China's expansionist strategy
IQ test may have some validity within a single country - for comparisons between countries they're useless due to cultural and historic differences.. An IQ of 70, the AVERAGE for countries such as El Salvador, woudl put you in the lowest 13% in the UK. I'm willing to accept differences but not that half the good folk in Salvador are verging mentally deficient I'm afraid.
Thread Starter
I do not think one can separate the economic and financial components of China's strategy from the territorial expansion criteria. Taiwan obviously exists in a cultural and historic framework as part of the greater China, however, the need to occupy territory with "boots on the ground" is a prerequisite for ensuring supply of critical raw materials and possibly technology. I am not yet convinced of China's peaceful intentions in this regard, it may be the "long game" but it has a certain inevitability which will need to be confronted sooner or later.
IG
IG
“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.”
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: USA/England
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As China'a economic power grows, it will claim more assets in the South China Sea because naval power has always been a prerequisite for the next world empire. The US is become less inclined to fight for such global supremacy at a cost it increasingly can't sustain.
I think they looked at overstretched empires like the Romans or the current day Americans, and easily saw the folly of attempted military control of the known world. Their goal is economic, manufacturing, monetary, innovation and trade domination, not empirical or military domination. I think what really stuffed the US up was their disastrous serious of wars in the Middle East post 2001. Not only did they kill and devastate millions, not only did they destabilise and upend an entire region with worldwide ramification, what they also did was show the Chinese government the lunacy of a national doctrine to establish security via military supremacy, which only really has gained debt, bloodshed, loss of influence and loss of respect for the US whilst not achieving any of their original goals. Whilst the Chinese GDP has almost tripled since the Iraq War 2003 they were smart enough to not make the same mistake of launching similar wars themselves as they’ve grown, which is quite telling in how their mindset works. In fact after the loss of 4000 US soldiers in Iraq who became Iraq’s largest trading partner without firing a shot? Wars of conquest are so 20th century.
Chinese memories go back a long way before 1949. It’s no surprise the topic of the Opium Wars have been mentioned In the US-China trade negotiations, probably followed by US officials scrambling for their phones to find out what the hell that was all about. China’s plan to populate and develop the Spratleys and Paracels has more to do with avoiding a repeat of 1842 than as a springboard to launch imperialistic wars of conquest of far flung foreign lands.
dr dre
You say that "Chinese memories go back a long way before 1949". It's a shame that the Chinese government's memory can't seem to stretch back as far as 1989, 1966 or 1958. As to the purpose behind China's activities in the South China Sea, perhaps it might be instructive to ask the Japanese, among others, about that.
You say that "Chinese memories go back a long way before 1949". It's a shame that the Chinese government's memory can't seem to stretch back as far as 1989, 1966 or 1958. As to the purpose behind China's activities in the South China Sea, perhaps it might be instructive to ask the Japanese, among others, about that.
Thread Starter
dr dre,
Somehow I can't see how
equates with the building of fixed base aircraft carriers, logistic and supply stores with associated port facilities, without talking about personnel or facilities.
Well I suppose one could "develop" a "resort" in one corner of the "flight deck" to give an impression of propriety but it's not easy to position the deckchairs.
IG.
Somehow I can't see how
China’s plan to populate and develop the Spratleys and Paracels
Well I suppose one could "develop" a "resort" in one corner of the "flight deck" to give an impression of propriety but it's not easy to position the deckchairs.
IG.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Trump and the Mach 17 Super Duper Missile
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...hina-7j90bjs5b
US ‘would lose any war’ fought in the Pacific with China
The United States would be defeated in a sea war with China and would struggle to stop an invasion of Taiwan, according to a series of “eye-opening” war games by the Pentagon.
American defence sources have told The Times that simulated conflicts conducted by the US concluded that their forces would be overwhelmed. One war game focused on the year 2030, by which time the Chinese navy would operate new attack submarines, aircraft carriers and destroyers.
The analysis also found that Beijing’s accumulation of medium-range ballistic missiles has already made every US base and any American carrier battle group operating in the Indo-Pacific Command region vulnerable to overwhelming strikes. The Pacific island of Guam, a base for American strategic bombers such as the B-2 and B-52, is now considered wholly at risk.
“China has long-range anti-ship ballistic missiles and hypersonic [more than five times the speed of sound] missiles,” a US defence source said, meaning that US carrier groups could not oppose their Chinese counterparts “without suffering capital losses”.
The conclusions, described as “eye-opening” by one source, are supported by the most recent analysis provided by America’s leading experts on China.......
A defence source said that repeated warnings by Admiral Philip Davidson, the regional commander, and a drive from within the Pentagon to fund hypersonic weapons to counter the Chinese threat had led to a significant switch in resources. “Mark Esper [the defence secretary] is aggressively moving to build the capabilities that we need to deter China from committing to a major confrontation,” the source said.
Hypersonic weapons are viewed as key to taking out China’s ballistic missiles capability, and the US also plans to deploy long-range, ground-launched cruise missiles in the Asia-Pacific region. Marine units are also to be armed with anti-ship missiles, along a string of islands enclosing China’s coastal seas.
President Trump announced yesterday during a White House ceremony to receive the flag of the Space Force from military leaders that the US was developing a “super-duper missile”.
“We are building incredible military equipment,” he said. “We have, I call it the super-duper missile, and I heard the other night 17 times faster than what they have right now, when you take the fastest missile we have right now. You’ve heard Russia has five times and China’s working on five or six times, we have one 17 times.”........
US ‘would lose any war’ fought in the Pacific with China
The United States would be defeated in a sea war with China and would struggle to stop an invasion of Taiwan, according to a series of “eye-opening” war games by the Pentagon.
American defence sources have told The Times that simulated conflicts conducted by the US concluded that their forces would be overwhelmed. One war game focused on the year 2030, by which time the Chinese navy would operate new attack submarines, aircraft carriers and destroyers.
The analysis also found that Beijing’s accumulation of medium-range ballistic missiles has already made every US base and any American carrier battle group operating in the Indo-Pacific Command region vulnerable to overwhelming strikes. The Pacific island of Guam, a base for American strategic bombers such as the B-2 and B-52, is now considered wholly at risk.
“China has long-range anti-ship ballistic missiles and hypersonic [more than five times the speed of sound] missiles,” a US defence source said, meaning that US carrier groups could not oppose their Chinese counterparts “without suffering capital losses”.
The conclusions, described as “eye-opening” by one source, are supported by the most recent analysis provided by America’s leading experts on China.......
A defence source said that repeated warnings by Admiral Philip Davidson, the regional commander, and a drive from within the Pentagon to fund hypersonic weapons to counter the Chinese threat had led to a significant switch in resources. “Mark Esper [the defence secretary] is aggressively moving to build the capabilities that we need to deter China from committing to a major confrontation,” the source said.
Hypersonic weapons are viewed as key to taking out China’s ballistic missiles capability, and the US also plans to deploy long-range, ground-launched cruise missiles in the Asia-Pacific region. Marine units are also to be armed with anti-ship missiles, along a string of islands enclosing China’s coastal seas.
President Trump announced yesterday during a White House ceremony to receive the flag of the Space Force from military leaders that the US was developing a “super-duper missile”.
“We are building incredible military equipment,” he said. “We have, I call it the super-duper missile, and I heard the other night 17 times faster than what they have right now, when you take the fastest missile we have right now. You’ve heard Russia has five times and China’s working on five or six times, we have one 17 times.”........
Look at what happened to Russia after the invasion and occupation of Crimea. Do you really think that China would risk something similar happening?
Thread Starter
Its not like China sees itself as a global colonial power...
.China in Greenland
Just creeping in through the back door
IG
.China in Greenland
Just creeping in through the back door
IG
Last edited by Imagegear; 16th May 2020 at 19:01.
"a drive from within the Pentagon to fund hypersonic weapons" - another boondogle to be financed by the long suffering taxpayer in other words.
I can't see the advantage of a hypersonic weapon in a fight with China - you'd have to be sure you could hit every one of their anti-carrier batteries to risk a CVN in close to Taiwan.
I can't see the advantage of a hypersonic weapon in a fight with China - you'd have to be sure you could hit every one of their anti-carrier batteries to risk a CVN in close to Taiwan.
"a drive from within the Pentagon to fund hypersonic weapons" - another boondogle to be financed by the long suffering taxpayer in other words.
I can't see the advantage of a hypersonic weapon in a fight with China - you'd have to be sure you could hit every one of their anti-carrier batteries to risk a CVN in close to Taiwan.
I can't see the advantage of a hypersonic weapon in a fight with China - you'd have to be sure you could hit every one of their anti-carrier batteries to risk a CVN in close to Taiwan.
Heard of Virginia Class nuke subs that can locate targets and launch these weapons..
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...iers-2kdns0xsg
Beijing’s African port ready for aircraft carriers
A huge extension to China’s naval base in Africa has given Beijing its first permanent overseas military port capable of accommodating aircraft carriers, satellite images have shown. Although China calls its presence in Djibouti a logistics base, the new 330m pier indicates a grander strategy: a forward-operating facility for Beijing’s rapidly growing “blue-water” navy that can operate around the world.
US defence sources said that China seemed intent on developing strategic facilities allowing it to base parts of its navy in key parts of the world. Djibouti, where China opened its naval base in 2017, is strategically located at the mouth of the Red Sea on one of the world’s busiest shipping routes. On the other side of the Arabian Sea, at the mouth of the Gulf of Oman, Beijing has largely financed a huge development of a port at Gwadar in western Pakistan. US defence sources say that it also appears to be interested in building a naval facility in South America.........
The satellite images of the Chinese naval base, built at a cost of nearly $600 million, were published by Forbes magazine. They show further excavation under way, suggesting that a second pier might be planned. The People’s Liberation Army Navy, which runs the base, has two aircraft carriers, the Liaoning, which is 304m long, and the 315m Shandong, each of which could have just enough space to dock in Djibouti. A third one under construction is estimated to be 400m.
A senior US defence source said: “After 9/11 we thought that China was largely defensive militarily . . . There was no blue-water navy and no long-range missiles or any basing strategy outside their region . . . all that has changed. In the 20 years since, China has a blue-water navy and an offensive missile capability, they have man-made islands in the East and South China Seas for military purposes and they have a base overseas [Djibouti] and, we believe, plans for one in Pakistan.”.......
Beijing’s African port ready for aircraft carriers
A huge extension to China’s naval base in Africa has given Beijing its first permanent overseas military port capable of accommodating aircraft carriers, satellite images have shown. Although China calls its presence in Djibouti a logistics base, the new 330m pier indicates a grander strategy: a forward-operating facility for Beijing’s rapidly growing “blue-water” navy that can operate around the world.
US defence sources said that China seemed intent on developing strategic facilities allowing it to base parts of its navy in key parts of the world. Djibouti, where China opened its naval base in 2017, is strategically located at the mouth of the Red Sea on one of the world’s busiest shipping routes. On the other side of the Arabian Sea, at the mouth of the Gulf of Oman, Beijing has largely financed a huge development of a port at Gwadar in western Pakistan. US defence sources say that it also appears to be interested in building a naval facility in South America.........
The satellite images of the Chinese naval base, built at a cost of nearly $600 million, were published by Forbes magazine. They show further excavation under way, suggesting that a second pier might be planned. The People’s Liberation Army Navy, which runs the base, has two aircraft carriers, the Liaoning, which is 304m long, and the 315m Shandong, each of which could have just enough space to dock in Djibouti. A third one under construction is estimated to be 400m.
A senior US defence source said: “After 9/11 we thought that China was largely defensive militarily . . . There was no blue-water navy and no long-range missiles or any basing strategy outside their region . . . all that has changed. In the 20 years since, China has a blue-water navy and an offensive missile capability, they have man-made islands in the East and South China Seas for military purposes and they have a base overseas [Djibouti] and, we believe, plans for one in Pakistan.”.......
A bit difficult to run secretly with this lot next door.
From Wiki:
From Wiki:
Djibouti's strategic location by the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, which separates the Gulf of Aden from the Red Sea and controls the approaches to the Suez Canal, has made it a desirable location for foreign military bases. Camp Lemonnier was abandoned by the French and later leased to the United States Central Command in September 2002. The lease was renewed in 2014 for another 20 years.[85] The French Foreign Legion's 13 DBLE is still stationed in Djibouti as the largest French military presence abroad, the only one commanded by a 3-star general. The country also hosts the only overseas Chinese support base and the only overseas Japanese military base.[86] The Italian National Support Military Base is also located in Djibouti.[87]
The hosting of foreign military bases is an important part of Djibouti's economy. The United States pays $63 million a year to rent Camp Lemonnier,[86] France and Japan each pay about $30 million a year,[88] and China pays $20 million a year.[86] The lease payments added up to more than 5% of Djibouti's GDP of US$2.3 billion in 2017.
The hosting of foreign military bases is an important part of Djibouti's economy. The United States pays $63 million a year to rent Camp Lemonnier,[86] France and Japan each pay about $30 million a year,[88] and China pays $20 million a year.[86] The lease payments added up to more than 5% of Djibouti's GDP of US$2.3 billion in 2017.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Nobody said secret - difficult to hide major fleet facilities. Quite aggressive as well - the US has had to protest after the base started using lasers to blind the crew if USAF aircraft landing at the adjacent a Marine base.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...tack_djibouti/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...tack_djibouti/
So, the Chinese have established a base in a country where the French, the Americans, the Italians AND the Japanese already have bases?
Nasty sneaky expansionists!
Nasty sneaky expansionists!
The base looks quite modest to my untrained eye. Nothing like some of the sprawling US bases around the globe.
Of course, the waters around there are notoriously troubled so it makes perfect sense from a logistics perspective.
Of course, the waters around there are notoriously troubled so it makes perfect sense from a logistics perspective.
