Military Review

China: real and immediate danger

57

Most of the discussions in recent years regarding the increase in Chinese influence were conducted in the focus of a potential threat that China may present as, after all, as an equal competitor to the United States, challenging the status quo of the current world order. But another problem is more pressing. For at least another decade, China will remain rather weak compared to the United States and there is a real danger that relations between Beijing and Washington will end up in a crisis that will quickly escalate into a military conflict.


In contrast to the long-term strategy of rivalry between superpowers, which may escalate or not worsen, the danger of a crisis between two nuclear powers is real in the short term, and the events of the past few years suggest the possibility of increasing this risk.

Since the end of the Cold War, Beijing and Washington have managed to avoid dangerous clashes several times: in 1995-96, when the United States responded to Chinese missile tests designed to warn Taiwanese voters about the dangers of voting for independence; in 1999, when the Americans bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade by mistake during a NATO operation in Serbia; and in 2001, when an American reconnaissance aircraft collided with a Chinese fighter, which led to the death of a Chinese pilot. Beijing, in turn, detained an American plane with a crew. But the absence of an escalation of these conflicts should not give rise to complacency.

None of these episodes had a definition of a true crisis: a confrontation that would threaten the vital interests of both parties, and thus sharply increased the risk of war.

If Beijing and Washington are in a similar skirmish in the near future, both sides will have strong incentives to use force. Moreover, temptation is likely to be the strongest at an early stage, which will make it much more difficult to prevent war through diplomacy.

THIN RED LINE

It would seem that the prospects for similar crises in US-China relations have been reduced in recent years, as the tension around Taiwan’s problem subsided, and this was the main powder keg underlying most of China’s and US military planning in East Asia since the middle of 90’s years

But there were new potential hot spots. While China and its neighbors are arguing about islands and maritime rights in the Eastern and Southern Chinese seas, the United States reaffirmed its commitment to defend the two countries that have challenged China’s claims (Japan and the Philippines) and are very close to the same with the third (Viet Nam). In addition, the “axis” or “rebalancing” in Asia from the Obama administration is the diplomatic side of the planned military redistribution, which is a signal of Washington’s readiness to engage in the event of a regional conflict.

Also, the United States insists on international legislation allowing freedom of navigation in international waters and airspace, a limit defined in 12 miles from the country. China, on the other hand, claims that foreign warships and airplanes should be kept outside the country for approximately 200 miles (“exclusive economic zone”). Given such territorial claims, most of the South China Sea and the airspace for American ships and aircraft are closed. Disputes over freedom of navigation have already provoked a confrontation between China and the United States, and it remains a possible trigger for a serious crisis.

Today, China and the United States are not adversaries - clearly not in the sense of the word, as the USSR and the United States were during the Cold War. But the risk is that the US-China crisis will in fact be even more dangerous if Beijing and Washington fall into the trap of a zero-sum game, fighting for life and death.

As opponents in constant combat readiness, the USSR and Washington were aware of the fundamental contradiction of their interests, which could be the cause of war.

After several nervous confrontations around Berlin and Cuba, they gained an understanding of the vital interests of each other, challenging which inevitably provoke a crisis, and developed mechanisms for how to avoid escalation. China and the United States should achieve the same mutual understanding of interests or find reliable means to curb possible crises.

Neither China nor the United States clearly defined their vital interests in the vast expanses of the western Pacific. In recent years, China has issued various unofficial statements regarding its “key interests”, which sometimes go beyond the territorial and political integrity of the mainland and claim dominance over Taiwan.

For example, China intends to treat the disputed territories of the eastern and southern Chinese seas as its vital interests.

Washington's position in the region also looks vague.

The United States insured against the threat of Taiwan with a US security umbrella. And the position of the United States on controversial maritime issues, including China and its neighbors, looks somewhat confusing: Washington remains neutral on ownership issues and insists on a peaceful resolution of issues, but reaffirms its commitment to support its allies in the event of a conflict.

Such Chinese and American ambiguities about the “red line” that cannot be crossed without the risk of conflict increase the likelihood that one of the parties will take steps that will be considered safe, but will turn out to be unexpectedly provocative.

MORE DANGER THAN THE COLD WAR

The uncertainty of what could lead to war for both Beijing and Washington makes the crisis much more likely than if the parties knew when, where the danger lurks or how much pressure can be pressed if the other side is not ready for concessions. A similar situation occurred at the beginning of the Cold War, when there were several serious crises, until the parties began to feel each other and learned the rules on the go.

But today the situation is even more dangerous.

The balance of nuclear and traditional military power between China and the United States, for example, is much more one-sided than it was between the USSR and the United States. If the relations between the United States and China enter into conflict, the huge advantage of the United States in traditional weapons will cause the temptation to threaten or use force.

Realizing the temptation of Washington, Beijing, in turn, may feel an urge to use traditional weapons before they are destroyed. Although China is not able to correct the military imbalance, it may believe that a quick serious damage is the best way to force the US to retreat.

The fact that both sides have nuclear arsenals will help to avoid its use, which would be a reason for retaliation. In fact, if only nuclear weapon played a role, the US-China crises would be very stable and would not be worth worrying about too much. But the traditional armed forces of both countries complicate the situation, undermining the stability of nuclear deterrence.

Throughout the crisis, both parties can believe that the use of traditional weapons is a tool with which you can achieve better bargaining positions by manipulating the other side in what economist Thomas Schelling called “taking risks”.

During a crisis, China or the United States can assume that what is at stake means more for the enemy, and thus are willing to tolerate a greater level of risk.

But since the use of conventional weapons can only be the first step of unpredictable errors, mistakes and miscalculations, there is no guarantee that this balancing will end before an unforeseen nuclear catastrophe.

China, moreover, apparently believes that nuclear deterrence opens up the possibility of the safe use of traditional military force. Since both countries fear a potential nuclear exchange, the Chinese are inclined to think that neither they nor the Americans will bring the escalation of the conflict too far.

Soviet leaders, on the contrary, demonstrated that they would use any military means if the war began — one of the reasons why the war did not start. In addition, the Chinese official position on the use of nuclear weapons “not to be the first to use”, which is observed in military exercises and military preparations, increases their confidence that a war with the United States will not turn into a nuclear one. As a result of these beliefs, Beijing may be less careful in taking steps that could trigger the crisis. And if the crisis happens, China may also be less cautious about the first shot.

Such opinions are particularly disturbing, given the development of technology in recent years, thanks to which the accuracy and effectiveness of traditional weapons has improved dramatically. Their lethal effect can give a great advantage to the first attacking side, which was uncharacteristic of the traditional military actions of the US-Soviet confrontation in Europe.

In addition, due to complex computer and satellite systems, the management of modern weapons is extremely vulnerable to traditional military attacks and cyber attacks, today more accurate weapons can be effective only if they are used before the enemy has struck or taken counter-measures.

If peacetime containment has been replaced by a search for an advantage during a crisis, neither China nor the United States can be sure of the reliability of their systems that control traditional weapons.

Under such circumstances, both Beijing and Washington have incentives to initiate an attack. China will be under heavy pressure from the fact that their advanced weapons fully depend on vulnerable computer networks, fixed radar stations and satellites. The effectiveness of advanced US forces is less dependent on these vulnerable systems. However, the US advantage may increase the temptation to strike first, especially against Chinese satellites, which will cope with a similar response to retaliation from China.

NO COMMUNICATION

The US-China crisis may also be more dangerous than the clashes of the Cold War due to the unreliability of the existing communication channels between Beijing and Washington. After the Cuban missile crisis, the USSR and the United States recognized the importance of a direct connection between their leaders, establishing the Moscow-Washington hotline. In 1998, China and the United States also established a hotline between the presidents. But despite the work of the hotline, the White House was unable to get in touch with the Chinese leaders in a timely manner after the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade 1999 of the year or the incident with the spy plane 2001 of the year.

China’s inability to use the hotline may reflect the reluctance of Chinese leaders to respond before they have developed internal consensus or have not held extensive consultations with their military. The delay can also talk about the difficulties of policy coordination, since China has no equivalent to the US National Security Council. But whatever the reasons, the delay in direct communication can be critical in the early stages of the unfolding crisis.

Instead, communication between countries will initially be limited to early public statements or silent signals transmitted through actions. But public statements aimed at different audiences, and the patriotic passion in China or the United States, as well as the pressure of the allies, could push the other side to take an even more aggressive stance than was considered sufficient. In the absence of direct and confidential communication, the two countries will not be able to discuss politically sensitive proposals. They also will not be able to share information that will cool the heat of the terrible escalation of the conflict, such as information about military capabilities or current military preparations.

Communication through action is also problematic, as it is related to the possibility of a lot of distortion when sending a message and misinterpretation when it is received. Chinese analysts seem to overestimate the ease with which you can send a signal through military action and underestimate the risk of escalation resulting from misreading a message.

For example, analysts Andrew Erickson and David Young drew attention to the Chinese military publications, which suggested the use of Chinese anti-ship missile systems created against American aircraft carriers to give China resolve during the crisis. Some Chinese military thinkers assumed that China could send a signal by opening warning fire close to a moving aircraft carrier and even a targeted strike on the aircraft carrier command tower without affecting the rest of the ship. But, as Owen Cotier points out, even the most accurate anti-ship missile systems have an inevitable accuracy of accuracy. Thus, the smallest salvo of this kind can entail the risk of serious damage and thus unintentional escalation.

The final important factor that makes the US-China crisis more dangerous than the Cold War is geography. The focus of the Cold War was on land, especially in central Europe, and the future confrontation between the United States and China will almost certainly take place at sea. This difference will characterize the new crisis in many ways, especially requiring both parties to make some crucial decisions from the very beginning. The Chinese small submarine fleet with nuclear missiles (SSBNs) and the much larger fleet with traditional weapons feel most secure being in shallow water near the Chinese mainland where, due to poor acoustics, the efficiency of American submarines will deteriorate. Their proximity to aviation and China’s missile defense also limits the ability of the US Air Force and US surface ships to deal with them. For China, submarines play a large role in the confrontation with the United States, but for this they will have to leave safe waters.

Chinese submarines dramatically increase the possibility of a crisis getting out of control. Although American technology of underwater warfare is more effective in less noisy open waters (where Americans also enjoy air superiority), this is not ideal: part fleet The United States caught in the range of surviving Chinese submarines will be in jeopardy. Thus, at the very beginning of the crisis, the US will be tempted to attack Chinese submarines as soon as they try to leave domestic waters. Especially because there are only a few narrow routes through which Chinese submarines can reach deep water, the United States will be tempted to strike immediately, rather than endanger the ships of its navy.

Regardless of the decision of the United States, every Chinese military submarine that manages to reach deep, deep waters will have to choose whether to use or lose, due to its huge vulnerability to American anti-submarine forces — another potential trigger for escalating the conflict.

The Chinese nuclear submarine fleet presents other risks. By virtue of its “not to be the first to use” policy, China clearly stated that any attack on strategic nuclear forces would be a pretext for a second nuclear strike, which makes an attack on SSBNs unlikely. At the beginning of the crisis, therefore, Beijing will find it safer to place SSBNs at a distance in deep waters, where it will be most convenient for them to execute the launch order. But such an arrangement, in turn, includes new dangers. One of them is the possibility of confusing a submarine with nuclear missiles with a conventional submarine, and attacking it to provoke a Chinese retaliatory strike. The other is the possibility of an escalation of the conflict without a direct order from Beijing, due to the restriction of communication with the mainland, which is practiced to avoid detection.

MANAGEMENT OF RISKS

The chances of a US-Chinese crisis in the coming years are low, but they are not insignificant, and they worry more and more as the risks of such a conflict increase. The most important steps that Beijing and Washington can take are those that can prevent such crises. Due to the uncertainty of the framework of the vital interests of each other, which could be the trigger for such a crisis, both countries should deepen political and military exchanges, the focus of which lies on this problem. Even if they are unable to achieve complete clarity, the discussion will help draw attention to what each country views as the greatest risk.

Although it would be difficult to rule out the possibility of confrontation between the United States and China, both countries can do more to address the sources of potential instability and improve their ability to manage the risks they may face during the crisis. Leaders in Washington can share their rich risk management experience with their Chinese counterparts, emphasizing the importance of policy coordination. In addition, the United States must emphasize the need to use the existing hotline for operational, direct communication between the top leaders of countries during a crisis.

China and the United States should deepen their modest military cooperation.

Without prejudice to the leakage of important secrets, increase familiarity with each other’s military systems and practices, which will reduce the risk of accidental escalation in the event of a clash. It would be wise for both sides to develop personal contacts among the commanders of both countries who, in the event of a crisis, created a grain of trust, which would be useful if political leaders tried to reduce the level of conflict.

The task received by Washington and Beijing to address the future crisis will not be easy. In the end, you may need to go through the experience of a frightening collision, just as it was during the beginning of the Cold War. But no need to go through that.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rugor
    rugor 16 October 2013 15: 31
    +4
    The USSR and the USA conducted real military operations against each other in foreign territories, Vietnam, Korea, the Middle East, etc. Trying on to larger conflicts, thereby avoiding them.

    The involvement of China in such conflicts is indicative, as long as they are on the sidelines.
    1. ShturmKGB
      ShturmKGB 16 October 2013 15: 42
      11
      China will be wary of engaging in open confrontation with the United States or Russia while one of the fighting tigers (Russia or the United States) is alive ... this is from a Chinese parable that a wise ruler will not intervene in a fight between two tigers until a winner appears, and when someone wins, the third tiger leaves the bushes and kills the victorious but exhausted tiger ...
      1. Guun
        Guun 16 October 2013 15: 53
        +1
        Over time, China will intensify and a clash with the United States will lead to foreign territories. The United States has rich experience - China does not have it. Time will tell what will happen next.
      2. clidon
        clidon 16 October 2013 17: 36
        +5
        The Chinese said (listened on the radio) in the early 90s, when the USSR collapsed, that the Great Helmsman prophecy had come true and one tiger had died. It's time they say a wise monkey to climb down a tree. Something like that. So for them, Russia, to some extent, is no longer quite a tiger. Actually, which was confirmed by the demarcation of the border and, as a whole, by the consumer attitude to the northern neighbor.
        1. timer
          timer 16 October 2013 20: 49
          +3
          I believe that China needs to be wary and strengthen the Far East and Primorye. The Chinese like cockroaches are climbing the Far East, and the indigenous population is getting smaller and smaller. If it goes on like this (and for now I don’t see the active actions of our rotten authorities to change the trend) - and without attack, the Far East and Primorye will become a Chinese fool. It is necessary to squeeze the Chinese out of our territory, develop industrial production, increase the birth rate of the indigenous population, and invite people from the central regions of Russia to work. taxes, in general, on the one hand, take steps leading to the withdrawal of the Chinese from the Far East and Primorye, on the other, it is powerful to develop this region. Only all this must be done wisely and cunningly so as not to quarrel with China. We still need it against the United States.
          1. alex86
            alex86 16 October 2013 21: 00
            0
            Quote: timer
            .Only all this must be done with wisdom and cunning
            But with this we have the worst of things ... And everything is right, there would have lived at least 50 million, and not the 6 that are now (don’t cling to the numbers, they’re quite arbitrary) - that’s how the Chinese could be assimilated - and now they are assimilating us ...
      3. timer
        timer 16 October 2013 21: 02
        0
        I believe that it will not be profitable for China to oppose the United States. China is a major US lender, the main power of America. concerns, also in China. The Rothschilds have relied on China, and they are friends with the Rockefellers (USA).
        By the way, the Rothschilds "cover" Russia too, so the global China-Russia link against the United States is understandable (but not an open confrontation). I would like China to actively win the US nerves for a long time, and Russia to control this process to please its interests. VA RF do not need to do!
    2. varov14
      varov14 16 October 2013 17: 38
      +2
      Hence the task is to contribute to the outbreak of such conflicts, albeit in foreign territories.
  2. Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 16 October 2013 15: 39
    -3
    The United States is not interested in China, unlike Russia ... So far, the doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons signed by Medvedev is saving us ...
    1. Don
      Don 16 October 2013 15: 47
      +5
      Quote: Dazdranagon
      The United States is not interested in China, unlike Russia

      Yes, but China and Taiwan and the islands of the US allies of Japan and the Philippines are interesting.
      1. albi77
        albi77 16 October 2013 16: 17
        10
        But the United States is unlikely to leave its allies to be torn to pieces by China.
        When, as with Russia, they may well "help", trying to snatch something for themselves.
        In fact, wherever China does not move everywhere there will be a guaranteed conflict. In the South and East with the USA and Japan. in the West with India, in the north with Russia ...
        the question of whom he considers weaker ....
        1. Hudo
          Hudo 16 October 2013 17: 20
          +3
          Quote: albi77
          the question of whom he considers weaker ....


          ... and so to speak nutritious, for the good of Chinese digestion.
          1. Revolver
            Revolver 16 October 2013 19: 33
            +2
            Quote: Hudo
            Quote: albi77
            the question of whom he considers weaker ....


            ... and so to speak nutritious, for the good of Chinese digestion.

            The Chinese are generally omnivorous, eating everything that grows or moves. What is offered in Chinese restaurants in America is far from everything that is offered in similar establishments in China and neighboring Asian countries, and is also highly adapted to Western tastes.
            So the first Chinese will try to gobble up the one who at the moment seems easier prey. And for some reason it seems that it will most likely be the Russian Federation.
            China’s war with America (as well as with Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, because America will not give them to China for free) will turn out like a fight of an elephant with a whale (or rather a tiger with a crocodile), each stronger in his environment and will not climb into someone else’s, at least with the intention of fighting. China at sea simply has nothing to oppose America, and there will not be soon, if any. And landing troops on mainland China, even if it turns out under the guise of a fleet, will cost America too much to undertake this without absolute necessity.
            But with a bear, a tiger may well try its luck, especially if it decides that the bear is weakened after hibernation.
    2. velikoros-xnumx
      velikoros-xnumx 16 October 2013 16: 49
      +1
      Quote: Dazdranagon
      The United States is not interested in China, unlike Russia ... So far, the doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons, signed by Medvedev, is saving us.

      Both of them are very interested in overwhelming superiority in the Asia-Pacific region, the United States will not give up its positions here without a fight, and China will never reconcile with the domination (well, at least with very serious influence) of the United States in Southeast Asia.
    3. Lapotnik
      Lapotnik 16 October 2013 17: 43
      +4
      China and the United States will always be interested in the territory of Russia - the Far East. Everything else is for them a clue to the main treat.
      You can at least twist all the analytical dregs - Asian markets, yuan huani and other victories are negligible when the foundation of power on the planet is at stake, both geopolitically and in terms of resources and banal survival on earth. Plus, the Far East is an open road to the development of the north, and there it is inexhaustible ...

      All this has already been reviewed and revised horseradish cloud of times. You have to think big, and you are the Asian region) China from the USA ... this will be due to the division of Russia, but by the way it is already underway.
  3. Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 16 October 2013 15: 47
    +5
    Yeah, guys, China is still the Secret of the Open Door and is clearly not going to plunge into the allies. Industrialization of China for the sake of the Western society of the stomach and zh_py still comes around to the west.
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 16 October 2013 22: 44
      0
      Quote: Peaceful military
      Industrialization of China for the sake of the Western society of the stomach and zh_py still comes around to the west.

      And not only to the West, to the whole world, there will be a headache with hemorrhoids, but in general it is already felt. I rarely agree with you, but here you +
  4. WIN969
    WIN969 16 October 2013 16: 04
    +3
    I think it would be beneficial for Russia if China and the United States start a cold war among themselves, they would seriously weaken each other in our favor. Since China is already the first economy in the world, I think this conflict is not far off.
  5. Megatron
    Megatron 16 October 2013 16: 04
    0
    The war of the USA and China is our most cherished dream!
    1. Hudo
      Hudo 16 October 2013 16: 11
      +4
      Quote: Megatron
      The war of the USA and China is our most cherished dream!


      Can't wait to see the nuclear sun? It would be much nicer if China drives the United States into a state of civil war by economic measures.
      1. pint45
        pint45 16 October 2013 16: 34
        0
        It’s time for the Chinese to claim the American debt and .. The Yankees owe to many. IMHO
        1. Revolver
          Revolver 16 October 2013 22: 46
          0
          Quote: pint45
          It’s time for the Chinese to claim the American debt and .. The Yankees owe to many. IMHO
          So in the event of a direct collision, debts can be forgiven. According to the formula "To all whom I owe I forgive." bully
      2. Revolver
        Revolver 16 October 2013 22: 56
        0
        Quote: Hudo
        Quote: Megatron
        The war of the USA and China is our most cherished dream!


        Can't wait to see the nuclear sun?
        If this begins, there will be little to no one. For this alone, you ++++++++++++++
        Quote: Hudo
        It would be much nicer if China drives the United States into a state of civil war by economic measures.
        Rather, America will crush the Chinese economy. Should the United States impose an embargo, or at least inflate duties on Chinese goods, the Chinese will sit on a pile of consumer goods that cannot be sold to anyone (everyone has saturated markets anyway), including the Chinese themselves (and would like to afford it). And if the Chinese workers do not pay a month or two or three (there is simply nothing), then the Beijing leadership will in practice feel what the proletarian revolution is. It is only in the North that there will not be Comrade Stalin, who supported the CCP during the time of Mao by all means and means.
    2. clidon
      clidon 16 October 2013 17: 38
      +2
      Whose is yours? If there is a collision of this magnitude, then everyone will get it. Therefore, "let there always be the sun (ordinary)."
  6. Algor73
    Algor73 16 October 2013 16: 05
    +7
    "China has been thinking for thousands of years" - this is its whole essence. He will not get involved openly now, as the USSR and the USA did since the Cold War, when the whole world was divided into two camps. China's strategy has long been developed, and they are going according to the plan, increasing (for now) their power. When they get stronger, and realize that they are strong, then they will say their loud "fairy". China knows how to maneuver, knows how to transform the way it needs. sadly to admit it, he will "snatch" the primacy in the world.
    1. Goodmen
      Goodmen 16 October 2013 16: 22
      +3
      It will vomit if we, as now, click with our beak ...
      To restore order in the country, economy, industry, agricultural, consumer goods, etc. Raise science, strengthen the country's defense ability due to high technology.
      If we are a self-sufficient country with a strong economy, army and navy, then China and the United States will be in one place ... but these are dreams so far ... for their realization, a host of the country is needed, and not this misunderstanding - our ruling elite ...
      1. pint45
        pint45 16 October 2013 16: 41
        +1
        Alas and ah, so far everything is stagnant as self-praise, and what you please
  7. alone
    alone 16 October 2013 16: 11
    +3
    anyone who thinks that China is a danger is cruelly mistaken. China is now dangerous for everyone. And the more time passes, the more it becomes dangerous
    1. The comment was deleted.
  8. Stiletto
    Stiletto 16 October 2013 16: 14
    0
    Tell me, the author of Avery Goldstein, - you are definitely not Khramchikhin ?! laughing
  9. Ddhal
    Ddhal 16 October 2013 16: 17
    +9
    Again - there are a lot of buzzwords around nothing, apparently, nationality still predetermines a certain outline ..
    As Bismarck or Asimov said: "Strength is the last argument of the dumbass."
    And the Chinese are not stupid. Why blow up a safe in which most of the money is yours? I suppose their interests are more strategically determined by the disputed territories and our Far East, populated by the silent glanders of the Chinese comrades ... Thus, the Chinese will not be the first to start a war with the states.
    1. 3935333
      3935333 16 October 2013 16: 35
      0
      stand in solidarity
    2. pint45
      pint45 16 October 2013 16: 59
      +2
      It is high time to strengthen the Far East, and very much in the 70s we ask them to land on the runway, they are quiet on the runway, the fighters are standing on the runway, and in response THEM have prophylaxis. They flopped on the "Pchelka" and took off back on taxiing. flights are night and our wheels are dirty.
  10. pahom54
    pahom54 16 October 2013 17: 32
    +3
    This article talks about some kind of confrontation between China and the United States, and the author, as I understand it, is American, and he considers the current situation from his point of view, however, adding that the policy of both the USA and China in the Pacific region is MUDDY AND UNCERTAIN .. .
    This is where I get the idea that the East is a delicate matter ... Yes, China is growing not only numerically, but also economically, its armed forces are strengthening. But what does the United States and the alleged war with them have to do with it? Let me remind you once again an excerpt from the article that China "has not yet determined exactly the scope of its interests and claims" ... The fact that it still claims to a certain number of some islands is, in my opinion, just an estimate and verification who will react how. But the thought is worse, and the States have nothing to do with it.
    If you remember, the military confrontation between us (the USSR) and China was at the end of the 60s of the last century. Yes, and Vladimirov, the representative of the Comintern in the PRC, in his book "Special Region of China" wrote that Mao Tse Tung was never an ardent adherent and friend of the USSR, and believed that friendship with the USSR was needed insofar as pull juices and help ...
    This is what I mean: to hell with the islands, when the huge and RICH (still not completely plundered) territory of Russia adjoins ??? And after all, the occupation of Russian cities and villages has already begun, so far - quiet, creeping ... And yet our open spaces are simply asking to capture them ...
    It seems to me that articles like this take away from the real core of the situation in the East: wildly growing China urgently needs material and land resources, and they are nearby ... To wage war with the United States - why, for what, and why ??? Moreover, 100% confidence that this war will mainly take place in China ... This is useless for China, and the United States, it seems to me, too ...
    It is not the United States, and not even Japan, that we need to think about China’s economic and military growth, but Russia, we ... We don’t need a war with China, we don’t have the potential with which we can defeat China, so we need to be friends with China. To be friends, smile and ... AND ARMED, ARMED, ARMED! Because the wound or later, and the tidbit in the form of our territory, China will want to grab.
    1. clidon
      clidon 16 October 2013 17: 46
      +2
      Any occupation of a nuclear power is fraught with great risks. Therefore, in the foreseeable future of large-scale conflicts with Russia, Beijing does not plan. He is so good, why spoil everything.
      But you are right, the Chinese are now preoccupied with islets, or rather, primarily the island and its name Taiwan. Chinese diplomacy is dancing from this territory, and it is here that the largest number of contradictions with the United States.
      And Sengaku, yes, it’s more for the soul - now the Celestial Empire is experiencing the euphoria of the growth of power, and now I want something tasty, try to show myself.
      But we will have not so much to arm ourselves as to conduct a reasonable foreign and domestic policy. The USSR was clogged with weapons to the brim and this did not help him much.
    2. Walker1975
      Walker1975 16 October 2013 17: 51
      +2
      Or maybe China does not fight with Russia? Settle 150 million Chinese in Siberia, and then hold a referendum on the annexation of Siberia to China?
    3. Mhpv
      Mhpv 16 October 2013 18: 13
      +1

      Once again, look from the 21 minutes, yet not a bad analysis of the army and the intentions of the PRC.
      Friendship is friendship, and you need to keep your eyes open, it’s painful they are slippery rice-eaters.
      1. Walker1975
        Walker1975 16 October 2013 18: 33
        +1
        Is there a comparison of the Chinese and Russian army: infantry, tanks, artillery, aviation? Forecast of military conflict?
      2. pahom54
        pahom54 18 October 2013 08: 13
        0
        In fact, this video gives an answer to the question: what kind of war is China preparing and with whom, and the mood does not improve from this ...
  11. old rocket man
    old rocket man 16 October 2013 17: 47
    0
    The title of the article clearly lacks the US abbreviation, which is why the title smacks of provocation.
    The topic has been touched upon urgent but set out so verbose and confusing that you involuntarily pay attention to the name of the author laughing , and therefore put a minus, although everything is correct
  12. voliador
    voliador 16 October 2013 17: 59
    0
    An open military confrontation is probably not worth the wait. It is also not an option for the Chinese to extinguish sramers to the Chinese, in any case, while in their currency capsule more than 1 trillion. green pieces of paper that will immediately depreciate. And as for participation in military conflicts - in the early 80s, the Chinese sank into Vietnam and received lyuley.
  13. sashka
    sashka 16 October 2013 18: 25
    +2
    Strange reasoning. The headache should not be about the Americans, and not about Taiwan, but about its own borders. Whatever one may say, the Chinese have never been friends. And it is wrong to recognize its military power only in relation to the United States, Taiwan and Japan .. After all, China has no serious rivals "closer" to our borders. And which are so through the sea-okiyan. Maybe the time has come to think about yourself.
  14. Mhpv
    Mhpv 16 October 2013 18: 45
    0
    China insists on maritime borders in 200 miles, and climbs our Northern Sea Route, already with its icebreakers. Drive them from there to the neck, close the Bering Strait for such tramps and transport only with our escort, let them pay.
    Russia is inferior to China in the pace of development of the Northern Sea Route

    publication time: 19 March 2013, 14: 09
    last updated: March 19 2013, 14: 12




    Russia is rapidly losing its transit advantages of the shortest route from Europe to Asia. The Northern Sea Route (NSR), formerly an exclusively Russian fiefdom, is now being actively developed by foreigners, and primarily by the Chinese, writes Nezavisimaya Gazeta.

    China announced sensational plans for the development of the so-called polar possessions of the USSR. Following China, India and Singapore will send their ships to bypass Russia. Meanwhile, the RF is not able to offer carriers an adequate road or rail route, an alternative to the NSR.

    The first Chinese icebreaker Xuelong (Snow Dragon) sailed along the Northern Sea Route in 2012. This summer, the Chinese shipping company plans to launch its first commercial voyage.

    1. 17085
      17085 16 October 2013 20: 54
      -1
      It’s called - I heard a ringing, but I don’t know where it is ... And what about civilian ships? They can go wherever they want. Thousands of ships pass through Singapore daily. So what? They make money not dumb - DO NOT GO. Develop infrastructure, etc. etc. The quote is generally stupid, with its steamer it will always be more profitable than 1000 other cars. Therefore, they go ...
      1. Mhpv
        Mhpv 17 October 2013 09: 17
        0
        Quote: 17085
        And here are the civil courts? They can go wherever they want.

        There is no stupider, there are norms and rules of shipping, there are still maritime borders, take the trouble to read the definition. They go where only cats want.

        Quote: 17085
        They make money not dumb - DO NOT GO.

        Where did you see in my comment "not let go"?
        close the Bering Strait for such vagrants and transport only with our escort, let them pay.

        Take the trouble to read carefully
  15. moremansf
    moremansf 16 October 2013 19: 09
    +1
    It used to be, we were a big brother for China and sang songs - "Russian and Chinese brothers forever !!!" Since those times, the geopolitical situation has changed dramatically and China has long ceased to install smelting furnaces in every courtyard. Today, China is one of the most developing countries in the world, with great ambitions, therefore, it is impossible to underestimate our northern neighbor ... friendship is a drink, and tobacco is apart !!!!
  16. Selevc
    Selevc 16 October 2013 20: 13
    0
    China: real and immediate danger
    A good title for the article is just not clear to whom is China a danger? For America? The USA is the most armed country in the world, with the largest fleet, aviation and nuclear weapons ... And everywhere they seem to be in danger ... They are still all afraid to be a Superpower, but mine has obviously torn the navel :))) And they want to steer everything like that on the other side of the ball !!! But in my opinion, all the same, their Golden Age is quickly coming to an end - this is very much in terms of the rate of raising the credit level of the state debt ... And seeing the growing China (potential super-power) - they understand that they need to do something, and do it quickly, or else the forces will go too far ...

    But China doesn’t need to fight the United States at all - they need to develop steadily - time works for them and against America And as a last resort, they can at any moment crash the bucks by dumping American derivatives, dollars and gold on the market (they say that they have the largest gold reserves in the world) ... Well, look at such a triple blow to the USA and the West :))) ))))
  17. Clueless
    Clueless 16 October 2013 20: 50
    +1
    ShturmKGB
    China will be wary of engaging in open confrontation with the United States or Russia while one of the fighting tigers (Russia or the United States) is alive ... this is from a Chinese parable that a wise ruler will not intervene in a fight between two tigers until a winner appears, and when someone wins, the third tiger leaves the bushes and kills the victorious but exhausted tiger ...


    Yes, they pulled it up already with this expression, every time something is about China, there is a wise guy who will put it in :))
  18. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 16 October 2013 21: 54
    0
    By and large, I don’t see big disagreements between the United States and China. On the contrary, classical symbiosis, complete interdependence, while the economies of both countries are functioning relatively stably. The need for territories, let’s say, is desirable. Under certain nationalism (and maps to the Urals have long been known) and ambitiousness, political will may appear to resolve this issue by military means (if this is possible in our time due to nuclear weapons). An attack on the United States is unlikely for a number of reasons, well, at least because of the remoteness (you don’t even include it in the borders, they would be bolder, far-fetched) and they look worse now. So in this case they have one road to Russia, then only if they digest, the question of the United States will arise. Moreover, as we see from the program, it is solved (at the state level) in two peaceful ways (settling in an explicit order) and
    preparing the army in full. It remains for us to quickly strengthen the army (it is possible to withdraw from the INF Treaty) and maneuver with the help of politics, in addition, a definite migration policy.
    1. Walker1975
      Walker1975 16 October 2013 22: 29
      -1
      But tell me. Nuclear weapons. Suppose that China launched an invasion, dared to block the curtains and advanced a couple of thousand kilometers in Siberia, and then declared: Let's negotiate with the observance of the status quo. What we bit off is ours, but we do not go further. Here's how Russia bit off South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia. Will Russia use nuclear weapons? In response, too, will arrive in the European part. I think that there will be a lot of screams, indignation, but it will come down on the brakes.
      1. Yuri Y.
        Yuri Y. 16 October 2013 23: 53
        +2
        In my opinion, nuclear weapons will have to be used at the first sign of a large-scale attack. On the territory of China, areas along the border, as if cutting off intruders on our territory. Well, there they can try to grind them with tactical nuclear weapons (well, for example, artillery), depending on how many of them penetrate. In this case, of course, and you yourself need to wait (ABM) for what will arrive. This is of course the best scenario for the United States, it seems even their cherished dream to play the role of the same monkey or the third tiger (I don’t remember). It will even be possible to push China as Hitler. In due time, an article on their mill. And it remains for us, as always, to strengthen the Army and pursue its policy.
        1. Yuri Y.
          Yuri Y. 17 October 2013 01: 29
          +1
          Quote: Yuri Ya.
          . This is of course the best scenario for the United States, it seems even their cherished dream to play the role of the same monkey or the third tiger (I don’t remember). It will even be possible to push China as Hitler. In due time, an article on their mill.

          In this connection, China will solve its problems by non-military methods, the United States in this case may get (remembering its decay). Already, the Chinese are taking measures to avoid the dollar (in this perspective, we are at the same time), thereby undermining it. Well, we have time to solve our problems.
      2. MIX58
        MIX58 17 October 2013 08: 50
        -3
        Quote: Walker1975
        Here's how Russia bit off South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia


        Russia made it possible for the Ossetians (Alans) and the Abkhaz to have their own States, having escaped from the clutches of a vile enslaver and an arrogant aggressor who pursued a policy of GENOCIDE !!!!!! And you seem to have fought there on the side of the "victorious" Georgian army ... the land of the Western bloody mercenaries ... The Kremlin is restoring its "long hands" .... and the method of destroying vile creatures .. still in the bowels of KGB, honed to shine !!!


        Quote: Walker1975
        Suppose China started an invasion,


        According to the "Strategy for the use of nuclear weapons" ... Russia can deliver a PREVENTIVE ALL-DESTRUCTIVE strike by all types of nuclear weapons on the aggressor's territory !!! And for the invasion of our Earth ... you will have to accumulate a certain number of military units .... And why does the Russian GRU sleep such a limitless situation ???? ... And ischo for especially gifted ignoramuses ... K.N.R - draws conclusions from the lessons of history and remembers them for a long time .... Spring 1979 .. the Chinese military machine rushed, with a desire to start an invasion, into the territory of Vietnam .. . And how did it end ??? .... That's right ... The Russian fighting Bear (sorry, it was still Soviet at that time) slightly moved his paw and annihilated the aggressor (eyewitnesses say that there was no one to escape ... heaps of ash and molten metal) ... Vietnam - --won :)


        Quote: Walker1975
        In response, too, will arrive in the European part.

        "Dreams, dreams, where is your sweetness ???" ...... Maybe something will take off, but it is unlikely to fly !!!
        1. Walker1975
          Walker1975 17 October 2013 10: 59
          0
          You at least read the definition of Genocide. I won’t even discuss further.
          1. MIX58
            MIX58 17 October 2013 12: 47
            -1
            But what about the extermination of the Alans ... by the Georgians in the 20s of the 20th century was not genocide ???? .....
            Quote: Walker1975
            I won’t even discuss further.

            Did I offer you to discuss something ?????? I just want to remind all the soldiers of the "zapadians" ... that Russia is restoring special forces ... in the image and likeness of those that were in K.G.B. .... And to all the bandits and terrorists and "zapadyantsam" .., including, KARACHUN will come soon !!!!! And with your minus sign you confirmed my assumption, in your involvement in serving bandits and terrorists as part of the occupation troops of Georgia. .... So what remains is to calculate your IP address ... the rest is a matter of technology ...
      3. MIX58
        MIX58 17 October 2013 14: 02
        0
        Quote: Walker1975
        I think that there will be a lot of screams, indignation, but it will come down on the brakes.

        And so I think that you personally DO NOT LIGHT on the brakes ... !!!!!!!!!!!! :)
  19. mikkado31
    mikkado31 16 October 2013 21: 57
    -2
    Strange comments. Obviously, there is no need for China to conflict with the United States for a large number of reasons. First, the United States is stronger militarily and technologically. The United States has serious allies in the region: Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines. The Chinese are not liked by all their neighbors. The Chinese have had conflicts with all their neighbors and have territorial disputes. China was at war with Vietnam, with the USA (in Korea), with India, with the USSR ... Taiwan interests the Chinese less and less. They have already taken back Hong Kong and Macau. The PRC has less and less disagreements with Taiwan. There are direct flights and mutual investments. The CCP is China's Communist Party in name only. In fact, she has long taken a course towards nationalism. China will first begin to digest its neighbors - the Central Asian countries, Mongolia, and then it will tackle Russia. There is a good saying "if the Chinese come somewhere, they don't leave."
  20. PKTRL
    PKTRL 16 October 2013 22: 41
    +1
    China has never unleashed a global warrior. Therefore, Chinese civilization has existed for more than 5000 years, unlike Carthage, Egyptian civilization, the Roman Empire, the empire of Alexander and others. These earhooks disappeared, because they always fought, did not want to earn, but to get quick money (albeit bloody), because they were mired in joys (solid homosexuals, pedophiles, etc.). They considered it the norm. And where are these little people now ...?! Nothing in the world has changed for hundreds or even thousands of years. So do not fantasize. Like in a joke: .. science fiction on the second floor ... :)
    1. Bober
      Bober 17 October 2013 07: 49
      +1
      I agree that if nothing in the world changes, then there will be no military attack from China either, because all Chinese energy has always gone into the interior of the country. During their "civil" wars, there were such battles with the subsequent extermination of 70-80% of the captured population of the neighboring kingdom. The population of China was not in a fever for children. But judging by the fact that the Chinese are getting smarter and do not intend to repeat mistakes, they will go outside by "peaceful" expansion, but I do not think that by military means, because going outside without having strength inside is suicide. + The Chinese practice of forceful going beyond its limits has always been bad Sea development is another matter. They are rowed by the injustice of the fact that they do not have free access to the operational space of the ocean. It takes a very long time to go south and go around many islands. During such a move with distance from their bases and the inability to adequately respond during such march, the Chinese fleet may be destroyed several times By the way, when Liu Shunkoy (Port Arthur) tried to view the northernmost base of China last year, I was caught by the military police. smile Watching.
  21. mixxlll
    mixxlll 16 October 2013 22: 46
    0
    People tell me how long will the orbital constellation of satellites in the event of a war?
  22. PKTRL
    PKTRL 16 October 2013 22: 54
    +1
    Quote: mixxlll
    People tell me how long will the orbital constellation of satellites in the event of a war?

    Management of spacecraft groupings for 2-3 days. After (when managers are banging ..), another 24 hours, less often 48. They of course (KA) can give out (nonsense ..), for a long time, but pointless .. (
  23. Flyers
    Flyers 16 October 2013 23: 02
    0
    One thing is for sure, China has overtaken us both in terms of quantity and power of weapons! We need to prepare for the worst, and there you look and get out.
  24. PKTRL
    PKTRL 16 October 2013 23: 07
    0
    Quote: Flyer
    One thing is for sure, China has overtaken us both in terms of quantity and power of weapons! We need to prepare for the worst, and there you look and get out.

    Read my comment just above yours, please. |
  25. PKTRL
    PKTRL 16 October 2013 23: 07
    0
    Quote: Flyer
    One thing is for sure, China has overtaken us both in terms of quantity and power of weapons! We need to prepare for the worst, and there you look and get out.

    Read my comment just above yours, please. |
  26. PKTRL
    PKTRL 16 October 2013 23: 13
    0
    Quote: Walker1975
    But tell me. Nuclear weapons. Suppose that China launched an invasion, dared to block the curtains and advanced a couple of thousand kilometers in Siberia, and then declared: Let's negotiate with the observance of the status quo. What we bit off is ours, but we do not go further. Here's how Russia bit off South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia. Will Russia use nuclear weapons? In response, too, will arrive in the European part. I think that there will be a lot of screams, indignation, but it will come down on the brakes.

    Another wanderer ..
    I believe that similar articles (like this one about China) are chewing gum for the mind. As if there’s nothing more to do.?!
    1. Walker1975
      Walker1975 16 October 2013 23: 30
      0
      So why do you go to such sites? Is it not for chewing gum for the mind?
  27. PKTRL
    PKTRL 16 October 2013 23: 36
    +1
    Quote: Walker1975
    So why do you go to such sites? Is it not for chewing gum for the mind?

    Comrade does not understand ..! :)
  28. alekseyal
    alekseyal 17 October 2013 05: 05
    +2
    The main enemy for us is the United States. At this stage, China is for us a country with which to cooperate, against the United States. And then it will be seen.
    Against the aggression of the United States and its sixes in Syria, Russia and China came together.
  29. Anubis Gorynych
    Anubis Gorynych 17 October 2013 07: 51
    +1
    Economically, the United States is tied to China. And a Chinese embargo is unlikely. Russia and China are tributaries of the West, and Russia is also an obvious colony. And we need to strive for the return of independence with all our might! The war between Russia and China is a dream of the West, but the Chinese government is not made of fools and will not go for it. Moreover, Russia offers China military and economic cooperation, and China is meeting halfway, including in Syria. Another thing is that part of the world behind the scenes is ready to replace the United States (as a world pirate) with Russia or China. But these are their perspectives. For us now, the real danger is posed by the mercenary army of militants in the Middle East, which, if we do not hold the defenses in Syria, will attack our southern borders. China is also threatened. Therefore, we are together now. Dear Alekseyal from the Air Defense Forces forgot to recommend reading N. Starikov's materials on this matter. As for Ktai's claims to our territory ... there is such an ancient Chinese game - GO. Opponents in this game do not "eat" each other, but constantly change their deployment until they achieve a more or less integral disposition of the forces of one of them. This is the essence of China's political wisdom. And they were not friends with the USSR, because Mao was a Stalinist, and Khrushchev was a Trotskyist and anti-Stalinist.
    1. alekseyal
      alekseyal 17 October 2013 08: 58
      +2
      By the way, I recommend reading the book by N. Starikov "Geopolitics, how it is done". wink
      I can’t write in all my comments about the books of N. Starikov.
      Although I try.
      1. Anubis Gorynych
        Anubis Gorynych 17 October 2013 09: 40
        +1
        I understand, I will consider for the future wink
  30. individual
    individual 17 October 2013 08: 22
    +1
    The voltage will increase, and when the joint safety valve breaks, it is not possible to predict.
    Simply, China should take into account that the United States has a host of allies and some of them have atomic weapons.
    In the event of a crisis, China should seek support from outside, and real support is possible only from Russia.
    Russia's task now is to properly manage this situation of the geopolitical premises of our advantage.
  31. MIX58
    MIX58 17 October 2013 09: 04
    +1
    Author Avery Goldstein

    This aftar - a fat minus - for presenting material in the language of "aliens" ..... Although what to ask of him? ..... They have a whole nation like that .... (((
    1. Anubis Gorynych
      Anubis Gorynych 17 October 2013 09: 41
      +2
      I agree, the language of the Aesop. As the author himself wrote, the intentions are muddy ...
  32. DZ_98_B
    DZ_98_B 17 October 2013 17: 17
    -1
    Anyone who considers the Chinese to be friends of Russia and Russians is the enemy of Russia and Russians. The Chinese are our enemies. You cannot be friends with them. The Chinese Sasmaya vile .... natsyya in the world.