Does China's intransigence remind you of the actions of 1930s Germany?

So China has begun Mr Xi Jingping’s third term, which was approved yesterday, by howling that the world is out to cook its goose. Don’t bully us, please, the Chinese government seems to be saying, while and after bullying everyone. No wonder they say that bullies don’t like to be bullied back.

According to the New York Times, Xi said last Monday that “Western countries led by the United States have implemented all-around containment, encirclement and suppression of China, which has brought unprecedented severe challenges to our country’s development.”

And China’s foreign minister said, according to the NYT again, “The United States actually wants China not to fight back when hit or cursed, but this is impossible.”

Qin then snivelled that “If the US doesn’t step on the brakes but continues to speed up, no guardrail can stop the derailment,” he said.

The short point is this: China can now see that it has overreached and is saying ok ok, let’s not get carried away. That’s the real message in the two statements quoted above. But it’s saying it in its usual minatory way, threatening war.

Really? Well, yes and no. China will surely fight back but not in a hot war. It will resort to cheaper ways mostly via cyberwar. Truth be told, China simply doesn’t have the power to take on the US in any other way. Sneakiness is its best bet.

Besides, cyberwar is consistent with Maoist doctrines. Shoot and scoot. Disrupt. Cause chaos. All that guff. One step forward, two back. Well, this is all very well but in reality it doesn’t work.

Thus, although much has been made of the Long March of Mao Zedong which helped him capture power in China after 16 long years of “struggle”, it was actually the Second World War that really mattered. The same thing had happened in India a couple of years earlier in 1947, but entirely peacefully.

The thing is, sneaky attacks a la Mao — and Satyagraha a la Gandhiji — don’t make much difference. Disruption by either means is just a nuisance, it’s not a winning strategy. It’s not even something that will make the opponent change its behaviour. In fact, violent sneakiness and non-violent protest only make the other side more determined.

China will probably also adopt an old tactic. “I will keep what I have taken. You accept that. And we will all calm down then”. Taiwan will be off the boil for a while.

It will not, however, give up its ambitions. It will continue to prepare for a major confrontation sometime later. In short, China is buying time. It’s a bluff. It should be called.

Let me give you just one historical precedent from less than 100 years ago. It’s lesson must not be ignored because there are certain types of nationalism that are inherently aggressive. It’s proponents inevitably go to war.

I am referring to the 1930s in Germany. The Nazis had won an election by a narrow margin in 1933, and soon thereafter, Adolf Hitler became ruler and dictator for life. Like Xi has.

Hitler believed in the idea of ‘manifest’ destiny of Germany ruling the world. He started surreptitiously preparing for war. By 1938 he felt strong enough to annex first Austria and then Czechoslovakia.

Both were annexed bloodlessly because the then super power, Britain, didn’t respond firmly. Indeed, it acquiesced in German expansionism in 1938 with the Munich agreement. “Peace in our time” said it’s prime minister.

Emboldened by this Hitler attacked Poland in September 1939. That’s when the world, led by Britain, started pushing back.

The rest is history. Two byproducts of that war were Indian and Chinese independence.