This article begins with a cliché that China has turned out to be a superpower covering the distance in three decades only which others have taken centuries to traverse. At present, China is recognized as the second largest economy after the United States. The main reason for that is that China has approximately 2 billion hands working for bumper growth, however, excluding the very young and old 1 million.

The successive governments and the leaders such as Deng Xiaoping have been responsible for taking shrewd decisions to prepare China model which is a model of reforms, but it is especially the Chinese people who have actually brought the transformation. And out of the people, it is the portion of entrepreneurs who set up business, produce surplus growth in areas of agriculture, industry, manufacturing and service industry. But more especially, the credit goes to collective private owners, that is, the actual employees of the entrepreneurial companies, nevertheless working under the shadow of provincial governments. And finally, out of these private owners are the champions of transformation. The salient individuals are Jack Ma of Alibaba; Chen Haibin of Medical Laboratories, Zhang Rinmin, the chief of Haier, Ren Zhengfei of Huawei and Di Shufu, most successful car manufacturer, to name a few!

The standard practice in China is that the government studies, searches and then provides opportunities to the people who establish companies with little knowledge and business experience. The prime mover is their force to satisfy the customer’s demands.

As superpower, China has started playing its role in international affairs, and this factor is a challenge for those European and North American countries who have dominated post-closure of World War II.

Interestingly and perhaps ironically, the tone of most of the US negotiators such as Henry Paulson Jr. head of Goldman Sachs and former Treasury Secretary under President George W. Bush with their Chinese counterparts has been to make the Chinese realize that the strength which their economy has achieved in so huge a size and in so short a time is due to the United States positive response in areas, such as trade and technology transfer. Perhaps this has consciously been acted out to send the message to the Chinese authorities that the US is not working at the policy of containment or confrontation against China.

Nonetheless, the group of critics of China, generally known as the “Sceptics” or “Blue Team”, including the Nobel Prize Winner Paul Krugman and Gordon Chang who wrote The Collapse of China maintain that China had gained more than the US had. The sceptics have contemptuously labelled the Chinese policy of opening up to the world by borrowing from the words of an official of Qing Dynasty as “Chinese Bodies, Foreign Technology”. This remark is also a sarcastic reference to Chinese currency manipulations, tendency of providing subsidies to attract manufacturers and benefitting from reverse technology obtained through alleged theft and industrial espionage.

To make things worse, the economic crunch of 2008 brought a paradigm shift in Sino-American relationship: China became the largest US creditor. The Western media along with the members of “Blue Team” have, therefore, always been portraying China’s economic strength as a threat to the US.

At this stage of the argument, an important insider, Thomas J. Christensen who served as the US Deputy Assistant Secretary for East Asia and Pacific Affairs brings the whole issue to one pivotal question: How should the United States negotiate or confront challenges posed by China’s social, political, economic and military power?

The above essential question further seeks answers to the three pertinent questions which are:

i. Is China a real threat to the US?

ii. Does the US want to dictate to China under threat?

iii. What is the possibility of World War III and Cyber War I of 21stCentury?

If the past history of three centuries is scanned, the straightforward answer to the first question is in the negative because China has never been an expansionist nation. In the contemporary world, after the return of Hong Kong, China has preferred to be recognized as one country with two opposing systems to run and govern the state affairs. Hong Kong, it is expected, will never be allowed to come into the main stream of political culture unless the people do not express willingness out of informed choice.

In view of American dream of world order which they have been aspiring for since the days of Franklin Benjamin, the answer to the second question is “YES” with capital letters. In order to turn this dream into reality, the US has to act upon not only on expanding its sphere of influence in 14 neighbouring countries where Chinese borders meet but also on a policy of weakening China. To weaken China, currency war, which is akin to guerrilla warfare because of common elements of surprise, harassment and sabotage, is in the offing. Since August 11, 2015 when China announced its abrupt currency devaluation, whether Chinese have taken decision to attract sale of their over production or the economy is facing some systemic problem such as slow economic activity, it has caused a lot of surprise and panic in other countries. There has been flight of capital from many Asian countries. Worried investors on account of heavy taxes switched over to Chinese market ran at once back into Indian markets causing trouble for China but bringing benefits for India. The uncertainty about Chinese economic stability has aggravated as the US and European companies which earn revenues in China are bickering over the effects of Yuan devaluation. Like epidemic, the effects of stock market crisis are contagious, infecting Asia, Europe and the US. In Pakistan, Karachi Stock Exchange has suffered in loss of Rs.280 billion approximately, in three days.

A new development in Sino-American relationship might take place in a few days. In his next month US visit, it is thought, Xi Jinping will perhaps be slightly as a result of recent Yuan devaluation and slowing economic growth on one hand, while, on the other hand, rapid rising of debt levels.

But there is an inherent problem in the policy of squeezing Beijing as it will be counterproductive. The companies which are earning revenues from Chinese market would not allow this policy to flourish because it would be against their interest, and thus, indirectly damage the US interests.

Moreover, the impression that China has emerged as a bigger competitor came to surface when China has almost already won the trade war. To undo Chinese economic supremacy at this stage will need decades, and then one is not sure what would be the outcome by then.

War cry against China is an irrational, self-damaging response because it would not be a result-oriented effort. And yet, severe tension is building up in South East China Sea. Various claims about ownership of South East China Sea and islands have been established and so violations have occurred on one pretext or the other. But recently just in two weeks time, tension is building upon South East China with greater provocations. John Kerry has refused to accept Chinese restrictions in Spratly Islands where Chinese engineers are developing islands from sheer barren ridges and reefs.

The earlier referred group of sceptics are, therefore, of the view that Sino-American war is inevitable. Their speculation is based on a weak ground. Today China is a strong nuclear power. Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SC) with Russia in the background is a reality which will not allow such a drastic step to happen as that of Cyber War.

Samuel Huntington’s words that the US was “becoming the rogue superpower” - which Noam Chomsky in his latest article quoted in support of his evaluative judgement that “America is the greatest threat to world peace” - confirm the expectation that conflict can be avoided if there is will for reconciliation. There is hope if each superpower starts complimenting the others’ achievement and secret of success.

How clear is Xi Jinping’s message “My concern is mainly reform and related issues?”