China's Peaceful Rise

[Josh]

I get the impression China is bullying for the sake of bullying and India is reciprocating. Outside of the minor loss of life, I don't see it functionally different from the shenanigans the PRC is up to in the SCS. They seem determined to burn any potential neutral bridge they can. Push on everyone in every direction because you can. It makes me think Xi is under a lot of pressure either internally (seems doubtful post 'corruption' purge) or else he feels China's expansion has a deadline. What that could be I don't know; I would assume it would have to be either economic decline or social unrest related.

[glenn239]

Tough to gauge India's domestic cohesion if tested.  It could be that under pressure India as a nation will grow stronger.  It could be that under pressure it will grow weaker and prosecuted minorities backed by China will start causing real trouble.  India's leadership seems to act like they fear the latter more than they hope for the former.

China acts like it has the whip hand and that both sides know it, but it seems not seek anything from India beyond non-interference in its strategic initiatives.  I doubt India believes that inviting Australia and the US to military exercises will cause India's disenfranchised 225 million Muslims to feel less alienated.

[JasonJ]

China wanted to make a base in Indonesia but was declined.
 

Quote

 

TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — Indonesian Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto told his Chinese counterpart, Wei Fenghe (魏鳳和), that his country would not accept a request for a Chinese military base in the country, reports said Friday (Sept. 11).

The conversation occurred during a meeting between the two top defense officials in Jakarta on Sept. 8, according to a report by Indonesian publication Kompas. Indonesia occupies a strategic location on the southern edge of the South China Sea and on the main sea route between China and the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, Europe and Africa.

Subianto also excluded the possibility that Indonesia would sign military accords with any other country, a military spokesman said. China would never be allowed to set up a base on Indonesian soil, as the government conducted an active foreign policy based on national freedom, a military spokesman said.

According to a U.S. report about China’s military published Sept. 1, Beijing was looking to expand its reach overseas by opening more bases. Djibouti in the Horn of Africa is one mooted location, but China is considering several other countries, from Sri Lanka and Myanmar, all the way to the Seychelles off the coast of East Africa, CNA reported.

 

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4006820

[R011]

On 9/10/2020 at 8:34 AM, Josh said:

I get the impression China is bullying for the sake of bullying and India is reciprocating. Outside of the minor loss of life, I don't see it functionally different from the shenanigans the PRC is up to in the SCS. They seem determined to burn any potential neutral bridge they can. Push on everyone in every direction because you can. It makes me think Xi is under a lot of pressure either internally (seems doubtful post 'corruption' purge) or else he feels China's expansion has a deadline. What that could be I don't know; I would assume it would have to be either economic decline or social unrest related.

How is India standing up for itself when faced with aggressive Chinese behavior bullying?  Is this like the way some schools punish both bully and victim?

[Josh]

I meant that they were broadly reciprocating the violence.

[RETAC21]

https://media.defense.gov/2020/Sep/01/2002488689/-1/-1/1/2020-DOD-CHINA-MILITARY-POWER-REPORT-FINAL.PDF

[JasonJ]

2 hours ago, RETAC21 said:

https://media.defense.gov/2020/Sep/01/2002488689/-1/-1/1/2020-DOD-CHINA-MILITARY-POWER-REPORT-FINAL.PDF

The list of PLA bilateral/multilateral exercises on document page 169 looks like a handy list.

[glenn239]

On 9/11/2020 at 2:53 PM, Josh said:

I meant that they were broadly reciprocating the violence.

I thought the score from the latest tiff was India 20 KIA and China 0 KIA?

[BansheeOne]

Quote

Chinese ships stay in Japanese waters near Senkakus for record 57 hours

Oct 14, 2020

Naha – Chinese coast guard ships that entered Japanese territorial waters near the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea over the weekend left the area Tuesday night, having stayed there for a record 57-plus hours until Tuesday evening, the Japan Coast Guard said.

The two ships left Japanese waters and sailed in the so-called contiguous zone from 8:19 p.m. Tuesday after remaining in the waters for a record 57 hours 39 minutes. The length of time exceeds the previous record set in July, when Chinese vessels spent 39 hours and 23 minutes in the waters.

The two ships had entered the waters near the islands, which are claimed by China, at around 10:47 a.m. Sunday, and attempted to approach a Japanese fishing boat, the coast guard said.

Japan Coast Guard vessels sent to the area repeatedly urged them to leave while protecting the fishing ship. The territorial spats over ownership of the islets have often strained Japan-China relations.

“The situation has continued for more than two full days, and it is very regrettable,” said Chief Cabinet Secretary Katsunobu Kato earlier in the day, adding Japan had repeatedly warned the vessels to leave the waters and “strongly protested” to China over the intrusion through diplomatic channels.

The top government spokesman said Japan is determined to protect its territory.

Meanwhile, China repeated its mantra about the uninhabited islets, saying they are its “inherent territory” without elaborating on why the country’s vessels have remained near the isles for such a long time.

In Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told reporters, “It is China’s inherent right to carry out patrolling and law enforcement in the waters of the Diaoyu Islands, and Japan should respect this,” using the Chinese name of the isles.

It is the longest period Chinese vessels have intruded in the waters since the Japanese government put the islets under state control in September 2012 after buying out a private Japanese owner.

On Tuesday, the coast guard said it also spotted another pair of Chinese vessels sailing in the so-called contiguous zone outside Japan’s territorial waters.

Chinese vessels were seen sailing near the Senkakus for the 37th straight day, according to the coast guard.

[...]

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/10/14/national/china-japan-senkakus-record-57-hours/

 

Quote

Date 20.10.2020

Taiwan, China trade barbs over violent altercation in Fiji

A violent altercation broke out between Chinese and Taiwanese diplomats at a Taiwan National Day celebration in Fiji. Taiwan said an official was hospitalized with a head injury after Chinese officials crashed the event.

China and Taiwan traded barbs on Monday over a violent altercation that broke out between Chinese diplomats and Taiwan government employees at a recent Taiwan National Day reception in Fiji.

Taiwan said it would not be intimidated by China's "hooligan" officials and would continue to celebrate its national day around the world, after it accused Chinese diplomats of trying to charge into the event.

China has heavily disputed Taiwan's allegations, including that a Taiwanese diplomat was hospitalized with a head injury following the altercation. China views the democratically-run island as its own territory with no right to formal diplomatic ties.

The Pacific is a region of major competition between the two countries, where Taiwan maintains formal relations with four countries: the Marshall Islands, Republic of Nauru, Palau and Tuvalu.

The confrontation broke out when Taiwanese at the gathering tried to stop Chinese diplomats from taking photos of guests at the reception, according to a statement from Taiwan's Foreign Ministry.

"We strongly condemn the violence against our diplomat in Fiji by China's uncivilized 'wolf warriors,'" tweeted Taiwan's Foreign Minister Joseph Wu. "As a sovereign state, we'll continue celebrating Taiwan National Day everywhere, every year. Taiwan is a force for good in the world & we won't be intimidated."

China: Taiwan's account 'inconsistent with the facts'

China has countered Taiwan's account of the events, saying Taiwan's statement was "inconsistent with the facts." It added that one of its staff was also injured.

"On that very evening, the staff of the Taipei Trade Office in Fiji acted provocatively against the Chinese Embassy staff who were carrying out their official duties in the public area outside the function venue, causing injuries and damage to one Chinese diplomat,'' the Chinese Embassy statement said.

Chinese officials also criticized the National Day celebration, saying it "violates the one-China principle and relevant rules and regulations of the Fijian government, with an attempt to create 'two Chinas' or 'one China, one Taiwan' internationally."

The one-China principle refers to the idea that Taiwan, a self-ruled island democracy, is also a part of China.

Speaking in Taipei, a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said Taiwan was a "peace-loving country" that invited people to events around the world for its national day.

"The reality is this year we had 108 offices hold national day events in different ways, inviting the world to celebrate our birthday," said Joanne Ou.

Fiji's Foreign Ministry has not commented on the incident, but police issued a statement making clear that the issue would be resolved via diplomatic channels and that the involvement of Fijian authorities was at an end.

[...]

https://www.dw.com/en/taiwan-china-trade-barbs-over-violent-altercation-in-fiji/a-55331299

Edited October 20, 2020 by BansheeOne

[JasonJ]

Here's a graph showing the number of times China Coast Guard ships intruded into Senkaku waters per month.

https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000465486.pdf

The number of times PRC CG ships have been in territorial waters has been roughly the same although a general increase in activity in the contiguous zone. Although, usually in the past few years, whenever PRC Coast Guard ships entered Senkaku territorial waters, they stay in them for about 2 hours. So staying in them for 30 to over 50 hours is very different.

 

With the overall increase of PRC coast guard ship activity for a year now, USFJ General reaffirmed US posture in backing Japan with the Senkaku island in late July this year.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20200729/p2g/00m/0na/123000c

Edited October 20, 2020 by JasonJ

[glenn239]

Hadn't seen this before,

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3109809/chinas-aircraft-carrier-killer-missiles-successfully-hit-target

 

DF-21 and 26 hit a moving target in the SCS back in August.

[Josh]

That is interesting, though I don't believe the account as it stands - it seems unlikely that the test was arranged directly in response to the U-2, since that would be they through it together in a couple days. If that were truly the case, then they took an asset already at see and abandoned it while under way and then shot at it. That seems like a bit of a stretch to arrange in two days.

But it is still the first test I've heard of either system over water and against a moving target. It's surprising more wasn't made of this in the regular press, or even the usual defense blogs. I'd like to get confirmation from another source.

[Josh]

I guess with all the election noise I missed this; it was definitely reported in publications I frequent:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/36004/china-tests-long-range-anti-ship-ballistic-missiles-as-u-s-spy-plane-watches-it-all

The above article seems to imply a much more controlled test rather than a spur of the moment firing. Interestingly the presence of a Cobra Ball implies the US was aware of the test well before it occurred, which is surprising. It looks like the notice to divert civilian air traffic gave away the drop zone and that there was no way to avoid this. I believe this is why the DF-21D entered service practically a decade ago but never was used on a maritime target - the PRC didn't want a test to be monitored by US aircraft. Perhaps with the introduction of DF-17 they feel testing an older weapon type is an acceptable security risk.

Furthermore, there apparently was a test I missed last year, although it isn't clear what missile was used or if there was a maritime target to hit:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28810/chinas-reported-anti-ship-ballistic-missile-test-in-the-south-china-sea-is-a-big-deal

[KV7]

It was tested. They hit the hulk of Yuan Wang 4 in November 2011 for one.

Edited November 17, 2020 by KV7

[Stuart Galbraith]

https://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-8879791/China-close-world-domination-Europe-wake-danger-German-spy-chief-says.html

China is on the brink of 'world domination' and Europe needs to wake up to the danger, a former German spy chief has said. 

Gerhard Schindler said Beijing was 'very cleverly' spreading its influence across Europe, Asia and Africa - warning that its technology is now so advanced that Germany cannot tell if it is being used for sinister purposes.  

Schindler called on Germany to strip out Huawei from its 5G mobile network in order to make the country 'less dependent' on Beijing, echoing the US government's fears that Huawei could be used to spy for China's Communist Party.  

[RETAC21]

5 hours ago, KV7 said:

It was tested. They hit the hulk of Yuan Wang 4 in November 2011 for one.

The big question is how could a carrier group be detected and identified with sufficient precision to be targetted, rather than can it be hit by missile.

[Josh]

That was always the trick, but previous to this I don't think the weapons were even used against a moving target. Maybe the test last year, it wasn't clear what they shot at from reports. But this seems to be the closest to an operational test to prove that the weapons could terminally adjust their course onto something that was moving. Although if a Cobra Ball was present, they probably taught the US almost as much as they themselves learned. One of China's problems as a growing naval power is that their backyard is already teaming with US intelligence gathering assets. In a fight, they have the advantage of shorter ranges for their missiles and other platforms, but from a peacetime testing and training perspective the very shallow and very busy sea of Bohai is pretty much the only territorial waters they can use as a testing ground. Where as the USN has facilities like the Tongue of the Sea and the missile ranges in the central Pacific that it's opponents have a hard time getting to, let alone monitoring discretely.

Edited November 17, 2020 by Josh

[RETAC21]

25 minutes ago, Josh said:

That was always the trick, but previous to this I don't think the weapons were even used against a moving target. Maybe the test last year, it wasn't clear what they shot at from reports. But this seems to be the closest to an operational test to prove that the weapons could terminally adjust their course onto something that was moving. Although if a Cobra Ball was present, they probably taught the US almost as much as they themselves learned. One of China's problems as a growing naval power is that their backyard is already teaming with US intelligence gathering assets. In a fight, they have the advantage of shorter ranges for their missiles and other platforms, but from a peacetime testing and training perspective the very shallow and very busy sea of Bohai is pretty much the only territorial waters they can use as a testing ground. Where as the USN has facilities like the Tongue of the Sea and the missile ranges in the central Pacific that it's opponents have a hard time getting to, let alone monitoring discretely.

To be fair, from the naval point of view, their backyard is not the problem. The PRC, from my point of view, doesn't have a very clear idea of what the naval threats are, so it has built a huge coastal defence force in the late 90s/early 2000s (Type 22 missile boats and Type 39 submarines) that then it had to sideline because nobody is thinking about landing Normandy style in continental China, then it went full throttle ocean navy with carriers and destroyers with limited logistic support, so the out of area presence is limited. It's nuclear submarine program is still concentrated in missile submarines which will need a bastion area or else. In the meantime, it has become an oil importer with its main suppliers being  Oman, Yemen, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Indonesia and Angola, of which only Indonesia and Russia do not have routes that pass close by its main rival, India. Going to war with the US over Taiwan or the Spratly (on behalf of Malaysia or the Philippines) would cut off Chinese trade, and not only near the Chinese coast, as the US Navy does have a global reach, not to speak about the likely massacre at the hands of US submarines.

[KV7]

There are some reports that during the early testing target vessels were hit while moving.

There is some speculation that 884 Jingpoho was retired recently to be used as a target ship, due to presence of 5 members of the PLARF at the decommissioning ceremony:

[Josh]

I think China has a very clear idea concerning the threat; I just think its military capability changed so drastically that it was a problem for them the same way it was for the US. In 2000 everyone called a Taiwan invasion the million man swim and any conflict with the US would have simply been a live fire exercise for the USN. I think the rapid build up of coastal units which were rapidly replaced with more blue water units simply were growing pains of a nation that suddenly found itself with another level of naval technology and production in a matter of years. It's other problem is that its technology base is extremely uneven as part of that break neck pace to catch up with the US: some technologies could easily be licensed, copied, or otherwise duplicated (French helos, German diesels, British radars, etc) while others were far less accessible (nuclear engineering, strategic bombers, strategic airlifters). In some cases vast resources were focused to catch up, in others the skill set or basis just wasn't there. So there was a combination of rapid growth and obsolesce in some areas combined with less progress in more challenging technological areas that take decades of experience to master. But if anything I think the Chinese had an absolute singular focus on where they wanted to be, and largely got there. They just grew so fast that they outstripped some platforms before their life expectancy and in a few areas seem to lag in comparison to all their other progress.

[glenn239]

40 minutes ago, RETAC21 said:

To be fair, from the naval point of view, their backyard is not the problem. The PRC, from my point of view, doesn't have a very clear idea of what the naval threats are, so it has built a huge coastal defence force in the late 90s/early 2000s (Type 22 missile boats and Type 39 submarines) that then it had to sideline because nobody is thinking about landing Normandy style in continental China, then it went full throttle ocean navy with carriers and destroyers with limited logistic support, so the out of area presence is limited. It's nuclear submarine program is still concentrated in missile submarines which will need a bastion area or else. In the meantime, it has become an oil importer with its main suppliers being  Oman, Yemen, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Indonesia and Angola, of which only Indonesia and Russia do not have routes that pass close by its main rival, India. Going to war with the US over Taiwan or the Spratly (on behalf of Malaysia or the Philippines) would cut off Chinese trade, and not only near the Chinese coast, as the US Navy does have a global reach, not to speak about the likely massacre at the hands of US submarines.

China has been building up its strategic oil reserves, now about 400 to 500 million barrels with daily consumption around 2.7 million barrels, (but that could be cut in half with rationing).  Given oil prices, I would think they'll continue to build their reserves as time go by.

 

 

 

 

[RETAC21]

2 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

China has been building up its strategic oil reserves, now about 400 to 500 million barrels with daily consumption around 2.7 million barrels, (but that could be cut in half with rationing).  Given oil prices, I would think they'll continue to build their reserves as time go by.

 

Doesn't matter, oil is just one of the inputs, they also need other raw materials that arrive from overseas and need to export to sustain growth. If they get into a war with the US, their overseas routes disappear overnight (see Germany in WW1 and WW2) and they are unable to reach the US heartland while the US is capable of hitting any point in China (be it with bombers, cruise missiles or other "items").

[glenn239]

3 minutes ago, RETAC21 said:

Doesn't matter, oil is just one of the inputs, they also need other raw materials that arrive from overseas and need to export to sustain growth. If they get into a war with the US, their overseas routes disappear overnight (see Germany in WW1 and WW2) and they are unable to reach the US heartland while the US is capable of hitting any point in China (be it with bombers, cruise missiles or other "items").

Right, the Chinese position is hopeless WRT sea trade.  Not so sure that hitting targets in China to the purpose of causing economic collapse is a good idea though.  Is the point of policy to contest the SCS or try to wipe out the global economy?

[RETAC21]

1 minute ago, glenn239 said:

Right, the Chinese position is hopeless WRT sea trade.  Not so sure that hitting targets in China to the purpose of causing economic collapse is a good idea though.  Is the point of policy to contest the SCS or try to wipe out the global economy?

Neither, it's China that is the aggressor, the US has no territorial ambitions, but the PRC has put a number of lines in the sands regarding Taiwan and the SCS. Despite the advances they have made in some military items, the PRC cannot militarily contest either if the US is involved.

The global economy is not going to fold without Chinese products, even though it may hit some hard times until they are replaced, particularly for resource exporting countries.

[glenn239]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

That was always the trick, but previous to this I don't think the weapons were even used against a moving target. 

There's a discussion on drone warfare ongoing elsewhere.  One useful possibility for drone swarms is solving the at-sea targeting problem against carrier and other task forces.  Picture missiles delivering several hundred drones into a 1,000 mile uncertainty area (or whatever), and these commence the hunt for the carrier and escorts.  Drones that find ships go for the sensors and radars, systematically knocking out all defenses.  For the carrier itself, once the defenses are down, the drones simply swarm nearby to guide the hypersonics in for the kill, and judging from the Armenian war results, there won't be anything to be done about it.  Before that, one assumes the carrier would be given the chance to strike its colors such that if a massacre occurs, its on the captain of the carrier.