[POST] The Gang of Four
Our global problem-set isn't all that intimidating -- much less impressive
This is a reader-supported publication. I give it all away for free but could really use your support if you want me to keep doing this.
I have complained here in the past about the naming and analysis of the so-called CRINK (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea) “bloc” that has the US national security establishment up in arms, predicting all manner of future wars (often strategic/nuclear).
I have also complained a great deal here about the declining quality of US leadership (up-front confession: I do NOT consider Trump some negotiating “genius”).
So, you put a declining US capacity to lead up against this seemingly scary and coherent bloc, and, sure, it can make you nervous about the future.
But here’s the thing: I don’t see good futures for any of these countries, and I likewise believe that the quality of their leadership has declined significantly compared to what we faced back in the Cold War day.
Let’s start with the Big Dog China:
China’s demographic collapse is real and unfolding, signaling the worst type of widespread domestic dread regarding the future.
China’s population is aging quickly, putting immense pressure on the workforce and social welfare systems — in addition to younger generations (yet another reason why NOT to have babies).
With a fertility rate of 1.0 (less than half the replacement rate of 2.1), China could actually see its total population halved by 2100. Stunning, right?
China’s era of rapid, “extensive” (more of everything) economic expansion is ending, pushing them to “intensive” (productivity) growth that is far harder to centrally plan.
Xi is not succeeding in creating domestic consumption-led economic growth, and his presidency-for-life is sending all the wrong signals to both his people and rest of the global economy.
Corporate and local government debt are at unsustainable levels, raising the risk of financial crises.
Increasing state control and ideological conformity under Xi are stifling private sector innovation and entrepreneurship; politically driven crackdowns have erased trillions in market value from leading tech firms.
China seems on track to get stuck in the “middle-income trap,” unable to transition to a high-income, innovation-driven economy — thus resulting in China growing old before it grows rich.
Xi’s consolidation of power has reversed previous trends toward collective leadership and economic liberalization, yielding more rigid and less response policies. The longer he stays in power, the worse it will become.
Growing inequality, lack of affordable housing, and limited career opportunities are fueling dissatisfaction among younger generations, leading to ever-more severe suppression of dissent, particularly in Xinjiang, Tibet, and Hong Kong.
The US and its allies are increasingly cooperating to counter China’s influence, imposing sanctions, export controls, and seeking alternative supply chains.
Thanks to demographic dividends unfolding presently in SE Asia and India, global companies are relocating manufacturing away from China.
China is a highly polluted nation suffering profound water insecurity, a growing reliance on imported food, and unsustainable development.
China's agricultural sector is highly vulnerable to climate change due to its reliance on specific crops and the potential for extreme weather events.
Add it all up and would I take Xi over Deng Xiaoping?
No, I would not.
China’s road ahead is far harder than America’s.
Russia up next:
Russia’s population is also shrinking and aging rapidly, putting significant stress on its welfare system, reducing its available labor, and reducing its military recruitment pool (having already forced Russia to tap North Korea for fresh meat on the battlefield).
Life expectancy, especially for men, remains low compared to other developed countries, due to health issues, alcoholism, and poor healthcare.
Many young and educated Russians are emigrating, further draining the country’s talent pool.
Russia remains severely overdependent on energy exports. Now isolated from the West’s big markets over Ukraine, Russia is forced to sell overwhelmingly to China in a monopsonistic relationship that Beijing exploits by paying below-market prices. Beyond that, it remains vulnerable to global price fluctuations (mostly downward pressures) and the global shift toward renewable energy (creating those long-term downward pressures on fossil fuels).
Western sanctions have cut Russia off from key financial markets, advanced technologies, and foreign investment, stifling growth and modernization.
Chronic corruption, weak rule of law, and a lack of economic diversification hamstring innovation and productivity, particularly as the best and brightest leave.
Putin’s increasingly autocratic rule stifles dissent, debate, and policy innovation, and, when he goes (he is not well), the regime is likely to come apart due to no clear succession plan.
Russia is barely holding its core federation together, with plenty of restive regions along its vast border.
The ongoing war in Ukraine has drained resources, caused massive casualties, and exposed weaknesses throughout its substandard military, which only loses ground due to Western export controls.
Russia’s aggressive foreign policy has alienated many neighbors, revived NATO, and pushed former partners closer to the West or China.
Increasing reliance on China for damn near everything makes it a poor man’s junior partner to Beijing — sort of a big NorKo.
Russia’s global image has suffered greatly under Putin, limiting its influence outside a shrinking circle of friendly states.
Much of Russia’s infrastructure is outdated and in need of costly upgrades.
Melting permafrost threatens infrastructure and communities throughout Siberia, counterbalancing the advantages of a warmer Arctic.
To the extent that Russia benefits from climate change, it will have to rely on Chinese investment (and control) to exploit those advantages.
Sum it all up and Russia is becoming China’s bitch on every level.
As for the “genius” Putin: all you can say is that Russia’s military performance remains as crappy as ever, easily surpassing — in a negative sense — even its horrible Soviet-era performance in Afghanistan.
All we can really say about Putin is that the KGB makes for great police-state leaders and nothing else.
On to Iran, where, in many ways, we’re talking just a worse version of Russia:
As par for the course, Iran is suffering rapid demographic aging and population decline. Iran’s population is aging at a rate five times faster than it is growing. By 2050, about one-third of Iranians will be 60 or older, up from less than 10% today.
The usual explanations apply to its seriously low fertility rate (1.6 to Russia’s 1.4), signaling — yet again — that the nation’s young people do not believe in its future under the mullahs.
Iran’s version of the Boomers (born in the 1970s and 1980s) are heading into retirement age, meaning a shrinking working-age population and higher elder-dependent requirements — likewise depressing the younger generations’ fertility.
Projections suggest Iran’s population could shrink by more than half over the next 75 years if current trends persist.
Iran’s economy, overwhelmingly dependent on oil exports, has been stagnant for decades, with high inflation, high unemployment, and a repressed consumer base.
Iran’s social welfare system is barebones and only becoming more stressed as the population ages.
The nation’s brain drain is legendary, mostly benefiting “Tehrangeles” (Los Angeles).
The best elements of Iranian society (those who haven’t left already) are ideologically checked-out in a manner very reminiscent of Russia at the start of Gorbachev’s rule in the mid-1980s, so that, even if a reformer could arise to reverse the nation’s economic decline, the most likely outcome of any serious reform campaign would be regime collapse.
Iran is already suffering widespread water scarcity, which will only grow far worse with climate change.
Add it up, and then add in Israel’s beatdown of both its military and its once vaunted “axis of resistance” militias across the region, and Iran is looking pretty grim for the foreseeable future.
It is led by an 86-year-old ayatollah whose primary skill lies in securing his continuing rule and nothing else. We are told his son is his likely replacement, and we know how well that tends to work out.
Finally, North Korea, where the idiotic grandson replaced the idiot son who replaced the original Great Leader:
North Korea’s future as a great power is based almost solely on its possession of nuclear weapons.
The country’s regime is basically a kleptocracy and its economy relies on (1) selling raw materials at below-market prices to patron China and (2) various black-market activities around the world.
Far worse than China, North Korea grows old while remaining cruelly poor.
North Korea’s economy is stuck decades in the past in terms of being labor-intensive and technologically backward.
Xenophobic to a degree that shames Japan, NorKo has no way forward, demographically speaking.
On every measurable level of health and human welfare, North Koreans compare quite badly to South Koreans (e.g., lifespans a full decade shorter), meaning the population is essentially stunted and growing more stunted over time.
All you can say about Kim Jong Un is that he continues to ensure his regime’s survival, largely through the military’s dominance throughout the economy. Economically and technologically, North Korea remains a backward power that matters only because of its nukes. Take away the nukes and it remains a basket case largely cut off from the world and friendless.
Add up the CRINK quartet and only China, structurally stressed as it is, has anything close to a positive long-term future — and that’s with a total population that is slated to be cut in half by 2100. Let’s be honest and say that nobody has any idea how that demographic trajectory will unfold because it’s just so unbelievably unprecedented in modern history.
Moreover, remove the current leader in each CRINK instance, and there’s a solid chance the regime falters badly, given the concentration of power at the very top.
As for the United States, where, thank God, we swap out our leaders every 4-8 years, I wouldn’t trade our future for China’s under any circumstances. We have plenty of problems and challenges lying head, but our row will be far easier to hoe on just about every score.
It’s important to conduct this sort of broad-framing comparison on a regular basis. If I stack China on top of Russia on top of Iran on top of North Korea, I don’t spot a combined capacity — be it economic, military, or ideological — that surpasses that of my 50-member state American Union.
Not even close.
And if I add advanced Asia and the European Union to that tally … things look even more lop-sided in our collective favor, which only highlights just how damaging Trump’s wholesale dismissal of our long-time allies truly is.
But fear not, as this too shall pass with time.
Lately, I’ve been getting too many depressed emails from too many depressed readers, so I figured I owed you all this one.
