|
< Previous Post | Next Post >
Europeans View China as Biggest Threat to Global SecurityPosted by Joerg Wolf in Transatlantic Relations on Wednesday, April 16. 2008
In April 2006, the Atlantic Review posted Poll: 45% of Germans consider U.S. more dangerous than Iran.
Perceptions have changed. Spiegel International reports: China has now overtaken the United States as the greatest perceived threat to global stability in the eyes of Europeans, according to the opinion poll commissioned by the Financial Times. The poll, carried out by the Harris agency between March 27 and April 8 and published on Tuesday, found that 35 percent of respondents in the five largest EU states see China as a bigger threat to world stability than any other state. Moreover, the United States is also doing better in popularity contests: Atlantic Community noted: "For the first time since 2005, the number of people abroad that view the US as a positive force has increased slightly, to 35 percent." Related posts in the Atlantic Review: • Europe is a Threat to the United States • Transatlantic Foreign Policy Attitudes and Threat Perceptions
Share on Facebook
Welcome! You are reading the ATLANTIC REVIEW -- a Press Digest on Transatlantic Relations edited by three German Fulbright Alumni. The horizontal menu bar at the top helps to navigate this site. Subscribe to one of our RSS-Feeds or to our newsletter, which is emailed twice per month.Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Don S
- #1 - 2008-04-16 22:29 - (Reply)
A threat? Not yet. And not to peaceful old Europe in any case.
a_guy_中国
- #1.1 - 2008-04-17 04:37 - (Reply)
When European economy is in recession, They instinctively resort to protectionism and exclusivism. It is easier to blame others than to self criticize.
Zyme
- #2 - 2008-04-16 22:39 - (Reply)
No Don I would say there are objective reasons for that assumption. Until very recently, the US have had the monopoly on bad news here, but this honor is now shared with China.
Reid of America
- #2.1 - 2008-04-16 23:56 - (Reply)
Tibet may be a moral issue but it isn't a international security issue. Chinese colonialism is no different than that practiced by the US, Russia, UK, France, Canada, Mexico, most mid-size nations of the world, etc.
a_guy
- #2.1.1 - 2008-04-17 06:28 - (Reply)
There is minor difference between Tibet and UK 's colonial states. Tibet is under China 's control for more than 700 years. It never was recognized as an independent country in the world. PRC China take the place of Republic of China as China's sole and leagal government. That was supported by UN resolution .
A_guy
- #2.2 - 2008-04-17 05:10 - (Reply)
"Tibet independence" is something President Trueman and CIA's fabricated. They want to use Tibet as an religious bulwark to counter communists .
Zyme
- #2.2.1 - 2008-04-17 07:28 - (Reply)
I was not referring to the justifcation of Tibet´s seek of independence. The only thing I wanted to point out was that the news from there contributed to Europeans considering China as a threat. I also know that the bigger European capitals mostly use Tibet as a tool to produce instability in China - but hey, this is the usual power game at the world stage. Potential opponents in the future are best weakened before becoming dangerous.
a_guy
- #2.2.1.1 - 2008-04-17 09:51 - (Reply)
I have no objection to your above post .
Reid of America
- #2.2.1.1.1 - 2008-04-17 22:10 - (Reply)
My problem with China is the communist dictatorship. All Chinese suffer under communist rule not just the Tibetans. I welcome the rise of China but at the same time demand democratic freedom for all 1.4 billion not just Tibetans.
Suddenly
- #2.2.1.1.1.1 - 2008-04-18 07:56 - (Reply)
Although I think China should promote democracy step by step, I still think your points stand reasons there. China definitely should accelerate its reform in politics and Give more liberty and freedom to native Chinese people.
Merkel
- #2.2.1.2 - 2008-04-18 04:55 - (Reply)
TWO_GUY
- #2.2.1.3 - 2008-04-18 04:57 - (Reply)
Zyme - #2.2.1 - 2008-04-17 07:28 - (Reply)
Simon_Pendy
- #2.2.1.4 - 2008-04-23 04:07 - (Reply)
ravin
- #2.2.1.5 - 2008-04-23 10:11 - (Reply)
Henrry Sworthy
- #2.2.1.5.1 - 2008-04-24 05:53 - (Reply)
Marry Anderson
- #2.2.1.6 - 2008-04-25 05:13 - (Reply)
suddenly_2
- #2.3 - 2008-04-18 08:15 - (Reply)
Zyme
- #2.3.1 - 2008-04-18 14:29 - (Reply)
"If Merkel Government's position to unite the whole EU to confront China is ok, China's position to strive for supports from other european states is understandable. In German, France , UK almost every powerful EU states there exist such thing in deomestic affairs. Within a country different parties
Don S
- #3 - 2008-04-16 22:45 - (Reply)
So vote them off a couple UN committes and send Bush a stiff note demanding the US cool relations with it's fellow malefactor/totalitarian state.
franchie
- #3.1 - 2008-04-16 23:12 - (Reply)
Don
Don S
- #3.1.1 - 2008-04-17 00:14 - (Reply)
"but they already started their war on the net and show off an agressive nationalism "
Don S
- #3.1.1.1 - 2008-04-17 00:29 - (Reply)
I failed to mention the US among distinguished practicioners of the trade of forcible integration, my apologies.
Kevin Sampson
- #3.1.1.1.1 - 2008-04-17 05:16 - (Reply)
'But the US largely limited their land-grabs to the Mexican-American War & Florida - arguably the latter was justified by the Spanish planning to allow the British the use of Florida as a landing base from which to land to take New Orleans - something of a violation of strict neutrality.'
franchie
- #3.1.1.2 - 2008-04-17 01:16 - (Reply)
thanks for the chinese history sum-up
Don S
- #3.1.1.2.1 - 2008-04-17 11:04 - (Reply)
Actually I did read the Speigel story, and just now re-read the story. There was no analysis of why this shift occured. The Tibetan crackdown was mentioned, China's official figure of 470 executions (and suspicions that there are many, many more) were mentioned.
franchie
- #3.1.1.2.1.1 - 2008-04-17 12:02 - (Reply)
that's wasn't I was saying, till now we didn't see much of the chinese population opinion in the medias, this is changing, and it is orchestrated by Benjin power ; so far they filtrated the net, convenientely they reopened it for their new agenda : this is not officially the communist government that expresses its angerness but the chinese population, that's the goal !
not_Merkel_but_a_chinese_guy
- #3.1.1.2.1.1.1 - 2008-04-18 06:06 - (Reply)
franchie - #3.1.1.2.1.1 - 2008-04-17 12:02 - (Reply)
A_guy
- #3.1.1.2.1.1.1.1 - 2008-04-22 05:18 - (Reply)
Pat Patterson
- #3.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1 - 2008-04-22 05:54 - (Reply)
No, NED is an abbreviation, rarely used except as its internet address, for the National Endowment for Democracy. Which is an group set up by both political parties and the AFl-CIO under Lane Kirkland and the AFT to spread basic knowledge of democracy and democratice practices,for example the secret ballot, canvassing, setting up polling sites and most importantly transaparent results and accurate results, anywhere in the world. They do receive funding, and have done so under both Democratic and Republican leadership. But the board that determines these grants is independent and does not report to any legislative or executive body in the federal government.
Pat Patterson
- #3.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1 - 2008-04-22 05:58 - (Reply)
Link to the National Endowment for Democracy;
A_guy
- #3.2 - 2008-04-17 05:44 - (Reply)
[So vote them off a couple UN committes and send Bush a stiff note demanding the US cool relations with it's fellow malefactor/totalitarian state.]
Don S
- #3.2.1 - 2008-04-17 17:53 - (Reply)
Can we assume that you are against Germany getting a third European seat on the UNSC, then? ;)
A_guy
- #3.2.1.1 - 2008-04-18 03:39 - (Reply)
As long as Japan is excluded from UNSC, I don't mind German being a UNSC permanent member. Actually China once ardently welcome German as the bulwark of Europe to balance US hegemony. There is no problem when in Shroder government.
Don S
- #3.2.1.1.1 - 2008-04-18 11:18 - (Reply)
"When you Mr Don suggest vote China off the UNSC. What response you expect from me about German's UNSC membership."
Joserph_Goebbel
- #3.2.1.2 - 2008-04-23 04:51 - (Reply)
franchie
- #3.2.2 - 2008-04-18 11:44 - (Reply)
a guy,
Pat Patterson
- #4 - 2008-04-16 23:19 - (Reply)
Sorry, but the results of these polls leave me with the feeling of watching a playground full of children running from one exciting event to the next. And I hope that the nations of Europe handle this shiny new toy better than the last one that kept them fascinated for weeks.
Badboy Recovered
- #4.1 - 2008-04-17 02:17 - (Reply)
LOL!
Don S
- #4.2 - 2008-04-17 16:37 - (Reply)
Sometimes it reminds me less of a 'shiny new toy' and more of the child pulling the wings off a dragonfly.
A_GUY
- #5.1 - 2008-04-17 03:51 - (Reply)
Joerg - Atlantic Review
- #5.1.1 - 2008-04-17 10:08 - (Reply)
It's ridiculous to turn sentences into links that go to nowhere.
Two_guy
- #5.1.1.1 - 2008-04-18 05:20 - (Reply)
@Joerg
Pat Patterson
- #5.1.1.1.1 - 2008-04-18 06:55 - (Reply)
Joerg, and the editors, runs a private website and can exclude or include anyone from the comments page, which luckily he does not, for a variety of reasons. Even including not liking the color of someone's hair or where there posting is from or even someone who continually goes off topic. Even this comment could be deleted as it is clearly off topic.
Noory
- #6 - 2008-04-17 03:08 - (Reply)
Are you sure this doesn't have something to do with wanting the convince oneself that Iran isn't a threat? It comes right after the wistling heard from past the graveyard.
joe
- #7 - 2008-04-17 19:45 - (Reply)
Gee.....I am amazed that the euros see ANY threats other than of course the US.
Zyme
- #7.1 - 2008-04-17 20:35 - (Reply)
At least you manage not to amaze us with a surprising point of view.
3rd_men
- #7.1.1.1 - 2008-04-18 06:17 - (Reply)
CNN'S curse ignite "nationalist fever", If you put in Chinese shoes , you get to know why chinese netizens are so angry.
JOHN VAUSE
- #7.2 - 2008-04-24 03:54 - (Reply)
Joe Noory
- #7.2.1 - 2008-04-24 16:09 - (Reply)
There is no embracing one belief or another, etc. There are only two things of importance.
Michel Chossudovsky
- #7.3 - 2008-04-24 06:28 - (Reply)
@Joe noory
Joe Noory
- #7.3.1 - 2008-04-24 15:51 - (Reply)
With time, you'll learn that no media can be taken at face value or implicitly trusted, and that free speech, (for good or the ill that you see it), is the only way to permnit any real information to show itself.
Marry Anderson
- #7.3.1.1 - 2008-04-25 03:46 - (Reply)
3rd_one
- #8 - 2008-04-18 06:09 - (Reply)
@ franchie
Reid of America
- #9 - 2008-04-18 22:24 - (Reply)
The Olympic boycott movement is misguided and hypocritical. Has anyone not learned the lessons of the Soviet era boycotts?
Pat Patterson
- #9.1 - 2008-04-19 04:17 - (Reply)
Considering all of the negative publicity the Moscow Games of 1980 accrued and then the Soviet blocs subsequent tepid reponse to a call for a boycott in 1984. I would say that the Soviets suffered a large setback. The Soviet Union and then Yugoslavia seem to serve as examples that even minor disruptions of the event have lasting consequences for the sponsoring governments. Image for sure but primarily economic.
a_chinese_guy
- #9.1.1 - 2008-04-22 04:13 - (Reply)
raven
- #9.2 - 2008-04-23 10:05 - (Reply)
Chinese_guy
- #10 - 2008-04-22 03:29 - (Reply)
@Patterson and Patrick Henry,
a_guy_chinese
- #10.1 - 2008-04-22 04:37 - (Reply)
Cafferty didn't make a clear distinction between the Chinese government and the Chinese people, he was talking about “China” the whole time, so I wouldn’t blame the Chinese for thinking that Cafferty was referring to the Chinese as “goons and thugs”. CNN claim that it always invite some arguing guys as commentators to incur debates. I really don't think racist remarks will do any good to CNN. Without credibility , CNN can go nowhere.
GUY_chinese
- #10.1.1 - 2008-04-22 04:48 - (Reply)
The more I hear about those rhetorics about American “freedom of speech”, the more I feel the hypocrisy deeply imprinted in the American culture. It is so arrogant and ignorant to belittle foreign leaders and governments while your president is responsible for the death of millions of innocent Iraqi people.
James Ouyang
- #10.1.1.1 - 2008-04-22 05:01 - (Reply)
Pat Patterson
- #10.1.2 - 2008-04-22 05:27 - (Reply)
Or we can simply have a test. I'll call President Bush and say PM Harper idiots or even murderous idiots if I thought that way. I don't fear anybody knocking on my door and then sending my survivors a bill for the bullet used in my execution. I'll also say that Mao Zedong and Hu Jintao are idiots and the former being a despicable murderer of anywhere from 40-75 million Chinese between 1949-1975 via Stephan Courtois' Le Livre Noir du Communism. Let's see you do the same! That is a fair indication of which country has free speech and a free press.
a_Guy
- #10.1.2.1 - 2008-04-22 07:46 - (Reply)
[/i](Paterson)
crazy_guy
- #10.1.2.2 - 2008-04-22 08:01 - (Reply)
|



