Second Cold War

[Kirkzzy]

I think it is no longer a matter of if, but a when for a Second Cold War. That isn't to say we might actually be in one already. Even with promising budget cuts the Obama administration has still increased US defence expenditure to 708 billion dollars and China's continues to rise at 12.7% this year. Although it is important to note in this article I found it mentioned "Defence will drop from 708 billion dollars in the fiscal year 2011, which ends in September, to 671 billion dollars in 2012."

And tbh it doesn't even have to involve the US anymore, although China would most likely be involved as this century is pretty much "The Rise of China". It could be China and India (plus their allies). Focused on South Asia and the arms race going on at the moment.

Any thoughts on where the early 21st century will take us?

EDIT: Could a mod move this to the Geo-Strategic Defense forum.

 

[Feanor]

What exactly do you want to discuss? You made a number of categorical statements, provided little to no support, seemingly assuming everyone agrees with them. If that's the case, what's there to talk about? And if it's not, then why not provide some support for your opinion?

 

[Kirkzzy]

What exactly do you want to discuss? You made a number of categorical statements, provided little to no support, seemingly assuming everyone agrees with them. If that's the case, what's there to talk about? And if it's not, then why not provide some support for your opinion?

"Any thoughts on where the early 21st century will take us?"

Would you prefer the thread to be called predictions of the early 21st century? Or thoughts on rivalry between nations in 21st century?

 

[Feanor]

That's awfully broad... do you want to talk about European nations, the EU, and their immediate geo-political surroundings? Or the Middle East? Or East Asia? Or maybe Sub-Saharan Africa? When you say something along the lines "where will the 21st century take us" after claiming that a second cold war is imminent between China and someone else (a question you leave open) I'm really left with nothing to say.

 

[Feros Ferio]

I think it is no longer a matter of if, but a when for a Second Cold War. That isn't to say we might actually be in one already. Even with promising budget cuts the Obama administration has still increased US defence expenditure to 708 billion dollars and China's continues to rise at 12.7% this year. Although it is important to note in this article I found it mentioned "Defence will drop from 708 billion dollars in the fiscal year 2011, which ends in September, to 671 billion dollars in 2012."

And tbh it doesn't even have to involve the US anymore, although China would most likely be involved as this century is pretty much "The Rise of China". It could be China and India (plus their allies). Focused on South Asia and the arms race going on at the moment.

Any thoughts on where the early 21st century will take us?

EDIT: Could a mod move this to the Geo-Strategic Defense forum.

If you are seeking some focus here, may I suggest taking a look at India and China. I could be way off here but from the cursory reading I've been doing in the last little while, it looks as though one could make the case for an arms race between these two rising powers. Both are pursuing stealth fighter technology, both are working on various warhead delivery systems, both are pursuing aircraft carriers, etc... leaving one with the impression that neither wants to be left behind.

As far as thoughts on where the 21st century will take us, I truly hope this doesnt even become what the Cold War was (i.e. proxy wars going on all over the place, and coming incredibly close to a nuclear exchange). While the Cold War was relatively bloodless, compared to other wars, it could have been much worse (personally, I don't even believe the Cold War should be called as such. General Rupert Smith put it best when he said that it wasn't a war, but merely an extended confrontation). The potential for destruction and loss of life, if these two heavily populated juggernauts decided to go at it, boggles the mind.

Could an extended confrontation occur between these two? Yes (I believe one already does to a lesser degree over the Aksai Chin border area, and the border of Arunachal Pradesh). Will it escalate? I don't see an actual war, at this point, as likely because both sides would probably lose so much, it would be a victory in name only. India and China already fought a war anyway, in which China overran much of India's defensive line. They then declared a ceasefire and withdrew. Wouldn't it be much easier for them to just have their respective spheres of influence and occasionaly bully some smaller nations?

Queu Feanor's verbal riposte?

 

[Mosamania]

Right now a Cold War is ongoing between Iran and Saudi Arabia the no two can argue about it being the most threatning cold war right now.

Since if a war was to break out Oil will go to historical prices and the world economy will pretty much collapse.

 

[Swampfox157]

I personally see India and Japan as the two biggest regional buffers against China, as both are US-friendly and operate (or have the potential to operate) US-made equipment. If we actually see something along the lines of an east-Asia Cold War, those two countries would likely fill the role of NATO, as would smaller US allies in the region. As for proxy wars, India vs. Pakistan. Finally, any thoughts on where Russia would fit into this one? They're friendly(ish) to both India and China (although they have not seemed too happy with the Reds for stealing tech from the Flanker and building unlicensed copies, and China is getting cut out of the faster road to 5g stealth aircraft b deciding to go with the J-20) and there are a huge variety of actions that could occur.

It's a fascinating topic. I'd like to see some insight on this one as it develops.

 

[H Nelson]

Redefine Cold

We may want to change our paradigm of 'Cold War'. In the good old days it was simple, as Maj Kong put it: 'This is it, Nuclear Combat toe-to-toe with the Ruskies'. It was a Bi-Polar world, two nuclear powers. Now we have a waning superpower, a near-third world former superpower with nuclear weapons, a rising Juggernaut with nukes, and several other states that probably have nukes.

This will not be our parents Cold War. It will be a cold war of industry and technology. A cold war for the best and brightest, for scientists and engineers, . Americans will lose their heads when/if China outpaces our development. When they put a man on the moon, and start a space station, and invent the next iPhone, and manufacture transparent aluminium, it's going to hit the fan.

It may not be the edge of your seat, this is it, 'you have no idea how close we came' type of cold war; but a dark, brooding, jealous type of cold war. One where Americans sit helpless and wonder what went wrong.

 

[Swampfox157]

China has to be dealt with in one way or another. A threat that large to US interests can NOT be allowed to remain a threat. I'm unsure if the solution to the PRC is going to be economic or military, but I can guarantee you that this is going to be the next "big one." In my opinion, the US needs to be closely analyzing the downfall of the USSR and NOT LET IT HAPPEN TO US. There is potentially a lot to be gleaned from analyzing this information that could identify general trends and ide tify their solutions (if any) and how this would fit into the modern world.

 

[Feanor]

I don't think that China is the threat to US influence. I think the fact is that the world can not remain mono-polar, regardless, be it China, India, the EU, or a resurgent Russia. Or as it happens right now all of the above. I don't think that Schmittean political thinking is a good approach nowadays. Not to mention, it isn't the approach being used by actual decision makers.

 

[Falling_Potatoe]

China has to be dealt with in one way or another. A threat that large to US interests can NOT be allowed to remain a threat. I'm unsure if the solution to the PRC is going to be economic or military, but I can guarantee you that this is going to be the next "big one." In my opinion, the US needs to be closely analyzing the downfall of the USSR and NOT LET IT HAPPEN TO US. There is potentially a lot to be gleaned from analyzing this information that could identify general trends and ide tify their solutions (if any) and how this would fit into the modern world.

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:

 

[STURM]

China has to be dealt with in one way or another. A threat that large to US interests can NOT be allowed to remain a threat. I'm unsure if the solution to the PRC is going to be economic or military, but I can guarantee you that this is going to be the next "big one."

And why exactly is China a threat to the U.S.? Or are you choosing to view things solely from a U.S. prespective? The last time I checked, China has not been at war or invaded anyone for quite some time now. Unlike the U.S., China does not have a military presence in dozens of foreign countries and it's naval ships are not patrolling the world's oceans........ Bear in mind that countries close to China's sea borders are either close U.S. allies or partners - Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, etc.

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.

How can U.S. dealing with China be strictly on economic issues when both have overlapping security concerns in the Asia Pacific region and that the economic interests of both countries are already closely interwined?

And then we strike :ar15:

Strike at whom exactly and for what?

 

[Feanor]

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:

Sure. But first you'd have to find a way to back all those unback collar currency reserves they hold. And a way to fill the big hole in consumer goods. In fact the amount of tampering you'd have to do with the economy would be huge, with the results questionable at best.

 

[DarthAmerica]

I think the USA will see the following major military challengers going forward.

Near Term- Russia and possibly Iran

Long Term- Japan, Mexico and possibly Turkey

Notice I didn't mention China or India. I also omitted what I considered nuisance threats such as N Korea and similar irritants. Way too numerous and unpredictable and when they occur they represent non existential threats.

Regards,
DA

 

[Feanor]

Why did you not mention India or China? Because they're too long term, before they get to a point where they are a challenge?

 

[DarthAmerica]

Why did you not mention India or China? Because they're too long term, before they get to a point where they are a challenge?

This is my opinion so I'm asking everyone in advance not to be upset and if you are you promise to wait until sometime next year...

Okay, my view of China is that it's current economic growth is unsustainable. It's mostly based on export of goods manufactured locally but designed elsewhere. Moreover, even as it gains expertise, like the Japanese economy in the 1990's it's dependencies are linked to foriegn markets. Unlike the Japanese however China doesn't have the national unity to survive the inevitable crash. With many of it's billions of people I'm poverty, it's huge military is mostly focused on internal security. You can only separate the haves and the have nots by force and censorship for so long. I see huge potential for fragmentation going forward. With regards to military matters J-20s, Varyag and DF-21s, yes they are impressive but it takes many decades to develop the doctrine necessary to make it a sustainable threat. Organizations like the USN don't just appear overnight and ultimately that's what they face. On land the geography contains them so that isn't a true threat IMHO. Let's be honest, the USA can with the stroke of a pen cripple the PRC economically and no other markets exist that can make up the lack of US business. The USA on the other hand and others can use any number of developing nations for labor in the absence of the Chinese. Speaking of which as China grows the people doing that labor are going to want more and unless the government deals with that then they will induce the internal security issues. If it does then the price of Chinese cheap labor increases and iPods and other goodies will simply be made elsewhere. It's damned if they do, damned if they don't.

India is also politically fractious, geographically contained and once the GWOT fades into history I expect the USA to cancel out India via Pakistan. The more support the USA gives to Pakistan the more India will need to focus on it's Airforce, Army and nukes to counter putting the Indian Navy at the back of the list of priorities. Finally, the IJN, OOPS!!! I meant the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force will begin to grow in order to secure energy security and bottle up the sea in the Indian ocean. I think the Fukashima disaster will speed this up as Japan has been reminded very painfully once again of it's vulnerability due to lack of commodities and dependence on sea lanes. I'm not saying India won't be significant just that I don't see it rising beyond being a regional player rather than global competitor.

It is the way of things...

-DA

 

[Feanor]

In regards to India I beg to differ. If the US reduces contacts with India it will lose a huge and growing market. It will not however stop India from continuing to expand capability. Short of exporting the JSF to Pakistan, they will have nothing that can counter the PAK-FA. As is, I'm not sure their F-16s are adequate to handle the MKIs India is fielding.

Betting on Pakistan is a losing bet, and from the look of the way things are going now, the US agrees. While the growth of the Indian Navy may slow, if (or I'd rather say when) India reaches a level of development enabling and justifying further growth, the absence of US support will hardly prevent it. I think the real question is when not if.

I'm not going to argue with your opinion on China, I think the possibility you outlined is the most likely one. There are others but this one seems to be where they are headed. Perhaps not fragmentation outright, but instead major internal problems with an eventual change of power. Or maybe they will fragment, with the Manchus, Mongolians, Tibetans, Ughyurs etc. (mistakenly) deciding they're better off on their own.

 

[brian00]

Let's be honest, the USA can with the stroke of a pen cripple the PRC economically and no other markets exist that can make up the lack of US business. The USA on the other hand and others can use any number of developing nations for labor in the absence of the Chinese. Speaking of which as China grows the people doing that labor are going to want more and unless the government deals with that then they will induce the internal security issues. If it does then the price of Chinese cheap labor increases and iPods and other goodies will simply be made elsewhere. It's damned if they do, damned if they don't.
-DA

I couldnt disagree more,

If the US were to erase China's holdings of US debt it would be seen as a default, all other holders of Treasuries would become worried about the same thing happening to them, a run on the dollar would ensue, spelling ruin for the US and probably destruction of the global financial system.

China and the US have a symbiotic relationship, and both would suffer massively from what you describe, but the biggest loser would be the dollar. China does a lot of trade with Europe and the rest of asia and 40% of their reserves are in Euros, pounds and yen.

Also China has 600million people working in factories for the global supply chain, 'replacing them with other cheap labour' isnt possible without a major upheaveal, India labour is the only real alternative and their infrastructure is 10 years behind chinas.

Wages have been skyrocketing in china, up 500% in 10 years, china has already outsourced a lot of labour to vietnam and other SE asian countries. This has already happened, western companies may grumble, but rather than move operations to other countries, they move deeper into china to take advantage of cheaper labour in the countryside

 

[Swampfox157]

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.

 

[Sampanviking]

I do hum and ahh about joining these sort of threads as it usually leads nowhere edifying, but hey ho.

Darth America, your assessment of conditions within the PRC could not be more incorrect if you tried. I really do not have time to go point to point on rebuttal, but if this is the view that is widely held inside the US, then I am afraid that as a nation, you have no clear conception whatsoever of the nature and characteristics of your main peer competitor and that is not a good thing for you.

Regarding Main Topic I think you need to reflect on the meaning of the term "rise of the rest". This indicates a growing number of new and powerful nations going out into the world and developing interests, plus a larger number of smaller ones hosting those interests. sooner or later those interests will come into contact and no doubt conflict with the interests of others, which will prompt nations to develop the capabilities to protect those interests.

The 21st Century I see is one of large countries going out in the world and establishing themselves globally and of smaller countries playing the aforementioned large nations off against each other in order to illicit maximum benefit. Inevitable there will be friction and the occasional flare up. Such things however will no doubt be a matter for proxies as the larger nations will have no desire to come to blows directly.