Times Joins Pentagon on China’s ‘Naval Ambitions’

Times Joins Pentagon on China’s ‘Naval Ambitions’

Times Joins Pentagon on China’s ‘Naval Ambitions’

The editors want more weapons and military "steadfastedness" against Beijing.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Someone put angry pills into the New York Times’ editors’ cornflakes on Sunday morning. Or perhaps they were neo-cornflakes. In either case, the Times’ editorial on “China’s Naval Ambitions” sounded unhappily neocon-like.

Though the Times stipulates that “the Pentagon has a long history of hyping the Chinese threat to justify expensive weapons purchases,” it goes on to warn ominously of precisely that Chinese “threat.” The edit begins:

"Beijing’s drive to extend its military and territorial reach is making America’s close allies in the region nervous and raising legitimate questions about American diplomacy and future military procurement."

It then warns that China “seems increasingly intent on challenging United States naval supremacy in the Western Pacific,” and concludes:

“Dealing with a rising China could be Washington’s biggest challenge in the decades ahead. The United States has no interest in heightening tensions. A rapidly developing China has better uses for its new wealth than weapons. But when China pushes, as it is doing now, America needs to push back with a creative mix of diplomatic suppleness and military steadfastness.”

This is mostly baloney. Nowhere does the Times suggest that America’s own military budget, now equal to the rest of the world’s combined and about four or five times China’s entire defense budget, could be applied to those same “better uses” that it recommends for China. In fact, China is a rising world power, not merely a regional one, and its economic, political and yes, military power must be accommodated by a declining United States. Given America’s spiraling economic descent, we can no longer sustain global military dominance, and we’d better get used to the fact that rising powers such as China and India, along with regional powers such as Iran, will increasingly flex their muscle. Containing any of them, by a nation which can’t defeat a third-rate Islamist insurgency in Afghanistan, isn’t in the cards.

Like this Blog Post? Read it on get the Nation’s free iPhone App, NationNow.
NationNow iPhone App

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x