Bloomberg: China risks repeating the mistakes of the Soviet Union in the confrontation with the United States

[The SC]

22 septembre 2021

Bloomberg Agency considered that China, which is facing a strategic dilemma amid the accumulation of military capabilities of Washington and its allies in East Asia, risks repeating the mistakes of the Soviet Union.

The agency noted that China should draw several lessons from the Soviet experience.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union three decades ago, Chinese leaders studied the causes and concluded that one of the Soviet Union’s biggest mistakes was engaging in a costly arms race with the United States that ultimately bankrupted the Soviet economy.

Bloomberg also indicated that against the background of the accumulation of US military capabilities in East Asia, Beijing faces a “similar strategic dilemma”, and therefore the attempt to catch up with US military power will require China to radically increase its defense spending, and as a result the country may find itself in the same trap that fell. in the Soviet Union.

“However, the inability to confront the US military build-up could make China more vulnerable and weaker,” she added.

​

She considered that the US decision to arm Australia with nuclear submarines is a manifestation of China’s “dilemma”, and that Washington is effectively defying Beijing by provoking a new arms race with it.

She stated that at present China enjoys an unenviable strategic position, as it is forced to confront the military capabilities of the United States and its allies in the Pacific Ocean at the same time.

According to Bloomberg, given the technological superiority of the United States as well as its weapons stockpile after decades of excessive military spending, China cannot count on winning a new arms race, noting that it is more useful for Beijing to focus on diplomacy to improve the security situation.

​

In addition, the main reason for the success of the United States in mobilizing Japan, India and Australia is the countries’ fear of China’s growing military capabilities as well as the ongoing territorial disputes, meaning that the Celestial Empire (referring to China) must strive to resolve these disputes and defuse the tension in Relationships with neighboring countries.

She noted that given the mistrust and mutual hostility had reached dangerous levels, it was equally important for China to start doing business with the United States again.

She also stated that China should learn several lessons from the Soviet experience, adding that Soviet leaders continued to invest in a losing arms race because they feared that the United States would strike first. However, these fears were completely unfounded.

She stressed that a nuclear-armed China need not fear a US attack, and that the Soviet Union succeeded in preventing the Cold War from turning into an armed conflict by cooperating closely with the United States and developing protocols and rules to prevent accidental conflicts.


Source: “Bloomberg”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...deal-shows-china-will-lose-arms-race-with-u-s

 

[K_Bin_W]

Bloomberg talking through its a$$... there is a big difference between USSR and China. Soviet union was a declining economy and China is a rising. Today as we speak US is the USSR.

 

[DJ_Viper]

22 septembre 2021

Bloomberg Agency considered that China, which is facing a strategic dilemma amid the accumulation of military capabilities of Washington and its allies in East Asia, risks repeating the mistakes of the Soviet Union.

The agency noted that China should draw several lessons from the Soviet experience.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union three decades ago, Chinese leaders studied the causes and concluded that one of the Soviet Union’s biggest mistakes was engaging in a costly arms race with the United States that ultimately bankrupted the Soviet economy.

Bloomberg also indicated that against the background of the accumulation of US military capabilities in East Asia, Beijing faces a “similar strategic dilemma”, and therefore the attempt to catch up with US military power will require China to radically increase its defense spending, and as a result the country may find itself in the same trap that fell. in the Soviet Union.

“However, the inability to confront the US military build-up could make China more vulnerable and weaker,” she added.

​

She considered that the US decision to arm Australia with nuclear submarines is a manifestation of China’s “dilemma”, and that Washington is effectively defying Beijing by provoking a new arms race with it.

She stated that at present China enjoys an unenviable strategic position, as it is forced to confront the military capabilities of the United States and its allies in the Pacific Ocean at the same time.

According to Bloomberg, given the technological superiority of the United States as well as its weapons stockpile after decades of excessive military spending, China cannot count on winning a new arms race, noting that it is more useful for Beijing to focus on diplomacy to improve the security situation.

​

In addition, the main reason for the success of the United States in mobilizing Japan, India and Australia is the countries’ fear of China’s growing military capabilities as well as the ongoing territorial disputes, meaning that the Celestial Empire (referring to China) must strive to resolve these disputes and defuse the tension in Relationships with neighboring countries.

She noted that given the mistrust and mutual hostility had reached dangerous levels, it was equally important for China to start doing business with the United States again.

She also stated that China should learn several lessons from the Soviet experience, adding that Soviet leaders continued to invest in a losing arms race because they feared that the United States would strike first. However, these fears were completely unfounded.

She stressed that a nuclear-armed China need not fear a US attack, and that the Soviet Union succeeded in preventing the Cold War from turning into an armed conflict by cooperating closely with the United States and developing protocols and rules to prevent accidental conflicts.


Source: “Bloomberg”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...deal-shows-china-will-lose-arms-race-with-u-s

Very sensible and logical conclusion. China can't win from the US militarily. Now add US, Australia and India in the equation and it's a lost battle. This isn't WWII that there are "blocks" to go against each other. Add Vietnam and a much stronger Taiwan in the mix too. It is wise to sit down with the US and talk trade and business and continue military modernization at a moderate pace as there is no way it can level (let alone win) with the nations I described above. The US has essentially built an anti-China alliance but only with much bigger nations to contain it easily (India, Australia for example and then there is the US and EU). Good article giving good advise to China.

Bloomberg talking through its a$$... there is a big difference between USSR and China. Soviet union was a declining economy and China is a rising. Today as we speak US is the USSR.

I don't think you understood the logic provided in the article. Just like the top secret submarines being provided to Australia, let's assume if the US provides -35's to India, Australia and keeps a few squadrons in Vietnam and further strengthens Taiwan, this 300 number -35 force, essentially renders the PLAAF useless.

China is a "rising" economy. Not a global economic super power. The alliance against it, is the US, UK, India, Australia, all are extremely powerful economically. How many fronts will China focus on? To deter each of these, it would need $ 75-80 billion a year, take an example, India's defense budget is around this much while the US is close to a Trillion (times four, that's $ 300 billion plus R&D for future warfare, and then countering the US, etc). This arms race is MUCH more devastating for the Chinese than it is for the other 4 nations and 4 economies, vs. one nation and only one economy, i.e. the Chinese!

 

[OIO]

22 septembre 2021

Bloomberg Agency considered that China, which is facing a strategic dilemma amid the accumulation of military capabilities of Washington and its allies in East Asia, risks repeating the mistakes of the Soviet Union.

The agency noted that China should draw several lessons from the Soviet experience.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union three decades ago, Chinese leaders studied the causes and concluded that one of the Soviet Union’s biggest mistakes was engaging in a costly arms race with the United States that ultimately bankrupted the Soviet economy.

Bloomberg also indicated that against the background of the accumulation of US military capabilities in East Asia, Beijing faces a “similar strategic dilemma”, and therefore the attempt to catch up with US military power will require China to radically increase its defense spending, and as a result the country may find itself in the same trap that fell. in the Soviet Union.

“However, the inability to confront the US military build-up could make China more vulnerable and weaker,” she added.

​

She considered that the US decision to arm Australia with nuclear submarines is a manifestation of China’s “dilemma”, and that Washington is effectively defying Beijing by provoking a new arms race with it.

She stated that at present China enjoys an unenviable strategic position, as it is forced to confront the military capabilities of the United States and its allies in the Pacific Ocean at the same time.

According to Bloomberg, given the technological superiority of the United States as well as its weapons stockpile after decades of excessive military spending, China cannot count on winning a new arms race, noting that it is more useful for Beijing to focus on diplomacy to improve the security situation.

​

In addition, the main reason for the success of the United States in mobilizing Japan, India and Australia is the countries’ fear of China’s growing military capabilities as well as the ongoing territorial disputes, meaning that the Celestial Empire (referring to China) must strive to resolve these disputes and defuse the tension in Relationships with neighboring countries.

She noted that given the mistrust and mutual hostility had reached dangerous levels, it was equally important for China to start doing business with the United States again.

She also stated that China should learn several lessons from the Soviet experience, adding that Soviet leaders continued to invest in a losing arms race because they feared that the United States would strike first. However, these fears were completely unfounded.

She stressed that a nuclear-armed China need not fear a US attack, and that the Soviet Union succeeded in preventing the Cold War from turning into an armed conflict by cooperating closely with the United States and developing protocols and rules to prevent accidental conflicts.


Source: “Bloomberg”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...deal-shows-china-will-lose-arms-race-with-u-s

The collapse of the Soviet Union was, in a sense, a retreat after the expansion of Tsarist Russia.

China is very different from the Soviet Union. The relationship between main ethnic groups and ethnic minorities are generally very good, and the economic development, especially the manufacturing industry, is sufficient to support the arms race. Engineers govern the country and lead the world trend.

The stagnation of scientific research is a prerequisite for China to catch up with the United States. The existing advantages of the United States are nothing but a legacy of history, and it is impossible for them to lead a new technological revolution.

Finally, thank you Bloomberg for your concern.

 

[Rafi]

Very sensible and logical conclusion. China can't win from the US militarily. Now add US, Australia and India in the equation and it's a lost battle. This isn't WWII that there are "blocks" to go against each other. Add Vietnam and a much stronger Taiwan in the mix too. It is wise to sit down with the US and talk trade and business and continue military modernization at a moderate pace as there is no way it can level (let alone win) with the nations I described above. The US has essentially built an anti-China alliance but only with much bigger nations to contain it easily (India, Australia for example and then there is the US and EU). Good article giving good advise to China.


I don't think you understood the logic provided in the article. Just like the top secret submarines being provided to Australia, let's assume if the US provides -35's to India, Australia and keeps a few squadrons in Vietnam and further strengthens Taiwan, this 300 number -35 force, essentially renders the PLAAF useless.

China is a "rising" economy. Not a global economic super power. The alliance against it, is the US, UK, India, Australia, all are extremely powerful economically. How many fronts will China focus on? To deter each of these, it would need $ 75-80 billion a year, take an example, India's defense budget is around this much while the US is close to a Trillion (times four, that's $ 300 billion plus R&D for future warfare, and then countering the US, etc). This arms race is MUCH more devastating for the Chinese than it is for the other 4 nations and 4 economies, vs. one nation and only one economy, i.e. the Chinese.

BS the US cannot win against China in her back yard, it is the US that is facing ruin after covid. Fighting China in the SCS is mission impossible, also Japan Vietnam and even the injuns are not going to fight a war and potentially get nuked by China.

For China, Taiwan is the same as New York or Florida, would the US except either place being permanently removed from the Nation, if the answer is no, then you have your answer.

Also the PLA has developed near peer capability both in the Naval and Air theatres with spending about 2% of GDP and it will have always have the home advantage, Taiwan is 150 miles of the coast and the US is thousands of miles away.

The US cannot stop China's rise, and also by sanctioning Russia has also pushed the Russian Fed and the PRC into each others arms.

 

[K_Bin_W]

I don't think you understood the logic provided in the article. Just like the top secret submarines being provided to Australia, let's assume if the US provides -35's to India, Australia and keeps a few squadrons in Vietnam and further strengthens Taiwan, this 300 number -35 force, essentially renders the PLAAF useless.

China is a "rising" economy. Not a global economic super power. The alliance against it, is the US, UK, India, Australia, all are extremely powerful economically. How many fronts will China focus on? To deter each of these, it would need $ 75-80 billion a year, take an example, India's defense budget is around this much while the US is close to a Trillion (times four, that's $ 300 billion plus R&D for future warfare, and then countering the US, etc). This arms race is MUCH more devastating for the Chinese than it is for the other 4 nations and 4 economies, vs. one nation and only one economy, i.e. the Chinese.

You still fail to understand the bottom line, the only heavy lifter is US and it is on the decline rest of its cronies won't last 30 minutes without US. Like they say "it's the economy stupid" China reached this point because of its economy and if it's economy keeps growing then there is nothing US can do except use proxies and terrorism.

Right now China is on the rise until that changes rest is all noise.

 

[DJ_Viper]

BS the US cannot win against China in her back yard, it is the US that is facing ruin after covid. Fighting China in the SCS is mission impossible, also Japan Vietnam and even the injuns are not going to fight a war and potentially get nuked by China.

For China, Taiwan is the same as New York or Florida, would the US except either place being permanently removed from the Nation, if the answer is no, then you have your answer.

Also the PLA has developed near peer capability both in the Naval and Air theatres with spending about 2% of GDP and it will have always have the home advantage, Taiwan is 150 miles of the coast and the US is thousands of miles away.

The US cannot stop China's rise, and also by sanctioning Russia has also pushed the Russian Fed and the PRC into each others arms.

This is rather an emotional response than a fact-based post.
1) The US Navy's 2/3 CBG's in SCS mean the Chinese navy is 100% countered. Add Australia's submarines and ships, IN ships and submarines and UK's navy (not even touching EU yet).
2) Add 300-400 ready to go -22's and -35's at all times (supplemented by -18's), these will neutralize about 75-80% of the PLAAF / PLN air crafts. Again, not touching Japan, Taiwan, Australian or Indian jets.

3) AND MOST important, New York or Florida (lol, hilarious example) are with the US, not separated states for 70 years. If you must link them, Taiwan may be Mexico, a separate country. Your logic means, India saying "Pakistan was a part of us and it got cut, we want it back", when Pakistan is an independent country for the past 70 years I think, and so is Taiwan. These tall claims are historical and the world lives in 2021.

4) China can rise, there is no stopping to it. But it can't "defeat" the US/Australia/UK/Japan/Taiwan/Vietnam/India. I hope logic can make sense to you.

You still fail to understand the bottom line, the only heavy lifter is US and it is on the decline rest of its cronies won't last 30 minutes without US. Like they say "it's the economy stupid" China reached this point because of its economy and if it's economy keeps growing then there is nothing US can do except use proxies and terrorism.

Right now China is on the rise until that changes rest is all noise.

Useless to argue. When you decide to act blind and don't want to process information, these emotional posts usually result. Why don't you review my post and come back with numbers and strategies to show me how China will counter what I've explained?

 

[K_Bin_W]

This is rather an emotional response than a fact-based post.
1) The US Navy's 2/3 CBG's in SCS mean the Chinese navy is 100% countered. Add Australia's submarines and ships, IN ships and submarines and UK's navy (not even touching EU yet).
2) Add 300-400 ready to go -22's and -35's at all times (supplemented by -18's), these will neutralize about 75-80% of the PLAAF / PLN air crafts. Again, not touching Japan, Taiwan, Australian or Indian jets.

3) AND MOST important, New York or Florida (lol, hilarious example) are with the US, not separated states for 70 years. If you must link them, Taiwan may be Mexico, a separate country. Your logic means, India saying "Pakistan was a part of us and it got cut, we want it back", when Pakistan is an independent country for the past 70 years I think, and so is Taiwan. These tall claims are historical and the world lives in 2021.

4) China can rise, there is no stopping to it. But it can't "defeat" the US/Australia/UK/Japan/Taiwan/Vietnam/India. I hope logic can make sense to you.


Useless to argue. When you decide to act blind and don't want to process information, these emotional posts usually result. Why don't you review my post and come back with numbers and strategies to show me how China will counter what I've explained?

I have read your post and your rebuttal missed the mark by miles.. you still fail to understand that it all boils down to the biggest economy.. PEROID.. China is growing until that changes the rest is all noise.

 

[Rafi]

This is rather an emotional response than a fact-based post.
1) The US Navy's 2/3 CBG's in SCS mean the Chinese navy is 100% countered. Add Australia's submarines and ships, IN ships and submarines and UK's navy (not even touching EU yet).
2) Add 300-400 ready to go -22's and -35's at all times (supplemented by -18's), these will neutralize about 75-80% of the PLAAF / PLN air crafts. Again, not touching Japan, Taiwan, Australian or Indian jets.

3) AND MOST important, New York or Florida (lol, hilarious example) are with the US, not separated states for 70 years. If you must link them, Taiwan may be Mexico, a separate country. Your logic means, India saying "Pakistan was a part of us and it got cut, we want it back", when Pakistan is an independent country for the past 70 years I think, and so is Taiwan. These tall claims are historical and the world lives in 2021.

4) China can rise, there is no stopping to it. But it can't "defeat" the US/Australia/UK/Japan/Taiwan/Vietnam/India. I hope logic can make sense to you.


Useless to argue. When you decide to act blind and don't want to process information, these emotional posts usually result. Why don't you review my post and come back with numbers and strategies to show me how China will counter what I've explained?

Bro, your clearly a kid, no offence but keep playing PS5, you have no idea about the scale of war fought with a peer power, the US has never fought a nation with the size of economy and military as China.

 

[OIO]

BS the US cannot win against China in her back yard, it is the US that is facing ruin after covid. Fighting China in the SCS is mission impossible, also Japan Vietnam and even the injuns are not going to fight a war and potentially get nuked by China.

For China, Taiwan is the same as New York or Florida, would the US except either place being permanently removed from the Nation, if the answer is no, then you have your answer.

Also the PLA has developed near peer capability both in the Naval and Air theatres with spending about 2% of GDP and it will have always have the home advantage, Taiwan is 150 miles of the coast and the US is thousands of miles away.

The US cannot stop China's rise, and also by sanctioning Russia has also pushed the Russian Fed and the PRC into each others arms.

There is another reason. China has good relations with almost all Muslim countries. The United States has not been able to repeat history. During the Cold War, the United States used Muslims to fight the Soviet Union, but this time the United States failed to achieve its goals.

 

[redtom]

Military spending.
US 3.4%GDP
China 1.8%GDP

$1 billion for 055， 13000 tons,
$3.7 billion for Burk3, 9800 tons

Then the conclusion is that China will be dragged down by the US arms race.

 

[Rafi]

There is another reason. China has good relations with almost all Muslim countries. The United States has not been able to repeat history. During the Cold War, the United States used Muslims to fight the Soviet Union, but this time the United States failed to achieve its goals.

Yes, I totally agree, the Yanks talk with a "Forked tongue" as our native brothers and sisters know all too well.

 

[MH.Yang]

1, China's shipbuilding capacity is 30 times that of the USA(per year 12 million tons:0.4 million tons)
2, The cost of shipbuilding in China is less than half that in the USA
055's cost is $0.9 billion.
Burke's cost $1.85 billion.
3, The USA lacks manufacturing, their government spending will cause prices to rise. But China will not, our production capacity is seriously surplus, and the government's spending on warships will only stimulate economic development.
4, Chinese warships are 100% domestic, from electromagnetic ejection devices to soldiers' underwear, all made in China. Chinese warships do not need to spend foreign exchange, and all the costs will enter our economic internal circulation. Or maybe we need to import some iron ore from Russia?
5, The most important difference is that China's social stability far exceeds that of the USA. Can American people tolerate a further three fold increase in military spending? Can the greedy Military industrial complex accept that the USA does not enter China's arms race trap?

The biggest problem in the United States is the lack of manufacturing and social instability.
The biggest problem in the USA is the lack of manufacturing and social instability. We will challenge in these two areas.
In Chinese, danger=危机. It has two words. 危 means danger and 机 means opportunity. The Chinese believe that danger and opportunity coexist.
So we think the Taiwan issue is not necessarily a danger for China, nor is it necessarily an opportunity for the United States.
In another 20 years, we will know the answer.


The USA can prepare for the arms race. We will compete who has better manufacturing and social stability.
Don't die in the same way as the former Soviet Union, because it would be a great irony.
I forgot that the USA can print money, or another 4 trillion? LOL

 

[Beidou2020]

It is the US risking its entire empire getting into a confrontation with China. America at its absolute peak struggled against a very one dimensional Soviet Union. Soviet Union collapsed because of its economic mismanagement. China is 5 times the size and an all round power that competes in all areas. The end difference will be the vastly superior governance model of China. By 2050, China will be by far the dominant global power in every area. China as a developing country is already surpassing a fully developed US in many areas. China isn’t even close to the peak of her power.

With each passing decade the US will get weaker while China will grow stronger. This is a rivalry the Americans will never win.

 

[kankan326]

Soveit Union collapsed within a decade after it withdrew from Afghan. Let's see how long US can last from 2021.