Peter Morici would fight a war that isn't there

How do you fight a war that isn't there? You start one; that's how you do it. But why would you start a war? Because we made a mess of our politics and our economics and fell behind China, says Peter Morici.

He goes on to say: and those Chinese did nothing to screw-up their own politics and economics so as to remain behind us ... we, who are the most lethargic zombies on the Planet, he adds.

You think I'm picking on Peter Morici unfairly? Believe me I'm not. In fact, you can see for yourself. His latest creation is an article that came under the title: “How U.S. can win the Cold War with China,” published on July 11, 2020 in The Washington Times.

Here is what Morici admits to at the start of his piece: (1) America won the Cold war against the Soviet Union. (2) China will be a much harder opponent to fight. (3) Henry Kissinger says there is no Cold War but we're in the foothills of one. (4) Richard Haass says there is no Cold War but Donald Trump might precipitate one that will distract from other serious threats.

Despite all of this, Morici wants to start a new war without explaining to what end. It is that normally, generals who want to refight the last war, do so because they lost it and wish to pull a moral victory from the jaws of defeat. On the other hand, those who refight the war they already won, do nothing better than pull a defeat from the jaws of victory. Is this what Peter Morici––who never was a general––wants for America?

Near the end of his article, Morici makes the following recommendation: “Fund a bigger Navy with a base in the South Pacific. Eleven nuclear carriers are not enough.” This means he thinks that a shooting war is a possibility, or that it is wise to prepare for one, just in case things get out of hand and turn kinetic unexpectedly. This being the case, we need to determine what he sees that led him to this conclusion.

Going through the article, we find out how much hostility, Peter Morici has built up toward China. He distrusts the Chinese, fears them, and believes they are planning to replace America as planetary hegemon, maybe even destroy America in the process. What follows are the bad things he said about China:

“Successive Chinese leaders have pursued aggressive mercantilism that has weakened the US and European economies. China believes its rule and economy are superior and should displace democracy and capitalism as the prevailing model. It is out to impose its values in a China-centric system of refurbished international institutions. It is building naval power, imposing tributary relationships on smaller states through aid and trade, and subverting the WTO, WHO and other international institutions. It promises more subsidies for Chinese technology companies”.

Except for the mention that China is building naval power, there is nothing in Morici's article to indicate that China has the intention to do more than compete with the US and Europe, outside the realms of science, technology and economics. This being the ideal relationship among nations that was sought by the delegates of the world assembled at the UN in the aftermath of the Second World War, criticizing China now, exposes the extent to which Peter Morici suffers paranoia. He should be told that when you come down to it, there is nothing to fear about China as long as you don’t provoke it.

If now, we ask what it is that's fueling Peter Morici's paranoia, we are surprised to find that he unconsciously fears the decline of America at the hands of Americans more than he fears the rise of China at the hands of the Chinese. Here is what he said that so indicates:

“Trump's behavior undermines NATO, WTO and WHO and alienates our allies. Decades of US policy toward China failed. America has let important national technological assets decay. US efforts at catchup in 5G may come down to bankrolling an inferior European competitor –– Nokia or Ericsson. For decades, federal support for R&D has been declining. America is a deeply divided nation. Its mayors happily tolerate anarchy and rioting in the streets to answer brutality by police already subjected to their progressive reforms. Leftists offer few constructive ideas through demands for social justice. The federal government, states and big cities prioritize health care, social services, education and affirmative action programs that have failed to move the needle for Black communities”.

It boggles the mind that someone looking at this level of deficiency in America and sufficiency in China in several fields, can still believe that adding more ships to the fleet, and engineering a fake sort of economic growth, will put America on the path to winning a Cold War that China will not start but, if forced upon it, is well equipped and prepared to finish.

It looks at this point that the best advice someone can give America, is tell it to think up a new definition for the word “winning”.

The reality is that the world has changed, the fortunes have reversed, and yesterday's winners can easily become tomorrow's losers if they keep listening to the voices of grown men whose mental capacity never developed past the age of adolescence.