The transfer of power from West to East is gathering pace and soon will dramatically change the context for dealing with international challenges -- as well as the challenges themselves. Many in the West are already aware of Asia's growing strength. This awareness, however, has not yet been translated into preparedness. And therein lies a danger: that Western countries will repeat their past mistakes.
Major shifts of power between states, not to mention regions, occur infrequently and are rarely peaceful. In the early twentieth century, the imperial order and the aspiring states of Germany and Japan failed to adjust to each other. The conflict that resulted devastated large parts of the globe. Today, the transformation of the international system will be even bigger and will require the assimilation of markedly different political and cultural traditions. This time, the populous states of Asia are the aspirants seeking to play a greater role. Like Japan and Germany back then, these rising powers are nationalistic, seek redress of past grievances, and want to claim their place in the sun. Asia's growing economic power is translating into greater political and military power, thus increasing the potential damage of conflicts. Within the region, the flash points for hostilities -- Taiwan, the Korean Peninsula, and divided Kashmir -- have defied peaceful resolution. Any of them could explode into large-scale warfare that would make the current Middle East confrontations seem like police operations. In short, the stakes in Asia are huge and will challenge the West's adaptability.
Today, China is the most obvious power on the rise. But it is not alone: India and other Asian states now boast growth rates that could outstrip those of major Western countries for decades to come. China's economy is growing at more than nine percent annually, India's at eight percent, and the Southeast Asian "tigers" have recovered from the 1997 financial crisis and resumed their march forward. China's economy is expected to be double the size of Germany's by 2010 and to overtake Japan's, currently the world's second largest, by 2020. If India sustains a six percent growth rate for 50 years, as some financial analysts think possible, it will equal or overtake China in that time.
Nevertheless, China's own extraordinary economic rise is likely to continue for several decades -- if, that is, it can manage the tremendous disruptions caused by rapid growth, such as internal migration from rural to urban areas, high levels of unemployment, massive bank debt, and pervasive corruption. At the moment, China is facing a crucial test in its transition to a market economy. It is experiencing increased inflation, real-estate bubbles, and growing shortages of key resources such as oil, water, electricity, and steel. Beijing is tightening the money supply and big-bank lending, while continuing efforts to clean up the fragile banking sector. It is also considering raising the value of its dollar-pegged currency, to lower the cost of imports. If such attempts to cool China's economy -- which is much larger and more decentralized than it was ten years ago, when it last overheated -- do not work, it could crash.
Even if temporary, such a massive bust would have dire consequences. China is now such a large player in the global economy that its health is inextricably linked to that of the system at large. China has become the engine driving the recovery of other Asian economies from the setbacks of the 1990s. Japan, for example, has become the largest beneficiary of China's economic growth, and its leading economic indicators, including consumer spending, have improved as a result. The latest official figures indicate that Japan's real GDP rose at the annual rate of 6.4 percent in the last quarter of 2003, the highest growth of any quarter since 1990. Thanks to China, Japan may finally be emerging from a decade of economic malaise. But that trend might not continue if China crashes.
India also looms large on the radar screen. Despite the halting progress of its economic reforms, India has embarked on a sharp upward trajectory, propelled by its thriving software and business-service industries, which support corporations in the United States and other advanced economies. Regulation remains inefficient, but a quarter-century of partial reforms has allowed a dynamic private sector to emerge. Economic success is also starting to change basic attitudes: after 50 years, many Indians are finally discarding their colonial-era sense of victimization.
Other Southeast Asian states are steadily integrating their economies into a large web through trade and investment treaties. Unlike in the past, however, China -- not Japan or the United States -- is at the hub.
The members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), finally, are seriously considering a monetary union. The result could be an enormous trade bloc, which would account for much of Asia's -- and the world's -- economic growth.
that's only 1 page, click here for the rest:
from Foreign Affairs, the main establishment journal
[comment: I can't imagine that all that stuff could happen without WWIII. Whatever happens, there's never been a better time than now for Canada to cut itself loose from the USA, or any other country.]
Note: from Foreign Affairs, t...

We must stop exporting all raw materials, we certainly have the ability to manufacture here and then export a finished product, this creates jobs here and keeps us independant.
We need to get away from the BMD and U.S. military schemes, we need to return to what is important to Canadians.
It has always amazed me at what we cannot do during peace time and how all that changes during war times, we were able to mobilize this country in record time during WWII, create, manufacture and ship...no problem. Why not implement those same principles now??
---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?
As for MacDonald, I think I might know what you are getting at, but I still think we owe him a lot.
I think we should have many more frank talks on these board about what Canadian politicians actually said, tried to do, failed to do, and managed to do. We also need to know more about the forces that opposed them. Were there deeper conspiracies, or is "Doing what the rich wanted" an honest explanation.
If you have any more information regarding MacDonald contributing to our branch-plant economy, I'm sure we'd enjoy reading it.
This is a sad attitude, we need people who realize they are elected to do the job they are getting paid for, think, research, pay attention to the decisions being made for the future of this province and this country, and act!
---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?
What I was getting at with MacDonald was a the disastrous railway policies he had, and his change to the Patent Act which let Americans get patents in Canada. Until then only Canadians could get things patented in Canada. The worst PM of all was Laurier though. He was undoubtedly the Mulroney/Harper of his day. It was under his "leadership" that the wheels really came off & got taken over by the USA.
---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va
---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va
As for the railway policies, it's my understanding he changed the gauge of rail on our railways so that the U.S. couldn't send troops into Canada by rail. As for the disastrous rail policies you mention, I'm afrain you'll have to enlighten me, unless you mean the railway scandal.
---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va