Nowhere in my interactions do I get this vibe of China as uber-strategists who think long-term compared to those puny American brains that can only concentrate on the here and now. Nor do I see it in their writings. The more I interact with them, the more I think that's the usual mirror-imaging: they model themselves on us because we're the leaders and then we freak at their modeling behavior, believing it reveals some deep, strategic, long-term thinking when in actuality none exists.

I find China as clueless about the future as most emerging countries. That's why they plan so much. People really confident about the future don't have to plan. They simply know what to do. I believe this is a naturally accruing capability with age, and in that regard, China is "young" despite the age of its civilization. Again, we need to think of them more like the U.S. at the start of the 20th century: getting brash but essentially uncertain and nervous about how to behave in the world. The more the bluster, the more the fear--I always say.

Speaking to defense analysts there, most confided that China's military build-up is without any serious grand strategic thought, and that stuff just gets bought due to bureaucratic outcomes more than seriously applied strategic or even operational rationales. Sad to say, the Chinese military is far too much like our own in that regard.

And that's why the idea of alliance with the U.S. in the SysAdmin function interests them so: they are desperate for hints and guidance on how to emerge militarily over something besides Taiwan, which remains their mindless default position--unless we choose to move them off it.

The growing backlash against the Chinese in the Gap is real, and it will unfold. Better we have them grooved into some useful role there militarily when some serious shit really hits the fan. Better for us, better for the Chinese, better for the Gap, better for the Core.