China and the US resume military contacts

HKSDU

Junior Member
I find it rather strange that China opposes it.

There is big, albeit hidden, opportunity there. If, eventually, Taiwan decides to join PRC .... all those sophiticated weapons from USA will be in PRC's hands.

PRC has otherwise no chance of laying it's hands on such sophiticated stuff. Once the sophisticated weapons are in hand ..... obviously, reverse engineering is the way to go.
What technology does ROC have that PRC currently doesn't have an equivalent to? Only thing I can see that is useful are those turbofan running the F-16, that can supplement WS-10 variants...And maybe the Apache on board target engagement systems.
 

luhai

Banned Idiot
I find it rather strange that China opposes it.

There is big, albeit hidden, opportunity there. If, eventually, Taiwan decides to join PRC .... all those sophiticated weapons from USA will be in PRC's hands.

PRC has otherwise no chance of laying it's hands on such sophiticated stuff. Once the sophisticated weapons are in hand ..... obviously, reverse engineering is the way to go.

The funny thing is even the US are talking about that.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


go to 0:20:20 for the comment, and this about the initial batch of F-16s.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
I just came across this article on time (derived from a blog), which I think is quite worth reading. I felt quite vindicated after reading it.

Couldn't find any other places to put this.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Thomas P.M. Barnett is an old Pentagon hand and heavy-duty national-security thinker. He's perplexed by a glaring omission in Tuesday's front-page New York Times' piece on the growing distrust expressed by young Chinese military officers towards the U.S.

"This is the same U.S. military that assembles multinational war games in China's front yard and sells advanced weaponry to a small island nation off its coast--in addition to anyone else who will buy it in the region (and yes, business is very good right now, as weapons purchases are up 100% over the past half decade)," he writes in his blog. "Are we honestly that clueless or has our disingenuity broken through to some higher, slightly irrational plane?"

He then details how things might look if China were doing in our neighborhood what we are now doing in theirs:


"Follow me into this brave, alternative world:

-- Imagine the Chinese navy holding multinational exercises with the Cubans and Venezuelans and Nicaraguans (a silly sight, I know) in the waters around Cuba, while Beijing warns us subtly that their 1979 Cuba Defense Act will be pursued to the ultimate vigor required, including the sale of advanced attack aircraft to the Cuban air force.

-- Imagine Chinese carriers conducting such operations, sporting aircraft and weaponry that could rain destruction over most of the continental U.S. at a moment's notice.

-- Imagine Chinese spy craft patrolling the edge of our local waters and flying around the rim of our airspace.

-- Imagine the Chinese selling all sorts of missile defense to Venezuela and other allies "scared of rising American militarism."

-- Imagine weapons purchases throughout Latin America doubling in five years time, with China supplying most of the goods.

-- Imagine Chinese naval bases and marine barracks doting the Latin American landscape and Caribbean archipelago.

-- Imagine a Cuban missile crisis-like event in the mid-1990s, which led the Chinese military to propose a new evolution in their warfare since. (A reference to the Taiwan Strait crises of 1995-96)

-- Imagine the Chinese military conducting regime toppling events in the Middle East, involving countries upon whom our energy dependency is dramatically and permanently rising, while China actually gets the vast bulk of its oil from non-Persian Gulf sources like Canada, Mexico, Latin America, Africa and itself.

-- Imagine the Chinese government demanding that the Chinese military produce an elaborate report every year detailing the "disturbing" rise of U.S. military power.

-- Imagine the Chinese military announcing their new military doctrine of attack from the sea and air, with their documents chock full of bombing maps of U.S. military installations that are widely dispersed across the entirety of the continental United States, meaning their new war doctrine has--at its core--the complete destruction of U.S. military assets on our territory as the opening bid.

-- Imagine the U.S. military stating that this new doctrine of attacking the entirety of the U.S. territory is necessary to maintaining the regional balance of power in the Western hemisphere, because the U.S. Navy has--in an "unprovoked" and "provocative" manner, begun significant patrolling operations in the Caribbean Basin, whose waters constitute a "profound" national interest to the Chinese.

-- Imagine this series of developments unfolding over close to two decades, as China, having lost its familiar great-power war foe, the Soviet Union, firmly glommed onto the U.S. as a replacement enemy image.

-- Imagine all that, and then imagine how the U.S. military views the Chinese military.

-- Imagine if the Chinese military offered military-to-military ties under such conditions. (Something the U.S. has been seeking.)

What do you think the U.S. Congress would say to that? Would it be considered "caving in" to Chinese pressure?

The truth, unexplored in this otherwise fine article, is that the U.S. military needs--and has needed--rising China as an enemy image for more than a decade-and-a-half now, so I don't know how we can expect anything from young Chinese officers other than returning the favor."

The original blog post by Thomas Barnett can be found here:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
I just came across this article on time (derived from a blog), which I think is quite worth reading. I felt quite vindicated after reading it.

Couldn't find any other places to put this.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!




The original blog post by Thomas Barnett can be found here:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

i absolutely agree

for all these years, this is the first time i ever came by something of such good quality article, written by someone who's so objective

what he's said was so true, and not only so, i even went on to follow his twitter and blog. he had a discussion at the bottom with someone else, and wow i was blown away with their etiquette manner

im currently taking critical thinking and international studies in my school. when they mentioned the words "realist, inductive, deductive", i felt i cant help but respect their how educated they presented themselves.
 

ABC78

Junior Member
Sadly Sino-US military relations is always the first casualty when ever these sort of hick ups occur. Some say Sino-US military relations should be better because during the Cold War Soviet-US military relations were much more developed.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

HK_Thoughtful

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Sadly Sino-US military relations is always the first casualty when ever these sort of hick ups occur. Some say Sino-US military relations should be better because during the Cold War Soviet-US military relations were much more developed.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I agree with this, as every time bilateral tensions rise, military to military communication between the U.S. and the PRC suffer the most.

While bilateral military ties tend to breakdown frequently and even at the slightest signs of tension, military ties between the U.S. and the PRC can resolve misunderstandings and incidents while preventing unnecessary escalation (military or otherwise). Additionally once ties become more developed and more permanent (hopefully...) both sides might even work together to address mutual security problems (i.e. piracy).

That said, at this point it is probably best, as mentioned in previous posts, for both sides to "agree to disagree" and move on from there. Furthermore, it can be argued that both PRC military modernization and U.S. surveillance around PRC territorial waters can be regarded by the respective sides as pertaining to national interest. If so then both sides should respect the opposite's national interest and find ways to handle these situations without escalation and without causing damage to assets and personnel. For example, take the U.S. surveillance ship case. U.S. ship detected? Okay, instead of employing Chinese ships to harass U.S. ship and risk causing a maritime incident, use these same ships to shadow. This lets the U.S. know that the Chinese are watching them. I mean I am sure that the PLAN routinely monitors U.S. naval activity and exercises all the time.

Just my opinion. :coffee:
 

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
I agree with this, as every time bilateral tensions rise, military to military communication between the U.S. and the PRC suffer the most.

Maybe this is because out of all the different levels and types of bilateral relations between the two powers, these; despite the hype, are the least valuable, have the least repercussions if disrupted and the most simple to resurrect afterwards.

In other words all sound and fury but no actual jobs or money on the line;)
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
For example, take the U.S. surveillance ship case. U.S. ship detected? Okay, instead of employing Chinese ships to harass U.S. ship and risk causing a maritime incident, use these same ships to shadow. This lets the U.S. know that the Chinese are watching them. I mean I am sure that the PLAN routinely monitors U.S. naval activity and exercises all the time.

Just my opinion. :coffee:

You mean doing the sub-stalk thing again?
 
Top