United Muscovite Nations wrote:Because I am a constructivist and I recognize that every country has its own perspective on reality, and what seems like aggression to one country may be defensive for another. This is the security dilemma and leads to escalation. In time it will lead to war. It's well and good to contain China, but we should seek to compromise with them and understand their greivances.
We can appreciate their grievances while not capitulating to them in East Asia. In much the same way that we can appreciate why the Russians might not appreciate a nuclear arsenal based in Turkey or Poland. It doesn't really change where we stand though because, even understanding their grievances and interests, we may still have grievances and interests of our own that prevent an acceptable accord. When I refer to the Chinese or Russians as political enemies, I'm not implying that I hate them or view them as wholly unreasonable. I'm simply acknowledging that we're at odds with regard to what we want and need. I'm an American. I'm supposed to care more for the devastation wrought on Detroit or American military secrets being stolen than the failure of the Boxer Rebellion. And I do not ask the Chinese, outside of reasonable limits, to consider our grievances and interests because, while a good exercise in empathy, this is ultimately fruitless unless it leads to a favorable peace from our standpoint.
