Home » Posts tagged 'People’s Republic of China'
Tag Archives: People’s Republic of China
The bad news first. The People’s Republic of China now believes it can successfully prevent the United States from intervening in the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or some other military assault by Beijing.
Now the good news. China is wrong—and for one major reason. It apparently disregards the decisive power of America’s nuclear-powered submarines.
Moreover, for economic and demographic reasons Beijing has a narrow historical window in which to use its military to alter the world’s power structure. If China doesn’t make a major military move in the next couple decades, it probably never will.
The U.S. Navy’s submarines—the unsung main defenders of the current world order—must hold the line against China for another 20 years. After that, America can declare a sort of quiet victory in the increasingly chilly Cold War with China.
How China wins
The bad news came from Lee Fuell, from the U.S. Air Force’s National Air and Space Intelligence Center, during Fuell’s testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 30.
For years, Chinese military planning assumed that any attack by the People’s Liberation Army on Taiwan or a disputed island would have to begin with a Pearl Harbor-style preemptive missile strike by China against U.S. forces in Japan and Guam. The PLA was so afraid of overwhelming American intervention that it genuinely believed it could not win unless the Americans were removed from the battlefield before the main campaign even began.
A preemptive strike was, needless to say, a highly risky proposition. If it worked, the PLA just might secure enough space and time to defeat defending troops, seize territory and position itself for a favorable post-war settlement.
But if China failed to disable American forces with a surprise attack, Beijing could find itself fighting a full-scale war on at least two fronts: against the country it was invading plus the full might of U.S. Pacific Command, fully mobilized and probably strongly backed by the rest of the world.
That was then. But after two decades of sustained military modernization, the Chinese military has fundamentally changed its strategy in just the last year or so. According to Fuell, recent writings by PLA officers indicate “a growing confidence within the PLA that they can more-readily withstand U.S. involvement.”
The preemptive strike is off the table—and with it, the risk of a full-scale American counterattack. Instead, Beijing believes it can attack Taiwan or another neighbor while also bloodlessly deterring U.S. intervention. It would do so by deploying such overwhelmingly strong military forces—ballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, jet fighters and the like—that Washington dare not get involved.
The knock-on effects of deterring America could be world-changing. “Backing away from our commitments to protect Taiwan, Japan or the Philippines would be tantamount to ceding East Asia to China’s domination,” Roger Cliff, a fellow at the Atlantic Council, said at the same U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission hearing on Jan. 30.
Worse, the world’s liberal economic order—and indeed, the whole notion of democracy—could suffer irreparable harm. “The United States has both a moral and a material interest in a world in which democratic nations can survive and thrive,” Cliff asserted.
Fortunately for that liberal order, America possesses by far the world’s most powerful submarine force—one poised to quickly sink any Chinese invasion fleet. In announcing its readiness to hold off the U.S. military, the PLA seems to have ignored Washington’s huge undersea advantage.
The Silent Service
It’s not surprising that Beijing would overlook America’s subs. MostAmericans overlook their own undersea fleet—and that’s not entirely their own fault. The U.S. sub force takes pains to avoid media coverage in order to maximize its secrecy and stealth. “The submarine cruises the world’s oceans unseen,” the Navy stated on its Website.
Unseen and unheard. That why the sub force calls itself the “Silent Service.”
The Navy has 74 submarines, 60 of which are attack or missile submarines optimized for finding and sinking other ships or blasting land targets. The balance is ballistic-missile boats that carry nuclear missiles and would not routinely participate in military campaigns short of an atomic World War III.
Thirty-three of the attack and missile boats belong to the Pacific Fleet, with major bases in Washington State, California, Hawaii and Guam. Deploying for six months or so roughly every year and a half, America’s Pacific subs frequently stop over in Japan and South Korea and occasionally even venture under the Arctic ice.
According to Adm. Cecil Haney, the former commander of Pacific Fleet subs, on any given day 17 boats are underway and eight are “forward-deployed,” meaning they are on station in a potential combat zone. To the Pacific Fleet, that pretty much means waters near China.
America has several submarine types. The numerous Los Angeles-class attack boats are Cold War stalwarts that are steadily being replaced by newerVirginia-class boats with improved stealth and sensors. The secretiveSeawolfs, numbering just three—all of them in the Pacific—are big, fast and more heavily armed than other subs. The Ohio-class missile submarines are former ballistic missile boats each packing 154 cruise missile.
U.S. subs are, on average, bigger, faster, quieter and more powerful than the rest of the world’s subs. And there are more of them. The U.K. is building just seven new Astute attack boats. Russia aims to maintain around 12 modern attack subs. China is struggling to deploy a handful of rudimentary nuclear boats.
Able to lurk silently under the waves and strike suddenly with torpedoes and missiles, submarines have tactical and strategic effect greatly disproportionate to their relatively small numbers. During the 1982 Falklands War, the British sub Conqueror torpedoed and sank the Argentine cruiserGeneral Belgrano, killing 323 men. The sinking kept the rest of the Argentine fleet bottled up for the duration of the conflict.
America’s eight-at-a-time submarine picket in or near Chinese waters could be equally destructive to Chinese military plans, especially considering the PLA’s limited anti-submarine skills. “Although China might control the surface of the sea around Taiwan, its ability to find and sink U.S. submarines will be extremely limited for the foreseeable future,” Cliff testified. “Those submarines would likely be able to intercept and sink Chinese amphibious transports as they transited toward Taiwan.”
So it almost doesn’t matter that a modernized PLA thinks it possesses the means to fight America above the waves, on land and in the air. If it can’t safely sail an invasion fleet as part of its territorial ambitions, it can’t achieve its strategic goals—capturing Taiwan and or some island also claimed by a neighboring country—through overtly military means.
That reality should inform Washington’s own strategy. As the United States has already largely achieved the world order it struggled for over the last century, it need only preserve and defend this order. In other words, America has the strategic high ground against China, as the latter must attack and alterthe world in order to get what it wants.
In practical military terms, that means the Pentagon can more or less ignore most of China’s military capabilities, including those that appear to threaten traditional U.S. advantages in nukes, air warfare, mechanized ground operations and surface naval maneuvers.
“We won’t invade China, so ground forces don’t play,” pointed out Wayne Hughes, a professor at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. “We won’t conduct a first nuclear strike. We should not adopt an air-sea strike plan against the mainland, because that is a sure way to start World War IV.”
Rather, America must deny the Chinese free access to their near waters. “We need only enough access to threaten a war at sea,” Hughes said. In his view, a fleet optimized for countering China would have large numbers of small surface ships for enforcing a trade blockade. But the main combatants would be submarines, “to threaten destruction of all Chinese warships and commercial vessels in the China Seas.”
Cliff estimated that in wartime, each American submarine would be able to get off “a few torpedo shots” before needing to “withdraw for self-preservation.” But assuming eight subs each fire three torpedoes, and just half those torpedoes hit, the American attack boats could destroy all of China’s major amphibious ships—and with them, Beijing’s capacity for invading Taiwan or seizing a disputed island.
Waiting out the Chinese decline
If American subs can hold the line for another 20 years, China might age right out of its current, aggressive posture without ever having attacked anyone. That’s because economic and demographic trends in China point towards a rapidly aging population, flattening economic growth and fewer resources available for military modernization.
To be fair, almost all developed countries are also experiencing this aging, slowing and increasing peacefulness. But China’s trends are pronounced owing to a particularly steep drop in the birth rate traceable back to the Chinese Communist Party’s one-child policy.
Another factor is the unusual speed with which the Chinese economy has expanded to its true potential, thanks to the focused investment made possible by an authoritarian government … and also thanks to that government’s utter disregard for the natural environment and for the rights of everyday Chinese people.
“The economic model that propelled China through three decades of meteoric growth appears unsustainable,” Andrew Erickson, a Naval War College analyst, told the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.
What Erickson described as China’s “pent-up national potential” could begin expiring as early as 2030, by which point “China will have world’s highest proportion of people over 65,” he predicted. “An aging society with rising expectations, burdened with rates of chronic diseases exacerbated by sedentary lifestyles, will probably divert spending from both military development and the economic growth that sustains it.”
Wisely, American political and military leaders have made the investments necessary to sustain U.S. undersea power for at least that long. After a worrying dip in submarine production, starting in 2012 the Pentagon asked for—and Congress funded—the acquisition of two Virginia-class submarines per year for around $2.5 billion apiece, a purchase rate adequate to maintain the world’s biggest nuclear submarine fleet indefinitely.
Given China’s place in the world, its underlying national trends and America’s pointed advantage in just that aspect of military power that’s especially damaging to Chinese plans, it seems optimistic for PLA officers to assume they can launch an attack on China’s neighbors without first knocking out U.S. forces.
Not that a preemptive strike would make any difference, as the only American forces that truly matter for containing China are the very ones that China cannot reach.
For they are deep underwater.
China’s nuclear missile drill seen as warning to US not to meddle in region | South China Morning Post
The People’s Liberation Army has for the first time released photos of its most advanced intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in action – a move seen as a response to US military moves in the region.
The 17 photos published on the PLA Daily’s website on Tuesday provided the first glimpse of a live drill involving the Dongfeng-31 since its delivery to the Second Artillery Corps in 2006.
Photos published by the PLA Daily show for the first time members of the Second Artillery Forces launching a Dongfeng-31 missile. Photo: SCMPThe missile has an estimated range of nearly 10,000 kilometres – enough to deliver a nuclear warhead to the capitals of Europe or the west coast of the United States. Military experts said the release was a warning to the US not to interfere in the country’s territorial disputes with Japan over the Diaoyu Islands, or Senkakus, in the East China Sea.
Macau-based military observer Antony Wong Dong cited the Pentagon’s decisions to send a dozen advanced F-22 fighter jets to Okinawa and replace the USS George Washington with the younger USS Ronald Reagan at Yokosuka Naval Base near Tokyo.
“The disclosure of the Dongfeng-31 at this time obviously aims to respond to the United States’ two big military moves in Japan, which make Beijing believe it is going to meddle in the territorial disputes between China and Japan,” Wong said.
Several of the photos published by the PLA Daily were also posted on the newspaper’s official Sina Weibo account. It was unclear when the drill took place; the captions said sometime this winter.
The pictures showed a missile fired from a large launcher mounted on a 16-wheeled truck. Operators were shown inside a military camp dressed in protective suits, suggesting that the missile force was simulating the launch of an armed warhead.
The caption cast the exercise as defensive preparation, saying the soldiers were simulating how to disrupt an enemy’s missile attack. The pictures show the launcher was erected on the truck and ready for firing.
Hong Kong-based defence analyst Ma Ding-sheng said the pictures indicated that the PLA was more confident about showing off its military hardware after decades of secret development.
“The PLA realises that it needs to increase its transparency, which would also provide them more opportunities to show off their military muscle, as well as quiet questions from the US and other Western countries,” Ma said, adding the missiles had so far appeared to help deter threats.
“I doubt whether the missile is capable of hitting the US, although they claim it has a range up to 10,000 kilometers,” Ma said. “All its live-launch drills have happened inside Chinese territory, within 5,000 kilometers. And we never see the PLA shooting missiles to the Western Pacific.”
Non-operational versions of the Dongfeng-31 and the more advanced Dongfeng-31A were displayed publicly on October 1, 1999, the 50th anniversary of the People’s Republic of China. The Donfeng-31 is the country’s second generation of ICBM, replacing the earlier Dongfeng-4. It was formally delivered to the strategic missile defence force in 2006.
The Pentagon said at the time that the weapon was built using US missile and warhead secrets obtained through espionage and illegal transfers of technology.
Some have dreamt of it, others have only imagined it. Now Saxo Bank, the online multi-asset trading specialist and investment advisor has released its ‘Outrageous Predictions’ for 2014. They fully admit that the probability of any of them coming to fruition is rather low. But, that hasn’t stopped them making them. Be outrageously provocative and it can be predicted that as sure as eggs are eggs the crystal ball will go cloudy on you. But, it makes for light-hearted reading along the rocky road of fortune-telling. The saving grace is that if any one of them does actually hit the truth on the nose, Saxo Bank will be saying ‘I told you so’. If they don’t come true, Saxo’s drivel will be forgotten in the mass of pages on the internet.
Predictions for 2014
- Soviet-Style Economy in EU: This one comes from Steen Jakobson, Chief Economist and CIO at Saxo Bank. It tops the list. The Soviet-Union will be back in force in style at least in the EU, when deflation causes panic amongst the leaders of the EU. Wealth Taxes will be introduced across the Union in the attempt to reduce inequalities in society. Europe will at last move into the final stages of totalitarian government from Brussels.
- Fat-Five Tech Companies: Amazon, Netflix, Twitter, Pandora Media and Yelp are all trading at about 700% above market valuation. That’s while the rest of the information-technology sector is 15% under market value. The bubble will burst in 2014 for the fat five. Some of that flab just has to come off.
- US Deflation: It’s only the US government and the Federal Reserve that are saying that the US economy is doing better. January will see the FOMC dealing with deflationary pressure on the economy as consumer confidence gets a whacking and employment and investment take a beating after Congress ends up ‘disrupting the US economy’ again.
- Brent to Fall to £80/Barrel: Sanctions against Iran are going to ease. This coupled with the problems that will seem to abate in Libya will see the price of oil fall drastically. Non-Opec supply is predicted also to increase by 1.5 million barrels per day.
- CAC40 to Drop 40%: They don’t call it the 40 for nothing. The French economy will fall like pigeons being shot out of the sky. The investors in France will be scrambling for the way out as the French government ends up taking a lashing.
- Fed Tapers: March-time will cause widespread panic on the financial markets. Apparently the prediction is that Yellen will resign and that Bernanke will be called back. Oh, there is a Hollywood film too of what happens when Yellen gets kicked out of the comfy bed.
- Germany to Need Bailout: Germany will fall into recession and end up asking to be propped up by the European Central Bank. Let’s hope the Greeks agree to that one.
- Spain to Recover: Spain is set to become the strongest economy in the EU.
- Russia to Turn Tails: Russia will turn to the Western world and end up crying in mummy’s skirts as there are escalating costs of the Olympics and plunging oil prices. Russia will give up on Syria and will cave in to Europe on energy prices.
- China to Revolt: The Chinese will become emboldened and empowered in the face of their government as the one-child policy is loosened and the residency program comes to an end. Urban cities will see demonstrations and the government will change its policies bring the country into modernity.
Outrageous Predictions for 2014
Steen Jakobsen, Chief Economist at Saxo Bank states “This isn’t meant to be a pessimistic outlook. This is about critical events that could lead to change – hopefully for the better. After all, looking back through history, all changes, good or bad, are made after moments of crisis after a comprehensive failure of the old way of doing things. As things are now, global wealth and income distribution remain hugely lopsided which also has to mean that significant change is more likely than ever due to unsustainable imbalances. 2014 could and should be the year in which a mandate for change not only becomes necessary, but is also implemented”.
That’s all well and good except for the fact that looking back in history, changes rarely happen even at the crossroads of a crisis. Things carry on as they always did and it’s just business as usual. The banks haven’t changed the way they do business and governments haven’t changed the way they do theirs.
Apparently, the idea behind the predictions is to make people think of the worst-case scenarios that might possible happen in the world and to be in a position to adjust investments accordingly. Hype or outlandishly canny laughable material?
How many of the predictions do you go along with?