This is a truly informative article. One that is worthy of repeatedly returning to and using as a constant reference.

It is just packed with both information and insight and well developed. Ironically its richness is its major challenge. It has so much to say that the reader can drown in all the information. The article does not need rewriting but it does need reformatting to make it more manageable. In particular: The paragraphs are much too large. They need to be broken down each to its major purpose and point. Sub-headings that were thematic and carefully ordered in progressive logic leading to the conclusion would greatly help and might also result is a few repositioning of points. or e!ample: The "estern debate could be broken down into the two camps: Those fearing the colossus and those seeing growing contradictions and challenges. Similarly the debate itself can be broken up into the internal and e!ternal -both on the part of outsiders and #hinese. Then there is the very important observations on the macro level how and why #hina is actually searching for a new position to anchor itself in relation to others. So there is a $uestion of consistency verses e!perimentation. Then there are the very important contrasts between what they re saying and what they are doing %especially as regards their &sian neighbors and the $uestion of practice verses propaganda. inally all must be weighted and the conclusion justifies. This is a very impressive piece and would do the journal honor. The writing is very good. The author just needs to have some mercy on the reader in terms of dividing all that is offered into more easily discerned and more digestible bites.