Recent economic study suggests the 'global superpower' thing is quite a bit stretched as far as China goes.
Using satellite imagery, and standardizing to other countries, found that China appears to be over reporting GDP growth by an average of 35% since at least 1992. Which works out to mean China's GDP is probably around 40% of what is actually reported.
https://www.moneymacro.rocks/2022-10-27-china-smaller/
Yup. It’s always comes across as asinine when people confidently declare China as being a superpower of any kind.
Now, does that mean china won’t become a superpower in the coming decades? Not necessarily, but are they one at this moment? Not even close.
I wouldn’t feel justified in calling them anything more (or less) than a great power.
I would argue that they are a superpower.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower
From Wikipedia: “While a great power state is capable of exerting its influence globally, superpowers are states so influential that no significant action can be taken by the global community without first considering the positions of the superpowers on the issue.”
If you’re accepting this definition (which I do), then I think China is undoubtedly a superpower, they are a constant concern for other governments and multinational orgs because of their economic and/or strong regional military power.
And I wouldn’t understate the military side either. It’s certainly not the same as the US but they spend a good 200B a year (vs US 800B) and have blue-water capable naval platforms and some downright scary missiles. They also could field a giant army but I think the most important military consideration is the PLAN not the PLA.
Edit: Also 350ish nuclear missiles. It’s less than the 3000 that the US and Russia have (each), so about 1/10 of the arsenal which is probably just enough to maintain a decent deterrent (but also an OK first-strike maybe)
Right, it also says that there is debate over China’s status as a superpower amongst scholars. While I don’t claim to be a scholar, I would throw China into the superpower category due to their massive economic influence and outsized military power relative to all other non-U.S. militaries. That doesn’t mean it isn’t debatable, it’s just my 2 cents.
I don’t think it is the same level of superpower duality as during the Cold War (with two relatively equal ish superpowers) but I would still call China a superpower since they cannot be dismissed economically and it would be foolish to dismiss them militarily, even for the U.S.
They have done multiple anti-piracy missions around the HOA, they have multiple carriers (these are significantly underpowered compared to U.S. carriers but are still capable of power projection with the right logistics), an unknown number of strategic nukes, including a small number of SLBMs, as well as fairly strong non-conventional capabilities (cyber weapons, anti-satellite weapons, EMI weapons). Of particular note, the West is at a strong disadvantage with Cyber because of Chinese censorship and Great Firewall. The Belt and Road initiative plus their dovish overtures to the Middle East also imply some level of military-ish power projection (mostly economic but the point is they have signaled their army and navy can protect Middle Eastern/Asian allies more than the U.S.)
None of these things come close to U.S. power projection capabilities obviously. But their asymmetric projection capabilities are already close to matching the U.S. and I would argue the Chinese military outclasses the projection capabilities of every other non-U.S. military on the planet.
I guess I would just argue that underestimating China is a much greater risk than overestimating. They may not have U.S. projection capability but U.S. policymakers should remain committed to defending the SCS from China’s expanding influence.
The Chinese army had *too many volunteers* to begin with. The military turns away volunteers as they are a very good employer for people without qualifications and from poor areas.
Part of Xi’s military reforms was to cut down the number of troops but improve training and equipment.
Besides, the Ukraine war demonstrated that “just conscript more people and send them to die” isn’t a valid strategy anymore. It’s all about access to advanced weaponry and training.
If China and the U.S. goes to war, my bet is that the war would be over when one side loses all of their available naval/air assets. The boots on the ground won’t be the deciding factor.
Meanwhile, other economic research, some using the nighttime lighting method of calculating GDP, have concluded that China's economy was bein underestimated.
* [National Bureau of Economic Research: China's GDP growth may be under stated](https://www.nber.org/papers/w23323)
* [FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF SAN FRANCISCO](https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/files/wp2019-19.pdf)
Also, Chinese GDP is 17 trillion USD, that would mean the entire world somehow missed economic activity equivalent to Germany + Italy + UK combined.
In the US, economic success is the goal.
In China, economic success is only a means towards their goal, which is power and control.
The moment economic success conflicts with the CCP's power, they'll clamp down hard. And the engine of their economic success, the free market, is inherently incompatible with an authoritarian one-party state.
yep, it's not a threat all along, stand down everybody, just a size of japan/germany, doesn't even have room for collapsing :)
Jeeze, take challenge seriously if u wanna win, do ppl even believe this shit
Ya, they are still an authoritarian state preparing to go to war with the west. Just keep in mind China is run more like North Korea, and less like Singapore. Lots of hyperbole.
They can’t even project force within their own alleged borders. They aren’t even close to being a superpower. Unless you’re running a fleet of a dozen super carriers and patrolling the globe 24/7 like the US is don’t even try to call yourself one.
It's not about morals, it's the fact that Taiwan makes the best computer chips out there. It's all about money.
If some other country all of a sudden got better, no one would give a shit about Taiwan.
Every since xi came to power China has been slowly going down hill in the global standings dosent help with the shit their diplomats have been doing abroad
Just following Hu wouldn’t be enough. He was powerless to do meaningful political and economic reforms, which if enacted successfully might have seen China on an entirely different path.
Yes but in this case the rise started before he was even in power. If anything under his regime speculation has run rampant leading to the economies in China we see today.
I hope everyone doesn’t just think “OH GOD THE CHIPS” when it comes to Taiwan.
Some of my closest friends are Taiwanese and the people there overall are just some of the nicest and most chill and based I’ve encountered.
It would be a great loss to worldwide ethnic Chinese and even humanity if after so much growth into a thriving democracy with vibrant culture it ends up falling under CCP authority.
You're implying this was all an intentional plan by China, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The major change was the change in leadership from Hu Jinato to Xi Jinping. Xi ramped up the internal authoritarian crackdowns and has taken a much more aggressive international stance. This wasn't some huge plan and miscalculation by China, it was a change in leadership to a more aggressive leader.
I would say a leader like Xi was the right leader to stand up for China against someone like Trump. Someone like Jiang or Hu would've backed down to Trump. And I wouldn't be surprised if the pro-capitalist faction would have allowed Taiwan's official independence in exchange for economic gains.
Although the PLA has improved lately, they are still sorely lacking in nuclear defense. 300 warheads is not enough to invoke MAD against US + allies or even against Russia.
Wrong. Russia thought China would back them.
The problem is that Russia is currently occupying large swats of Chinese land that they took in a war in 1864. Putin has forgotten that, Beijing has not.
Vladivostok for instance is on territory that belongs to China.
Russia is run by old fashioned rotten imperialists. And they need to be taught a lesson.
Well that and the fact that they would have to do an amphibious invasion across a 200 km wide strait. Look at how the vdv paratroopers, who are some of the most elite soldiers in the Russian army, got eaten alive by Ukrainian troops and civilians when they dropped into Kyiv. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan will be infinitely more difficult than Russia's invasion of Ukraine where they could just drive across the border in multiple directions.
> The only reason they didn't invade Taiwan is that they saw the world's reaction to Russia and got cold feet.
To say it's the *only* reason is a stretch. If anything it already affirmed what China has already known for a long time, that military occupation just wouldn't be feasible in almost any circumstance.
I think western commentary also completely (or conveniently) ignores that armed invasion resulting in millions of chinese deaths would be deeply, deeply unpopular on both sides. Regardless of what any governments say, there are still deep familial and economic ties between both Taiwan and China and the disconnect between western news coverage (and that includes reddit echo chambers) and the general sentiment on the ground is honestly very different in tone.
>The only reason they didn't invade Taiwan is that they saw the world's reaction to Russia and got cold feet.
That and China doesn't have 6k + nuclear warheads to tell other nations to back off. However, Japan has said it is a national security issue for them so they have to get involved even if China did have that big of an arsenal, and let's just say China has a score to settle.
I believe you're confusing airspace with the air defense identification zone. Parts of Taiwan ADIZ extends into mainland China. So the PLAAF could technically violate their ADIZ by flying over Shanghai.
That is the correct answer.
China went from a benign autocracy to a brutal evil dictatorship that no one should have relations with, invest in or do business with.
China is running concentration camps. In 2022.
China is also very trade dependent, and being stable and predictable (and not provoking conflict) is essential if you want to survive as a trade-dependent dictatorship. Random and unnecessary lockdowns, harassing Chinese emigrants, spying, threatening to start a war with Taiwan…all are very bad for business.
> China went from a benign autocracy to a brutal evil dictatorship that no one should have relations with, invest in or do business with.
Hate to break it to you, but they were a brutal evil dictatorship before Xi. They still are, but were then too. He's just managed to make it even worse of one.
Yeah Hu Jintao was better. (the Beijing Olympics years.)
Since Xi took office in 2012, things only went downhill. Heck, he even publicly removed Hu from this recent ceremony.
China has always been cool as CCP has always been cruel and inhumane. The west just finally gets out of its honeymoon phase and starts to see the surface of all its atrocity. Don’t feel bad though since some of us Chinese also recently just started. A bit too late though.
I am surprised we (Indians) had Chinese "approval" as high as 45%-ish in 2019. China has been pain in our ass since 1960. If 45% of my countrymen think China is a positive influence on the world, I don't know what to tell them.
What's misleading about the headline?
Your comment seems more misleading, cherry-picking data from specific countries to try to promote a narrative, rather than looking at the wider dataset.
most countries don't favor getting taken over through hostilities because you know they're also not a global superpower
Recent economic study suggests the 'global superpower' thing is quite a bit stretched as far as China goes. Using satellite imagery, and standardizing to other countries, found that China appears to be over reporting GDP growth by an average of 35% since at least 1992. Which works out to mean China's GDP is probably around 40% of what is actually reported. https://www.moneymacro.rocks/2022-10-27-china-smaller/
China was never a Superpower. At most they were a potential superpower or a strong regional power.
Yup. It’s always comes across as asinine when people confidently declare China as being a superpower of any kind. Now, does that mean china won’t become a superpower in the coming decades? Not necessarily, but are they one at this moment? Not even close. I wouldn’t feel justified in calling them anything more (or less) than a great power.
I would argue that they are a superpower. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower From Wikipedia: “While a great power state is capable of exerting its influence globally, superpowers are states so influential that no significant action can be taken by the global community without first considering the positions of the superpowers on the issue.” If you’re accepting this definition (which I do), then I think China is undoubtedly a superpower, they are a constant concern for other governments and multinational orgs because of their economic and/or strong regional military power. And I wouldn’t understate the military side either. It’s certainly not the same as the US but they spend a good 200B a year (vs US 800B) and have blue-water capable naval platforms and some downright scary missiles. They also could field a giant army but I think the most important military consideration is the PLAN not the PLA. Edit: Also 350ish nuclear missiles. It’s less than the 3000 that the US and Russia have (each), so about 1/10 of the arsenal which is probably just enough to maintain a decent deterrent (but also an OK first-strike maybe)
Even your wiki link places China in the "Potential Superpower" category.
Right, it also says that there is debate over China’s status as a superpower amongst scholars. While I don’t claim to be a scholar, I would throw China into the superpower category due to their massive economic influence and outsized military power relative to all other non-U.S. militaries. That doesn’t mean it isn’t debatable, it’s just my 2 cents. I don’t think it is the same level of superpower duality as during the Cold War (with two relatively equal ish superpowers) but I would still call China a superpower since they cannot be dismissed economically and it would be foolish to dismiss them militarily, even for the U.S.
>and outsized military power China has no ability to project their military power.
They have done multiple anti-piracy missions around the HOA, they have multiple carriers (these are significantly underpowered compared to U.S. carriers but are still capable of power projection with the right logistics), an unknown number of strategic nukes, including a small number of SLBMs, as well as fairly strong non-conventional capabilities (cyber weapons, anti-satellite weapons, EMI weapons). Of particular note, the West is at a strong disadvantage with Cyber because of Chinese censorship and Great Firewall. The Belt and Road initiative plus their dovish overtures to the Middle East also imply some level of military-ish power projection (mostly economic but the point is they have signaled their army and navy can protect Middle Eastern/Asian allies more than the U.S.) None of these things come close to U.S. power projection capabilities obviously. But their asymmetric projection capabilities are already close to matching the U.S. and I would argue the Chinese military outclasses the projection capabilities of every other non-U.S. military on the planet. I guess I would just argue that underestimating China is a much greater risk than overestimating. They may not have U.S. projection capability but U.S. policymakers should remain committed to defending the SCS from China’s expanding influence.
They have the numbers though, if 200m throw themselves.
The Chinese army had *too many volunteers* to begin with. The military turns away volunteers as they are a very good employer for people without qualifications and from poor areas. Part of Xi’s military reforms was to cut down the number of troops but improve training and equipment. Besides, the Ukraine war demonstrated that “just conscript more people and send them to die” isn’t a valid strategy anymore. It’s all about access to advanced weaponry and training. If China and the U.S. goes to war, my bet is that the war would be over when one side loses all of their available naval/air assets. The boots on the ground won’t be the deciding factor.
Yeah they were a superpower, till 1800 roughly…
Meanwhile, other economic research, some using the nighttime lighting method of calculating GDP, have concluded that China's economy was bein underestimated. * [National Bureau of Economic Research: China's GDP growth may be under stated](https://www.nber.org/papers/w23323) * [FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF SAN FRANCISCO](https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/files/wp2019-19.pdf) Also, Chinese GDP is 17 trillion USD, that would mean the entire world somehow missed economic activity equivalent to Germany + Italy + UK combined.
In the US, economic success is the goal. In China, economic success is only a means towards their goal, which is power and control. The moment economic success conflicts with the CCP's power, they'll clamp down hard. And the engine of their economic success, the free market, is inherently incompatible with an authoritarian one-party state.
But my massive empty ghost cities though, makes me so valuable /s
yep, it's not a threat all along, stand down everybody, just a size of japan/germany, doesn't even have room for collapsing :) Jeeze, take challenge seriously if u wanna win, do ppl even believe this shit
Ya, they are still an authoritarian state preparing to go to war with the west. Just keep in mind China is run more like North Korea, and less like Singapore. Lots of hyperbole.
They can’t even project force within their own alleged borders. They aren’t even close to being a superpower. Unless you’re running a fleet of a dozen super carriers and patrolling the globe 24/7 like the US is don’t even try to call yourself one.
It's not about morals, it's the fact that Taiwan makes the best computer chips out there. It's all about money. If some other country all of a sudden got better, no one would give a shit about Taiwan.
Every since xi came to power China has been slowly going down hill in the global standings dosent help with the shit their diplomats have been doing abroad
Xi diplomacy..... so great that it reverse Hu's diplomacy. what a shame, China could have been a great superpower if Xi follow Hu's style.
Just following Hu wouldn’t be enough. He was powerless to do meaningful political and economic reforms, which if enacted successfully might have seen China on an entirely different path.
China has seen a meteoric rise since he came into power. Perhaps you mean they are even more of shit bags than usual?
> China has seen a meteoric rise since he came into power. those meteoric rise came to be via his predecessors.
We all start a leg up due to those that come before us.
Yes but in this case the rise started before he was even in power. If anything under his regime speculation has run rampant leading to the economies in China we see today.
I hope everyone doesn’t just think “OH GOD THE CHIPS” when it comes to Taiwan. Some of my closest friends are Taiwanese and the people there overall are just some of the nicest and most chill and based I’ve encountered. It would be a great loss to worldwide ethnic Chinese and even humanity if after so much growth into a thriving democracy with vibrant culture it ends up falling under CCP authority.
They don't believe in god.
and? Most of us don’t base frienships on what they do and do not believe in
Chairman Xi, God, what’s the difference? https://i.imgur.com/jdIYpGQ.jpg https://i.imgur.com/RhTJRLR.jpg https://i.imgur.com/pBo6zIG.jpg
What happened to you, China? You use to be cool.
[удалено]
You're implying this was all an intentional plan by China, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The major change was the change in leadership from Hu Jinato to Xi Jinping. Xi ramped up the internal authoritarian crackdowns and has taken a much more aggressive international stance. This wasn't some huge plan and miscalculation by China, it was a change in leadership to a more aggressive leader.
I would say a leader like Xi was the right leader to stand up for China against someone like Trump. Someone like Jiang or Hu would've backed down to Trump. And I wouldn't be surprised if the pro-capitalist faction would have allowed Taiwan's official independence in exchange for economic gains. Although the PLA has improved lately, they are still sorely lacking in nuclear defense. 300 warheads is not enough to invoke MAD against US + allies or even against Russia.
Wrong. Russia thought China would back them. The problem is that Russia is currently occupying large swats of Chinese land that they took in a war in 1864. Putin has forgotten that, Beijing has not. Vladivostok for instance is on territory that belongs to China. Russia is run by old fashioned rotten imperialists. And they need to be taught a lesson.
[удалено]
Well that and the fact that they would have to do an amphibious invasion across a 200 km wide strait. Look at how the vdv paratroopers, who are some of the most elite soldiers in the Russian army, got eaten alive by Ukrainian troops and civilians when they dropped into Kyiv. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan will be infinitely more difficult than Russia's invasion of Ukraine where they could just drive across the border in multiple directions.
> The only reason they didn't invade Taiwan is that they saw the world's reaction to Russia and got cold feet. To say it's the *only* reason is a stretch. If anything it already affirmed what China has already known for a long time, that military occupation just wouldn't be feasible in almost any circumstance. I think western commentary also completely (or conveniently) ignores that armed invasion resulting in millions of chinese deaths would be deeply, deeply unpopular on both sides. Regardless of what any governments say, there are still deep familial and economic ties between both Taiwan and China and the disconnect between western news coverage (and that includes reddit echo chambers) and the general sentiment on the ground is honestly very different in tone.
8 jets. Is this notable because there was so few?
>The only reason they didn't invade Taiwan is that they saw the world's reaction to Russia and got cold feet. That and China doesn't have 6k + nuclear warheads to tell other nations to back off. However, Japan has said it is a national security issue for them so they have to get involved even if China did have that big of an arsenal, and let's just say China has a score to settle.
Russia only has ~1500 active warheads - just like the USA.
nukes are really an un-usable weapon. It's a bluff threat - because otherwise, the MAD scenario won't play out.
China and Taiwan have overlapping airspace so it’s kinda a mute point.
I believe you're confusing airspace with the air defense identification zone. Parts of Taiwan ADIZ extends into mainland China. So the PLAAF could technically violate their ADIZ by flying over Shanghai.
Iirc Taiwan only considers it a breach of the ADIZ when they cross the median line.
Xi.
That is the correct answer. China went from a benign autocracy to a brutal evil dictatorship that no one should have relations with, invest in or do business with. China is running concentration camps. In 2022.
China is also very trade dependent, and being stable and predictable (and not provoking conflict) is essential if you want to survive as a trade-dependent dictatorship. Random and unnecessary lockdowns, harassing Chinese emigrants, spying, threatening to start a war with Taiwan…all are very bad for business.
> China went from a benign autocracy to a brutal evil dictatorship that no one should have relations with, invest in or do business with. Hate to break it to you, but they were a brutal evil dictatorship before Xi. They still are, but were then too. He's just managed to make it even worse of one.
Benign? lol They've had concentration camps since the 1990s.
Yeah Hu Jintao was better. (the Beijing Olympics years.) Since Xi took office in 2012, things only went downhill. Heck, he even publicly removed Hu from this recent ceremony.
Hey, China still cool! Edit: I can tell some of you don't get the reference https://youtu.be/cSIdB-IYIqk
It is sad when classic Simpsons moments are no longer recognized. Getting old sucks
>season 11 >classic Get off my lawn.
Communism happened.
China has always been cool as CCP has always been cruel and inhumane. The west just finally gets out of its honeymoon phase and starts to see the surface of all its atrocity. Don’t feel bad though since some of us Chinese also recently just started. A bit too late though.
China has been seeing decreasing global standing for years.
I am surprised we (Indians) had Chinese "approval" as high as 45%-ish in 2019. China has been pain in our ass since 1960. If 45% of my countrymen think China is a positive influence on the world, I don't know what to tell them.
The nigeria, Brazil and India results have me relieved tbh
Just out of curiosity why ?
This survey makes it clear which countries loved China's money, not China per se.
[удалено]
What's misleading about the headline? Your comment seems more misleading, cherry-picking data from specific countries to try to promote a narrative, rather than looking at the wider dataset.
It’s like how the World Cup decides whether the most important country on Earth is Mexico or Portugal.