Friday 3 June 2016

Why China may deserve Nobel Peace Prize for aggression?

 In IHS Jane’s Defence Budgets Annual Report, it was reported

Asia Pacific’s share of global defence spending will rise from one fifth in 2010 to almost one third by 2020. Growth accelerated in Asia Pacific as states bordering the South China Sea boosted defence spending.*

A wonderful, wonderful news for the American military-industrial complex and by extension, perhaps for world peace one day. You may be puzzled what is the connection between an aggressive China and world peace. Now, to understand my theory you must first realise that it is based on few assumptions such as firstly, China will just flex its muscles in South China Sea and other regions and not idiotically go on a full on war which is a very outdated concept anyways. You only go on actual wars if you are very old-fashioned (like Iraq was while attacking Kuwait and Iran) or stupid (like Pakistan used to be before they realized the great potential for terrorism their nation has) or have a large military-industrial complex you need to nurture (like United States of Assholes). Even Pakistan has become wise to the folly of going on full scale war with a formal declaration and the related hassles of Geneva Conventions and damaged international image, it stands to reason that China will not act in a dumber fashion than Pakistan. Another assumption is that China will continue to maintain the same level of aggression and for some unforeseeable reason not become a pacifist nation. Lastly, I assume that all the conspiracy theories about military-industrial complex of USA is true**.



So, how will this benefit all peace-loving hippies? Very simple. In the past century, USA first emerged as the arsenal of democracy, then of non-Left dictatorships and then of any Tom, Dick or Harry who will pay for weapons. But if conspiracy theories are true (and when are they not), the fact is that USA did not just supply weapons to countries going to war, it actually actively nudged them to war so that it will buy its weapons. It had an industry to run, an industry where they were far ahead of competitors and which returned insane profits. Other nations have also joined USA in this gory, soulless but lucrative business of arms manufacturing. 



When Cold War was going on, the military-industrial complex had a booming business. But with the fall of USSR, there was no boogeyman which could justify the large scale arms purchases. Thus, the Gulf war, Bosnian war, Iraq war, Afghan war etc. which ensured that the shutters won't be closed down on the arms shops. Reasons had to be created out of thin air and media had to be pumped with propaganda to back up all those lies. After all, the average Joe wouldn't be too keen on any war which occurred to give job security to arms manufacturers. And thus, you get the "War on Terror". Al-Qaida, ISIS etc. are a necessity for them, their bread-and-butter. If it wasn't so why would USA repeatedly supply arms to the very people they will be fighting in few years.*** Either Americans are the dumbest people on Earth or more likely, just pretend to be.


But with China being all aggressive there is no need to go to actual wars anymore. You just need to shout "Look China!" and Asian counties would increase their defense spending, as is already happening. It doesn't hurt that they have fast growing economies. What China is basically doing is keeping arms bosses from creating new wars based on flimsiest of reasons. Those guys even end up saving on propaganda expenditure. Loss of human lives will be reduced and at the same time, based on my assumptions China won't go to wars and thus, the replacement source of income for arms manufacturer (Chinese boogeyman) won't cause large-scale deaths. It is a win-win situation. And hence that Nobel Peace Prize should undoubtedly go to China and its army in future, in the tradition of giving Peace Prizes to likes of Henry Kissinger (a war monger for concluding peace after losing a war he mongered) and Yasser Arafat (terrorist organisation's leader for retiring from terrorist business).

No comments:

Post a Comment