War driven by resources is not a new phenomenon.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stryker001

Banned Member
Ismail Serageldin, a former senior vice-president of the World Bank, once wrote: 'The next World War will be over water.' China's green light for the project could indeed be considered a declaration of war by South Asia. (www.rediff.com/news/2003/oct/27spec.htm, October 23, 2003 )

The above statement still rings true as if China was not to take action to secure water supplies in the future a displacement would occur from Chinese territories. With the reduction of Monsoonal, rainfall that has been occurring these countries below India and China cannot sustain an increase in population.

Forcing a mass movement further down towards Indonesia and Australia. The result for Australia and Indonesia is the same regardless of the ethnic orgin of the displaced people. Indonesia is a frontline and buffer to such a problem and it would be in Australia’s interest to conduct joint operations to prevent Indonesia from being affected, specifically maritime operations.

Small releases of water downstream from China would only be conducted to reduce salinity levels, leaving those below without seasonal flows, and water that cannot be consumed causing the mass movement of people into South East Asia eventually hitting the Pacific Rim.

This would place serious strains on Australian and Indonesia’s military, but as proven with the boat people incursions in past years Australia is a clear final destination. Indonesia would face territories such as West Papua, West Timor being occupied by displaced people as a staging grounds once the Indonesian military move them on. Papua New Guinea and Timor Leste face similar threats.

The response from the incursions of displaced people will result in people moving down not up after the initial event depending on Russia. Part of the displacement will be diversified with movement of people to Russia then Europe and Iran could be affected as a gateway to the Middle East.

If Russia took a strategic decision and movement was allowed to occur via Russia, Europe would face serious consequences due to the influx of people. Russia as with South East Asia and Indonesia would be a transition point for displaced people. The UK would be able to secure England’s boarders from what is occurring in Europe and as the UK has its own currency, there is a certain degree of economic stability.

Clearly, in such a world humanitarian aid would be non-existent and the only reason aid is given is to prevent the mass movement of populations affecting neighboring countries. A compromise is not as easy to achieve as people envisage, China has a cap on its population as China’s need for water increases, meaning that any compromise would require a purge of Chinese citizens.

Therefore, via water security China could also act strategically with the mass displacement. If China and India fight a conventional war, a large displacement of people would also occur anyhow. As the origins of the rivers start in Chinese territories, they have every right to act on water security. A bit like a farmer diverting water and the next properties allocation being reduced.

A Similar topic to what Mick Keelty has previously stated although in reference to climate change and the Pacific Rim. If both events happen within a decade of each other, Australia would face chaos.

http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/brahmaputra.htm

A counter to mass displacement HAARP or the Russian equivalent + H5N1 then Thermobaric = Homeland Security.
 
Last edited:

exported_kiwi

New Member
I have to agree with this. I live in China and I know, first hand, that they're facing acute water problems. It's not that they don't have enough water really, but because they waste the water they have in inefficient farming techniques. The rest of the water is polluted and it's totally unsafe to drink tap water in any place in China, despite the hype that may be read from the CPC.
In my opinion, water, living space, arable land for cropping and other natural resources will become reasons for war. the trouble is that wars will probably destroy the real reason, the land/water etc, which makes said war(s) untenable and not a viable solution to the resource question. China'd be far better off, as would the world, developing more efficient use of the land and water they have, cleaning up the waterways, reclaiming the encroaching deserts and taking a leaf out of Israels book in this area.
 

Stryker001

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
!

Your right about Israel, I got an invitation to a water security conference that was held in Israel in 07, I would have liked to have gone. However, I had other commitments last year, that prevented that.
 

Cooch

Active Member
China'd be far better off, as would the world, developing more efficient use of the land and water they have, cleaning up the waterways, reclaiming the encroaching deserts and taking a leaf out of Israels book in this area.
One of the interesting implications of China's current level of economic growth, is that they may soon have the economic resources to actually do this.

Peter
 

exported_kiwi

New Member
Hi Peter, Chinas"s actually doing a fairly decent job of reclaiming some land up in the Gobi area. The big problem with the development here is that it's basically uncontrolled and this is, in itself causing massive pollution problems. I have yet to see, after 4 years of living around China, a clean waterway that isn't choked with domestic and industrial garbage. China will have a major water problem in the very near future if something's not done about it, and once the problem becomes acute, I wonder who China'll eye up as an easy target so they can get clean water resources to keep their huge population satiated. Technology can only go so far!

Stryker; shame about not being able to go to Israel, maybe next time huh?
 

Black Legion

New Member
Wars are an investment, they are far too expensive to be executed for philosophical reasons of right and wrong, they are indeed started for resources.
 

Stryker001

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
Cheers re: Israel

However, it will not be for that brief, I have ceased work on water security; I finished the report on ‘strategic implications of water security in Australia and the Pacific Rim on the DOAAI’

In the future, nations will launch strikes and incursions in regards to the level of carbon emissions being produced. It will start with a fines system, sanctions, then conflict.
 

Cooch

Active Member
Hi Peter, Chinas"s actually doing a fairly decent job of reclaiming some land up in the Gobi area. The big problem with the development here is that it's basically uncontrolled and this is, in itself causing massive pollution problems.<snip>
It's of interest that some chemical prices have risen rather significantly of late.
One of the reasons that glyphosate is in short supply is that a lot of the generic active ingredient is manufactured in China, and report has it that some plants are being shut down for modernisation that includes reduced emission of pollutants.

I don't blow China's trumpet, but it is interesting to see such things happening. Cleaning up your own nest is sometimes a better option than pinching someone else's, especially when not changing the way that you do business will only result in that resource becoming spoilt as well.

Hobson's choice, they have!

Cheers.......... Peter
 

Stryker001

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
The availability of oil on the international market, the rising cost of oil, the need to subsidies food supplies, the reduction of carbon omissions for the Olympic games all have an effect on the PRC military modernization program….the black money that is unaccounted for. The anti-US coalition have harmed their ally in China, while their primary target was the US.


Geopolitical events affect the decisions that are made.
It is not something the US telegraphs and it works on a geological timeframe.
:nutkick
 

exported_kiwi

New Member
Well, China has a huge nest to clean up and it's not gonna be easy! I live in Guangzhou and sometimes, the air pollution is so bad, you can't see 500mtrs ahead, let alone further. This is bad because it adds respiratory diseases to Chinas already formidable health problems! Everyone here seems to think that technology is the "magic" that'll clean China up, but I seriously doubt it, sadly!
 

Stryker001

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
The parallel in regards to Tibet and resources, the Dalai Lama does not have control over young Tibetans, your intelligence is wrong. The CIA stopped covert operations under Nixon, Tibetan freedom fighters have not be been backed by a State agency since the Nixon decree.

The PRC will have to conduct ethnic cleansing, as in future uprising will be more violent. Example the access road will be blow up. You can quickly rebuild it, but it allows a window of opportunity for targeted killings of officials in Tibet, major projects target by sabotage. Tibet will be unsafe for travelers.
The Tibetan freedom fighters will gain access to weaponry in the future. When such brutality is inflicted on people, monks will be willing to conduct covert suicide operations.

The PRC have infiltrated all Tibetan groups internationally, they could have start it themselves.

I think a Tibetan insurgency would have kicked off in 2015-16; they have gone to early.

It is linked to resources as they want their land and the land is resources.

Deceit
Yeah a full blow insurgency was meant to start in 2008; instead, it is a low intensity conflict.
I should add that no Chinese people or people of Chinese decent are allowed to be attacked on foreign soil.
 
Last edited:

Stryker001

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
Mod edit:

What's the point of this thread? It's not yet a page long and hasn't been on topic since it was opened.

Thread's closed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top