China - Geostrategic & Geopolitical.

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
[...]
Invasion of taiwan is different level of severity in term of international perception, and China know this. China military is growing, so 5, 10, 20, 30 years from now its gonna be much different. Where taiwan due to its size/grow potential will lag further and further behind. Also Taiwan internal politic is not align, KMT prefer 92 consensus, and blame the opposition party for any economic fallout. Taiwan heavily rely on mainland economy as well. as long as China is stable and growing, time is on their side., and they know it. So basically they can wait till 2035 or later for much better chance at taking over taiwan. Xi dont want to have a legacy of taiwan invasion failure. beside he start his career as pig farmer, and had decades of govern experience, so he is definitely knowledgeable, have plenty experience, and outmaneuver his opponent to achieve today's position. Not someone can easily made a blunt decision. They waited over 70 years, they can wait another decade or two.

if china is not stable, they might use external opponent to drove up domestic support. In that case they might start a war with taiwan. but that just a theory.
Due to the Chinese handling of Hong Kong, and their threatening behavior recently, KMT may be changing their stance on China, although they are not ready to give up the "92 consensus" quite yet:

The chief of Taiwan's main opposition has doubled down on his description of China as a security threat, but faces a forthcoming leadership challenge that could shift the party away from the island's youth and toward closer ties with Beijing.

Johnny Chiang, 49, marked one year as chairman of the China-friendly Kuomintang (KMT) on Tuesday. He has vowed to modernize the party—following consecutive presidential election defeats in 2016 and 2020—and rethink some of its decades-old policies, which have become unpopular among the country's China-skeptic younger voters.

Following a Reuters interview last week, Chiang—one of the KMT's youngest-ever leaders—was chided by Beijing after calling the cross-strait neighbor a "major threat." The Chinese government's Taiwan Affairs Office cautioned Chiang against falling into a "populist trap of irrational and confrontational thinking."
Among Beijing's criticisms of the current Taiwanese government led by President Tsai Ing-wen has been its outright rejection of the disputed "1992 Consensus"—an agreement struck by representatives of the two governments, tacitly allowing for different interpretations of "one China."

It had served as part of the basis for cross-strait exchange between China and Taiwan when the KMT was in power, but in recent years, Beijing's interpretation of the phrase has extended to include more emphasis on its one-China principle, which claims Taiwan as part of the Chinese government's territory, and the "one country, two systems" formula Beijing uses to govern Hong Kong and Macau.

Chiang rejected the administrative model during his Reuters interview, saying one country, two systems had "no market" in Taiwan. However, the party appears to be sticking with the 1992 Consensus despite the policy having proved unpopular with Taiwan's younger voters.
Taiwan's Pro-China Opposition Suffers Identity Crisis as Chief Admits Beijing Threat (newsweek.com)
 

weaponwh

Member
Due to the Chinese handling of Hong Kong, and their threatening behavior recently, KMT may be changing their stance on China, although they are not ready to give up the "92 consensus" quite yet:
i would say wait and see, cause if you watch any taiwness news, specially those pro KMT one, they basically blame DPP for the current situation. It could also be a political move for now. wait few years than we'll know.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
i would say wait and see, cause if you watch any taiwness news, specially those pro KMT one, they basically blame DPP for the current situation. It could also be a political move for now. wait few years than we'll know.
Well, it's quite common for the opposition party to blame any political issues on the party in government, this happens all the time in all democratic countries, worldwide. Also for that reason it's very interesting to note that KMT is criticizing not just the DPP but also China for the current difficult situation...
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
7TAIPEI (Reuters) - Taiwan’s newly-appointed defence minister said on Wednesday it has strengthened deployments in the disputed South China Sea and that the United States has approved the export of sensitive technology to equip Taiwan’s new submarine fleet.

China, which claims democratic Taiwan as its own territory, has increased its military activity near the island in recent months seeking to pressure Taipei to accept Beijing’s sovereignty. Taiwan has vowed to defend itself.

Speaking in parliament, Defence Minister Chiu Kuo-cheng, who took up his post last month, said Taiwan has increased personnel and armaments on Itu Aba, the main island Taiwan occupies in the South China Sea.

Itu Aba, also known as Taiping island, is the largest naturally occurring island in the Spratleys and is garrisoned by Taiwan’s Coast Guard.

“They are capable of starting a war,” Chiu told the parliament when asked by a lawmaker on whether China could attack Taiwan. “My goal is for us to be ready at all times.”

Chiu said Taiwan was bolstering its position there due to China’s “expansionism” in the region, though it was not currently considering a return to a permanent army garrison.
I imagined that if China would use their "salami slice" tactic against Taiwan they might go for islands close to China, e.g., the Kinmen islands. Perhaps they will start in the disputed Spratleys instead?

Separately, Chiu said that the United States had approved export permits for all of the sensitive equipment needed by Taiwan’s indigenous submarine fleet, which it started building last year.

He added that Taiwan’s arms purchases from the United States - the island’s main source of weapons - had not been impacted by the new Biden administration taking office in Washington and were continuing.
Not surprising -- the Biden administration continues the military support of Taiwan, as most analysts expected.
Taiwan bolsters South China Sea deployments, gets U.S. submarine parts approval | Reuters
 

weaponwh

Member
I imagined that if China would use their "salami slice" tactic against Taiwan they might go for islands close to China, e.g., the Kinmen islands. Perhaps they will start in the disputed Spratleys instead?


Not surprising -- the Biden administration continues the military support of Taiwan, as most analysts expected.
Taiwan bolsters South China Sea deployments, gets U.S. submarine parts approval | Reuters
I think with recent push from US and other, china may bide its time and wait. their current agenda is reduce its reliance on US chips, thats consider strategic vulnerability. also economic growth. i think both side will use "salami slice" tactic to see where the red line at.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
I think with recent push from US and other, china may bide its time and wait. their current agenda is reduce its reliance on US chips, thats consider strategic vulnerability. also economic growth. i think both side will use "salami slice" tactic to see where the red line at.
When you say "recent push from US and others", what are you referring to?
What "salami slice" tactic are you referring to from the US?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #407
I think with recent push from US and other, china may bide its time and wait. their current agenda is reduce its reliance on US chips, thats consider strategic vulnerability. also economic growth. i think both side will use "salami slice" tactic to see where the red line at.
No the PRC won't. They have a plan that they have set in motion with a timetable known only to them, and they won't deviate from the plan because that will be seen as failure. The CCP is highly intolerant of failure and considering that it will have staked a considerable amount of resources and political capital on this plan, it cannot be seen to fail.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Well, the first physical meeting after Biden became president between china and the US went not very smoothly.

And now another case.
These two Canadians were arrested more than two years ago.
Their detention came shortly after Canada detained Meng Wanzhou, a senior executive at Chinese tech giant Huawei, on a US warrant. So it looks like this is more a revenge-act with fake trials on two random Canadians with bad-luck.

 
Last edited:

weaponwh

Member
No the PRC won't. They have a plan that they have set in motion with a timetable known only to them, and they won't deviate from the plan because that will be seen as failure. The CCP is highly intolerant of failure and considering that it will have staked a considerable amount of resources and political capital on this plan, it cannot be seen to fail.
not sure what those plan refer too? they had wait for 70 years, getting taiwan into china is their utlimate goal. as you mention, they can't tolerate invading taiwan and failed, failure means jeopardizing their power, which is why i think they will do it till they are confidence about it. is there chance for them to invade taiwan soon, yeah, but i think its small. as long as they are growing, the longer they wait, the success rate goes higher, .
 
Last edited:

weaponwh

Member
When you say "recent push from US and others", what are you referring to?
What "salami slice" tactic are you referring to from the US?
well after 2015ish sino-US relationship went cooler. there are push from both sides in term of trade/tech/ and other areas. as for "salami" for example would taiwan allow US military ship dock at taiwan port(destroyer etc, not research vessel), would higher level of official meeting occur, what would reaction from china? would US consider station military personnel/equipment at base in ScS thats controlled by taiwans, eventually base in taiwan. its step by step process, probe reaction from china, where is their red line at and what china reaction to these events.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #411
not sure what those plan refer too? they had wait for 70 years, getting taiwan into china is their utlimate goal. as you mention, they can't tolerate invading taiwan and failed, failure means jeopardizing their power, which is why i think they will do it till they are confidence about it. is there chance for them to invade taiwan soon, yeah, but i think its small. as long as they are growing, the longer they wait, the success rate goes higher, .
They will have a plan, don't you worry. The thing is now that Xi has gone all aggressive and upset all the neighbours and their mates, thrown out the Hong Kong agreement, and been caught out with the Uygher solution, Taiwan has been fully warned and is rearming as quickly as it can. It now has more overt support from the US than before and its building up its defences. So sitting on their haunches no longer plays in to the CCP's hands because the longer it waits the more the defenders will gut the PLA and the longer it will take the PLA to recover. Don't forget that the last time the PLA went to war, the NVA handed them their arse on a plate. They don't have any experience of modern warfare, especially of modern amphibious warfare.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
Some analysts believe that there is a real danger of military conflict related to Taiwan, long before 2027:


Is war with China just a matter of time? (washingtonexaminer.com)

Although this scenario seems "not likely" I suggest one should be cautious. The political environment can change rapidly, potentially triggering Xi Jinping to execute plans that are already there. If something happens that changes the political calculus significantly China may decide to move even before the Olympics.

I suggest that the US should move with haste and rapidly assist in strengthening the Taiwanese deterrence. For example, Taiwan has recently ordered 400 Harpoon block II missiles and 135 SLAMM-ER missiles, however, it will take some time to execute those orders. In the interim the US should consider to "loan" a smaller number of missiles to Taiwan, to provide some deterrence until the missiles have been delivered.

Taiwan has ordered 66 new F-16 block 72, to be delivered by 2026. They are also working on upgrading their existing F-16 (19 had been upgraded by December 6 2020). Perhaps the US should also consider a small interim loan of F-16 block 52 to Taiwan, until those new F-16 can be delivered and/or the old upgraded.

In addition to the above, Taiwan is also developing submarines that could start entering service around 2025. When all this additional capability start getting in place it will increase the cost of an invasion. Thus China may consider it a "window of opportunity" to make a move well before 2026.

Taiwan says new Harpoon missiles will help it crush half of Chinese invasion fleet | Taiwan News | 2020/11/02
US finalizes sale of 66 F-16 fighters to Taiwan as China tensions escalate - CNN
Taiwan aiming to complete upgrade of 22 F-16A/B fighters by end of 2020 (janes.com)
Taiwan Is Finally Set To Build The New Diesel-Electric Submarines It Desperately Needs (thedrive.com)
My apologies, I was misreading the Janes article linked to above -- actually they had 19+15 F-16 upgraded by December 6 last year.It was recently announced that they have 42 upgraded F-16, so it's moving forward:

Taiwan Air Force completes upgrade of 42 F-16A/B fighter jets to F-16Vs - Focus Taiwan

There are some claims that Harpoon deliveries will be delayed, but I am not sure if the source is to be trusted.

The U.S. Delays Delivery of Harpoon Coastal Defense System to Taiwan - Naval Post
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #414
Nope, it never was. The PRC does tolerate any push back.They were always going to toss their toys and spit the dummy.

One of our media companies has been running a series on the Uygher genocide and the PRC Consulate in Auckland has threatened trade repercussions if Stuff continues the series and doesn't delete it.

 

weaponwh

Member
They will have a plan, don't you worry. The thing is now that Xi has gone all aggressive and upset all the neighbours and their mates, thrown out the Hong Kong agreement, and been caught out with the Uygher solution, Taiwan has been fully warned and is rearming as quickly as it can. It now has more overt support from the US than before and its building up its defences. So sitting on their haunches no longer plays in to the CCP's hands because the longer it waits the more the defenders will gut the PLA and the longer it will take the PLA to recover. Don't forget that the last time the PLA went to war, the NVA handed them their arse on a plate. They don't have any experience of modern warfare, especially of modern amphibious warfare.
As i mention before, hk protest 2014 vs 2019 is very different, No ccp leader gonna stand by and do nothing about it, while protester ransack HK legislator building and desecrate their national symbols. Thats why they introduce the national security act now rather than in 2014, to nip future protester before it start.
There is no indication or evidence of Xi gonna invade taiwan in few years or so. the chance for china to invade taiwan in next few years, are low, unless some significant status quo change. furthermore, china know they dont have the capability to launch full invasion of taiwan. As long as taiwan doesn't announce full independence, i dont see Xi order a invasion. The risk and cost of invasion is far too great for china.

Taiwan Timelines

Third, there are as many myths about China’s external behavior as there are about its domestic policy. One of the most common is: Xi is deeply nervous about Taiwan’s future and is set to invade Taiwan in the next two to three years. In fact, former national security adviser H.R. McMaster suggested this in recent testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

This is a misreading of China’s calculus toward Taiwan and the current situation in cross-strait relations. China’s top leaders have long viewed the Taiwan problem as fundamentally a political problem, not a military one. Their consistent preference has been, first and foremost, to deter independence rather than to compel unification by force. They have deployed a mix of coercion and incentives to do so, and recent military activities around Taiwan reflect this.

Beijing’s strong preference is to create a situation in which the people of Taiwan and their leaders recognize their future is inevitably tied with the mainland, and then negotiate a reunification deal on Beijing’s terms. The Xi administration’s undermining of Hong Kong’s political and legal autonomy serves only to make Taiwan more resistant to Beijing’s overtures. This means Beijing will need to rely even more on coercion and political warfare to achieve its goal of reunification. This reality, more so than armed conflict, is the near-term challenge U.S. policymakers need to be focused on.

Even in the context of rising cross-Strait tensions, there is little evidence that Xi is uniquely anxious about Taiwan now and preparing an all-out invasion of Taiwan in the next two to three years. All Chinese leaders have to talk tough, and Xi is no exception. But he has never set a clear deadline. The closest he came was in a January 2019 speech linking the achievement of “national rejuvenation” with Taiwan reunification. The timetable for rejuvenation is still some 30 years off in 2049 (when Xi would be 96). This sounds more like political posturing by Xi within CCP circles than formal planning. Most recently, last week’s annual meeting of the National People’s Congress did not signal any urgency and instead used stock language on Taiwan, which is unlike last year when comments by senior leaders hinted at a questioning or even a movement away from “peaceful reunification” as a goal.

Invading Taiwan remains an extraordinarily risky and costly action and, in the next two to three years, it would come at a crucial time for Xi’s big domestic agenda. It is the one move that could short-circuit Xi’s vision of national rejuvenation – any military action short of complete victory would be a loss. Even if an invasion succeeded, China would then have to occupy Taiwan and seek to pacify its 24 million citizens, gutting Taiwan’s economy in the process, including its strategically significant high-tech sector.

Whereas experts continue to debate whether China has the military capability in the next few years to invade fully and occupy Taiwan, there is broad agreement that the People’s Liberation Army has made substantial strides in developing a wide range of capabilities across the spectrum of conflict that it lacked in the last crisis in 1995 and 1996. Whether China possesses the ability for a military invasion or is close to it, the risk calculus remains complex — major military action will be far from a “no-brainer.” The U.S. military is increasingly focused on improving warfighting capabilities in East Asia, including doing much more with its Asian allies. All of this will enhance deterrence.

The most immediate challenge for U.S. policymakers is China’s coercion strategy, which seeks to shape outcomes in Taiwan by means short of outright aggression. While many of Beijing’s recent efforts to affect Taiwan’s domestic political environment have backfired, Taiwan’s people, as well as its political, economic, and military institutions, are nonetheless coming under increasing stress. Washington needs to be attentive to a loss of confidence by the people of Taiwan in their future, or a loss of faith in U.S. reliability, producing a resignation that their future is with the mainland. In response, Washington needs to do more to enhance Taiwan’s resilience and diversification in the face of these pressures.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #416
As i mention before, hk protest 2014 vs 2019 is very different, No ccp leader gonna stand by and do nothing about it, while protester ransack HK legislator building and desecrate their national symbols. Thats why they introduce the national security act now rather than in 2014, to nip future protester before it start.
There is no indication or evidence of Xi gonna invade taiwan in few years or so. the chance for china to invade taiwan in next few years, are low, unless some significant status quo change. furthermore, china know they dont have the capability to launch full invasion of taiwan. As long as taiwan doesn't announce full independence, i dont see Xi order a invasion. The risk and cost of invasion is far too great for china.

The problem that I have with that is I believe that analysis is through a western lens, not a Chinese lens so it is quite possibly incorrect. They like the vast majority of western analysts assess other cultures through their own cultural lens and that leads to false conclusions.

TBH a lot of it is guesswork because of the highly secretive nature of the inner workings of the CCP Politburo and CMC. Even the Central Committee of the CCP is relatively secretive WRT to its dealings. I am of the opinion that these organs and / or their support services would be quite difficult for a foreign intelligence service to penetrate, especially now that the CCP has really invested in electronic and biometric technologies.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
the longer it waits the more the defenders will gut the PLA and the longer it will take the PLA to recover.
I would argue that the time factor works to China’s favour. Sure; the longer it waits the more time the Taiwanese get to buy new gear/develop new capabilities but the PLA also gets more time to do the same and to widen the wide gap which currently exists.

Also; the Chinese do necessarily have to embark of an amphibious op or a full scale invasion. They can start with the less militarily and politically risky moves of a sea denial campaign; in parallel with missile/cruise missile and cyber attacks to weaken Taiwan and see how the U.S. responds.

Don't forget that the last time the PLA went to war, the NVA handed them their arse on a plate. They don't have any experience of modern warfare, especially of modern amphibious warfare.
Very true but that was in 1979 and the PLA then was very different to what it is now. They’ve spent a lot of time analysing various conflicts and poured in a lot of resources into modernising the PLA and identifying its weaknesses.

Ultimately we have no idea how the effective the PLA actually is and we won’t know until a conflict actually occurs but neither can we predict with absolute certainty how other countries; which enjoy various key advantages over the PLA will actually perform also.

We keep hearing about the wide gap which separates the PLA between the U.S. and it’s key allies and the lack of experience the PLA has in various areas (amphibious ops, joint expeditionary ops; etc) but the PLA; for what it intends to do within its backyard; doesn’t necessarily have to be a peer competitor per se.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #418
I would argue that the time factor works to China’s favour. Sure; the longer it waits the more time the Taiwanese get to buy new gear/develop new capabilities but the PLA also gets more time to do the same and to widen the wide gap which currently exists.

Also; the Chinese do necessarily have to embark of an amphibious op or a full scale invasion. They can start with the less militarily and politically risky moves of a sea denial campaign; in parallel with missile/cruise missile and cyber attacks to weaken Taiwan and see how the U.S. responds.



Very true but that was in 1979 and the PLA then was very different to what it is now. They’ve spent a lot of time analysing various conflicts and poured in a lot of resources into modernising the PLA and identifying its weaknesses.

Ultimately we have no idea how the effective the PLA actually is and we won’t know until a conflict actually occurs but neither can we predict with absolute certainty how other countries; which enjoy various key advantages over the PLA will actually perform also.

We keep hearing about the wide gap which separates the PLA between the U.S. and it’s key allies and the lack of experience the PLA has in various areas (amphibious ops, joint expeditionary ops; etc) but the PLA; for what it intends to do within its backyard; doesn’t necessarily have to be a peer competitor per se.
Yep there is definitely that too and that is also a concern. However I think that the attempted conquest of Taiwan is ideologically and politically driven so those two imperatives will be considered more important than the military imperative. A non totalitarian general staff planning such an operation would considered the military imperative above any political and ideologically imperatives. However the PLA works in a different dynamic where both the ideological and political imperatives have to be considered equally or superior to the military imperatives. So any operational plan must not only be militarily sound, it must also be ideologically and politically sound. Makes life interesting and complicated for them.

It'll be interesting how their command system is going to react to quick unplanned changes on the battlefield. From what I understand, they have a dual command system of the unit commander and the political commissar at every level. So how much freedom of action does the unit commander have? At section, platoon, company, battalion level etc? Are they able to use their initiative, think for themselves and react instantly? Or is it like the old Soviet system where it was very much top down control with little or no room for deviation from the plan.

Like you say we won't know this until they get into proper combat.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
My understanding (I could be wrong of course) is that although China is a totalitarian state controlled by the Communist party; compared to previous times; as part of the PLA’s reforms the senior leadership has fully realised and catered for the vital need for commanders to be given a certain leeway/flexibility to display initiative and divert from the script; when needed; in order to do their jobs effectively.

Also; as part of the rethinking the PLA did following Desert Storm; in which Chinese planners realised that the PLA was too far behind and needed deep changes; surely they also would have realised that a part of the U.S’s military’s strength is the ability of commanders at all levels to display initiative and to act independently and continued reliance on the old Soviet way of doing things would be a major inhibiting factor in the PLA’s ability to reform.

There are several excellent lectures/talks on the PLAN on YouTube. A common theme is that despite rapidly closing the gap between itself and the U.S. military; the PLAN still doesn’t have sailors as well trained as those in the USN and ships still not constructed to the same quality as USN ships.

To me these points are immaterial as they might not necessarily be determining factors in the event of a future conflict in China’s backyard in which the PLA will certainly be doing its best to to avoid playing to the various strengths and advantages the U.S. enjoys.

As a participant in of the lectures/talks put it; in the event of war with the U.S. the PLAN doesn’t necessarily have to sortie its whole fleet out. That would play into the hands of the U.S; China has a variety of other means to make life difficult for the Americans.

Another factor to consider is that although the average Chinese airman, sailor and soldier is deeply loyal to the party and displays unquestionable obedience; they are also a product of their generation and the rapid changes which have occurred in Chinese society in recent years. Continued reliance on the old Soviet way of doing things might not work as effectively with the current generation.

With regards to the Spratlys and the smaller much less powerful/capable other claimants; I would argue that a major worry; even before a first shot is fired; if the possibility of Malaysian, Vietnamese and Filipino radios, SATCOM, GPSs, BMSs, combat management systems, radars, etc, being shut down by Chinese EW and cyber attacks. Or perhaps I’m overestimating China’s capabilities
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
My understanding (I could be wrong of course) is that although China is a totalitarian state controlled by the Communist party; compared to previous times; as part of the PLA’s reforms the senior leadership has fully realised and catered for the vital need for commanders to be given a certain leeway/flexibility to display initiative and divert from the script; when needed; in order to do their jobs effectively.

Also; as part of the rethinking the PLA did following Desert Storm; in which Chinese planners realised that the PLA was too far behind and needed deep changes; surely they also would have realised that a part of the U.S’s military’s strength is the ability of commanders at all levels to display initiative and to act independently and continued reliance on the old Soviet way of doing things would be a major inhibiting factor in the PLA’s ability to reform.

There are several excellent lectures/talks on the PLAN on YouTube. A common theme is that despite rapidly closing the gap between itself and the U.S. military; the PLAN still doesn’t have sailors as well trained as those in the USN and ships still not constructed to the same quality as USN ships.

To me these points are immaterial as they might not necessarily be determining factors in the event of a future conflict in China’s backyard in which the PLA will certainly be doing its best to to avoid playing to the various strengths and advantages the U.S. enjoys.

As a participant in of the lectures/talks put it; in the event of war with the U.S. the PLAN doesn’t necessarily have to sortie its whole fleet out. That would play into the hands of the U.S; China has a variety of other means to make life difficult for the Americans.

Another factor to consider is that although the average Chinese airman, sailor and soldier is deeply loyal to the party and displays unquestionable obedience; they are also a product of their generation and the rapid changes which have occurred in Chinese society in recent years. Continued reliance on the old Soviet way of doing things might not work as effectively with the current generation.

With regards to the Spratlys and the smaller much less powerful/capable other claimants; I would argue that a major worry; even before a first shot is fired; if the possibility of Malaysian, Vietnamese and Filipino radios, SATCOM, GPSs, BMSs, combat management systems, radars, etc, being shut down by Chinese EW and cyber attacks. Or perhaps I’m overestimating China’s capabilities
I don’t think you are overestimating the PLA’s capability at all.
The developed democracies should heed the historic example of Japan’s military buildup between the World Wars.
Japan rapidly grew its military, the “western” powers viewed their capability with disdain and condescension only to be resoundingly defeated on first contact.
Let’s not let history repeat that saga.

In truth sophisticated strategic thinkers are not complacent but I’m sure many commentators are.
 
Top