"Warm War", the United States and China
Anaconda Rings and Pearl Thread
For the past few months, opposition to the United States and China in East and Southeast Asia has been actively discussed in Western think tanks. It is no secret that in international politics the center of gravity has long since moved from the Atlantic to the Pacific and Indian Ocean. It is no coincidence that Obama proclaimed himself the first Pacific president of the United States, and Beijing began to accuse the Americans of wanting to surround the Celestial Empire with a ring of military bases and began to build up in response its line of defense, called the “string of pearls”.
The United States is concerned that many in Asia have the impression that China has emerged from the economic crisis stronger, and America weakened. Such a stereotype, according to Western political scientists, contributes to the creation of a cinocentric Asia.
Antique Chinese Coalition
“That's why the United States,” they say, “is trying to put together an anti-Chinese coalition in the region.” “American strategists openly let the PRC understand that they are preparing for a military clash,” writes The Independent. “They surround China with military bases and have already entered into a triple alliance with Japan and India, which Australia will join in the near future.” The alliance of four, apparently, could become the Asian branch of the League of Democracies, the creation of which the tireless Senator McCain has long been calling for. Although before such an alliance is finalized, the participating countries will have to overcome some technical difficulties and get rid of established stereotypes. In Washington and Tokyo, for example, skepticism about the military potential of New Delhi and Indian the fleet will have to try very hard to coordinate with the Japanese and American Navy.
Indeed, despite the fact that the decision on joint exercises and operations was made three years ago, the position of diplomats who uphold the traditional principle of "non-alignment" to international military alliances is still strong in India.
On the other hand, the Indians are well aware that their Chinese neighbors are less likely to remember Deng Xiaoping's covenants and gradually abandon restraint in foreign policy. And this means that border conflicts in Tibet and Kashmir will only worsen every year. And it is not surprising that the government of Manmohan Singh is betting on America. “Only Washington can make India feel like a great power,” said the Indian prime minister. “The United States, for example, can achieve UN Security Council reform that would secure New Delhi the status of a permanent member of this organization.” In addition, America is oriented towards large Indian business related to information technology and the military industry. “Singh believes in the age of the United States that the fate of India is inextricably linked with this country,” writes Jyoti Malhotra, editor of the diplomatic department of the Indian newspaper The Telegraph. The same can be said of the Japanese political elite, which is gradually getting rid of the guilty complex in front of China, which from its pitiful and offended younger brother turns in her eyes into an implacable rival, dreaming of revenge. More and more experts admit: sooner or later, two Asian powers will come to grips - "two tigers will not get along in the same forest." Another US ally in the region remains South Korea, traditionally hostile to Japan. And although the United States has defense agreements with both countries, their armies have virtually no contact. "Korean-Japanese historical controversy is a weak link in the US Asian security strategy, ”writes The Washington Times.
Anaconda rings
The countries of Southeast Asia are beginning to play an increasingly important role for the United States. It is no coincidence that Hillary Clinton acceded to the Bali Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation and offered to play the role of mediator in resolving disputed territorial problems in the South China Sea, which Western experts have already dubbed "the East Asian Mediterranean." In China, this proposal was called “shameless interference in the internal affairs of the continent,” but out of fear of Beijing, more and more Asian states are ready to support the Clinton initiative. “We need the US as a counterweight to Chinese influence, because even by joining forces, the countries of the region are not able to put pressure on Beijing,” said Singaporean creator Lee Kuan Y. — If America leaves us to the mercy of fate, it risks losing the role of world leader. . "The tighter the policy of the PRC becomes," writes The Atlantic, "the easier it is for Americans to intimidate Asian whelps with the mythical Chinese threat and prevent the unification of East Asia around Beijing." In order to feel confident, America is clearly not enough old bases in Japan, Guam and South Korea, and it is seeking to expand its military presence in the region. It is no coincidence that negotiations are underway to restore the Subic Bay base in the Philippines, which has been the main outpost of the United States in the region throughout the past century. In 1992, the local parliament decided to expel the Americans from the Philippine land, but after 20 years, the archipelago authorities seemed to come to their senses and again swore allegiance to Washington, agreeing to host reconnaissance aircraft, warships, and large US military contingents.
As in the era of the Cold War, when America sought to surround the Soviet Union with a chain of military bases, the current US advance in East Asia is compared with anaconda rings. "The Obama administration is trying to build a system of military alliances in the APR," writes The Washington Post, "and after successful negotiations with Manila, hopes to win over to its side the Vietnamese and Thai generals, irritated by the arrogant policy of the PRC." In this sense, the visit of American ships to Vietnam last August in the past 40 years, which was once one of the largest deepwater bases in the United States, certainly deserves attention. "It is very symbolic," writes The Foreign Affairs, "that the country whose conflict caused the US to flee from Southeast Asia is beginning to flirt with Washington in the hope of protecting itself from the claims of the Chinese giant."
At the end of last year, the United States agreed with Australia to deploy the largest American military contingent since World War II in the north of the country and received Singapore’s consent to use the Changi naval base. The United States makes it clear that they intend to maintain their hegemony not only in the Pacific, but also in the Indian Ocean. They reinforce the fifth and seventh fleets, based in the “Chinese Underbelly,” and strengthen the naval base on Diego Garcia. What is particularly symbolic, weapons and equipment on this island come from Europe: from the closing of the US military bases located in Germany and Italy.
Pearl string
By deploying troops in the Philippines, Australia and Singapore, Americans can at any time close the transportation artery, the Strait of Malacca, the most important for China, through which 85 per cent of oil goes to China from Africa and the Middle East. In this regard, many recall the oil blockade of Japan, which preceded the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. “Every year, 50 of thousands of ships pass through the Strait of Malacca, which account for a quarter of the entire maritime turnover,” said Chinese political scientist Chen Shaofen. “And understanding what role it plays for China, the Americans, along with their allies, can easily plug it.” Not for nothing in June of last year, the United States conducted large-scale joint exercises in the waters of the Malacca Strait with the Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Brunei. This is the Achilles heel of China, and, realizing this, Chairman of the People's Republic of China, Hu Jintao, has long proclaimed the way out of the Malacca impasse to be a major state task.
To solve it, a strategy of a “string of pearls” was developed in Beijing, which involves creating a string of ports and military bases of the PRC in friendly countries on the northern Indian Ocean (Myanmar, Bangladesh, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Iran). “Thanks to this magic thread,” notes Shaofen, “Chinese ships will be able to go out to the ocean, bypassing the Strait of Malacca. It will help Beijing establish control over the South China Sea and strengthen its position in the Bay of Bengal. ”
An important place in the chain of "pearls" is given to the ports of Myanmar. The ruling military junta in this country, led by General Thein Sein, regards China as its political ally and is extremely grateful for its support in confronting Western democratizers who in 2007 had threatened to impose sanctions against "Asian tyranny." On the Myanmar-owned Koko Islands, the Chinese have deployed a radar that allows them to monitor navigation in the Strait of Malacca. They modernized the Myanmar airports of Mandalay and Pegu and built military bases in Sitt, Kyokpu Hangi, Mergui and Zaedji. "Ports in Myanmar," writes Foreign Policy, "allow the People's Republic of China to bypass the numerous Indian islands located in the Bay of Bengal, which can be used as an iron chain blocking the Strait of Malacca."
In addition, the Chinese are building the Chittagong port in Bangladesh, the Marao naval base in the Maldives (according to experts, in the future it will allow the PRC to control the actions of the Indian fleet) and the port of Hambantot in Sri Lanka. But the most valuable "pearl" is considered the port of Gwadar on the west coast of Pakistan. This is the main observation post of the Chinese Navy, allowing them to follow the actions of the American fleet in the Persian Gulf and the Indian - in the Arabian Sea.
Thus, Beijing is doing everything possible to assert its preemptive rights in East and Southeast Asia. However, this clearly does not fit in with the Western concept of deterrence. And the fact that the Chinese consider it a forced defensive measure can be interpreted in the West as an act of aggression. And, on the contrary, the attempts of the United States to “contain” China, in Beijing, are perceived by many as a desire of the “barbarians” to hold the Celestial Kingdom in a vice.
The big game in East Asia
It is no coincidence that the PRC reacted so painfully to the talks between the Americans and the Filipino military. The English-language Chinese newspaper The Global Times has set an ultimatum even to Manila: "A step forward in military cooperation with America means a step back in economic rapprochement with China." The Chinese government has threatened to impose sanctions on the Philippines, although such methods of pressure in the Middle Kingdom have never been welcomed. In addition, the Chinese made it clear that they could force the ASEAN countries to interrupt economic ties with Manila.
To besiege the "Western imperialists", China began to show activity in the "backyard of America." The Hong Kong billionaire Lee Ka Shin leased the Panamanian ports of Bilbao and Cristobal, and on the table of the head of the Pentagon immediately laid down the report "The Chinese bridgehead in the Panama Canal." True, experts assure that such geopolitical games should not be taken seriously. After all, in order to challenge the ocean hegemony of the United States, first of all, China will need to seize the world's longest island ridge, in the center of which is the island of Taiwan.
Since the times of the Cold War, Americans have perceived this island as a key element of their defense system in East Asia, “an unsinkable aircraft carrier restraining the rapid growth of the PRC.” But the Chinese Communists since 1949 have assured that sooner or later they will be able to restore central authority on the island. The example is the Manchu Qing Dynasty, which began to rule in China in 1644, while Taiwan only took over half a century later. And a year and a half ago, after concluding a trade deal with Taipei, Beijing had grounds for optimism. Journalists talk about the "velvet reintegration of big China" and publish cartoons in which the big panda seduces the little ice cream cone. According to political scientists, the Chinese are planning to use the concept of “one country - two systems” successfully tested in Hong Kong in the case of Taiwan, making Taipei the financial and economic center of the “empire” and giving it wide autonomy. Chairman Hu Jintao calls for “economic gingerbread” for the islanders, which over time will allow China to swallow up Taiwan and break out into the world's oceans. Many people call this the Jintao political testament to the fifth generation of Communist Party leaders who will replace him in 2012.
And while the pragmatic approach to foreign policy prevails in China, the positions of the nationalist trend, whose representatives by Western political analysts, by analogy with the American neocons, are called neocomm, are becoming ever stronger. "In the Middle Kingdom," writes The American Thinker, "the mentality of the Middle Kingdom comes to life, other Asians are perceived here as creatures of a lower order, and representatives of the West as barbarians."
The author of the Chinese Chinese Dream textbook pamphlet, Professor Lee Munfu, believes that the PRC should abandon its “peaceful development”, rely on military power and prepare for the “duel of the century” with the United States. “The national security strategy should not be static,” echoes another influential neocom, an expert at the Center for Strategic Studies at Peking University, Dai Hu. “We need to move away from the non-confrontational model, because the world has long since entered the era of a“ warm war, ”which runs the risk of becoming a hot one.” Even more categorical is the professor of the Chinese National University of Defense, Major General Zhang Chaochon, who called on the PRC "not to give in and defend Iran, even if it means the beginning of a third world war."
The problem is not even in allied relations with Iran, but in the panic of the Chinese over the possibility of closing the Strait of Hormuz, through which more than 20 percent of the oil goes to China. According to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, “after the Big Two project was buried, the period of confrontation in the US-China relations began again, and many experts are convinced that everything America is doing now, starting with the invasion of Libya and ending with the conflict with Iran, aimed at weakening the global rival. The Trans-Pacific Partnership serves as the same goal - an economic union that, according to Washington strategists, should minimize Chinese influence in East Asia and the chain of American military bases around the Celestial Empire.
For the past few months, opposition to the United States and China in East and Southeast Asia has been actively discussed in Western think tanks. It is no secret that in international politics the center of gravity has long since moved from the Atlantic to the Pacific and Indian Ocean. It is no coincidence that Obama proclaimed himself the first Pacific president of the United States, and Beijing began to accuse the Americans of wanting to surround the Celestial Empire with a ring of military bases and began to build up in response its line of defense, called the “string of pearls”.
The United States is concerned that many in Asia have the impression that China has emerged from the economic crisis stronger, and America weakened. Such a stereotype, according to Western political scientists, contributes to the creation of a cinocentric Asia.
Antique Chinese Coalition
“That's why the United States,” they say, “is trying to put together an anti-Chinese coalition in the region.” “American strategists openly let the PRC understand that they are preparing for a military clash,” writes The Independent. “They surround China with military bases and have already entered into a triple alliance with Japan and India, which Australia will join in the near future.” The alliance of four, apparently, could become the Asian branch of the League of Democracies, the creation of which the tireless Senator McCain has long been calling for. Although before such an alliance is finalized, the participating countries will have to overcome some technical difficulties and get rid of established stereotypes. In Washington and Tokyo, for example, skepticism about the military potential of New Delhi and Indian the fleet will have to try very hard to coordinate with the Japanese and American Navy.
Indeed, despite the fact that the decision on joint exercises and operations was made three years ago, the position of diplomats who uphold the traditional principle of "non-alignment" to international military alliances is still strong in India.
On the other hand, the Indians are well aware that their Chinese neighbors are less likely to remember Deng Xiaoping's covenants and gradually abandon restraint in foreign policy. And this means that border conflicts in Tibet and Kashmir will only worsen every year. And it is not surprising that the government of Manmohan Singh is betting on America. “Only Washington can make India feel like a great power,” said the Indian prime minister. “The United States, for example, can achieve UN Security Council reform that would secure New Delhi the status of a permanent member of this organization.” In addition, America is oriented towards large Indian business related to information technology and the military industry. “Singh believes in the age of the United States that the fate of India is inextricably linked with this country,” writes Jyoti Malhotra, editor of the diplomatic department of the Indian newspaper The Telegraph. The same can be said of the Japanese political elite, which is gradually getting rid of the guilty complex in front of China, which from its pitiful and offended younger brother turns in her eyes into an implacable rival, dreaming of revenge. More and more experts admit: sooner or later, two Asian powers will come to grips - "two tigers will not get along in the same forest." Another US ally in the region remains South Korea, traditionally hostile to Japan. And although the United States has defense agreements with both countries, their armies have virtually no contact. "Korean-Japanese historical controversy is a weak link in the US Asian security strategy, ”writes The Washington Times.
Anaconda rings
The countries of Southeast Asia are beginning to play an increasingly important role for the United States. It is no coincidence that Hillary Clinton acceded to the Bali Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation and offered to play the role of mediator in resolving disputed territorial problems in the South China Sea, which Western experts have already dubbed "the East Asian Mediterranean." In China, this proposal was called “shameless interference in the internal affairs of the continent,” but out of fear of Beijing, more and more Asian states are ready to support the Clinton initiative. “We need the US as a counterweight to Chinese influence, because even by joining forces, the countries of the region are not able to put pressure on Beijing,” said Singaporean creator Lee Kuan Y. — If America leaves us to the mercy of fate, it risks losing the role of world leader. . "The tighter the policy of the PRC becomes," writes The Atlantic, "the easier it is for Americans to intimidate Asian whelps with the mythical Chinese threat and prevent the unification of East Asia around Beijing." In order to feel confident, America is clearly not enough old bases in Japan, Guam and South Korea, and it is seeking to expand its military presence in the region. It is no coincidence that negotiations are underway to restore the Subic Bay base in the Philippines, which has been the main outpost of the United States in the region throughout the past century. In 1992, the local parliament decided to expel the Americans from the Philippine land, but after 20 years, the archipelago authorities seemed to come to their senses and again swore allegiance to Washington, agreeing to host reconnaissance aircraft, warships, and large US military contingents.
As in the era of the Cold War, when America sought to surround the Soviet Union with a chain of military bases, the current US advance in East Asia is compared with anaconda rings. "The Obama administration is trying to build a system of military alliances in the APR," writes The Washington Post, "and after successful negotiations with Manila, hopes to win over to its side the Vietnamese and Thai generals, irritated by the arrogant policy of the PRC." In this sense, the visit of American ships to Vietnam last August in the past 40 years, which was once one of the largest deepwater bases in the United States, certainly deserves attention. "It is very symbolic," writes The Foreign Affairs, "that the country whose conflict caused the US to flee from Southeast Asia is beginning to flirt with Washington in the hope of protecting itself from the claims of the Chinese giant."
At the end of last year, the United States agreed with Australia to deploy the largest American military contingent since World War II in the north of the country and received Singapore’s consent to use the Changi naval base. The United States makes it clear that they intend to maintain their hegemony not only in the Pacific, but also in the Indian Ocean. They reinforce the fifth and seventh fleets, based in the “Chinese Underbelly,” and strengthen the naval base on Diego Garcia. What is particularly symbolic, weapons and equipment on this island come from Europe: from the closing of the US military bases located in Germany and Italy.
Pearl string
By deploying troops in the Philippines, Australia and Singapore, Americans can at any time close the transportation artery, the Strait of Malacca, the most important for China, through which 85 per cent of oil goes to China from Africa and the Middle East. In this regard, many recall the oil blockade of Japan, which preceded the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. “Every year, 50 of thousands of ships pass through the Strait of Malacca, which account for a quarter of the entire maritime turnover,” said Chinese political scientist Chen Shaofen. “And understanding what role it plays for China, the Americans, along with their allies, can easily plug it.” Not for nothing in June of last year, the United States conducted large-scale joint exercises in the waters of the Malacca Strait with the Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Brunei. This is the Achilles heel of China, and, realizing this, Chairman of the People's Republic of China, Hu Jintao, has long proclaimed the way out of the Malacca impasse to be a major state task.
To solve it, a strategy of a “string of pearls” was developed in Beijing, which involves creating a string of ports and military bases of the PRC in friendly countries on the northern Indian Ocean (Myanmar, Bangladesh, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Iran). “Thanks to this magic thread,” notes Shaofen, “Chinese ships will be able to go out to the ocean, bypassing the Strait of Malacca. It will help Beijing establish control over the South China Sea and strengthen its position in the Bay of Bengal. ”
An important place in the chain of "pearls" is given to the ports of Myanmar. The ruling military junta in this country, led by General Thein Sein, regards China as its political ally and is extremely grateful for its support in confronting Western democratizers who in 2007 had threatened to impose sanctions against "Asian tyranny." On the Myanmar-owned Koko Islands, the Chinese have deployed a radar that allows them to monitor navigation in the Strait of Malacca. They modernized the Myanmar airports of Mandalay and Pegu and built military bases in Sitt, Kyokpu Hangi, Mergui and Zaedji. "Ports in Myanmar," writes Foreign Policy, "allow the People's Republic of China to bypass the numerous Indian islands located in the Bay of Bengal, which can be used as an iron chain blocking the Strait of Malacca."
In addition, the Chinese are building the Chittagong port in Bangladesh, the Marao naval base in the Maldives (according to experts, in the future it will allow the PRC to control the actions of the Indian fleet) and the port of Hambantot in Sri Lanka. But the most valuable "pearl" is considered the port of Gwadar on the west coast of Pakistan. This is the main observation post of the Chinese Navy, allowing them to follow the actions of the American fleet in the Persian Gulf and the Indian - in the Arabian Sea.
Thus, Beijing is doing everything possible to assert its preemptive rights in East and Southeast Asia. However, this clearly does not fit in with the Western concept of deterrence. And the fact that the Chinese consider it a forced defensive measure can be interpreted in the West as an act of aggression. And, on the contrary, the attempts of the United States to “contain” China, in Beijing, are perceived by many as a desire of the “barbarians” to hold the Celestial Kingdom in a vice.
The big game in East Asia
It is no coincidence that the PRC reacted so painfully to the talks between the Americans and the Filipino military. The English-language Chinese newspaper The Global Times has set an ultimatum even to Manila: "A step forward in military cooperation with America means a step back in economic rapprochement with China." The Chinese government has threatened to impose sanctions on the Philippines, although such methods of pressure in the Middle Kingdom have never been welcomed. In addition, the Chinese made it clear that they could force the ASEAN countries to interrupt economic ties with Manila.
To besiege the "Western imperialists", China began to show activity in the "backyard of America." The Hong Kong billionaire Lee Ka Shin leased the Panamanian ports of Bilbao and Cristobal, and on the table of the head of the Pentagon immediately laid down the report "The Chinese bridgehead in the Panama Canal." True, experts assure that such geopolitical games should not be taken seriously. After all, in order to challenge the ocean hegemony of the United States, first of all, China will need to seize the world's longest island ridge, in the center of which is the island of Taiwan.
Since the times of the Cold War, Americans have perceived this island as a key element of their defense system in East Asia, “an unsinkable aircraft carrier restraining the rapid growth of the PRC.” But the Chinese Communists since 1949 have assured that sooner or later they will be able to restore central authority on the island. The example is the Manchu Qing Dynasty, which began to rule in China in 1644, while Taiwan only took over half a century later. And a year and a half ago, after concluding a trade deal with Taipei, Beijing had grounds for optimism. Journalists talk about the "velvet reintegration of big China" and publish cartoons in which the big panda seduces the little ice cream cone. According to political scientists, the Chinese are planning to use the concept of “one country - two systems” successfully tested in Hong Kong in the case of Taiwan, making Taipei the financial and economic center of the “empire” and giving it wide autonomy. Chairman Hu Jintao calls for “economic gingerbread” for the islanders, which over time will allow China to swallow up Taiwan and break out into the world's oceans. Many people call this the Jintao political testament to the fifth generation of Communist Party leaders who will replace him in 2012.
And while the pragmatic approach to foreign policy prevails in China, the positions of the nationalist trend, whose representatives by Western political analysts, by analogy with the American neocons, are called neocomm, are becoming ever stronger. "In the Middle Kingdom," writes The American Thinker, "the mentality of the Middle Kingdom comes to life, other Asians are perceived here as creatures of a lower order, and representatives of the West as barbarians."
The author of the Chinese Chinese Dream textbook pamphlet, Professor Lee Munfu, believes that the PRC should abandon its “peaceful development”, rely on military power and prepare for the “duel of the century” with the United States. “The national security strategy should not be static,” echoes another influential neocom, an expert at the Center for Strategic Studies at Peking University, Dai Hu. “We need to move away from the non-confrontational model, because the world has long since entered the era of a“ warm war, ”which runs the risk of becoming a hot one.” Even more categorical is the professor of the Chinese National University of Defense, Major General Zhang Chaochon, who called on the PRC "not to give in and defend Iran, even if it means the beginning of a third world war."
The problem is not even in allied relations with Iran, but in the panic of the Chinese over the possibility of closing the Strait of Hormuz, through which more than 20 percent of the oil goes to China. According to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, “after the Big Two project was buried, the period of confrontation in the US-China relations began again, and many experts are convinced that everything America is doing now, starting with the invasion of Libya and ending with the conflict with Iran, aimed at weakening the global rival. The Trans-Pacific Partnership serves as the same goal - an economic union that, according to Washington strategists, should minimize Chinese influence in East Asia and the chain of American military bases around the Celestial Empire.
Information