Second Cold War

[Rish]

Last I checked, Mexico's major air combat forces consisted of a relative handful of F-5s, Hinds, and a few hundred AFVs. Excepting the 'illegal immigrant terrorist' concept and the drug war, it's frankly not a major threat to US interests.

Japan has the ability to be a thorn in the side of US power-projection efforts in the west Pacific, but their antiship capabilities are a credible threat (Type 93s, ASM-1 and ASM-2 carried on F-1, F-2, and F-4EJ Kai aircraft) but any fixed bases (and their antimissile systems) could possibly be overwhelmed by large quantities of BGM-109 cruise missiles or conventional strikes by F-35C or F/A-18E/F aircraft using a variety of weapons to damage or destroy runways, aircraft shelters, and aircraft in the open.

Turkey is armed with 3rd-generation and late 4th-generation aircraft and 1950s/1960s-vintage MBTs, with a handful of Leopard 2A4s. It's not a huge threat to a well-equipped force.

I think he was refering to the collapse/destabilization of the mexican government through the drug wars and the rise of a failed state in americas backyard. I think it would be a significant threat to america if such a senario played out and could result in migrations from mexico into neighboring countries and wars for power on the N. American continent.

For Turkey- he may have been refering to a shift in Turkey that would result in its backing of Iran and its move away from the NATO political block. this could be an important issue for the US as it would see a rebalancing of power in the mideast in which a relatively advanced NATO nation is now on the side of Iran and theres a major shift in policy towards Israel. the process is already occuring..

 

[ngatimozart]

There are 15 languages spoken in China and that is just the major ones. They are each as different from one another as English is from German or French or Greek of Latin. China is an old civilisation, it spawned Genghis Khan who fought his way across all of Asia and Russia to Vienna only stopping because he over extended himself. It has the largest population of any country in the world and for Americans who think that China needs democracy reinstated it never has experienced democracy in its long history. Democracy is as foreign to China as the cheese would be to a martian. The one thing China has a lot of besides people is patience.

After the death of Mao Zedong and the overthrow of the Gang of Four within the PRC a momentous change happened. After he was rehabilitated and returned to the Politburo, Deng Xao Peng reformed the economy, the result of which we see the today. An inspired move because it has bought great wealth and change to China. However the reforms were only economic, not political and given that the PRC was then, and still is, a Marxist Leninist state, Deng would have signed his own death warrant by advocating political change. He didn't want political change just economic change because he knew that if there was no change to the Maoist economics, the state would wither and die along with millions of its citizens. All of the veterans of the Long March may have departed this world, but their political ideology, government structures and methodologies are still currently in force. The Politburo do not tolerate change easily and they have far less tolerance of anything that threatens their grip on the helm of state - their grip on power.

Now in the 21st Century the PRC has a number of issues that it has to face. A burgeoning young wealthy, traveled and educated middle class who are tech savvy and want more than just the standard Party line. The PRC also wants to replace the US $ as a major trading currency, but before it can do that it has to float its' currency. Politically that will be unacceptable to the Politburo. Whilst it would make economic sense, it would be political suicide and probably personally fatal for them to agree to it. Rival factions within the Central Committee would see it as giving control of their treasure and national sovereignty to foreign devils. Remember that the Politburo and the Party do not tolerate departure from the party line and failure.

Already alluded to by DarthAmerica are the workers wanting a greater share of the profits. Because of the economic reforms there has been a marked internal population migration from rural areas to rapidly increasing urban spaces. This migration exacerbates pressures on existing infrastructures, social and political systems. Resources are having to be diverted from rural areas to support the burgeoning urban areas. Rural areas still have a very low GDP with a real possibility of most rural populations living below the poverty line. So there exists two sets of discontented sections, although highly disparate, of the population. How the Politburo deals with this set of problems will be of great interest considering the constrictive dialectic they work within.

Another cause for concern is the PLA. Unique amongst all of the worlds major militaries it has an extensive economic empire as well as being funded by the central government. By convention the Secretary of the Communist Party is also the Chairman of the Central Military Commission (I am doing this from memory so might not have the terminology right), Chairman of the Politburo and Head of State. So in theory the PLA should answer to the Politburo (and by default Party) through both the Central Military Commission and the Political Officers within the PLA. But the trappings and baubles that are gathered by having access to wealth, generated by ones own economic empire without the oversight of ones masters, must surely tempt even the most zealous and politically reliable officers and political cadres within the PLA.

If you are going to discuss a US - Chinese cold war then one should understand a bit about China and not look at it through the lens of a western mind set. If any have been to a military War College or similar they should have read the Sun Tzu Ping Fa, very old but just as relevant today. Don't expect China to act the same way a western nation would to any given set of circumstances.

 

[The American7]

I highly doubt that we, the U.S., would ever have open military confrontation with China in the next 30 years or so. There would be too much at stake. We are dependent on China for a great deal of our "common" manufacturing (plastic products, normal consumer goods, etc.), and while that is unrelated to our military or federal spending for the most part, it is still capital that we need. The only rational way I could see the U.S. "dealing" with China would be on a strictly economic basis. I would imagine that we would have to slowly lessen our economic ties with them until we reach a point of almost complete separation.

And then we strike :ar15:

if china were to ever become a military threat to the US, (which it wont) we would immediately deal with them through both economic, international, and military influences. The world knows that while the chinese may inflict a solid 50-120,000 casualties, (if that) in a full blown war, they simpily cant match the US in any form of military technology:ar15

 

[Mosamania]

Actually even though they are technologically not as advanced as the USA they still have alot of guns to go around plus they have compulsory military service for all graduates meaning the army they will assemble will be one of the biggest the world has ever and will ever see.

the USA would run out of bullets before they can actually damage them on a strategic level.

 

[Chino]

The one thing China has a lot of besides people is patience.

Maybe in the past but I wouldn't put "Patience" & "Chinese" together in any context.

Don't believe me, try driving or even simply crossing the road anywhere in China.

Perhaps the better word is "resilience", or "persistence" (along with the all positive and negative connotations they bring).

 

[ngatimozart]

if china were to ever become a military threat to the US, (which it wont) we would immediately deal with them through both economic, international, and military influences. The world knows that while the chinese may inflict a solid 50-120,000 casualties, (if that) in a full blown war, they simpily cant match the US in any form of military technology:ar15

Me thinks you overestimate the capabilities of the US and under underestimate the Chinese in any US - Sino conflict. First of all the US no longer has the abilities to cause any economic harm to the Chinese. The US debt at the moment is US$14.2 Trillion. The current Chinese surplus is US$305.4 billion and from what I read, a fair amount of the US debt is owed to China, so that kinda shoots the economic attempts to threaten China in the foot. In fact if China wanted too, it could effectively cripple the US just by calling in all of the US debt it holds. The USG would have to liquify a lot of assets to pay the debt. Granted a lot of the debt is commercial but the USG would still be pressured to pay.

Internationally, at present the US has allies, friends and "friends". Again it comes to pressure and economics. For example China is a large trading partner of my country, NZ. We even have a free trade agreement with them, the only country at present to do so. But by de facto so does Australia because of the Closer Economic Relationship between NZ & Australia. (What this means for an Australian business if they are sharp enough, they can set up a small base in NZ and export to China and because of the FTA between NZ & China bypass Chinese import tariffs etc.) China is a very important market to both NZ and Australia so both nations would have to weigh their own economic relationships with China against any gains supporting a US move against China.

Technology is not the be all to end all or the holy grail. It does give a lot of advantages but it is expensive and the more advanced the more expensive. In fact I would hazard a guess in saying the the cost of technology is exponential when plotted against level of complexity. But one thing must be remembered; what science can discover and devise, science can replicate. That is the basis of science, so the same with technology. What one person can devise another can copy at some stage.

Finally read the previous post I wrote about China. That may give you some insight. Also welcome to the forum and any ideas you have are most welcome but avoid one liners because the mods have no sense of humour about them. And politics is not tolerated by the mods either. That said enjoy and participate.

 

[ngatimozart]

Maybe in the past but I wouldn't put "Patience" & "Chinese" together in any context.

Don't believe me, try driving or even simply crossing the road anywhere in China.

Perhaps the better word is "resilience", or "persistence" (along with the all positive and negative connotations they bring).

There is a large Chinese population in Christchurch so they would fit in well because Christchurch drivers aren't known for their tolerance or patience either. I read somewhere that Kiwi drivers are supposed to be the most aggressive in the world. Yes I think you are right "resilience" and "persistence" would be better suited terms. Thanks.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Me thinks you overestimate the capabilities of the US and under underestimate the Chinese in any US - Sino conflict. First of all the US no longer has the abilities to cause any economic harm to the Chinese.

This is a DRAMATIC misunderstanding. Why do you suppose the Chinese are so aggressively developing anti access systems and blue water capabilities? Have you read about the Chinese position on the Straits of Malacca? Do you know why they call it a "dilemma"?

-DA

 

[Chino]

Okay, my view of China is that it's current economic growth is unsustainable. ... the inevitable crash.
-DA

Anyone with with half an opinion can say this or that is not sustainable. Because nothing ever is.

With many of it's billions of people I'm poverty, I see huge potential for fragmentation going forward.

You must've read too much TIME or Newsweek magazines in the early 2000. They were predicting widespread rebellion due to poverty etc. They also alleged that China's energy crisis meant that Shanghai was suffering at least one economically costly major blackout every month. I was already living in Shanghai and this "news" was absolute fabrication.

They were feeding the western readers in 2002 what the readers wanted: reassurances that China will fail. They (the publications) have since changed their tune.

IMO, China is nowhere near invincible or infallible but it is silly to form such extreme misconceptions like yours. Lesser countries have chugged along without "inevitable crashes or fragmentation" for hundred of years. Why China? - with its thousands of years of history of surviving through good and hard times?

 

[DarthAmerica]

Anyone with with half an opinion can say this or that is not sustainable. Because nothing ever is.



You must've read too much TIME or Newsweek magazines in the early 2000. They were predicting widespread rebellion due to poverty etc. They also alleged that China's energy crisis meant that Shanghai was suffering at least one economically costly major blackout every month. I was already living in Shanghai and this "news" was absolute fabrication.

They were feeding the western readers in 2002 what the readers wanted: reassurances that China will fail. They (the publications) have since changed their tune.

IMO, China is nowhere near invincible or infallible but it is silly to form such extreme misconceptions like yours. Lesser countries have chugged along without "inevitable crashes or fragmentation" for hundred of years. Why China? - with its thousands of years of history of surviving through good and hard times?

Chino,

I don't read Time or Newsweek. I do know that China doesn't create much of anything the world can do without. I also know that the things they make that are created elsewhere are made there because China has a surplus of CHEAP LABOR. What do you suppose happens when China's labor and currency is suddenly made not so cheap? China IS NOT a lesser country and several billion unhappy unemployed people are as much an existential threat as the D-5.

I think before you brush off the reality you should come with something a little better than China is old ect.

-DA

 

[ngatimozart]

This is a DRAMATIC misunderstanding. Why do you suppose the Chinese are so aggressively developing anti access systems and blue water capabilities? Have you read about the Chinese position on the Straits of Malacca? Do you know why they call it a "dilemma"?

-DA

It is not a "dramatic misunderstanding". I come from a farming area and we had a saying that usually applied to teenage males and sailors. An old ram and a young ram were standing by an open gate that lead into a paddock of ewes (female sheep). The young ram said "lets run in and do a couple." The old ram looked him up and down and quietly said "boy you've got a lot to learn. Lets walk in and do the lot." The point of that that story is why rush in and achieve only a small prize when with proper husbanding of resources, in the rams case energy, you can gain a lot.

Do the Chinese have a dilemma in the Straits of Malacca? and if so what is it? The reason they are only now developing a blue water navy is because now they have the resources to do it. With regard to denying access you forget that the PRC is a one party state which does not tolerate any political opposition real or perceived. Americans seem to have this idea that all peoples of the world yearn for democracy. Well, sorry to disappoint but that argument my just prove to be a fallacy. If you remember the Tianamin Square protests in June of 1989 apparently a minority of the protesters called for democracy. But why? Because for all its history China has never experienced democracy - it is an alien concept to them. Secondly is the American version of democracy the best example available. I would argue no, because in my country I actually enjoy more freedoms than US citizens do. The French, Germans, Japanese all have different variations which may or may not be better.

One argument that the Chinese would put forward as validation for building a blue water navy is that they have a potentially hostile force close to their borders with a large navy. I would have to agree with that logic and the same with the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile crisis. The US got very upset about Soviet nuke being based in Cuba yet the US had exactly the same capability in Turkey which bordered the Soviet Union. So I can see no logical grounds for your being strident about China gaining blue water capabilities.

Is your reaction to this emotive? Or is because it is seen as a threat to US hegemony as the marxists would label it? Going back to the Straits of Malacca the PLA(N) would only have to skirt around the bottom of Indonesia through the Timor Sea across the top of Australia to gain access to the India Ocean. It is a bit longer but doable and China and Australia don't have any issues at the moment. In fact the Royal Australian Navy was doing live firing exercises with the PLA(N) very recently.

Don't worry I am not a supporter of China but an outsider who is watching this with great interest. I am just trying to strip the emotion and jingoism out of this and look at the issue coldly and clearly. I have an interest in China having studied the country and at present I am wondering what nation will replace the US as the next super power.

 

[DarthAmerica]

It is not a "dramatic misunderstanding". I come from a farming area and we had a saying that usually applied to teenage males and sailors. An old ram and a young ram were standing by an open gate that lead into a paddock of ewes (female sheep). The young ram said "lets run in and do a couple." The old ram looked him up and down and quietly said "boy you've got a lot to learn. Lets walk in and do the lot." The point of that that story is why rush in and achieve only a small prize when with proper husbanding of resources, in the rams case energy, you can gain a lot.

Do the Chinese have a dilemma in the Straits of Malacca? and if so what is it? The reason they are only now developing a blue water navy is because now they have the resources to do it. With regard to denying access you forget that the PRC is a one party state which does not tolerate any political opposition real or perceived. Americans seem to have this idea that all peoples of the world yearn for democracy. Well, sorry to disappoint but that argument my just prove to be a fallacy. If you remember the Tianamin Square protests in June of 1989 apparently a minority of the protesters called for democracy. But why? Because for all its history China has never experienced democracy - it is an alien concept to them. Secondly is the American version of democracy the best example available. I would argue no, because in my country I actually enjoy more freedoms than US citizens do. The French, Germans, Japanese all have different variations which may or may not be better.

One argument that the Chinese would put forward as validation for building a blue water navy is that they have a potentially hostile force close to their borders with a large navy. I would have to agree with that logic and the same with the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile crisis. The US got very upset about Soviet nuke being based in Cuba yet the US had exactly the same capability in Turkey which bordered the Soviet Union. So I can see no logical grounds for your being strident about China gaining blue water capabilities.

Is your reaction to this emotive? Or is because it is seen as a threat to US hegemony as the marxists would label it? Going back to the Straits of Malacca the PLA(N) would only have to skirt around the bottom of Indonesia through the Timor Sea across the top of Australia to gain access to the India Ocean. It is a bit longer but doable and China and Australia don't have any issues at the moment. In fact the Royal Australian Navy was doing live firing exercises with the PLA(N) very recently.

Don't worry I am not a supporter of China but an outsider who is watching this with great interest. I am just trying to strip the emotion and jingoism out of this and look at the issue coldly and clearly. I have an interest in China having studied the country and at present I am wondering what nation will replace the US as the next super power.

I understand you want to debate and I can appreciate that. However you are not operating on a full set of facts. Please read the following in full before we go any further and waste each others time.

The Jamestown Foundation: China’s “Malacca Dilemma”

Do you know how long it takes to build a navy and more specifically COMPETENT Admirals?

-DA

 

[ngatimozart]

I understand you want to debate and I can appreciate that. However you are not operating on a full set of facts. Please read the following in full before we go any further and waste each others time.

The Jamestown Foundation: China’s “Malacca Dilemma”

Do you know how long it takes to build a navy and more specifically COMPETENT Admirals?

-DA

Thanks for the link. I will have a read. My thinking is that it will take the Chinese probably at least 2 generations before they achieve competence in blue water operations. But that depends on how many resources they dedicate to achieving the knowledge that only comes with experience. Secondly a lot will depend on how much freedom of action that they will delegate to Fleet and Task Force Commanders and down individual CO's. Thats a political decision and I don't think the Politburo would like to delegate very much authority at all, so then whilst strategically Politburo control wouldn't hamper much, tactically it would be a millstone around the Force Commanders neck. Personally I think the days of the carrier battle fleet may be becoming numbered as it eventually will, just like the battleship before it. Again it comes down to technology. It's just a matter of when.

Edited in later: Thanks for the Jamestown link, I've had a bit of a nose around the site and it does have some interesting material in it.

 

[Chino]

Chino,

I don't read Time or Newsweek. I do know that China doesn't create much of anything the world can do without. I also know that the things they make that are created elsewhere are made there because China has a surplus of CHEAP LABOR. What do you suppose happens when China's labor and currency is suddenly made not so cheap? China IS NOT a lesser country and several billion unhappy unemployed people are as much an existential threat as the D-5.

I think before you brush off the reality you should come with something a little better than China is old ect.

-DA

Put on your reading glasses and re-read my the first line of my post.

Any fool can come up with predictions etc. My only problem is that you stop short of putting a date to your predictions so we can all come in on that day and see if you were right or you're just working with half a glass.

 

[ngatimozart]

I understand you want to debate and I can appreciate that. However you are not operating on a full set of facts. Please read the following in full before we go any further and waste each others time.

The Jamestown Foundation: China’s “Malacca Dilemma”

Do you know how long it takes to build a navy and more specifically COMPETENT Admirals?

-DA

I have read the Jamestown paper and the Malacca Straits are a choke point not just for the Chinese but for all of Asia, Australasia and Polynesia. However that doesn't really change my point of view because I had already factored that in plus India, the FPDA and other various pacts & forces within Asia, Australasia and the Middle East.

My opinion is that the US is in decline and will be replaced at some stage. The US military already has realised that it no longer "can go it alone". The politicians just need to realise that. Unfortunately for militaries in western democracies, politicians have an attention span that lasts one electoral cycle and usually the military personnel are the ones who eventually pay if the polis stuff it up. All of us who have served in uniform know this. Empires like the British, Roman, Soviet, Chinese dynasties etc., all have a cycle of growth, consolidation, stasis and eventual decline due to reduction in political and economic momentum, some longer lasting than others.

The US can not afford a second cold war nor an economic war especially with China. The world cannot afford an economic war - we are still recovering from the 2008 economic crunch caused by massive bank fraud in New York. But the US is going to have to deal with China and treating China as an equal would be a good place to start. Secondly, as I've already said technology can be replicated - it just takes time and resources of which China has both. Thirdly, you cannot assess China using western ideals or cultural values because it is like using dogs as an analogy for analysing cows. The Chinese are a totally different culture and have different moral values to the west.

Finally a personal comment. We try to make points by using valid propositions and concise conclusions, also known as logical and rational arguments. Shouting in a conversation is considered impolite in some quarters. I am quite willing to debate over many subjects but I prefer the logical rational objective approach rather than the subjective emotional debate. It is a personal idiosychronicity of mine.

 

[brian00]

From what i understand, China is investing a lot in Burma, including port facilities and an oil pipeline, to circumvent the Malacca strait.

I think the thread titles description of the beginnings of a cold war is apt, insufficient supply of important commodities is the main driver behind this. Also other factors such as US military encroachment into Chinas traditional back yard (Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan), whilst embargoing arms sales has created ill feeling. Some conflict has already occurred in the cyber area, but these are still early days and China is not yet able to match the US in military or diplomatic influence

 

[DarthAmerica]

Put on your reading glasses and re-read my the first line of my post.

Any fool can come up with predictions etc. My only problem is that you stop short of putting a date to your predictions so we can all come in on that day and see if you were right or you're just working with half a glass.

Chino,

I'm sorry but putting dates on things like this is not how professional defense analysis/threat assessment works. China is a powder keg and will reach the point were domestic unrest ignites over the next 20 years. The results will be a catastrophe and the process is ALREADY in progress and has been for the last 20 years. China in it's current incarnation is not going to last. You'll take care to note the IED attacks there last week. There isn't going to be a "we can all come in and see" moment. You need to be seeing it now or be just as shocked as people were when the Berlin Wall fell or on 9/11/01...

-DA

 

[DarthAmerica]

I have read the Jamestown paper and the Malacca Straits are a choke point not just for the Chinese but for all of Asia, Australasia and Polynesia. However that doesn't really change my point of view because I had already factored that in plus India, the FPDA and other various pacts & forces within Asia, Australasia and the Middle East.

My opinion is that the US is in decline and will be replaced at some stage. The US military already has realised that it no longer "can go it alone". The politicians just need to realise that. Unfortunately for militaries in western democracies, politicians have an attention span that lasts one electoral cycle and usually the military personnel are the ones who eventually pay if the polis stuff it up. All of us who have served in uniform know this. Empires like the British, Roman, Soviet, Chinese dynasties etc., all have a cycle of growth, consolidation, stasis and eventual decline due to reduction in political and economic momentum, some longer lasting than others.

The US can not afford a second cold war nor an economic war especially with China. The world cannot afford an economic war - we are still recovering from the 2008 economic crunch caused by massive bank fraud in New York. But the US is going to have to deal with China and treating China as an equal would be a good place to start. Secondly, as I've already said technology can be replicated - it just takes time and resources of which China has both. Thirdly, you cannot assess China using western ideals or cultural values because it is like using dogs as an analogy for analysing cows. The Chinese are a totally different culture and have different moral values to the west.

Finally a personal comment. We try to make points by using valid propositions and concise conclusions, also known as logical and rational arguments. Shouting in a conversation is considered impolite in some quarters. I am quite willing to debate over many subjects but I prefer the logical rational objective approach rather than the subjective emotional debate. It is a personal idiosychronicity of mine.

If you think choke points on SLOCs impact China no worse than they do the other regional navies and the USN then you are mistaken. Also the USA is no where near a decline but rather is leaving all other potential military and economic challengers in the dust and the rate of change is accelerating even more. This has nothing to do with morals but rather geography. The Chinese are nowhere near "equal" to the United States militarily or economically. A stroke of the pen by the US Congress could devastate the Chinese in unimaginable ways and they know that. They also know there is zero hope of making any kind of military challenge to the US outside of mainland China. They are little more than a cheap place to manufacture goods that need to be purchased in the USA. Goods that could easily be made elsewhere. There is no market that could replace the volume of product consumed by Americans for the Chinese.

If you guys want to talk cold war then you should start to look at the Russians and then the Japanese and Turks...

-DA

 

[Feanor]

Russia and Turkey? You really think those two are on the verge of some sort of confrontation?

 

[DarthAmerica]

Russia and Turkey? You really think those two are on the verge of some sort of confrontation?

No. I think that the USA and Russia will be on the verge of confrontation in the near future and through the 2020's. Call it Cold War 2. That will last until Russia's demographic issues and decreased reliance on fossil fuels pushes them aside. Shortly after the Japanese and Turks will be the nations that we will be dealing with.

-DA