Why China Tiptoed onto the Far Side of the Moon
January 9, 2019
Xi Jinping's state media was strangely quiet about its historic lunar
landing, writes Patrick Lawrence in this look at the U.S. effort to maintain
primacy over advanced technologies.
By Patrick Lawrence
Special to Consortium News
When China landed a space probe on the far side of the moon last week, it
was a first for humanity. The Chang'e 4 spacecraft touched down on Thursday
and then sent a rover to explore and photograph lunar terrain we Earthlings
had never before seen. This feat is up there with the U.S. moon landing in
1969. But while the scientists who designed the Chang'e 4 probe were
properly proud, China's state-controlled media buried the story beneath the
day's more mundane news. As one space analyst put it, the silence was
deafening.
The New York Times reported: "Compared with previous missions, however, the
reaction to Thursday's milestones seemed strikingly restrained, both in the
country's state-run news outlets and on social media. On China's
most-watched TV news program early Thursday evening, the landing - declared
a success by officials at mission control - was not even one of the four top
stories." (CGTN, China's state-owned English language TV broadcast geared
towards the West, however, ran more than 15 stories about the moon landing
between Wednesday, Jan. 2 and Friday, Jan. 4.)
Why would this be? Why would Xi Jinping's hyper-ambitious China go
relatively quiet after demonstrating that its swiftly developing
technological capabilities are making the nation the global leader its
president thinks it is destined to be?
Colored topo image of the far side of the moon from a 2010 image provided by
NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter
NASA's lunar far side topo map from 2010, highest elevations above 20,000
feet in red and the lowest areas down below -20,000 feet in blue.
(NASA/Goddard)
Mike Pompeo suggested an answer the same day the Chang'e 4 touched down on
lunar soil. President Donald Trump's secretary of state chose last Thursday
to warn the Iranians to drop their plans to launch three satellites into
space over the next several months. Pompeo dismissed these projects as
nothing more than a cover to test intercontinental ballistic missiles
capable of bearing warheads.
These events are not unrelated.
Yes, the Trump administration has started a trade war with China. But
Washington's quarrels with Beijing are about far more than trade. The U.S.
proposes to sanction Iran to kingdom come so as to limit its leverage as an
emerging power in the Middle East. But the U.S. administration's dangerously
aggressive policies toward Tehran are about more than the Islamic Republic's
regional influence.
Larger Theme
There is a larger theme here that is not to be missed: Maintaining America's
lead in advanced technologies is now essential to preserving U.S. primacy.
And China and Iran are among those middle-income nations whose scientific
and technological advances will at some point challenge this lead.
In effect, Washington appears intent on imposing a development ceiling on
any nation that resists its global hegemony. And of all the unpromising
foreign policies the U.S. now pursues, this has to count among the least
thought-out. Attempting to limit any nation's aspirations to climb the
development ladder is a straight-out loser. No one who understands world
history since the decolonization era began in the 1950s can possibly
conclude otherwise.
Tensions between the U.S. and China have increased steadily since Beijing
announced its Made in China 2025 Initiative several years ago, and it is
hard to imagine this is mere coincidence. As one of Xi's core strategies,
Made in China 2025 designates 10 high-technology industries-robotics,
pharmaceuticals, cutting-edge telecom networks, advanced machine tools, and
the like-in which China proposes to make itself a global leader. All 10 of
these industries are currently dominated by the U.S. and other Western
nations.
Since Xi's program began, Washington has made persistent efforts to limit
its progress. Last year the State Department began a program intended to
restrict the number of Chinese students permitted to study at U.S.
universities.
In two much-noted cases, the Commerce Department has gone after leading
Chinese high-tech companies, ZTE and, most recently, Huawei, charging both
with violations of U.S. restrictions on exports to Iran and North Korea.
Legislation now prohibits the federal government from purchasing products
from either company.
Justice Department on a Tear
The Justice Department is also on a tear. In quick succession last autumn it
indicted four Chinese companies-one of them state-controlled-on charges they
stole trade secrets from U.S. manufacturers in a variety of industries.
"Chinese economic espionage on the U.S. has been increasing, and it has been
increasing rapidly," Jeff Sessions, then serving as attorney general,
asserted. "Enough is enough. We're not going to take it anymore." None of
the four cases has yet been adjudicated.
It is not difficult to detect a 21st Century version of the old "yellow
peril" in all this. Last year the Council on Foreign Relations referred to
Made in China 2025 as "a real existential threat to U.S. technological
leadership." In the long run this may prove to be so. The Chinese strategy
has a lot in common with Japan's designation of "strategic
industries"-autos, shipbuilding, and electronics among them-in the postwar
decades, and we know how those battles turned out.
High speed electric train arrives at a Shanghai rail station. (Wikimedia)
The U.S. has no more chance of restraining China's development now than it
did Japan's in the 1970s and 1980s. The proper response to China's emergence
as a technological competitor is to seek opportunities in the advances of
another nation. The alternative is to fight a technology war there is little
chance of winning.
We now await concrete results of the trade truce Trump and Xi announced
after they met at the Group of 20 session in Buenos Aires last November.
Before talks began this week, there were already indications that Beijing
may dilute its Made in China 2025 Initiative by allowing foreign companies
to participate.
Chinese Modesty Aside
In this context, Beijing's modesty after last week's moon landing appears to
be another effort to make as little as possible of China's technological
challenge to U.S. competitors. But it would be a mistake to interpret such
developments as signs that China is willing to abandon its aspirations.
There is zero chance that this is so.
The Iran case is a flimsy variant of the full-court press Washington has
mounted against China. Pompeo, who formed an "Iran Action Group" after the
Trump administration withdrew from the 2015 nuclear accord last year, is
skating on very thin ice in charging Tehran with pretending satellite
launches are anything more than covers for a ballistic missile tests. Three
are reasons:
No. 1: Iran has been sending satellites into space since 2005. There is
nothing singular about those it now plans.
No. 2: Even if the Iranians were testing ballistic missiles-and there is no
self-evident reason to assume this is so-it would not be in violation of the
U.N. Security Council resolution governing such tests. Tehran has been as
scrupulous in observing Resolution 2231, unanimously approved five days
after the nuclear accord was made final, as it has been with the agreement
itself.
Finally, there is the matter of deterrence. Given that Washington now
acknowledges-at last-that Israel possesses a nuclear arsenal, Iran has an
open-and-shut case for maintaining adequate defenses in the event of a
hostile neighbor's attack. Remember what all the old Cold Warriors used to
tell us: Deterrence was the very key to averting a Soviet attack on the U.S.
Is this reasoning no longer valid when it applies to a nation on
Washington's enemies list?
China, Iran, and let us not forget Russia: None of these three nations wants
a war with the U.S., all three resolutely oppose Washington's quest for
global hegemony and they are all climbing quickly up the technological
development ladder. America's challenge is to learn to live with these three
realities. No nation has ever succeeded in stopping history's wheel from
turning.
Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the
International Herald Tribune, is a columnist, essayist, author, and
lecturer. His most recent book is Time No Longer: Americans After the
American Century