A coming war over resources in Asia?

[Feros Ferio]

Slowly but surely, China has been asserting itself with greater tenacity on the world stage, much to the chagrin of its neighbors. Relatively recently, China has claimed the vast majority of the South China Sea as its own territory, in direct and open competition with the claims of it's neighbors. Similarly, China has completely blown an incident with Japan out of proportion, and I'm pretty sure this was do to the fact that it took place in the area of the disputed Diaoyu/Senkaku islands.

These disputes are leading, in some cases, to what amounts to economic warfare. In an article I recently read in the Economist (I would love to post the link, however I need more posts apparently. If you would like to read it I could try to figure out another way to send it to you) it states that China has yet to resume shipments of rare earth metals to Japan, which are crucial to many of Japan's high tech exports. This is just one example of the actions China is taking to bully its neighbors in regards to territory and natural resources.

My understanding of this situation is that China is beginning to take control of a broader resource base in order to secure its economic future, at the expense of its neighbors. As the population of Asia is at a truly incredibly level (and rising), it seems as though this sort of thing could quickly turn ugly as governments seek to provide for their people.

So my question is, are we witnessing the beginning of what will turn into a "resource war" in Asia?

 

[Feanor]

I suspect that China's population growth will turn to the negatives probably within a decade, as their one child policy comes to fruition. That will be an interesting moment to observe.

 

[EXSSBN2005]

I read something about this awhile ago with something to the effect of the one child policy was instituted due to the large population boom in the 50-70's and while working very well for 1-2 generations when it becomes time for those who are in their current work force to retire the working population at the time will not be able to support their version of SS or some other version of elder care as there will be 4 grandparents(retirees) 2 working and 1 dependent (child) the one child policy allows for some exceptions if you were from a single child family then you can have 2 but they are only having 1 still due to economic conditions and would they want to have to split their resources between the 2 children as opposed to just the 1. From what I have gathered they are not actively enforcing this policy as strigently as they used to but I cant point to anything to back that up. As for a resource war look to sub-sahara Africa at the tribal level where figthing over grazing lands and overpopulation fftopic . While normally I would concider this topic slightly outside the purview of the site if we are refering to resource guarding as a weapon then this and most wars would qualify as just resource guarding writ large.

 

[riksavage]

The biggest area of concern isn't population growth in China (and for that matter India), it's the growing domestic consumption of the existing billions. The growing middle class in China want the same standard of living and access to the same number of automobiles as their counterparts in the West. The average number or cars in a US household is three. Now if middle class Chinese / Indian's (assuming current growth rates of families classed as such) aspire to the same level of ownership and also want to spend spare cash on luxuries to the same level as the US then the world will need to increase the extraction and processing of natural resources by 700% (pulp paper, petrochemical products, O&G etc.).

This hunger for natural resources will fuel the next confrontation, whether this kicks off over the new shallow/deep offshore oil fields in the South China Sea or mineral deposits in Africa is up for debate. It's only a matter of time before the old and new powers start butting heads over securing essential resources to sustain growth and economic survival.

 

[Feanor]

The biggest area of concern isn't population growth in China (and for that matter India), it's the growing domestic consumption of the existing billions. The growing middle class in China want the same standard of living and access to the same number of automobiles as their counterparts in the West. The average number or cars in a US household is three. Now if middle class Chinese / Indian's (assuming current growth rates of families classed as such) aspire to the same level of ownership and also want to spend spare cash on luxuries to the same level as the US then the world will need to increase the extraction and processing of natural resources by 700% (pulp paper, petrochemical products, O&G etc.).

This hunger for natural resources will fuel the next confrontation, whether this kicks off over the new shallow/deep offshore oil fields in the South China Sea or mineral deposits in Africa is up for debate. It's only a matter of time before the old and new powers start butting heads over securing essential resources to sustain growth and economic survival.

The issue is that the planet has finite resources. Ultimately US levels of consumption can not be sustained on a global scale. Someone will have to suffer.

 

[riksavage]

The issue is that the planet has finite resources. Ultimately US levels of consumption can not be sustained on a global scale. Someone will have to suffer.

Unfortunately the growing wealthy in China want what the US have/had - the god of capitalism has arrived with a vengeance, they represent the fastest growing consumers in the world and they feel it's their birth right to have access to luxury goods regardless of the environmental impact. The demand for fossil fuel products will become insatiable. Beijing is already looking at a one car policy. Even this based on the current car production rate will suck-in a vast proportion of the worlds petroleum supplies. We are at 90 dollars a barrel now because of Chinese demand for fuel. That rise will hopefully fund the hugely expansive exploration and drilling in deep water (regardless of the recent BP disaster) and may even make oil sand extraction profitable again.

The other potential flashpoint is the arctic region. Countries such as Canada will have to adapt their Navy accordingly, designing more assets with ice breaking capabilities from day one.

 

[Feanor]

Unfortunately the growing wealthy in China want what the US have/had - the god of capitalism has arrived with a vengeance, they represent the fastest growing consumers in the world and they feel it's their birth right to have access to luxury goods regardless of the environmental impact. The demand for fossil fuel products will become insatiable. Beijing is already looking at a one car policy. Even this based on the current car production rate will suck-in a vast proportion of the worlds petroleum supplies. We are at 90 dollars a barrel now because of Chinese demand for fuel. That rise will hopefully fund the hugely expansive exploration and drilling in deep water (regardless of the recent BP disaster) and may even make oil sand extraction profitable again.

Provided they don't tear into another dimension and awaken Cthulhu, bringing an eternity of darkness to Earth... :

But seriously, the arctic oil will become more of an issue, and alternative energy sources will go from being experimental projects, to mainstream focuses for large industrial countries. And of course, in the process, Western consumers will suffer.

 

[Feros Ferio]

The other potential flashpoint is the arctic region. Countries such as Canada will have to adapt their Navy accordingly, designing more assets with ice breaking capabilities from day one.

What sort of mix of forces would you suggest in the case of Canada? This sort of thing has been of great interest to me lately. Ice Breakers would be an obvious choice to form part of any force in the Arctic. I wonder if it would it be possible to mount any sort of significant armament on them, creating a new "iron clad" so to speak.

 

[Feros Ferio]

fftopic . While normally I would concider this topic slightly outside the purview of the site if we are refering to resource guarding as a weapon then this and most wars would qualify as just resource guarding writ large.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this site play host to debates over military strategy as well? I could be wrong but I believe that any discussion of strategy, which doesn't deal with the origins of the need for a strategy, is an incomplete one.

 

[riksavage]

What sort of mix of forces would you suggest in the case of Canada? This sort of thing has been of great interest to me lately. Ice Breakers would be an obvious choice to form part of any force in the Arctic. I wonder if it would it be possible to mount any sort of significant armament on them, creating a new "iron clad" so to speak.

War in the Arctic represents a unique challenge, staying alive being a prime driver. Operating North of the Arctic Circle tests manpower and equipment to the absolute limits.

In my opinion the Canadians should raise an Inuit Battalion to help protect their assets. Use them in the long range recce and intelligence gathering role. They can communicate in their native language and confuse the shite out of the enemy. It will also keep them off the grog and leverage off their skills as trackers.

A colleague of mine was involved in testing military equipment in extreme conditions in Northern Norway - everything from hollow-fill jackets to special insulated gloves. In the end the best clothing they trailed was that used by the local Sami People, specifically Reindeer skins. They adapted the skins for use as jackets, skidoo seat covers and has hand warmers around the throttles. In a nutshell use the locals to do fighting backed up by adapted technology.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The issue is that the planet has finite resources. Ultimately US levels of consumption can not be sustained on a global scale. Someone will have to suffer.

Sure some resources are finite but we use them so inefficiently. So why can't we all live like kings? Burning hydrocarbons for energy is a historically low capital investment means of producing energy but very inefficient. Hydrocarbons only provide 30-55 MJ/kg with free oxygen compared to 3,500,000 MJ/kg from reactor grade uranium (3.5% enriched). Current nuclear reactors are also very inefficient designs compared to Gen IV reactors. So actually humanity’s future energy production is going to be far, far better assuming the Greens don’t stuff everything up with their Romantic technophobe desires. Huge quantities of electricity and process heat produced from very small reactors with no need for large quantities of cooling water using inherently safe TRISO fuel and helium coolant.

The next big issue is protein. Currently we relay on managed nature resources (ie farming) but work is underway to move to factory production of palatable protein. Once this is successful food resource will be determined by energy and capital investment. Its energy that is the finite factor. Once you open the door to high level energy generation efficiencies suddenly a lot more becomes possible. This planet could support billions more and all at the highest standard of living with the right energy sources.

 

[EXSSBN2005]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this site play host to debates over military strategy as well? I could be wrong but I believe that any discussion of strategy, which doesn't deal with the origins of the need for a strategy, is an incomplete one.

I meant to say that my small detour into the grazing rights while close to the topic was slightly off topic since we were talking about south/east Asia. I wasnt sure where the thread was heading and thought we were trying to stick to just resource war in asia. I was only saying my example was off topic and didnt want to derail the thread to elsewhere. [yay 32 hours at work in the last 2 days].

 

[Feros Ferio]

The next big issue is protein. Currently we relay on managed nature resources (ie farming) but work is underway to move to factory production of palatable protein. Once this is successful food resource will be determined by energy and capital investment. Its energy that is the finite factor. Once you open the door to high level energy generation efficiencies suddenly a lot more becomes possible. This planet could support billions more and all at the highest standard of living with the right energy sources.

First off, that sounds just plain terrible. Factory produced protein? I see your point though. Technology is providing the means to avert squabbles over certain resources. However, wouldn't adding billions to the population in a place like Asia still result in war due to some sort of catastrophic break down in the ecosystem? All those people would need places to live, food to eat, etc... They will probably all want comparable standards of living with the rest as well requiring more resources. While a seemingly limitless supply of energy and artificial protein would solve some of the problem, technology could not solve the whole of the problem (in the short term) that this situation is creating.

Also, what if a large, populous Asian country simply decided that waiting for a technology to solve the problem isn't something it could or would do? I think regardless of the face it presents to the world, China is a country that won't care much for waiting if faced with a tough enough choice. Furthermore, they have a long memory and a proud history. China was a very great civilization, and they have returned. They remember how other countries kicked them around in the 1800 and 1900's. What if they feel the need to kick back regardless of peaceful solutions?

 

[Feros Ferio]

I meant to say that my small detour into the grazing rights while close to the topic was slightly off topic since we were talking about south/east Asia. I wasnt sure where the thread was heading and thought we were trying to stick to just resource war in asia. I was only saying my example was off topic and didnt want to derail the thread to elsewhere. [yay 32 hours at work in the last 2 days].

No worries!

 

[godbody]

That do have me thinking about what China and Asia gonna do to help it demand for oil and other resources. That's gonna be big time problem for China. Are they still in Sudan cause thay gonna have to make a stand about this oil thing one way or the other. What the relationship will Sudan? Because they have large reserve in the south. I do see why China is trying to build its military up now. It has a long way to go. But they trying there best to reach these military goals such as aircraft carriers and trying to enlarge it naval fleet. I do see some kind of conflict on resources in Asia just dont see how it would play off because going to war right now would not be in China interest it not ready for war yet.