MUTUAL DEVELOPMENT NOT MILITARY ALLIANCE IS THE TREND OF WORLD DEVELOPMENT

MUTUAL DEVELOPMENT NOT MILITARY ALLIANCE IS THE TREND OF WORLD DEVELOPMENT By Francis C W Fung, Ph.D. More than 35 years ago Deng Xiaoping, the Chinese leader who led the Chinese nation on "reform and open up" correctly predicted that in the conceivable future the path for the world will be peace and development and not war. Today with the world more inter connected and interdependent the future trend for the world is more mutual development and not military alliance and war. In the current G20 meeting both the host nation Australia and China emphasized growth and development whereas U.S. emphasized security and military alliance. No wonder the Australia Prime Minister Abbott finds more in common with Chinese president, Xi Jinping than Obama. While Abbott and Xi signed a free trade agreement that was in discussion for ten years Obama made a speech in a warning not so subtle to China to play by American security rules. In a speech to the Australian parliament Xi Jinping stated in no uncertain terms that China is resolutely committed to world peace and those that favor war to solve problems will finally fail no matter how strong they are. Obama in the APEC meeting at one hand officially announced that he welcomes China’s rise but on the other hand made a dig of China by saying that U.S. must speak out for Hong Kong’s Occupy Central movement. These seemingly contrary statements are the paradoxes of American domestic politics that it is not politically correct to be too friendly to China. Obama will be seen as weak by American public without lecturing China. This strange phenomenon is the deep rooted result of many decades of Cold War propaganda. But the matter of fact is that the U.S. actually does not have too much to offer above and beyond talks of security and military alliance to show its strength in the Pacific region. Or his warning of potential Pacific military conflict is essential part of the U.S. pivot to Asia grand plan? There is also the unspoken rule , that a U.S. President must lecture China whenever the opportunities arises otherwise he will be criticized as weak and soft. It is business as usual, the last two times Obama went to Asia, he warned China about military conflict in China sea. Because it is only in military power America can exert influence in the region as the most powerful police force. China will never use force to achieve results as clearly demonstrated in the following exert of Xi Jinping’s G20 peace speech. It is important to point out that out of the 14 territory dispute China has with neighbors China resolved 12 disputes by discussion and diplomacy. That exemplifies an outstanding peace effort. The following is an excerpt of a peace offer by Chinese President Xi Jinping at the G20 meeting in response to Obama’s warning :- “Chinese President Xi Jinping has vowed to always use peaceful means in pursuit of Beijing's goals, including in maritime disputes, just days after US President Barack Obama warned of the dangers of outright conflict in Asia.” "China remains unshakable in its resolve to pursue peaceful development. Neither turbulence nor war serves the fundamental interests of the Chinese people," Xi said on Monday, addressing the Australian parliament. "There's only one trend in today's world, that is, the trend of peace and development and win/win cooperation." "A review of history shows that countries that attempted to pursue development with force invariably failed," Xi said. "China is dedicated to upholding peace. Peace is precious and needs to be protected."But he added: "We must always be on high alert against the factors that may deprive us of peace." "It is China's longstanding position to address peacefully its disputes with countries concerned and territorial sovereignty and maritime interests through dialogue and consultation,China has settled land boundary issues with 12 out of its 14 neighbours through friendly consultation. And we will continue to work in this direction," Xi said. "The Chinese government is ready to enhance dialogue and cooperation with relevant countries to maintain freedom of navigation and the safety of maritime routes, and ensure a maritime border of peace, tranquillity and cooperation." Xi made the comments as he sealed a long-awaited free trade agreement with Australia - a country that has long profited from China's voracious demand for its natural resources - after nearly a decade of talks.” Concludes the Xi Jinping peace speech at the current 7th G20 meeting. The following included essay by Hannay Richards titled “Obama offers same old vision of division”, is a critic of Obama’s warning speech to China at the current 7th G20 meeting. “Speaking at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, on Saturday, US President Barack Obama gave what at least one person has called "the historic Brisbane speech". It was hardly that, but certainly it had one eye on history as it was clearly intended to be both part of the cement fixing Obama's place in history before he steps through the White House door for the last time, and a reassertion of the United States' leadership credentials after China's successful week in the spotlight hosting the Asia-pacific Economic Cooperation meetings in Beijing. Unlike his performance in the Chinese capital last week, during which he cultivated the image of being just one of the boys hanging out in the local neighborhood, Obama's speech in Brisbane was intended to tell the world that the US is still firmly in the driving seat, and to tell future historians that it was Obama who ensured the US was behind the wheel during the Asia-Pacific century, thanks to his "pivot" policy. Obama claimed that he was in town to talk about "the future that we can build together, here in the Asia-Pacific region". Yet the future he envisioned was clearly the US way or the highway, or as Obama put it, a choice between conflict and cooperation. Most people would say that's a no-brainer, let's all work together for a better future. Indeed, that was what appeared to have been the consensus at the APEC summit, where the regional leaders stated in their final declaration, "We commit to working together to shape the future through Asia-Pacific partnership in the spirit of mutual respect and trust, inclusiveness, and win-win cooperation." But, as with most things when you get tired of reading the small print, there was a catch in Obama's speech. What he actually meant by cooperation is not everyone pulling together so the boat doesn't end up on the rocks that all the disputes are about, but everyone pulling together to follow a course set by the US in favor of its own interests. Although Obama claimed the US believes that nations and peoples have the right to live in security and peace, it was hard to ignore the subliminal message that it is only the US that has some god-like ability to grant these, even though there are one or two nations and peoples who would probably argue that in using what power it has, the US has only bought them turmoil and violence. Obama offers same old vision of division He asserted that an effective security order for Asia must be based "not on spheres of influence, or coercion, or intimidation where big nations bully the small", yet those should be laid at the door of the White House, as it is the US' insistence on such tactics to promote its own dominance that have resulted in the tensions and uncertainties plaguing the region. The alliances that Obama went to great lengths to praise are an inflexible structure that heralds disaster unless adjusted to meet the changing times. Obama's allusive remarks were clearly aimed at China, whose rise the US is having trouble adapting to. When Obama did finally get round to naming China, it was to portray the two countries as best buddies, but only when it is acting in accordance with the US' wishes. He was happy to praise China's role as a responsible actor in the region when the two countries' interests overlap, when it is "cut from the same cloth" as Australia or the US' other regional allies. He was less forthcoming about China's role in the areas where they disagree. The message was clear, if you're not wearing the gang colors you're not welcome to have a say in what the US regards as its area. And so there could be no doubts about the message, Obama elaborated how the US will continue to modernize its defense posture across the region, deploying more of its "most advanced military capabilities to keep the peace and deter aggression" and steadily deepening its engagement in the region "day in and day out". Then with a straight face he said, "We do this without any territorial claims". This after quoting Brisbane's famous son, David Malouf, who has written that the shrinking of distance means "even the Pacific, the largest of oceans, has become a lake", which only served to reinforce the perception that the US considers the Pacific to be its own private lake that others can use only if it chooses to grant them the privilege; a privilege that it will extend exclusively to its friends. The overall tone of his speech was another clear indication that the US' self-conceived exceptionalism is nothing more than the hubris that comes with thinking you are better than anyone else. On the surface, Obama appeared to be promoting inclusiveness and friendship, nicely wrapped up as usual with the promotion of values that have universal appeal, but in reality it was a reaffirmation to its allies that the US had not changed tack. After the positive vibes given off by the APEC meeting in Beijing, Obama's speech, with its business-as-usual message, was a real a downer. The paucity of imagination shown in the old-school vision of division he presented was in stark contrast to the forward-looking inclusiveness elaborated by Beijing earlier in the week. But, of course, if the US is to continue to play its leading role in world affairs in the 21st century, it needs a bogeyman to star against, and China is the country that best fits the bill.” Francis C W Fung, Ph.D. Director General World Harmony Organization San Francisco, CA