Between war and capitulation

Just a couple of weeks ago, the situation in the South China Sea was considered relatively calm, but everything changed literally in one day. The entry of a destroyer of the US Navy into the waters that the PRC considers its own is a precedent, and its repetition is unacceptable for Beijing from the reputational side. Washington, in turn, will seek to prevent another case of unauthorized redistribution of borders. Yes, China, of course, is also not holy, and the islands, because of which a scandal erupted, he himself seized weapons less than thirty years ago, but in this case it was the United States that went to a conscious aggravation. In fact, the conflict unfolding before our eyes clearly demonstrates how China’s hopes of sitting apart on the side of 2020 have collapsed, while Moscow and Washington are holding military shows in different regions of the world. The Americans strongly reminded the main economic and geopolitical competitor that they had not forgotten about him and did not intend to let him down.




“If the US continues such dangerous and provocative actions, there will be an extremely dangerous situation between the armed forces of the two countries in the sea and airspace, which can even result in the use of weapons,” said the head of the Navy of the People’s Republic of China, Shengli. His words should heed. The fact that for the United States is a banal demonstration of power, for Beijing it is a matter of principle. But the principles of the true masters of geopolitics do not trade even for the most insane commercial benefits. Since the US military has already announced the continuation of actions on the non-recognition of Chinese sovereignty in the South China Sea, events can develop only in a few fairly predictable scenarios.

The first scenario: "The last Chinese warning." China does not take any action, confining itself to verbal warnings, and the Americans, and after them all the others, begin to consciously violate the “forbidden zone”, demonstrating their contempt for Beijing. Just a couple of weeks of water, which China considers its own, will turn into a passing yard, which can be corrected only by a total shooting of violators. The image of the Chinese leadership in the international arena and, worse, within the country, will be significantly affected. And this, given the falling economy and the discontent of citizens with social inequality, can have the most unpredictable consequences.

Scenario two. "Limited Answer." Aircraft and ships-offenders are attacked by Chinese border guards. The move is logical, but dangerous, because no one recognized the Chinese sovereignty over the Spratly Islands, which means that, formally, we are talking about the attack of one state over neutral waters - casus belli in its purest form.

Scenario Three. "War of Intimidation." Both the first and the second scenario can result in the third, which can be considered as a “war of intimidation”. Its essence is that the PRC will risk engaging in a limited maritime conflict over the possession of islands with one of its neighbors, most likely, Vietnam. For example, one very sensational article in the Runet “Six wars in which China should participate in the next 50 years” suggests such a path.

The fourth scenario is China’s “total war” against Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines, Vietnam and Taiwan (against the latter only on the Spratly Islands), with the seizure of the entire region. In miniature, this is a repetition of the Japanese 1941-1942 path, but with its own amendments. On the one hand, the People’s Republic of China can take away all the disputed wrecks by direct invasion, on the other hand, there is a high risk of intervention by countries that are not directly involved in the dispute: Singapore, Japan and, of course, the United States.

Often comparing the possibilities of China and the United States at sea, Russian and foreign “experts” show their flagrant illiteracy. Like, the United States has 11 aircraft carriers, and China has only one, and so on. And they conclude that the Middle Kingdom has no chance. This is mistake. The Second World War and the Falkland War have long shown that it aviation provides dominance over the sea. China in a specific geographical region can put an order of magnitude superior to all imaginable air armada, which will take off from continental and island airfields. Already, the PLA Air Force has more than 3000 modern aircraft, and another 700 are part of naval aviation. Back in June last year, the US Department of Defense announced that Chinese aviation was modernizing at an unprecedented pace. And this is not to mention the anti-ship ballistic missiles DF-21D. Another absurdity is to say that China will not go to conflict because, he says, he’s not ready enough for war. History He knows a lot of examples when it was necessary to fight and win a country that was completely unprepared for war. Just because she was forced to fight.


China Claims Card


Now both sides are kept from escalating only fear. Fear is not a nuclear war, which is hardly possible in the 21st century, but the fear of uncertainty, to which a conflict of this magnitude will inevitably lead. The United States with 1945, openly did not fight with a country comparable to them in power, and with so economically developed as China - never fought at all. China, in no way, can recognize its strength and begin to use it, since the price of defeat may be high.

While the situation is not happy. It is possible that the US naval provocations will eventually put Beijing on the same choice that 75 faced Tokyo years ago. Namely - to capitulate or fight. And China is definitely not going to capitulate.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

69 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. igor.borov775 3 November 2015 06: 05 New
    • 27
    • 0
    +27
    But in vain you think so. China landed a scout and the United States had to admit that the plane flew by mistake. I remember the cries of many saying that the Chinese could not cope with the technology made in the United States. And they posted pictures from scout computers on the Internet and everything became quiet. Then, when the radio intelligence team returned home, it was awarded medals. It’s a kind of payment for fear. It was because the ACG pulled themselves up and China conducted exercises and pulled the army to the coast. Bush had the courage to move away from madness. And after the apology, the United States received both the plane and crew unharmed. This is how many years have passed, but the Yankees twitched again.
    1. Hammer 3 November 2015 07: 22 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Unfortunately, in the United States, besides the president, there are many who still make decisions, for which the president then has to pout ... The hawkish lobby in Congress, the Pentagon, the military-industrial complex and others, will be stronger than the president.
      And everywhere, such provocations will be repeated further. Especially with the growing success of Russia in Syria.
      But wait and see.
      1. andre 3 November 2015 07: 48 New
        • 22
        • 0
        +22
        The (later) Chinese warning is a humorous expression in Russian, meaning fruitless warnings “in words”, while it is known that no action will follow.

        The expression arose in connection with the aggravation of US-Chinese relations in the 1950s and 1960s regarding the so-called Taiwan issue. The United States, not recognizing communist power in the PRC (but recognizing the Chiang Kai-shek regime), carried out reconnaissance flights over the territorial waters of China. China recorded all violations of its air and water space by the United States. For each such violation, the Chinese government through diplomatic channels sent the so-called “Warning” to the American side, but took no action. All of these warnings are numbered. Since in those years, violations by the United States of the Chinese air and water space, especially in the area of ​​the Taiwan Strait, were frequent, the numbering of violations went through the roof for many hundreds. The exact number of warnings made by China is difficult to assess. It is known that only by the end of 1964 there were more than 900
        1. andre 3 November 2015 07: 50 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          As I understand it, the Chinese will still try to sit out, they’re not much to fight, they’re much on quiet "expansion."
          1. Azitral 3 November 2015 09: 27 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            Zero experience of modern warfare. In general, they did not fight, God forbid, since 1986, but how many serious conflicts, then from 1953-54. They themselves do not know what they are capable of in terms of war and, of course, are afraid.
            1. Vend 3 November 2015 09: 47 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              There is one more option. China operates economically. Then the USA, tail-tailing, is fleeing from China.
              1. alicante11 3 November 2015 12: 59 New
                • 6
                • 0
                +6
                There is one more option. China operates economically. Then the USA, tail-tailing, is fleeing from China.


                This is interesting how? It offers “treasury” for payment, which allows the amers to calmly default and then all Chinese gold and foreign currency reserves instantly multiply by zero. Or maybe it introduces a ban on the sale of amers of iPhones and clothes to Amers and a month later it’s overstocked to the lid and brings down its entire economy?
                1. Karlovar 3 November 2015 18: 54 New
                  • 8
                  • 0
                  +8
                  China has external debts to Western banks in the amount equivalent to almost the top of the head in its currency reserves !!! ............... This is such a Chinese scam insurance from the United States ... The United States depreciates the dollar , Chinese foreign exchange reserves are depreciating, Chinese foreign debts are depreciating ... Bottom line: China has nothing to lose .... Regarding the ban on the sale of Chinese goods: I don’t remember exactly, but they tried to cover Chinese imports 3-4 years ago in Canada, under what pretext, I also don’t remember ...., the result is a mass demonstration of Canadians with the slogan "Either return Chinese imports, or raise salaries 5-2 times (so that we can buy Canadian goods)" ... What solution do you think accepted by the Canadian authorities ???
            2. Semen Semyonitch 3 November 2015 11: 29 New
              • 7
              • 0
              +7
              Quote: Azitral
              Zero experience of modern warfare.

              Does anyone have such an experience? Is it not the British in the Falklands? Or the United States in Iraq ??? what
              1. Karlovar 3 November 2015 18: 56 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quite rightly noticed ...
            3. mvg
              mvg 3 November 2015 12: 23 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              What about India? at 62?
        2. Semen Semyonitch 3 November 2015 11: 26 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: andre
          there were more than 900

          901 would definitely be the last ... laughing
  2. Indifferent 3 November 2015 06: 15 New
    • 15
    • 0
    +15
    For such provocations, the Chinese need to take an example from us. Do not use weapons, but maneuver, but "unsuccessfully." How ours in the Black Sea scrapped part of the superstructure from American ships and set off a fire. They immediately got out of our sea and didn’t come in so brazenly anymore.
    True, for this the Chinese need to be good navigators so as not to drown anyone and not to drown themselves. But to teach a lesson. The level of their training is difficult to assess.
    I think the Chinese will leave everything as it is. They will make the “1763 last Chinese warning” and calm down. This is their mentality. But they are not yet ready for war. For this, the determination of the whole people is needed. We need ideological training, and military, too. Expand forces and assets in the area takes time, and the applicant.
    1. shans2 3 November 2015 06: 42 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      We need a history of victories, and whom has China defeated in the last 200 years? wipe off, traders. And according to UN rules, artificial islands do not have a 12-mile zone as such, and here China is in flight. The United States understands this very well.
      1. Alexander Romanov 3 November 2015 06: 47 New
        • 10
        • 0
        +10
        Quote: shans2
        We need a history of victories, and whom has China won over the past 200 years? wipe off, traders.

        China has never in history had such a powerful army as it is now.
        Quote: shans2
        and here China is in flight.

        Kitai has grown up and he doesn’t give a damn what the UN thinks there.
        1. chebman 3 November 2015 07: 45 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Will they fill up with corpses?
      2. Azitral 3 November 2015 09: 31 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        MacArthur in Korea was completely broken. And - the fact that they fought a little differently, does not make war with them entertainment. The Japanese did not have fun, although they seemed to be winning all the time, but could not win.
        1. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 03 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Despite the fact that the Japanese had a regular army, technical superiority, and the Chinese had a partisan movement ...
      3. tacet 3 November 2015 09: 46 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: shans2
        We need a history of victories, and whom has China defeated in the last 200 years?

        And in 1950-1953 he passed by? according to your DPRK does not owe him anything?
        1. sa-ag 3 November 2015 10: 14 New
          • -5
          • 0
          -5
          Quote: tacet
          Those. according to your DPRK does not owe him anything?

          Well, by and large, nothing, as the fighting began on the same parallel, so then they finished on it
          1. tacet 3 November 2015 12: 48 New
            • 5
            • 0
            +5
            There would be no DPRK without direct intervention in the conflict of the PRC
          2. dog1965 3 November 2015 18: 59 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            If you recall, at first the southerners drove the northerners almost to the Chinese border. And only the intervention of China turned the tide. Moreover, along with the southerners, the Yankees draped. The only thing that stopped the Chinese was the fact that from the south the US forces deployed their fleet.
          3. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 06 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Without the Chinese "volunteers" North Korea would not have existed .... The Chinese intervened when the northerners were on the verge of defeat ....
      4. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 00 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The islands are not washed away from scratch, alluvial EXTENDED small natural islands to acceptable sizes ....
    2. Archon 3 November 2015 17: 34 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      and if you send 500 million Chinese migrants to America?
    3. Karlovar 3 November 2015 18: 57 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      With ideology, they are just the norm ...
  3. parusnik 3 November 2015 06: 28 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It is possible that the US naval provocations will eventually put Beijing in front of the same choice that it faced Tokyo 75 years ago...I doubt this opportunity .. Beijing is not Tokyo, and Tokyo is not Beijing ... the difference is palpable ..
  4. maxbrov74 3 November 2015 06: 56 New
    • 15
    • 0
    +15
    US 1945 year did not openly fight with a country comparable in power to them


    For all its time, the United States has never fought a country comparable in power to them.
  5. Sirocco 3 November 2015 06: 59 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Considering all three scenarios that we are offered, and not only the author, but the USA and the company, I would have acted as the Russian Federation in the place of China, silently, quietly would have presented them with a surprise from the opera that they did not expect. Such a surprise. Everything else is a bluff of pure water. Really the USA decided to lie to us on this line, not only to us. Everyone will get there, the Pacific Ocean will have to be renamed.
    1. Stirbjorn 3 November 2015 13: 46 New
      • -2
      • 0
      -2
      Quote: Sirocco
      like the Russian Federation, silently, quietly would have presented them with a surprise from the opera they had not expected. Such a surprise.
      Give a concrete example?
  6. Tra-ta-ta 3 November 2015 07: 15 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    It is possible that the US naval provocations will eventually put Beijing in front of the same choice ..
    ..and perhaps the "partners" need to scare China's neighbors so that they are more accommodating in the final ratification of the Pacific Partnership Treaty.
    Clever thoughts are here:
    http://delyagin.ru/articles/89862-razdavit-kitaj-zakhvatit-evropu-o-prioritetnyk
    h-tcelyakh-ssha.html
    1. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 08 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quite an option ....
  7. chebman 3 November 2015 07: 56 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    China and the United States are major trading partners and there can be no military conflict between them in principle. Even China is not suitable as an ordinary woman for ordinary Americans, because the USA lives according to the laws of marketing. In order to “promote” China as the main villain, billions of dollars of promotional budget are needed. It is much easier to get the good old Joker-Russia from the closet and shake off the dust from it.
  8. Lyton 3 November 2015 07: 56 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I think the wallpaper will release everything on the brakes, as having received a slap you will have to react somehow, so as not to lose face.
    1. Petrix 3 November 2015 13: 53 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      China and the United States can agree. These are business partners. It is not beneficial for them to conflict. But playing the conflict is very profitable. The Chinese will demonstrate their courage, the United States - their own. As a result, the region will start spending more on weapons manufactured in the USA on Chinese components. All in business. Also, the townsfolk will be distracted from domestic and American problems.
      Show must go on ....
      1. Nyrobsky 3 November 2015 22: 47 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Petrix
        China and the United States can agree. These are business partners. It is not beneficial for them to conflict. But playing the conflict is very profitable. The Chinese will demonstrate their courage, the United States - their own. As a result, the region will start spending more on weapons manufactured in the USA on Chinese components. All in business. Also, the townsfolk will be distracted from domestic and American problems.

        It's like a grandmother in two said. The main cargo transportation and trade routes of China today are carried out by sea. Who controls the islands controls the trade. The Americans, within the framework of the signed trans-Pacific trade agreement with 11 countries of the region, can clearly complicate China's trade by suppressing (resistance) a competitor or his ambitions for economic dominance in the region, in order to make him more accommodating and accept US conditions, it is clear in whose favor. In fact, there is pressure on China in terms of sea blockade of cargo transportation.
        Not for nothing, over the past couple of years, several ideas have been expressed about expanding the Baikal-Amur trunk line to increase the flow of goods from China through the territory of Russia, and to create a great silk road from China to Europe and B. Vostok, with the aim of avoiding dependence on maritime transport and land expansion.
        It is very possible that China will be forced to attempt release. Only one thing I can’t understand - why do mattresses need this? Indeed, in the event of a serious aggravation, they will not be able to leave the region just like that without suffering large image losses. Having renounced resistance, China will lose its authority in the region and in the world.
        There is only one option for resolving the dispute by military means? And here, it’s not even a fact that the mattresses will win.
        Maybe Obama is taking revenge on America for centuries-old oppression of blacks and wants to drop the United States from the Middle East to the Far East?)))
    2. The comment was deleted.
  9. MolGro 3 November 2015 08: 13 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The United States will eventually put Beijing in front of the same choice that it faced Tokyo 75 years ago.

    Japan is an island, but China is not!
    1. andj61 3 November 2015 14: 33 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: MolGro
      The United States will eventually put Beijing in front of the same choice that it faced Tokyo 75 years ago.

      Japan is an island, but China is not!

      Who cares? There are no land borders between China and the United States. And the United States is not going to directly fight with China: for this, Vietnam and the Philippines will be pulled up. As the Anglo-Saxons usually do: divide and conquer.
      1. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 11 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Man meant the resources and logistics of a continental power ....
  10. sa-ag 3 November 2015 08: 42 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    I put on the second option, it is locally conflicted, but both sides will save face, China needs it even
  11. the47th 3 November 2015 08: 53 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    And why China does not look at the situation with the SU-24 and Donald Cook and do something similar? You can take a dozen front-line bombers and circumnavigate the destroyer at low altitude until they turn blue.
    1. Stirbjorn 3 November 2015 13: 49 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      What is the specific result of the situation of Donald Cook and SU-24. NATO ships both entered the Black Sea and are still entering. Pampers fantasies of local wits, please do not bring
    2. andj61 3 November 2015 14: 45 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: the47th
      And why China does not look at the situation with the SU-24 and Donald Cook and do something similar? You can take a dozen front-line bombers and circumnavigate the destroyer at low altitude until they turn blue.

      In the Black Sea, in accordance with the Montreux Convention, there can be only one warship of a non-Black Sea country, and then for a very limited time. There are no such restrictions in the South China Sea: the United States can pull the entire Pacific Fleet there. And electronic warfare on ships can be two orders of magnitude more powerful than on airplanes.
      Yes, and aviation is also tightened - the bases in the Philippines and Taiwan are nearby.
      But the thing is different - China is fundamentally wrong with these islands: artificial islands do not have the rights of ordinary islands, and a lot of other countries of the region, primarily Vietnam and the Philippines, claim these reefs. Here are the candidates for "cannon fodder" in the confrontation between the United States and China. Americans themselves will not fight.
  12. wild 3 November 2015 09: 09 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    China is blown away, babosy rule. It will creak, creak and everything, quietly with Amer, will come to their senses, fart louder and that's all. China paper tiger, puffer.
    1. PSih2097 3 November 2015 14: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: wild
      babosy rule.

      they rule if China throws American bonds with dollars (and there are more than a trillion of them there) into the sale, a kayuk will come to the states, both economically and politically ...
  13. Olezhek 3 November 2015 10: 21 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    China cannot and will not retreat. This means a complete loss of face. There will be active maneuvers and the local "cold war". American warships will enter the very "Spratly waters", but hardly anyone is more.
    1. Atemzug 3 November 2015 11: 14 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      The level of economic ties is such that it makes impossible any armed confrontation between China and the United States. Both of them will strike the first.
      1. Olezhek 3 November 2015 11: 29 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        The level of economic relations is such that it makes impossible any armed confrontation between China and the United States.

        The same said about Europe, before the PRC
    2. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 16 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Moreover, the “face” is the cornerstone of the Chinese mentality! The loss of material bonuses for them is preferable to the loss of a "face" ... In Chinese society, a person without a "face" is an outcast .....
  14. The Chat 3 November 2015 10: 59 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    And drew attention to the level of claims of China (see map)?
    It is only in the South China Sea.
    And also claims against India (not to mention captured Tibet).
    And also claims to Russia (although they are not expressed directly, but they keep a pebble in the bosom and in case of weakening we immediately get Damansky the size of Siberia). We should not forget adventures in the Far East when they perly recklessly ....
    And the past war with Vietnam in the 80s after the Americans were driven out -
    clearly thought that the Vieta were weakened and could not resist. True, then they were piled heavily by the Vietnamese.
    China (and any country) respects only a strong neighbor. The weak will be eaten instantly.
    It is only we who endlessly indulge in and endure spitting and insults from microscopic bouts and rodents.
    The only reliable allies of Russia - the army and navy, and even the VKS who joined them ....
    1. Orionvit 3 November 2015 17: 01 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      I fully agree with Le Chat. China has imperial thinking. And if territorial claims are not directly expressed, then all neighboring countries consider to themselves "the essence of the lost Chinese provinces."
      1. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 20 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And which of the global players thinks not imperial ??? Even the Persians have imperial thinking, the Germans, Spaniards, French, Japanese ... The list goes on ...
  15. Ural resident 3 November 2015 11: 06 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Judging by the map, China does not pretend to be a territory comparable to the existing one. Is not it too much?
    And what will happen if in the 22nd century China becomes the only superpower? Are we allowed to swim there?
    Maybe it’s not worth it to so rampant to support Chinese expansion, while this is still possible?
    1. traveler 3 November 2015 13: 46 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: A resident of the Urals
      Maybe it’s not worth it to so rampant to support Chinese expansion

      Well these are our brothers, forever. our patriots are going to fight all the Chinese against world imperialism. at least they would ask what neighboring countries think about the Chinese before they run to them with open arms. the neighbors know very well what they are worth.
    2. shans2 3 November 2015 14: 55 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Yes, no one supports them, ideally, that they would fight with the Japanese and Americans there and quietly become collectively regional shabby powers that do not decide anything even in their parts of the world ...
  16. Olezhek 3 November 2015 11: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Now both sides are kept from escalating only fear. Fear not nuclear war which hardly possible in the 21st century


    ??
  17. Belousov 3 November 2015 11: 33 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The Chinese will not do anything, they will endure. So the staff will shake things up. But if China responded once as it should, then it would be easier for them themselves in the future, they would not be pressed like that.
    Economically, they, too, will not dare to respond strongly, now their economy is not in the best possible way, and they also quite seriously depend on staff members.
  18. Army soldier2 3 November 2015 12: 02 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    For China, the disputed islands are a matter of principle. If he succumbs to other, weaker candidates (under pressure from the United States or without it), he will “lose face” and cast doubt on his foreign policy aspirations on many issues. For the United States, these islands are not important. For them, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are immeasurably more important.
    I propose this scenario: the United States will provocatively provoke China; China, on the one hand, will bombard the Americans with diplomatic notes, on the other, it will try to land intruder aircraft at its airfields and physically extrude intruder ships.
    1. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 23 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The most likely scenario ...
  19. sieras 3 November 2015 12: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    China will use such tactics. "if you wait 1000 years, the empire of your enemy will perish." I wonder where then will be China.
    P.S. Sarcasm.
  20. fa2998 3 November 2015 12: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yes, the map is interesting, it’s good that territorial waters were left to Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines. And Taiwan was "circled" and asked? Are all neutral waters in the South China Sea just Chinese. Do they take a lot on themselves? In general, the construction of artificial islands like then it is regulated by International Law. Or anyone who wants to find a "can" in neutral (or disputed) waters, drive a dredge and build "their own" islands. You can also carry barges with materials. It’s not important that you build a "land" - the main thing around them is your territorial and economic zones. hi
  21. I doubt it 3 November 2015 12: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    China will not risk contacting the United States. Their military power is not comparable, if not cool. From an economic point of view - in general madness. The economy is export oriented. In case of conflict, the United States will not be difficult to pull up its European partners. The closure of these two markets will lead to a very rapid collapse of the Chinese economic miracle. Too big can be the price tag. So everything will be viscous and without specifics. In the spirit of “recent warnings” and minor incidents.
    1. Olezhek 3 November 2015 13: 54 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      China will not risk contacting the United States. Their military power is not comparable, but not cool


      Already took a chance ...
      And what is the power of the United States today?
      1. I doubt it 3 November 2015 17: 31 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Denying the obvious does not make sense.
        No country is comparable to the United States in military capabilities.
        All the competitions in scandalously removed provocatively youthful cries are from the evil one. And only to encourage themselves. And they do not help in any way to answer the questions that go into your head:
        - And where are our fifth generation fighters?
        - why can't we build satellites without their components?
        - why do their drones not at all look like the crafts of an aircraft modeling circle, but ours look like?
        - But where are our lasers, at least experimental, well, at least some prototypes?
        - But how is it that the Boeing builds 50 planes a month, and this is only civilian, and we creaked over two Il-476s in two years?
        Yes, and many, many such questions.
      2. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 27 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The very fact of island mounds (they have been mound for almost a year and a half, scoring all the "concerns") is already a challenge ....
    2. Karlovar 3 November 2015 19: 25 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Collapse will certainly be mutual .... MUTUAL dependence is called ...
  22. traveler 3 November 2015 13: 30 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    war? but isn’t the occasion small - the disputed islands with the dubious prospect of legitimizing their possession?
    it seems like crazy people are not noticed in the PRC manual.
  23. Megatron 3 November 2015 14: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The Chinese will not do anything, they will wipe themselves off as always. And the Americans will be swimming there, as they have already babbled over sencacca.
  24. Clueless 3 November 2015 15: 31 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    Quote: Olezhek
    China cannot and will not retreat. This means complete loss of face.


    The Chinese do not care about face loss for a long time :)
  25. shonsu 3 November 2015 16: 52 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    If the United States does not recognize that it is China’s water, then China has the right not to recognize that the US destroyer is sailing, and to send some sort of bulk carrier to collide with it. and you can always say that this happened purely by accident and apologize. I would do so.
  26. ML-334 3 November 2015 17: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    At the moment, China needs to help Russia in the fight against the IS. Let them break in at least a division, they will have to start anyway if they want to fight for the bulk islands with the enemy. But do not make the last warnings.
    1. marinier 3 November 2015 18: 27 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Dobryi ve4er gaspodin. Ja vziat na sebja smelost, koment Vash beriht.
      Na moi vzgliad minovat tot zlopolu4noi vremia, kogda RUSSLAND nujdal help.Slava GOD RUSSLAND Federation, Sam komu xo4esh help delat.Ja s4itat lu4she pust ne meshaetsya pod noga, 4to-bi bank sorval RUSSLAND, kotda neusti netili sam vibirat svoi poganij sudba negative
  27. marinier 3 November 2015 18: 20 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Dbryi vremia sutok gospoda.S Vashuj blagozilatelni soglasi, ja bi toze pozvolil dobavit paru-trika shtix, sei statija g-in Kabardin.Malenkij nyans, obstanovka v etom bez-uslovno vaznom ne pojdjapi napi rajapov napi rajapov naprjap -opasen po krainej mer bliz lezashix land.Na moj vzgliad sei4asbi poduetitsia KREML, posle togo kak shajna-taun polu4il po nosu shel4ok.Ja s4itat 4ito KREML dolzen obozna4it krug svoix interesov v etom region 4to-bi ne u kogo ne voznik idiot misli 4to RUSSLAND Federation samo-ustranit iz etot bez preuveli4eni vaznij region.
    PSlezet je polosatij lYCIFER ZA 1000 TISJA4 km ot svoi pomoika usa.
    s uvazeniem gospoda hi
  28. kunstkammer 3 November 2015 20: 45 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I believe that there will be another development option:
    The USA and China secretly agree that for prestige the Americans will once again enter these waters. And China, for prestige, will raise aviation and its steamships. Both will be shown live - which are all cool. As a result, the Americans will stop their campaigns, and the Chinese will limit their activity.
    Neither one nor the other is ready to fight.
    That Russia would have responded with all of its harpoons, and with that its pocket is more expensive :)
    Capitalism ...
  29. aba
    aba 3 November 2015 22: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: I doubt it
    The closure of these two markets will lead to a very rapid collapse of the Chinese economic miracle

    And who will fill these markets? Or will the Yankees and Europeans take their factories from the Middle Kingdom to themselves and say that there’s enough for the people to sit back, is it time to pick up a sledgehammer?
  30. sanyavolhv 3 November 2015 23: 12 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    health
    I'm sitting on the couch. I think. closed his eyes and see. Chinas sits in a barn on the shore and rivets a purebred Japanese mine swimming. from purebred Japanese metals and purebred explosives. Well, he likes old things, and then he sends him to swim in the sea, because after all, it’s beautiful for his (not my) taste.
  31. Ykrofashist 4 November 2015 03: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    So it is, but how to deliver an old mine, so that later the screw and motor are not found (the author claims that the submarine will be detected by noise)
  32. Ykrofashist 4 November 2015 23: 12 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And they won’t believe that a cool ship with the newest filling suddenly bent down from an old WWII mine just because it wandered into the zone of foreign geopolitical interests.