China Training for 'Short Sharp War' with Japan

[Hari Sud]

Beg to differ Mattster

China and US interests are so balanced that US would do nothing to hurt it. Hence my reasons for US willing to dump everybody including Japan and India and all others because for them their own interests are more important. Chinese regime is dictatorial, they can tolerate economic upheaval if US does not buy their dishwashers. Imagine the upheaval in a democracy like US where Republicans and Democrats are at logger heads during all times including peace time and also during war. Inflation jumping to 15 to 16% as these products made in US and Japan and other places are that much more expensive. The stock market devoid of cheap Chinese cash would take downhill path. Voting minded US citizens would ask for a change in any local or Congress or presidential election. My point here is that US would be hurt far more than Chinese, if US and China at any time in next 10 to 20 years decide to confront each other. Hence US other than statements and Whitehouse press releases would do nothing to be tough with China. That leaves Japan and other small countries in the lurch. Chinese know all about it.

As regards to seventy year old men running Indian Government, it is all going to change in May of this year. That does not mean that India would suddenly have export orders from US at Chinese level. No it is not going to happen. Even if India begins to grow at 9% level as previously, it will be inward looking economic growth.

The point here is not the seventy years old men running India or dictators running China or completely divided Congress and White house running US. The point here is that if trouble begins in South China Sea at Chinese instant in the near future, will US mount a rescue operation the way they mounted in Kuwait in 1989. My belief is that US is completely enmeshed with China and that for its self interest, it would only issue Whitehouse press releases emphasizing peace and nothing more.

Japan and other little countries are of their own. India would have to be content with its role in Indian Ocean only.

 

[J20!]

Much less was knowable about Iraq WMD than is evident about Chinese activity in the Pacific today.

Vague assertions of an imminent threat with no actual proof of intent. Sounds like Iraq II to me.

What evidence is there in your article to prove that a Sino-Japanese war is imminent?

Even the Pentagon itself is distancing itself from Fanell's statements. And what is the US military training for almost weekly in the Pacific? Hugging teddy bears? LOL!

 

[J20!]

I don't fully disagree with some of your comments but some parts of your analysis are too simplistic.

First off its not just the US that needs China's trillion dollar surplus.....the Chinese need a place to put their Trillion dollars surplus.
In simple words it means that the Chinese even after spending billions on huge infrastructure still need a safe place to park their money and a decent return for it.

Also the Chinese needed sub-prime US housing boom to stimulate demand for all the low-tech products like dishwashers, refrigerators, etc, etc.
So to make a long story short - The Chinese need the US market even more than the US needs China's money. If China does not make easy capital available by not lending money to the US....then a good portion of that trillion dollars worth of low-tech junk from cell-phone to dishwashers to TVs that the Chinaman makes is going to be parked permanently in Shanghai's ports.

My 2nd point - Which strategic mind in the US is going to fully depend on India to form any kind of strategic alliance ?
Indian leadership is weak, and India capacity to make major strategic decisions is very limited. India is a country run by a bunch of seventy year olds and not known for quick action or pragmatic vision.

The truth of the matter is neither the US nor India need each other very much. That may change if China becomes very aggressive in the South China sea with Japan or if it tries to grab Arunachal Pradesh.

Speaking of simplisyic views, its not the 90's anymore.

China is now the biggest market from everything from autos to telecoms equipment and mobile tech. China is the engine that pulled the US economy out of recession, not to mention Japan and the entirety of ASEAN save the Philipines.

Many American companies depend on low-cost Chinese products and components to keep their costs down and profits up. Wasn't it jus last year that a story came out on how lockheed was using 2 dollar chinese magnets on the F35?

Obama's pivot is a 3 lane street ie. diplomatic, economic and millitary. Thus the overly ambitious TPP agreement that will probably never pass through Congress.

Economics are just as if not more important than the millitary. 60 percent of the US Navy and expanding bases in the Pacific won't change the fact that Chinese economic influence in the Asia pacific is almost absolute. All of Americas military allies are completely dependent on the Chinese economic growth story. Japan needs Chinese markets and investment opportunities to grow if not survive. Australia's resource dependent economy relies almost exclusively on Chinese ore and agricultural markets. South Korea is so economically dependent on Chinese markets for its products that it can afford to diplomatically cut off Japan. ASEAN, from singapore, thailand and even Vietnam need both Chinese investments and markets to keep developing. For every 4 Chinese citizens pulled out of poverty by China's economic growth, an ASEAN citizen emerges from under the poverty line as well.and how many hundreds of millions hof Chinese people have been raised from poverty? How many hundreds of billions has China invested in South Asian countries?

The painful truth Matty, is that Asia needs China more than it does the US.

China's economic growth is vital for Asian AND American growth in the short and long term. If it wasn't America would have found some reason to wage war on us a long time ago.

Have you read Daniel Elsburg's pentagon papers?

 

[Ray]

China's economic growth is vital for Asian AND American growth in the short and long term. If it wasn't America would have found some reason to wage war on us a long time ago.

If waging war was that simple to execute, then the world would be at war.

There are these days many facet to 'waging war' and that need not be by force!

Vague assertions of an imminent threat with no actual proof of intent. Sounds like Iraq II to me.

The Chinese actions and intent in SCS and against Japan is for all to see.

 

[xuxu]

"according the chief of intelligence of the U.S. Pacific Fleet (PACFLEET)."
WOW, it will be more credible at least this news come from China, just as "India will invade US" according the chief of intelligence of the China Pacific Fleet

 

[J20!]

Double post,

please delete

 

[J20!]

If waging war was that simple to execute, then the world would be at war.

How many wars has the US fought in the past 3 decades? Which country profits most from the export of defense equipment and services? A very large and significant portion of the US economy depends by no small means on "waging war".

Many of the congressmen and women who determine US foreign policy have their campaign funds donated by the very defense contractors - BAE systems, General Dynamics, Ingalls - which benefit most from those very same wars. The very same defense companies which provide hundreds of thousands of jobs to the constituents those congressmen made campaign promises to.

Which leads to editorials in blogs and newspapers and speeches that sound and read like sales pitches for those same companies, such as this one by US representative Rep. Randy Forbes in thediplomat earlier this month:

Stand With Our Ally in Tokyo | The Diplomat

I view the relationship between the United States and China as an emerging peacetime competition that demands a strong U.S.-Japan alliance to shape PRC decision-making in ways that are amenable to the region's rules-based order. While many democracies around the world are tightening their defense budgets, I applaud Tokyo for seeking to counter this trend with their own real increase in spending. Additionally, as I see it, Japan is not just spending more on defense but spending on the right kinds of capabilities, including investments in sea control, mobility, and ISR assets that will allow it to secure its archipelagic interests. Coupled with recent moves to establish a National Security Council and a defense research agency similar to the Pentagon's DARPA, Japan is positioning itself to be an anchor of stability in Northeast Asia. As Tokyo debates its future contributions to regional security, I welcome the development of a more "normal" Japan that can accept an equal share of alliance responsibilities in the years ahead.

Washington needs to reinforce its defense posture in the Asia-Pacific with new ideas and technology if it hopes to keep pace with the PRC's maturing anti-access/area-denial investments. First, this requires new doctrine and operational concepts like AirSea Battle that will enable our forces to operate more effectively in contested environments. We also need to think creatively about how we can use the capabilities we currently have in different ways to counter the PLA's counter-intervention strategy. Second, we must invest in platforms like submarines, amphibious capabilities, and a family of power-projection systems, among others. We also need to invest in a new generation of munitions that can keep pace with the demands of the maturing guided-munitions regime. Finally, we need to nurture technologies like electromagnetics, directed energy, hypersonics, and electronic warfare that will help the U.S. keep its edge in game-changing capabilities.

Guess which companies where the top 20 donors for Rep. Forbes' 2013-2014 campaign:

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2014&cid=N00013799&type=I&newmem=N


capture screen

You guessed it, Ingalls, BAE Systems, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin etc etc.

So yes Ray, not only is it easy to wage war if you're the United States, its profitable. So I'll ask you, who will profit most from a war in East Asia? China? Only these very same US defense contractors, and the US politicians they sponsor.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Pentagon has downplayed reports of this short sharp war.
But on the other hand US & Japan have exercised to retake islands that have been seized by hostile forces.

Exactly. If USN were not training for war with PLAN, it would not be doing its job. If PLAN were not training for war with USN, it would not be doing its job. We hope the diplomats do their job so war does not happen.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Vague assertions of an imminent threat with no actual proof of intent. Sounds like Iraq II to me.

What evidence is there in your article to prove that a Sino-Japanese war is imminent?

Even the Pentagon itself is distancing itself from Fanell's statements. And what is the US military training for almost weekly in the Pacific? Hugging teddy bears? LOL!

I think I answered you in my post (#28).

Do you have a link to Pentagon's take on Fanell?

 

[J20!]

I think I answered you in my post (#28).

Do you have a link to Pentagon's take on Fanell?

And we're in agreement.

What we don't agree on is that China is training for a forceful seizure of the Diayoutai's. An notion I find improbable if not ridiculous considering that an amphibious landing on those rocks would be both difficult considering the terrain and Japanese resistance, as well as unnecesary and self-defeating as far as strategies go.

Yeah I do:

Pentagon plays down intelligence officer's provocative China assessment | Reuters

 

[W.G.Ewald]

The comments by Captain James Fanell, director of intelligence and information operations at the U.S. Pacific Fleet, were little noticed when he made them last week at a conference on maritime strategy called "West 2014" in San Diego. They can be seen here: link.reuters.com/qyq96v

Fanell also predicted China, which declared an air defense zone last year in the East China Sea where it is locked in a territorial dispute with Japan over a string of small islands, would declare another air defense zone by the end of 2015, this time in the South China Sea.

The Pentagon's top spokesman, Rear Admiral John Kirby, declined to comment on whether it was appropriate for Fanell to publicly offer such a blunt assessment, but said the Pentagon wanted closer ties with China's military.

"Those were his views to express," Kirby told a Pentagon news conference.

"What I can tell you about what Secretary Hagel believes is that we all continue to believe that the peaceful, prosperous rise of China is a good thing for the region, for the world," he said, referring to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

Kirby wears 2 stars and Fanell is a Captain.

 

[J20!]

I think I answered you in my post (#28).

Do you have a link to Pentagon's take on Fanell?

And we're in agreement.

What we don't agree on is that China is training for a forceful seizure of the Diayoutai's. A notion I find improbable if not ridiculous considering that an amphibious landing on those rocks would be both difficult considering the terrain and Japanese resistance, as well as unnecesary and self-defeating as far as strategies go.

Yeah I do:

Pentagon plays down intelligence officer's provocative China assessment | Reuters

 

[W.G.Ewald]

@J20!

The amounts are almost insignificant, really.

 

[J20!]

@J20!

The amounts are almost insignificant, really.

He's not running for president Ewalld, his yearly campaign warchest averages at the half a million mark.

So the fact the industry that provides the largest part of his campaign funds is the defense sector, and that the defense sector provides a large portion of jobs in his constituency(state) has no bearing on his foreign policy footing?

Its just a coincidence that Rep. Forbes is 1 of the biggest advocates in congress for Air-Sea Battle and a more aggressive presence in the Pacific by the US military?

Hard to believe that his foreign policy "just happens" to align with the interests of the defense companies that foot a large part of his campaign bill.

Bears sh*t in the woods and politicians are corrupt; its the nature of the beast my friend.

The same is true for the gun lobby, the Jewish lobby etc etc. Such lobbyists play a major part in determining US domestic and foreign policy.

Or are you saying they're influence is "insignificant" too?

 

[Ray]

How many wars has the US fought in the past 3 decades? Which country profits most from the export of defense equipment and services? A very large and significant portion of the US economy depends by no small means on "waging war".

Many of the congressmen and women who determine US foreign policy have their campaign funds donated by the very defense contractors - BAE systems, General Dynamics, Ingalls - which benefit most from those very same wars. The very same defense companies which provide hundreds of thousands of jobs to the constituents those congressmen made campaign promises to.

Which leads to editorials in blogs and newspapers and speeches that sound and read like sales pitches for those same companies, such as this one by US representative Rep. Randy Forbes in thediplomat earlier this month:

Stand With Our Ally in Tokyo | The Diplomat



Guess which companies where the top 20 donors for Rep. Forbes' 2013-2014 campaign:

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2014&cid=N00013799&type=I&newmem=N


capture screen

You guessed it, Ingalls, BAE Systems, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin etc etc.

So yes Ray, not only is it easy to wage war if you're the United States, its profitable. So I'll ask you, who will profit most from a war in East Asia? China? Only these very same US defense contractors, and the US politicians they sponsor.

Thank you for the stereotype commentary about the US.wars that they fight and who organises them for profit.

Maybe that is the reason why the US Military has announced that they are downsizing!

Army to Cut Its Forces by 80,000 in 5 Years
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/army-to-cut-its-forces-by-80000-in-5-years.html?_r=0

Maybe, to fight wars goaded by defence contractors, and lose, right?

 

[mattster]

Speaking of simplisyic views, its not the 90's anymore.

China is now the biggest market from everything from autos to telecoms equipment and mobile tech. China is the engine that pulled the US economy out of recession, not to mention Japan and the entirety of ASEAN save the Philipines.

Many American companies depend on low-cost Chinese products and components to keep their costs down and profits up. Wasn't it jus last year that a story came out on how lockheed was using 2 dollar chinese magnets on the F35?

Obama's pivot is a 3 lane street ie. diplomatic, economic and millitary. Thus the overly ambitious TPP agreement that will probably never pass through Congress.

Economics are just as if not more important than the millitary. 60 percent of the US Navy and expanding bases in the Pacific won't change the fact that Chinese economic influence in the Asia pacific is almost absolute. All of Americas military allies are completely dependent on the Chinese economic growth story. Japan needs Chinese markets and investment opportunities to grow if not survive. Australia's resource dependent economy relies almost exclusively on Chinese ore and agricultural markets. South Korea is so economically dependent on Chinese markets for its products that it can afford to diplomatically cut off Japan. ASEAN, from singapore, thailand and even Vietnam need both Chinese investments and markets to keep developing. For every 4 Chinese citizens pulled out of poverty by China's economic growth, an ASEAN citizen emerges from under the poverty line as well.and how many hundreds of millions hof Chinese people have been raised from poverty? How many hundreds of billions has China invested in South Asian countries?

The painful truth Matty, is that Asia needs China more than it does the US.

China's economic growth is vital for Asian AND American growth in the short and long term. If it wasn't America would have found some reason to wage war on us a long time ago.

Have you read Daniel Elsburg's pentagon papers?

My friend.......you are overestimating the role of China in the future just like that J20 stealth aircraft that looks as big as Boeing 737.

First off China period of crazy growth at all costs is done. Your pollution is the worst in the world across all your cities.
Your labor costs are slowly getting higher that most parts of SE Asia.
Your competitive advantage in making low-tech products like refrigerators, TVs, cell-phones, furniture, appliances....all low tech products with low margin built on the backs of a whole generation of low wage slave labor children of peasant farmers is slowly vanishing. Your population is also aging fast.

Also there is one very important distinction to make between China and all the other leading developed economies of the world - In China the government is rich, but most of the people are still poor and don't have that much disposable income.
China is the only country that has this strange dynamic compared to other developed countries !!

But most of this is just the natural order of things......your quality of life is better for most Chinese, so now all the low wage stuff is soon going to be history.

The next generation Chinese will have to build high margin products that compete with the very best from Europe, North America, Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Brazil. Toyota's Lexus division still makes very nice cars, but BMW is still kicking their ass in the luxury performance automobile segment in the US. Your Geely cars may sell well in China but that doesn't mean that anyone outside China is going to buy a Geely.

China still certainly has a huge role to play in Asia by virtue of its size, but the next stage of growth for China is not going to be that simple. The 10% growth has come down to 7% and I will be surprised if it does not become 4 or 5% in the next 5 to 10 years. Your environment is complete garbage - air, water, rivers, farmland are all horribly polluted. I am not even talking about the political stuff and social unrest, etc.

40 years ago the Japanese economy was growing like crazy and every pundit in the universe were saying the Japanese were going to steamroll the US and every other nation economically. That did not happen because Japan could only play the low-margin game for so long.....when they had to move to high margin products their advantage was not that great. They made fantastic hardware, but most of their software was mediocre.
They like the Chinese were good at copying and making great products, but not that great at innovation.

And all those resource based economies like Australia and Indonesia and the Middle-East will find other emerging economies to replace China's waning appetite for raw materials. Australians are not going to go bankrupt because the Chinese stop buying their iron ore, timber or beef.

 

[jalsa]

@mattster are you sure Japanese are not very innovative? Their automobiles are surely not as stylish as some Europeans but some stuff in Japanese cars is really innovative. Lexus packs greater technology than a Mercedes S-Class but still manages to be extremely reliable. Nissan GT-R may look ugly but no American sports car can come close to it in terms of performance. AWD systems in Lancer EVOs and Subaru Imprezas are easily best in the world.

 

[mattster]

@mattster are you sure Japanese are not very innovative? Their automobiles are surely not as stylish as some Europeans but some stuff in Japanese cars is really innovative. Lexus packs greater technology than a Mercedes S-Class but still manages to be extremely reliable. Nissan GT-R may look ugly but no American sports car can come close to it in terms of performance. AWD systems in Lancer EVOs and Subaru Imprezas are easily best in the world.

Not to sidetrack this thread......but 2013 the top 3 luxury performance sales in the US were : 1) Mercedes 2) BMW 3) Lexus
If Lexus is so good why aren't they kicking the door open ?

My point is that when China gets to Phase-2......its not going to be as simple as Phase-1. Show me a high-end high margin Chinese product success story ?
Sure they have a huge local captive market, but to be the King of the Road - they have to play with the big dogs.

 

[CCP]

Not to sidetrack this thread......but 2013 the top 3 luxury performance sales in the US were : 1) Mercedes 2) BMW 3) Lexus
If Lexus is so good why aren't they kicking the door open ?

My point is that when China gets to Phase-2......its not going to be as simple as Phase-1. Show me a high-end high margin Chinese product success story ?
Sure they have a huge local captive market, but to be the King of the Road - they have to play with the big dogs.

could you list some "high-end product" you were talking about ?

 

[jalsa]

Not to sidetrack this thread......but 2013 the top 3 luxury performance sales in the US were : 1) Mercedes 2) BMW 3) Lexus
If Lexus is so good why aren't they kicking the door open ?

My point is that when China gets to Phase-2......its not going to be as simple as Phase-1. Show me a high-end high margin Chinese product success story ?
Sure they have a huge local captive market, but to be the King of the Road - they have to play with the big dogs.

You are right that China has nothing to compete in terms of brand recognition with the likes of Apple, BMW, Mercedes,Lexus etc.. No one will prefer a "highend" Chinese product when a better Premium product is available from Europe or some other place. My point with the previous post was that Japanese are on par with the West in terms of innovation.

One point, Lenovo recently bought Motorola Mobility, so that give them some brand recognition to compete in Highend mobile market.