China Geopolitical News Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blackstone

Brigadier
Do you really think US and/or other western nations care IF PRC becomes more bellicose and belligerent?
That's a no brainer, the entire world care if China is more bellicose and belligerent, especially the US and other Pacific nations, including Nippon.

You know if PRC leaves the UN it's just repeating history when Japan left United League of Nations in the 30's.
Only problem is which nation is going to ally with PRC going against the US and other nations?
More realistic problem is which nations are going to make trade with PRC if that situation actually comes to place?
Japan can fantasize all it wants, but PRC isn't leaving the UN and giving up her seat of the Security Council, and Japan wouldn't be on the council in our lifetimes, except as a guest.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
Blackstone

Stop editing placing words in my mouth. It's US and/or other western nations care (of the One China Policy) IF PRC becomes more bellicose and belligerent?

In which the answer is hell no.
As for;

The US is quite so irresponsible nor short-sighted enough to do as you propose, not even that pack of irresponsible amateurs currently in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

The so called "irresponsible amateurs" also do not want to be the next Chamberlain either so I won't count my chickens just yet if I were you.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Alright, let's stop this particular discussion once and for all, since this is getting no where except into a long political discussion.

SamuraiBlue, I'm going to say this once and for all cause what you said is very offensive to a lot of people on this forum. When I was growing up in China, I think most people my age and older knew of someone who was tortured or killed by Japanese soldier in WWII. When I visited Nanjing in 2006, it still did not allow Japanese business from operating on the city premise due to the infamous rape of Nanking. You would find Chinese people compare that event to the holocaust. It's not something amplified by the communist government. It's real. So comparing China sending unarmed cutters into disputed waters to genocide is quite extreme.
 
Last edited:

weig2000

Captain
From WSJ:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The US-China contest in Asia will continue in the air, in the water, under the sea and in the space in the coming decades. The US will not stop surveillance and spying along China's coasts for real or made-up reasons (transparency/freedom of navigation/"friends and allies"/national interest/primacy/might-is-right); China is unlikely to back off with its long list of justifications (strategic naval assets/national security/growing capabilities/sphere-of-influence/backyard/"core interest"). Let's hope both sides can learn from the interactions and manage the process without severe escalation and consequences.

I believe China is in the process of planning for SCS ADIZ if high-profile and highly public encounters like this one occur quite frequently, then it believes it would have an easier job to sell the SCS ADIZ to the world instead of being perceived of acting "unilaterally" and unprovoked. I think China is also waiting to make sure it has sufficient assets to backup the establishment of ADIZ. Meanwhile, they're gaining experiences and exploring the boundaries and parameters of the future ADIZ. My guess is that the ADIZ would probably overlap with EEZ substantially (check out how far the 2001 EP-3 encounter was and the current one is from Hainan Island). It will probably take a couple of years.

U.S.-China Rivalry Simmers Underseas
Pentagon Concerned About Beijing's Expanded Submarine Forces

By James T. Areddy
Aug. 26, 2014 1:46 p.m. ET

SHANGHAI—A close midair encounter between U.S. and Chinese military planes last week reflected long-running tensions in the skies—a rivalry that is building under the waters below, as well.

The Defense Department didn't explain the mission for the U.S. Navy P-8 aircraft—a plane designed to track submarines—that was intercepted by a Chinese J-11 fighter over the South China Sea to the east of China's Hainan Island on Aug. 19. U.S. officials say in that encounter, and several others in recent months, Chinese fighter pilots have flown dangerously close to U.S. aircraft.

One Chinese rear admiral said the U.S. plane was likely spying on China's nuclear submarines.

The midair intercepts come as the U.S. military has warned that Beijing is quickly expanding its submarine force, including a fleet of Jin-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile subs.

At least two of those appear to be based at Hainan, according to foreign defense experts who point to a recently expanded sub base there that features an undersea entrance.

The Pentagon has said it expects the Chinese navy to use the Jin-class to begin China's first sea patrols with fully armed nuclear weapons at some point this year.

"The U.S. wants to know exactly what's going on in Hainan," said Chen Qi, an expert on Sino-U.S. relations at Beijing's Carnegie-Tsinghua Center. "China does not want the U.S. to know."

Both the U.S. and China are trying to reduce the likelihood that chance encounters between the militaries could lead to accidents. The Chinese defense ministry said Tuesday that it sent a delegation to the U.S. to take part in meetings this week to discuss military rules at sea and in the air.

The U.S. Embassy in Beijing declined to comment, referring inquiries on the matter to the Pentagon.

The U.S. patrols and China's intercepts are likely to continue, some analysts said, given the stakes. The U.S. military is concerned about what it says is China's growing investment in submarines as part of a broad modernization program that already includes an aircraft carrier and an expanding fleet of navy ships.

Like few other systems in the military arsenal, submarines add stealth to military power and allow it to be projected virtually anywhere. China sees the force as vital to its aspirations to be a superpower.

The recently commissioned P-8 is the Navy's most advanced sub-hunter, notable for its relative speed and long-range surveillance capabilities. Since December, the U.S. has sent six P-8s to bases in southern Japan to boost its anti-submarine forces.

China's plan is to augment its submarine fleet of around 60, many acquired from Russia over the past 25 years, the U.S. military says.

"China's advance in submarine capabilities is significant," Adm. Samuel J. Locklear, Commander of the U.S. Navy's Pacific Command, testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee in March. "They possess a large and increasingly capable submarine force."

The Defense Department points in particular to submarines equipped to carry a new ballistic missile with an estimated range of more than 4,000 nautical miles. That would leave much of North America in range, depending on where in the Pacific the subs are.

"This will give China its first credible sea-based nuclear deterrent, probably before the end of 2014," Adm. Locklear told the Senate committee.

According to the Defense Department's latest annual report to congress, China operates three such Jin-class Type 094 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines and up to five may enter service before it unveils a next generation type over the coming decade.

"Make no mistake, the nuclear ballistic missile submarine is the most dangerous weapon on Earth," John Keller, editor of Military & Aerospace Electronics wrote in a June report.

"Think of it as a stealthy, silent, and mobile collection of nuclear missile silos. They deploy quietly, submerge quickly, and remain hidden under the waves for months at a time. Tracking them is difficult and imprecise."

Experts in China said encounters like the one last week are neither new, nor likely to stop. Ni Lexiong, a military expert at Shanghai's University of Political Science, said the U.S. feels threatened by China's "normal and reasonable" desire to build a modern navy.

"This is an irreconcilable contradiction," said Mr. Ni.

The U.S. augments surveillance from aircraft with satellites, surface ships and other submarines, looking for favored routes and maneuvers, experts say.

That adds complications to a region with busy commercial shipping lanes and natural-resources exploration, as well as periodic clashes between vessels from China, Vietnam and the Philippines over disputed maritime claims.

As in last week's intercept in the skies, submarines appear in the background of past Sino-U.S. encounters near China's southern coast.

In March 2009, the U.S. said one its navy ships—the Impeccable, a surveillance vessel designed specifically to drag a sonar array to detect submarines—faced harassment from five Chinese vessels as well as a low flyby from a Chinese air force plane.

The U.S. called the Chinese ships' actions reckless, unprofessional and unlawful, while China said the Impeccable was illegally surveying within its Exclusive Economic Zone—an area extending 200 nautical miles from its coast.

The U.S. says countries are free to carry out military surveillance and mapping outside the 12-nautical mile territorial waters.

—Kersten Zhang
contributed to this article.
 

Janiz

Senior Member
I believe China is in the process of planning for SCS ADIZ if high-profile and highly public encounters like this one occur quite frequently, then it believes it would have an easier job to sell the SCS ADIZ to the world instead of being perceived of acting "unilaterally" and unprovoked. I think China is also waiting to make sure it has sufficient assets to backup the establishment of ADIZ. Meanwhile, they're gaining experiences and exploring the boundaries and parameters of the future ADIZ. My guess is that the ADIZ would probably overlap with EEZ substantially (check out how far the 2001 EP-3 encounter was and the current one is from Hainan Island). It will probably take a couple of years.
Captain James Fanell made a statement like that (it was last year or this?) which has been played down in the press by Pentagon after he said that China is going to announce ADIZ in the SCS by the end of 2015. The facts are on Cpt. Fanell's side who's probably the most knowledgeable 'at hand' person about US-China relations at the moment.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Captain James Fanell made a statement like that (it was last year or this?) which has been played down in the press by Pentagon after he said that China is going to announce ADIZ in the SCS by the end of 2015. The facts are on Cpt. Fanell's side who's probably the most knowledgeable 'at hand' person about US-China relations at the moment.

Captain Fanell might very well be the most knowledgeable NIS officer on the PLA, especially PLAN, but he's hardly the go-to guy on US-China relations in the SCS, ECS, or anywhere else on the planet. I say that with the utmost appreciation and respect for the good Captain's knowledge of Chinese military issues, and his honorable and unwavering service to America and to the USN; I simply disagree with him on some of his stances. However, the Captain is neither an expert on Chinese politics nor evenhanded in his approach of Chinese geopolitical issues.

I saw Captain Fanell's West 2013, and West 2014 presentations on Youtube videos, and he definitely has a China-threat agenda, and makes no pretense of taking balance views of China's disputes with her neighbors.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


My personal takeaways of his speeches are-

1) Neither China nor US want war (I agree with Captain Fanell)
2) China wants to reestablish a form of her dynastic tributary state system, and sees America as the biggest roadblock to her re-domination of Asia. (I agree with Captain Fanell)
3) China is being more aggressive and assertive in ECS and SCS. (I agree with Captain Fanell)
4) China uses its Coast Guard and other maritime agencies as "professional harassment forces" to press its aims. (I agree with Captain Fanell)
5) China uses economic tools as weapons to beat smaller states into submission. (I agree with Captain Fanell)
6) China is pursuing a strategy to push the US out of Asia, starting with the first island chain, then the second, and then all the way to Hawaii or even the West Coast (I agree with Captain Fanell)
7) By inference, China and the US are in a zero-sum situation (I disagree with Captain Fanell)
8) China is the instigator of much of current ECS and SCS troubles (I disagree with Captain Fanell)
9) China-US problems are more China's fault than the US (I disagree with Captain Fanell)
10) China violates Japan's sovereignty over "Senkakus." (Captain Fanell is dead wrong)
 

Brumby

Major
7) By inference, China and the US are in a zero-sum situation (I disagree with Captain Fanell)

I agree if a cooperative approach is taken then we can see a positive sum game and likewise a confrontational approach will likely result in a negative sum for both parties assuming is purely economic modelling. Unfortunately the value system and political structure differences between the countries will eventually get in the way.

I am always reminded of Bible prophesy of the rise of the Kings in the East that eventually leads to Armageddon.
 

xiabonan

Junior Member
Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

It is understandable that people do not like changes.

People are so used to the current situation that the US is the only hegemony in the region and that everyone in the region should not challenge the US and just let things be the way they are. After all, this model indeed brought about relative peace over the last few decades.

But we also need to ask ourselves, is this normal? Is this the way it's supposed to be?

The US, which is a country tens of thousands of miles away, is the hegemony in this part of the world? In fact, not only this region, but the world in a more general sense.

It certainly is not. For thousands of years China has been the dominant power and centre of civilisation in the region, and during that period of time the region enjoyed relative peace and prosperity, too. Japan learnt a lot from us, and even preserved part of our culture in their own ways; Korea almost entirely copied our systems, even their historical texts were in Chinese.

Now that China's economy is growing, and she's already the largest trading partner of many East Asian and Southeast Asian countries. And trade has only been growing despite tensions. China-Korea FTA is about to be signed as well.

At the same time, China's military strength has been growing as well.

I think it's time that the US recognise these and show more respect. Quit those exercises so near our waters and even our capital (Huang Hai exercises), reduce or stop sending spy planes near our shores, let alone our SSBN bases, regulate her allies (Japan, Korea, the Philippines), refrain them from provoking China. If you want a better relationship, show some respect and sincerity, please.

I hope our American friends also realise that these countries are not only provoking us, they are taking advantage of the US. They simply want a blank cheque-a cheque that says "we'll come to your help/rescue if anything happens between you and China".

They can do this because the US wants to use them to contain China. But if the US works with us and fully recognise our strength in the region and stop trying to contain us, imagine what will happen?

The countries will cease to provoke us because a lost of US support, the US enjoys a better relationship with her largest trading partner, and the amount of resources used to contain China can now be used elsewhere more efficiently, and we can collaborate to maintain peace and stability in the region.

Why not?
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
I am always reminded of Bible prophesy of the rise of the Kings in the East that eventually leads to Armageddon.

I believe they're supposed to be kings in the near/middle east and not far east. Iran and India are probably as far east as it gets for kings.
 

Zool

Junior Member
Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

Article from Global Times now being referenced in other defence journals. It's an Op-Ed piece, Related to ADIZ and Surveillance Flights in general, so this seemed the best thread to post in. Take the source and content as you will, however the few references to 'Core Interests' caught my eye.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"The large-scale implementation of reconnaissance by US warships and aircraft in the coastal waters and airspace of China is one of the three major barriers that keep impeding the Sino-US military relationship. The others are the US' arms sale to Taiwan and its National Defense Authorization Act posing discriminatory restrictions on China."

"But such reconnaissance is posing a threat to China's core security interests, which could be treated as an act of hostility. If the roles of China and the US were reversed on this matter, Washington would not accept it."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top