China's Defense/Military Breaking News Thread

[shen]

In the summary article, Minneck stated that 70-80% of family are from one child family. What is the source of that statistic? One Child Policy mainly applies to Chinese urban families, according to wiki, only 35.9% of the population are subject to the limit. In addition, the majority of PLA recruits are still from rural families, and until recently there was a limit on the percentage of urban recruit. Take these factors into account, I find the 70-80% figure highly suspicious. That's without going into question of whether recruits from one child family are indeed tough enough.

In the section titled The People’s Liberation Army’s Strategic Objectives, the report states

The traditional core missions of the PLA are ones that have dominated Beijing’s threat perceptions and responsibilities since the founding of the PRC. While both the threat environment and the PLA’s
ability to respond to various threats have changed dramatically since
1949, these broad missions have remained largely constant and include
“resisting aggression” from both neighboring countries, such as India
and Russia (formerly the Soviet Union), and countries that can project power into China’s territorial and maritime domains, such as the United States; “containing separatist forces” in the provinces of
Xinjiang and Tibet and deterring Taiwan moves toward independence;
and “safeguarding border, coastal, and territorial air security” from
intervention or interference from either state or nonstate threats. “Protecting national security interests in space and cyberspace,” while not
traditional in the sense of historical focus, is a mission consistent with
China’s aforementioned strategic goals of national sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity. Indeed, China clearly sees its interests as
increasingly extending into these domains, which creates new challenges and opportunities for the PLA (Information Office of the State
Council, 2013).

The source quoted for that paragraph is this

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the relevant paragraph

The diversified employment of China's armed forces adheres to fundamental policies and principles as follows:

Safeguarding national sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, and supporting the country's peaceful development. This is the goal of China's efforts in strengthening its national defense and the sacred mission of its armed forces, as stipulated in the Constitution of the People's Republic of China and other relevant laws. China's armed forces unswervingly implement the military strategy of active defense, guard against and resist aggression, contain separatist forces, safeguard border, coastal and territorial air security, and protect national maritime rights and interests and national security interests in outer space and cyber space. "We will not attack unless we are attacked; but we will surely counterattack if attacked." Following this principle, China will resolutely take all necessary measures to safeguard its national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The highlighted sections are not supported by the original text and implies strategic intentions that reflect the biased assumption of the authors rather than the official policy of PRC.

 

[janjak desalin]

This is interesting:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

on Friday, February 13th, 2015

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[balance]

Why are there articles like this recently, as if the major conflict of US-China is looming?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Who really wants this kind of war? Anybody has any idea? Even if they think of economic benefit, it's nothing compared to the damage.

 

[delft]

Why are there articles like this recently, as if the major conflict of US-China is looming?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Who really wants this kind of war? Anybody has any idea? Even if they think of economic benefit, it's nothing compared to the damage.

The National Interest sees the national interest of the US as *** Cut the Ideological driven statements like this against nations ***. With the trend of the economic development we see now they look for other ways of maintaining supremacy.

 

[Ultra]

Why are there articles like this recently, as if the major conflict of US-China is looming?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Who really wants this kind of war? Anybody has any idea? Even if they think of economic benefit, it's nothing compared to the damage.

Because if you havn't been paying attention, the US is doing a major strategic shift towards aggressive containment of China as its long term strategy; while the hawks wants a war with China in the short term - because currently China is still fairly weak compare to the US - it can do "some" damage to the US if war does break out, but because of the weakness in its power projection capability - US can effectively put China back 100 years if they want to. The long term strategists in US sees this as the only period in which US can still "control" the situation - if China continue its development as it is right now for another 30 years, it will surpass US economically (that goes without saying) and technologically and even militarily, by then there would be little US can do except to fight a losing war. In the short term it is a war that they can win and put China back some decades before they can threaten their hegemon again.

 

[balance]

Because if you havn't been paying attention, the US is doing a major strategic shift towards aggressive containment of China as its long term strategy; while the hawks wants a war with China in the short term - because currently China is still fairly weak compare to the US - it can do "some" damage to the US if war does break out, but because of the weakness in its power projection capability - US can effectively put China back 100 years if they want to. The long term strategists in US sees this as the only period in which US can still "control" the situation - if China continue its development as it is right now for another 30 years, it will surpass US economically (that goes without saying) and technologically and even militarily, by then there would be little US can do except to fight a losing war. In the short term it is a war that they can win and put China back some decades before they can threaten their hegemon again.

That sounds reasonable. But will US really attack China? Seriously? Yes, this is the only time, but does it mean US will do it? And China doesn't know it? What is China's plan if your assessment is right that US is planning to do major damage to China?

 

[Ultra]

That sounds reasonable. But will US really attack China? Seriously? Yes, this is the only time, but does it mean US will do it? And China doesn't know it? What is China's plan if your assessment is right that US is planning to do major damage to China?

US is still a democracy, so it cannot wage war against China unilaterally even if its military planners wants to because the population at large doesn't want war; it needs an excuse - excuses such as if its "allies" get attacked with massive civilian casaulties. This will give the US excuse and political capital to wage war against China and there are a lot of "triggers" right now for this to happen - trigger as a war with Vietnam over South China Sea (least likely, as it will be just a small skirmish on the high sea plus US population still havn't forgot the Vietnam war where Vietnam was the enemy so it is unlikely US will get involve for such small affair), or war in Korean Peninsula (also unlikely as it will be a proxy war between the North Korean vs South Korean), or a war with Japan over the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(quite possible as two countries have deep hatred with each other and both China and Japan are itching for a fight and Japan sees current short term as the only way to get US involved and a war where they can "win" and push China back 100 years before they can threaten them again - you can see this in Abe's aggressive policy of intimidation in trying to get China into fight by first nationalizing the Senkaku Islands when it is still disputed and going through the Internaional Court of Justice; or when Japan changed its AIDZ which promoted China to change theirs). The most likely trigger point though is a war over Taiwan - when KMT lose the 2016 election by a landslide (this is a given - the current president Ma who is KMT has seen his popularity dropped to less than 9% !!) which will give the opposition party DPP the political mandate to re-start the process of Taiwan independence - which will trigger military action from the Chinese. The DPP gets A LOT of support (financially, politically) from the Japanese (particularly the right wing hawks) who would prefer the war with China to be fought on Taiwan (not their land that's going to be razed to the ground), with the American soldiers (not their blood that's going to be shed).

 

[Ultra]

My prediction - when 2016 does roll around and DPP gets elected - under the table Japan will aggressively push DPP to get independence, and they will give DPP the assurance that Japan will recognize Taiwan's independence or even get a group of nations on Taiwan's behalf to recognize Taiwan's independence - DPP will start the declaration of independence and that will just incense China and trigger the military action to take Taiwan which will just give US the excuse it needed to go to war with China.

 

[Ultra]

Why are there articles like this recently, as if the major conflict of US-China is looming?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Who really wants this kind of war? Anybody has any idea? Even if they think of economic benefit, it's nothing compared to the damage.

Another thing, have you noticed when Russia actually invaded Ukraine how little the media or thinktanks talk about war with Russia ?? This is because Russia is already too strong for US to take on. Not China though, every little thing China do (like the high sea collision over South China Sea) the US media or think tanks will talk about war against China, and even US government/military don't think much of Chinese military when they do their analysis or reporting which leads to this current difference in attitude when they talk about Russia or China.

 

[delft]

US is still a democracy, so it cannot wage war against China unilaterally even if its military planners wants to because the population at large doesn't want war; it needs an excuse - excuses such as if its "allies" get attacked with massive civilian casaulties. This will give the US excuse and political capital to wage war against China and there are a lot of "triggers" right now for this to happen - trigger as a war with Vietnam over South China Sea (least likely, as it will be just a small skirmish on the high sea plus US population still havn't forgot the Vietnam war where Vietnam was the enemy so it is unlikely US will get involve for such small affair), or war in Korean Peninsula (also unlikely as it will be a proxy war between the North Korean vs South Korean), or a war with Japan over the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(quite possible as two countries have deep hatred with each other and both China and Japan are itching for a fight and Japan sees current short term as the only way to get US involved and a war where they can "win" and push China back 100 years before they can threaten them again - you can see this in Abe's aggressive policy of intimidation in trying to get China into fight by first nationalizing the Senkaku Islands when it is still disputed and going through the Internaional Court of Justice; or when Japan changed its AIDZ which promoted China to change theirs). The most likely trigger point though is a war over Taiwan - when KMT lose the 2016 election by a landslide (this is a given - the current president Ma who is KMT has seen his popularity dropped to less than 9% !!) which will give the opposition party DPP the political mandate to re-start the process of Taiwan independence - which will trigger military action from the Chinese. The DPP gets A LOT of support (financially, politically) from the Japanese (particularly the right wing hawks) who would prefer the war with China to be fought on Taiwan (not their land that's going to be razed to the ground), with the American soldiers (not their blood that's going to be shed).

Just a few remarks:
The War Powers Act of the the 1970's says that the US Presidents needs a resolution of the Senate before he can start a war but that act is rarely invoked. Think of the US war against Iran in the '80's when USN destroyed an Iranian Airbus flying in an international air corridor and an Iranian oil production platform in reaction to the Iraqi attack on USS Stark. And think of President Obama asking the permission of the Senate weeks after he started to destroy the Libyan state. The American people are never asked.
A DPP government can declare Taiwan independent but it will be sufficient for China, as the Recognized Authority, to declare the ports and airports of the island closed to very severely damage the economy and destroy the standing of the Taiwan government. It can also revoke the registration of Taiwan's civil aircraft and ask its many friends to arrest any Taiwan owned ship in their ports. A difficult problem can so be solved without recourse to war.
The interests of South Korea would suffer immense damage if Abe were to succeed in starting a war against China. The South Korean government knows on which side its bread is buttered and will if necessary take the side of China to prevent such an occurrence.