Under President Xi Jinping, China has become more diplomatically assertive and shown an increased willingness to back up its claims over disputed territory with demonstrations of its military prowess. Neighbouring countries, and the United States have been watching closely.
The increasingly loud voices sounding alarm of a potential China-US conflict in the South China Sea mostly came from the fact that the US is now seeing China on equal footing because of the latter’s growing army,” said Yin Dongyu, a Beijing-based analyst on the Chinese military. “And that’s quite a good indication of China’s growing military strength already.”
Within its ranks, there are more than 915,000 active-duty troops in its ranks, dwarfing the US, which has about 486,000 active soldiers, according to the latest Pentagon China Military Power Report.
The army has also been stocking its arsenal with increasingly high-tech weapons.In 2019, the DF-41 intercontinental ballistic missile, which experts say could hit any corner of the globe, was unveiled during the National Day military parade. But it was a DF-17 hypersonic missile that caught most people’s attention.
In 2019, the DF-41 intercontinental ballistic missile, which experts say could hit any corner of the globe, was unveiled during the National Day military parade. But it was a DF-17 hypersonic missile that caught most people’s attention.
The People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is now the largest navy in the world, according to the government’s defence white paper, and its submarines have the capability to launch nuclear-armed missiles. To support the navy, China also has so-called maritime militia, funded by the government and known as “little blue men”, which are active in the South China Sea, while this year Beijing authorised its coastguard to fire on foreign vessels.
Read more at:
Just how strong is the Chinese military? | Military News | Al Jazeera
Showing posts with label Strength. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Strength. Show all posts
5/15/16
Euroskepticism’s empty promises - not able to spell out their alternatives to European integration
With so much effort aimed at dismantling the European project, it is
time to ask the Euroskeptics to spell out their alternatives to European
integration. Of course, many conservative and libertarian Euroskeptics,
such as Daniel Hannan,
stress that their goal is not to destroy political cooperation on the
continent, or even to return to protectionism.
What they want is to return to a Europe made up of sovereign, democratic and self-governing nation states that are cosmopolitan and open to trade, investment, and, to a large degree, to immigration.
Boris Johnson,
for example, famously identified himself as being “about the only
politician … who is actually willing to stand up and say that he’s
pro-immigration.” The EU, argue the skeptics, is neither a necessary nor
sufficient guarantee of such openness. The EU, they say, is a
distortion that opens market and migrant flows within Europe, while
jealously guarding itself against competition from overseas.
Born out of the ashes of World War II, the aim of the European integration project was to make war between Europe’s leading nations impossible. It would do this by tying them together economically and politically, in what should have become a European federal state.
The EU’s critics like to emphasize that the premise is outdated, and that the animated policy debates in the 1940s and 1950s are now obsolete. As L.P. Hartley’s proverbial quote goes, the past is a foreign country — they do things differently there.
In reality, any alternative to being strong and united as one in Europe, is doomed to eventualy backfire,
Unfortunately many shortsighted Euroskeptics seem to believe that "charity starts at home".
Read more: Euroskepticism’s empty promise – POLITICO
What they want is to return to a Europe made up of sovereign, democratic and self-governing nation states that are cosmopolitan and open to trade, investment, and, to a large degree, to immigration.
Born out of the ashes of World War II, the aim of the European integration project was to make war between Europe’s leading nations impossible. It would do this by tying them together economically and politically, in what should have become a European federal state.
The EU’s critics like to emphasize that the premise is outdated, and that the animated policy debates in the 1940s and 1950s are now obsolete. As L.P. Hartley’s proverbial quote goes, the past is a foreign country — they do things differently there.
In reality, any alternative to being strong and united as one in Europe, is doomed to eventualy backfire,
Unfortunately many shortsighted Euroskeptics seem to believe that "charity starts at home".
Read more: Euroskepticism’s empty promise – POLITICO
3/18/14
Germany: Foundations of German Power - by Ulrich Speck
Germany today
is widely regarded as the most powerful country in Europe. But it is
often reluctant to take the lead. This hesitance has much to do with the
foundations of German power—Berlin has considerable resources but also
faces considerable constraints. Most importantly, German power is
embedded in the European Union, which both enhances and confines the
country’s capability to be a foreign policy player.
And on security, Berlin depends on its Western allies, especially the United States. But as the United States is reducing its footprint in Europe, Germany needs to step up its game.
German power rests primarily on the country’s economic strength. In terms of gross domestic product (GDP), Germany ranks fourth in the world, behind the United States, China, and Japan, and ahead of France and the United Kingdom. Thanks to its economic weight, Germany is a global player, a role it exercises, for example, through its membership in the G8 group of leading economies. This gives the country status, influence, and a certain independence in its decision making.
Germany has come through the global financial crisis in better shape than most European countries. It expects healthy economic growth in years to come, and the official GDP growth forecast for 2014 is 1.75 percent. With its solid manufacturing base and many “hidden champions”―globally successful small and medium-sized businesses―the German economy has drawn worldwide admiration, despite regular criticism of its strong emphasis on exports.
Read more: Foundations of German Power - Carnegie Europe
And on security, Berlin depends on its Western allies, especially the United States. But as the United States is reducing its footprint in Europe, Germany needs to step up its game.
German power rests primarily on the country’s economic strength. In terms of gross domestic product (GDP), Germany ranks fourth in the world, behind the United States, China, and Japan, and ahead of France and the United Kingdom. Thanks to its economic weight, Germany is a global player, a role it exercises, for example, through its membership in the G8 group of leading economies. This gives the country status, influence, and a certain independence in its decision making.
Germany has come through the global financial crisis in better shape than most European countries. It expects healthy economic growth in years to come, and the official GDP growth forecast for 2014 is 1.75 percent. With its solid manufacturing base and many “hidden champions”―globally successful small and medium-sized businesses―the German economy has drawn worldwide admiration, despite regular criticism of its strong emphasis on exports.
Read more: Foundations of German Power - Carnegie Europe
3/13/14
Is Europe's Economy Really Sick? - by Bruno Lanvin
You cannot pick up a business newspaper magazine these days without
reading some article about Europe’s economic crisis; there seems to be
an almost universal consensus that Europe is sick, that its
institutional frameworks and governments are unfriendly to business, and
that its prospects for getting better are dim.
For example, a survey answered by some 1,300 business executives worldwide that we conducted for INSEAD’s European Competitiveness Initiative shows that hardly anyone disagrees strongly with the proposition that innovation in Europe is hampered by a lack of culture of innovation and entrepreneurship, while about two thirds of those surveyed thought that Europe was actually unfriendly to innovation.
What exactly are the issues that people have with Europe’s innovativeness? Well, it’s not about the people. Half or more of those surveyed believed that European innovators were good, even world class, and that they had good business and technological skills.
The culprits were institutional. Most survey participants believed that government and financial institutions gave relatively little support to innovation. And while innovators may have had good business skills, the general culture of business in Europe did not encourage innovation.
And who exactly is doing the complaining? The Europeans themselves seem to be pretty evenly balanced on the state of their Union. Outside Europe, though, opinions are distinctly less positive. A shocking 83% of Latin American respondents expressed concern for Europe’s future and nearly three quarters of those surveyed in the big emerging economies like China and India felt the same way. Nearly two thirds of North Americans were pessimistic.
But is all this negativity really justified? A seemingly contradictory message is emerging from other surveys and analyses that I and my colleagues at INSEAD and across partner institutions such as the World Economic Forum, Harvard or Cornell conduct for the Global Innovation Index Report (GII), the Global Information Technology Report (GITR), and the Global Talent Competitiveness Report (GTCI).
Let’s look at innovativeness. The data that goes into creating the Global Innovation Index is based on some 84 variables, covering over 140 countries. It gives us a reasonable sense of how successful at innovation different countries and regions are.
The US is usually seen as a hotbed of innovation. And it is certainly in the top ten. But in 2013 it was comfortably beaten by Singapore and Hong Kong and by four other countries: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland. What’s more, the countries just below the US and Canada are all European as well. Of course, not all the European countries are as successful as those listed here, but on an aggregated regional level, we find that Europe is just as innovative as the US, and that both are well ahead of the other world regions.
And what about those anti-competitive social systems? Take a look at this chart, which plots country competitiveness scores as per the Global Competitiveness Index against the proportion of GDP spent on welfare. Strikingly, the most innovative countries all spend a lot on the social safety net. Of course, correlation is not causality, but it does at the least suggest that social protection and competitiveness are not mutually exclusive.
So is Europe really sick? Maybe, but not perhaps in the way we think, and very possibly it’s at least somewhat psychosomatic.
Read more: Is Europe's Economy Really Sick? - Bruno Lanvin - Harvard Business Review
For example, a survey answered by some 1,300 business executives worldwide that we conducted for INSEAD’s European Competitiveness Initiative shows that hardly anyone disagrees strongly with the proposition that innovation in Europe is hampered by a lack of culture of innovation and entrepreneurship, while about two thirds of those surveyed thought that Europe was actually unfriendly to innovation.
What exactly are the issues that people have with Europe’s innovativeness? Well, it’s not about the people. Half or more of those surveyed believed that European innovators were good, even world class, and that they had good business and technological skills.
The culprits were institutional. Most survey participants believed that government and financial institutions gave relatively little support to innovation. And while innovators may have had good business skills, the general culture of business in Europe did not encourage innovation.
And who exactly is doing the complaining? The Europeans themselves seem to be pretty evenly balanced on the state of their Union. Outside Europe, though, opinions are distinctly less positive. A shocking 83% of Latin American respondents expressed concern for Europe’s future and nearly three quarters of those surveyed in the big emerging economies like China and India felt the same way. Nearly two thirds of North Americans were pessimistic.
But is all this negativity really justified? A seemingly contradictory message is emerging from other surveys and analyses that I and my colleagues at INSEAD and across partner institutions such as the World Economic Forum, Harvard or Cornell conduct for the Global Innovation Index Report (GII), the Global Information Technology Report (GITR), and the Global Talent Competitiveness Report (GTCI).
Let’s look at innovativeness. The data that goes into creating the Global Innovation Index is based on some 84 variables, covering over 140 countries. It gives us a reasonable sense of how successful at innovation different countries and regions are.
The US is usually seen as a hotbed of innovation. And it is certainly in the top ten. But in 2013 it was comfortably beaten by Singapore and Hong Kong and by four other countries: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland. What’s more, the countries just below the US and Canada are all European as well. Of course, not all the European countries are as successful as those listed here, but on an aggregated regional level, we find that Europe is just as innovative as the US, and that both are well ahead of the other world regions.
And what about those anti-competitive social systems? Take a look at this chart, which plots country competitiveness scores as per the Global Competitiveness Index against the proportion of GDP spent on welfare. Strikingly, the most innovative countries all spend a lot on the social safety net. Of course, correlation is not causality, but it does at the least suggest that social protection and competitiveness are not mutually exclusive.
So is Europe really sick? Maybe, but not perhaps in the way we think, and very possibly it’s at least somewhat psychosomatic.
Read more: Is Europe's Economy Really Sick? - Bruno Lanvin - Harvard Business Review
11/20/13
EU Economy: If the European economy is so shaky, why is the euro so strong?
The euro zone is looking healthier than it has in some time, but that is not saying much. The long-suffering economy pulled out of recession earlier this year, unemployment is levelling off, and crisis worries continue to ebb along with government borrowing costs.
Yet growth may struggle to top 1% next year, which in turn is generating fear of deflation. European firms and households remain stuck under piles of debt. Earlier this month, amid signs of new economic weakness, the European Central Bank (ECB) cut its benchmark interest rate to 0.25%.
From late 2009 to mid-2012 the euro weakened as Europe’s debt crisis deepened. But since July of last year the euro has been on a tear, and it is now back to 2007 levels. After half a decade of financial gyrations, investors seem as eager to hold euros as ever. If the European economy is still shaky, why is the euro so strong?
An appreciating currency can cause serious problems. Exchange rates are an important determinant of the price of a country’s goods on world markets. If American car prices hold steady while the dollar strengthens, then the cost of American cars in yen or euros rises and America will sell fewer of them abroad. Europe has more reason than most to fear a strong currency. With firms, households and governments all cutting back, Europe is reliant on exports to drive growth and hiring. Some European leaders, such as France's president, François Hollande, worry that a strong euro is hurting European exporters.
Explaining exchange-rate moves is a near-impossible task. A currency might rise as improving economic prospects attract foreign capital—or because domestic banks are liquidating foreign investments and bringing money home to cover expected losses. Yet two factors look especially culpable for the euro's recent strength.
One is falling odds of a nasty euro-zone break-up. The flip from weakening to strengthening came in July 2012, when the president of the ECB, Mario Draghi, promised to do "whatever it takes" to preserve the single currency. Markets breathed a sigh of relief and seemed to worry less about keeping money in euros.
Relatively tight monetary policy could also be a factor. European interest rates are often higher than those elsewhere, while inflation is lower. Those small differences can add up to big gains for investors who borrow dollars (for example), and use them to buy euros to park in European banks. This "carry trade" raises the value of the euro relative to other currencies.
A soaring euro is not all bad news. It could signal increased foreign interest in lending to periphery governments. And Europeans benefit from lower import prices. But the costs—to struggling exporters and from deflation—are probably larger. Luckily Europe is not powerless in the face of a buoyant euro.
The ECB could discourage the carry trade by paying negative interest rates on deposits and could follow other rich-world central banks in deploying "quantitative easing" (QE) to boost the economy. QE entails printing euros to buy government bonds. In the end, an exchange rate is just a price: the price of euros, as expressed in other currencies. The surest way to bring it down is to make more euros.
Read more: The Economist explains: If the European economy is so shaky, why is the euro so strong? | The Economist
Yet growth may struggle to top 1% next year, which in turn is generating fear of deflation. European firms and households remain stuck under piles of debt. Earlier this month, amid signs of new economic weakness, the European Central Bank (ECB) cut its benchmark interest rate to 0.25%.
From late 2009 to mid-2012 the euro weakened as Europe’s debt crisis deepened. But since July of last year the euro has been on a tear, and it is now back to 2007 levels. After half a decade of financial gyrations, investors seem as eager to hold euros as ever. If the European economy is still shaky, why is the euro so strong?
An appreciating currency can cause serious problems. Exchange rates are an important determinant of the price of a country’s goods on world markets. If American car prices hold steady while the dollar strengthens, then the cost of American cars in yen or euros rises and America will sell fewer of them abroad. Europe has more reason than most to fear a strong currency. With firms, households and governments all cutting back, Europe is reliant on exports to drive growth and hiring. Some European leaders, such as France's president, François Hollande, worry that a strong euro is hurting European exporters.
Explaining exchange-rate moves is a near-impossible task. A currency might rise as improving economic prospects attract foreign capital—or because domestic banks are liquidating foreign investments and bringing money home to cover expected losses. Yet two factors look especially culpable for the euro's recent strength.
One is falling odds of a nasty euro-zone break-up. The flip from weakening to strengthening came in July 2012, when the president of the ECB, Mario Draghi, promised to do "whatever it takes" to preserve the single currency. Markets breathed a sigh of relief and seemed to worry less about keeping money in euros.
Relatively tight monetary policy could also be a factor. European interest rates are often higher than those elsewhere, while inflation is lower. Those small differences can add up to big gains for investors who borrow dollars (for example), and use them to buy euros to park in European banks. This "carry trade" raises the value of the euro relative to other currencies.
A soaring euro is not all bad news. It could signal increased foreign interest in lending to periphery governments. And Europeans benefit from lower import prices. But the costs—to struggling exporters and from deflation—are probably larger. Luckily Europe is not powerless in the face of a buoyant euro.
The ECB could discourage the carry trade by paying negative interest rates on deposits and could follow other rich-world central banks in deploying "quantitative easing" (QE) to boost the economy. QE entails printing euros to buy government bonds. In the end, an exchange rate is just a price: the price of euros, as expressed in other currencies. The surest way to bring it down is to make more euros.
Read more: The Economist explains: If the European economy is so shaky, why is the euro so strong? | The Economist
7/24/13
Europe in the global economy: Surprising external strength amid domestic weakness
Daniel Gros is director for the Centre for European Policy Studies and a member of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on Europe says, "EU has maintained its share in global exports over the past decade, whereas other mature economies have seen theirs decline considerably, most notably the US and Japan.
The EU exports almost three times as much to the fast-growing BRICs than the US does. In fact, the EU has increased its exports much more than the US over the last decade, and this holds true whether one looks at exports of goods, services or manufacturing. The performance of the EU is particularly striking in the latter, where exports have increased by about 150%, compared to about 50% for the US.
But it is services that could emerge as Europe’s hidden champion. It is widely assumed that Europe is not competitive in this market – numerous studies have shown that services are the sector in which productivity performance in the EU has been weakest and that the continent has been comparatively slow in adopting information technologies.
In reality Europe’s exports of services are performing well. Here, too, the EU has outperformed the US, whose exports have increased by 100% over the last decade, compared to Europe’s 150%. In 2011 extra-EU exports of services amounted to over €570 billion, 40% higher than those of the US.
That the EU is competitive in services can also be seen from the fact that it is continuously recording a surplus, which rose to about €100 billion in 2011. This strong trading position is astonishing, since services constitute the sector in which productivity growth in the EU has been most disappointing (both in absolute terms and relative to the US).
Read more: Europe in the global economy: Surprising external strength amid domestic weakness | EurActiv
The EU exports almost three times as much to the fast-growing BRICs than the US does. In fact, the EU has increased its exports much more than the US over the last decade, and this holds true whether one looks at exports of goods, services or manufacturing. The performance of the EU is particularly striking in the latter, where exports have increased by about 150%, compared to about 50% for the US.
But it is services that could emerge as Europe’s hidden champion. It is widely assumed that Europe is not competitive in this market – numerous studies have shown that services are the sector in which productivity performance in the EU has been weakest and that the continent has been comparatively slow in adopting information technologies.
In reality Europe’s exports of services are performing well. Here, too, the EU has outperformed the US, whose exports have increased by 100% over the last decade, compared to Europe’s 150%. In 2011 extra-EU exports of services amounted to over €570 billion, 40% higher than those of the US.
That the EU is competitive in services can also be seen from the fact that it is continuously recording a surplus, which rose to about €100 billion in 2011. This strong trading position is astonishing, since services constitute the sector in which productivity growth in the EU has been most disappointing (both in absolute terms and relative to the US).
Read more: Europe in the global economy: Surprising external strength amid domestic weakness | EurActiv
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)