Notices
Results 1 to 6 of 6
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By cosmictraveler
  • 2 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By icewendigo

Thread: China, Russia and America joining together for military excercises

  1. #1 China, Russia and America joining together for military excercises 
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    By Gordon G. Chang and James A. Lyons Jr. May 30, 2013


    This spring, China's navy accepted the Pentagon's invitation to participate in the 2014 Rim of the Pacific — RIMPAC — naval exercise to be held off Hawaii. This will be the first time China takes part in the biennial event.
    Our allies should signal their intent to withdraw from the exercise if China participates. Failing that, the invitation should be withdrawn. RIMPAC is for allies and friends, not nations planning to eventually wage war on the United States. Russia sent ships in 2012, but while its senior officers may occasionally utter unfriendly words, they are not actively planning to fight the United States. Analyst Robert Sutter was surely correct when he wrote in 2005 that "China is the only large power in the world preparing to shoot Americans."
    That assessment, unfortunately, remains true today. Beijing is configuring its forces — especially its navy — to fight ours. For instance, China has deployed along its southern coast its DF-21D, a two-stage solid-fuel missile that can be guided by satellite signals. The missile is dubbed the "carrier killer" because it can be configured to explode in midair, raining down sharp metal on a deck crowded with planes, ordinance, fuel and sailors. Its apparent intent is to drive U.S. forces out of East Asia.

    A pattern of aggressive Chinese tactics also points in that direction. Especially troubling is the harassment in international waters of unarmed U.S. Navy reconnaissance vessels for more than a decade, most notably the blocking of the Impeccable in the South China Sea in 2009. And there was the 2001 downing of a Navy EP-3 and the surfacing of a Song-class attack submarine in the middle of the Kitty Hawk strike group near Okinawa in 2006.

    Since then, we have been hearing bold war talk in the Chinese capital, from new leader Xi Jinping to senior officers and colonels who say they relish combat — a "hand-to-hand fight with the U.S.," as one of them put it in 2010.
    Why do China's officers want to go to war? There is an unfortunate confluence of factors. First, there is a new Chinese confidence bordering on arrogance. Beijing leaders, especially since 2008, have been riding high. They saw economic turmoil around the world and thought the century was theirs to dominate. The U.S. and the rest of the West, they believed, were in terminal decline.

    The Chinese military also has gained substantial influence in the last year, perhaps becoming the most powerful faction in the Communist Party. Beginning as early as 2003, senior officers of the People's Liberation Army were drawn into civilian power struggles as Hu Jintao, then the new leader, sought their support in his effort to shove aside Jiang Zemin, his wily predecessor who sought to linger in the limelight. Last year, the civilian infighting intensified as the so-called Fifth Generation leadership, under the command of Xi, took over from Hu's Fourth. Like a decade ago, feuding civilians sought the support of the generals and admirals, making them arbiters in the party's increasingly rough game of politics.

    The result of discord among civilian leaders has been a partial remilitarization of politics and policy. Senior officers are now acting independently of civilian officials, are openly criticizing them and are making pronouncements in areas once considered the exclusive province of diplomats.
    The remilitarization has had consequences. As Huang Jing of Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy said: "China's military spending is growing so fast that it has overtaken strategy. The young officers are taking control of strategy, and it is like young officers in Japan in the 1930s. They are thinking what they can do, not what they should do."

    What do China's admirals want? They are supporting their nation's territorial ambitions to close off the South China Sea to others. This brings them into conflict with nations surrounding that critical body of water and pits them against the U.S. If there has been any consistent U.S. foreign policy over the course of two centuries, it has been the defense of freedom of navigation.

    According to a white paper it issued in April, China is building a a navy capable of operating in the ocean's deep water, and has 235,000 officers and sailors. Its navy last year commissioned its first aircraft carrier, and it is reportedly building two more. China has about a dozen fewer submarines than the U.S., but the U.S. has global responsibilities. The Chinese, therefore, can concentrate their boats in waters close to their shores, giving them tactical and operating advantages.
    While the Chinese plan to dominate their waters and eventually ours, we are helping them increase their effectiveness with invitations to RIMPAC and other exercises and by including them in joint operations like the one directed against Somali piracy. The U.S. Navy at the same time is continuing to reduce its fleet, currently at 283 deployable ships. As Beijing's behavior has become more troubling, the Pentagon has clung to the hope that military-to-military relations will somehow relieve tensions with the Chinese.

    Yet as Ronald Reagan taught us, the nature of regimes matter. We are now helping an incurably aggressive state develop its military — to our peril. There is something very wrong at the core of the Obama administration's and the Pentagon's China policies.
    Gordon G. Chang, a writer on Asian affairs, is the author of "The Coming Collapse of China." Twitter: @GordonGChang. James A. Lyons Jr., a retired admiral, was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet from 1985 to 1987.


    Ascended likes this.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,798
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    We are now helping an incurably aggressive state develop its military — to our peril. There is something very wrong at the core of the Obama administration's and the Pentagon's China policies.
    On the other hand China will revamp its military regardless of help.
    And inviting them to joint exercises will show them the benefits of cooperation.
    Plus, of course, the US gets first-hand knowledge of their competence, procedures and methods, direct observation of them "in action" and plenty of opportunity for electronic "sniffing".
    Smart move.


    Ascended and sculptor like this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,418
    I think Cosmic is right that we are indeed helping the Chinese build up their military which in the long run may not be in our best interests, If we can avoid it we certainly shouldn't be giving them a leg up militarily speaking. This being said whilst not actually actively helping them it is still very difficult to stop their rapid military rise without conflict. So really we can only try and find diplomatic way to engage with them to deter any serious military ambitions that could ultimately prove a threat to our interests.
    With this in mind we have to balance the tactical considerations of working jointly with them against the possibility of gaining diplomatic influence. We should also consider here that China is still evolving and perhaps just perhaps if we can find a way to engage with them in the right way then there may be a possibility of influencing their development in a way that will prove to be beneficial for world peace and security.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,150
    " but the U.S. has global responsibilities."I bursted out laughing when I read this gem.(Its unfair, the chinese concentrate next to their own country, while we have to spread to all sides of the planet because we have global imperial dominance ambitions, hur, I mean we have global " responsabilities ", yea, thats the ticket)
    Last edited by icewendigo; June 2nd, 2013 at 06:00 AM.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    I just do not understand why joint maneuvers would be beneficial at all. With satellites and other means of seeing what the Chinese have in their military supplies then why would bringing them together be of any benefit? I just do not think that this is a smart thing to be doing unless of course that Russia, China and America want to form a NWO together and dominate all the other countries.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    I just do not understand why joint maneuvers would be beneficial at all. With satellites and other means of seeing what the Chinese have in their military supplies then why would bringing them together be of any benefit? I just do not think that this is a smart thing to be doing unless of course that Russia, China and America want to form a NWO together and dominate all the other countries.
    They are multinational...joint means with different branches of armed forces such as Navy, Army etc.

    I've been part of several of these in Europe and in the Pacific. We do them for many reasons; probably the two biggest to to help understand each other's military operations and to help develop procedures for coordination in the event we need to cooperate for combat or, more likely, in response to a huge international natural disaster (the Pacific has several possible).
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. synthesis-dependent nonhomologous end joining
    By fcampbell in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 12th, 2012, 01:59 PM
  2. Japan/China vs China/Tibet situation.
    By Raziell in forum Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 16th, 2012, 04:56 PM
  3. Russia-Serbia
    By Mateja78 in forum History
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 9th, 2012, 03:08 PM
  4. Joining the invaders
    By icewendigo in forum History
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: April 25th, 2007, 03:38 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •