China's strategic vulnerabilities

Mongolian reunification was never really on the cards, since the Inner Mongols (also known as Southern Mongols) would outnumber all the Outer Mongols (Khalkas). Given the presence of Khalka chauvinism in segments the Mongolian population the Khalkas aren't going to accept being ruled by Southern Mongols (especially since TBH, Southern Mongols, like Manchus and Yanbian Koreans, are heavily Sinified).

The Khalka are unlikely to be able to impose an ascendancy over the Southern Mongols since the later are more wealthy, numerous, better armed (and likely trained).

Additionally, what's to stop Greater Mongolia from reunifying with China, when the Southern Mongols decide that they want to watch Chinese television broadcasts, , PRC pork barrel spending, and visa free travel to Beijing and Shanghai?

Gatekeeper said:

This is where China is vulnerable...

Click to expand...

Yes and they made themselves vulnerable by giving more importance than necessary to the relationship with US.

There doesn't have to be rhyme or reason. The US just wants to see chaos happening in China hoping that will lead to a splintered China because remember, when they see something happen somewhere else that they like, they try to replicate that in other places. The Soviet Union splintered and plenty of people in the US was hoping that would happen to China. And in this case over the Mongolian language... an Arab Spring.

Andy1974 said:

This is the most racist thing I have seen on this forum, I really hope this view is not widespread.

Click to expand...

Please elaborate.

Skywatcher said:

Mongolian reunification was never really on the cards, since the Inner Mongols (also known as Southern Mongols) would outnumber all the Outer Mongols (Khalkas). Given the presence of Khalka chauvinism in segments the Mongolian population the Khalkas aren't going to accept being ruled by Southern Mongols (especially since TBH, Southern Mongols, like Manchus and Yanbian Koreans, are heavily Sinified).

The Khalka are unlikely to be able to impose an ascendancy over the Southern Mongols since the later are more wealthy, numerous, better armed (and likely trained).

Additionally, what's to stop Greater Mongolia from reunifying with China, when the Southern Mongols decide that they want to watch Chinese television broadcasts, , PRC pork barrel spending, and visa free travel to Beijing and Shanghai?

Click to expand...

Don't forget how Mongolia came about the first place. It was the eight nations alliance (basically the western powers plus the little runt Japan) desire to carve up China for its own empire. Never again shall China be carve up. This is why China should always remain vigilant.

This map is from the new york times I think. The French caption was the partition of China.

@Gatekeeper

CBSA paper below on US-China strategy for the next 15 years.

Basically looking at 4 differing future possibilities for China.
Some of the future timeline stories are very unrealistic, which I won't go into.

But interestingly, 3 of the 4 economic scenarios still expect Chinese GDP to be 50%-100% larger than the USA in the year 2035.
And it also doesn't look very deeply at Chinese technology R&D spending.

3 of the 4 military scenarios also involve the US-alliance system breaking down or Taiwan being reunified.

Most wars today are due to Western colonialists redrawing borders. When India and Pakistan had one of their skirmishes, the BBC had an article declaring if India and Pakistan get into nuclear war, it will be China's fault. No, it will be the British to blame.

AndrewS said:

@Gatekeeper

CBSA paper below on US-China strategy for the next 15 years.

Basically looking at 4 differing future possibilities for China.
Some of the future timeline stories are very unrealistic, which I won't go into.

But interestingly, 3 of the 4 economic scenarios still expect Chinese GDP to be 50%-100% larger than the USA in the year 2035.
And it also doesn't look very deeply at Chinese technology R&D spending.

3 of the 4 military scenarios also involve the US-alliance system breaking down or Taiwan being reunified.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

They seems to be an assumption in CSBA that the B-21 Raider and future U.S. military intermediate range hypersonic weapons will be vastly superior, if not invincible, to Chinese and Russian systems. Still, how do we know that won't be follow-ups to the DF-17 by 2025??? What if a potential DF-17A or DF-27...whatever...doubles the range of the current hypersonics in service with the PLARF? What if the PLAAF deploys a new multi-band AESA radar in 2023 that reduces stealth aircrafts' effectiveness? We already know that the PLA has radars that could render the B-2 ineffective, except these radars' ranges and deployment are limited for now. We also know that the DF-17 won't be the last hypersonic in service with the PLARF, nor is the HQ-9B the last Chinese long-range SAM. Maybe the HQ-9C/D would be able to intercept hypersonic gliders...who knows?

When you have US versus THEM scenarios like in the former Key Aviation forum was notorious for, someone posted a Sweden versus China thread and of course on the Swedish side they had speculative Western weapons of the future available to them while China was restricted to what it can do and with only what it already has. And of course Sweden won. These think tank reports are basically the same. Remember the good ole days when they were bragging that X-47B would be ruling the skies of China and if China dared to expose Chinese ASBMs to launch them, they would be there to destroy it. Where's the X-47B? I really haven't seen any news on it. Just like they bragged about Prompt Global Strike, the last I heard it was silently cancelled. How about how artificial intelligence would reduce the US ability to recognize targets to destroy from satellite recon from hours for humans to do down to 45 minutes. Well if China rolls out an ASBM from a tunnel and it takes up to 30 minutes to launch, they're already 15 minutes too late even with AI helping.

Josh Luo said:

They seems to be an assumption in CSBA that the B-21 Raider and future U.S. military intermediate range hypersonic weapons will be vastly superior, if not invincible, to Chinese and Russian systems. Still, how do we know that won't be follow-ups to the DF-17 by 2025??? What if a potential DF-17A or DF-27...whatever...doubles the range of the current hypersonics in service with the PLARF? What if the PLAAF deploys a new multi-band AESA radar in 2023 that reduces stealth aircrafts' effectiveness? We already know that the PLA has radars that could render the B-2 ineffective, except these radars' ranges and deployment are limited for now. We also know that the DF-17 won't be the last hypersonic in service with the PLARF, nor is the HQ-9B the last Chinese long-range SAM. Maybe the HQ-9C/D would be able to intercept hypersonic gliders...who knows?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Today, the Chinese economy is already larger than the US economy AND China is spending more on R&D, when measured using PPP.
And the majority of scenarios expect the Chinese economy to grow even further to 50%-100% larger.

So logically speaking, you would expect overall Chinese technology levels to catchup and surpass the US in every area, given enough time.

And that should spillover into the military realm.