With that i can agree and don't see contradiction. Just that China's fighting a proxy war in Latin America is a stretch.
What happens is they provide access to military technology for cash. It's pure business. If buyer will start war, so be it.
China - Geostrategic & Geopolitical.
- Thread starter ngatimozart
- Start date
-
- Tags
- china geopolitics geostrategy prc
What happens is they provide access to military technology for cash. It's pure business. If buyer will start war, so be it.
They actually actively destroyed said culture during communism rule, then when they felt that communism failed, they switched back to roots.
And it did not happened only in China. In every post communist country when nationalistic movement rise it play on these sentiments.
As i posted i also don't see China as communist or western regime.
I mostly agree. Xi Jinping's turn to harder policy is certainly justified by Sun Tzu Ping Fa. I still think it's a mistake. i also think that China's understanding of West is flawed as much if not more, then western understanding of China. They somewhat understand how West work, they do not understand why it work that way. Maybe because they are blinded by "three plus thousand year old civilisation" thing.
I keep it in mind.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Except then they've been at each others throats during civil wars, have split into separate kingdoms or been conquered by external powers. It's a myth that "there's always been China". There's always been some sort of state present within the geographical boundaries of modern China, but it's not always been Chinese and it's not always been the only one.
That was the case in the 1980s and 1990s, as well as part of the 2000s. However, it's no longer true. How the CCP has dealt with Hong Kong is the opposite of patience. All they had to do was wait until 2049, or even 2040, because after the 50 period legally they were entitled to do whatever they wanted and in the run up to that they could have justified converging HK's politics with the mainland. They could have bought the protesters off with an independent investigation into police brutality for now, maybe made some concessions on electoral reform in the next 5 years. Instead they went full oppression-mode because they couldn't help themselves. Zero patience.
What they've done is short-sighted not just because it ruffled feathers in countries like the UK, US, Canada, etc, but it also sent a message to Taiwan about what they could expect if unification took place. That was an incredibly dumb thing to do, as it helped the pro-Taiwan DPP win another double-election, and even made the KMT say that one country-two systems was no longer a viable political solution.
Following on from that, rather than opening talks with the DPP and make it think that the CCP could be changing its view and thereby playing a long game where Taiwan becomes ever more reliant on China, the CCP has stepped up military threats. That can only worry Taiwanese and make it easier to justify unpopular military reforms as well as force the Taiwanese government to seek to make itself less reliant on the PRC. That doesn't benefit China.
Finally, the wolf-warrior diplomacy has been an epic failure. It's just antagonised other countries more and more. For example, read this article from the pro-Beijing SCMP.
China unleashed a ‘wolf warrior’ on Canada. It may have backfired
Ambassador Cong Peiwu’s remarks on the safety of 300,000 Canadians in Hong Kong may have stiffened the Trudeau government’s stance, and emboldened China hawks.
www.scmp.com
Any official with half a brain would have told this idiot that what he was going to say was dumb. So either the CCP has no diplomatic staff with brains or they're too terrified to tell their bosses that they don't know what they're doing. Again, no patience.
2019/2020 was not the time for China to "reveal" itself. If the CCP were playing a game of absolute patience they'd wait until we're all dead, like 2100 or even later, because by then the Chinese economy and military theoretically could have completely eclipsed the US to the point where the power balance was like China-Taiwan now.
Last edited:
But you are looking from western perspective.
Maybe from China's view, they can see US as "bigger power in turmoil", they see smaller countries as "vassals", not allies.
So the moment they feel they can overawe in one place(for example Taiwan), while US is not concentrated there, they can frighten other states and prevent US from building some kind of alliance to counter China.
Also we see China as rising state based on population size and liberalisation.
But if they allow further liberalisation, will it not endanger regime itself(internally) in case some turmoil happen?
And what actual state of China's economy?
So it may be logical from China's POV to try and shift policy now.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Why? What is the need for the CCP to be aggressive recently? It has nothing to do with Covid-19, because this behaviour started beforehand. Taiwan didn't threaten to make a unilaterial declaration of independence. The Chief Executive didn't propose universal suffrage in HK without consulting Beijing. There were no external triggers for this.
It's possible that this is all motivated by Pooh Jinping, as he wanted to be Dictator of the Hundred Acre Wood for Life and decided to sustain his power base by whipping up ultra-nationalism.
However, that's the opposite of patience. Patience means biting your tongue and resisting the urge to throw your weight around. It also requires you to not exploit a situation for personal gain when the greater whole would benefit from a subtle approach. ngatimozart was saying that China is patient. I don't think it can be, even if the Standing Committee thinks its new foreign policy is a great idea.
Why do you think they motivated by need and not by feeling that there is chance to make situation better for CCP?
Our problem with authoritarian states in the first place is use of force for benefit, not out of necessity.
If they jugged that US will be alone against China and EU, that politically drifted away from US, can be neutral for example, then policy shift justified.
Or if goal is to reach new China's politically homogeneous structure in face of future financial troubles, with external enemy to boot, then all external military postures are actually deception and goal is internal.
I can make countless guesses about "why" they see such shift beneficial, including as you say human factor of Xie himself.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
I'll say it one more time. I was responding to a viewpoint that China is patient. The CCP has not been patient in recent years, it has been acting foolishly by grabbing a few easy quick wins (taking more control over Hong Kong a few decades early and trying to push other countries around) at the price of making other countries more hostile towards China and pushing Taiwan away.
I don't mind someone saying that the CCP has decided it has something to gain from acting this way. But that's not the issue I was responding to.
If you don't mind I'd be grateful if you could leave this point alone, as I was quoting a comment made by another user rather than yourself.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #188
You have touched on the reasons why the PRC has acted aggressively recently, but not quite in the way you thought. I agree about Xi Jinping's ambition in becoming the new Great Leader and maybe even supplanting Mao Tse Tung as the most revered Great Leader. However the more practical reasons I would argue are the slowing PRC economy and diverting the masses attention towards foreign adventures helps keep a lid on dissent at home as the economy weakens and people lose jobs and prices rise.
I know that, but I am using a sweeping generalisation rather than launching into a treatise on the history of China that covers events such as the Five Kingdoms, Mongol invasion and subsequent dynasty, etc., the time of the warlords after the fall of the dynasty in 1911, and the civil war.
The PRC wolf warrior diplomat is not going to go away in the near future and they and their CCP masters regard themselves as a unto themselves. Again look at it through their eyes not ours. That's how you figure them out and find weaknesses that are able to be exploited.That was the case in the 1980s and 1990s, as well as part of the 2000s. However, it's no longer true. How the CCP has dealt with Hong Kong is the opposite of patience. All they had to do was wait until 2049, or even 2040, because after the 50 period legally they were entitled to do whatever they wanted and in the run up to that they could have justified converging HK's politics with the mainland. They could have bought the protesters off with an independent investigation into police brutality for now, maybe made some concessions on electoral reform in the next 5 years. Instead they went full oppression-mode because they couldn't help themselves. Zero patience.
What they've done is short-sighted not just because it ruffled feathers in countries like the UK, US, Canada, etc, but it also sent a message to Taiwan about what they could expect if unification took place. That was an incredibly dumb thing to do, as it helped the pro-Taiwan DPP win another double-election, and even made the KMT say that one country-two systems was no longer a viable political solution.
Following on from that, rather than opening talks with the DPP and make it think that the CCP could be changing its view and thereby playing a long game where Taiwan becomes ever more reliant on China, the CCP has stepped up military threats. That can only worry Taiwanese and make it easier to justify unpopular military reforms as well as force the Taiwanese government to seek to make itself less reliant on the PRC. That doesn't benefit China.
Finally, the wolf-warrior diplomacy has been an epic failure. It's just antagonised other countries more and more. For example, read this article from the pro-Beijing SCMP.
China unleashed a ‘wolf warrior’ on Canada. It may have backfired
Ambassador Cong Peiwu’s remarks on the safety of 300,000 Canadians in Hong Kong may have stiffened the Trudeau government’s stance, and emboldened China hawks.
Any official with half a brain would have told this idiot that what he was going to say was dumb. So either the CCP has no diplomatic staff with brains or they're too terrified to tell their bosses that they don't know what they're doing. Again, no patience.
2019/2020 was not the time for China to "reveal" itself. If the CCP were playing a game of absolute patience they'd wait until we're all dead, like 2100 or even later, because by then the Chinese economy and military theoretically could have completely eclipsed the US to the point where the power balance was like China-Taiwan now.
Venezuela is or recently was very close to a proxy war theater between Russia and the US in the latter's backyard. China can't be quite so naive about what they are doing by selling advanced naval stand-off weapons to Maduro.
Last edited:
They are not naïve, it's what you call added benefits. China by itself won't even take hard political stance there. IMO
I don't know how they react if other state actively reach China and ask for military help. My guess is, if it's not country on Silk Road, they will not help.
CCP feels pressured by the West and US specifically, but way to counter is different from what RF doing.
Actively influence other countries go to war is contradicting the agenda CCP wants to push.
They want reach state where most countries in the world hold neutral view of China, no matter what China do in it's backyard
either out of fear, or out of economic consideration.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #191
Nope, what the PRC does in its back yard is attempting to revert to historical norms where other nations kow towed and paid tribute to Beijing. They see as their gods given right as the Middle Kingdom. It's called the Middle Kingdom because it exists between the Gods in the Heavens and the peoples upon the earth. That is why they traditionally look down on foreign devils. So subjugation of neighbours and regional nations by varying means has been standard operating practice for the imperial Chinese governments for centuries. I also classify the current CCP government of the PRC as an imperial dynasty because it has all the trappings and instincts of one except for one fact, it's not hereditary or familial.
We're talking about "far away" country(in Latin America in this case).
They will not reach any country militarily unless China's oil supply(Iran), or land road to big market(EU) threatened. IMO
So i'm talking about Asia Pacific states(that is backyard), Central Asia states(that is vital supply line) and Middle Eastern states(also vital supply line) as possible areas where China can use direct military force.
All the way to Syria.
For example Uighur from China present among Turkey supported militants in Idlib can be viewed as sign of not just terrorism threat, but also threat to Silk road, bcs of Erdogan ambitions of pan Turkism.
This is article from 2016
Uighur Foreign Fighters: An Underexamined Jihadist Challenge(counter-terrorism report 2017)
They will not reach any country militarily unless China's oil supply(Iran), or land road to big market(EU) threatened. IMO
So i'm talking about Asia Pacific states(that is backyard), Central Asia states(that is vital supply line) and Middle Eastern states(also vital supply line) as possible areas where China can use direct military force.
All the way to Syria.
For example Uighur from China present among Turkey supported militants in Idlib can be viewed as sign of not just terrorism threat, but also threat to Silk road, bcs of Erdogan ambitions of pan Turkism.
This is article from 2016
Uighur Foreign Fighters: An Underexamined Jihadist Challenge(counter-terrorism report 2017)
Yes, one of the problems western countries encountered when they tried to open diplomatic relations with China was that the Chinese assumed that the relation would be one of barbarian inferiors approaching China as supplicants, offering tribute & begging the emperor to condescend to accept them as tributaries, after which he would, from the kindness of his heart, grant them gifts suitable to their status (which traditionally meant matching the tribute they'd given).
To the western countries that was a grave insult. That baffled the Chinese, who had no other model for foreign relations. Chinese superiority was taken for granted. They didn't understand why the westerners didn't accept it, & why their ambassadors were unwilling to kow tow. The idea that they'd expect to be treated as equals was shocking.
I agree and don't see contradiction with what i wrote.
What they want from other world countries is not to screw these plans by forming some big anti-China alliance. And they pour lot of resources outside immediate area of interest (AP, CA, ME) for this very reason.
So why destroy this goal by openly wedging wars far from home and expressing global ambitions, like Soviet did?
China's rhetoric all about coexistence. Money and technology with no political strings attached.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #195
The PRC says one thing and does another. The "aid" they give is in the form of loans and is called debt diplomacy. They actually own the Venezuelan oil wells now because of the loans that Venezuela took out with the PRC and eventually defaulted on. So their interest there is in there assets and owning the resource. Africa is the same. It's not about being altruistic but about owning and extracting the resource. So there are definitely political strings attached because once they become your paymaster you are expected to follow the Party line. If you don't there will be ramifications.
CMC’s guidelines on joint combat Ops - Part 1
China’s Central Military Commission (CMC) has published a set of guidelines on PLA joint combat operations approved by President Xi Jinping, who is chairman of the CMC, and took effect on 7 Nov 2020. This marks only the fifth time that the PLA has changed its operational doctrine since 1949.
The guidelines stem from Xi Jinping Thought on Strengthening the Military and the nation's defense strategies for the new era. They clarify responsibilities of units at different levels, expound on questions such as how to fight future wars and also stress the importance of combat preparedness. The publication of the guidelines is part of the efforts to boost the PLA's structural reforms and enhance its joint operational capability.
Two strong indicators of the PLA’s great confidence in DF26B:
The CMC has ordered all levels of the armed forces to study and implement the guidelines and use them to organize joint combat and training activities to boost the military's overall operational capabilities. A researcher with the PLA Academy of Military Science, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said such guidelines are badly needed by the armed forces because they will help combat units to better plan, organize and coordinate their joint operations.
"Our forces are giving unprecedented importance to honing their joint combat skills but have found many problems and questions that they have been unable to solve," he explained. "Therefore, the highest military authority made the guidelines to provide methods and solutions and answer questions."
It has been reported that the PLA forced India off hilltops in Aug 2020 with microwave weapons. China had “turned the mountain tops into a microwave oven ... in 15 minutes, those occupying the hilltops all began to vomit.”
China’s Central Military Commission (CMC) has published a set of guidelines on PLA joint combat operations approved by President Xi Jinping, who is chairman of the CMC, and took effect on 7 Nov 2020. This marks only the fifth time that the PLA has changed its operational doctrine since 1949.
The guidelines stem from Xi Jinping Thought on Strengthening the Military and the nation's defense strategies for the new era. They clarify responsibilities of units at different levels, expound on questions such as how to fight future wars and also stress the importance of combat preparedness. The publication of the guidelines is part of the efforts to boost the PLA's structural reforms and enhance its joint operational capability.
Two strong indicators of the PLA’s great confidence in DF26B:
(i) is the extraordinarily fast production & deployment in high numbers of a modern weapon system; and
(ii) no apparent need to hedge with multiple missile types with broadly overlapping capabilities.
Part of the motivation for modernisation comes the PLA’s observation of US military performance at Operation Desert Storm (Iraq) in 1991; US involvement in the 1995–1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis; and US military intervention in Kosovo in 1999 (during which the US accidentally bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade). This motivated Chinese leaders to invest considerable resources in the transformation of the PLA. These conflicts bluntly demonstrated to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that it lacked a military that could effectively fight and win wars against modern opponents, especially adversaries who could effectively harness the information revolution and successfully conduct joint operations. Although the modernization drive is now over two decades old and has yielded impressive results, numerous weaknesses persist.The CMC has ordered all levels of the armed forces to study and implement the guidelines and use them to organize joint combat and training activities to boost the military's overall operational capabilities. A researcher with the PLA Academy of Military Science, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said such guidelines are badly needed by the armed forces because they will help combat units to better plan, organize and coordinate their joint operations.
"Our forces are giving unprecedented importance to honing their joint combat skills but have found many problems and questions that they have been unable to solve," he explained. "Therefore, the highest military authority made the guidelines to provide methods and solutions and answer questions."
It has been reported that the PLA forced India off hilltops in Aug 2020 with microwave weapons. China had “turned the mountain tops into a microwave oven ... in 15 minutes, those occupying the hilltops all began to vomit.”
Last edited:
CMC’s guidelines on joint combat Ops - Part 2
Joint combat operations require sophisticated arrangement and integration of planning, commanding, logistic support, mobilization and political effort, all of which must be based on a set of unified guidelines that are suitable for each service branch, according to the researcher. Xi has repeatedly urged the armed forces to focus on and improve their joint operational capability.
During a Oct 2020 visit to the HQ of the PLA Navy's Marine Corps or PLA(N)MC in Chaozhou, Guangdong province－his most recent inspection of a military unit－Xi told Marine Corps senior officials to boost their units' joint operational capability.
In response to Xi's attention, exercises organized by the PLA(N)MC over the past several years have largely focused on verifying and strengthening such capability. China’s Type 075 amphibious ships will be the spearhead of an expeditionary force.
The strength of the PLA(N)MC, has nearly tripled over the past three years to 35,000 troops, according to a report prepared by Jane’s for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. The corps has also become a more visible presence in the South China Sea.
Andrew Scobell, the Bren Chair in Non-Western Strategic Thought at Marine Corps University, said the PLA(N)MC is meant to be the “nucleus” for China’s armed forces as they operate further afield. “The PLA(N) is intent on improving its expeditionary capabilities and its Marines are considered a key -- if not the core -- component of this expeditionary force.” he said.
“The PLA… they have been given a mission by 2020 to be able to conduct a full-scale amphibious assault based on a leadership decision and they stand, I think, ready to do so,”said Chad Sbragia on military & security developments in China.
Joint combat operations require sophisticated arrangement and integration of planning, commanding, logistic support, mobilization and political effort, all of which must be based on a set of unified guidelines that are suitable for each service branch, according to the researcher. Xi has repeatedly urged the armed forces to focus on and improve their joint operational capability.
During a Oct 2020 visit to the HQ of the PLA Navy's Marine Corps or PLA(N)MC in Chaozhou, Guangdong province－his most recent inspection of a military unit－Xi told Marine Corps senior officials to boost their units' joint operational capability.
In response to Xi's attention, exercises organized by the PLA(N)MC over the past several years have largely focused on verifying and strengthening such capability. China’s Type 075 amphibious ships will be the spearhead of an expeditionary force.
The strength of the PLA(N)MC, has nearly tripled over the past three years to 35,000 troops, according to a report prepared by Jane’s for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. The corps has also become a more visible presence in the South China Sea.
Andrew Scobell, the Bren Chair in Non-Western Strategic Thought at Marine Corps University, said the PLA(N)MC is meant to be the “nucleus” for China’s armed forces as they operate further afield. “The PLA(N) is intent on improving its expeditionary capabilities and its Marines are considered a key -- if not the core -- component of this expeditionary force.” he said.
“The PLA… they have been given a mission by 2020 to be able to conduct a full-scale amphibious assault based on a leadership decision and they stand, I think, ready to do so,”said Chad Sbragia on military & security developments in China.
Last edited:
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
I'd be taking more interest in these Chinese reports if they had disclosed:
1. The speed that the target vessel was travelling at;
2. Whether it was on a pre-determined course that the team operating the missile was already aware of; and
3. How long they had to target and fire.
If the target vessel was travelling at around 30 knots on a variable course, and whoever had set the course had not disclosed it other than a vague "it's here in this very large area, go find it", I would be impressed. However, I have a sneaking suspicion it was more of a case that the target was moving at a slow speed on a steady course, or with very minor course changes that could easily be taken into account, in a much smaller area where it was easier to find - assuming that the exact coordinates had not been provided before the test.
I think we know that these missiles would be completely useless if they could only hit ships in port or stationary with engine failure. The question is, can they hit a USN carrier when transiting at full speed, where the course is not already known to the PLA?
Also, and I appreciate that this isn't something the PLA can easily test, but is it possible to know what would happen if intercept was attempted with an SM-6?
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I agree there is lots of missing information about this intercept and your last point regarding counter measures is the real question mark. Nevertheless it has to be assumed this missile MAY be capable.