become the operating system for artificial intelligence, so that artificial intelligence is long term objectives are aligned with that which is in the long-term most beneficial interest of the human race is a species. My “course” is a one stop shop…
I might add that anyone who is interested in understanding how the international system works, and the best way to navigate it given the realities of how it works would be would do well to watch everything that John Mearsheimer has had to say on YouTube for the last 30 years. The investment of the 50 to 60 hours that it would take to watch everything that he’s had to say would be a very good use of people’s time. This is especially true for those who are our world leaders.
The term "liberal democracy", frequently used by the Prof., strongly reminds me of the term "Corinthian Leather".
The problem with US is, it is economically in an uncontrollable sinking pattern. Deficits can never be balanced again, etc. in an era where the US share of GDP is declining. Also, US not operating on a deficit (domestic, and trade) is no longer imaginable. Of what does the US GDP consist anyway? This is in all likelihood also the reasons for the forever and then some wars.
As literature I recommend
- Prof. Bas van Bave (NL)l: "The Invisible Hand? - How Market Economies have Emerged and Declined since AD 500"
- Prof. Peter Turchin: "End Times" (also has interesting blog entries on his web site)
A huge amount of interesting ideas is offered by
- Emmanuel Todd (FR): "La défaite de l’Occident" ("The defeat of the West" - which I might translate real soon now)
To find out more about China I recommend the insights by
- Prof. Kishore Mahbubani (SG): "Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy"
-- freely available: "The Asian 21st Century"
Reviews should be out there.
A broader knowledge of issues may inject new interest into a format which gets repetitive and tired.
The U.S. is provoking China. I appreciate all the geopolitical analysis of Professor Mearsheimer and in all the comments but this is not a hard question to answer and the complexities should not obscure this basic obvious fact from which all others about the situation proceed.
The U.S. is a flailing empire in decline and is acting just like every prior empire did at this point. The persons and organizations in charge of that empire are shoring up its decline with reckless use and threats to use military power, which is all they have left, to offset that decline and prolong its global supremacy in perpetuity. It is stupid, wrong, unimaginative, and arrogant to the nth degree and is threatening everyone with nuclear annihilation.
Lest one think that the situation is more complicated at root than what I have just described, here is an authoritative source, from the horse’s mouth, about what the U.S. is up to with China (from https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/08/04/erpq-a04.html):
“The US geopolitical motivations for going to war with China were laid out by Elbridge Colby, the principal author of the 2018 National Defense Strategy, who declared on Twitter Tuesday that a conflict with China over Taiwan ‘makes sense for Americans’ concrete economic interests.’
Unless China is contained militarily, Colby warns of a future in which ‘China will have a controlling influence over more than 50 percent of global GDP. It will be the gatekeeper and the center of the global economy.’ And, ‘the yuan will be the dominant currency.’
In his 2021 book The Strategy of Denial, Colby advocates a policy of goading China into military action. ‘Perhaps the clearest and sometimes the most important way of making sure China is seen this way [as the aggressor] is simply by ensuring that it is the one to strike first. Few human moral intuitions are more deeply rooted than that the one who started it is the aggressor and accordingly the one who presumptively owns a greater share of moral responsibility.’”
Needless to say, this attitude toward the world must be opposed without surcease, before it’s too late.
I wish more Americans could maintain this sense of combination of curiosity and caution. It underlines that Chomsky was not being entirely facetious when calling Nixon the last liberal President. I look forward to more from Professor Mearsheimer.
People benefiting from business with China never understand the CCP's goals and become naive about history. The idea the CCP embraces is hazardous for Western civilisation, as we have witnessed in the past and now even in the US. CCP aspires to dominate Asia and then, from that position, become globally preeminent. We must prioritise a denial defence against China.
Here is a leak of Xi JinPing's supposed recent speech. According to the speech China and Xi are getting ready for a civil war. You can make your own judgment about whether the leak is authentic or not. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hShXpqnDd4
I have a tremendous amount of respect for you and your insights into the US hegemony
Hello,
I want to say I have great respect for your insights, in particular the US hegemony and resulting role in the Ukraine/Russia war.
Question:
Do you think the current China-Taiwan tensions arose when the US realized just how reliant they were on Taiwan’s microchips and feared loosing access to China?
The chip shortage brought about by COVID seems to be neglected in the media. Is this not really a microchip war and doesn’t the US still have a signed agreement to respect the one-china, one country policy?
This and many articles are shared on A Skeptic War Reports
A Skeptic War Reports
https://askeptic.substack.com/p/war-reports-2024-07-08
You can find it on Wikipedia:
"Stoltenberg's first steps into politics came in his early teens, when he was influenced by his sister Camilla, who at the time was a member of the then Marxist–Leninist group Red Youth. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jens_Stoltenberg
China was never as strong and resilient as it is now.
Thank you for continuing to get facts about foreign policy out to our citizens and the world. Greatly appreciated
The West's trade with China and Russia is mutually advantageous - but it's more so for the West. How stupid can we be? Is there a limit? Americans, Canadians, Australians, Brits , the French, Germans and others already pay much more for energy, and therefore for everything, because of this strange predilection to cut off their noses to spite their faces - whenever their elite keepers give them the sign.
Simply said, the latter.
The same people behind the war in Ukraine and the struggle against China, are the same people who were behind the Bolshevik revolution https://open.substack.com/pub/andrewsurman/p/from-the-pale-to-power?r=2jrz7r&utm_medium=ios