For Nepali men, going abroad to work is often the only option they have to support their family. But doing so can come with great risk. Lately, many Nepali men have died under mysterious circumstances while working in other countries, and it seems to be part of a larger trend that strikes every decade or so. Since Nepal’s government started promoting foreign labor, the number of Nepali men trying their luck in other countries has increased a lot.

In 2015, about 500,000 men went abroad to work, compared to about 220,000 in 2008. But the number of men who die while away has gone up disproportionately–in 2008 only one in 2,500 workers died. In 2015, the number was one in 500, according to the Associated Press.

In total, more than 5,000 workers from the small country situated in between India and China have died since 2008. About 10 percent of Nepal’s 28 million people are working abroad and the money they send back amounts to almost a third of the country’s annual revenues.

These statistics could be enough to intimidate most from endeavoring on a journey across borders. But as Nepal is one of the poorest and least developed countries in the world, many have few alternatives to earn money. And because Nepali men are often willing to work hard under any circumstances, they are in high demand.

Qatar is preparing for the 2022 FIFA World Cup and has hired around 1.5 million immigrants from different countries. To make its citizens desirable for recruitment, the Nepali embassy in Doha even started advertising online, saying, “Nepalese workers are well known for their hard work, dedication, and loyalty.” The site goes on to say they are “comparatively cost effective and their hiring cost is lower as compared to other labour exporting countries,” and that they are “experienced in working in the extreme climatic conditions.”

Qatar has long promised to make conditions for migrant workers safer. But still, Nepali men working for the World Cup were dying at a rate of one man every two days in 2014. The government has been criticized for not doing enough to prevent this from happening. The men work long hours in temperatures that often reach 122 degrees Fahrenheit. “We know that people who work long hours in high temperatures are highly vulnerable to fatal heat strokes, so obviously these figures continue to cause alarm,” Nicholas McGeehan from Human Rights Watch told the Guardian.

Two Nepali workers die in Qatar every three days constructing for the 2022 FIFA WC, @Jomo1966 at #ThorolfRaftoChallenge @RaftoFoundation pic.twitter.com/ZlcrrrZM8o

— Solveig Moldrheim (@Solmol) October 5, 2016

Nepal only has one international airport, located in the capital, Kathmandu. About 1,500 workers fly out every day, and on average, three dead bodies come back. “The rate at which Nepali workers are dying abroad is alarming because they are too young to die,” said labor migration expert Ganesh Gurung to Nepali Times. Gurung added that it’s difficult to know the actual reason for the deaths, as autopsies are very rarely performed. Writing “natural causes” in the death certificate could be a way to cover up the real cause.

Many Nepali workers also end up taking on a lot of debt just to get a job abroad. Even though it’s illegal for employers to charge fees for work, both in Nepal and in Qatar, the costs can be high. The men need to get enough money to afford a plane ticket, pay a recruiter, and find a place to sleep. This means many work endless hours, live with a dozen or more men in one room, while also being the target of scammers. These brutal conditions might be a reason why otherwise healthy young men die. Nepal’s government even arranged for trucks to be retrofitted to carry coffins after deaths abroad increased.

Nepali migrant workers who return in coffins are too young and healthy to die https://t.co/kBjuq18Zkt @omastharai pic.twitter.com/fCLYMGDEws

— Nepali Times (@nepalitimes) January 8, 2016

Exactly how the young men die largely remains a mystery, as natural death, heart attack, or cardiac arrest are listed as the cause of death in about half of the cases. Many of them went to bed as usual, but never woke up in the morning. According to medical researchers, this is actually something that happens about every 10 years to healthy Asian men working away from their home countries. In the 1970’s, it was a problem in the U.S., in the 1980’s in Singapore, and later on in China. The phenomenon was named Sudden Unexplained Nocturnal Death Syndrome and next year an international effort plans to take a closer look at the phenomenon.

Patrick Clarkin at the University of Massachusetts told the AP that he could see a pattern in the Nepali workers. “I suspect that there would be little harm in improving the diets and living conditions of these young men. Something as simple as a multivitamin could go a long way and with little risk.” The difference in diet when going to another country could be an explanation, but also because even though they are working in the desert they drink less water than usual because, as Hindus, they are not allowed to use Muslim restrooms.

Nepali authorities blame stress and even homesickness. “I’m not trying to be insensitive but we have sent millions of workers to more than 100 countries, and so yes, sometimes people will die,” the spokeswoman for the Department of Foreign Employment, Rama Bhattarai, told the AP. “They die as foreign employees, they die here when a bus goes off a cliff.” The problem doesn’t seem to be taken as seriously as it should. But Krishna Dawadee, director of Kathmandu’s work permit center, wishes that it would. “These are our youth, draining out from our country. I am very much worried about these people,” she said. Hopefully, the international investigation will find out more about the cause in order to find a solution.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Nepali Workers Abroad are Dying at an Alarming Rate appeared first on Law Street.

Like most of America’s longstanding allies, Japan is probably concerned, or at least surprised, about what happened here on Tuesday night. Japan, which the U.S. occupied for a time after World War II, now depends on the U.S. for almost all of its security needs–including deterring a nuclear North Korea and an encroaching China. As world leaders seek the ear of Donald Trump to probe whether his campaign rhetoric will hold once he takes office, Japan bursted out of the gate. In a show of good faith, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe held a 20-minute teleconference with Trump on Thursday and arranged to meet with him in New York next Thursday.

According to his deputy chief cabinet secretary, Abe told Trump that “a strong Japan-U.S. alliance is an indispensable presence that supports peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.” And though Abe embodies Japan’s version of the “political establishment” Trump railed against during his campaign, the prime minister bit his tongue and chose to pursue the amicable relationship Japan has enjoyed with the U.S. for decades: “America will be made even greater,” Abe told Trump.

President Obama has often signaled a “pivot” to the Asia-Pacific region throughout his presidency–seen with the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a buildup of troops in the region, and engagement with its market, the largest in the world. Based off of Trump’s statements over the past few months, Obama’s Asia-Pacific vision and agenda could be upended by his successor.

“Of course they should pick up all the expense. Why are we paying for this?” Trump said, referring to the nearly 54,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan. He has blasted the TPP trade deal, which Japan’s lower house of Parliament passed on Thursday. Trump has also toyed with the idea of Japan and South Korea building up their own atomic arsenals, which would scale back the U.S.’s role in defending both countries against China and North Korea.

President Park Geun-hye of South Korea also called Trump on Thursday, and stressed the importance of the U.S.-South Korea alliance in pressuring its erratic northern neighbor. Trump assured her that he “agreed “100 percent,” according to a statement Park released after the phone call. “We are with you all the way, and we will not waver,” Trump said in a statement.

It’s the unknown of Trump, as well as the unprecedented campaign he ran, that spooks Japan and other traditional U.S. allies in the region. Some in Japan worry that even if Trump does not abandon Japan and Asia altogether, he could place the region much lower on his priority list than Obama, creating a void of influence that China could fill. Additionally, building up a nuclear arsenal in Japan might be difficult, if not impossible, because anti-nuclear sentiment runs rampant in pacifist Japan, which technically does not even have a military.

“We should be aware that the U.S. will pay less attention to Asia,” Nikkei Shimbun, a Japanese financial newspaper, wrote in an editorial Thursday. “During the transitional period, China could make a new move in the South or East China Sea. The Japanese government needs to be ready for such a situation.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post With Trump as President, What’s Next for Japan and the U.S.? appeared first on Law Street.

With a submarine-based missile launch on Wednesday, North Korea reached dangerous new territory, as the missile breached Japan’s air defense identification zone–a first, according to Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. The missile, a 9 meter long KN-11, launched from the waters off Sinpo, in North Korea’s South Hamgyong Province. U.S. Pacific Command tracked the missile as traveling 300 miles over the Sea of Japan before falling into the waters below Japanese-controlled airspace.

“If the North Korean regime continues to pursue its nuclear and missile capabilities and ignore severe economic difficulties of its people, it will bring about more severe sanctions and diplomatic isolation. It should also realize that it will hasten its self-destruction,” South Korea’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

The KN-11, a missile with a maximum reach of 4,000 kilometers, launched from a submarine at 5:30 a.m. local time, according to South Korea’s Foreign Ministry. It marks the latest in a string of missile launches from the communist country over the past few months. It was not entirely surprising, given the fact that the North said if the annual joint military exercises between South Korea and the United States occurred (they started Monday), it has a “self-defensive right and justifiable action to respond in a very hard way.”

Video: North Korea test-fired a ballistic missile from a submarine, two days after ROK-US war game pic.twitter.com/pg1ftkeAdI

— China Xinhua News (@XHNews) August 24, 2016

And given a letter North Korea sent to the U.N. Security Council on Tuesday, that seems to be what happened. “U.S.-led large-scale joint military exercise in collusion with the South Korean forces despite repeated warnings of the DPRK is a grave military provocation aimed to launch a preemptive nuclear attack on the DPRK and a challenge to regional peace and stability in every way,” said the letter, referring to the country’s official title, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Shinzo Abe, Japan’s prime minister, called the latest missile test “a threat to Japan’s security and an unforgivable reckless act that significantly damages the peace and stability of the region.” And the three most powerful nations in the region agreed on Wednesday to meet to discuss deterring an increasingly adventurous North Korea. At a meeting following the morning launch, the foreign ministers of Japan, South Korea, and China announced a trilateral summit to take place in Japan by the end of the year.

“There are many problems existing between the three countries, but China, Japan, and South Korea are the three biggest economy entities in Asia. It’s our responsibility to promote economic development, lead regional cooperation and maintain regional peace and stability,” said Wang Yi, China’s Foreign Minister.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post North Korean Missile Reaches Japan’s Air Defense Zone appeared first on Law Street.

After 70 years of pacifism, the Japanese parliament recently voted to allow the use of military force under specific conditions, potentially moving the country away from a longstanding policy that guided it since the end of World War II. While this decision immediately drew an outcry of criticism from Japanese citizens, it was strongly supported by Japan’s conservative Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. The new legislation will not completely do away with the country’s policy of pacifism, but it does allow for the use of military force under a set of narrow circumstances. After years of stagnant economic growth, this decision reflects the efforts of conservatives in the country’s parliament to expand its role in the region. Read on to see how Japan has currently defined itself and what that will mean for its future.

Japan’s Economy

The strength of Japan’s economy has been central to defining its place in the region. Japan was the first in Asia to modernize along European lines, starting at the end of the 19th century. Adopting a Prussian-style, government-dominated economy, Japan became a powerhouse up until WWII. Following the war, while Japanese industries struggled to recover, the nation was helped by a large surplus of young educated workers and free trade.

Then, starting in the 1960s, Japan began its economic miracle in which it relied on exports to make it a world power economically, second only to the United States. That miracle, however, came to an end in the early 1990s, as GDP growth leveled off. From 1992 onward, Japan’s GDP growth remained largely stagnant. Despite a brief period of growth in the 2000s, those gains were erased by the 2008 global recession.

Japan’s most recent effort to reverse this trend was the election of Shinzo Abe as prime minister in 2012. After three years and a large economic stimulus, there has been very little to show for it. But despite that stimulus, there have been brief periods of recession. Economic stimulus has also come with significant costs–the national debt in Japan is currently 240 percent of its GDP, the highest in the world.

Demographics

Part of Japan’s economic problem is the demographics of its workforce. On average, Japanese citizens have the longest life expectancy of any people on the planet. While that is certainly good for the people of Japan, when you couple that with the country’s extremely low birth rate it creates a significant issue for the Japanese workforce. Namely, while life expectancy is going up, the birth rate is going down. This means that there are fewer young workers to replace the older retirees. So, the younger workers must now support more retirees per person, along with themselves and their families. The best way to visualize it is as an inverted pyramid. This problem is only made worse by Japan’s relatively young, customary retirement age of 60. The video below details the issues plaguing Japan demographically:

Foreign Relations

China

Up until the end of the 19th century, Japan had been under the influence of China, even adopting its customs and language. However, beginning in the 1890s and continuing into WWII, the roles were reversed as Japan became the dominant power. Japan earned long lasting infamy and hatred among the Chinese when its army killed and raped hundreds of thousands of people.

Japan’s current relationship with China can be characterized as contentious, particularly in light of China’s growing military and economic power. In this case, Japan serves as the traditionally dominant power that it is being overtaken by the upstart China. The following video below shows the difficult relationship between the two nations:

North and South Korea

Many of the complications with Japan’s relationships with its neighbors stem from its deep history in the region. For thousands of years, there existed an exchange of ideas and customs between Korea and Japan. But in 1910, Japan annexed Korea, holding the territory as a colony until its defeat in World War II. This period involved particularly harsh rule and oppression from Japan, which is the source of strong resentment that still exists today. Despite Japan’s policy of pacifism adopted after World War II, resentment from past conflict continued to shape Japan’s relations with its neighbors.

Japan’s relationship with North Korea is also filled with wariness, much like the one with China. However, the reasons why Japan mistrusts North Korea are different. Unlike the Chinese, an economic and territorial rival, North Korea’s danger lies in its instability. Couple this instability with its nuclear capability and the repeated missile tests near Japan and it presents Japan with a very dangerous and unpredictable potential adversary close by. Recently Japan has been part of the six-party talks about North Korea’s nuclear program. As North Korea has proven committed to the program, Japan has employed sanctions, further distancing itself from North Korea.

Despite their similarities, Japan and South Korea have had a strained relationship since the early 1900s. Both countries have democratic market-based economies, causing them to share several interests in the region–both are wary of China’s growing role in the region and are close allies with the United States. Scholars argue that formal relations between the governments are largely shaped by public opinion. In their book, The Japan-South Korea Identity Clash, Brad Glosserman and Scott Snyder argue:

We conclude that the threat-based and alliance-based evaluations of conditions for Japan-ROK [Republic of Korea] cooperation cannot overcome the psychological and emotional gaps in perspective on Japan-ROK relations, chasms that are reflected in public opinion in both countries. For this reason, this study has chosen to utilize public opinion data as a way of getting into the heads of the publics on both sides and more deeply understanding the nature and parameters of identity-related issues that have inhibited development of the relationship.

United States

Prior to its defeat in World War II, Japan was a staunch rival of the United States. Japan’s imperial interests in Southeast Asia conflicted with the United States’ interests in the region and threatened the United States’ Open Door policy in China. But after the war, Japan developed on the United States’ terms and has since become one of the most important U.S. allies over the past several decades.

In an almost ironic twist, relations between the United States and Japan are as good, if not better than with any of its neighbors, which is significant given the legacy of WWII. Since the end of the war and American occupation, Japan has been a close ally–it now hosts a major U.S. military base on the island Okinawa. Japan is also a major market for U.S. goods and an important regional partner for diplomacy.

Japan’s Military

The Cost of War

Japan’s movement away from pacifism also has the potential to affect the nation’s bottom line. Although next year’s budget increase for military spending is not huge, about $41.7 billion or 2.2 percent, it matters quite a bit in the context of the country’s economy, as Japan is mired in extreme debt.

Along with rising costs of an expanded military, there are the effects on the weapons industry in Japan. Last year, the country allowed its weapons manufacturers to export military weapons for the first time. Prior to 2014, companies were only allowed to sell weapons to the Japanese military. But it remains unclear whether this move will actually benefit these companies, which are usually part of much larger corporations. This is because these manufacturers have never had to compete for business before. While exposure to more markets may seem like a good thing, removing the protections in place may not provide many short-term benefits.

Nuclear Weapons

When we talk about a less-passive Japan, the topic of nuclear weapons may also come up. Most of this rhetoric comes from China, Japan’s chief rival, who suggests with Japan’s advanced nuclear energy knowledge, building a weapon would be very easy. The second part of the assertion is certainly true, as most experts believe that with their know-how and inventory of radioactive material, the Japanese could likely build a nuclear weapon in a matter of months. However, the idea that Japan would do so seems unlikely for several reasons. These reasons include a nuclear guarantee from the United States, a strict commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and the growing criticism of nuclear technology in Japan in general following the nuclear meltdown disaster in Fukushima. Finally, the historical significance of nuclear weapons still resonates with Japan after the nation was decimated in World War II. The following video gives a complete analysis of Japan ending its policy of pacifism:

Conclusion

Like its economy, Japan itself seems caught in a malaise which threatens to affect its role within the region. Japan’s economy remains in neutral despite the election of Shinzo Abe, who pledged to turn things around with government spending and other innovations. Diplomatically, relations with its Asian neighbor remain simmering, especially with China and the Koreas.

This may explain Japan’s recent decision to move away from its 70-year-old policy of pacifism. However, popularity and concern for spending certainly remain issues for the country, as the decision flies in the face of both. The decision also threatens to further aggravate tensions with Japan’s neighbors, who still carry memories and grudges from World War II.

Japan’s role in the region seems to be the same as that of many countries in their respective spheres, not as big as it thinks it is or should be. Perhaps becoming a more assertive military power is a way for Japan to bolster itself, especially in the face of a rising China. It may also just be a reaction to the arms races currently ongoing in Asia, set off by a rising China.

Resources

CNN: Assertive Japan Poised to Abandon 70 Years of Pacifism

BBC: China & Japan: Rival Giants

Stanford: Learning from the Japanese Economy

The National Interest: The Demographic Timebomb Crippling Japan’s Economy

The Heritage Foundation: Japan Needs Real Economic Reform

Wall Street Journal: Japan Military Spending in Cross Hairs

CNN: Pacifism bill: Why Japan Won’t Build a Nuclear Weapon Quickly

The ASAN Forum: North Korea in Japan’s Strategic Thinking

Department of State: U.S. Relations with Japan

Voice of America: American History: US-Japan Relations Before World War Two

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Defining Japan’s Place in the World appeared first on Law Street.

The South and East China Seas conflicts are suddenly dominating the news. Multiple countries are claiming ownership over a number of islands in the South and East China Seas–and the debate has gone international, even involving the U.S. But why does the United States even care who owns these islands? Read on to learn about why these islands and territories are so important, and why we should all be paying attention to this conflict.

A History of Conflict

What is under dispute?

The islands under question are located in the East and South China seas. China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea, including those islands. But along with China, the Philippines and Vietnam both claim the Paracels and Spratley Islands. China and the Philippines both claim the Scarborough Shoal. And Malaysia and Brunei also claim disputed maritime territory in the South China Sea as well.

The East China Sea Conflict revolves around a group of five inhabited islets named the Diaoyu Islands according to China or the Senkaku Islands according to Japan. Taiwan, along with China and Japan, also claims these islands in the East China Sea, although China also claims Taiwan.

South China Sea 

China’s claims in the South China Sea base from ancient times. China documents territorial rights from the Xia and Han dynasties. China uses a map with a nine-dash line to chart its territories that include 291 islands and reefs in the area. The nine-dash line was formulated in China by the nationalist Kuomintang party in 1947 and is still used in China’s maps today.

But other countries don’t agree. Vietnam, Taiwan and the Philippines all have a military presence on at least some of the islands in the region as well. But it is really in the last eighteen months that China’s massive construction has started to spark tensions higher than ever.

East China Sea

The beginning of the East China Sea Conflict can be dated back to the end of the first Sino-Japanese War in the 1890s, fought between China and Japan over Korea. In defeat, China ceded a number of territories to Japan in the Treaty of Shimonoseki. China claims the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands were a part of this cession, although there is no mention of the islands specifically in the treaty. Japan claims to have had them all along, since it discovered and annexed the lands in 1895. In 1937, Japan invaded China and fortified its military strength. This time period really honed the bad blood between Japan and China, as the Chinese people suffered gravely. After WWII, China demanded the islands back, even though China never actually controlled the islands and they were now under U.S. control. When the United States finally left the islands in 1972, post WWII, the Japanese government resumed control. Whether the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands were ceded to Taiwan or considered part of Okinawa (remaining with Japan) remains a heated point of debate today.

What’s so special about these islands?

When it comes to the South China Sea, it all boils down to economics. The area is home to an abundance of natural resources, fertile fishing grounds, and “the world’s most dynamic economies.” The South China Sea holds vital global trade routes, especially for oil. The dominant country in the region, China, could control trade shipments from all over East and Southeast Asia and control foreign military access. The South China Sea conducts $5.3 trillion in total trade each year. There are 11 billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic of feet of natural gas in the South China Sea. If that isn’t enough, 90 percent of Middle Eastern fossil fuel exports are expected to pass through Asia by 2035.

The conflict over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands is a little more complicated. Presumed oil and gas reserves are important factors. But the conflict is also a bit more symbolic–China is now the big man on campus, and wants to show its strength. Nationalism and honor play big parts on this side of the maritime conflicts. Old wounds are not forgotten. “Maritime disputes suggest that China’s rise is not going to be without its frictions,” says Council on Foreign Relations Director for Asia Studies Elizabeth Economy, “That is many instances China feels that its economic throw weight really does give it a greater stance and a greater ability to assert its interests, in some cases to reform norms, and in some cases to upend them.”

Recent Developments

In recent news, the conflicts are heating up due to China’s major building. In the last eighteen months, China has created more “new island surface” than all the other countries involved combined, amassing to about 2,000 acres. Although China already started land reclamation in controversial areas close to the Spratly Islands last year, this recent action is on a whole other scale. China has placed military equipment such as military airfields and motorized artillery pieces on the man-made islands and plans to continue that action in the future.

China isn’t the only one building however. Similar actions have been taken by Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Malaysia on much smaller scales. For example, in 2008, Taiwan completed a 3,900 foot land strip on the Itu Aba, part of the Spratley Islands, fit for search and rescue missions and military aircrafts. In a more recent example, Malaysian Defense Minister Hishamuddin Hussein announced a plan in 2013 to place a marine corps on a yet to be created naval base on Bintulu in Sarawak.

U.S. Involvement

The major concern for Americans is a conflict between the U.S. and China. Conflict amongst the Asia-Pacific countries can easily bring in the U.S. We have a stake in the trade markets and no interest in allowing China to control the region and our allies like Japan.

This month Secretary of State John Kerry met with China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, in Malaysia. Kerry pressed for China to immediately halt “problematic actions” and expressed concern for the “militarization of features there.” After the meeting, Kerry was optimistic to other diplomats and called the conversation a “good meeting.” Kerry stated, “We want to ensure the security of critical sea lanes and fishing grounds, and we want to see that disputes in the area are managed peacefully and on the basis of international law.” Still points of contention remained. Although Wang promised to stop land reclamation, he did not promise China would vacate current projects .

This previous May, a U.S. surveillance plane flew over some of the contested waters. The flight was conducted in order to apparently “make clear the U.S. does not recognize China’s territorial claims.” The Chinese sent eight warning against the aircraft from an island over 600 miles away from the Chinese coast. The warning made clear that China considers the area its jurisdiction.

Kerry and Wang were in Malaysia for a meeting held by ASEAN, a 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations. China and ASEAN previously agreed to negotiate a “code of conduct” regarding the disputed regions. But ASEAN secretary general, Le Luong Minh, is not happy with the progress. ASEAN calls for an earlier resolve of the “code of conduct” and for China to stop all building.

Conclusion

We haven’t seen the last of the arguments over the islands in the East and South China Seas. While the conflict may have served as a show of strength between the United States and China, it also involved many other nations that continue to have influence in the region. Moreover, given other extenuating factors like the Trans-Pacific Partnership debacle, the Chinese-American relationship may definitely be heading toward icy waters. Whether or not that will affect the disputes in the East and South China Sea will have to be seen.

Resources

CFR: China’s Maritime Disputes

Associated Press: ASEAN wants China to stop work in disputed sea

CNN: China Warns U.S. Surveillance Plane

The Economist: Who really owns the Senkaku islands? 

The New York Times: Kerry Urges Beijing to Halt Actions in South China Sea

Reuters: Everything you need to know about the South China Sea conflict

The Wall Street Journal: China to Build Military Facilities on South China Sea Islets

The Washington Post: China is not the only country reclaiming land in South China Sea

The Washington Post: Tension with China loom larger as Obama prepares to welcome Xi Jinping

Jessica McLaughlin

Jessica McLaughlin is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a degree in English Literature and Spanish. She works in the publishing industry and recently moved back to the DC area after living in NYC. Contact Jessica at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The South and East China Seas: Conflict Continues appeared first on Law Street.

At the recent Zhuhai Air Show, China unveiled a new stealth fighter jet that one day has the potential to rival the United States’ own F-35. This came just days before President Obama was to travel to China to meet with its leaders as part of the larger APEC summit. While the significance of the timing of this display is debatable, it unquestionably shows China is determined to steadily improve and modernize its military arsenal. The question that remains is why? Is China’s path aimed at some future point at which it will surpass the United States as the world’s pre-eminent world power, both economically and militarily? If the answer to this question is yes–or even if it is no–does this then make China a military threat to the United States?

China and the U.S.: Positions in the Global Hierarchy

It’s the Economy

To begin to answer this question it is necessary to start by looking at these countries’ economies and in particular their economic growth. There are an infinite number of economic measures available to argue which economy in the world is the strongest; however, one of the most traditional and commonly accepted is Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In this regard, America has enjoyed dominance for decades going all the way back to the end of World War II. Today even in a supposedly more multipolar world, the GDP of the US economy, nearly $17 trillion in 2013, dwarfs that of any other nation and almost doubles the second place country, China.

Nonetheless, while the United States enjoys the largest GDP its rate of growth is much smaller than China’s. Since 1978, when it moved from a centrally planned to a market based economy, China’s yearly GDP growth has averaged nearly 10 percent. The United States during this time has experienced annual growth rates of 2 to 3 percent.

This figure excludes many factors, notably the fact that as a larger economy it is harder for the U.S. to grow at a rate equal to that of China. This issue has actually started to affect China as well as its recent growth has slipped to the 7 to 8 percent range as it seeks to curb several glaring social issues. Moreover, while China’s economy is growing faster and one day may pass the U.S. economy based strictly on total GDP, the average GDP per person is much lower in China than the United States. Regardless of the metrics though, why is economic might so important in determining whether China is a military threat to the United States?

China and U.S.: Military Spending

The United States Spends More (A Lot More)

A successful economy often goes hand in hand with a powerful military. Such is the case in the United States. As has been well documented, military spending by the United States far surpasses that of any other country. In fact, the edge in military spending by the United States far outstrips its edge economically by any measure. In 2013 for example, the United States spent an estimated $619 billion on military expenditures. This is more than three times what the second-place country spent in that same time period.

That second country on the list is–you guessed it–China again. In 2013 China spent $171.4 billion itself on military expenditures. While the United States again is overwhelmingly outspending China, it is critical to look at the growth rates, not just the overall total. As China’s economy continues to grow, so does its potential military capability.

China is Spending More Lately

In 2013, the U.S. actually saw a significant decline in military spending as a result of not only the ending of its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also due to the sequester. In contrast, China actually increased its budget in the same year between 7.4 and 10.7 percent. In 2014, it is reported that China will increase its budget again by an additional 12.2 percent. While this still does not make China equal to the United States, it suggests a desire by China to project its power further beyond its borders. The video below provides a more in-depth explanation.

China and U.S.: Their Relationship

Long and Intricate 

While China’s military capability is increasing this does not automatically make it a threat to the United States, instead it is also important to consider the relationship between the two nations. Historically this could be characterized best as complicated. The video below highlights the complex connection.

The United States has long had a relationship with China, almost from its inception. China was an important market following the Revolutionary War when it was shut out of many other places due to animosity emanating from England. American missionaries also flocked to China and Chinese immigrants came in waves to the United States and were instrumental in constructing the railway network, among other things. Things started going downhill, however, near the end of the nineteenth century during the rise of Imperialism worldwide. In 1882 the U.S. passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which was aimed at curbing Chinese immigration.

Additionally, in 1899 the U.S. provided men and weapons to help put down the Boxer Rebellion in which Chinese citizens attempted to expel foreigners who they viewed as exploitative of their country. The United States did advocate the Open Door Policy, initiated in the late nineteenth century, that prevented the literal break-up of China; however, the motive for that can be seen as greed as much as humanitarianism in that the U.S. wanted to keep China as an open market to which it had access.

The relationship improved again during the lead up to and for the duration of World War II as the United States provided supplies and men to China in its fight against Imperial Japan. Later during the conflict China also served as a launching point for American attacks against Japan. The bond the countries had hammered out during the war seemed to be set in stone when the United States worked to get China to become one of the five permanent members of the Security Council. Once again however, the relationship frayed with the communist takeover of China and with Chinese soldiers actually engaging U.S. troops during the Korean War. At one point the situation was so bad that nuclear war seemed to be a possibility. Relations stayed frozen until President Nixon famously opened up dialogue between the two countries in the 1970s.

Since Nixon’s thawing the two nations have maintained a strong economic relationship. In 2014, China was the United States’ second most valuable trading partner and the United States was China’s top partner. The two sides also recently agreed for the first time to a major environmental pact that is scheduled to cap China’s emissions in 2030 and cut US emissions by 25 percent by 2025. Still though while the U.S. and China are working in concert, many issues remain between the two nations that could potentially lead to conflict, namely human rights abuses and continued Chinese attempts to steal American technological secrets.

Other Considerations

The Price of Friendship

While the complicated relationship between China and the United States may not make China a military threat, the relationship China has with its neighbors in Asia certainly has that potential. Currently China is attempting to exert its newfound power throughout the region. This has led to two separate crises in two separate seas. The one problem in both cases, with Japan in the East China Sea and several Asian countries in the South China Sea, is over control of the seas. Specifically it is over who controls the resources under those seas, particularly the large amount of oil. The video below gives a glimpse of what exactly the issue is.

The reason why all this could lead to China becoming a military threat is because the United States has defensive military treaties with both Taiwan and Japan. Thus if these two nations or others that also have military commitments from the United States were to come into direct physical conflict with China, the United States would be required to come to their aid militarily. The United States could always refuse to honor these obligations, but then that would lead to a loss of credibility.

End of the Pax Americana 

Such a loss of credibility may actually already have occurred. Specifically by failing to honor the security commitment to Ukraine and the failure to punish Syria for crossing Obama’s Red line against the use of chemical weapons, hostile countries may now have their doubts concerning American power, or at the very least its commitment.

Not only has this seemingly emboldened countries like Russia, it may also lead other countries with differing political goals such as China to determine the time is ripe for them to assert their own power as well, without the former fear of American retaliation. This may also signal the end of an unofficial era, defined as the Pax Americana or American Peace. During this period dating from the end of World War II, the United States was able to assert its global ambitions due to its military strength.

To Russia With Love

Another potential challenge to the system, crafted by the United States, comes in the form of China’s growing economic relationship with Russia, which has been both a long term and recent nemesis of the United States. While the U.S. and its European allies sanction Russia for its involvement in the unrest in Ukraine, China was agreeing to a $400 billion energy deal that could undermine the sanctions already in place.

China’s Nuclear Card

Even if China were not emboldened by a perceived American decline, it still has the potential to be a threat to the United States or any other state on this planet because of its nuclear stockpile. While China has long maintained its policy of no First Use concerning nuclear weapons, recent improvements in its arsenal may signal its intent to shrink the nuclear capability gap between the United States and itself.

Conclusion

Fool Me Once Shame on You, Fool Me Twice…

Aside from all the spending and rhetoric, good and bad, many still believe that China cannot be a threat to the United States militarily for one major reason: China and the U.S. are each other’s most important trading partners. But this argument has been made before. In one such case it was argued that Germany and France, which prior to WWI were economically independent, would not go to war. This was proven wrong of course and the two sides soon engaged in one of the bloodiest conflicts in human history.

Thus in time China could very possibly become a military threat to the United States with its quickly growing economy and military budget; however, the amount of dialogue and trade between the two countries could just as easily lead to a peaceful and prosperous relationship well into the future. For now only time will tell.

Resources

Primary

World Bank: Gross Domestic Product 2013

World Bank: China Overview

Census: Foreign Trade

Additional

Heritage Foundation: The Complicated History of US Relations with China

Trading Economics: Countries Spending the Most on the Military

CNN: Just How Good is China’s New Stealth Fighter

Council on Foreign Relations: Trends in US Military Spending

The New York Times: China Announces 12.2 % Increase in Military Budget

China Daily: Top 10 Trading Partners of the Chinese Mainland

Guardian: US and China Strike Deal on Carbon Cuts in Push For Global Climate Change Pact

World Affairs Journal: Conflicting Claims: China, Japan, Taiwan on Edge

Atlantic: The End of Pax Americana: How Western Decline Became Inevitable

National Interest: West Concerned about Russia and China Economic Ties

Diplomat: Could China’s Nuclear Strategy Evolve?

National Interest: Should America Fear China’s Nuclear Weapons

UCSD: Trading on Preconceptions

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post China as a Military Threat: What Does It Mean for the U.S.? appeared first on Law Street.