AUKUS News, Views, Analysis.

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Addressing only ASEAN and the Indian Ocean, there's a few ways around Australian access to the Indian Ocean or to make it obsolete:

Thailand is a neutral country that may be persuaded to either further develop its Indian Ocean ports on its west coast (i.e. Patong) and link them via train with east coast ports, or alternatively, build a canal.

Myanmar is current unstable and has backstabbed China in the past. However, with a more agreeable government, they could also be an important ASEAN partner on the Indian Ocean.
Ultimately, China should have physical presence in the Indian Ocean, by whatever "means".

The most stable and sure way is having yourself protecting a national strategic region

Yes, Allies/friends and neutrals are good, but these things come and go. Boots on the ground however, stay forever. I will leave it to other members to think about how this should be done. IMO that should be 2040+ plan and I am quite certain that Chinese leadership could also be thinking about it.

As for Australia, its 2040 submarines are meaningless in the overall US-China strategic competition
 

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
@Sardaukar20 what a great analysis, my hats to you bro, but I had seen a chink in its armor, domestic and economic problem, pursuing such grant strategy and ambition need support from the masses especially counting the cost. UK had just raise taxes, the US an unprecedented economic catastrophe looming, EU a possible breakup due to the pandemic, instead of looking to fix those problem their focus is China. For that I think the Chinese had already won. And the Chinese especially Xi instead of responding back had just launch a major reform in a growing economic readying its people for a possible conflict.
Yes I agree. There are many flaws with this US war plan. The number one biggest flaw is the assumption that the CPC's rule in China is shaky. That the average Chinese would overthrow the CPC if they lose their Starbucks, Nike, iPhones, and stuff. Not to speculate things, but how China responded to the Wuhan Covid-19 outbreak is a true demonstration of China's readiness for total war. China and its people acted as if they were in an actual war. The govt, police, military, doctors, and average Chinese citizens all cooperated well to combat the virus and they have proved to be effective. How the Chinese people reacted with the attacks on Huawei, and Xinjiang Cotton showed that they were far more patriotic than the West gave them credit for.

The other flaw in this US war plan as you have mentioned is the public support in the US, and the US's own economic strength to carry out a war on China. But its the US elites and their bought up politicians who are calling the shots. Democracy in the US is an illusion. If there was true democracy, Bernie Sanders could have been elected as the 46th US president, not Joe Biden. The elites and ruling class morons in the US are quite detached from reality. They will continue entertaining the idea of a stupid war with China for the sake of their Anglo-white superiority. Hopefully, by the time they got serious with their war plan, China is powerful enough, to make them reconsider.

You're also right in that China is already working to counter this RAND 2016 war plan. There are many things like the BRI, double-circulation economy, green energy projects, RCEP, etc. But an alliance building with ASEAN countries is sorely lacking. Perhaps the greatest obstacle in this is the SCS disputes, and US political meddling in ASEAN. But China has to figure out a way to build some kind of an alliance with ASEAN nations for a common cause. Something that can overlook individual disputes. Perhaps an SCO of sorts for ASEAN. If and when the unthinkable war happens with AUKUS, having ASEAN to help resupply and provide access to PLAN ships would be extremely helpful.

Addressing only ASEAN and the Indian Ocean, there's a few ways around Australian access to the Indian Ocean or to make it obsolete:

Thailand is a neutral country that may be persuaded to either further develop its Indian Ocean ports on its west coast (i.e. Patong) and link them via train with east coast ports, or alternatively, build a canal.

Myanmar is current unstable and has backstabbed China in the past. However, with a more agreeable government, they could also be an important ASEAN partner on the Indian Ocean.
Thailand and Myanmar can access the Indian Ocean, but they would need to cross the Andaman Sea first. I would assume that when the AUKUS-led bloc blocks the Malacca Straits, India will happily join them. The USN should receive Indian support from their navy and their Andaman-Nicobar islands to blockade the Andaman Sea. Let's leave out the technical war discussions aside for now, because I just wanna talk about the US's POV. So on paper at least, Thailand and Myanmar could still be blocked from accessing the Indian Ocean. They are important partners for China, but geography do limit their ability help open an alternative access to the Indian Ocean.

Indonesia OTOH has direct access to the Indian Ocean from Sumatera. There is thousands of kilometers of Indonesian coastline facing the Indian Ocean. They also have the Sunda Strait, an alternative route to the Indian Ocean. Off course the AUSKUS war planners will aim to blockade that too. But unlike the MS, it is much further away from India, and is still quite far away from Australia for friendly logistical support. At least there, both the PLAN, and AUKUS navies are far from any home base. Unless off-course Indonesia picks a side. This is where Indonesia becomes pivotal in this tug-of-war between China and AUKUS. Nevertheless, suffice to say that if both the MS and Sunda Strait are blocked, then its practically an act of war on Indonesia and the rest of ASEAN.
 
Last edited:

plawolf

Lieutenant General
So now that the dust have settled somewhat from the initial announcement, I think we are draw a few more insights on the nature of AUKUS based on the reaction (or lack thereof) of other major players.

First, Japan and SK’a silence on this announcement is deafening. They above all others would be most directly affected by this move, being so dependent on US military protection. If they had not been invited to the alliance, then they would be very concerned by this announcement as it would suggest that the US is shifting away from its commitments to them. Their silence means that this announcement did not come as a surprise, and if the Americans did already approach them about this alliance, then it’s almost certain that the Americans would have done so to invite them to join, but were turned down.

There is no way America could not have foreseen the horrendous optics of such a pink sausage fest alliance aimed at Asia. So if they could have gotten some Asian founding members, they absolutely would have done so.

NZ’s swift reaction to go so far as to ban any future Australian SSN from its waters is also noteworthy and suggests they were also pre-briefed (and almost certainly invited), and not only declined, but did so with protest, suggesting they strongly objected to the new alliance and believed that this was a bad and destabilising move, which is absolutely correct.

All of this taken in context means that far from being the aggressive push into Asia that AUKUS claims to be, in reality it actually represents a massive erosion of existing American positions within Asia. It’s main battle lines have been pushed back from the first and second island chains to Australia.

It is almost certainly because of this that we see such a mild reaction from China, the target of AUKUS. Chinese reactions have been by the numbers bare minimum needed, and represents a proverbial shrug of the shoulders in diplomatic terms. That is also a carefully calibrated response to show displeasure but no alarm. With the only significant measures likely to be further economic pain being inflicted on Australia to better reflect its openly adversarial stance against China.

Up till now, China’s economic punishment of Australia can be characterised as essentially cost free to China. With AUKUS and the elevated hostile stance from Australia, I expect China to now also upgrade its economic punishment of Australia to active infliction of pain, whereby China will now be prepared to take some pain itself if it means it can fuck the Australians over more. That is a step down from maximum pain, which is what Trump did to China, where almost any cost is worthwhile if it hurts the opponent, even if it hurts yourself more.
 

DarkStar

Junior Member
Registered Member
All of this taken in context means that far from being the aggressive push into Asia that AUKUS claims to be, in reality it actually represents a massive erosion of existing American positions within Asia. It’s main battle lines have been pushed back from the first and second island chains to Australia.
Lee Kuan Yew did warn the anglo americans not to try to contain China, otherwise China would formulate a counter-containment strategy and (in his own words) 'demolish the United States'.
 

escobar

Brigadier
Ultimately, China should have physical presence in the Indian Ocean, by whatever "means".

The most stable and sure way is having yourself protecting a national strategic region

Yes, Allies/friends and neutrals are good, but these things come and go. Boots on the ground however, stay forever. I will leave it to other members to think about how this should be done. IMO that should be 2040+ plan and I am quite certain that Chinese leadership could also be thinking about it.

As for Australia, its 2040 submarines are meaningless in the overall US-China strategic competition
China will not overreact. They’ve made pro forma protests, laughable almost. They’ll continue “common prosperity” internally & externally play to their strengths: build & deepen economic & financial ties; avoid political entanglements. US/UK are playing shock & awe. AUKUS looked big & bold, like a tectonic shift because of the nuke-powered subs. But now it’s sunk in that it's just another defense alliance. It won’t help the region resist PRC geoeconimics rise. It’s a fire alarm. No one will want to break the glass to call out the firefighters because that might end up badly for everyone. The confront, compete, cooperate model of relations is dead, have always be a nonsense. China will cooperate enough to keep relations on life support while doubling down on self-reliance. There will be no serious effort to resolve differences. So a partially bifurcated global economy is more likely.
 

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
China will not overreact.
Oh, my comment about China having permanent physical presence/access in the Indian Ocean is not only about AUKUS.

Nevermind AUKUS, even if everything was peaceful, China still has national interests in keeping that lifeline open. Physical presence there is not option, it is a necessity. China cannot be kept hostage everytime someone wants to blockade trade. And China also doesn't want to depend on other countries for keeping the sea trade lane open.

The only solution is for China to have permanent land there. How this will be done, is up to the Chinese leaders
 

Chin evan

New Member
Registered Member
I suspect Indonesia got screwed playing both sides, just sign up for 2 frigates with the British and the submarine deal came
 
Top