Know Thy Enemy: Build up defense to thwart US provocation

[TaiShang]

Build up defense to thwart US provocation
Source:Global Times
Published: 2016-2-1 0:08:01


The US on Saturday sent one of its naval vessels within 12 nautical miles of the Xisha Islands in the South China Sea. The move, according to the Pentagon, was about "challenging excessive maritime claims that restrict the rights and freedoms of the United States and others." The Chinese side criticized the behavior of a "serious political and military provocation."

Until recently, China-US frictions have been fixed on the Nansha Islands. The latest intrusion by US vessels is a high-profile US provocation that has expanded to the Xisha Islands. Xisha is under China's actual control and China has released the territorial sea baseline of the Xisha Islands, including Zhongjian Island. Therefore, the US provocation this time is more vicious.

Currently, China and the US have been focused on making their own moves in the South China Sea disputes. China is building islands in accordance with the law, and the US cannot prevent China from doing so despite strong protests. The US sent warships to provoke, and China protests against it strongly, yet with few effective countermeasures.

It is hard to evaluate the strategic nature of Sino-US confrontations in the South China Sea. China seems to have more room to maneuver, while the US apparently has more control over the overall situation.

Since it happens at the door of China, China feels that the US is circling to contain it and the US vigilance against China is aggressive. There is a long way to go before China can have an equal footing with the US. Such equality can only be achieved with the build-up of strategic strength.

China's military strength still significantly lags behind that of the US. If the US is ready for a face-off in the South China Sea, it can quickly gather its military strength despite the far distance.

We also face similar setbacks in the East China Sea. We bear enormous pressure from Washington in our peripheral areas, and the relative backwardness of China's military might is the weakest link in our competition with the US. Chinese people must be clear about the broader strategic significance of this reality.

The US provocation comes ahead of the 2016 two sessions which are scheduled in March. This reminds us that we must retain a high growth rate of military spending in spite of the economic downward trend.

The defense expenditure of a big power must constitute a certain percentage of its overall expense. China's military budget only takes up 2 percent of its GDP, much lower than the US figure of 4 percent. Before we reach the same ratio as the US, we should hold a cautious attitude toward decreasing the defense budget.

China needs to accelerate its speed of building up strategic strike capabilities, including a nuclear second-strike capability. The US provocation will not stop due to Chinese objections. In the short-term future, we will have limited means to counter the US.

It will probably take China a dozen years or longer of military build-up before it faces a different situation in the South China Sea.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

What Americans are doing today is just the repetition of the Huns did during Han dynasty : violate our boundary and pillage and think they can get away with impunity. Any Chinese know Han vs Hun history will have a good understanding on how we should deal with Americans: be patient and fight when we're ready, we can wait 100 years if needed.

 

[XiaoYaoZi]

The action of US has been interpreted as the "vicious provocation", that just means we will build more and bigger islands.

 

[xunzi]

Chinese people need to prepare for the worse. I hate to say this, but war is no longer our decision. It is important that Chinese people must understand what is at stake in the grand scheme of things and be prepared to aid our military including spending a little less on social reform and more on the military spending. I agree with the author that we need to spend at least 2-3% of GDP on military if we want to maintain our territorial integrity. It is a tough choice, indeed, but one we have to make to survive.

 

[Economic superpower]

China need to have a major rethink in its military buildup. This includes how much to spend and reviewing the no-first-use nuclear policy.

China thinks by being nice and timid that others will leave it alone.

Incredibly naive!

 

[TaiShang]

China need to have a major rethink in its military buildup. This includes how much to spend and reviewing the no-first-use nuclear policy.

China thinks by being nice and timid that others will leave it alone.

Incredibly naive!

In fact China has been taking enormous steps in terms of its defense strategy, my friend, although I agree that more needs to be done on that front.

The enemy and the threat it poses is more than real.

The most significant change is the gradual transition from one of territorial defense to offensive and second-strike capability that also involves annulling the US-led first and second island chains through forward deploying China's naval assets in newly-built structures in the SCS.

The recent restructuring of military regions (into 5 battle zones) is also important.

Space and strategic missile capabilities also need to be reinforced.

Chinese people need to prepare for the worse. I hate to say this, but war is no longer our decision. It is important that Chinese people must understand what is at stake in the grand scheme of things and be prepared to aid our military including spending a little less on social reform and more on the military spending. I agree with the author that we need to spend at least 2-3% of GDP on military if we want to maintain our territorial integrity. It is a tough choice, indeed, but one we have to make to survive.

I agree with that.

I used to hold the US would be a rational actor, but, it show it is in fact quite the otherwise. In one way or another, they want to bring the war to us in order to not to give us any more time to gather capability to bring death and destruction right down to their own homes.

China is already halfway there so US move is a belated one at best. A protracted crisis for another five years is what we need at most.

 

[Aepsilons]

China needs to accelerate its speed of building up strategic strike capabilities, including a nuclear second-strike capability. The US provocation will not stop due to Chinese objections. In the short-term future, we will have limited means to counter the US.

Tho i admit i liked the patriotic tone of the article, this particular one was anti-progressive oriented and is too emotional. We know there is no development in a zero-sum nuclear scenario, no winners, just collateral losses on all sides and innocent civilians. Its best the writers refrain from being too cautiously pessimistic by going this route.

Chinese people need to prepare for the worse. I hate to say this, but war is no longer our decision. It is important that Chinese people must understand what is at stake in the grand scheme of things and be prepared to aid our military including spending a little less on social reform and more on the military spending. I agree with the author that we need to spend at least 2-3% of GDP on military if we want to maintain our territorial integrity. It is a tough choice, indeed, but one we have to make to survive.

I think you're being aggressively morose in regards to the situation. The Yankees are merely sending a warship here, a plane there, they're not actually striking of reclaiming structures or land terrain, actually. The perception of provocation by the Chinese side should be re-analyzed and appraised for the Americans' politicization of the situation and region (context to SCS) as a modus operandi for rebuilding their alliance projection with the Philippines and possibly security partnership with the strategically ambiguous Viet Nam. America will not strike first, merely will prod and prod the Chinese side under the banner of American hegemony over the pacific. This is just a tit for tat game of territoriality and proxy. Its a miniscule game and should not be used to undermine the gigantic trade volume between China and America, let alone the growing cultural exchange between the two pre-eminent powers.

What Americans are doing today is just the repetition of the Huns did during Han dynasty : violate our boundary and pillage and think they can get away with impunity. Any Chinese know Han vs Hun history will have a good understanding on how we should deal with Americans: be patient and fight when we're ready, we can wait 100 years if needed.

I disagree. America being compared with the Huns? Gross inappropriate correlation, imho. The Yankee meddling in the SCS is non-engaging and purely political stints to bolster regional alliance systems that they have responsibility of upholding or projecting an aura of confidence and sophistry , else it will undermine their Pacific Hegemony Mandate. It is more so American intervention to satisfy global and regional expectation of American Power Projection. Tho hardly i wouldn't say 1 or 2 destroyers traversing near tolls and islands is pretext for a global war, lol. Let's be realistic, okay, my dear?

 

[TaiShang]

Tho i admit i liked the patriotic tone of the article, this particular one was anti-progressive oriented and is too emotional. We know there is no development in a zero-sum nuclear scenario, no winners, just collateral losses on all sides and innocent civilians. Its best the writers refrain from being too cautiously pessimistic by going this route.

I guess the article employs a very realist tone. There is little option for progress between China and the US. It is existential which defies developmentalism. That's quite different from the dynamics that we have in our region amongst us.

Second strike capability is actually to ensure that there would be peace. Because peace is at risk if there is the strong perception that only one side would incur loss in the event of a fatal crisis.

The Yankees are merely sending a warship here, a plane there, they're not actually striking of reclaiming structures or land terrain, actually.

That's obvious. Nonetheless it is a serious challenge that is going out of hand, persistently. Their sending warship or war planes every other week is not a factor for a concern for China's assets. But they are definitely a concern with respect to reminding China of the urgency of building up greater capabilities. Hence, they are simply reminders and we take them as it is. No emotionality. If one wishes to hear emotions running high, one must give an ear to Congressional hearings.

America will not strike first, merely will prod and prod the Chinese side under the banner of American hegemony over the pacific. This is just a tit for tat game of territoriality and proxy. Its a miniscule game and should not be used to undermine the gigantic trade volume between China and America, let alone the growing cultural exchange between the two pre-eminent powers.

I predict it will be like the following:

China will determine the direction of developments.

The US will determine the speed of them.

 

[Aepsilons]

No emotionality. If one wishes to hear emotions running high, one must give an ear to Congressional hearings.

ha ha ha ha or anti-Hillary congressional hearings, lol.

 

[xunzi]

I agree with that.

I used to hold the US would be a rational actor, but, it show it is in fact quite the otherwise. In one way or another, they want to bring the war to us in order to not to give us any more time to gather capability to bring death and destruction right down to their own homes.

China is already halfway there so US move is a belated one at best. A protracted crisis for another five years is what we need at most.

I used to have hope that we can co-exist and live peacefully with the US but apparently, the war monger and hawkish anti-China faction in the US is taking over the American foreign policy. It is clear to our leadership that the US engages in a provocative ways to bait us into a war. It is important that we do not give in to their demand but fight them on our term. We need time. Today is simple not the right time to face them as we have many years left for development.

I think you're being aggressively morose in regards to the situation. The Yankees are merely sending a warship here, a plane there, they're not actually striking of reclaiming structures or land terrain, actually. The perception of provocation by the Chinese side should be re-analyzed and appraised for the Americans' politicization of the situation and region (context to SCS) as a modus operandi for rebuilding their alliance projection with the Philippines and possibly security partnership with the strategically ambiguous Viet Nam. America will not strike first, merely will prod and prod the Chinese side under the banner of American hegemony over the pacific. This is just a tit for tat game of territoriality and proxy. Its a miniscule game and should not be used to undermine the gigantic trade volume between China and America, let alone the growing cultural exchange between the two pre-eminent powers.

It is easy for you to say that because the US didn't threaten your country. We are not friend with them. We are partner, working together for mutual interest. Once those mutual interest no longer work, you will see the real US. Remember what happen to Iraq, Libya, Iran. All these countries used to be US friends until the US find them no longer useful and they took them out. We are next after Russia.

Anyway, in order to keep a balance, we need to increase our military force. There is no other ways around it. Next year, music will go through my ear when I see a big increase in military spending.

 

[Aepsilons]

It is easy for you to say that because the US didn't threaten your country. We are not friend with them. We are partner, working together for mutual interest. Once those mutual interest no longer work, you will see the real US. Remember what happen to Iraq, Libya, Iran. All these countries used to be US friends until the US finds them no longer useful and they took them out. We are next after Russia.

Anyway, in order to keep a balance, we need to increase our military force. There is no other ways around it. Next year, music will go through my ear when I see a big increase in military spending.

Japan is not a 'friend' of America, we cooperate on partnerships on on US-centric defense platforms that have been coaxed on Japan through post-war articulations that practically strangled Japanese nationalism and perpetuated weakling administrations. Japan 'hosts' close to 53,000 American soldiers not because it had a choice; those soldiers forward deployed in Japan were but a fraction of the original occupying forces that were in Japan immediately after the surrender in 1945. I think you have to understand that Japan really doesn't have a choice in various security policies --- you have to understand behind the scenes cajoling and arm twisting the Washington state actors have on Japanese politicians.

You will be acutely surprised to know how much Japan actually cooperates with China under the surface and actually supports Chinese rise as a way to undermine American reciprocal interventionism in Asia & Japan.

But that's a topic for another day, lol.

It is easy for you to say that because the US didn't threaten your country. We are not friend with them. We are partner, working together for mutual interest. Once those mutual interest no longer work, you will see the real US. Remember what happen to Iraq, Libya, Iran. All these countries used to be US friends until the US find them no longer useful and they took them out. We are next after Russia.

We know purely well how it is to be in opposite spectrum in regards to engaging with the Americans. We were at war with them in the largest maritime-based conflict the world had ever seen. Aside from being nuked twice, American military presence in Japan was a way for the Americans to 'contain' the Yellow Threat that is Japan to American Pacific Hegemony.

Japanese are not idiots nor are we deaf and blind to historical processes.

 

[xunzi]

Japan is not a 'friend' of America, we cooperate on partnerships on on US-centric defense platforms that have been coaxed on Japan through post-war articulations that practically strangled Japanese nationalism and perpetuated weakling administrations. Japan 'hosts' close to 53,000 American soldiers not because it had a choice; those soldiers forward deployed in Japan were but a fraction of the original occupying forces that were in Japan immediately after the surrender in 1945. I think you have to understand that Japan really doesn't have a choice in various security policies --- you have to understand behind the scenes cajoling and arm twisting the Washington state actors have on Japanese politicians.

You will be acutely surprised to know how much Japan actually cooperates with China under the surface and actually supports Chinese rise as a way to undermine American reciprocal interventionism in Asia & Japan.

But that's a topic for another day, lol.



We know purely well how it is to be in opposite spectrum in regards to engaging with the Americans. We were at war with them in the largest maritime-based conflict the world had ever seen. Aside from being nuked twice, American military presence in Japan was a way for the Americans to 'contain' the Yellow Threat that is Japan to American Pacific Hegemony.

Japanese are not idiots nor are we deaf and blind to historical processes.

Well I wish your country will get liberated from the US. Best of luck!

 

[Aepsilons]

Well I wish your country will get liberated from the US. Best of luck!

Thank You, sadly, the liberation of Japan from American Interventionism lies on China's ascendancy in the region.

So long as America continues to check China, then the Eagle's nest in Japan and Korea will remain defended. It will require a region-specific conversation of cooperation to undermine the hegemonic American interests in Greater East Asia.

It will take time, and I hope China and her Leadership remain sensitive to the position of her East Asian fraternal civilization peers. In the end, and in the long term future, domination of East Asia will require the cohesion of China, Korea and Japan.

Divided we are contained, united, nothing can stop us.

 

[TaiShang]

You will be acutely surprised to know how much Japan actually cooperates with China under the surface and actually supports Chinese rise as a way to undermine American reciprocal interventionism in Asia & Japan.

That's an interesting dynamics; and being a dynamic, it may change anytime as power equations change. I understand that Japan would like China to "check" on the US more than the other way round, unlike how it is perceived by the petty Western analyses.

China, too, understands from its own vantage point that to weaken the US position, it needs to render Korea and Japan more able and normal countries. We actually never believed that it was the US that had a check on Japan's militarism in modern times. We always held that it was in fact the US that sought and encouraged a Japan that is more hawkish but still subdued. It is understood that the conditions will not be developing the way they wish.

It will require a region-specific conversation of cooperation to undermine the hegemonic American interests in Greater East Asia.

Exactly and this start from the economic dimension, just as how the European integration took form back in the 50s in the form of resource sharing and then removal of trade barriers.

It will take time, and I hope China and her Leadership remain sensitive to the position of her East Asian fraternal civilization peers. In the end, and in the long term future, domination of East Asia will require the cohesion of China, Korea and Japan.

I think China's leadership understands this. Hence, the purpose is never to antagonize Japan/Korea but in fact encourage to focus on areas of cooperation while simply shelve disputes. There will be fluctuations due to conjectural developments such as force deployments and moves by the US in Japan and Korea, but, the overall structure will involve a deeper cooperation overtime.

On this, the intelligentsia of the three historical neighbors need to work consciously to create a Northeast Asian political discourse.

Divided we are contained, united, nothing can stop us.

 

[Aepsilons]

China, too, understands from its own vantage point that to weaken the US position, it needs to render Korea and Japan more able and normal countries. We actually never believed that it was the US that had a check on Japan's militarism in modern times. We always held that it was in fact the US that sought and encouraged a Japan that is more hawkish but still subdued. It is understood that the conditions will not be developing the way they wish.

It has always amazed me, really, whenever i attend forums relating to work and whenever the issue of Asia comes up, my Western peers always bring up how American will stand by Japan to fend off the threats of Korea, and China and Russia. I always find it quite interesting almost insulting that they think im some kind of parvenu in regards to regional development and Japan-specific relations with China (+Taiwan), Russia and even Korea. One has to be forced to smile out of necessity whenever they bring to mind Japan's military to help "defend" America, too. So in other words Japan and the Japanese people are nothing more than shields ? Tho in these kinds of instances, one has to be careful in what one says to them as one might be labeled a 'radical'. Its always so interesting tho to see how defense analysts from the west, referring to washington here, tend to fail to realize that Japan wishes to free itself of Washington's irritating interventionism in our politic. Its almost so ingratiatingly annoying when I read western articles of how "America and Japan exercising in xyz". Or articles saying , "America teaches Japanese military how to do xyz", lol. I think , given our ability to wage extrahemispherical warfare in the early 20th century, we are capable of doing things without being 'taught'.

We always held that it was in fact the US that sought and encouraged a Japan that is more hawkish but still subdued. It is understood that the conditions will not be developing the way they wish.

More or less opposition to militarization in Japanese public opinion is directed towards verbiage of the bill that Abe trumpeted. On context to "aiding American military assets under attack." You see, there is a popular opinion in Japan that tends to hold American military interventionism in low regard --- and in regards to American presence in Japan. There is the degrading aspect in having to host a foreign entity in our soil.

The only reason why America is giving leeway to Japanese constitutional changes because it believes and perceives China as a threat to its domination in the Pacific. Hence it is trying to coax Japan to make constitutional changes to (by the way the one who wrote post war Japanese constitution were the Americans, lol, LOL) be able to put a check to China. So , indirectly , China is actually aiding Japan to gradually free itself of Washingtonian domination. Eventually we would hope to see their removal from Okinawa.

This will take time, of course. Tokyo must be careful in not being too pro-Beijing as this would enrage Washington and who knows what they might do with devious intent to undermine Tokyo's interest --- under fit of rage.