China - Geostrategic & Geopolitical.

[Ananda]

This is quite interesting video on how China economic developement. The speaker is a proffesor on China Business School. One thing that for me like to stress on his description on China as Totaliterian Decentralise System.

He talk on how Chinese region has abilities to used their own regional resources or even regulations to attract investment. China central govt encourage each region to develop on their own as long as still within national frame work.

Strong regional actually already happen since Imperial era. This also shown Xi as Supreme Leader need to balance the central with regional need. In short, just like old days, any Emperor that lose their provincial/regional lords support can also lose mandate of heaven (at present time CCP Polit Bureau).

Something shown that in sense China still China of old.

 

[John Fedup]

This is a rather dated article describing Chinese surveillance on its citizens. The cost of this exceeds the defence budget by 20% and in 2018 was 6% GDP. If accurate this is a huge amount of money. I wonder what the current numbers are?

China Spends More on Domestic Security as Xi’s Powers Grow

Beijing has substantially increased spending on domestic security, reflecting concern about threats inside its borders as President Xi moves to acquire more power and reassert Communist Party authority.

www.wsj.com

 

[swerve]

Internal security covers a lot more than surveillance, & the article doesn't say 6% of GDP, but 6.1% of government spending, which is a very different thing.

"Across China, domestic security accounted for 6.1% of government spending in 2017, the Ministry of Finance said. That translates into 1.24 trillion yuan ($196 billion) and compares with 1.02 trillion yuan in central-government funding for the military."

However, it's only officially admitted spending.

You may find this interesting - China’s Domestic Security Spending: An Analysis of Available Data

 

[John Fedup]

Internal security covers a lot more than surveillance, & the article doesn't say 6% of GDP, but 6.1% of government spending, which is a very different thing.

"Across China, domestic security accounted for 6.1% of government spending in 2017, the Ministry of Finance said. That translates into 1.24 trillion yuan ($196 billion) and compares with 1.02 trillion yuan in central-government funding for the military."

However, it's only officially admitted spending.

You may find this interesting - China’s Domestic Security Spending: An Analysis of Available Data

Interesting information. It appears the security costs for enabling Xi to be Leader for life are becoming an expensive bill for Chinese citizens, not really an issue for Xi’s CCP.

 

[weaponwh]

Interesting information. It appears the security costs for enabling Xi to be Leader for life are becoming an expensive bill for Chinese citizens, not really an issue for Xi’s CCP.

hmm isn't the conclusion was

During Hu Jintao’s second term as general party secretary (2007 to 2012), total national expenditures increased 51 percent faster than domestic security spending. During Xi Jinping’s current term (2013 to 2017), China’s domestic security spending grew 34 percent faster than total spending

domestic security always gonna increase when CCP consider the region challenging its power. also traditionally most chinese dynasty fall from within, even mongol/Qing invasion was due to severally weaken/corrupt central government. So the central have to make sure domestic stability is one of their top priority, probably more so than south china sea, or even taiwan. afterall they can united chinese to back ccp if its external threat, but if its internal, then thats troublesome for them to deal with it.

 

[ngatimozart]

hmm isn't the conclusion was

domestic security always gonna increase when CCP consider the region challenging its power. also traditionally most chinese dynasty fall from within, even mongol/Qing invasion was due to severally weaken/corrupt central government. So the central have to make sure domestic stability is one of their top priority, probably more so than south china sea, or even taiwan. afterall they can united chinese to back ccp if its external threat, but if its internal, then thats troublesome for them to deal with it.

Yes and no. Historically dynasties fell when they were seen to lose the Mandate of Heaven and they weren't as centralised as today because of the communications technologies available at the time. Whilst the Emperor was the absolute authority and still ruled through the bureaucracy, the regional governors held significant political power and control. To a reasonable degree this is still current today within the PRC but the people are far more oppressed than any time under previous dynasties.

The CCP brooks no competition to its political power and control. It ruthlessly crushes all opposition and in recent years technology has increased both its surveillance and control capabilities. Its sole purpose is to remain in power and to that end everything else is subservient. That is why it spends significantly more on internal security than it does on external security. It requires the capabilities to keep the population in control and prevent them from replacing it with an alternative form of government.

 

[weaponwh]

To a reasonable degree this is still current today within the PRC but the people are far more oppressed than any time under previous dynasties.

The CCP brooks no competition to its political power and control. It ruthlessly crushes all opposition and in recent years technology has increased both its surveillance and control capabilities. Its sole purpose is to remain in power and to that end everything else is subservient. That is why it spends significantly more on internal security than it does on external security. It requires the capabilities to keep the population in control and prevent them from replacing it with an alternative form of government.

i have to disagree on some these points. imperial dynasties was much more ruthless in term of punishment when someone challenging/criticize the emperor or the central government. in ancient china, even a hint of treason, they basically kill the entire family tree or torture them and their family member till they confess. there are alot of 文字狱 during imperial china, where scholar didn't even know why they get beheaded, not just them, their family will get exiled or beheaded as well. right now if someone criticize ccp, usually the 1st thing they do is tell them to shut up, if that doesn't stop them, they threatened the jobs/pension, maybe few days in jailed. these measure usually stop most who dare criticize ccp.

CCP still has to provide something to the ppl otherwise they will end up like NK, and ppl will revolt. CCP basically trade economic growth for lack of political freedom. Most chinese ok with it as long as the material life/economy is decent. but you are right CCP will crush any they perceived challenge to their power whether its from religion/miniority/majoirty, doesn't matter.

 

[OPSSG]

Updates to help understand Chinese-Pakistani interests

1. Tensions are rapidly rising with Kabul, and Pakistan’s ties with key ally Beijing are showing some strain due to attacks on Chinese citizens. Chinese-Pakistani interests are strategic in nature and it is not an emotional bond that is easily hurt by an unfortunate act of terror. Chinese Premier Li Keqiang urged authorities in Pakistan to bring the perpetrators to justice in a phone call with Pakistani PM Imran Khan.

2. While there is a mutuality of purpose, the lack of security will hinder any development project in a remote area in Pakistan. The suspected suicide attack in July 2021 — with the largest loss of life of Chinese citizens in Pakistan in recent years — targeted a two-bus convoy transporting Chinese and Pakistani workers to the China-funded Dasu hydropower project that is under construction in the northwestern Kohistan region.

​

(a) The suicide bomber tried to ram his explosive-laden car into the first bus, but the ensuing blast did not go off with full intensity due to technical glitches, shattering windows but causing no harm to the passengers.​

​

(b) The explosion prompted the driver of the second bus to swerve to avoid a collision, plunging the bus into a ravine. That resulted in all the deaths and injuries, sources said.​

"China is shocked by and condemns the bomb attack in Pakistan's Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province which caused Chinese casualties, mourns for the Chinese and Pakistani personnel killed in the attack, and expresses sympathy to their families and the injured. Pakistani security forces have taken measures to control the situation, properly transfer and treat the wounded. China has asked the Pakistani side to thoroughly get to the bottom of this as soon as possible, arrest the perpetrators, severely punish them and earnestly protect the safety of Chinese personnel, institutions and projects in Pakistan," Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told reporters in Beijing just hours after the attack.​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1415981229858426885

3. Winner of the best Twitter post of this week by Hu Xijin:

“The cowardly terrorists behind this attack dare not show up until now. But they will definitely be found out and must be exterminated. If Pakistan’s capability is not enough, with its consent, China’s missiles and special forces can be put into action.”​

​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1416715390902685698

This is followed up with a more even tempered post by Hu Xijin. Hu is a Chinese journalist and the editor-in-chief of the Global Times, a state-owned tabloid under the auspices of the Chinese Communist Party's official People's Daily newspaper.​

As is well known Pakistan’s aims in Afghanistan are driven by the Indian threat (strategic depth) and also to ensure it has friendly relations with Afghanistan’s Pashtun majority; given that Pakistan has a large Pashtun population and unresolved border demarcation issues with Afghanistan along the Durand Line. India’s previous attempts to seek greater influence in Afghanistan and the reported support given to Baluch separatist groups have played to Pakistani paranoia.

4. I pity Imran Khan. His intelligence agency has caused havoc abroad but his government cannot even be sovereign within its own undisputed borders. Afghanistan has withdrawn its ambassador and diplomats from Pakistan's capital following the kidnapping of the ambassador's daughter, the Afghan foreign ministry said on 18 July 2021. A hospital medical report, seen by the Associated Press, said Silsila Alikhil, suffered blows to her head, had rope marks on her wrists and legs, and was badly beaten for 5 hours. "The Afghan government recalled the ambassador and senior diplomats to Kabul until complete elimination of the security threats including the arrest and punishment of the perpetrators," the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.

 

[SolarWind]

Sounds like Pakistan is on the path to becoming a failed state vulnerable to eventual Chinese takeover. "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

All together this is around 230 additional silo's.
I have the feeling that china has more nuclear warheads than the official number.

China expanding its nuclear capabilities, scientists say

It is building a site that will have extra capacity to store and launch missiles, scientists say.

www.bbc.com

 

[ngatimozart]

All together this is around 230 additional silo's.
I have the feeling that china has more nuclear warheads than the official number.

China expanding its nuclear capabilities, scientists say

It is building a site that will have extra capacity to store and launch missiles, scientists say.

www.bbc.com

Of course they have. I would presume that every other nuclear armed state is the same. You always keep something up your sleeve. I read elsewhere a while back that they will most likely be playing a shell game with these new silos as well.

 

[weaponwh]

I personally think china wont hide its nuke, maybe even exaggerate a bit more. mainly because nuke are used as deterrent weapon, the more other side think china have, the better deterrence. Nuclear build up including delivery system + maintenance cost alot. so for china its better to use those saving and spend on their conventional force/rocket etc. Also less chance of rogue event/mistake happen. many those silo are likely empty or fill with dummies with very few actually has nuke. Much cheaper to dig hole and make it look like silos.

 

[STURM]

My question is why even bother with resource intensive silos? China is a large country with lots of places to hide; keeping track of mobile ICBMs would be harder for anyone to do; plus the fact that mobile systems are mote survivable.

As for “sunny” silos; much more easier to have “dummy” mobile systems. Silos can be constantly observed and they do have to be loaded and gave their hatches opened for maintenance.

 

[Ananda]

China just following what US and USSR doing in Cold War and even now. The Analysts call it 'shell game'. Basically you put as much as target that need to take, thus reducing the number of your first strike toward strategic/population target.

When you see hundreds of ICBM silos on your adversary, you have to make assumptions that all of that have missiles, eventough you may also suspect only some of them has actual missiles. However, can you take the risk on not try to neutralize them all? I suspect China just try to give US more Target to calculate on.

Most of China missiles I believe will be in Mobile and railway TEL, and their boomers under the sea. They put those new silos in Western China in desert, which far from most of their populations. So it will the target they can afford to give to US, French and UK.

 

[swerve]

The USA & USSR didn't actually do it in the Cold War, but it was talked about, & even seriously planned in the USA, IIRC. Reagan vetoed it.

I think the Chinese currently have some ICBM silos in remote parts of Inner Mongolia, so no real change in choice of silo location: somewhere sparsely populated, a long way from the industrial & demographic heartland, & populated largely by non-Han.

 

[Blackshoe]

My question is why even bother with resource intensive silos? China is a large country with lots of places to hide; keeping track of mobile ICBMs would be harder for anyone to do; plus the fact that mobile systems are mote survivable.

Can't award construction-related contracts to your party-connected friends on road-mobile ICBMS, though.

Rollwithit.jpg

(I mean, you can, but not as much)

 

[ngatimozart]

Interesting article in Foreign Affairs by Kevin Rudd (ex Aussie PM) on how the CCP / PRC is concerned by the Quad. He argues that when the Quad was reactivated in 2017 Beijing just saw it as another talk fest that going to go nowhere, so they weren't concerned about it and treated it with a bit of derision. In 2019 when the Quad was formalised Beijing was taken aback and started to take it seriously. It now sees the Quad as a threat to its geopolitical and geostrategic plans.

Using its carrot and stick strategy Beijing attempted to offer carrots to India and Japan. However after the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers othe the Lof Control between India and the PRC, has hardened India's resolve against the PRC and it's moved from a previous position of being tactful with the Beijing because of trade concerns, to now being openly assertive against Beijing's behaviour. Japan basically rebuffed Beijing's carrots. Beijing's stick was used against Australia with its trade war against Australia. However that's basically back fired.

Beijing is concerned that the Quad will share intelligence that they have gained about it with FVEY, forgetting that 2 members of the Quad are part of FVEY. They are also considering applying to join the CPTTP, but it is possible the member nations may not want them. Beijing is also concerned that the Quad could turn into something larger that will be considerably more formidable to thwart.

Why the Quad Alarms China

The Quad's success poses a major threat to Beijing’s ambitions.

www.foreignaffairs.com

 

[swerve]

Using its carrot and stick strategy Beijing attempted to offer carrots to India and Japan. However after the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers othe the Lof Control between India and the PRC, has hardened India's resolve against the PRC and it's moved from a previous position of being tactful with the Beijing because of trade concerns, to now being openly assertive against Beijing's behaviour.

Is it that the Chinese don't see how that inconsistency in their behaviour is perceived? Or is the bullying so ingrained now that it's automatic? Or do they expect neighbours to be cowed into submission by it?

Never heard the fable of the north wind & the sun, I presume.

 

[ngatimozart]

Is it that the Chinese don't see how that inconsistency in their behaviour is perceived? Or is the bullying so ingrained now that it's automatic? Or do they expect neighbours to be cowed into submission by it?

Never heard the fable of the north wind & the sun, I presume.

I get the impression that the CCP expect their neighbours and the rest of the world to kow tow to them. Mao ruled by fear as did Stalin and I would argue that they to intend to rule by fear. After all Mao said all politics and power come from the point of a gun. Xi Jinping is a Maoist and he's taking the CCP and the PRC back to the times and politics of Mao, except where Mao tended to be more inward focused, Xi is outward looking in order to secure what he sees as the PRC's place as the preeminent world power. But he is at the same time and focused upon domestic affairs which are his priority and he's more than willing to stoke nationalistic fervour to divert attention from domestic problems. It's also worthwhile noting that the PRC spends more on internal security than it does on defence.

Xi has resurrected the cult of personality and if he's successful in cementing his position at next year's five year CCP Congress he'll be the Helmsman for life. That will be concerning because it reduces certainty of stability within the CCP. That was one of the reasons why Hua Gofeng and the PLA arrested the Gang of Four and their fellow conspirators after Mao Tse Tung died. They wanted stability returned to the country and the Party after the massive disruption and instability created by Mao's Red Guards and the Cultural Revolution. If the Gang of Four had succeeded in having Madam Mao installed as Mao's successor the Cultural Revolution would've continued for who knows how long and she and Mao were its original architects plotting it between them.

 

[John Fedup]

I get the impression that the CCP expect their neighbours and the rest of the world to kow tow to them. Mao ruled by fear as did Stalin and I would argue that they to intend to rule by fear. After all Mao said all politics and power come from the point of a gun. Xi Jinping is a Maoist and he's taking the CCP and the PRC back to the times and politics of Mao, except where Mao tended to be more inward focused, Xi is outward looking in order to secure what he sees as the PRC's place as the preeminent world power. But he is at the same time and focused upon domestic affairs which are his priority and he's more than willing to stoke nationalistic fervour to divert attention from domestic problems. It's also worthwhile noting that the PRC spends more on internal security than it does on defence.

Xi has resurrected the cult of personality and if he's successful in cementing his position at next year's five year CCP Congress he'll be the Helmsman for life. That will be concerning because it reduces certainty of stability within the CCP. That was one of the reasons why Hua Gofeng and the PLA arrested the Gang of Four and their fellow conspirators after Mao Tse Tung died. They wanted stability returned to the country and the Party after the massive disruption and instability created by Mao's Red Guards and the Cultural Revolution. If the Gang of Four had succeeded in having Madam Mao installed as Mao's successor the Cultural Revolution would've continued for who knows how long and she and Mao were its original architects plotting it between them.

If Madam Mao was the successor, would China ever have been given WTO status? Would greedy Western corporations been able to pump billions into China and sacrificed their IP rights. Instead of an emerging superpower perhaps another inefficient “Soviet Union” would have resulted. China would still be a significant threat but certainly not what we have today. Mao’s significant other probably wouldn’t have pleased the Russians either.