​   
The successful return of China's Chang'e-5 mission to orbit the moon to drill into the lunar soil is commendable. This has promoted great progress in the field of space science and created many new ‘firsts’ in history. First of all, it is a breakthrough that China can send a payload of 8.2 tons to the lunar orbit by rocket propulsion. Second, it is also the first time that the lunar module can land on the moon at a certain location based on the new map of the moon. Third, completing the excavation and sampling within 24 hours is the biggest goal of this lunar exploration. Fourth, the lunar soil is transferred from the moon module to the moon ship by automatically linking them in the orbit of the moon. No one is operating in the spacecraft, which proves that the automation design technology of this mission is mature. Fifth, the unmanned driving back to the scheduled landing site in Inner Mongolia is flawless. The sixth is to use the technology of long-range missiles to dap across outside the atmosphere of the earth and to select an accurate coordinate for the moon ship to penetrate through the atmosphere returning to earth safely. The seventh is to send real-time images (video) of part of the mission back to Earth so that we can see it. Eighth, the complete success of the mission shows that China is extremely competent in hardware and software technologies for space exploration, especially in the manufacturing and application of computers and semiconductor chips needed in the design of the intelligent control systems.
 
Having said that, some people may ask why are the Chinese telecommunication and electronics companies are being ‘choked by the neck’ by the U.S. sanction? Actually, this is a business strategy issue rather than a military or space technology problem. Of course, military weaponry or space exploration must have high technology, but they are dependent on technology in terms of ‘quality’ and ‘reliability’ far more than ‘quantity yield’ and ‘low cost’ as commercial products demanding them. Military weapons development and space exploration are expensive in terms of research and development (R&D), but relatively little demand for mass manufacturing. The unit price is not very important in military components as long as the products can pass multiple environmental tests, such as high and low pressure, high and low temperature and other operational specifications. The task reliability can always be guaranteed by choosing tested parts from one out of a hundred even one out of a ten thousand units. Commercial technology products, for example, smart phones, require hundreds of millions of low-cost parts which have to pass a slightly looser use environment test. But the difficulty is that commercial products can’t afford the picking one out of a hundred approaches. The cost of the parts will be too high, and the mobile phone cannot have competitive prices or the so-called ‘cabbage prices’.
 
Under a global free trade environment, everyone divides labor and parts, cooperates in manufacturing and assembly, and buys and sells to each other. The U.S. has always been the leader in semiconductor chips and chip design. China is a big buyer and the US is a big seller. This gives the US a chance to choke China’s neck if a trade relation becomes sour. That is precisely what has happened. If China wants to produce all the chips on her own, she must invest tons of money in ultra clean chip manufacturing plants. This creates a competition in capital, skilled workers, technology and time. As for the so-called critical (Guanjian) technology, like the three-nanometer lithography machine is currently only manufactured by ASML in the Netherlands, and China must find short cuts to overtake it by R&D innovation since it is on the sanction list. Fortunately, this nanometer technology has reached near the end of physical limit, thus it is possible to catch up in time. Furthermore, the biggest advantage of the nano-technology is to help the problem of ‘quantity’, that is, the nanometer technology can make several times the number of devices on the same chip and more chips per wafer reducing the cost of the chip and the size of the circuit. New smart phones have more and more functions which need more circuits and memory cells. The three nanometer technology will help the smart phone because the compaction of components in a thin flat phone. Therefore, the United States can ‘pinch the neck’ of Huawei's smart phone business by sanctioning the export of semiconductor chips and manufacturing technologies. Huawei needs small chips and a large number of low-priced components. But then again, American manufacturers may not find other buyers if they don’t sell to China since China is the world's largest market. If the Chinese people don't buy cell phones with American chips except domestic products, then in a few years, American companies will collapse, and China's mass production technology and nanometer technology will catch up.
 
Speaking of lunar exploration, the 1.731 kilograms of lunar soil brought back by Chang'e 5 this time is very meaningful and valuable. There are many news reports in the media reporting that China will give some lunar soil to friendly countries, all thinking from political angles. The author has also seen a lot of discussions about Lunar Soil on the Internet. Some people suggest that Mainland China should give a little to Taiwan, and see what the Tsai government will do. If the Tsai Administration refuses to accept, it will make the world laugh. The author believes that the significance of exploring the moon should by no means be limited to political consideration. Space science is closely related to the future of mankind. This is why the lunar soil is valuable and the lunar space science is important in the future. Space knowledge and technology may dominate the future development of the Earth, and the moon is a ‘leaping board’ to space. The value of lunar soil and lunar research can be easily imagined: this is also why every major country in the world is launching a new lunar exploration plan. The author also believes that China should set aside a portion of the lunar soil for research by the civilian scientific institutions. Applications from non-governmental academic circles in all China, including Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan should be encouraged to apply for lunar soil for research, abiding by the same rules for review and approval. Do not waste lunar soil as political presents, especially not to the unfriendly Taiwan government. China central government can give invitation to the Academia Sinica of the Taiwan government to participate in the international seminar on lunar soil and lunar exploration, which should be a non-political but global continuous affair. China should also invite the institutions and states in the U.S. as well as EU, Russia, Japan, South Korea and India to participate in such global collaborative space research conferences. In reciprocity, if any lunar soil should be offered to any friendly and/or helpful countries, the main purpose should be for space scientific research with suggested research topics and expectation for some meaningful findings. On the issue of moon exploration and space research, China should try to play a leader’s role despite of her previous exclusion by the international space effort. China should follow the principle that space science should have no country borders and let natural leadership guide the direction of human space science. China may consider setting up a ‘Chang’e Prize’ (say of 30 million RMB little higher than the Nobel Prize) to encourage international scientists to conduct space research and let space science serve the well-being and peace of mankind. China and any other country willing should strive to contribute to space science research collaboratively.




​

 
It is clear from the above analyses, China is far more interested in her economic relations with foreign countries than in military alliance. The U.S. is clearly doing just the opposite. The above data and analyses also discredit the ‘China Threat’ proponents’ argument based on the point of view on U.S. national security. The concept of maintaining military superiority for dominating inter-national or world affairs never worked and is obsolete. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the mighty U.S. military power not only did not succeed in settling thorny international or regional conflicts (such as in the Middle East), it only stimulated more arms race which had put a huge burden on the U.S. in military spending. With nuclear power already proliferated, any military conflict between two nuclear power may have a chance to ignite a nuclear war capable of destroying mankind. So obviously one must abandon the strategy of using military power to settle international issues; any military exercise involving nuclear bombers and  continental missiles launchers can create vulnerable risks.
 
IV. Education and Social Systems
 
As discussed in the demographic analysis, the 4:1 population ratio between China and the U.S. is probably the only significant variable in the comparison of their competitiveness. The most significant consequence of human resources or human power in peace time is productivity. We are not going to assess the human power in war time since we have already concluded that war is not a desirable option for resolving any international problem including the economic competition between the U.S. and China. Currently, the U.S. labor productivity is 12 times of China’s. However, China’s labor productivity has maintained a positive growth, except year 1990, as high as 13% per annum but generally and consistently above 6% for the past two decades, whereas the U.S. labor productivity suffered several times due to recessions (twice in the 1980’s and four times since 2007 to 2019 having negative growth rate) and rarely exceeding 3-4% per annum, more likely below 2%. So China’s higher (3-4 times of the U.S.) growth rate of productivity and 4X labor force (population) essentially mean that the total economic output of the U.S. and China is going to be comparable soon. Whether or not China can maintain her growth rate to eventually surpass the U.S. labor productivity depends very much on her education and social systems in comparison with that of the U.S.
 
Education system is critical in producing skilled productive work force and social system is important in managing migration and immigration of labor force geographically to match the needs of industry development and transformation. The U.S. education system has been recognized world-wide as being capable of producing high quality education from K-12 and even more so in higher education. However, this high quality of education, attractive to foreign students, does come with a high price tag. The American education system is far more expensive than elsewhere. ($20,000 - $60,000 per student year.) China, to a large extent, has been emulating some of the America education programs, particularly in higher education, but managing it with a lot less cost. So the real competition in national productivity is essentially in education reform - which country can turn out more right skilled and timely needed productive work force at a reasonable cost and in establishing appropriate social programs, including healthcare, immigration and retirement system, that can attract migrant and immigrant (from foreign talents) workers to join and sustain a competitive work force. The U.S. has been successful in attracting foreign talents but she will have to face competition with China.
 
V. Innovation and System Reform
 
Both the U.S. and China recognize that the real competitiveness of a nation lies in her ability in advancing technologies and producing innovation in all aspects of a country, especially important in her government system, industrial transformation and the above discussed education and social systems. Military system cannot be eliminated entirely, but it is no longer a strategic investment guaranteeing a ‘healthy return'. (Thucydides Trap theory might not hold for the two strongest competing nations simply because they would realize that neither side could survive a devastating war!) In terms of innovation, the U.S. has a fine track record in pioneering innovative systems such as social security system, immigration policies (green card, H visa, etc), local tax-payer funded public education system augmented with competitive private education institutions. However, the world has changed with rapidly advanced technologies, the human society has transformed into many new social norms challenging the existing systems. The present systems may or may not be a competitive one for the future. In fact, the late comers may have the advantage of taking on innovation without the old baggage or can adopt an old system with new technology support. (For example, some legacy issues existing in the current education, healthcare, retirement and the government system.) It is obvious that a nation must be first focusing on national issues, improving her current systems, and solving domestic problems before developing and realizing competitive strength for the nation.
 
Summarizing the above analyses, we can conclude that the competitive strength of a nation depends on how well the nation can solve her national and domestic problems (such as infrastructure), build effective systems (such as healthcare and education), then develop her citizens to take on productive career (such as job training for industry innovations thus raising competitive capability. The current COVID-19 pandemic disease provided a lesson for nation building. Such a valuable experience will support our conclusion. The pandemic is a stress test on every nation’s healthcare system, education system, commerce system and government system. It is clear that from the pain each country has suffered we can see that no one has a perfect system to respond to the COVID-19 attack. The sensible thing to do is to engage with each other and to cooperate fully in dealing with the problem.
 
The challenge brought by the pandemic can be compared with the challenge we face our global economy. We all have a common goal of maintaining a prosperous global economy. It only makes sense for us, of course, especially the two largest economies, the U.S. and China, to engage each other collaboratively to maintain a healthy world economy. Only under a healthy global economy, the U.S. and China can each have its healthy economy. Trade war makes no sense just like blaming each other for the pandemic to each other makes no sense. Therefore, we urge the U.S. and China to adopt an ‘engagement’ foreign policy, starting from dealing with COVID-19 and vaccine development to resolving trade imbalance instead of uttering rhetoric and rattling sabers.
 


​

 
Abstract

This paper reviews the US-China relations and points out that the real motivation factor for Chin's rapid rise comes from the harsh and untrue criticism on the CCP regime. These negative forces enhance the Chinese people's positive motivations coming from their culture, Confucius philosophy and family tradition, and motivates them to develop China faster out of fear and insecurity. China is succeeding.

 
The Real Motivation Factor for China’s Rapid Rise
 
Sure, China was motivated to build her nation up, who wouldn’t after years of humiliation by foreign powers? However, nation building is not an easy task, it depends on a number of matching factors in terms of timing, resources and peaceful period. The ending of WW II gave China the opportunity but she was deprived the resources and most damagingly she was not given a peaceful time to rebuild. The Korean War cost her million lives including Mao Ze Dong’s own son and a few years of precious time to rebuild. In contrast, Taiwan, separated from reunion with China, along with Japan were benefited from being an ally with the U.S. in supplying goods to the U.S. troops in Korean War. Twenty years of Vietnam War (11/1/1955-4/30/1975), although it was between the U.S. and North Vietnam, it had similar effect of the Korean War on China. It was not until the U.S. changed her strategy in confronting the Soviet Union, China really got a peaceful period of time for nation building. In 1979, the U.S. recognized China and began a new Cold War with the Soviet Union. China seized the opportunity to develop herself. She quickly settled a border issue with Vietnam by strategically staged a brief war （2/17/1979-3/16/1979）with the consent of the U.S. to check Vietnam’s ambition and war Monger attitude causing border issue not only with China but also with Laos and Cambodia. Since then China had no wars with anyone thus giving her a decade of peace time (1979-1989) for nation building.
 
In the new Cold War period, the U.S. engaged China to contain the Soviet Union. China indeed had made significant progress in economic development during that decade through hard work. However, the hardworking at a peaceful time was the requisite condition for economic development but they are not the real motivation factor for her rapid rise. In 1990, the Soviet Union collapsed and the U.S. became the only superpower in the world. However, the U.S. China policy had also revealed its true face. China was a part of the U.S. tool kit to win the Cold War against the Soviet Union, but China was not treated in any way close like Japan and South Korea. The U.S. categorized China as an adversary, which hindsight could be seen from many things such as the U.S. opposition to letting China join the WTO and the Space Station program. China chose to be humble and tolerant hoping to be accepted by the Western Power Club.
 
The intensification of China’s Motivation Factor
 
The real motivation factor for China’s rapid development came gradually with increasing intensity since the second term of Clinton Administration (1997-2001). The U.S. China policy was ‘engagement within containment’. The Bush Administration (2001-2009) was too occupied with terrorism and Middle East Wars thus giving China another period of peaceful development. The China policy in the Obama-Mrs. Clinton era (2009-2017) had switched further away from engagement towards containment. This made obvious by the Pivot-To-Asia policy. Treating China as an Adversary became intensified. This process continued into the Trump administration with further hostility. It was the past two dozen years placing China under watchful eyes that had given China the real motivation factor to develop rapidly including military and technology development since they had finally recognized the true face of the U.S. The U.S. shall not accept any strong competitor threatening her superpower status. Placing China under the most watchful eyes and instigating all measures to stop China’s rise became the real motivation factor for China’s rapid development and rise, out of not just desire to acquire a better living standard but out of fear and insecurity that the U.S. will eventually staging another eight-nation alliance to crush China like the U.K. had done in 1900, only 120 years ago.
 
In the past two decades or so, the U.S. had waved the anti-communist flag targeting China no matter how much reform China is doing in socialism and in embracing capitalism. It has become clear to the world, not only the ‘Five Eyes’ are physically watching China, but an increasingly rigorous effort is mounting to build an anti-China alliance, for example, by recruiting Vietnam, India, Japan, etc. The U.S.-China relation has become the worst in a century with trade wars spreading to technology wars and military provocations. China was able to mobilize her citizens to work hard and strife for better life, but the U.S. China policy turning the screw tighter using all measures (using The Secretary of State, Pompeo’s words and thoughts) against the CCP government employing media force (fabricating narratives and lies), sanction measures (choking China’s industries) and military exercises with allies (agitating Hong Kong and Taiwan) as if the 1900 battle of Peking could be replayed. Can it be replayed?
 
Chinese People Can Be Motivated by Negative Force
 
Chinese people are unique people who are more tolerant and peace loving. Long immersed under Confucius philosophy, Chinese people are generally motivated by positive thoughts, like honor, praise and encouragement. China may have done a good job in creating a positive motivation for her people to strive for a better life out of the Chinese culture, Confucius theory and family traditions, but the negative force coming from the U.S. China policy is creating an exceptional drive and motivation for the Chinese, to die for their country if necessary; just like they had done against the atrocious attack from the Imperial Japan in 1937-1945 and the Korea War in 1950-1953. The harsher lies generated by the West media, for example, on Uighur genocide charge, fake news on concentration camp, etc. would turn Uighurs and Hans to fight vigorously together against the Western liers to clear their honor.
 
Communism is built on equality of people and fair share and usage of natural and human resources. The Western nations’ media (like CNN), blasting accusations and charges, like depriving Tibetans’ religious rights, suppressing Hong Kong’s freedom of protests and putting 2 million Uighurs under surveillance or concentration camps, etc. actually helped the CCP to do the right thing faster. Tibetans’ lives improved tremendously under CCP governance and there were more beautiful Tibetan temples now than ever before. The Hong Kong riots are completely stopped after China published her national security law. As for Uighurs, 37 countries in the UN Human Rights Council and the Council of Foreign Ministers of Organization of Islamic Cooperation passed resolution in support of China disputing the fake news charges (concentration camps, etc.). It is ironic that the U.S., the promoter of democracy, would deny many of the UN resolutions passed in democratic manner and would insist on repeating the fake news.
 
For U.S.-China relations observers, one must wonder why does the U.S.keep giving China the motivation factor to develop and rise up fast if that is not what she desires.