Indo Pacific strategy

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Ngatimozart has hit the nail on the head, or to put that another way around, it is the head that hits the nail.

Analysts who talk only at a macro-level, miss the greatest lesson of history - it is leaders who start wars for totalitarian nations are not rational actors. Having ruthlessly purged so many, having determinedly collated such power in his hands, having so assetively expanded the borders of China like no other Chinese leader ever has, the fate of the entire Indo-Pacific region depends upon what Xi orders and what is on is mind.

Time for our navies and nations to prepare my friends as the CCP builds the equivalent of the French Navy every four years.

'Dictator for life': Xi Jinping's power grab condemned as step towards tyranny
I would disagree? Was GW Bush Jnr a totalitarian leader when he started the 2nd Iraq War? What about the Suez War of 1956 started by the British and French? Or when the US invaded Grenada during the 1980s? It is pollies who start wars and it's service personnel who pay for it in blood and lives. Very few pollies are willing to literally pay the price with their own blood and life. I would suggest that you read up on Chinese imperial history as well because there has been expansions of Chinese borders by imperial dynasties.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Xi Jinping does appear to be a man with an ego and he has an obedient CCP. However, he is ruler of the second largest economy
in the world with a large group of very powerful people who don't want to see stuff that effects their prosperity. Any adventure that causes massive hurt to the economy will cause problems for him thus perhaps a restraint mechanism. Then again, I guess German industrialists thought this mechanism would apply to Hitler too. Bottom line, when ego is involved, "stuff" happens.
 

Traveller

Member
Reading the comments above on Chinese power projection and of the current leader Xi Jinping, it is interesting to note the level of concern. Jinping comes with a political pedigree and tough background. His father fought with Mao and after the communist win was a senior party official. The father was one of many Mao cadres 'brought down' in the Cultural Revolution. At this time Xi Jinping was sent to rural re-education for 6 years as a result of mistrust due to his father's former status. Jinping returned from the countryside and was later repeatedly was rejected for party membership. Obviously he eventually was accepted as post-Cultural Revolution, the former Maoists returned to relative favour. My reading of what is published on him is that he is autocratic and tough. Like Stalin he has centralised power to himself and purged competition. Jinping has also called for the full PLA to be more ready for conflict. I don't believe that readiness will be wasted.

The following articles demonstrate a renewed Chinese military vigor both in hardware and doctrine. The intention to protect overseas Chinese is a point for concern, even for the overseas Chinese.

https://www.army.gov.au/our-future/...inese-evacuations-and-power-projection-part-1

https://www.army.gov.au/our-future/...acuations-and-power-projection-part-2-a-movie
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Xi Jinping does appear to be a man with an ego and he has an obedient CCP. However, he is ruler of the second largest economy
in the world with a large group of very powerful people who don't want to see stuff that effects their prosperity. Any adventure that causes massive hurt to the economy will cause problems for him thus perhaps a restraint mechanism. Then again, I guess German industrialists thought this mechanism would apply to Hitler too. Bottom line, when ego is involved, "stuff" happens.
The mutual benefits of trade for two or three of the worlds big powers does shine a positive light for a peaceful future.
Lets hope its the case.
Then again is history repeating itself !!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards S
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The mutual benefits of trade for two or three of the worlds big powers does shine a positive light for a peaceful future.
Lets hope its the case.
Then again is history repeating itself !!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards S
There was significant trade between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union right up to the German invasion. In fact Russian trains were crossing the demarcation lines in Poland with Russian goods when the opening German artillery barrage started.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Just want to put map on Qing empire teritory in 1775..at the height of their might (I believe it's Emperor Kiang Liong reign). The point is, present PRC teritory is actualy smaller than Qing Empire times.

Thus if being said Xi Jin Ping has increase Chinese border much bigger than previous leaders of China..well he's not.

250px-18_century_Qing_China.jpg
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Just to reinforce Ananda's point and my earlier point about China's history and expansion here are two maps. The first illustrates the Tang Empire with it's western most border reaching Persia, and close to Tashkent and Samarkand, and up past Lake Baikal in modern day Russia.

Tang dynasty.jpg
Source: https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3b0d8e3b2ba460626d279505237445d2

The second map is of the Qing dynasty and illustrates their expansion from 1644 to 1911 when the dynasty lost the Mandate of Heaven and fell. As an aside, it is my argument that since 1949 the CCP is the latest imperial dynasty to occur in Chinese history - it is just dressed in different cloth, not wearing the imperial yellow.
Qing map.jpg
Source: https://kappamapgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/3036827.jpg
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
So maybe Erdogan isn't the only dictator looking at old imperial borders for inspiration.:D
It's their national identity cornerstone, that China is China..thus present PRC is just another evolution of Imperial China.

That's what I see if seeing their media, their official statement..their 'official' academics..and the behavior of many Chinese 50cent army in internet.
In the case of South China Sea, that's what I argue to some of them in saying, that it's never part of Imperial China..and considering most in Imperial China, they 'shuned' martime power besides some period under Ming and Yuan time.

China decision that want to move from continental/land power to also become martime/sea power is not in my opinion a 'traditionally' Chinese 'genre' if we can say that. That's the one that can create more frictions then previous Chinese movement in land.

If looking toward South East Asia history, I see that Chinese Imperial Navy was not really a dominant power in SCS or SEA Archipelago..even tough their Commercial trade is quite high also in that era. SEA seas are more controlled by various maritime kingdoms, from Srivijaya, Champa, Majapahit or Malayan Kingdoms on the Straits. Regionally also as comparison to 'say' Japanese, which they were more active as Maritime power.

In short the move of China to 'trying' become more assertive as Maritime power is the 'one' that raise concerned and potential frictions. The neighborhood now and historically is more acceptable of China as land power, and not Maritime power.
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
I do like a good map, particularly historical maps where you can see the geopolitical layout of a region over time.
With regards to China we don't need to go back century's to see a change.
Like many country's and regions, the last couple of decades have seen tensions develop from what the PRC claims to be her own territory.
Land disputes with India, Pakistan and Bhutan and maritime disputes with her maritime neighbours have see the map change and no doubt continue to evolve.
Some disputes have been solved peacefully and other have led to conflict.
The area that is the South China Sea has the most creative geography with magic Islands appearing as bases for Chinese flag poles.
China may not be unique in this quirk of special maritime geography but they are the dominant practitioner of Island building and the claims such geography brings to an expanding nation.

What will the map of Asia look like in the decades ahead.
Time will tell

Regards S
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I do like a good map, particularly historical maps where you can see the geopolitical layout of a region over time.
Maps are worth 1,000+ words. I belong to the geographers union so like my service number, the use of maps is burned into my brain. Not using maps is regarded as a mortal sin and heresy in the geographers union.
With regards to China we don't need to go back century's to see a change.
Like many country's and regions, the last couple of decades have seen tensions develop from what the PRC claims to be her own territory.
Land disputes with India, Pakistan and Bhutan and maritime disputes with her maritime neighbours have see the map change and no doubt continue to evolve.
Some disputes have been solved peacefully and other have led to conflict.
The area that is the South China Sea has the most creative geography with magic Islands appearing as bases for Chinese flag poles.
China may not be unique in this quirk of special maritime geography but they are the dominant practitioner of Island building and the claims such geography brings to an expanding nation.

What will the map of Asia look like in the decades ahead.
Time will tell

Regards S
I think that it is a mistake to think that change over a short period of time describes a problem, when in fact the study of change over a long period of time informs the analysis of a problem far better, because one is able to tease out patterns in far greater detail. Hence, as Ananda states, the very recent maritime focus for Chinese expansion is a new phenomena that is a distinct change in behaviour. The question now is what are the reasons and drivers for this change? How is this change happening? And what are the processes driving it?
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Maps are worth 1,000+ words. I belong to the geographers union so like my service number, the use of maps is burned into my brain. Not using maps is regarded as a mortal sin and heresy in the geographers union.

I think that it is a mistake to think that change over a short period of time describes a problem, when in fact the study of change over a long period of time informs the analysis of a problem far better, because one is able to tease out patterns in far greater detail. Hence, as Ananda states, the very recent maritime focus for Chinese expansion is a new phenomena that is a distinct change in behaviour. The question now is what are the reasons and drivers for this change? How is this change happening? And what are the processes driving it?
Hi ngatimozart.
Change, be it short or long term is a dynamic that needs answers.
In the context of the PRC I can understand their needs and have indeed some empathy with their sense of place in the world.
This does not however mean that her land or maritime neighbours do not also have aspirations and rights.
Regarding the SCS, the PRC has made a conscious decision to expand it's maritime reach with a combination of Maritime power through the rapid development of the PLAN and also Island building activities.
These are indeed recent ( Two decades ) developments and certainly agree a "distinct change in behaviour"
Change can bring both hope and uncertainty and its the later that concerns me.

The thing with maps of course is it depends on who actually writes them.
On a recent trip to Vietnam I was standing on the beach with my feet in the South china sea only to be reminded by a local it also comes under a different name.
I wish I could remember the name but it wasn't the SCS, and the local was keen to point out the distinction with conviction.

Regards S
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Hi ngatimozart.
Change, be it short or long term is a dynamic that needs answers.
In the context of the PRC I can understand their needs and have indeed some empathy with their sense of place in the world.
This does not however mean that her land or maritime neighbours do not also have aspirations and rights.
Regarding the SCS, the PRC has made a conscious decision to expand it's maritime reach with a combination of Maritime power through the rapid development of the PLAN and also Island building activities.
These are indeed recent ( Two decades ) developments and certainly agree a "distinct change in behaviour"
Change can bring both hope and uncertainty and its the later that concerns me.

The thing with maps of course is it depends on who actually writes them.
On a recent trip to Vietnam I was standing on the beach with my feet in the South china sea only to be reminded by a local it also comes under a different name.
I wish I could remember the name but it wasn't the SCS, and the local was keen to point out the distinction with conviction.

Regards S
Change is a constant, some claim the only constant in the universe. There is a historical arrogance to the Chinese world view, similar to that of the British and the Americans. Suppose it's like the old Mac Davis song "Its hard to be humble (when you're perfect in almost every way)" Just ask any NSW Blues supporter around the time of the State Of Origin :p Doesn't stop them from losing though :D

The world of human endeavours and international relationships are like the natural world, much like the Earth's climate in that they go through cycles over periods of time that could be in spans of many many human life spans. Some cycles are short, some are long and within each cycle there will be many short aberrations and variations such as typhoons, wars, floods, border disputes, droughts, diplomatic spats etc. Hence you have to not only look at it on a macro scale but also at the meso and micro scale simultaneously. So when we look at China (in this case) the macro scale is it's long history, all 2,500 years of it, the meso scale the last say 100 - 150 years and the micro scale the last 5 - 10 years. My point is we cannot look at one scale only and exclude the other two because they all impact upon and inform what we are looking at.
 

weaponwh

Member
China traditionally are land power similar to Russia, but now, it has vast interest oversea, most its resource are import from oversea. So its natural they want a blue navy to protect that interest, any nation would do it. As for ScS, there is no doubt china want dominated influence in the region, but not necessary claim entire region as territory. China main concern are still domestic, such as economy, if its economy slow/fail, people will become discontent, Xi power will weaken. War with major power these days are slim, due to globalism, and escalation to nuke(maybe), there is too much too lose on both side unlike before WWII.
I don't believe China will expand its land border now, with Russia north, most land border dispute are solved. its mainly concentrate on resource security oversea. There is no point looking at something 100years from now, we all be dead.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
China traditionally are land power similar to Russia, but now, it has vast interest oversea, most its resource are import from oversea. So its natural they want a blue navy to protect that interest, any nation would do it. As for ScS, there is no doubt china want dominated influence in the region, but not necessary claim entire region as territory.
How is China modernizing its navy? | ChinaPower Project
Right now, China has the second most capable navy in Asia after the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (海上自衛隊 or JMSDF). The JMSDF has a fleet of 154 ships and 346 aircraft and consists of approximately 45,800 personnel.

Broadsword: China's navy surpasses India's in both strength and doctrine
This rapid development and growth in tonnage has seen the PLA(N) surpassing the combined naval fleets of S. Koreans and the Indians in JUST one decade. The PLA(N) is building warships at an unprecedented rate. It now operates an aircraft carrier, 33 destroyers, 50 frigates, 41 corvettes, 109 missile boats and 75 submarines – a fleet three-to-five times the size of India’s. With its current ship building rate, it is only a matter of time (within the next 20 years) before the PLAN will not only surpass the JMSDF in ship tonnage and naval capability but also be a challenge for the USN - see above link on ChinaPower Project.

But the issue or concerns for littoral nations in the South China Sea isn’t about the development of self defence for China to protect its trade routes. Rather, the concern is with recent Chinese attempts to take (by force) maritime features or interfere with ‘freedom’ of navigation - which is well documented.

On the first issue, Viet Nam and Philippines has lost in this pushing contest around the Spratly Islands and in the Hai Yang Shi You 981 standoff. Earthrise Media, which analyzed satellite images by DigitalGlobe, of China’s building counts that spanned the years 2014 to 2017. Based on these data, 780 of these Chinese built structures can be found in the West Philippine Sea, the part of the South China Sea that is claimed by the Philippines. In particular, the Chinese structures can be found on the artificial islands constructed on the following reefs:
- Subi Reef, "now home to nearly 400 individual buildings," according to Reuters
- Mischief Reef and Fiery Cross Reef, that "each house almost 190 buildings and structures"

Further, in 2012, the China took control of Scarborough Shoal after a standoff with the Philippine Navy, since then China had effective control of the shoal.
- Woody Island, occupied by China since 1956, has undergone a major expansion of its runway and airport facilities, including a new concrete runway measuring 2,920 meters in length. Apart from the air defense systems that were recently uncovered, there is also significant Chinese military activity on other parts of Woody Island. A key feature of the base is its runway, which gives China the ability to send and receive combat aircraft. In November 2015, J-11 fighter jets were reportedly deployed to the base. China’s deployment of missiles and the rotation of J-11 fighters in Woody is a triggering factor that intensifies this security dilemma.
Eighty kilometers southwest of Woody, on Duncan Island (seized by China from Viet Nam in 1974) satellite images show landfill that has increased the size of the island.
- On 24th Mar 2016, the MMEA reported that it was monitoring 100 Chinese fishing vessels escorted by two Chinese Coast Guard ships encroaching Malaysian waters around the South Luconia Shoals in the South China Sea near the town of Miri in Sarawak, East Malaysia.

On the second, Australia, India, UK, France, and Japan have joined the Americans in pushing back against Chinese efforts to obstruct ‘freedom’ of navigation. In addition, the ‘wall of sand’ island building efforts by China and China’s imposition of ADIZ affecting commercial flight routes is a concern for Taiwan and Japan. For example, JASDF scrambles to identify unknown penetrating aircraft mainly from China and Russia have steadily risen from about 300 annually in 2012 to a peak of almost 1200 in 2016. In 2017, the number of scrambles declined to around 900: 55% against Chinese intruders and 43% Russian. A broadly similar ratio was held up in 2018 until the end of the third quarter; there were 758 scrambles, an average of almost three a day. Most Chinese aircraft intercepted by the Japanese are fighters; for Russia, intelligence collector aircraft are the most frequently encountered. In other words, China not only has competing claims with Taiwan and Japan, it conducts armed overflights. Since 2016, the JASDF has often launched four aircraft for each scramble. The front two aircraft undertake visual identification, while the two rear aircraft manage any additional intruders that join in and try to interfere. Scrambles now may also use E-2C airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft to coordinate the intercept, sanitise the airspace and avoid tactical surprise. The JASDF is taking its daily scrambles very seriously. Implications behind PLA warplanes' cruise around Taiwan island - China Military

The Japanese, the Indians and S. Koreans who have capable navies are not seen as a ‘threat’ to the littoral nations in the South China Sea in the same way that the PLA(N) and the Chinese coast guard have acted. In contrast, China has shown itself, through its actions that it interested in projecting power abroad.

From an individual member state's perspective, Beijing can be a useful counter-weight to Washington and vice-versa. Even treaty allies with the US in ASEAN (namely Thailand and the Philippines) have different interests, with regards to disputes in the South China Sea. Thailand does not have a maritime dispute with China. But China is also seen as a threat (especially to Viet Nam and the Philippines). The Sino-Thai friendship developed when China withdrew its support of the communist movement in Thailand, removing red threats from within and outside of the country. This bilateral relationship drew bloomed in the late 1970s when Bangkok needed Beijing's military and strategic support to cope with an expansionist Vietnam. Unlike the Philippines and Viet Nam, whose ties with China are strained over disputes in the South China Sea, Thailand and China have exceptionally close ties - with evolving military to military ties. China, Thailand kick off "Joint Strike-2019" counter-terrorism exercise - China Military

China parades new warship as navy celebrates 70th anniversary | DW | 23.04.2019
In the last 4 years since protecting civilians through the evacuation of its own citizens (and other foreign nationals) from Aden, the Chinese Navy has become even more capable.
China main concern are still domestic, such as economy, if its economy slow/fail, people will become discontent, Xi power will weaken. War with major power these days are slim, due to globalism, and escalation to nuke(maybe), there is too much too lose on both side unlike before WWII.
I also hope for peace but as the others have pointed out, the desire for trade alone does not prevent wars. We are doomed if we don’t learn from history. Having and developing military capability gives rise to the temptation to use it.
There is no point looking at something 100years from now, we all be dead.
But this is a discussion thread on defence and geo-politics which have long time frames.
 
Last edited:

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Hi Ngatimozat
History is a fascinating subject, and I think when you talk in the context of thousands of years its best to talk of regions in a broad sense. The political lines on the map change over the years as do the cultures , language, religion and what gives people a sense of self.
China ( The Region ) is no different but for the fact it has always been a big player because in global terms it has always supported a large population over the millennia
Over the centuries it has thrived......It has fractured....it has ebbed and flowed in power.......it has been conquered and been dominated both militarily and culturally and it has also done the same to others..........it is a fascinating place.....................from the days of Rome to the present this region has always been one to watch and this apply s to China the country today.
I'll very much keep in mind Chinas last 20 years of military development in the context of the previous 2000 years of the regions history.

Regards S
 

weaponwh

Member
China navy still lag far behind US, which is really their #1 aimed competitor. Globalism/Nuke significantly reduce the chance of war, especially major war. there might be small skirmish here and there, maybe proxy war, but a hot war like WWII between major power is much less likely today, not 0% but less likely compare to 1940s. Consider USSR and US have no economy ties, but they didn't go at each other like WWII. Today China economy is tie to the world, both US/China don't want war, both have too much too lose, the chance of major conflict are even less compare to USSR/US. Right now, China Aim is its economy, its still a developing country. No one know what china gonna be like in 100yrs, it might become democratic or something else, that just too far ahead. I think discuss China Geo-politics upto few decades is more realistic, anything more than that just for fun and "what if" scenario. just my 2c
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
China navy still lag far behind US, which is really their #1 aimed competitor. Globalism/Nuke significantly reduce the chance of war, especially major war. there might be small skirmish here and there, maybe proxy war, but a hot war like WWII between major power is much less likely today, not 0% but less likely compare to 1940s. Consider USSR and US have no economy ties, but they didn't go at each other like WWII. Today China economy is tie to the world, both US/China don't want war, both have too much too lose, the chance of major conflict are even less compare to USSR/US. Right now, China Aim is its economy, its still a developing country. No one know what china gonna be like in 100yrs, it might become democratic or something else, that just too far ahead. I think discuss China Geo-politics upto few decades is more realistic, anything more than that just for fun and "what if" scenario. just my 2c

Certainly agree that trying to crystal ball the future is enough of a challenge next month yet alone many decades ahead.
Also positive as to the interdependence of economies to see nations seeing the benefits of trade and commerce as a catalyst for mutual cooperation rather than the temptation of conflict.
That said I'm sure we could all bring up examples of this all going to pot in the past.
I don't particularly want to get into a conversation on which of China and the USA is the most powerful. It's not with an answer and certainly not what DT is about.
Two important points.
One - China has invested heavily in its maritime domain both with island building and defence capacity. Why?
Two - For all the military expeditionary power of the US, it only takes ONE political decision not to engage and overnight the balance of power in a region will shift dramatically.
Not wanting to discuss the right or wrong, but the USA was late to both WW1 and WW11. In the hypothetical, if she had engaged earlier or not at all this would of had a massive affect on the respective outcomes of each war. Currently the US has being engaged for the last couple of decades in conflict and has not really seen a good outcome for the price in blood and dollars. I can certainly see that the US may turn inward. Again not saying this is right or wrong but it will have an affect around the world
Domestic challenges and a generation that is war weary may very much reflect US foreign policy in the the early 2020's. Strong arguments to ease defence spending will no doubt come after Trump.( this term or next )
So, within a decade or even less, we may well see a big shift in geopolitical influence. For all the military power of the USA today and those who seek comfort under it's defence umbrella, some hard decisions will need to be made.
For Australia we certainly have a conundrum of relations both military and economic with two of the worlds big players.
I don't have the answers other than some big choices may be thrust upon us sooner rather than later.

In the context of current defence acquisitions and their time tables for roll out I can certainly see some area's of concern.
Therefore I can see some of the proposals in the DWP already looking a bit dated.
So whoever forms government next month may well be the very ones having to make some big decisions.
Time to review the 2016 DWP.............now!

Regards S
 

Traveller

Member
Stampede, for Point 1 I have posted a link to fairly simple pro-Chinese explanation of the island building. I'm not as trusting as the author in Chinese intents but the piece does raise some logical thoughts on how China can increase its legal share of the South Chine Sea.

Why is China Building Islands in the South China Sea?

A New York Times article which points out that other SCS nations have been island building and developing and they also have airfields. However none has matched the Chinese building capacity. This piece has some interesting timeline graphics demonstrating the speed of construction.

What China Has Been Building in the South China Sea
 
Top