The Pentagon's new China war plan

[Ray]

Saturday, Aug 13, 2011 13:01 ET
The Pentagon's new China war plan

According to the defense trade press, Pentagon officials are seeking ways to adapt a concept known as AirSea Battle specifically for China, debunking rote claims from Washington that it has no plans to thwart its emerging Asian rival. A recent article in Inside the Pentagon reported that a small group of U.S. Navy officers known as the China Integration Team "is hard at work applying the lessons of [AirSea Battle] to a potential conflict with China."

<snip>

AirSea Battle, developed in the early 1990s and most recently codified in a 2009 Navy-Air Force classified memo, is a vehicle for conforming U.S. military power to address asymmetrical threats in the Western Pacific and the Persian Gulf -- code for China and Iran.

<snip>

It complements the 1992 Defense Planning Guidance, a government white paper that precluded the rise of any "peer competitor" that might challenge U.S. dominance worldwide. The Planning Guidance is the Pentagon’s writ for control of what defense planners call "the global commons," a euphemism for the seaways, land bridges and air corridors that are the arteries of international commerce. For a foreign power to challenge this American dominion is to effectively declare war on the United States, and that is exactly what China appears to be doing in the South China Sea, a resource-rich and highly contested waterway in Southeast Asia.

It was in this spirit that Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Jim Amos, at a dinner hosted by the Center for a New American Security in late May, remarked that the wars in the Persian Gulf were denying Washington the resources it needed to cope with an increasingly assertive China. "

<snip>

In addition to China, Vietnam, Brunei, Taiwan, Malaysia and the Philippines all have competing claims on several clusters of South China Sea islands. Rather than intervening with quiet diplomacy to untangle this incendiary thicket, the U.S. has starkly sided against Beijing. In March 2010, when a Chinese official was quoted by Japanese media as identifying the region as a "core interest" of Chinese sovereignty, the White House retaliated by declaring that freedom of maritime navigation is a U.S. "national interest."

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20..._stephen_glain

Notwithstanding the Defence Budget cuts, the national debt, commitment in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US apparently has not abandoned its national geostrategic perspective as some may believe.

If indeed it is so, one wonders how the US will be able to balance the strategic interests around the world to include the above, Arab Spring and the Chinese hegemonic intent.

[Dayuhan]

Sounds like an old plan, not a new one.

I wouldn't read too much into the existence of a plan or various efforts to develop new plans. The Pentagon does this all the time; they have plans for all kinds of contingencies. It's their job. The likelihood of the plan ever being used is a quite different thing.

I don't think either the US or China has any real interest in initiating conflict, or anything to gain from initiating conflict.

[Fuchs]

I agree, although the official statement a year or so ago that SHAPE did not yet have plans for defending the Baltic NATO states did create cracks in my confidence that military forces have lots of strategic plans...

[Ray]

Old plan or not, one wonders why raise it now.

Saturday, Aug 13, 2011 13:01 ET

[Backwards Observer]

Originally Posted by Ray

Old plan or not, one wonders why raise it now.

Just so the generals can say the road's open?

F-16s pivotal for Taiwan’s future: Yang

If Taiwan does not get the F-16C/D aircraft it seeks from the US to replace its aging fleet, Taipei will lose its leverage and face immediate challenges in fulfilling its responsibilities of preserving peace and stability in Asia, Deputy Minister of National Defense Andrew Yang (楊念祖) told a defense magazine in an interview published yesterday.

“Washington sometimes does not get the right picture of Taiwan’s responsibility. That is part of the reason we want new fighters,” Yang told Defense News in a wide-ranging interview. “Otherwise, the US has to send its own military to replace our daily patrols in the region.”

F-16s pivotal for Taiwan's future: Yang - Taipei Times - Aug 9, 2011

-$-$-$

F-16C/D deal for Taiwan dead: report

THE BIG SURPRISE:It had been anticipated that the US would upgrade Taiwan’s entire fleet of F-16A/Bs. However, it appears only one of the two F-16 wings will be retrofitted

By J. Michael Cole / Staff Reporter

Taiwan will not be getting the 66 F-16C/D aircraft it has been requesting since 2007, a Ministry of National Defense official has confirmed, and fewer of its older F-16s will be retrofitted, news that could strike a blow to President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration as it heads into elections next January.

“We are so disappointed in the United States,” the official told Defense News on the sidelines of the Taipei Aerospace and Defense Technology Exhibition (TADTE), which ended on Saturday, blaming the decision on pressure from Beijing.

F-16C/D deal for Taiwan dead: report - Taipei Times - Aug 15, 2011

-$-$-$

CHIEF

"You're on your own, captain. You wanna go on ?
Like this bridge : We build it every night. Charlie
blows it right back up again. Just so the generals can
say the road's open. Think about it. Who cares ?"

Do Long Bridge - Youtube

Special Bonus Link

[Dayuhan]

Originally Posted by Ray

Old plan or not, one wonders why raise it now.

Who raised it? Looks to me like it got a few column inches in the "Daily Tedium" section of some specialized defense journal and some eager beaver at Salon figured they could yank it out of context and get a headline out of it. look for the same item to appear in hysteria blogs under the headline "US Plans War With China!!".