The South China Sea's Gathering Storm

[fitliker]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/japan-builds-new-long-range-missile-to-defend-itself-from-neighbours-d5c3h6ds8

Japan builds new long-range missile to defend itself from neighbours

Japan is to build new long-range cruise missiles to defend itself against attack from China, the latest development in the east Asian arms race and a further erosion of the country’s pacifist constitutional position.

The ministry of defence will request ¥33.5 billion (£240 million) to upgrade an existing ground-to-sea missile into a weapon capable of travelling 300km (186 miles), according to Japanese media. It is also developing a high-speed gliding missile that could fly up to 1,000km, putting both China and North Korea in range.

The conservative ruling Liberal Democratic Party said over the summer that the country should prepare itself to launch pre-emptive strikes on foreign missile bases, a move that will alarm Japan’s neighbours and provoke anxiety among defenders of the postwar “peace constitution”.

The party’s defence committee gave its authority to a growing consensus in government that Japan needed to acquire the ability to destroy North Korean missiles (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/north-korean-missiles-can-evade-defences-3rgvj7mwq) on the ground before they are launched, rather than relying on missile defence systems to take them out in the air.

The immediate priority, however, is to defend Japan’s remote southwestern islands against Chinese attack (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/beijing-s-military-bases-in-disputed-seas-too-isolated-x60k7p6ml). Chinese coast guard vessels and patrol planes have been increasingly active around the uninhabited Senkaku Islands (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-troops-ready-to-take-on-china-over-disputed-senkaku-islands-5zzrm5sd9), administered by Japan, but claimed by Beijing under the name of the Diaoyus.

Earlier this year, Japan’s Self-Defence Forces deployed Type 12 missiles, which have a range of 100km, to Miyako island, part of the Nansei chain between the big island of Kyushu and Taiwan. This is the weapon that is to be upgraded to a 300km range, and adapted so that it can be fired from ships and planes, to deter and repel naval attack on the Senkakus, 200km away.....

The Japanese have heavy lift capabilities in the HB rockets used on the Mars missions for the UAE Mars mission . The HB 3 series has an even bigger payload than the HB rocket used for the Mars lift . They also have a head start on biological stuff from the 731 experiments on humans almost a century ago . The Japanese also hit a very small target moving at great speed at the outreaches of space so the dual use capabilities are there . Large heavy lift with pin point accuracy . Add multiple re-entry vehicles to the mission and it will make the contrails program redundant.

[Asturias56]

Apart from the unnecessary and frankly unpleasant mention of the 731 experiments you have a good point.

Should the Japanese decide to "break-out" from their pacifist history there is no doubt that within 5 years they could have most of the capabilities of some of the bigger players - an atomic bomb, long range rockets (but not maybe integrated in that time frame etc etc . Aircraft are a weakness as although they've expended zillions over the years they've never really manage d a decent aircraft programme. But if they turn their attention to electronic and cyber warfare they'd probably be leaders in less than 5 years.

But there'd have to be a complete U-turn in public opinion. I know very few Japanese who see anything good in militarism and the military

[racedo]

I'd classify 200% duties (on Australian wines iirc) as a vigorous 'political' response.
China is on its way to recovering its role as the producer of 40% of global GNP, after an almost 200 year hiatus.
They may have a slogan about political power growing out of the barrel of a gun, but they are quite aware that economic power is as potent, but more easily wielded and more flexible. They are using it effectively against the western 'coalition', as shown by the just negotiated EEC/China trade and investment agreement, which puts all the real issues off to further discussions, while giving China continued free rein, all because Germany is terrified that its auto industry, which is super dependent on the Chinese market, would face a calamity if China closed its borders.

I believe duties on wines and targeting of Australian exports of natural resources, come down to China getting tired of Australia mouthing off while claiming China is an important trading partner.

China decided that Australia is quite free to abuse it.

However as Austalia has a AUS$70 billion trade surplus with China then perhaps abusing the country which is the lynchpin of your economy has its consequences. US has a AUS$19 billion trade surplus with Australia.

Australians will need to get used to the idea that political pronouncements have an economic impact.

[racedo]

I doubt they’re “in stitches” but rather seeing the another threat that must be mitigated and mulling over a political response as well.

I love your optimism, in reality they can just ignore, unless RN is part of a USN deployment then it really has zero impact.

The "we have a big aircraft carrier" has zero impact when people you are challenging make you aware that in the event of any conflict it will be "we had a big aircraft carrier",

The Prince of Wales and The Repulse on 7th of December 1941 supposedly were a big show of RN power in Asia, couple of days later both were on the bottom of the sea.

[etudiant]

I believe duties on wines and targeting of Australian exports of natural resources, come down to China getting tired of Australia mouthing off while claiming China is an important trading partner.

China decided that Australia is quite free to abuse it.

However as Austalia has a AUS$70 billion trade surplus with China then perhaps abusing the country which is the lynchpin of your economy has its consequences. US has a AUS$19 billion trade surplus with Australia.

Australians will need to get used to the idea that political pronouncements have an economic impact.

Australia has the raw materials China needs. The idea that Australia's modest trade surplus is an issue when China runs a half trillion annual surplus with the US alone seems dubious.
China does seem to be becoming a lot more touchy about foreign opinions voiced elsewhere, but not very receptive to allowing similar sentiments to be articulated to their own people.
That will be a problem, getting every tweet cleared with Beijing.
Of course, having decided that 'hate speech' can be censored, can any government object to censoring anti Chinese news and comments if it becomes economically damaging??

[West Coast]

I love your optimism, in reality they can just ignore, unless RN is part of a USN deployment then it really has zero impact.

The "we have a big aircraft carrier" has zero impact when people you are challenging make you aware that in the event of any conflict it will be "we had a big aircraft carrier",

The Prince of Wales and The Repulse on 7th of December 1941 supposedly were a big show of RN power in Asia, couple of days later both were on the bottom of the sea.

USN sends a lone destroyer near one of “their islands” and the Chinese military along with their diplomatic corps go ape ****. U.K. sends a carrier battle group and the Chinese don’t even take notice, nah, don’t buy it.. Any one in the leadership in the Chinese military who didn’t take the threat of a CBG sailing nearby should be relieved of their authority.

[JustinHeywood]

Australians will need to get used to the idea that political pronouncements have an economic impact.

Yeah, how dare Australia ask for an enquiry into the origins of COVID, which has wreaked havoc across the world. The gall of that pissant little country even asking the question!

If nations won’t stand up to China, things will get much worse. And the people who defend the CCP, (usually for no other reason that they hate America) can go screw themselves.

[Asturias56]

"USN sends a lone destroyer near one of “their islands” and the Chinese military along with their diplomatic corps go ape ****. U.K. sends a carrier battle group and the Chinese don’t even take notice, nah, don’t buy it."

that's because the "lone destroyer" is backed by the whole might of the USN and USA. A British CBG is much smaller that a US one, will have a dozen or so strike aircraft and represents about 50% of the whole UK navy.

Racedo is right here - it's politicians willy-waving and it would have the same outcome as 1941

[racedo]

Australia has the raw materials China needs. The idea that Australia's modest trade surplus is an issue when China runs a half trillion annual surplus with the US alone seems dubious.


So do others have the resources and a willingness to trade. US economy is 16 times bigger than Australia and remove the Chinese trade surplus and Australia is in defecit

China does seem to be becoming a lot more touchy about foreign opinions voiced elsewhere, but not very receptive to allowing similar sentiments to be articulated to their own people. That will be a problem, getting every tweet cleared with Beijing.
Of course, having decided that 'hate speech' can be censored, can any government object to censoring anti Chinese news and comments if it becomes economically damaging??

China touchy ? Think you need to look at all Govts as they are touchy.

[racedo]

USN sends a lone destroyer near one of “their islands” and the Chinese military along with their diplomatic corps go ape ****. U.K. sends a carrier battle group and the Chinese don’t even take notice, nah, don’t buy it.. Any one in the leadership in the Chinese military who didn’t take the threat of a CBG sailing nearby should be relieved of their authority.

Unless US support it then UK will struggle to send a CBG close to China. RN struggling to recruit / retain and that unlikely to change so putting all your resources and sailing around the world to put on a show of force achieves what ?

[fitliker]

Will the Carrier be allowed into Hong Kong for a port visit or will they be banned like other nations navies from spending money in the local economies ?

[arketip]

Will the Carrier be allowed into Hong Kong for a port visit or will they be banned like other nations navies from spending money in the local economies ?

Are Russian or Chinese military ships allowed into US/UK ports to spend money in the local economies?

[Tocsin]

"USN sends a lone destroyer near one of “their islands” and the Chinese military along with their diplomatic corps go ape ****. U.K. sends a carrier battle group and the Chinese don’t even take notice, nah, don’t buy it."

that's because the "lone destroyer" is backed by the whole might of the USN and USA. A British CBG is much smaller that a US one, will have a dozen or so strike aircraft and represents about 50% of the whole UK navy.

Racedo is right here - it's politicians willy-waving and it would have the same outcome as 1941

And that is why there will be a shed-load of US Marines and their F-35Bs as part of the well-publicised package - Racedo right? YGTBSM!

[racedo]

And that is why there will be a shed-load of US Marines and their F-35Bs as part of the well-publicised package - Racedo right? YGTBSM!

Thank you for agreeing my point that RN require US Support to have the Chinese consider them as an issue.

[West Coast]

I love your optimism, in reality they can just ignore, unless RN is part of a USN deployment then it really has zero impact.

The "we have a big aircraft carrier" has zero impact when people you are challenging make you aware that in the event of any conflict it will be "we had a big aircraft carrier",

The Prince of Wales and The Repulse on 7th of December 1941 supposedly were a big show of RN power in Asia, couple of days later both were on the bottom of the sea.

Well how about that, a lone Royal Navy ship exercising FONOPS sets off the Chinese. Far from your prediction they’d ignore the lads.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-china-southchinasea-exclusive/exclusive-british-navy-warship-sails-near-south-china-sea-islands-angering-beijing-idUSKCN1LM017

[Asturias56]

The Chinese are notoriously thin-skinned - they get bent out of shape about things that to us, seem totally trivial.

It doesn't change the fact that an small RN carrier group in the S China Sea would find it hard to survive if the balloon did go up

[West Coast]

The Chinese are notoriously thin-skinned - they get bent out of shape about things that to us, seem totally trivial.

It doesn't change the fact that an small RN carrier group in the S China Sea would find it hard to survive if the balloon did go up

The question isn't survivability, it's whether the Chinese would give a damn. Clearly they do, this despite some posters thinking otherwise.

As to survivability, I'm no naval warfare expert and I suspect neither are you. What I do know is survival/effectiveness is tied to tactics and risk aversion. A CBG, be it the UK's or the USN isn't going to sail just offshore of China where it would incur a savage result. I suspect it would operate in the outer island regions where the full brunt of the Chinese military would have issues concentrating.

[Asturias56]

Of course they might just "welcome" them off Singapore and trail behind about 10 kms all the way round their deployment

[West Coast]

Of course they might just "welcome" them off Singapore and trail behind about 10 kms all the way round their deployment


Stuff like that happens during peacetime FONOPS.

[etudiant]

So do others have the resources and a willingness to trade. US economy is 16 times bigger than Australia and remove the Chinese trade surplus and Australia is in defecit



China touchy ? Think you need to look at all Govts as they are touchy.

I think you missed my point, that the decision to censor 'hate speech', however that may be defined, puts all speech within range of the government censor.
Once that is the norm, China will be well within her rights to request/require comments seen as harmful to China to be suppressed.
Of course, your point that all governments are just aching to apply similar strictures is quite correct. Freedom has no friends in Whitehall or in Congress or any government.

[pr00ne]

I think you missed my point, that the decision to censor 'hate speech', however that may be defined, puts all speech within range of the government censor.
Once that is the norm, China will be well within her rights to request/require comments seen as harmful to China to be suppressed.
Of course, your point that all governments are just aching to apply similar strictures is quite correct. Freedom has no friends in Whitehall or in Congress or any government.

etudiant,

I'm currently working in Whitehall, and I'm afraid, or rather happy, that you couldn't be more wrong!

[ORAC]

China could go batty over this one.....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55541501

Australian advert of man eating bat sandwich investigated

An advert that shows a man eating a bat sandwich is being investigated by Australia's advertising watchdog.

The ad from outdoor equipment firm Boating Camping Fishing store (BCF) has been viewed more than 250,000 times on YouTube. In it, a man jokes that the pandemic was caused by someone eating a bat....

Relations between Australia and China deteriorated last year to their lowest point in decades, experts say. The advert could see tensions becoming further strained.....

https://youtu.be/BYGDUwCTiAU

[racedo]

etudiant,

I'm currently working in Whitehall, and I'm afraid, or rather happy, that you couldn't be more wrong!


But do the friends of freedom wield the leavers of power or are they the people who do the work ?

[West Coast]

I love your optimism, in reality they can just ignore, unless RN is part of a USN deployment then it really has zero impact.

The "we have a big aircraft carrier" has zero impact when people you are challenging make you aware that in the event of any conflict it will be "we had a big aircraft carrier",

The Prince of Wales and The Repulse on 7th of December 1941 supposedly were a big show of RN power in Asia, couple of days later both were on the bottom of the sea.


https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/05/europe/uk-aircraft-carrier-strike-group-intl-hnk-mil/index.html

Seems the Chinese are more interested in the RN CBG than you believe.

Sorry MODs, know you don’t like links, however it wouldn’t have been believed if I hadn’t added it. I’ll say 12 Hail Marys.

[etudiant]

The Bible says that 'by their fruits you shall judge them'. By that standard there are very few friends of freedom in Whitehall afaik.
I'd be delighted to be corrected with specific examples.

[Hot 'n' High]

West Coast, re China being worried about the RN CBG, there is probably a difference between "political annoyance" and "military fear". I suspect if you sailed a lone RN Minesweeper into the area there would be a protest! Over the last few decades, Beijing has quietly got on with weaving itself into many areas around the world such as Africa - completely ignored. Maybe they hoped to "get away with it" in a more open example of expansionism in the SCS.

I suspect they are more than a little annoyed that plan backfired and the spotlight has been turned on them rather than having much "military fear" - particularly of a small CBG as an entity. However, such a deployment demonstrates political resolve - and that's what China is annoyed about - it all adds to the US, Australia etc, in unison, shining a spotlight on China. I suspect they realize that, if the West took on China militarily, we'd be effectively looking at WW3.

"Cold War 2" anyone?

[pr00ne]

But do the friends of freedom wield the leavers of power or are they the people who do the work ?


Both in my, very recent, experience.

[pr00ne]

The Bible says that 'by their fruits you shall judge them'. By that standard there are very few friends of freedom in Whitehall afaik.
I'd be delighted to be corrected with specific examples.

Oh I disagree quite strongly, manifested by the life that I lead and the freedoms that I possess.

Go find your own specific examples.

[racedo]

Both in my, very recent, experience.

Interesting.

[racedo]

Seems the Chinese are more interested in the RN CBG than you believe.

Sorry MODs, know you don’t like links, however it wouldn’t have been believed if I hadn’t added it. I’ll say 12 Hail Marys.

Let's see from home port deployment to SCS.......................... from original notice to arrival minimum 35 days, yup lets be worried.

[West Coast]

Let's see from home port deployment to SCS.......................... from original notice to arrival minimum 35 days, yup lets be worried.

Once they’re there....

Employed correctly, the CBG is a potent tool.

[Lyneham Lad]

On BBC News website.
Pompeo: US to lift restrictions on contacts with Taiwan (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55606594)

The US is lifting long-standing restrictions on contacts between American and Taiwanese officials, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says.

The "self-imposed restrictions" were introduced decades ago to "appease" the mainland Chinese government, which lays claim to the island, the US state department said in a statement.

These rules are now "null and void".

The move is likely to anger China and increase tensions between Washington and Beijing.

It comes as the Trump administration enters its final days ahead of the inauguration of Joe Biden as president on 20 January.

The Biden transition team have said the president-elect is committed to maintaining the previous US policy towards Taiwan.

Analysts say they will be unhappy with such a policy decision being made in the final days of the Trump administration, but that the move could be reversed easily by Mr Pompeo's successor Antony Blinken.

China regards Taiwan as a breakaway province, but Taiwan's leaders argue that it is a sovereign state.

Relations between the two are frayed and there is a constant threat of a violent flare up that could drag in the US, an ally of Taiwan.

Done with an eye on creating a distraction for the post-20 Jan White House occupant or a final poke at Beijing? Or both?

[racedo]

Done with an eye on creating a distraction for the post-20 Jan White House occupant or a final poke at Beijing? Or both?

The assumption is that outgoing and incoming are so totally at loggerheads that no discussion ever takes place on continuity.

Another input is that incoming can blame the old administration for doing it which both agreed should happen.

[Finningley Boy]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9154059/China-threatens-counterstrike-Australia-condemns-Beijings-assault-Hong-Kong-democracy.html

I'm not sure what specifically is meant by counter-strike here in the context?

FB

[Fareastdriver]

They can't strike too hard. They get all their iron ore from Australia.

[Lordflasheart]

...
I'm not sure what specifically is meant by counter-strike here in the context?

It's quite simple really .....

我们将使他们为他们的干扰和无礼付出沉重的代价。

闪心勋爵

...

[etudiant]

They can't strike too hard. They get all their iron ore from Australia.
Not sure that is the case, Brazil is a big exporter and Australian shipments have been put on hold by China customs inspections.

Seriously, people should get a grip, China pours 10x as much steel as the US, they are already the world's leading industrial power.
Their military does not reflect that as yet, but the build rates are impressive. For client states such as Australia to peeve them is hazardous, China is a lot more important to Australia than the US.

[megan]

Not sure that is the case, Brazil is a big exporter and Australian shipments have been put on hold by China customs inspectionsThe year pre covid China obtained 62% from Australia and 21% from Brazil, iron ore is still being shipped from Oz to China, it's coal they have put a stop to.

[India Four Two]

For the benefit of those like me, that don't speak Mandarin. :E

我们将使他们为他们的干扰和无礼付出沉重的代价。

闪心勋爵

We will make them pay a heavy price for their interference and rudeness.

Lord Shining Heart

[Finningley Boy]

For the benefit of those like me, that don't speak Mandarin. :E
I'm relieved to read this, the original headline story had me thinking China was about to launch a military air attack on Australia or something!

FB

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2021/01/21/china-boosting-naval-footprint-at-its-southern-tip-new-satellite-images-suggest/

China boosting naval footprint at its southern tip, new satellite images suggest

MELBOURNE, Australia – China has continued to build up its air and naval forces in its southernmost province on the edge of the South China Sea, with deployments of more early-warning and anti-submarine aircraft over the past year and the construction of what appears to be a drydock large enough for aircraft carriers on the island of Hainan.....

[etudiant]

No surprise there, the world's largest industrial power is fencing off its own back yard. The place will not be assailable at all shortly.
Then the next question is what might the Chinese do then to assert national sovereignty in that space.
Blocking foreign military patrols seems pointless, the obvious counter would be to block incoming civil traffic from entering the area..
Does anyone see the value to China in this effort?

[Lyneham Lad]

Article plus photo on the BBC News website. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-55788359)
Taiwan has reported a large incursion by Chinese warplanes for the second day running, a show of force that coincides with the first days of US President Joe Biden's term of office.

Sunday's operation involved 15 aircraft and happened a day after a similar drill led to a warning from Washington.

China sees democratic Taiwan as a breakaway province but Taiwan's leaders argue that it is a sovereign state.

Analysts say China is testing the level of support of Mr Biden for Taiwan.

[West Coast]

When ramming them is no longer sufficient....

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-empowers-coast-guard-fire-foreign-vessels-amid-territorial-disputes-n1255425

[etudiant]

When ramming them is no longer sufficient....

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-empowers-coast-guard-fire-foreign-vessels-amid-territorial-disputes-n1255425

Shooting is easier to start than to stop.
I don't think China would be eager to start an altercation at sea, as both their raw materials as well as most of their exports flow via ship.
But it sure does seem less than cautious to give local commanders such ambitious yet ambiguous orders..

[Fareastdriver]

China cannot afford a punch up.

Their economic growth has been eyewatering for thirty years but they still have half a billion or so who look at the TVs and see the shiny life in the big cities and are asking 'when is it my turn',
An import ban by the majors powers would trigger a recession that even Beijing would have difficulty in controlling.

[West Coast]

China cannot afford a punch up.

Their economic growth has been eyewatering for thirty years but they still have half a billion or so who look at the TVs and see the shiny life in the big cities and are asking 'when is it my turn',
An import ban by the majors powers would trigger a recession that even Beijing would have difficulty in controlling.

Maybe not, but they’re marching towards that end.

[Asturias56]

Another border clash with China - tho it sound as if it wasn't that serious

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55793112

up at the or near the Nathu Pass Crossing Point - interesting place - if you go on Google Earth there are quite a few pictures taken from the Indian side

The LOC looks pretty well delineated there - probably a punch up about some-one straying (I'd guess Indian as they're playing it down) over the line to retrieve their cap or paint the wall from the other side

[Gnadenburg]

Interesting short article summarised by "an argument for a rising great power to exploit the maritime domain in all its dimensions: military, political, economic and scientific"

What doesn't tie in, is their Navy does seem to be a long way from being able to secure their critical sea lines, through the Malacca or alternatively Lombok & Sundra Straits.

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/does-soviet-naval-strategy-provide-a-template-for-chinas-maritime-ambitions/

[fitliker]

Interesting short article summarised by "an argument for a rising great power to exploit the maritime domain in all its dimensions: military, political, economic and scientific"

What doesn't tie in, is their Navy does seem to be a long way from being able to secure their critical sea lines, through the Malacca or alternatively Lombok & Sundra Straits.

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/does-soviet-naval-strategy-provide-a-template-for-chinas-maritime-ambitions/

The railway and improvements to the Silk Road initiatives give them sea access on the other side of those straights . Although that was before the simmering dispute in Kashmir and squabbles over the opium in the Khyber Pass might be interesting to watch.
Avoiding the need for conflict in the Malacca Straights , as Sun Tzu wrote : avoiding a conflict can be considered a victory .

[Asturias56]

I think the Belt & Road initiative brings influence but I can't see ho you'd be able to operate, for example, in the Indian Ocean using it. Sure you may have a base or two in Pakistan, Myanmar and the Seychelles but how do you support them? There are only a few roads linking China with Myanmar and Pakistan and they cross some dreadful countryside

[Lyneham Lad]

In The Times:-
Beijing flexes naval muscles as US steps up patrols in South China Sea (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/d873509c-5ffc-11eb-8bcc-6c1a7cf205dd?shareToken=fd726e39b61c2262e5091c72a64afa51)

Beijing announced plans to conduct naval exercises in the South China Sea a day after it accused the United States of threatening peace and stability by sending warships to the region.

The Chinese maritime safety administration issued a notice prohibiting entry to shipping into the northern part of the South China Sea. It gave warning of military exercises in parts of the Gulf of Tonkin until Saturday but no detail about the nature or scale of operations.

On Monday China criticised the US for sending a strike group led by the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-carriers-return-to-challenge-china-in-the-western-pacific-x5wrhpn6t), which entered the South China Sea on Saturday on what the US navy described as “routine operations”.

“The United States frequently sends aircraft and vessels into the South China Sea to flex its muscles,” Zhao Lijian, a spokesman for China’s foreign ministry said. “This is not conducive to peace and stability in the region.”

China claims almost all of the South China Sea, through which £3.5 trillion of international trade passes by ship every year. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan each claim some of the hundreds of reefs and small islands in the sea but since 2014 China has strengthened its claims by turning reefs into military bases (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/beijing-s-military-bases-in-disputed-seas-too-isolated-x60k7p6ml).

The US says that it does not take sides but it carries out “freedom of navigation operations (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pompeos-tough-words-set-stage-for-show-of-force-against-china-8c5rshrrl)” to assert the right of free passage in international waters.

Rear-Admiral Doug Verissimo, commander of the Theodore Roosevelt carrier group, said: “With two thirds of the world’s trade travelling through this very important region, it is vital that we maintain our presence and continue to promote the rules-based order which has allowed us all to prosper.”

Yesterday Taiwanese fighter jets carried out combat drills after Chinese aircraft, including nuclear-capable bombers, flew into the island’s air defence zone on Saturday and Sunday.

Separately, the People’s Liberation Army has deployed intermediate-range ballistic missiles to a training area in Shandong, according to the Federation of American Scientists.

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1354087086962454535?s=20

[Lyneham Lad]

In The Times. Another bout of sabre-rattling.

America warns China over threats to Taiwan (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3574ad90-6223-11eb-86d9-8d012affb84d?shareToken=849a1a32fae8d0ae232b45fd9ddd83e4)

America underlined its military commitment to Taiwan yesterday, hours after the Chinese government warned that any declaration of independence by the self-governed island would trigger a war.

John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said that the comment from China (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/china?page=1) was “unfortunate and certainly not commensurate with our intentions to meet our obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act”.

He said that the United States (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/united-states?page=1) would look for ways to co-operate with China but added: “We have obligations that we intend to meet. The United States military remains ready in all respects to meet our security commitments in the region.”

It shows that Taiwan remains a thorny issue in the US-China relationship, which rapidly deteriorated during the Trump presidency and has shown no sign of easing since President Biden (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/joe-biden?page=1) took office.

Washington has a security pact with Taiwan to equip it with sufficient military hardware to fend off any invasion by Beijing and the US commitment remains the biggest obstacle for China to seize the island.

The Chinese government has long considered Taiwan part of its territory, and President Xi (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/xi-jinping?page=1) has called for reunification with the island by 2050. He has proposed that the island be brought back under a “one country, two systems” framework but Beijing has insisted that the use of force remains an option.

“We are seriously telling those Taiwan independence forces: those who play with fire will burn themselves, and Taiwan independence means war,” said Wu Qian, a spokesman for the Chinese defence ministry, yesterday. “The Chinese People’s Liberation Army will take all necessary measures to resolutely thwart any form of Taiwan independence separatist attempts and firmly defend national sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Only three days after President Biden was inaugurated, Beijing intensified military exercises near Taiwan, sending 28 fighter jets over the island in one weekend.

Chinese military planes also conducted an exercise using the group of US navy vessels led by the carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt as a simulated target.
Pilots of China’s H-6 bombers could be heard in cockpit conversations confirming orders for the simulated targeting and release of anti-ship missiles against the carrier, according to intelligence sources.

When the US aircraft carrier entered the disputed South China Sea, Beijing announced (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/beijing-flexes-naval-muscle-as-us-steps-up-patrols-in-south-china-sea-mhnzr96rz) that it would conduct another exercise there.


(My bold/italics).

[Vzlet]

Sounds like rather sloppy reporting. 28 fighters "over the island" of Taiwan? And, impressive intelligence capable of monitoring "cockpit conversations"!

[fitliker]

Sounds like rather sloppy reporting. 28 fighters "over the island" of Taiwan? And, impressive intelligence capable of monitoring "cockpit conversations"!
Most pilots carry at least one microphone capable of recording every noise they make , smart phone , iPod , iPad , tablets , laptops, smart watches are are fully capable of offering eavesdropping with pictures to those intent on gathering intel or just how well fed an enemy may be by counting bowel movements . Those innocent looking personal devices might just be the difference.

Light three torches .

[West Coast]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39137/check-out-the-damage-to-this-japanese-submarine-after-it-collided-with-a-cargo-ship?fbclid=IwAR0f8imp2BH_OKsIIRmHF_QhoORXuR7d59BCi-hGrsua7bbg8PfYV--SAiQ

Has aviation content: see pics in the article.

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2021/02/11/in-the-south-china-sea-its-meet-the-new-boss-same-as-the-old-boss/

In the South China Sea, it’s ‘meet the new boss, same as the old boss’

....Just 21 days into Biden’s presidency, and with a remarkably small sample size, the emerging policy on China looks nearly indistinguishable from the Trump policy, which has led many China watchers to believe that a policy of strategic competition with Beijing — in the maritime realm and beyond — is here for the long term. Or at least for Biden’s....

“There is continuity in the South China Sea, but it’s its continuity of the Trump approach, not a return of the Obama approach.”.....

[etudiant]

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2021/02/11/in-the-south-china-sea-its-meet-the-new-boss-same-as-the-old-boss/

In the South China Sea, it’s ‘meet the new boss, same as the old boss’

....Just 21 days into Biden’s presidency, and with a remarkably small sample size, the emerging policy on China looks nearly indistinguishable from the Trump policy, which has led many China watchers to believe that a policy of strategic competition with Beijing — in the maritime realm and beyond — is here for the long term. Or at least for Biden’s....

“There is continuity in the South China Sea, but it’s its continuity of the Trump approach, not a return of the Obama approach.”.....

What exactly distinguishes the 'Obama approach'? Was it his 'hands off ' policy or was it something more tangible?

[Asturias56]

"Pivot towards Asia" was the Obama catchphrase

[fitliker]

"Pivot towards Asia" was the Obama catchphrase

Might explain the recent interests and activity on some of the WW2 old airstrips on the atolls.
Nice long run ways used by the Enola Gay .

[Asturias56]

I thought that was part of the Marines idea for dispersed strike operations - the ability of a USN Carrier group to get close in is being eroded and they're looking at rapid dispersal of cruise missiles to complicate any Chinese War Plan

[Asturias56]

This weeks Economist has an article on future plans"..... In 2018 a commission tasked with scrutinising American defence strategy warned that in a war with China, “Americans could face a decisive military defeat.” On March 4th Admiral Philip Davidson, head of America’s Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), said that China would achieve “overmatch” within five years.

That prospect has roused Congress. In December it authorised a $2.2bn fund, the Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI), to shore up INDOPACOM. ..... The heart of America’s military predicament in Asia is that it would rely on a handful of large bases, notably in Japan and South Korea, well within range of China’s huge arsenal of conventional missiles . American commanders want to use the PDI to harden their defences, spread out forces more widely and develop new ways of putting China on the back foot.

The centrepiece of these efforts is Guam, that INDOPACOM describes as “our most crucial operating location in the western Pacific”. The island is close enough to China to use as a springboard for bombers and other weapons, yet distant enough—almost 5,000km from the Chinese mainland—to be out of range of China’s most numerous missiles. A new Marine Corps base on Guam that opened in October is the corps’ first in Asia since 1952. Guam remains acutely vulnerable to low-flying cruise missiles that China could fire from ships, subs and bombers. INCOPACOM therefore wants to spend almost $4.4bn over six years to upgrade the island’s air and missile defences,

But if American bases in Japan and South Korea are peppered with missiles, Guam may not suffice.T... intend to spend $9bn over six years building and upgrading runways, fuel stores and arms depots, among other infrastructure, all across the region. Potential sites include American territories, such as Tinian; islands in countries with military compacts with America, such as Yap in the Federated States of Micronesia, and other, as-yet-unspecified countries in East Asia and the Pacific.

The point of this dispersal is not simply wait for an onslaught, but also to give China a taste of its own medicine. Trump’s withdrawal from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2019 means that America is free to build conventional land-based missiles with a range of over 500km. The PDI sets aside $3.3bn over six years for such missiles, which would be aimed at China’s navy. The catch is that not many countries are enthused by the prospect of hosting American missiles in peacetime or becoming a refuge for American troops in the middle of a shooting war.

In the meantime, INDOPACOM wants to lubricate relations with cash. More than $2.6bn is earmarked for training and equipping friends in the region over six years. That is sorely needed: last year China’s defence budget grew by $12bn, more than every other Asian country combined, according to IISS. For now, this remains a wish list. America’s defence spending is not expected to grow this year and the PDI must be carved out of the main budget. Admiral Davidson points out that his request is “less than seven-tenths of 1%” of defence spending. W hat is pocket change for the Pentagon would make a splash in the Pacific."

[havoc]

Chinese Navy Holds Intensive Combat Drills in Three Surrounding Seas (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/chinese-navy-holds-intensive-combat-drills-in-three-surrounding-seas/ar-BB1eEia6?ocid=msedgdhp)

The People's Liberation Army (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/peoples-liberation-army) Navy has conducted "intensive" combat exercises in three major seas surrounding the country, Chinese military channels reported this week. The Chinese (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/china) navy's simultaneous release of information and images from its Northern, Eastern and Southern theater commands came ahead of the Biden administration's first overseas diplomatic visits to Tokyo and Seoul.

According to China's state broadcaster CCTV, PLA warships and warplanes took part in recent live-fire exercises in the Yellow Sea, as well as the contested East and South China seas, where the Chinese government has territorial disputes.

The "combat-oriented" naval exercises in the Yellow Sea included main and secondary autocannon firing by corvettes Wuhai, Datong and Yingkou, the national television station said Sunday. Type 052 destroyer Qingdao and frigate Yantai and were ordered to sink an "enemy frigate" during the same mock operation, Fujian-based Southeast Television (SETV) reported Tuesday. 0lEQVR42mNkYAAAAAYAAjCB0C8AAAAASUVORK5CYII=

The People's Liberation Army (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/peoples-liberation-army) Navy has conducted "intensive" combat exercises in three major seas surrounding the country, Chinese military channels reported this week. Chinese state broadcaster CCTV publicised the operation on March 14, 2021.

The Chinese (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/china) navy's simultaneous release of information and images from its Northern, Eastern and Southern theater commands came ahead of the Biden administration's first overseas diplomatic visits to Tokyo and Seoul.

According to China's state broadcaster CCTV, PLA warships and warplanes took part in recent live-fire exercises in the Yellow Sea, as well as the contested East and South China seas, where the Chinese government has territorial disputes.

The "combat-oriented" naval exercises in the Yellow Sea included main and secondary autocannon firing by corvettes Wuhai, Datong and Yingkou, the national television station said Sunday. Type 052 destroyer Qingdao and frigate Yantai and were ordered to sink an "enemy frigate" during the same mock operation, Fujian-based Southeast Television (SETV) reported Tuesday.

In the East China Sea (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/east-china-sea), where Beijing claims rights over the Japan-controlled Senkaku Islands (https://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-warns-china-about-miscalculation-over-actions-japanese-waters-1571552), Type 051 destroyer Jinan practiced torpedo countermeasures while frigate Changzhou launched torpedos against a simulated submarine target, CCTV said. Anti-submarine aircraft were also present during the drill.

A far seas operation force comprising four ships held attack exercises against "enemy aircraft and surface vessels" in the South China Sea, SETV reported. Among them was Type 052D destroyer Yinchuan, Type 071 amphibious transport dock Wuzhishan, frigate Hengyang and support ship Chaganhu.

Chaganhu, a Type 091 replenishment vessel, was also part of a 34-day far seas mission which took the PLA Navy across the International Data Line deep into the Pacific, the Chinese military said last month.

The South China Sea (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/south-china-sea) operation also included search and rescue and driving training, said Sunday's CCTV military report. Similar exercises are expected to continue in the area for the entirety of March, with China's maritime authority announcing a no-go zone around Leizhou Peninsula (https://www.newsweek.com/taiwan-begins-missile-tests-amid-chinese-military-drills-south-china-sea-1573382) until the end of the month.

China's state-run broadcaster said the naval forces from the three theater commands conducted more than 10 training items in total but did not reveal when exactly the drills took place.

The announcement, however, coincided with the visits to Japan (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/japan) and South Korea (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/south-korea) by Secretary of State Antony Blinken (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/antony-blinken) and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/lloyd-austin).

The top Biden officials arrived in Tokyo (https://www.newsweek.com/antony-blinken-china-first-foreign-trip-japan-south-korea-1576420) early Tuesday and will be in Seoul on Wednesday for double "2+2" sessions with their foreign and defense ministry counterparts.

On Thursday, Blinken will be joined by national security adviser Jake Sullivan as the pair host the administration's first in-person sit-down with Chinese diplomats (https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-xi-jinping-diplomats-talk-over-deep-disagreements-1575306) Yang Jiechi (https://www.newsweek.com/xi-jinpings-top-diplomat-warns-joe-biden-chinas-red-line-1566171) and Wang Yi in Alaska.

Related Articles

China Chides 'Cold War Mentality' As Antony Blinken Bolsters Anti-Beijing Alliance (https://www.newsweek.com/china-chides-cold-war-mentality-antony-blinken-bolsters-anti-beijing-alliance-1576387)
U.S. Military's 'Maximum Pressure' in South China Sea 'Unprecedented': Beijing Think Tank (https://www.newsweek.com/us-military-maximum-pressure-south-china-sea-unprecedented-beijing-think-tank-1576390)
U.S. Navy Calls China's Rapid Sea Power Rise 'Concerning,' But Will 'Confront' (https://www.newsweek.com/us-navy-calls-chinas-rapid-sea-power-rise-concerning-will-confront-1574608)

[West Coast]

China building large heliport. Another step.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39837/massive-new-chinese-military-heliport-taking-shape-right-across-from-taiwan

[jolihokistix]

Chinese places 220 'fishing boats' in rows on the arrowhead at the NE corner of the Whitsun Reef, claimed also by Vietnam and The Philippines.
https://www.dw.com/en/philippines-asks-chinese-flotilla-to-leave-disputed-reef/a-56943127

[Asturias56]

China building large heliport. Another step.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39837/massive-new-chinese-military-heliport-taking-shape-right-across-from-taiwan


Interesting as some of the reports posted over the past few months have identified that lack of bases close to Taiwan are probably a limiting factor in just how much the PLA could mobilise against the island directly

[kilomikedelta]

it is of interest that all of this activity is being done by the communist party of china army,navy and airforce led by someone named Xi who claims to be the the leader of those forces.
there is no republic in mainland china.

[etudiant]

it is of interest that all of this activity is being done by the communist party of china army,navy and airforce led by someone named Xi who claims to be the the leader of those forces.
there is no republic in mainland china.

The Chinese constitution makes no claim to be other than a socialist state. ( CONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (http://en.people.cn/constitution/constitution.html))
The word 'republic' does not appear in the document.

[ORAC]

The word 'republic' does not appear in the document.
Hmmm, it’s the fifth word - in loud capitals - of the title of the document (as shown in your link...)

[etudiant]

Hmmm, it’s the fifth word - in loud capitals - of the title of the document (as shown in your link...)

My bad!
The title is indeed People's Republic, but the text does not seem to go into detail as to what the 'republic' is.

[minigundiplomat]

China building large heliport. Another step.

The US cruise missile manufacturers thank you for your business.

[Lordflasheart]

...
Recent posts have made passing mention of ASW - Don't forget the large helo base on Nanji-Shan (approx 27.5 N 121 E). There may be others.

it's probably another facet of the 两瓶塞反潜防御 programme, for which the purpose is to deny hostile submarine access to the entire Taiwan Strait.

LFH
...

[ORAC]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/china-s-growing-firepower-casts-doubt-whether-u-s-could-n1262148

China's growing firepower casts doubt on whether U.S. could defend Taiwan

WASHINGTON — China's massive arms buildup has raised doubts about America's ability to defend Taiwan if a war broke out, reflecting a shifting balance of power in the Pacific where American forces once dominated, U.S. officials and experts say.

In simulated combat in which China (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/would-biden-get-tough-china-n1239203) attempts to invade Taiwan (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/taiwan-feared-biden-would-be-softer-trump-china-so-far-n1261274), the results are sobering and the United States often loses, said David Ochmanek, a former senior Defense Department official who helps run war games for the Pentagon at the RAND Corp. think tank.

In tabletop exercises with America as the "blue team" facing off against a "red team" resembling China (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/more-words-democrats-republicans-hope-biden-will-take-harder-line-n1261357), Taiwan's air force is wiped out within minutes, U.S. air bases across the Pacific come under attack, and American warships and aircraft are held at bay by the long reach of China's vast missile arsenal, he said.

"Even when the blue teams in our simulations and war games intervened in a determined way, they don't always succeed in defeating the invasion," Ochmanek said.......

[etudiant]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/china-s-growing-firepower-casts-doubt-whether-u-s-could-n1262148

China's growing firepower casts doubt on whether U.S. could defend Taiwan

WASHINGTON — China's massive arms buildup has raised doubts about America's ability to defend Taiwan if a war broke out, reflecting a shifting balance of power in the Pacific where American forces once dominated, U.S. officials and experts say.

In simulated combat in which China (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/would-biden-get-tough-china-n1239203) attempts to invade Taiwan (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/taiwan-feared-biden-would-be-softer-trump-china-so-far-n1261274), the results are sobering and the United States often loses, said David Ochmanek, a former senior Defense Department official who helps run war games for the Pentagon at the RAND Corp. think tank.

In tabletop exercises with America as the "blue team" facing off against a "red team" resembling China (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/more-words-democrats-republicans-hope-biden-will-take-harder-line-n1261357), Taiwan's air force is wiped out within minutes, U.S. air bases across the Pacific come under attack, and American warships and aircraft are held at bay by the long reach of China's vast missile arsenal, he said.

"Even when the blue teams in our simulations and war games intervened in a determined way, they don't always succeed in defeating the invasion," Ochmanek said.......

That has been true for some years.
The most recent games just show that the Chinese would win 'more quickly'.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/australia-to-build-missiles-to-counter-chinese-threat-kdqcc500b

Australia to Build Domestic Missiles to Counter Chinese Threat

Scott Morrison, the prime minister, has announced Australia is to build its own missiles to allay fears that it would quickly run out of munitions in a regional conflict — probably against China. The A$1 billion (£550 million) project was unveiled on the 100th anniversary of the Royal Australian Air Force. The funds will be fast-tracked to create a military manufacturing industry.

The government expects to spend A$100 billion on defence over the next 20 years. At present it buys missiles from US, European and Israeli manufacturers, through long supply chains that are vulnerable to disruption.

Morrison said a new facility could produce weapons within three years. He emphasised that Australia must meet its own needs in a changing environment but did not mention China’s militarisation of local seas. “It is imperative we now proceed with the creation of a sovereign guided-weapons capability as a priority,” Morrison said. A “strategic partner” for the project will be chosen this year.

Michael Shoebridge, a director at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, a think tank, said that China’s aggression and the vulnerability of global supply chains exposed by the coronavirus were a concern for Australia. Its most pressing need was for long-range anti-ship missiles, he said.

If China moved to take control of Taiwan (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/china-could-be-preparing-to-invade-taiwan-by-2027-says-us-commander-ltt6f55wd), Australia would need a lot of missiles quickly and could not rely on importing them in time, he added.....

[etudiant]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/australia-to-build-missiles-to-counter-chinese-threat-kdqcc500b

Australia to Build Domestic Missiles to Counter Chinese Threat

Scott Morrison, the prime minister, has announced Australia is to build its own missiles to allay fears that it would quickly run out of munitions in a regional conflict — probably against China. The A$1 billion (£550 million) project was unveiled on the 100th anniversary of the Royal Australian Air Force. The funds will be fast-tracked to create a military manufacturing industry.

The government expects to spend A$100 billion on defence over the next 20 years. At present it buys missiles from US, European and Israeli manufacturers, through long supply chains that are vulnerable to disruption.

Morrison said a new facility could produce weapons within three years. He emphasised that Australia must meet its own needs in a changing environment but did not mention China’s militarisation of local seas. “It is imperative we now proceed with the creation of a sovereign guided-weapons capability as a priority,” Morrison said. A “strategic partner” for the project will be chosen this year.

Michael Shoebridge, a director at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, a think tank, said that China’s aggression and the vulnerability of global supply chains exposed by the coronavirus were a concern for Australia. Its most pressing need was for long-range anti-ship missiles, he said.

If China moved to take control of Taiwan (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/china-could-be-preparing-to-invade-taiwan-by-2027-says-us-commander-ltt6f55wd), Australia would need a lot of missiles quickly and could not rely on importing them in time, he added.....

Why Australia would need a lot of missiles if China takes control of Taiwan is not clear.
Afaik, the US as well as Australia have accepted that China includes Taiwan, under the 'one country, two systems' formula.
Admittedly, the 'two systems' concept was abrogated in Hong Kong with minimal respect for the treaty returning it to Chinese rule, so Taiwan is visibly vulnerable.
Still, Taiwan is nowhere near as susceptible to the kind of salami reincorporation tactics as was Hong Kong, so any Chinese action would have to be overtly military and thus messy.
But absent recognition of Taiwan as an independent country, where is the basis for military action?

[Mozella]

........ snip................. so Taiwan is visibly vulnerable.
Still, Taiwan is nowhere near as susceptible to the kind of salami reincorporation tactics as was Hong Kong, so any Chinese action would have to be overtly military and thus messy.
.......... snip................
It's going to be a military action, but it need not be messy, or at least not REAL messy. The Chinese can just march into Taiwan and declare, Here we are. Now deal with it.

The Taiwanese will object of course, but they alone can't do much; therefore, limiting the size of the mess. And who else is going to step in to help them? The once-mighty British Empire? France? The United States under the leadership of Joe Xiden? I hardly think so.

I'm afraid China is now in a position to do pretty much as they like.

[jolihokistix]

China cannot forget her history. At the Battle of the Red Cliffs in 208, the over-confident Cao Cao was defeated by the combined forces of Liu Bei and Sun Quan. China is a history of warring states, preoccupied with constantly calculating the strength of the opponent, by fair means or foul.

[Buster Hyman]

Afaik, the US as well as Australia have accepted that China includes Taiwan, under the 'one country, two systems' formula.



https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/480x360/hqdefault_ae71f5d99cf4a07bd6041d250cdd413ad1dce558.jpg

[Asturias56]

No Buster - BOTH sides say the same thing and always have - for many years Taiwan hoped that the mainland would throw off the Communists and they'd be back in charge

[Big Pistons Forever]

It's going to be a military action, but it need not be messy, or at least not REAL messy. The Chinese can just march into Taiwan and declare, Here we are. Now deal with it.


I'm afraid China is now in a position to do pretty much as they like.

I don’t agree. Taking Taiwan by military force is a tough military problem, especially if you want anything left when you are done. They could unleash a massive missile and bombing campaign and level everything standing, but they still have to have boots on the ground and Taiwan has a lot of geography very amenable to a successful long term guerrilla campaign of attrition.

This scenario would be devastating to the China communist leadership as it would represent failure.

I also feel that Taiwan is not likely the pushover that people may think. Qualitatively I think they are significantly ahead of the PLA and Chinese senior leadership is still prioritizing political loyalty over military competence.

Yes the overwhelming force disparity means China will inevitably win but it will likely be at a very high cost. That cost would IMO be hard to hide from the Chinese people even with the current government choke hold on information.

Bottom line I bet serious money against deliberate overt sustained military operations against Taiwan. If it came to war it would most likely be a stupid move by an over eager PLA commander which provokes a response that China feels they can’t ignore and the situation spirals out of control.

Much more likely is a scorched earth economic embargo designed to drive the Taiwan economy to its knees. Destroying the economy of a client state to the economic disadvantage of China in order to obtain a political win, is obviously on the table given what is happening in Hong Kong.

[Zombywoof]

gorilla campaign

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/736x381/gorilla_campaign_81be5556a2f92eadb5c0decee48a6f1a2194ea1e.jp g

[kiwi grey]

Much more likely is a scorched earth economic embargo designed to drive the Taiwan economy to its knees. Destroying the economy of a client state to the economic disadvantage of China in order to obtain a political win, is obviously on the table given what is happening in Hong Kong.
A big difference between Hong Hong and Taiwan is that whilst Hong Kong makes very little that is important let alone vital to the western economy, Taiwan absolutely does.
For example Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) makes all the chips that make AMD's CPUs, all the chips that make Apple's iStuff go, and a proportion even of Intel's CPUs [because Intel has completely stuffed up its 10nm manufacturing, but that's another story]. There are several other Taiwanese companies that are also strategically vital to the western economic system.
The CCP cannot choke the Taiwan economy without also causing a much-bigger-than-Covid shock to the whole western economic system. "Wow, a win-win for China" you say, but not so, the Chinese economy depends to a huge extent on manufacturing goods for export to the rest of the world. If those markets evaporate, so does a lot of Chinese domestic prosperity.
I'm not sure how long even the CCP could maintain control under that kind of pressure.

[Big Pistons Forever]

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/736x381/gorilla_campaign_81be5556a2f92eadb5c0decee48a6f1a2194ea1e.jp g
thank you auto correct...NOT

[Big Pistons Forever]

A big difference between Hong Hong and Taiwan is that whilst Hong Kong makes very little that is important let alone vital to the western economy, Taiwan absolutely does.
For example Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) makes all the chips that make AMD's CPUs, all the chips that make Apple's iStuff go, and a proportion even of Intel's CPUs [because Intel has completely stuffed up its 10nm manufacturing, but that's another story]. There are several other Taiwanese companies that are also strategically vital to the western economic system.
The CCP cannot choke the Taiwan economy without also causing a much-bigger-than-Covid shock to the whole western economic system. "Wow, a win-win for China" you say, but not so, the Chinese economy depends to a huge extent on manufacturing goods for export to the rest of the world. If those markets evaporate, so does a lot of Chinese domestic prosperity.
I'm not sure how long even the CCP could maintain control under that kind of pressure.

I think that the Chinese leadership is willing to subject their population to an amount of pain unimaginable in Western Democracies.

[Asturias56]

"whilst Hong Kong makes very little that is important let alone vital to the western economy"

It makes MONEY - anyone in the City of London would swap any number of chip factories for cash................

[fitliker]

Could this be the beginning of a global boxer rebellion ?

[racedo]

Could this be the beginning of a global boxer rebellion ?

Y Front do you think that ? :confused:

[Lyneham Lad]

Article & photos in The Times.
China sends maritime militia to disputed reefs (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ead69706-962c-11eb-b066-4357071f66d7?shareToken=203f5c5a0ca9a5faa5152da245f599d5)

The Philippines suggested the presence of hundreds of Chinese paramilitary ships “swarming” around a disputed reef risked military conflict in the latest escalation of tensions in the South China Sea (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/south-china-sea-dispute-beijing-names-more-islands-to-strengthen-territorial-claims-j3fjkk8z3).

A senior aide to President Duterte of the Philippines said the “incursions” by hundreds of Chinese vessels into the disputed waters could “trigger unwanted hostilities that both countries would rather not pursue”.The remarks are the sternest yet from Manila since it filed a diplomatic protest two weeks ago about a “threatening” presence of 220 Chinese vessels around a reef that it claims as its own.

Salvador Panelo, chief legal counsel to Duterte, said the boats’ presence since last month in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone was an unwelcome strain on relations, adding: “We can negotiate on matters of mutual concern and benefit, but make no mistake about it — our sovereignty is non-negotiable.” Duterte’s spokesman, Harry Roque, said: “We will not give up even a single inch of our national territory or our exclusive economic zone.”

China (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/china)maintains the vessels are simply fishing boats that have been taking shelter from the wind, and that they have the right to shelter and fish in “Chinese territory”.

Manila and independent analysts say they are vessels of the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia, which is part of the Chinese armed forces.

The Philippines has said 220 Chinese vessels were seen moored around Whitsun Reef, a boomerang-shaped feature that emerges above the water at low tide, on March 7. Satellite images showed the ships anchored in bunched-up lines. They have not appeared to be fishing, and they switch on powerful lights at night.

Click the link for remainder & photos etc.

[minigundiplomat]

I don’t agree. Taking Taiwan by military force is a tough military problem, especially if you want anything left when you are done. They could unleash a massive missile and bombing campaign and level everything standing, but they still have to have boots on the ground and Taiwan has a lot of geography very amenable to a successful long term guerrilla campaign of attrition.

This scenario would be devastating to the China communist leadership as it would represent failure.

I also feel that Taiwan is not likely the pushover that people may think. Qualitatively I think they are significantly ahead of the PLA and Chinese senior leadership is still prioritizing political loyalty over military competence.

Yes the overwhelming force disparity means China will inevitably win but it will likely be at a very high cost. That cost would IMO be hard to hide from the Chinese people even with the current government choke hold on information.

Bottom line I bet serious money against deliberate overt sustained military operations against Taiwan. If it came to war it would most likely be a stupid move by an over eager PLA commander which provokes a response that China feels they can’t ignore and the situation spirals out of control.

Much more likely is a scorched earth economic embargo designed to drive the Taiwan economy to its knees. Destroying the economy of a client state to the economic disadvantage of China in order to obtain a political win, is obviously on the table given what is happening in Hong Kong.

Sorry, you are judging China by Western values. The Chinese public would never hear of any failure, neither would they question them too hard.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Sorry, you are judging China by Western values. The Chinese public would never hear of any failure, neither would they question them too hard.

I am not so sure. Social media has changed the game for despotic regimes. I don’t think the kind of casualties on both sides necessary to subdue Taiwan can be covered up.

It would be a blood bath because China can’t afford to lose, that is why I think war is unlikely.

[minigundiplomat]

And the Chinese public would find that out through Google, or Facebook?

[West Coast]

Sorry, you are judging China by Western values. The Chinese public would never hear of any failure, neither would they question them too hard.

Far too many spigots to shut off to keep the word from spreading.

[Fareastdriver]

There was enough backlash from the PLA losses during China's war with Vietnam. With over a billion mobile phones Beijing will not be able to keep a bloodbath in Taiwan quiet.

[Buster Hyman]

And yet they seemed to try it in the LAC fracas. Albeit a much smaller & remote conflict.

[Deaf]

Boring S**t

TMSC has production problems due drought. Maybe 3 power failures due XXX and we have a few months gap in high end semiconductor production.

[havoc]

China's Rhineland test in the South China Sea (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/china-s-rhineland-test-in-the-south-china-sea/ar-BB1frE1g?ocid=msedgdhp)

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is enabling China to do in the South China Sea what Nazi Germany did with its remilitarization of the Rhineland in 1936 — that is to say, physically challenge the established international order in a politically potent manner.

The consequences for America, the South China Sea rim nations, and the broader international community may be significant.At contention is the Chinese maritime militia force (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/facing-chinese-invasion-fleet-rodrigo-duterte-kneels-before-xi) that has moored itself within the Philippines' exclusive economic zone. The approximately 200 vessels have been sitting in Whitsun Reef since late March. In 2016, an international maritime arbitration ruled in favor of the Philippines' sovereignty over the Spratly chain of which Whitsun Reef is a part. Still, China insists it owns the South China Sea. This geographic absurdity serves (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/its-geography-stupid-proof-of-chinas-imperialism) China's imperial effort to make itself into a 21st-century version (http://www.tomroganthinks.com/2014/10/china.html) of 1930s/1940s Japan — a power that is able to dictate political concessions from other nations in return for their access to the multitrillion-dollar trade flows that move through these waters.

The Rhineland comparison takes root in the fact that, as with China in this situation, Nazi Germany's incursion was ultimately designed to test whether Britain and France would back up their claims with action. They did not. With regards to the Whitsun Reef, America's problem is that the Philippines is a treaty ally led by an anti-American clown. Apparently determined to follow in German Chancellor Angela Merkel's footsteps (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/angela-merkel-reminds-us-why-she-deserves-chinas-friendship-medal) and win China's order of friendship at all costs, Duterte is unwilling (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/facing-chinese-invasion-fleet-rodrigo-duterte-kneels-before-xi) to defend his nation's interests. The degree to which Duterte gleefully appeases China's aggression is truly striking. Consider, for example, that the supposedly strongman president has transformed his navy into a glorified beach patrol (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/at-chinas-behest-rodrigo-duterte-turns-his-navy-into-a-beach-patrol).

So, while the U.S. and the Philippine defense establishments recognize the import of China's incursion, their hands are tied. Their long-standing mutual defense treaty is caught between China's bold incursion and the messy place of Duterte's mind.

China was banking on this tension. This deployment is almost certainly a design of Chinese President Xi Jinping's foreign policy brain, Yang Jiechi (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/china-brings-six-lies-to-anchorage). Yang wants to undermine the Biden administration as it seeks to strengthen alliances (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/countering-china-biden-rightly-doubles-down-on-the-quad) in the Indo-Pacific region. It wants to show that America's "free and open Indo-Pacific" is as rhetoric-thin as was the Treaty of Versailles.

Smarter than the Nazis (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/morality-aside-adolf-hitler-was-a-garbage-leader), the Chinese communists are playing a longer game. They claim that their militia vessels are fishing trawlers that are simply taking temporary shelter. The Chinese know that the United States and the Philippines know that this claim is a lie (the weather is fine and will remain (https://www.weathercrave.com/weather-forecast-world/island-42903/weather-forecast-spratly-islands-today) so for the near future), but the fishing veil offers a useful excuse for the European Union to avoid supporting their allies in favor of "seeking clarity," etc. Regardless, because the militia vessels have been asked to leave but have not done so, China can credibly present the Biden administration as hesitant. It hopes that regional powers such as Australia, Japan, Taiwan (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/does-kelly-craft-need-a-fighter-escort-for-taiwan-visit), and even India (http://www.tomroganthinks.com/2016/06/india.html) will take notice and question whether the U.S. is really all that reliable. If nothing else, it has a new reason to be confident that future antics such as this one will go unchallenged. To be clear, China does not want a shooting war. What it wants is to foster an acceptance of its omnipotent possession of the South China Sea, gradually but systemically. Its Whitsun Reef test advances that agenda.

The Biden administration faces a very difficult choice.

The Theodore Roosevelt carrier strike group is operating in the South China Sea, as is the Makin Island amphibious assault ship (Makin Island is embarked with the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which includes a detachment of F-35B fighter jets (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/pentagon-and-lockheed-martin-heads-should-roll-over-f-35-disgrace)). But with Duterte unwilling to demand China's relocation of the militia fleet and unwilling to enforce that withdrawal with his own military, the U.S. Navy is generally impotent here. Beijing is likely confident that the U.S. will not escalate in support of an ally if that ally is unwilling to defend its own interests. They'll be equally confident that Duterte won't change tack in a significant matter.

At least until Duterte leaves office, China will continue to exploit him. But Beijing will hope that the corrosive impact of this crisis sustains far beyond Duterte's premiership. Again, this is to the South China Sea what the Nazis' 1936 seizure of the Rhineland was to European security: a risky military test carrying profound political implications. Genocide, it seems, is not the only area (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/china-emulates-monty-python-with-evil-uighur-propaganda-briefing) in which China finds an example from the Nazis.

Original Author: Tom Rogan (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/author/tom-rogan)

[etudiant]

It is all very well to complain about 'Chinese aggression' and throw around Nazi analogies, but the sad truth is that everybody is hooked on Chinese production, so China can and certainly will push its claims much further than it has to date.
The US is running a $30B/month trade deficit with China, that allows China to pay for lots of militia boats and a surging Navy. Their $400B deal with Iran and their ongoing port development in Pakistan and the African coast signal their future goals, to dominate the ocean lanes from the Mid East to China. The South China Sea is sort of their equivalent of what the Gulf of Mexico is for the US, Chinese waters beyond discussion from their perspective.

[Prawn2king4]

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202104/1220619.shtml

[Lonewolf_50]

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-21/niall-ferguson-a-taiwan-crisis-may-end-the-american-empire

Niall Ferguson (see the link) has a pretty good article on the elephant in the room - what about Taiwan? - that has remained an open question between the US and China for over 50 years. In the meantime, Taiwan has carved out a niche in the global economic system.
Mr Biden will be tested, and the question is (for me): was the "pivot to the Pacific" too late when President Obama finally made it an overt aspect of American policy? (For my money, GHW Bush was far too optim1istic in his "after the wall came down" assessment of the Pacific Rim). I spent a lot of years grinding my teeth at what I saw as willful negligence ... (rant cancelled).

Seventh Fleet is going to have a busy AO for a long time to come: flying, sailing, and submarining.

Interesting, to me, to see how Mr Duterte is playing his piece of the game. Does he think that the Chinese dragon will eat him, the Philippine bison, last? :uhoh:

[Asturias56]

Duterte would be out of his depth running a corner store. He doesn't want the pain of bad relations with Chine, he certainly doesn't want a war but he talks BIG on every subject and some of his supporters are pressing him to "defend the Republic" - you make your bed, you have to lie in it

[ORAC]

Niall Ferguson (see the link) has a pretty good article on the elephant in the room - what about Taiwan?


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-senate-unveils-bipartisan-plan-to-counter-global-influence-of-china-bk5n9b68c

US Senate unveils bipartisan plan to counter global influence of China

United States senators have unveiled wide-ranging plans to confront China by beefing up the American military in the Pacific, cracking down on intellectual property theft and enhancing support for Taiwan.

The draft Strategic Competition Act of 2021 is a rare bipartisan initiative designed to counter China’s rising global influence. It reflects toughened attitudes towards Beijing among Democrats and Republicans in Congress.

The 280-page draft calls on the Pentagon to strengthen military ties with allies in the Indo-Pacific region in the face of Beijing’s military modernisation and expansion.

It calls for an enhanced partnership with Taiwan, which China regards as its own and which the US at present supports but without officially recognising. The bill states that Taiwan is “vital” to US strategic interests and that there should be no limits on American officials’ interactions with their Taiwanese counterparts.

This is in keeping with a lifting of restrictions governing official contacts with Taiwan under the Trump administration.

The draft legislation, drawn up by the Senate foreign relations committee, also calls on the White House and state department to advocate and actively advance Taiwan’s participation in the UN and other international bodies, as well as to promote democracy in Hong Kong.

The bill would also allow for further sanctions (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-announces-new-sanctions-against-officials-after-hong-kong-election-overhaul-rbnj5knqm) on Chinese officials in relation to abuses against the minority Muslim Uighur population in Xinjiang.

On the economic front, the bill would require the secretary of state to issue a list each year of Chinese state-owned companies that have benefited from intellectual property theft that hurt American companies.....

The foreign relations committee plans to debate the draft legislation next week.

Bob Menendez, the Democratic chairman of the committee, said it was the first significant proposal to bring Democrats and Republicans together in laying out a strategic approach towards Beijing. The aim was to show the US was ready and capable of competing with China across all dimensions of national and international power for decades to come, he said.

“I am confident that this effort has the necessary support to be overwhelmingly approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee next week and the full Senate shortly thereafter,” he said.

[etudiant]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-senate-unveils-bipartisan-plan-to-counter-global-influence-of-china-bk5n9b68c

US Senate unveils bipartisan plan to counter global influence of China

United States senators have unveiled wide-ranging plans to confront China by beefing up the American military in the Pacific, cracking down on intellectual property theft and enhancing support for Taiwan.

The draft Strategic Competition Act of 2021 is a rare bipartisan initiative designed to counter China’s rising global influence. It reflects toughened attitudes towards Beijing among Democrats and Republicans in Congress.

The 280-page draft calls on the Pentagon to strengthen military ties with allies in the Indo-Pacific region in the face of Beijing’s military modernisation and expansion.

It calls for an enhanced partnership with Taiwan, which China regards as its own and which the US at present supports but without officially recognising. The bill states that Taiwan is “vital” to US strategic interests and that there should be no limits on American officials’ interactions with their Taiwanese counterparts.

This is in keeping with a lifting of restrictions governing official contacts with Taiwan under the Trump administration.

The draft legislation, drawn up by the Senate foreign relations committee, also calls on the White House and state department to advocate and actively advance Taiwan’s participation in the UN and other international bodies, as well as to promote democracy in Hong Kong.

The bill would also allow for further sanctions (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-announces-new-sanctions-against-officials-after-hong-kong-election-overhaul-rbnj5knqm) on Chinese officials in relation to abuses against the minority Muslim Uighur population in Xinjiang.

On the economic front, the bill would require the secretary of state to issue a list each year of Chinese state-owned companies that have benefited from intellectual property theft that hurt American companies.....

The foreign relations committee plans to debate the draft legislation next week.

Bob Menendez, the Democratic chairman of the committee, said it was the first significant proposal to bring Democrats and Republicans together in laying out a strategic approach towards Beijing. The aim was to show the US was ready and capable of competing with China across all dimensions of national and international power for decades to come, he said.

“I am confident that this effort has the necessary support to be overwhelmingly approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee next week and the full Senate shortly thereafter,” he said.

Machiavelli had a maxim 'never do your enemy a slight injury'. I wish these legislators had heard of it.
It is just incoherent to force feed Chinese industry thanks to our huge stimulus spending, which is causing a huge shipping shortage for goods from China, while simultaneously reacting to Chinese expansion with pinprick sanctions that are ineffectual but annoying.
A 200% tariff on Chinese goods, similar to what China put on Australian wine, might have a more perceptible impact and would show serious concern.

[V-Jet]

It's a bit hard to crack down on intellectual theft when it's already been stolen. Cat and bag as well as bolting horses spring to mind.

China has to be held accountable IMHO but as alluded to above (and I've enjoyed reading all) it's not so easy.

What would Churchill have made of this? I suspect I know....

[Asturias56]

"200% tariff on Chinese goods,"

Boy that would hurt Apple etc pretty badly - I can hear the screams now

[West Coast]

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-21/niall-ferguson-a-taiwan-crisis-may-end-the-american-empire

Niall Ferguson (see the link) has a pretty good article on the elephant in the room - what about Taiwan? - that has remained an open question between the US and China for over 50 years. In the meantime, Taiwan has carved out a niche in the global economic system.
Mr Biden will be tested, and the question is (for me): was the "pivot to the Pacific" too late when President Obama finally made it an overt aspect of American policy? (For my money, GHW Bush was far too optim1istic in his "after the wall came down" assessment of the Pacific Rim). I spent a lot of years grinding my teeth at what I saw as willful negligence ... (rant cancelled).

Seventh Fleet is going to have a busy AO for a long time to come: flying, sailing, and submarining.

Interesting, to me, to see how Mr Duterte is playing his piece of the game. Does he think that the Chinese dragon will eat him, the Philippine bison, last? :uhoh:

Staying in theme, I can’t help but laugh at the author characterizing Pompeo as a fox. The two largest economies in the world, locked in a quasi cold war can’t be defined by the singular issue of Taiwan.

[etudiant]

"200% tariff on Chinese goods,"

Boy that would hurt Apple etc pretty badly - I can hear the screams now

Exactly true.
Withdrawal is a painful therapy for the addiction to cheap Chinese goods which is killing Western industry.
Sadly no Western politician has the stature to make that happen. Newt Gingrich, when asked many years ago, said there would be a revolt if that were done.

[tartare]

A 200 percent tariff on cheap Chinese goods would see many major retailers go under.
Our equivalent of B&Q/Home Depot, Bunnings, gets a huge amount of its stock from China.
Often not easily identifiable until you read the fine print.
Suspect it's the same across many sectors.
And that's not even addressing the component parts issue.

[etudiant]

A 200 percent tariff on cheap Chinese goods would see many major retailers go under.
Our equivalent of B&Q/Home Depot, Bunnings, gets a huge amount of its stock from China.
Often not easily identifiable until you read the fine print.
Suspect it's the same across many sectors.
And that's not even addressing the component parts issue.

Doubtless true. Addiction is painfully hard to shake.
Think it must be done, else our children will be Chinese serfs, but kids don't vote.

[Asturias56]

"Think it must be done, else our children will be Chinese serfs, but kids don't vote."

At various times since 1850 different countries have been the worlds main exporter of goods - the UK 1850 -1890, Germany 1890-1910, USA 1910 -2010, China 2010 - none of them finished up "enslaving" the whole world

I'd put my money on India to replace China eventually and then Brazil & Nigeria beyond that

[ATC Watcher]

And that's not even addressing the component parts issue.
remember that Container ship blocked in the Suez canal some time ago . it was only a 10 days delay in delivering essential parts for the car industry in Germany which was crying murder and threats of production stoppages that would take months to restore .
I am afraid China hold us by the balls and we more than willingly let them do it..

On thing I always remember when visiting for the first time the PRC in 1976 ,an organized few hours tour , 1h train ride from Hong Kong to a small poor village accross the border called Shenzen . When some of us made remarks about the overall poverty, the propaganda tour guide said something like : You westerners are always looking for a quick solution, quick wins, China can wait 1000 years. one day we will surpass you . . We keep forgetting that.

[V-Jet]

You westerners are always looking for a quick solution, quick wins, China can wait 1000 years. one day we will surpass you . . We keep forgetting that.

It’s actually unusual that China isn’t far in front of the West. Historically, they have led the world in major military and intellectual advances. As I’m sure they see it, they are simply re asserting their previous dominance.

If the world has changed enough, the West (as it did in 1939) will stand up for itself and say ‘enough’. If not, we need acquiesce and accept our position subordinate to China before too much damage is done. Are we woke or are we not?

[Asturias56]

"If the world has changed enough, the West (as it did in 1939) will stand up for itself "

That's a view often put forward here but of course its based on a historical inaccuracy. The "West" didn't step up against Hitler in 1939 - only the Poles, the British & French and their respective Empires did and they were only fighting the Germans (and Austrians). Most other European countries, but not all (no Ireland, Switz, Sweden, Spain or Portugal), were eventually dragged in from 1940-41. The US didn't come in for over 2 years and various other countries came in even later - the Russians finally joining the war against Japan a week or so before the end. If Hitler hadn't kept invading everyone in sight it would have remained a restricted war, probably with restricted results. Same with the Japanese - if they'd stayed in China or even only invaded the Russian Far East would the USA have come in?

Western countries only "stood up" when there was literally no alternative or when they were actually invaded. I suspect the same will happen with China

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/training-sim/2021/04/12/a-us-air-force-war-game-shows-what-the-service-needs-to-hold-off-or-win-against-china-in-2030/

A US Air Force war game shows what the service needs to hold off — or win against — China in 2030

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force repelled a Chinese invasion of Taiwan during a massive war game last fall by relying on drones acting as a sensing grid, an advanced sixth-generation fighter jet able to penetrate the most contested environments, cargo planes dropping pallets of guided munitions and other novel technologies yet unseen on the modern battlefield.....

Furthermore, the air force that fought in the simulated conflict isn’t one that exists today, nor is it one the service is seemingly on a path to realize. While legacy planes like the B-52 bomber and newer ones like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter played a role, many key technologies featured during the exercise are not in production or even planned for development by the service.

Still, the outcome was a marked improvement to similar war games held over the last two years, which ended in catastrophic losses. The Air Force’s performance this fall offers a clearer vision of what mix of aircraft, drones, networks and other weapons systems it will need in the next decade if it hopes to beat China in a potential war. Some of those items could influence fiscal 2023 budget deliberations......

In the war game, four types of aircraft made up the Air Force’s future fighter inventory. Three of those are ongoing programs of record for the service:

The highly advanced Next Generation Air Dominance aircraft (https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/09/15/the-us-air-force-has-built-and-flown-a-mysterious-full-scale-prototype-of-its-future-fighter-jet/), or NGAD, and its associated systems, which were capable of penetrating highly contested airspace (https://www.defensenews.com/smr/air-force-priorities/2021/02/26/air-force-general-worried-us-wont-field-sixth-gen-fighter-in-time-to-beat-china/).
The Lockheed Martin-made F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which operated as a “workhorse” aircraft attacking targets at short ranges.
Boeing F-15EX (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/04/07/the-f-15ex-has-a-new-name/) aircraft, which mainly conducted defensive missions but were also loaded with long-range missiles and hypersonic weapons (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/04/06/the-first-flight-test-of-the-air-forces-air-launched-hypersonic-booster-didnt-go-as-planned/) to strike targets farther downrange.

Finally, the service operated a non-stealthy, light, tactical fighter for homeland and base defense, which could also be flown in support of counterterrorism missions. That aircraft, which aligns with Brown’s idea for a “fourth-generation plus” replacement for the F-16, doesn’t currently exist in the service’s budget plans.

For years, Air Force officials have portrayed the F-35 as the aircraft that it would use to infiltrate into enemy airspace to knock out surface-to-air missiles and other threats without being seen. However, in the war game, that role was played by the more survivable NGAD, in part due to the F-35′s inability to traverse the long ranges of the Pacific without a tanker nearby, Hinote said.

Instead, the F-35 attacked Chinese surface ships and ground targets, protected American and Taiwanese assets from Chinese aircraft, and provided cruise missile defense during the exercise. But “it’s not the one that’s pushing all the way in [Chinese airspace], or even over China’s territory,” Hinote said.

Notably, the F-35s used during the war game were the more advanced F-35 Block 4 aircraft (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/03/18/development-costs-for-the-f-35s-modernization-program-increased-by-19b-in-a-year/)under development, which will feature a suite of new computing equipment known as “Tech Refresh 3,” (https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/paris-air-show/2019/06/21/lockheed-hypes-f-35s-upgrade-plan-as-interest-in-sixth-gen-fighters-grows/)enhancements to its radar and electronic warfare systems, and new weapons. “We wouldn’t even play the current version of the F-35,” Hinote said. “It wouldn’t be worth it.......

The service plans to take its findings to Capitol Hill (https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/air-warfare-symposium/2020/02/24/convincing-congress-secretive-programs-could-prove-harmful-to-air-force-funding-plans/)in the hopes of gaining the support of lawmakers for the difficult force posture decisions coming down the line in upcoming budget discussions. Brown, the Air Force’s top general, has indicated that programs could be canceled and legacy aircraft retired (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/08/31/new-and-old-aircraft-programs-could-get-the-ax-as-top-us-air-force-general-calls-for-a-ruthless-prioritization-of-its-capabilities/)as the service seeks to revolutionize its technology.

But as Mackenzie Eaglen, a defense budget expert with the American Enterprise Institute, wrote in a March report (https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/The-2020s-Tri-Service-Modernization-Crunch.embargoed.pdf), Congress has repeatedly rolled back the service’s plans to cut its existing force structure.

“This leaves the Air Force trapped in a near-term Catch-22,” she stated. “On one hand, it is trying to divest itself of decades-old legacy airframes, which drive up [operations and maintenance] costs every year, so that it can reinvest in next-generation platforms.

On the other hand, its replacement aircraft programs will not be operational fast enough to meet the ongoing demands of global operations, even if the net savings from legacy divestments are sufficient to fund new platforms.”.....

[etudiant]

The game assumes the impossible in terms of USAF procurement to achieve a hard fought victory.
Given production trends in the US and China, the prospects grow steadily worse in future iterations.
So the logical conclusion is to encourage Taiwanese citizens to emigrate to California, as we don't really care about Taiwan, but we (and Apple and AMD and Nvidia and Qualcomp) do care about their semiconductors.

[ORAC]

Etudiant,

You are going to have to fight them eventually - and I am reminded of a comment from Charles DeGaulle reference the British, that the thing he admired most about them was they always had the sense to fight their wars in someone else’s country....

[etudiant]

Etudiant,

You are going to have to fight them eventually - and I am reminded of a comment from Charles DeGaulle reference the British, that the thing he admired most about them was they always had the sense to fight their wars in someone else’s country....
Actually, I think the fight option is pretty much gone.
When 90% of your advanced semiconductors come from Chinese(Taiwan) factories, you'd be silly to wage war on them.
We still could take the pain of closing our market to them, that worked poorly for Spain in the 17th and 18th centuries, it funded a smuggler subculture immortalized by Bizet's Carmen.
I'd love to see clever solutions, but right now, just stopping the land grab in the South China Seas would be a start, imho.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I think that it is important to recognize that the US military industrial complex is built to incentivize the use of expensive technologies to solve battle problems. I would also suggest that the system assigns unrealistic abilities to their adversaries.

I think the latter is especially true for China. It has certainly increased the number of platforms in the air and sea environment, but has yet to demonstrate the capability to manage joint effects in a complex battle space.

A war over Taiwan is a distraction from the the larger issue of managing Chinese aggression in all sphere’s, cyber, diplomatic, economic, monetary, cultural, International aid, environmental degradation, and many other touch points.

Iraq is the poster child for the most effective use of military force to a achieve a political objective, regime change, in the history of warfare. The mess after “Mission Accomplished” is the poster child for failure on every other non military foreign engagement metric.

[V-Jet]

raq is the poster child for the most effective use of military force to a achieve a political objective, regime change, in the history of warfare. The mess after “Mission Accomplished” is the poster child for failure on every other non military foreign engagement metric

Once the professionals had done their job and the politicians took over.

Taiwan is indeed a stepping stone - China has time on its side (literally all the time in the world) will not let it go and only has to be lucky once.

[tartare]

25 jets into the Taiwan ADZ.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/12/largest-chinese-breach-of-taiwan-air-zone-in-a-year-after-us-warning
Another slice of the salami...
Based on that very insightful US navy report a while back - one gets the impression the PLA navy would get slaughtered by Uncle Sam if they tried to invade, and the air force would be a turkey shoot.
The report said their amphibious capability is still weak.
But what the Chinese could do very effectively is rain all kinds of missile hell down on Taiwan.

[unmanned_droid]

China doesn't need to invade Taiwan. It just needs to do enough to shut Taiwan down, close it off and push the right internal buttons to effect the regime change it wants. An added bonus is that it (primarily) makes the US feel pain.

We already have some quite serious semi-conductor production issues and people seem to prefer talking about the issues rather than trying to solve them.

The only way to win this one is to be more self sufficient.

[Asturias56]

"You are going to have to fight them eventually - "

ORAC - that tends to be a self fulling prophecy - not all big Power confrontations end in war - the west never went to war with the USSR did they?

[ATC Watcher]

The only way to win this one is to be more self sufficient. which is probably what the global warning and Covid-crisis is about to bring us , one of the few positive effects of these crises: Short delivery circuits
Investment money is being poured into such projects at the moment, . In Netherlands a huge semi conductor plant is being boosted and I am sure there are similar initiatives in other countries.

[ORAC]

the west never went to war with the USSR did they? They certainly did - only using their most effective weapons available at the time, economic and productive. They forced the USSR into an arms race they couldn't afford and, through use of the international economic organisations thread helped found (the World Bank, IMF, WTO etc) they bankrupted them....

They don't have the first two advantages any more - and the Chinese saw what happened and either joined the latter or set up their own....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank

[ORAC]

Tentacles......

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-montenegro-billion-dollar-china-unfinished-highway-loan/

EU rebuffs Montenegro plea to help repay $1B Chinese highway loan

Brussels on Monday rejected a call by Montenegro's government to help finance a $1 billion Chinese loan for an unfinished highway project that has plunged the EU accession candidate into a debt crisis.

Senior government officials have urged the EU in recent weeks to help Montenegro repay the loan, which amounts to one-quarter of the country's overall debt, and has shone a spotlight on China's influence in the Western Balkans.

But the European Commission said it was not going to comply with that request: "The EU is already the largest provider of financial assistance to Montenegro, the largest investor and the largest trade partner," EU foreign policy spokesperson Peter Stano said at a regular press briefing. “We continue to stand by them, but we are not repaying the loans they are taking from third parties.”

The EU’s decision risks opening the door for China’s state-run lender, the Export-Import Bank of China, to control assets owned by Montenegro.

Critics say that Montenegro's previous government made a poor decision in 2014 when it — against EU advice — accepted the Chinese loan, which covers 85 percent of the cost for a controversial highway project that has yet to be completed.

Other countries like Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Djibouti accepted attractive loan offers under China's Belt and Road Initiative and now find themselves under financial pressure to repay them, which risks exposing them to Chinese influence.

“The EU has concerns over the socioeconomic and financial effects of some of China’s investments, or the debt that some of China’s investments can have in the country," Stano said. "Because there is the risk of macroeconomic imbalances and debt dependency.”

A spokesperson for Montenegro Prime Minister Zdravko Krivokapić had no immediate comment on the Commission's reaction.

[fitliker]

“The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.”

[ORAC]

Only very blurred photos - presumably deliberately....

China unveils another stealthy UCAV ? Alert 5 (http://alert5.com/2021/04/20/china-unveils-another-stealthy-ucav/#more-88301)

China unveils another stealthy UCAV

China’s 中天飞龙(西安)智能科技有限公司 announced this morning that its 飞龙-2 (Flying Dragon -2) stealth unmanned combat air vehicle prototype has rolled off the production line.

The company says the aircraft can carry different types of precision guided munitions for use against command centers, early warning radars, air defense systems, air bases, troop concentrations and aircraft carriers.

There was also a 飞龙-2 mockup unveiled during the Zhuhai airshow in 2018. At that time, the mockup had a pair of canted vertical fins. The new 飞龙-2 is a pure flying wing design.


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x535/image_cd0c58603fb74e9914a9a1eb123a1684a4a9dfcd.png

[Asturias56]

The Chines have been cracking down on folk posting things about their military programs on Social media

Apparently some of the latest published info on their carrier program comes from spotters who visit the big windows in a local IKEA that overlooks the shipyard and then post on SM.

[Lyneham Lad]

Article in The Times.
Chinese spy planes try to fly under Taiwan’s radar

(https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/99a865ec-a73b-11eb-b000-cc13f23b4eff?shareToken=33624ed0cdc756142d5e4bd5cb68e1c4)A Chinese spy plane attempted to fly underneath Taiwan’s radar detection as it gathered intelligence and tested the island’s air defences.

The Y-8 tactical reconnaissance aircraft from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) flew 30 metres above sea level off Taiwan yesterday as part of China’s growing military manoeuvres around the self-governing island.

Chinese aircraft have made almost daily incursions into Taiwan’s air defence identification zone since September. This was the lowest flight so far in an area that acts as a buffer between international airspace and a nation’s territorial airspace.

Lin Yin-yu, a professor at the Institute of Strategic and International Affairs at National Chung Cheng University in southern Taiwan, told the South China Morning Post that the low-altitude flight served to test the Taiwanese military’s radar response capability.

“By flying at an altitude of 30 metres, the PLA plane was testing if it could fly beneath the radio wave coverage area,” Lin said.

In Taiwan, however, the defence ministry said that it responded to the incursion by scrambling civil air patrol aircraft, issuing radio warnings and deploying the air defence missile system to monitor the spy plane.

Tensions over the Taiwan Strait have escalated sharply over recent months. Beijing has vowed to unify with what it considers a runaway province. Washington, which has a security pact with Taiwan to supply sufficient hardware and technology to fend off any mainland invasions, has pledged its support.

Last week China made a rare public display of its naval powers by commissioning three advanced warships, including its first amphibious attack ship, on the same day. Chinese military experts claimed that the ships would play “important roles in solving questions in places like the island of Taiwan and the South China Sea”.

Chang Yen-ting, a former Taiwanese air force vice-commander, told the South China Morning Post that flying so close to the surface tested a pilot’s skill because there was a risk that optical illusions would cause them to misjudge the plane’s height.


“This is why most of these flights are conducted in the daytime,” he said, noting that the clear sky and the good visibility in the morning allowed the spy plane to fly at such a low altitude over sea.

Experts believe that the Chinese military are frequently sending their planes near Taiwan not only to train pilots but also to collect intelligence on the island and the US military deployment in the region. The missions also serve to keep pressure on the island and wear down the Taiwanese air force.

Meanwhile, Beijing chided Canberra after Peter Dutton, the Australian defence minister, said that conflict with China over Taiwan should not be discounted.

Wang Wenbin, a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry, said that it was important that Australia was “prudent in its words and deeds” and acted to enhance “peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait”.

[Trevor the lover]

China ?????? Pfffft.....How many surfers do they have in the top 100 of the world rankings eh?? They're not that good........

[Asturias56]

China ?????? Pfffft.....How many surfers do they have in the top 100 of the world rankings eh?? They're not that good........

And they've never won the European Song Contest either............................

[ORAC]

And they've never won the European Song Contest either............................
Never heard of that one. The Eurovision Song Contest, however, includes Russia participation and Australia has taken part since 2015 - so there’s hope for China yet....

[Fareastdriver]

At the end of the last century we were tasked to fly a survey party from Wenzhou to a rig being towed through the Taiwan Straight. It was right in the middle and the radar pickup of the helicopter caused the Taiwan Air Defence radar to scramble the Taiwan QRA. When they hit the stratosphere on the way to have a look the PLAAF launched their equivalent.

The helicopter sat on the deck disembarking its passengers whilst they were stalking each other on either side of the ADIZ.

[fitliker]

Article in The Times.
Chinese spy planes try to fly under Taiwan’s radar (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/99a865ec-a73b-11eb-b000-cc13f23b4eff?shareToken=33624ed0cdc756142d5e4bd5cb68e1c4)

30 meters is about 28 meters too high . The ten foot flying club has not been accepting new members since the new marine radars that can spot kayaks were installed .

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/australia-ramps-up-defence-spending-over-chinese-concerns-nw8vzzxnf

Australia ramps up defence spending over Chinese concerns

Australia will spend hundreds of millions of dollars on training with American troops amid rising tension with China.

In what has been interpreted as a signal to Beijing of Australia’s solidarity with its key defence ally, Scott Morrison, the prime minister, appeared beside US commanders in the Northern Territory yesterday to unveil increased training for Australian forces with US Marines.

Morrison announced an upgrade to military training bases and airfields across the north worth A$750 million (£418 million). He said that the spending would allow increased training with US forces under the Force Posture Agreement.

The agreement, which was put in place by President Obama’s administration, gives the US a military presence (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-plans-new-naval-base-in-australia-to-thwart-chinese-tcphn5t5t) in the Indo-Pacific region by stationing its troops at bases in the north of Australia. There is an annual rotation of US Marines in Darwin and about 2,200 Americans are based there at any one time....

The spending announcement follows a statement made on Sunday by Australia’s top security official, Michael Pezzullo, the home affairs secretary, that “drums of war” are beating and the country must be prepared “to send off, yet again, our warriors to fight”.*

Later on Sunday, Australia’s defence minister, Peter Dutton warned Australians not to “discount” the prospect of conflict with China over its intention to regain Taiwan (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/xi-unveils-three-new-warships-in-warning-to-taiwan-xf2cz50kq).

Last week the government tore up (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/china-threatens-australia-over-cancelled-belt-and-road-deal-3f2bz5v27) the only Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) deal that China had secured in Australia — an agreement negotiated by the Labor-led authority in the state of Victoria.

Yesterday the prime minister said that Chinese ownership of a port in Darwin would also be reviewed if Australian defence agencies negatively assessed “the national security implications” of the port’s ownership....

China’s foreign ministry yesterday said that Australia was “sick” and suggested the government needs to “take medicine”. Wang Wenbin, China’s foreign ministry spokesman, said that Australia was responsible for the deterioration of the trade relationship between the countries..... “Australia is sick, however it is asking others to take medicine, which will not solve the problem at all,” Wang said......


* “Drums of War Beating” warns Australian as China tension grows

Australia has warned that the “drums of war” are beating as tensions increase with China over its aggression against Taiwan.

Michael Pezzullo, the home affairs secretary, tipped as a future head of Australia’s defence forces, said the prospect of a military confrontation could no longer be ignored.

Writing in an unusually forthright message to 15,000 staff for Anzac Day last weekend, when Australia and New Zealand remember their war dead, Michael Pezzullo, 57, the Australian home affairs secretary tipped as a future head of Australia’s defence forces, declared that the “drums of war” were beating and that Australia must be prepared “to send off, yet again, our warriors to fight”.

He wrote: “In a world of perpetual tension and dread, the drums of war beat — sometimes faintly and distantly, and at other times more loudly and ever closer.”

Fears are growing that China is building a force capable of retaking Taiwan. The United States has a security pact with Taiwan to supply it with hardware and technology to deter any invasion from the mainland. In the event of any conflict, experts suggest that Australia would follow Washington’s lead.

Pezzullo’s message came as Peter Dutton, the defence minister, warned that a war with China over Taiwan could not be discounted**....

** https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-27/china-responds-to-dutton-comment/100096928

[Asturias56]

Unpopular Government trying to take attention away from their vaccination non-rollout

Don't think it'll play well with the voters

[Willard Whyte]

Reminds me of an episode of The Day Today

[tartare]

God help us if Pezzullo does become Defence Sec.
War virtually guaranteed.
https://www.themandarin.com.au/155031-the-pezzullo-factor-courting-controversy-and-climbing-high/

[fitliker]

God help us if Pezzullo does become Defence Sec.
War virtually guaranteed.
https://www.themandarin.com.au/155031-the-pezzullo-factor-courting-controversy-and-climbing-high/

When they start talking about registering for conscription like the USA has been . Then start to panic . Although the recent talks about the draft in the USA has mostly to do with whether females will be required to register for the draft . The Supreme Court are looking at this and may give an opinion sometime this year . Could set a precedent for other NATO countries . They have already got the maternity flight suits on order for people who need them .

[tartare]

I often wake at 3am - and reach for my iPhone.
I expect in the next decade to read a headline at that time - Reports of nuclear strikes.
It'll start as a skirmish over Taiwan - the Chinese will then damage or sink a US capital ship - with reciprocal strikes.
The Chinese will lose most of their navy and air force, and then will decide there's nothing left to lose, and use a nuclear weapon or two.
Pine Gap will certainly be hit, east coast airbases, and I'll hear and feel the warhead that hits Garden Island a few kilometres away.
A US city or two will be burnt.
And at that point my friends - the US will go utterly berserk - and burn the whole east coast of China.
Thus history repeats...

[Fareastdriver]

China has an Achilles Heel; it is call the Three Gorges Dam. The water level at the dam head can be up to 175 metres. That, with the contents of three large valleys behind it is an enormous amount of water. Barnes Wallace taught the world how to break that and the resulting tsunami down the Yangtze River would cause a unprecedented disaster stretching all the way to Shanghai. Up to 400 million people would be effected.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Natural-disasters/As-water-crests-Three-Gorges-Dam-crisis-puts-400m-at-risk

Is Taiwan worth that?

[etudiant]

I often wake at 3am - and reach for my iPhone.
I expect in the next decade to read a headline at that time - Reports of nuclear strikes.
It'll start as a skirmish over Taiwan - the Chinese will then damage or sink a US capital ship - with reciprocal strikes.
The Chinese will lose most of their navy and air force, and then will decide there's nothing left to lose, and use a nuclear weapon or two.
Pine Gap will certainly be hit, east coast airbases, and I'll hear and feel the warhead that hits Garden Island a few kilometres away.
A US city or two will be burnt.
And at that point my friends - the US will go utterly berserk - and burn the whole east coast of China.
Thus history repeats...

That is the optimistic view.
The number of warheads US intelligence indicates are available to China substantially exceeds the number of large US cities.
So to assume that China would accept an unbalanced exchange seems implausible to me.
Of course, the other perspective is that China is improving its forces so much more rapidly than the US that in another decade, they will have clear cut dominance in their neighborhood.
Assuming Xi is patient, he can expect to prevail without firing a shot.

[ORAC]

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/720x984/image_4e9be4b4f0349c7c269570d1a93cb6ee7c83e3bc.jpeg

[finestkind]

China has an Achilles Heel; it is call the Three Gorges Dam. The water level at the dam head can be up to 175 metres. That, with the contents of three large valleys behind it is an enormous amount of water. Barnes Wallace taught the world how to break that and the resulting tsunami down the Yangtze River would cause a unprecedented disaster stretching all the way to Shanghai. Up to 400 million people would be effected.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Natural-disasters/As-water-crests-Three-Gorges-Dam-crisis-puts-400m-at-risk

Is Taiwan worth that?

I do not think China is overly concerned about it's people. What was it, 190 million forcibly displaced. Affecting 400 million people would not be an issue for them.

[ORAC]

Acts aimed to “ attack, destroy, remove or render useless" objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, including “drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works" devices (e.g. reservoirs or dams) are banned and a war crime under the 4th Geneva Convention (1949).

Probably not a consideration if you decide to throw nukes around, but below that threshold....

[Imagegear]

If you're not going to fight dirty, don't expect to win.

IG

[Asturias56]

Yeah - how secure do you think the US electricity network is to an Israeli style software attack?

[tartare]

Yeah - I dunno if I buy all this `China's military is to be feared.'
Compare the two countries - the image above looks scary right?
Except that each of those aircraft is nowhere near as capable as their respective US equivalent, and there aren't as many of them.
China will not match the US for quite a while technology-wise, in terms of power projection, amphibious ability, submarine capability.
And nukes - China has around 260 warheads according to FAS and Stratcom - it seems around a dozen of those are MIRV'ed.
The US has nearly 1400 single warhead weapons on active deployment.
Much as the popular narrative might say the US is in decline, even now, it is not a super power - it is a hyper power and it's the only one.
In an air sea battle off Taiwan - I believe the US would decimate the Chinese.
Chinese satellites would be blinded, their sole carrier or two sunk, their fighters and bombers picked off in a turkey shoot.
There would be US losses of course - a DF-21 or two might take out a US carrier and some larger ships.
But China's conventional military forces would be wrecked.
In response I believe the Chinese might be able to launch limited nuclear strikes - hit a few cities in the region, possibly on the CONUS.
But the US would then wipe them from the face of the map.
An utterly devastated China - with countless tens of millions dead, refugees, horrified expatriate Chinese watching in other countries - doesn't bear thinking about.
In my view, their posturing is really rather pathetic when you think critically about it.

[Fareastdriver]

I do not think China is overly concerned about it's people. What was it, 190 million forcibly displaced. Affecting 400 million people would not be an issue for them.

Modern China is slightly different from Mao's days. They are not mushrooms any more and the various authorities are finding that it is easier to flow with the tide.

[etudiant]

Yeah - I dunno if I buy all this `China's military is to be feared.'
Compare the two countries - the image above looks scary right?
Except that each of those aircraft is nowhere near as capable as their respective US equivalent, and there aren't as many of them.
China will not match the US for quite a while technology-wise, in terms of power projection, amphibious ability, submarine capability.
And nukes - China has around 260 warheads according to FAS and Stratcom - it seems around a dozen of those are MIRV'ed.
The US has nearly 1400 single warhead weapons on active deployment.
Much as the popular narrative might say the US is in decline, even now, it is not a super power - it is a hyper power and it's the only one.
In an air sea battle off Taiwan - I believe the US would decimate the Chinese.
Chinese satellites would be blinded, their sole carrier or two sunk, their fighters and bombers picked off in a turkey shoot.
There would be US losses of course - a DF-21 or two might take out a US carrier and some larger ships.
But China's conventional military forces would be wrecked.
In response I believe the Chinese might be able to launch limited nuclear strikes - hit a few cities in the region, possibly on the CONUS.
But the US would then wipe them from the face of the map.
An utterly devastated China - with countless tens of millions dead, refugees, horrified expatriate Chinese watching in other countries - doesn't bear thinking about.
In my view, their posturing is really rather pathetic when you think critically about it.

Again, the US does not have 200 plus worthwhile targets, rather a handful of big cities. Deterrence recognizes that losing them is intolerable.
Having a thousand plus warheads to make the rubble bounce repeatedly does not change that.
But at the rate China is expanding its industrial edge vis a vis the US, they will be sufficiently preeminent in their back yard by the end of this decade to prevail even against the US there.

[Asturias56]

Cities with over 1 million people -

USA 11
China 102

[pr00ne]

Cities with over 1 million people -

USA 11
China 102


US deployed Strategic nuclear warheads; 1,365. US Strategic nuclear warheads in reserve; 1,870...

[Asturias56]

Yes - I was answering what I thing was etudiants statement that the US would only have a few big cities to hit in China. Having flown over city after city there that hardly appears on any western map and certainly has no name recognition I thought he/she was wrong................... and your numbers nicely show they have the means - if they so decide

[etudiant]

Yes - I was answering what I thing was etudiants statement that the US would only have a few big cities to hit in China. Having flown over city after city there that hardly appears on any western map and certainly has no name recognition I thought he/she was wrong................... and your numbers nicely show they have the means - if they so decide

I was unclear, I meant that there are only a handful of big cities in the US, so a Chinese force of 200 warheads is ample to deal with those, which is the basis of deterrence.
The much larger number of such cities in China is of course addressed by the much larger US arsenal, although presumably part of that is reserved for other potential targets.
Either way, there is such excess nuclear capability that the established players know it is not a usable tool. Whether new entrants such as North Korea share that view is unclear

[West Coast]

I was unclear, I meant that there are only a handful of big cities in the US, so a Chinese force of 200 warheads is ample to deal with those, which is the basis of deterrence.
The much larger number of such cities in China is of course addressed by the much larger US arsenal, although presumably part of that is reserved for other potential targets.
Either way, there is such excess nuclear capability that the established players know it is not a usable tool. Whether new entrants such as North Korea share that view is unclear

Do you feel that you might not be informed enough to be commenting on the targeting priorities of the Chinese?

[etudiant]

Do you feel that you might not be informed enough to be commenting on the targeting priorities of the Chinese?

I would not presume to opine on Chinese targeting priorities.
I'm simply saying that if the US has maybe a dozen cities it cannot afford to lose, a 200 warhead strike force is probably a pretty adequate deterrent.from the Chinese perspective.

Nuclear warheads are qualitatively different, yet people seem to lose sight of that.They are the poor man's insurance policy.
The decision to overthrow Qaddafi even though he had abandoned his nuclear program, cemented the common wisdom that no state is safe from outside military intervention without nuclear weapons.
North Korea showed what that means in our world, they are dirt poor but free from the fear of foreign invasion. Logically, Taiwan should be next, but perhaps they still have confidence the US will save them from the 'motherland'.
Viet Nam, Indonesia and perhaps the Philippines should be next.

[Asturias56]

Interesting article in the Economist - the publication of results of the latest PRC Census is delayed.

The suspicion is that it shows that the Chinese population is now static or declining. This was forecast for 2030 ish but CV19 has had big impact.

The issue is that (on previous calculation) 30% of the Chinese population will be over 60 (and retired) by 2050. The amounts that will have to be spent on health care and looking after them is eye watering. And older people normally aren't keen on defence spending or wars - they want pensions, bus passes and care homes

[ORAC]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-general-warns-china-aiming-to-establish-atlantic-naval-base-in-africa

US general warns China aiming to establish Atlantic naval base in Africa

The top U.S general for Africa (https://www.foxnews.com/category/world/world-regions/africa) is warning that a growing threat from China (https://www.foxnews.com/category/world/world-regions/china) may come not just from the waters of the Pacific but from the Atlantic as well.

U.S. Gen. Stephen Townsend, in an interview with The Associated Press, said Beijing is looking to establish a large navy port capable of hosting submarines or aircraft carriers on Africa’s western coast.

Townsend said China has approached countries stretching from Mauritania to south of Namibia, intent on establishing a naval facility. If realized, that prospect would enable China to base warships in its expanding Navy in the Atlantic as well as Pacific oceans.

"They’re looking for a place where they can rearm and repair warships. That becomes militarily useful in conflict," said Townsend, who heads U.S. Africa Command. "They’re a long way toward establishing that in Djibouti. Now they’re casting their gaze to the Atlantic coast and wanting to get such a base there."….


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1922x1468/image_afcbf0b44f6766b693f1c12f859aa2670b7e181f.jpeg

[Asturias56]

I don't see the point of showing how indebted countries are to China - they can't send in the bailiffs if they default

Like a lot of Western Investors and Governments have found if they renege on a debt there isn't a lot you can do about it

I'd retitle it "where China is wasting it's money" TBH

[BEACH KING]

I don't see the point of showing how indebted countries are to China - they can't send in the bailiffs if they default

Like a lot of Western Investors and Governments have found if they renege on a debt there isn't a lot you can do about it

I'd retitle it "where China is wasting it's money" TBH
Google "belt and road initiative" and you may well see the point.

[Asturias56]

Intentions and plans are all very well but they're shelling out cash to people, who let's put charitably, have a record of not using it well.................. Much of it will finish up in London ad Switzerland as usual

It'll get the Chinese through the door but zero long term influence - look at how much they've poured into Tanzania over the years

[grizzled]

Viet Nam, Indonesia and perhaps the Philippines should be next.

Unsure what you meant here. Those countries should be next for what?

[etudiant]

Unsure what you meant here. Those countries should be next for what?
To get nuclear weapons. Else they will become Chinese satellites.

[Asturias56]

Have you ever been to Indonesia? 270 million people at the last count - and they (to be polite) do not like the Chinese at all.............. Quite HOW the Chinese would take them over is a bit beyond me

[TWT]

Have you ever been to Indonesia? 270 million people at the last count - and they (to be polite) do not like the Chinese at all

Sure about that ?

Right now, China and Indonesia and holding joint naval exercises. And Indonesia has accepted a Chinese offer to salvage the KRI Nanggala 402 submarine.

Talks are also underway regarding China building a second copper smelter in Indonesia ($2.8 billion)

Looks like they're quite close at the moment.

[Asturias56]

"Sure about that ?"

Too damn true - when the good people of Indonesia riot for whatever reason it only takes a short while before they round on the ethnic Chinese - loot and burn their property and regretfully lynch a few

And the old CP of Indonesia was largely ethnic Chinese and we all know what happened to them - maybe half a million gone in '65-68.

As for the submarine they also accepted help from the USA, Thailand and Singapore IIRC, Politically they still are "non-aligned" but they buy most of their Navy from the west - the airforce is a mix of USA and Russian kit

And of course they are the largest Muslim country in the world

[cavuman1]

An interesting, if somewhat lengthy article concerning the China/Taiwan situation from Defense One:

Security tensions are brewing in East Asia. China has on several recent occasions sent military aircraft to fly around Taiwan, including into its air defense identification zone, complete with taunts from the Chinese pilots. Officials and analysts worry that an attack on the self-governing island could be in the offing. But when? Sometime between tomorrow and mid-century. Or never. No one knows, and that’s because no one really knows what drives China’s decision-making.

Some commentators have advanced what might be called structural theories about when and why China could attempt to invade Taiwan. General Secretary Xi Jinping has proclaimed the goal of achieving the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” by the centennial anniversary of the founding the People’s Republic of China in 2049 (often shorthanded as “mid-century”). Rejuvenation and unification are inextricable in the eyes of the CCP. Xi asserted (http://www.gwytb.gov.cn/wyly/201904/t20190412_12155687.htm) in January 2019 that the “Taiwan question…will definitely end with China’s rejuvenation.” Others expect it sooner: by 2035, when state-run media say the People’s Liberation Army, will “basically” be modernized enough (http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-10/29/c_139476284.htm) to fight and win a regional war against another advanced military. The implication being that China will invade once it concludes the PLA can win.

Alternative structural assessments see a more imminent peril. They argue the world, especially the United States, is entering a dangerous decade in relations with China generally and with regard to Taiwan specifically, where Beijing’s relative power is reaching an apex compared to would-be geopolitical competitors. Those theories posit that Chinese leaders might conclude they must attempt to forcibly annex Taiwan while they are at their strongest or risk it falling out of their grasp forever. Others acknowledge China faces future challenges but note that even slowing economic growth rates would arrive on top of a massive base, so Beijing’s power, at least relative to Taiwan, will likely continue to accrue.Another category of theories about when China might send mount a full-spectrum invasion might be described as events-driven.

Beijing has clearly stated (https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20150105_RL30341_6a250771f574e01575c1cc9fa15c71f92858ef44.pd f) that any declaration of independence or clear moves in that direction by the government in Taipei would provoke an attack. China has rejected direct political engagement with Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen because she has refused to reaffirm a political formulation known as the “1992 Consensus (https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/06/is-the-1992-consensus-fading-away-in-the-taiwan-strait.html),” an unwillingness Beijing interprets as sympathizing with the pro-independence views held by some in Tsai’s Democratic Progressive Party.

Other, less definitive political outcomes could beget a conflict as well. As John Culver, a former U.S. National Intelligence Officer for East Asia, has argued (https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/understanding-beijings-motives-regarding-taiwan-and-americas-role/), Beijing could decide that a lesser standard would be enough, such as Taiwan refusing to engage in a negotiating process whose end goal is some form of political unification. The ignominious end of the “one country, two systems” governance framework for Hong Kong, which Beijing still views as a model for Taiwan, has made the prospect of political integration with the mainland increasingly unpopular with the people of Taiwan.

Further, Chinese military maneuvers designed for political signaling could result in accidents or unintentional escalation. Operations that start off as diplomatic pressure tactics have the potential to spin out of control. Events beyond Taiwan itself could also give rise to a crisis. Political developments in the United States, especially a decisive policy change that either endorses Taiwan independence or rules out U.S. assistance to Taiwan during a contingency, could shift Beijing’s calculus (although both are highly unlikely right now).

Next, Chinese leaders could at some point face a major crisis of legitimacy—perhaps an economic crash or a botched leadership succession or lack thereof—and decide to use an invasion of Taiwan to gin up nationalistic support for the Communist regime. Beijing could also perceive opportunity in another crisis that occupies U.S. forces and attention. Likely candidates would include a conflict on the Korean Peninsula or somewhere outside East Asia such as Ukraine.

Finally, a cross-Strait conflict might never happen at all. Beijing no doubt understands that, despite the temptations, any decision to use military force against Taiwan would entail world-historical levels of risk. The PLA enjoys hefty budgets and increasingly cutting-edge capabilities. But it has not fought a war since 1979 and could still flunk its first test in decades for any numbers of reasons. Non-material factors like the capacity for effective combat leadership are notoriously difficult to develop and measure.

A failed invasion or even one with a messy mixed outcome could pose a major threat to the CCP regime. Politically, many Chinese citizens would question the leadership’s judgment and competence. Economically, even a successful campaign would require starting a major war right at the epicenter of lucrative-but-fragile global supply chains. Xi might believe he is on the cusp of fulfilling one of the Party’s most sacred goals by moving to take Taiwan—only to blow up the economic growth and stability pillars that are foundational to CCP rule in China. And that is not even mentioning the risk of uncontrolled military escalation.

Predicting with any accuracy which of these factors will prevail is impossible. For all the barrels of ink spilled writing about China, the inner workings of how the leadership makes decisions are almost completely opaque; Zhongnanhai, China’s Kremlin, is a mostly black box. That fact creates a problem because policy responses can differ based on what theory of the case they derive from and are trying to shape. Beijing could decide according to one of the aforementioned factors. Or it could be a mixture of them. Xi’s decision to choose aggressive military signaling as a central instrument in China’s pressure campaign gives weight those who think an attack could come sooner rather than later, but aggressive maneuvers are not themselves dispositive proof that a conflict is coming.

In response to the situation’s uncertainty, U.S. policy will have to be both firm and delicate. Washington should continue to emphasize to Beijing the costs of aggression and the value of the status quo for China, the region, and the world—saving the most vehement messages for private channels. Those costs go well beyond shipping disruptions in the heart of globalization’s engine room in Northeast Asia. They should include biting sanctions, structural economic decoupling, widespread diplomatic isolation of Beijing that would lock in a pessimistic view about the implications of China’s rise, and unspecified intelligence and military support to Taiwan from the United States and select allies and partners. Also, Beijing should expect to see regional states arming themselves against Chinese aggression with renewed fervor and commitment. In short, as Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently put it, that using force would be a “serious mistake (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/11/blinken-warns-china-action-against-taiwan-would-be-mistake).”

At the same time, however, U.S. policymakers should avoid official, public policy changes—including ending the policy of “strategic ambiguity”—that would be construed as Washington revising the status quo and therefore be likely spark a crisis. Washington should also forswear linking Taiwan directly to other issues in U.S.-China relations. Chinese officials will always accuse the United States of playing a “Taiwan card,” but Washington should steer clear of broader linkage for its own benefit and Taipei’s.

Finally, the United States should continue to counsel caution from Taiwan, with any countermoves to China’s actions calculated toward upholding or restoring the status quo, however embattled. Washington and like-minded partners should also devote special time and attention to finding innovative ways to aid implementation of Taiwan’s Overall Defense Concept (https://thediplomat.com/2020/11/taiwans-overall-defense-concept-explained/) plan for thwarting an invasion through asymmetric means.

Success will come if China decides that the best time to attack Taiwan is never—but there is a lot of time between now and then.

Jacob Stokes (@jacobstokes) is a Fellow in the Indo-Pacific Security Program at the Center for a New American Security. He previously served as an advisor in the White House and the U.S. Congress.

- Ed

[etudiant]

An interesting, if somewhat lengthy article concerning the China/Taiwan situation from Defense One:

Security tensions are brewing in East Asia. China has on several recent occasions sent military aircraft to fly around Taiwan, including into its air defense identification zone, complete with taunts from the Chinese pilots. Officials and analysts worry that an attack on the self-governing island could be in the offing. But when? Sometime between tomorrow and mid-century. Or never. No one knows, and that’s because no one really knows what drives China’s decision-making.

Some commentators have advanced what might be called structural theories about when and why China could attempt to invade Taiwan. General Secretary Xi Jinping has proclaimed the goal of achieving the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” by the centennial anniversary of the founding the People’s Republic of China in 2049 (often shorthanded as “mid-century”). Rejuvenation and unification are inextricable in the eyes of the CCP. Xi asserted (http://www.gwytb.gov.cn/wyly/201904/t20190412_12155687.htm) in January 2019 that the “Taiwan question…will definitely end with China’s rejuvenation.” Others expect it sooner: by 2035, when state-run media say the People’s Liberation Army, will “basically” be modernized enough (http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-10/29/c_139476284.htm) to fight and win a regional war against another advanced military. The implication being that China will invade once it concludes the PLA can win.

Alternative structural assessments see a more imminent peril. They argue the world, especially the United States, is entering a dangerous decade in relations with China generally and with regard to Taiwan specifically, where Beijing’s relative power is reaching an apex compared to would-be geopolitical competitors. Those theories posit that Chinese leaders might conclude they must attempt to forcibly annex Taiwan while they are at their strongest or risk it falling out of their grasp forever. Others acknowledge China faces future challenges but note that even slowing economic growth rates would arrive on top of a massive base, so Beijing’s power, at least relative to Taiwan, will likely continue to accrue.Another category of theories about when China might send mount a full-spectrum invasion might be described as events-driven.

Beijing has clearly stated (https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20150105_RL30341_6a250771f574e01575c1cc9fa15c71f92858ef44.pd f) that any declaration of independence or clear moves in that direction by the government in Taipei would provoke an attack. China has rejected direct political engagement with Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen because she has refused to reaffirm a political formulation known as the “1992 Consensus (https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/06/is-the-1992-consensus-fading-away-in-the-taiwan-strait.html),” an unwillingness Beijing interprets as sympathizing with the pro-independence views held by some in Tsai’s Democratic Progressive Party.

Other, less definitive political outcomes could beget a conflict as well. As John Culver, a former U.S. National Intelligence Officer for East Asia, has argued (https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/understanding-beijings-motives-regarding-taiwan-and-americas-role/), Beijing could decide that a lesser standard would be enough, such as Taiwan refusing to engage in a negotiating process whose end goal is some form of political unification. The ignominious end of the “one country, two systems” governance framework for Hong Kong, which Beijing still views as a model for Taiwan, has made the prospect of political integration with the mainland increasingly unpopular with the people of Taiwan.

Further, Chinese military maneuvers designed for political signaling could result in accidents or unintentional escalation. Operations that start off as diplomatic pressure tactics have the potential to spin out of control. Events beyond Taiwan itself could also give rise to a crisis. Political developments in the United States, especially a decisive policy change that either endorses Taiwan independence or rules out U.S. assistance to Taiwan during a contingency, could shift Beijing’s calculus (although both are highly unlikely right now).

Next, Chinese leaders could at some point face a major crisis of legitimacy—perhaps an economic crash or a botched leadership succession or lack thereof—and decide to use an invasion of Taiwan to gin up nationalistic support for the Communist regime. Beijing could also perceive opportunity in another crisis that occupies U.S. forces and attention. Likely candidates would include a conflict on the Korean Peninsula or somewhere outside East Asia such as Ukraine.

Finally, a cross-Strait conflict might never happen at all. Beijing no doubt understands that, despite the temptations, any decision to use military force against Taiwan would entail world-historical levels of risk. The PLA enjoys hefty budgets and increasingly cutting-edge capabilities. But it has not fought a war since 1979 and could still flunk its first test in decades for any numbers of reasons. Non-material factors like the capacity for effective combat leadership are notoriously difficult to develop and measure.

A failed invasion or even one with a messy mixed outcome could pose a major threat to the CCP regime. Politically, many Chinese citizens would question the leadership’s judgment and competence. Economically, even a successful campaign would require starting a major war right at the epicenter of lucrative-but-fragile global supply chains. Xi might believe he is on the cusp of fulfilling one of the Party’s most sacred goals by moving to take Taiwan—only to blow up the economic growth and stability pillars that are foundational to CCP rule in China. And that is not even mentioning the risk of uncontrolled military escalation.

Predicting with any accuracy which of these factors will prevail is impossible. For all the barrels of ink spilled writing about China, the inner workings of how the leadership makes decisions are almost completely opaque; Zhongnanhai, China’s Kremlin, is a mostly black box. That fact creates a problem because policy responses can differ based on what theory of the case they derive from and are trying to shape. Beijing could decide according to one of the aforementioned factors. Or it could be a mixture of them. Xi’s decision to choose aggressive military signaling as a central instrument in China’s pressure campaign gives weight those who think an attack could come sooner rather than later, but aggressive maneuvers are not themselves dispositive proof that a conflict is coming.

In response to the situation’s uncertainty, U.S. policy will have to be both firm and delicate. Washington should continue to emphasize to Beijing the costs of aggression and the value of the status quo for China, the region, and the world—saving the most vehement messages for private channels. Those costs go well beyond shipping disruptions in the heart of globalization’s engine room in Northeast Asia. They should include biting sanctions, structural economic decoupling, widespread diplomatic isolation of Beijing that would lock in a pessimistic view about the implications of China’s rise, and unspecified intelligence and military support to Taiwan from the United States and select allies and partners. Also, Beijing should expect to see regional states arming themselves against Chinese aggression with renewed fervor and commitment. In short, as Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently put it, that using force would be a “serious mistake (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/11/blinken-warns-china-action-against-taiwan-would-be-mistake).”

At the same time, however, U.S. policymakers should avoid official, public policy changes—including ending the policy of “strategic ambiguity”—that would be construed as Washington revising the status quo and therefore be likely spark a crisis. Washington should also forswear linking Taiwan directly to other issues in U.S.-China relations. Chinese officials will always accuse the United States of playing a “Taiwan card,” but Washington should steer clear of broader linkage for its own benefit and Taipei’s.

Finally, the United States should continue to counsel caution from Taiwan, with any countermoves to China’s actions calculated toward upholding or restoring the status quo, however embattled. Washington and like-minded partners should also devote special time and attention to finding innovative ways to aid implementation of Taiwan’s Overall Defense Concept (https://thediplomat.com/2020/11/taiwans-overall-defense-concept-explained/) plan for thwarting an invasion through asymmetric means.

Success will come if China decides that the best time to attack Taiwan is never—but there is a lot of time between now and then.

Jacob Stokes (@jacobstokes) is a Fellow in the Indo-Pacific Security Program at the Center for a New American Security. He previously served as an advisor in the White House and the U.S. Congress.

- Ed

The unspoken assumption in all the 'expert' analyses is that things stay the same, which they never do.
Reality is a moving target and here the trend is for vastly better Chinese military capability within a few years, both absolutely as well as relative to the US.
Changing that trend would require the US and Europe to quit subsidizing China with a half trillion trade surplus every year, which would require sacrificing the cheap Chinese stuff we've gotten accustomed to.
That is deeply unlikely, so a better evaluation would be to assess the best course of action once Taiwan is 'reunited' with the Chinese motherland.
Given that Taiwan produces about 90% of the world's most advanced semiconductors, the obvious decision is to aggressively subsidize non Taiwanese alternatives.
Fortunately that seems to be happening.

[tartare]

There's another unspoken assumption too in all this analysis.
And that's that the United States won't continue to technologically innovate at a rate that outpaces China, which will exponentially increase its force multiplication.
I'm more hopeful than most commentators.
Note again the $12bn per annum expenditure of the USAF in Special Access programs alone.
There is clearly a huge amount going on that we don't know about.

[Asturias56]

China has just announced the Census figures - a very very small increase in population (and a lot of people think that's massaged). The percentage of the population that is retired is going up very fast - by 2040 it'll be like the West and by 2050 every working Chinese will be supporting 2 non-working I think

That really cuts into the funds available for defence spending. The Govt is far too scared to increase the retirement age from 60, and the Chinese Health and Social care system is far behind most other E Asian countries. Looks like peak years for new spending could be between now and 2030 - after that they're in the same boat as the rest of us

[etudiant]

There's another unspoken assumption too in all this analysis.
And that's that the United States won't continue to technologically innovate at a rate that outpaces China, which will exponentially increase its force multiplication.
I'm more hopeful than most commentators.
Note again the $12bn per annum expenditure of the USAF in Special Access programs alone.
There is clearly a huge amount going on that we don't know about.

Technically innovate at a rate which outpaces China is an assertion which seems quite unsupported by the evidence. Buying more F-15EXs is indicative of a stagnant culture which has lost the ability to innovate.
The poster child imho are the US government's launch vehicles, all way over budget and modest performers, getting creamed by more innovative private designs from SpaceX.

[ORAC]

Technically innovate at a rate which outpaces China is an assertion which seems quite unsupported by the evidence. Buying more F-15EXs is indicative of a stagnant culture which has lost the ability to innovate.
That seems like a misconception.

We are at the point of a cusp where an individual airframe performance is becoming less important that, perhaps, control of a fleet of active wingmen and programmes such as Skyborg aren’t getting the attention they deserve. A two seat F-15EX replacement for the F-15E with 4 Skyborg could vastly outmatch a J-20:or similar platforms.

In fact it may be the concentration on building more Gen 5 stealthy platforms by the Chinese and Russians which is wasting money on technological dinosaurs. Whilst Gen 6 swarms are the future…..

Remember the NGAD is seen as a family of systems, not an individual aircraft…

[Fareastdriver]

Chinese census figures can be taken with a pinch of salt especially in the country areas. There is no reason to believe that the system has changed from the manual counting of the past.. Because of the 'one child' policy there is a large number of people who were born out of the system and therefore their very existence had to be hidden to avoid a large fine. As the census team approached there would be a certain number of people running around the back to the houses that had already been counted. Even if an illegitimate 2nd child had officially arrived he/she could not get an identity card so he/she was on his/her own.
There is no shortage in China of people who work in the cash only sector mainly because, as they do not officially exist, they cannot get a bank account.

A bit like the UK really.

[etudiant]

Chinese census figures can be taken with a pinch of salt especially in the country areas. There is no reason to believe that the system has changed from the manual counting of the past.. Because of the 'one child' policy there is a large number of people who were born out of the system and therefore their very existence had to be hidden to avoid a large fine. As the census team approached there would be a certain number of people running around the back to the houses that had already been counted. Even if an illegitimate 2nd child had officially arrived he/she could not get an identity card so he/she was on his/her own.
There is no shortage in China of people who work in the cash only sector mainly because, as they do not officially exist, they cannot get a bank account.

A bit like the UK really.
That is actually super good news from the CCP perspective if correct. They can resolve their birth rate problem by simply recognizing the Chinese people that actually exist,, but were previously uncounted.
Sadly the bureaucratic obstacles to reforming the 'hukuo' system may prevent such a happy outcome.

[Barksdale Boy]

Etudiant

I think you'll find that it's Hukou - kou means mouth, i.e. something you have to feed.

[Asturias56]

"Chinese census figures can be taken with a pinch of salt especially in the country areas. T"

All census are incorrect at some level - its the directivity that counts TBH - any way I'm sure they're more accurate then in the lat50's early 60's I can remember a TV Interview with Chou En Lai when has was asked the question. His answer was on the lines of " We 're not absolutely sure. China definitely has less more 500 million people and not more than 600 million but it's very difficult to count them all at the same time"

[etudiant]

Etudiant

I think you'll find that it's Hukou - kou means mouth, i.e. something you have to feed.
Thanks, I looked up the spelling but failed to write it down properly.
Should have cut and pasted....

[Big Pistons Forever]

That seems like a misconception.

We are at the point of a cusp where an individual airframe performance is becoming less important that, perhaps, control of a fleet of active wingmen and programmes such as Skyborg aren’t getting the attention they deserve. A two seat F-15EX replacement for the F-15E with 4 Skyborg could vastly outmatch a J-20:or similar platforms.

In fact it may be the concentration on building more Gen 5 stealthy platforms by the Chinese and Russians which is wasting money on technological dinosaurs. Whilst Gen 6 swarms are the future…..

Remember the NGAD is seen as a family of systems, not an individual aircraft…

The technology of an individual platform is essentially irrelevant. The difference between the PLAF and the USAF is profound. The USAF has a huge recruiting, training, logistics, and command and control advantage over the PLAF which has virtually no actual operational experience and a senior leadership that is chosen for political loyalty, not demonstrated operational competence.

The F15 had a air to air combat record of 115 to 0. Many of its kills were against peer or near peer airframes, but the training, experience and far superior organizational competence of the USAF guaranteed tactical superiority.

Could the Chinese military hurt the US Armed Forces, yes but they will be utterly destroyed in the process, I would suggest that all the reports that China would win a military conflict with any significant US forces should be taken with a grain of salt. There are many agencies and enterprises that are invested in playing up the threat.

[Big Pistons Forever]

If history has shown anything it is the next conflict will not be where we are expecting it and who’s cause is unforeseen. Personally I think if there is a conflict with the West involving China it will be a by product of a Pakistan v India nuclear exchange which draws in the rest of the world. I find it very concerning that the Pakistani ISI fanatics have control of the nuclear weapons.

[etudiant]

If history has shown anything it is the next conflict will not be where we are expecting it and who’s cause is unforeseen. Personally I think if there is a conflict with the West involving China it will be a by product of a Pakistan v India nuclear exchange which draws in the rest of the world. I find it very concerning that the Pakistani ISI fanatics have control of the nuclear weapons.

You raise a very valid point, big problems erupt from places where people are not dealing with the festering issues.
That was how the Balkan mess exploded, no one gave a hoot.
Pakistan ditto, they will be losing beaucoup bucks as the US abandons Afghanistan, because all the massive supply came via Pakistan.
Unlike India, Pakistan has zippo to fall back on, no massive cheap sweat shops , no big drug precursor factories.
Once the US money stops, they will depend on the good graces of China and China is a hard task master by all accounts.
A war seems like just the ticket under those circumstances. The Kaiser's Germany thought the same a century or so ago.
Everybody lost in that instance, could well happen again.

[Lookleft]

History has also shown that wars are also started because of territorial demands that one side thinks is valid and the other thinks are not. The German invasion of Poland is a significant case in point. Crazy Adolf just wanted the Danzig corridor and thought his demand was perfectly reasonable. He did not think that Britain and France would have an objection as they had let him have all his other demands. China thinks the same about Taiwan but this time the West is making it clear that an invasion of Taiwan will have consequences. Carazy Adolf was aiming for a major war in 1943 so China's grab for Taiwan will be determined by their timetable and when they think the PLA can take and hold Taiwan. Personally I think it will be in 2049 as that will be the centenary of the establishment of the PRC and atone for the century of shame that is a part of the CCPs grievance with the West. As 1939 showed however a miscalculation of another countries intent can destroy any carefully laid out strategy.

[fitliker]

If history has shown anything it is the next conflict will not be where we are expecting it and who’s cause is unforeseen. Personally I think if there is a conflict with the West involving China it will be a by product of a Pakistan v India nuclear exchange which draws in the rest of the world. I find it very concerning that the Pakistani ISI fanatics have control of the nuclear weapons.

Depends on who India blames for the pandemic . If they blame China , game on . If they blame the people who funded the research in the leaky laboratory doing banned biological weapons research . You might expect to see a few more denial of service crypto computer events from the bunkers of the curry call centers that provide the logistics to most of the gasoline stations . The business that supplies the computers to most gasoline stations is owned and operated by a company with some interesting political heavyweight connections. India could shut down a huge chunk global business simply because the greed of corporations made them choose the cheapest IT options in logistics and tech. Or they may to choose to blame the French designers of the leaky laboratory.
Blaming the French might suit everyone !
Corporate interests and national interests do not always align .
Who knows what mischief may occur if the Indian systems were to get hacked by cyber warriors or someone looking for a little entertainment ?

[BlankBox]

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/malaysia-air-force-scramble-jets-china-national-airspace-14927154

shenanigans: horseplay, mischief, nonsense, tomfoolery, frolics, antic, monkey-business, monkeyshine, prank, stunt and trick. Take your pick...

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2021/06/01/china-sends-16-military-aircraft-over-disputed-south-china-sea-shoals-near-malaysia/

China sends 16 military aircraft over disputed South China Sea shoals near Malaysia

https://twitter.com/TheBaseLeg/status/1399683506301669381?s=20

[Lookleft]

Is that all the Malaysians have for air defence, Bae Hawks?

[etudiant]

Is that all the Malaysians have for air defence, Bae Hawks?
Actually it is impressive that they had both radar coverage as well as the ability to muster an immediate intercept.

[Out Of Trim]

Is that all the Malaysians have for air defence, Bae Hawks?

No, but I believe The single seat Bae208 Hawks were the nearest based aircraft.

They also have F/A-18D / SU-30MKM / MIG-29 / F-5 ?

[Lookleft]

Unless the Malaysians are playing some Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon strategy I think they should be putting their best equipment in a position to intercept Chinese aircraft when it comes close to their airspace. If they don't then the Chinese will think that the Malaysians don't care and just put in a few more dashed lines on their maps.

[West Coast]

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Indo-Pacific/Indonesia-looks-to-triple-submarine-fleet-after-Chinese-incursions?n_cid=NARAN185&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=infeed&utm_campaign=BA_broad_17-20&utm_content=FB_dynamic_ads_Biz&fbclid=IwAR2YySjCvZcMh0tuNXJfaIKMWOYbi_jC04QX6_tdXqyqsAuZjQs ljZza2L0

Shame Honest Nigel’s used submarine emporium doesn’t have any spare boats for sale, Indonesia wants a few.

[ORAC]

Suddenly on NATO's doorstep - or even inside the door....

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/montenegro-s-motorway-to-nowhere

Montenegro’s motorway to nowhere

[Imagegear]

Montenegro was warned by the EU a long time ago that taking this poison pill would result in the country coming to it's financial knees.

It's not a case of them being bailed out by the EU or accepting more grist from China's mill, it's about showing China the door on it's extortionate Belt and Road Strategy.

Other countries seeking to get into bed with them should note the implications, of course for the back-handing politician, there are no scruples to consider.

IG

[ORAC]

Forget the headline and the ridiculous attempt to link it to Covid - it’s what else he knows…..

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/top-chinese-spy-defects-to-us-to-spill-wuhan-lab-secrets-fgrtv626r

Top Chinese spy ‘defects to US to spill Wuhan lab secrets’

One of China’s top spies is said to have defected to the United States and possibly handed the intelligence agencies information backing the theory that coronavirus escaped from a laboratory.

Dong Jingwei, 57, the deputy minister for state security in Beijing, is rumoured to have arrived in the US with his daughter in February, after first flying to Hong Kong. If confirmed, he would be the highest ranking official ever to switch sides between China and America.

Dong’s name has rarely appeared in English-language Chinese media reports. Yesterday, however, he was quoted by the South China Morning Post, a Hong-Kong-based newspaper, ordering the Chinese intelligence services to “step up their efforts to hunt down foreign agents and insiders who collude with ‘anti-China’ forces”.…..

Dong is a career official with years of experience at China’s security ministry. The social media accounts of anti-communist activists have been buzzing with speculation about him.

Han Lianchao, a pro-democracy activist who defected in 1989 after the Tiananmen Square massacre, claimed that Dong was discussed at the US-Sino talks in Alaska in March. Wang Yi, China’s foreign minister, was said to have demanded that Dong be extradited, a request that was rejected by the American secretary of state, Antony Blinken.

A senior administration official yesterday denied, however, that any such discussion took place in Alaska……

[Asturias56]

Ouch!! That's the sort of guy you really don't want to lose to the other side

[West Coast]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/australia-embraces-u-s-pays-price-china-trade-war-hits-n1270458

I tire of narratives that pigeon hole nations into someone’s camp.

it sells I guess.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fears-rise-over-chinas-nuclear-weapons-programme-0b553mj65

Fears rise over China’s nuclear weapons programme

Beijing is feared to be in the process of a significant expansion of its nuclear weapons capability after commencing the construction of more than 100 new missile silos in its northwestern desert.

Work is underway at several sites spanning hundreds of square miles near the ancient Silk Road city of Yumen, according to satellite images obtained by the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies in California.

The work indicates a major uptick in China’s nuclear deterrent, Dr Jeffrey Lewis, an expert on China’s nuclear arsenal, told the Washington Post.

Describing the scale of the project as “incredible,” Lewis, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Programme at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, said, “if the silos under construction at other sites across China are added to the count, the total comes to about 145 silos under construction.”

“We believe China is expanding its nuclear forces in part to maintain a deterrent that can survive a US first strike in sufficient numbers to defeat US missile defences.”

Lewis said the silos are likely intended for a Chinese missile that can carry multiple warheads with a range of 9,300 miles, sufficient to reach the US mainland.

The construction boom represents a major shift for China, which is thought to hold a modest stockpile of as few as 250 nuclear weapons, compared to the 11,000 collectively owned by the US and Russia. Beijing has deployed decoy silos in the past.

Admiral Charles Richard, who commands US nuclear forces, said at a congressional hearing in April that a “breathtaking expansion” of China’s intercontinental ballistic missile programme was taking place, including mobile missile launchers that can be hidden from satellites.

The Chinese navy, meanwhile, has introduced submarines capable of holding nuclear weapons.

[etudiant]

China pours 10x as much steel as the US and has 4x the population, with at least comparable GNP, so they appear entitled to play with the big boys globally.
If required as table stakes, the few hundred ICBMs and the associated few thousand nuclear warheads are a dirt cheap ante to be a full member of the club,

[Asturias56]

Article in this weeks Economist
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/813x436/2021_07_04_183531_5e29795015a8ec2601502800c0a18196142d50f2.j pgCarry that weight
China’s next aircraft-carrier will be its biggest

Jul 1st 2021

JIANGNAN SHIPYARD lies on an alluvial island at the mouth of the Yangzi river. It has grown rapidly since it moved there from nearby Shanghai in 2009, churning out destroyers, icebreakers and landing craft for the Chinese navy. The jewel in its crown is under construction. China is saying little about it, but satellite imagery reveals a near-complete flight deck in a corner of the yard where, less than 15 years ago, there was only farmland.

For now, the vessel-to-be is blandly known to military analysts as the Type 003. It will be China’s second domestically built aircraft-carrier and the largest ship that has ever served in the Chinese fleet. Experts at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a think-tank in Washington, have analysed satellite pictures such as the one above, which was taken in June by Planet Labs, an American firm. They conclude that the ship will be about as long as New York’s Chrysler Building is high: about 320 metres. She will mark another leap forward in China’s advance as a naval power.

The Type 003 could be launched this year, state media say. But building carriers is not the same as sailing them. Flying planes off wobbly decks is hard. In America, thousands of jets and pilots were lost in the formative years of naval aviation. It is also difficult to keep a carrier safe from missiles and submarines, and to integrate one into a “strike group” of warships. “It’s taken us over 100 years to get that right,” noted an American admiral in September. China hopes to be quicker.

There are signs that it is upping the tempo. Last year the navy put both of its carriers to sea at the same time. In April the Liaoning sailed through the Miyako Strait, south of the Japanese island of Okinawa; exercised near Taiwan and in the South China Sea; and returned the same way. Its escorts included the Renhai-class destroyer, one of the world’s most capable ships of its kind, as well as a Fuyu-class support vessel, which can replenish carrier strike-groups far from home.

Even so, a carrier designed in the early 1980s, and another based on it, hardly represent the cutting-edge of sea power. “I don’t worry from a US Navy point of view,” says Mr Montgomery. “These are just targets for our submarines.” That is where the Type 003 comes in. CSIS reckons she is already 10 metres longer than her predecessors. She is likely to be the world’s largest non-American carrier for many years, The Chinese navy does not plan to stop there. It is widely assumed that the Type 003’s successor is being planned. It may be nuclear-powered.

Mastering these technologies and learning the craft of conducting high-intensity air operations at sea will take years. Its planes are lightly armed, even compared with European counterparts, says Alessio Patalano of King’s College London. “I’ve yet to see a single picture of a Chinese plane taking off from a deck with a full payload,” he says.

The expert consensus is that China plans eventually to build a fleet of somewhere between six and ten. That would put it within spitting distance of America’s fleet of 11, the world’s largest.

[SASless]

Mastering these technologies and learning the craft of conducting high-intensity air operations at sea will take years. Its planes are lightly armed, even compared with European counterparts, says Alessio Patalano of King’s College London. “I’ve yet to see a single picture of a Chinese plane taking off from a deck with a full payload,” he says.

Sounds like some other operators of new Carriers.

[fitliker]

I wonder if those new ships will use the new deep sea ports they built in Kitimat B.C. As well as the other structures that were built by their “ people “

Dual use ? LNG tankers or Submarines ?

Fresh from their Arctic trading with Canadian Forces , it will not take them long to catch up . First space walk today at the new space station .
I wonder what they are serving for lunch at Kings College , they should enjoy it before they get their lunch eaten again .

[Asturias56]

They can build all the ports they like but whoever runs the country can take them over in an hour if they want.

[SASless]

If they dare....at risk of having their Countries taken over in return perhaps.

The Chinese...being the oldest continuous civilization on the planet....are students of history if nothing else.

You can bet they recall their former adversary the Japanese and how they came to grief when they tired to launch their infamous Greater Prosperity Sphere or whatever their War of expansion and conquest was called.....and will not make the same mistakes.

The Chinese understand politics, diplomacy, and economics....and can do each on a scale the Japanese could not.

Western Navies no longer have the numbers of ships or the industrial base that allowed the survival of the Western Powers during WWII.

Should War break out between China and the West....this shall be a very different War.

It might be a way of our writing off our Chinese Financial Debt if we can prevail....but at what cost in Lives, Ships, Aircraft, and National Treasure?

[Asturias56]

"at risk of having their Countries taken over in return perhaps."

they're going to invade Canada? Bloody hell - that's some amphibious capability:eek:​​​​​​​

[SASless]

Is Canada going to sit out a War with China if one kicks off with the West?

Impounding Foreign Nationals and Assets is part of the initial stages of War isn't it?

Would not those Port facilities and Container Ports be of strategic value to the belligerents?

What happens should China prevail in such a War?

Will the West refrain from the use of Nuclear Weapons if it sees a loss coming in at Sea and a destruction of its ability to use sea transportation of commercial goods to/from its Nations?

China ain't the Argies.....we are talking War on a huge scale again should it happen.

But then....are not the Geniuses telling us there shall never be a conventional War again....what if they are wrong?

Do the Nukes stay in the holster and one side or the other merely accept defeat?

[etudiant]

Is Canada going to sit out a War with China if one kicks off with the West?

Impounding Foreign Nationals and Assets is part of the initial stages of War isn't it?

Would not those Port facilities and Container Ports be of strategic value to the belligerents?

What happens should China prevail in such a War?

Will the West refrain from the use of Nuclear Weapons if it sees a loss coming in at Sea and a destruction of its ability to use sea transportation of commercial goods to/from its Nations?

China ain't the Argies.....we are talking War on a huge scale again should it happen.

But then....are not the Geniuses telling us there shall never be a conventional War again....what if they are wrong?

Do the Nukes stay in the holster and one side or the other merely accept defeat?

China pours more steel that the rest of the world put together, so the industrial capacity is there to win a large scale war.
That said, why would they? The countries where they are setting up ports and facilities usually are also heavily dependent on Chinese goods, so the local political leaders will be very leery of seizing the Chinese facilities.
As is, China is winning without firing a shot and China's global position continues to improve, eventually perhaps to the point that Taiwan is a layup. The main concern is that Mr Xi gets impatient about Taiwan in the near term.
However, China also knows that astonishing things can happen in war, as Deng learned when he tried to 'teach Vietnam a lesson'. So expect China to first stack the deck much more heavily than at present, which will take time.
Perhaps in Mr Xi's third or fourth term, he might feel pressed by age to get it done. No nukes will be used, there is no incentive to do so and the large expansion of China's deterrent forces now under way makes nuclear weapons pretty useless as a threat.

[Baldeep Inminj]

China pours more steel that the rest of the world put together, so the industrial capacity is there to win a large scale war.
That said, why would they? The countries where they are setting up ports and facilities usually are also heavily dependent on Chinese goods, so the local political leaders will be very leery of seizing the Chinese facilities.
As is, China is winning without firing a shot and China's global position continues to improve, eventually perhaps to the point that Taiwan is a layup. The main concern is that Mr Xi gets impatient about Taiwan in the near term.
However, China also knows that astonishing things can happen in war, as Deng learned when he tried to 'teach Vietnam a lesson'. So expect China to first stack the deck much more heavily than at present, which will take time.
Perhaps in Mr Xi's third or fourth term, he might feel pressed by age to get it done. No nukes will be used, there is no incentive to do so and the large expansion of China's deterrent forces now under way makes nuclear weapons pretty useless as a threat.

I agreed with you until the last sentence. Imagine you are in a fight, you have nukes, but for obvious reasons would prefer not to use them. You fight the conventional war, and realize you are going to lose.
If you surrender, you have lost forever and the enemy gets your nukes, as they would not allow you to keep them,
But if you use them, you might just steal victory from your adversary,
Lose the war, and possibly your national identity and your people, or use nukes as a last resort …
I know what I would do.

[SASless]

Sadly.....there are people that would do just that....on all sides.

Yet...they think themselves sane and rational decent human beings.

But.....even Khrushchev backed away from that....as did JFK.....so perhaps there is hope.

[Asturias56]

No one will win after a nuclear war. If the big guys start firing off missiles there'll be no-one left, anywhere.

Much as I love western democracy I don't put it above the human race

[Lonewolf_50]

Much as I love western democracy I don't put it above the human race
I do.
The rest are trying to catch up, or, as the Chinese are doing, implementing old style Imperial domination via all means: trade, information, diplomacy, force, bullying, blackmail, etc.
Right out of the playbook of the Western Imperial system, the Ottoman Imperial System, the Persian Imperial System, the Incan, and so on.
The Chinese, though, have about 4000 years of learning how to play the long game.
If you want to go back to that old system, go ahead.
Western Democracy is the last ideological hope for mankind not to kill one another off. It created the UN and an attempt (however imperfect) at international order and equilibrium. The West has been grinding away at that since the Peace of Westphalia, each iteration a slight upgrade over the last. The Chinese are very much Old School.

You, a child of that Western system, are apparently oblivious to its value.
There's a short pier, take a long walk.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The Nuclear World War won’t be deliberately started, it will be a mistake caused by the type of military incompetence that produced the shoot down of the Ukrainian airline by an Iranian missile battery.

The traditional nuclear powers generally have affective controls, but the Pakistani nuclear forces is under the “control” of the ISI wackaddodles and I don’t need to say anything more about N Korea. Pakistan has a border with China and is inside China’s inner circle of interests.

A Pakistani first strike against India followed by a counter strike will inevitably drag in the rest of the world…..

[ORAC]

You, a child of that Western system, are apparently oblivious to its value.
As, it would seem, all our children….

https://www.politics.co.uk/news/2021/07/06/majority-of-young-brits-want-a-socialist-economic-system/

Majority of young Brits want a socialist economic system

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-socialism-positive-axios-poll-b1874049.html

Support for socialism gaining traction in US, poll suggests

[beardy]

As, it would seem, all our children….

https://www.politics.co.uk/news/2021/07/06/majority-of-young-brits-want-a-socialist-economic-system/

Majority of young Brits want a socialist economic system

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-socialism-positive-axios-poll-b1874049.html

Support for socialism gaining traction in US, poll suggests
Socialism and democracy can coexist they are not mutually exclusive. Capitalism and communism already coexist. Marx grew the idea of the dictatorship of the masses from his observations of the failings of capitalism in a restricted democracy. His major mistake and that made by many today is to confuse political and economic theory.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/japan-would-defend-taiwan-if-china-invaded-says-deputy-pm-l7dnhdfn0

Japan pledges to defend Taiwan if China attacks, says deputy prime minister Taro Aso

Japan has said it would join America in defending Taiwan against a Chinese invasion, treating any such attack as an “existential threat” that could lead to an assault on its own territory.

The statement by Taro Aso, the deputy prime minister, signals a shift in policy towards Beijing. “If a major problem occurred in Taiwan, it would not be going too far to say that it could be an existential threat [for Japan],” he said.

“In such a case, Japan and the United States will have to work together to defend Taiwan.” He added: “We need to consider seriously that [the southern islands of] Okinawa could be next.”

There was a swift and angry response from Beijing, which considers Taiwan its territory. Last week President Xi promised to complete “reunification” of the island.

Zhao Lijian, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman, denounced Aso’s remarks as “extremely wrong and dangerous” and said that a diplomatic protest had been made. He said that Japan had not learnt the lessons of history and its “countless crimes of aggression against China”.

Zhao added: “China is strongly dissatisfied and resolutely opposed to such remarks. Today’s China is not the China of the past. We will never allow any country to meddle with Taiwan affairs in any way. No one should underestimate the strong determination, firm will and powerful ability of the Chinese people to defend national sovereignty.”

After decades in which it avoided confronting Beijing, Japan’s conservative government is meeting Chinese assertiveness with an increasing outspokenness, and pushing the limits of the post-Second World War pacifist constitution. Aso is the latest leader to express concern about Chinese intentions in Taiwan and a determination to stand up to any attempt to “reunify” the island by force…..

[JustinHeywood]

…..Majority of young Brits want a socialist economic system



Old adage. If you’re not a socialist when you’re 20, you have no heart.

If you’re still a socialist at 30, you have no brain.

[SASless]

Some fail to grasp the evil of Communism it would appear.

[Asturias56]

"You, a child of that Western system, are apparently oblivious to its value."

Wrong my friend, very, very wrong.

But I don't feel that we should wind the clock back 5 million years and start the evolutionary process over again.

[tartare]

As, it would seem, all our children….

https://www.politics.co.uk/news/2021/07/06/majority-of-young-brits-want-a-socialist-economic-system/

Majority of young Brits want a socialist economic system

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-socialism-positive-axios-poll-b1874049.html

Support for socialism gaining traction in US, poll suggests

Socialism and communism are two different things.

[SASless]

A sage individual pointed me towards a Book written by two Chinese Military Officers that explained how China will fight the next "War" and defeat the United States.

While doing a bit of searching on the internet I ran across this material and see that is related to the Book.

There is some very interesting ideas in this.

The Author(s) suggest War is still with us as a tool in Diplomacy but the manner of fighting has been greatly affected by previous Wars and the high cost in Human lives.

https://www.c4i.org/unrestricted.pdf

[Asturias56]

"Socialism and communism are two different things."

not if you are American.......................

[SASless]

Does that make us wrong?“We will not take America under the label of communism, we will not take it under the label of socialism. These labels are unpleasant to the American people, and have been speared too much. We will take the United States under labels we have made very lovable, we will take it under liberalism, under progressivism, under democracy. But take it, we will!”

-Alexander Trachtenberg, National Convention of Communist Parties, 1944


Look back to the Congressional Record....circa 1963 and compare this information to current events.

Perhaps we are skipping the "Socialism" part and arriving at the Communist destination?

Note we have General Milley and other very senior Generals embracing CRT which is unadulterated Marxism.

h

https://ia801201.us.archive.org/7/items/W.CLEONSKOUSENTheMythologySurroundingHisFBICareer46/Communist_Goals_-_1963_Congressional_Record-4.pdf (https://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/watchwomanonthewall/2011/04/the-45-communist-goals-as-read-into-the-congressional-record-1963.html)

[Lyneham Lad]

Heading back to the South China Sea (article in The Times):-

China’s underwater robots can attack enemy vessels without human guidance (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7f770152-dfd4-11eb-bac0-9597568b601f?shareToken=a85c4d5c70f1fffe61b03543a8df6c7a ​​​​​​​)

​​​​​​​China is developing underwater robots that can lurk in the sea and identify and attack enemy vessels without the guidance of human beings.

A newly published scientific paper describes tests in which an underwater drone was able to detect a dummy submarine and successfully strike it with a torpedo, relying on artificial intelligence rather than the instructions of an operator.

The experiments took place more than a decade ago in the strait dividing mainland China from the self-ruling island of Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its own. They are being revealed at a time of anxiety about a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan, apparently to send a signal that any defence of the island by the United States and its allies would be fraught with risk.

The paper published last week describes work done in 2010 by researchers at Harbin Engineering University, China’s pre-eminent centre of submarine development. The unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) was programmed to patrol in a fixed course 30 feet beneath the surface.

When its sonar detected the dummy submarine it altered course and circled the target, using onboard sensors to gather readings, which were analysed by its computer. It fired and hit the dummy submarine with an unarmed torpedo.

“The needs of future underwater warfare bring new development opportunities for the unmanned platforms,” wrote the scientists, led by Professor Liang Guolong, quoted in the South China Morning Post. It can be assumed that in the 11 years since the research described, the capabilities of the UUV have advanced.

Liang wrote that although the underwater robots created by his team worked alone they could be developed to operate in packs. With the right combination of communication systems and artificial intelligence, they could make simultaneous attacks on a common target from different positions.

UUVs are used commercially for maritime surveys, including the mapping of the seabed. They were employed in the unsuccessful hunt for the wreckage of the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.

There are no known examples of them being used in combat, but several navies use underwater robots for tasks including surveillance, reconnaissance and mine-sweeping. The US navy is awaiting the delivery next year of four Orcas, giant 26m long and 50t UUVs, made by Boeing.


​​​​​​​

[etudiant]

Heading back to the South China Sea (article in The Times):-

China’s underwater robots can attack enemy vessels without human guidance (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7f770152-dfd4-11eb-bac0-9597568b601f?shareToken=a85c4d5c70f1fffe61b03543a8df6c7a ​​​​​​​)
​​​


​​​​​​​
Sounds just like the US Navy Captor, a mine built using an encapsulated torpedo. Add a little processing power and swarm attacks are plausible. Only issue is the range of the torpedo, 10-20 miles is not enough other than for choke points.

Longer term, we should remember that the Chinese kicked the Dutch out of Taiwan in the 1600s, a period of relative Dutch military preeminence. Indeed, a Dutch fleet bombarded London in that era.
Yet the Dutch commander in Taiwan admitted that they were just outclassed by the Chinese, who were using tactics they had never seen before.
Right now China is rapidly widening its lead in the global production of unmanned vehicles and the relevant command and control systems. Their use of thousands of civilian drones to act as a free flying display for national celebrations is also a public indication of their control capabilities. Not an easy problem to solve for a defender and it will get worse. It may be that Taiwan will again be a place where China shows its military to be second to none.

[tartare]

I think many of us are too gullible when it comes to the popular media line that China is growing inexorably ever stronger and will surpass and defeat the US.
Cai Xia's paper (https://www.hoover.org/research/china-us-relations-eyes-chinese-communist-party-insiders-perspective-zhong-gong-yan-zhong) is interesting:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-chinese-party-insider-calls-u-s-hopes-of-engagement-naive-11624969800
As background, read this:
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-12-04/chinese-communist-party-failed
I have been on a reading tear for the last six months - immersing myself in Soviet history.
Have read this:
https://www.amazon.com.au/Stalin-Paradoxes-1878-1928-Stephen-Kotkin/dp/0143127861
then this:
https://www.booktopia.com.au/stalin-stephen-kotkin/book/9780141027951.html?source=pla&gclid=Cj0KCQjwxJqHBhC4ARIsAChq4auDYa3IUHTYn6TcHXZKBr_1dKKCIf oTBi5s-WD3BUgrjJhHWk9NgnIaAp8aEALw_wcB
Then this:
https://www.amazon.com.au/Lenin-New-Biography-Dmitri-Volkogonov/dp/1476764840
and have just finished this:
https://www.booktopia.com.au/khrushchev-william-taubman/book/9780393051445.html?source=pla&gclid=Cj0KCQjwxJqHBhC4ARIsAChq4asaLrE_BxuTRxYzeglUvQgQgRAPUz EYIttEYcM5qhq6mBkUPqz7OSMaAsvYEALw_wcB
This is next when published:
https://www.bloomsbury.com/au/brezhnev-9780755642113/
Xi's parallels with Stalin are intriguing.
Ms Cai's insights on the fragility of the CCP are insightful.

I recommend that the US be fully prepared for the possible sudden disintegration of the CCP. The CCP appears to be powerful on the outside, but this refined neo-totalitarian Stalinist dictatorship is actually quite fragile inside. The CCP has the ambition of a hungry dragon but inside it is a paper tiger. There are many factors that may lead to unexpected changes in the situation and even possibly the collapse of the regime. They include the unsustainable economic model and high levels of debt; the inherent and insurmountable contradiction between exaggerated ideological propaganda and social reality; the incompatible dual-track ownership system between the market and the state; the increasing social disparity between rich and poor; continuing corruption; and the fierce infighting for succession to supreme power. Xi Jinping’s overly suspicious and narrow-minded personality has led to continuous purges inside the party, which have brought extreme dissatisfaction among the middle- and high-level officials of the CCP. Everyone feels unsafe.

All of these factors make it possible that any unexpected event may cause a chain reaction leading to huge changes in the situation and even the collapse of the regime. Recall that no one predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union or other communist states in Eastern Europe—yet they occurred. A sudden and instant collapse triggered by random events will almost inevitably bring disorder and chaos within China, which will reverberate outside the country. Therefore, the US must have a clear-eyed understanding and prepare for unpredictable contingencies.

[etudiant]

The collapse of the Soviet Union was at least foreshadowed by Andrei Almarik's 'Will the Soviet Union survive till 1984?', written in 1970.
The possibility of a sudden implosion in China is clearly present. The huge focus on control of every relationship is a clear indication, the leaders fear social upheaval. The brutal reaction to the Covid outbreak underscored that.
In the initial stages, when the situation appeared most dicey, Xi disappeared from the front page of Xinhua, doubtless fearing to become a focus of popular outrage after the death of the doctor who had tried to sound the alarm.
However, the regime can claim to have lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese out of abject poverty, which is a huge achievement that helps stabilize the social compact.
That is a sharp contrast to the Russian experience during the latter Soviet period, stagnation at home and a pointless war abroad.

[Lyneham Lad]

Article in The Times this afternoon.

US vows to defend Philippines after Beijing ‘chases off’ warship (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6dde4ffa-e2f8-11eb-afdb-c7b01afbcfc5?shareToken=a572cb5be54160ba2e1dbe9c92dab167)

Snippet:-
The United States has warned that it will defend the Philippines against any attack by China, as Beijing boasted that it had chased away a US warship from islands that it claims in the South China Sea.

The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, gave the warning on the fifth anniversary of an international court ruling that dismissed Chinese claims to ownership of the South China Sea. It was issued as a naval destroyer, the USS Benfold, sailed close to the Paracel Islands in a symbolic rejection of Beijing’s claim to sovereignty over the area.

“The People’s Republic of China (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/china) continues to coerce and intimidate southeast Asian coastal states, threatening freedom of navigation in this critical global throughway,” Blinken said. “We call on the PRC to abide by its obligations under international law, cease its provocative behaviour and take steps to reassure the international community that it is committed to the rules-based maritime order that respects the rights of all countries, big and small.”

He added: “We also reaffirm that an armed attack on Philippine armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the South China Sea would invoke US mutual defence commitments under . . . the 1951 US-Philippines Mutual Defence Treaty.”

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/energy-and-environment/2021/07/13/japans-new-defense-whitepaper-issues-warnings-over-taiwans-security-climate-change/

Japan’s new defense whitepaper issues warnings over Taiwan’s security, climate change

[Lyneham Lad]

In The Times today.

America sends stealth fighters to China’s prized territory (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/23bf2c48-e657-11eb-a821-58982b1c936d?shareToken=d79b2e76117e6ff485c91d0a2764ecf1)

The US is sending its largest-ever formation of stealth fighters to the Indo-Pacific region to demonstrate America’s ability to operate in China’s self-declared area of military domination.

Twenty-five of the US air force’s fifth-generation F-22A Raptor stealth fighters, as well as ten F-15E Strike Eagles, will take part in the Operation Pacific Iron exercise this month.

They will operate from a remote airstrip on the US island territory of Guam and from Tinian, one of the Northern Mariana islands from where the US launched the atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

Guam would be vulnerable to attack by China’s onshore ballistic missiles in the event of a conflict.

Prized territory? Journalistic hyperbole presumably.

[etudiant]

In The Times today.

America sends stealth fighters to China’s prized territory (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/23bf2c48-e657-11eb-a821-58982b1c936d?shareToken=d79b2e76117e6ff485c91d0a2764ecf1)



Prized territory? Journalistic hyperbole presumably.
Guam is about 2000 miles from China, so well beyond the 'optimistic' 1000 mile combat radius of the F-22.
Are we perhaps setting a marker that China will be allowed to control its airspace to 1000 miles out?

[Lookleft]

I think the US is letting China know that the US is closer than it thinks and that its effective border is in the Western Pacific and not the Eastern Pacific.

[SASless]

That part of the Pacific has many disputed islands....and Freedom of Navigation Ops is one way of reminding all those who offer claims to them that there are limits to what can be unilaterally proclaimed as Sovereign Territory by any of them.

[Lookleft]

The limits are usually set by international conventions and agreed boundaries. The concern is that China does not recognise either. Their arbitrary "9 dash line" and the building up of reefs and shoals into islands have already gone beyond international limits. They don't see the taking of Taiwan by force as a limitation but the West does (presumably) does. So the limits are dependent on your point of view and ability to enforce them. Its normally resolved through diplomacy but when that fails its called war. In my view the parallels to the 30's will continue all the way to 1/9/39.

[jolihokistix]

China must surely have taken fresh heart from the example set by Russia in the Crimea.

[etudiant]

China must surely have taken fresh heart from the example set by Russia in the Crimea.

China and Taiwan both agree that they are part of China, as also the US from back when Kissinger reopened US/PRC relations.
The situation has evolved in the past 50 years, but afaik, Taiwan still views itself as the legitimate Chinese government.
That complicates the legalities for any US intervention if Taiwan and Beijing get into a conflict.

[Load Toad]

China and Taiwan both agree that they are part of China, as also the US from back when Kissinger reopened US/PRC relations.
The situation has evolved in the past 50 years, but afaik, Taiwan still views itself as the legitimate Chinese government.
That complicates the legalities for any US intervention if Taiwan and Beijing get into a conflict.

'China and Taiwan both agree that they are part of China..'

No they don't.

The KMT thinks it is part of China IF China is under the authority of the KMT. The KMT is pretty much a spent force now as the DPP more Pro-independence is in the ascendency. And more young people are pro Taiwan not pro-China. Plus since any realpolitik of the 1970's China may have developed economically it has not with regard to Human Rights & Democracy. Whereas Taiwan is a full democracy and progressive and open (it was not in the 1970's and martial law didn't end until 1987). Thus the One China Policy existed because of conditions in the early 70's which do not remotely reflect the situation in 2021.

[etudiant]

'China and Taiwan both agree that they are part of China..'

No they don't.

The KMT thinks it is part of China IF China is under the authority of the KMT. The KMT is pretty much a spent force now as the DPP more Pro-independence is in the ascendency. And more young people are pro Taiwan not pro-China. Plus since any realpolitik of the 1970's China may have developed economically it has not with regard to Human Rights & Democracy. Whereas Taiwan is a full democracy and progressive and open (it was not in the 1970's and martial law didn't end until 1987). Thus the One China Policy existed because of conditions in the early 70's which do not remotely reflect the situation in 2021.

Sure sounds like the pre WW1 Balkans.
The laws and treaties said one thing, reality on the ground was another. Unhappy results ensued.
Could be really ugly this time.

[SASless]

Like when Africa and the Middle East got divided up by the European powers you mean?

[etudiant]

Like when Africa and the Middle East got divided up by the European powers you mean?

Similar but worse.
There was no direct clash between the powers in Africa or the Middle East, but the Balkans had Russia and Austria/Hungary as immediate guarantors.
Taiwan has the China at its doorstep and the US in its living room. No proxies at all.

[Asturias56]

You are right - the situation is pretty clear - both sides claim to be part of "China" and both sides see the others as theones who should bend..... but one is very much bigger than the other.

No inbuilt stability in the situation

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/macron-promises-closer-ties-with-japan-to-oppose-chinese-expansion-in-the-pacific-tq99hl7l9

Macron promises closer ties with Japan to oppose Chinese expansion in the Pacific

President Macron has pledged to bolster France’s security ties with Japan as western allies pivot to the Pacific to try to counter Chinese expansionism.

Macron arrived in Tahiti yesterday for his first official visit to France’s Pacific territories, where he is expected to lay out a strategy to oppose Beijing’s rising incursions and influence.

He had earlier met Yoshihide Suga, Japan’s prime minister, in Tokyo after which they issued a joint statement committing to work closer on defence for a “free Pacific”. They expressed “serious concerns” about Beijing’s crackdown on rights in Hong Kong and on the ethnic Uighur community.

France has substantial territory and economic interests in the Pacific. French Polynesia, an archipelago of more than 100 islands, has vast mineral resources and fisheries, a source of tensions with Beijing’s trawler fleet.

An Élysée official said that Macron would present “the Indo-Pacific strategy and the position France intends to maintain in this increasingly polarised zone”…..

The UK announced last week that it would permanently deploy two warships to the region after the carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth, and its escort ships sail to Japan in September through the South China Sea, which China claims as its own.

Macron has said that France will help South Pacific nations to launch a coastguard network to counter “predatory” behaviour as China expands its maritime reach, often with paramilitary fishing vessels.

“To better cope with the predatory logic we are all victims of, I want to boost our maritime co-operation in the South Pacific,” Macron said after a video conference with Pacific leaders.

The president has been pushing for a strategic alliance with India and Australia to respond to challenges in the Asia-Pacific region.

Paris showed its military capabilities in the Pacific last month when it sent Rafale jet fighters, troop transport aircraft and air-to-air refuellers to Tahiti to show that its forces could intervene in the region in less than 48 hours.

The month before, French, American and Japanese troops carried out their first joint military drills, on land and at sea off Japan. Lloyd Austin, the US defence secretary, said France was an “ideal partner” as Washington was seeking alliances against Beijing.

China’s ambitions in the region, where it has been investing in nations, appear to have suffered a blow in Samoa where the country’s first female prime minister is preparing to take office on Monday after a 100-day stand-off with the country’s long serving, pro-China incumbent, who refused to accept defeat in the election.

Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, 64, has said that she will scuttle China’s plans to build a wharf to berth up to 12 large vessels near Samoa’s capital, Apia. The $90 million project was backed by Sa’ilele Malielegaoi, 76, who claimed that it would benefit local families.

Many of the 290,000 people in France’s Pacific territories hope that Macron confirms compensation for victims of radiation after the 30-year nuclear testing programme that began in the Pacific in 1966.

Studies have estimated that more than 100,000 people were affected by fallout from at least 175 underground and atmospheric nuclear tests. They remain a source of deep resentment. Only 63 French Polynesians have been compensated for radiation exposure since the tests ended in 1996.

[Asturias56]

The French support their territories very well in the S Pacific - no reason for any of them to really want full independence nor to go to the Chinese.

It's the smaller countries that really depend on Australian and NZ goodwill and who can be tempted by kind Uncle Xi that are the issue

[Load Toad]

You are right - the situation is pretty clear - both sides claim to be part of "China" and both sides see the others as theones who should bend..... but one is very much bigger than the other.

No inbuilt stability in the situation

'...both sides claim to be part of "China"'

No, they don't.

Things have changed a lot from when the KMT took refuge in Taiwan in 49 and from the One China Policy of the early 70's.
- There are older people in Taiwan who still identify to an extent with Japan....but anyway the DPP and younger Taiwanese see themselves as Taiwanese firstly. (And rightly so imho). Having seen what the CCP has done to Macau, Hong Kong and how the CCP under Xi acts in the PRC and in foreign policy it is not surprising they do not want to join a 'Greater China'

[Asturias56]

I don't think either Government (as opposed to popular opinion in Taiwan) has changed their long-held policies tho'

[Load Toad]

...er well when the DPP replaced the KMT in a democratic vote it certainly did.

[Barksdale Boy]

Asturias56
You seem to think that "Government" in Taiwan is a static thing. If I may say so, that is seriously to misunderstand the situation there, but I see that Load Toad has beaten me to it.

[skridlov]

The HK situation provides most of the information we need to predict the future relationship between Taiwan and the PRC. Did anyone actually believe that the PRC would be prepared to tolerate a fundamentally contrary political system persisting inside China? It was always clear that the Chinese government would allow a "decent interval" to elapse before starting to assimilate HK completely - as we see happening now. The idea that the PRC will ever reconcile itself to the existence of a second "Chinese Government" in Taiwan is preposterous. This is a long game but there's only one likely outcome.

[Frostchamber]

Is there any historical basis to China's claim to sovereignty over waters within the the nine dash line, other than that the line appeared (first as an eleven dash line) on a map issued by China in 1947, based apparently on an earlier map from 1935? What is the historical basis for the claims underpinning the 1947 map?

The 2016 arbitration tribunal ruling declared China's claim to be invalid because it had never exercised sole sovereign control over the waters in question. So as far as can be ascertained by the external observer, the sole basis for the claim is that at some point in the early 20th century, China decided that it should be so. Is there anything historically substantive justifying the line?

[Imagegear]

There is some interesting background in this document to China's claims to the SCS. It would appear that they have no leg to stand on under law.

South China Sea Tribunal (https://sites.tufts.edu/lawofthesea/chapter-ten/)

IG

[Lyneham Lad]

Quite lengthy article in The Times this afternoon.

China building second nuclear missile base, satellite images reveal (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3af1fd36-eeb9-11eb-8f01-2c678acbb979?shareToken=5ab6662141590fc654512c981d3ad07c)

Intro:-
China is building a new nuclear missile base, according to satellite images which provide further evidence that Beijing has embarked on a significant expansion of its arsenal.

The new silo complex encompasses an area of about 800 sq km (308 sq miles) in the desert near the city of Hami in the east part of the far western region of Xinjiang, not far from one of the country’s notorious re-education camps for Uighur Muslims.

It is being constructed around 240 miles northwest of another missile silo development, which was spotted a few weeks ago near the ancient Silk Road city of Yumen, also deep in the country’s interior.

[Not_a_boffin]

Quite lengthy article in The Times this afternoon.

China building second nuclear missile base, satellite images reveal (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3af1fd36-eeb9-11eb-8f01-2c678acbb979?shareToken=5ab6662141590fc654512c981d3ad07c)

Intro:-
Been in the defence press for a while now. We really can't say that we weren't warned.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/china-building-second-nuclear-missile-base-satellite-images-reveal-7j2tkp559

China building second nuclear missile base, satellite images reveal

China is building a new nuclear missile base, according to satellite images which provide further evidence that Beijing has embarked on a significant expansion of its arsenal.

The new silo complex encompasses an area of about 800 sq km (308 sq miles) in the desert near the city of Hami in the east part of the far western region of Xinjiang, not far from one of the country’s notorious re-education camps for Uighur Muslims.

It is being constructed around 240 miles northwest of another missile silo development, which was spotted a few weeks ago near the ancient Silk Road city of Yumen, also deep in the country’s interior.

The two new sites constitute “the most significant expansion of the Chinese nuclear arsenal ever”, wrote Matt Korda and Hans Kristensen, researchers at the Federation of American Scientists, who identified the Hami silo field as first reported by The New York Times.

With the construction of 120 silos at Yumen and potentially another 110 at Hami, it would amount to a tenfold increase in the number of known ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) fixed launch points in China, according to the researchers.

“The number of new Chinese silos under construction exceeds the number of silo-based ICBMs operated by Russia, and constitutes more than half of the size of the entire US ICBM force,” Korda and Kristensen said.

“The Chinese missile silo programme constitutes the most extensive silo construction since the US and Soviet missile silo construction during the Cold War.”

China, which also operates a force of about 100 mobile ICBM launchers, is believed to have a relatively modest stockpile of around 300 nuclear warheads as part of a policy sometimes referred to as “minimum deterrent”, which now appears to now be changing.

Admiral Charles Richard, who commands the US nuclear forces, said earlier this year that the Chinese nuclear weapons stockpile was “expected to double, if not triple or quadruple, over the next decade”…..