Chinese purchase of Su-35

thunderchief said:

This is more of Western wishful thinking then reality . As long as both Russia and China have means to deter each other (i.e. nuclear weapons) , large scale conflicts are excluded . Both sides would have far more to lose then to gain from this .

On the other side , given Chinese territorial disputes with Japan , Philippines and Vietnam , not to mention US interference with Taiwanese business , partnership with Russia is logical and beneficial for China in next 10-20 years .

Click to expand...

I think conflict between a densely populated, economically powerful but resource deprived china and a thinly populated, economically weak but resource rich russia would become a more steady, potent, long lasting, and influential reality than you realize.

Even if it is beneficial to China to keep smiling at Russia for the next 20 years, Russia would have to concern itself with the fact that the unerlaying causes of conflict with China would be vastly more long lasting than a mere 20 years, and Russia's fundamental situation would only have become worse in 20 years regardless of how much the Chinese may smile during this 20 years. Unless Russia seek some sort of external aid, sooner or later the disparity between Russia and China would become so great the Chinese wouldn't bother to smile anymore.

chuck731 said:

I think conflict between a densely populated, economically powerful but resource deprived china and a thinly populated, economically weak but resource rich russia would become a more steady, potent, long lasting, and influential reality than you realize.

Even if it is beneficial to China to keep smiling at Russia for the next 20 years, Russia would have to concern itself with the fact that the unerlaying causes of conflict with China would be vastly more long lasting than a mere 20 years, and Russia's fundamental situation would only have become worse in 20 years regardless of how much the Chinese may smile during this 20 years. Unless Russia seek some sort of external aid, sooner or later the disparity between Russia and China would become so great the Chinese wouldn't bother to smile anymore.

Click to expand...

With nukes in your face, everyone smiles. And Russia is in no short supply of nukes.

Resource deprivation is only possible with a dysfunctional energy security policy. It stems from over-reliance on fossil fuels and other non-renewable energy sources. Switching over to a sustainable energy policy seems hard for Westerners because it's hard to change anything in a democracy. However, the Chinese government has much more authority in its actions and can force a switch to sustainable energy without heeding the bickering of lobby groups. In fact, we're beginning to see the initial phases of such a switch with the adoption of hydroelectricity, wind turbines, solar panels and nuclear plants.

Fossil fuels is great for powering growth because it doesn't need a long preparation time; coal-powered generators can be built in a very short time-frame. In contrast, hydroelectric dams and nuclear plants needs years of planning and execution. So for the time being, China needs coal to power its economic growth but China is preparing for future energy security early. When economic growth slows down and coal plants are no longer essential, China will already have a large non-fossil fuel sector in operation, it will be relatively easy to fill in the gaps then.

In my view, an alliance between Russia and China vital to having a balance of power in the world. One would have to be either too consumed with vanity, or outright blind not to see the importance of a sustainable strategic alliance between the two superpowers of Asia. Whether be it in the economic sphere or the political, both of these Asian powers need to understand the simple rule of combined strength.

History has shown us time and time again, the need for sustainable alliance between powers, in order to create balance and peace in the world. Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia, Libya are prime examples where western military powers have come together and overwhelmed a single country that might or might not have a strong military defence. In all the countries mentioned above, the scenario played out as, one is to many. NATO's strength is not necessarily, in its military technologies or superior firepower. Rather, it is in its combined military strength, which has displayed a staggering superiority over its adversary, simply by combining its strength.

On the other end, history has also shown us that where military powers on both ends, come together to oppose an allied-force. That the results have weighed in favorably for the bullied. Korean War, Vietnam War and World War I/II. In both, the Korean and Vietnam wars, the joint effort of Russia and China, to support the country at war, has enjoyed favorable results and rendered in either a victory or a stalemate which ended the war.

Sometimes, you don't need an enemy to use as validity for an alliance. Its plain and simple logic which ought govern the leaderships of powerful countries, to come together in an alliance.

Whether anyone agrees with it or not, Russia and China need each other. As much as the Earth needs the Sun and the Moon needs the Earth, is the measure of how Russia and China need each other.

The world has drastically shrunk down. There is a stark reality on the limited number of options available to powerful countries, in the shape of allies and friends. And one keeps bickering and fighting over who needs what and who's stick is bigger than the other. Then my friend, before you know it, you would find yourself in a situation, where its either kill or be killed.

1. Russia is not a superpower in Asia now, and would only get ever further from superpowerdom in the future.

2. In any alliance, both sides has to be willing and able to contribute something important the other side needs at a cost less than the other has to bear if it sought the samethings elsewhere. Russia's ability to contribute things China needs has been getting thinner by the year and Russia's sad demographic trends strongly indicate this decline will not slow or reverse in the foreseeable future. Russia will gradually pass from being annoying but on the whole useful to china, to being annoying and on the whole of little net use to china, to being both annoying and a liability with useful thing for China but is itself not useful to China. Eventually Russia itself would be worth to China no more than a UN Veto, while Russia would be siting on vast mineral and energy resources China would like to have more cheaply. When the third stage occurs is when Russia should dread that China would take what Russia has and get rid of Russia. For the next 10, maybe 20 years, China and Russia would find each other useful, but Russia knows very well that the third stage is a likely only a matter of time along present trend.

3. Even nuclear arsenal is no garranty of security. Just as Russian nuclear arsenal could dissuade a strong China from hitting too close to the real European core of Russia, so Chinese nuclear arsenal in the future could dissuade a weak Russia from making too big a deal of Chinese encroachment in distant Siberia. Nuclear weapons can make attacker think twice, it can also make the defender think twice. Don't think defence has any moral advantage over offense that can be translated to practical behavior.

chuck731 said:

I think conflict between a densely populated, economically powerful but resource deprived china and a thinly populated, economically weak but resource rich russia would become a more steady, potent, long lasting, and influential reality than you realize.

Even if it is beneficial to China to keep smiling at Russia for the next 20 years, Russia would have to concern itself with the fact that the unerlaying causes of conflict with China would be vastly more long lasting than a mere 20 years, and Russia's fundamental situation would only have become worse in 20 years regardless of how much the Chinese may smile during this 20 years. Unless Russia seek some sort of external aid, sooner or later the disparity between Russia and China would become so great the Chinese wouldn't bother to smile anymore.

Click to expand...

This is all wildly off-topic re: Su-35 or any possible purchase by China; yet I cannot help replying after reading this...

Your theme boils down to China becoming more territorially aggressive vis-a-vis Russia as it grows in prosperity and development over the next 20 years or so. The simple response, and my apologies for being harsh here, is that is nonsense and you have a very naive understanding of international affairs / national interest.

Without going too in-depth, China is in a transformative stage from Developing to Developed nation. Over the next 50 - 80+ years it will be consumed with internal Socio-political, Economic and Infrastructure changes. The Leadership appears very calculated in how to manage the speed of these changes to avoid upset and the need for a stable regional environment.

Outside of China's stated core interests (which do not include any Russian held territory), there is not much chance of dispute or hostility.

From Russia's perspective the issue is one of Immigration. Russia is trying to resolve a low Birth-rate with the need for Immigration while somehow maintaining a Russian Culture and Identity. This is not a conflict issue with China.

A final point regarding war between modern nations. They are less inclined to enter into conflict when there is risk of direct reprisal to the homeland. Especially so when they share a direct boarder. The populace of developed nations are not used to the concept of their towns and cities being destroyed. Their interest is in everyday prosperity and convenience of life.

Cheers,
Zool

deleted

chuck731 said:

Wolf, you need to look beyond superficial de jure appearence meant to amuse school children and to kick the can down the road, and look instead at de facto currents and trends in strength, wealth, clout, and demographics to assess what would likely happen, instead of fall head over heels over what people say they want to happen.

Click to expand...

If you want to talk about future china-russia geopolitical relations, please open a seperate thread. This is the china purchase of su-35 thread.

If you guys look at the new picture of J-20, 2003, and 2004 prototypes you will realize that it is the same engine, the AL-31FM1. This means that the Su-35 deal is pretty much GAME OVER.


Now some1 is trying to say that the deal will be signed in 2014.

lol, at first late 2012, then early 2013 during Xi JingPing's visit, then late 2013, and now early 2014.


lol

A deal would have been believable in 2011, maybe even 2012.

But at this point, there's no operational requirement to gunk up PLAAF logistics and the J-20 development, even if 117S engines were delivered next week.

AeroEngineer said:

If you guys look at the new picture of J-20, 2003, and 2004 prototypes you will realize that it is the same engine, the AL-31FM1. This means that the Su-35 deal is pretty much GAME OVER.


Now some1 is trying to say that the deal will be signed in 2014.

lol, at first late 2012, then early 2013 during Xi JingPing's visit, then late 2013, and now early 2014.


lol

Click to expand...

Next but not last, late 2014...