China Inside and Out

I was recently reminded again of Fareed Zakaria's breathless assertion that China's rise (to what, global hegemony?)  is "inevitable."  Really?  So I guess we all just better brush up our Mandarin and get ready to welcome our Chinese creditor overlords.  As usual, this sort of "analysis" (like Tom Friedman's idiotic Sinophiliac dreams of autocratic paradise) is far too simplistic.  Take a look at this reminder that the Chinese economy can't paper over deep internal social problems.  (Hmmm, haven't I said this before?  The most recent rant is here.  See this too.)  Here's an interesting factoid:

According to its official budget, China spent about $80 billion on defence in 2009 (although the United States and others would argue that even this massive figure underestimates the true scale). But more remarkably, it spent almost as much—$75 billion—on internal security.

Keeping the lid on Xinjiang and Tibet has clearly required massive amounts of central government cash, as has policing China’s restless provinces and dealing with public unrest. Indeed, those who venture outside the grand cities of Shanghai and Beijing see a country with surprising levels of fractiousness and casual violence.  

. . . Indeed, while the rest of the world watches anxiously as China demonstrates an increasingly assertive streak in its dealings with its neighbours and the United States, the key slogan of the current government isn’t about a ‘peaceful’ rise or how China hopes to create a better global environment. Instead, the focus is very much inward, on `harmonious development.’ China looks strong from the outside, but internally there’s a potentially devastating minefield of environmental problems, inequality, ethnic tensions and social imbalances.

Then look at this commentary by Fang Lizhi -- as the byline states -- "a professor of physics at the University of Arizona, was a leader of the pro-democracy movement in China before fleeing the country in 1989."