The US response to China (catch all)

[Bob's World]

Nations do not expand their sovereignty based on legal merit (particularly when what is legal or illegal is largely established by their opponents). Nations expand their sovereignty when they believe it to be in their interest to do so, and believe they have the power to do so.

China has built a navy designed to seriously hurt the US Navy, and thereby deter the US from employing it to curb their long-stated ambitions. The US Navy keeps buying ever bigger, more vulnerable, more expensive carriers of aircraft too few and too expensive to put at risk. Where is our asymmetric counter to China's??

So far, phase 0 goes to the Chinese...as our Navy is stuck in WWII, and our Air Force is stuck in the Cold War. We must first change the way we think, not blame our competitors for refusing to play our game indefinitely.

Our carrier-centered navy may well be as obsolete as our battleship-centered navy was in 1940. Do we really have to wait for a more agile opponent to sink half of it to refocus for the world we live in today?

[davidbfpo]

Just spotted this on a HJS mailing for an event a month ago in London:

With Professor Christopher Coker, Professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science, and author of The Improbable War: China, the United States and the Logic of Great Power Conflict.

Professor Coker expanded upon the arguments set forth in his book, arguing that the next global conflict is likely to be played out in cyberspace and outer space and like all previous wars it will have devastating consequences. He made a case for why such a war between the United States and China may seem improbable, but is actually all too possible.

Transcript of event:http://henryjacksonsociety.org/2015/...ower-conflict/

[Bob's World]

If we bump with China, I would be very surprised indeed if there was not significant action in both space and cyber. These are domains we both compete within and build capabilities either designed for the other, or that are a threat to the other and therefore a target.

No surprise there. Cyber and space may be similar to how great powers have prodded at each other in small 3rd party conflicts, like we did with the Soviets in Vietnam and Afghanistan and elsewhere. A space where one can impose costs with low risk of direct warfare on one's home turf.

[AdamG]

China declared victory on Friday over an encounter with a US surveillance aircraft overflying the contested South China Sea, saying its military "drove away" the intruder with radio warnings.

http://news.yahoo.com/china-declares...114402363.html

[AdamG]

US-China war 'inevitable' unless Washington drops demands over South China Sea

Warning from state-run China newspaper as Beijing reveals plans for development of disputed South China Sea islands

China’s armed forces are to extend their operations and its air force will become an offensive as well as defensive force for the first time, in a major shift in policy that will strengthen fears of accidental conflict.

A policy document by the state council, or cabinet, said China faced a “grave and complex array of security threats”, justifying the change.

The People’s Liberation Army, including its navy and air force, will be allowed to “project power” further beyond its borders at sea and more assertively in the air in order to safeguard its maritime possessions, the white paper stated.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...China-Sea.html

[AdamG]

Related.

May 22, 2015 7:01 AM

China and Russia conducted joint naval exercises this week in the Mediterranean Sea — a sign, some security experts say, that the two countries are stepping up defense cooperation to offset U.S. military primacy.

The Russian Defense Ministry said a total of 10 warships from the Russian Navy and China’s People's Liberation Army Navy took part in the week-long exercises. The Chinese Defense Ministry said the joint exercises focused on navigation safety, at-sea replenishment, escort missions and live fire exercises.

http://www.voanews.com/content/are-c...y/2782818.html

15:41 May 12, 2015 Interfax

Russian and Chinese naval ships are expected to sail out of the Novorossiysk port and head to the Mediterranean Sea to hold their Joint Sea-2015 maneuvers, on Tuesday, the Russian Defense Ministry has reported.

"The active phase of the exercises will take place in a certain district of the Mediterranean Sea from May 17 to May 21," the ministry's spokesman for the Navy Captain 1st Rank Igor Dygalo told Interfax-AVN on Tuesday.

The unit of the Russian Navy and the People's Liberation Army Navy of China includes China's Linyi and the Weifang frigates and the Russian Black Sea Fleet's Samum amphibious ship, he said. They are expected to cross the Black Sea, sail through the Bosporus and the Dardanelles and catch up with other ships participating in the maneuvers in the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea.

- http://rbth.com/news/2015/05/12/russ...dri_45923.html)

Antonov also said he was concerned about stability in the region, naming the US as the main destabilizing factor. He said that Washington's policies have been aimed against Russia and China: "We are concerned by US policies in the region, especially since every day it becomes increasingly focused on a systemic containment of Russia and China."

http://rt.com/news/263533-rusia-mult...l-navy-drills/

[davidbfpo]

From Post 9, three weeks ago

China declared victory on Friday over an encounter with a US surveillance aircraft overflying the contested South China Sea, saying its military "drove away" the intruder with radio warnings.
http://news.yahoo.com/china-declares...114402363.html

It appears this incident was recorded by CNN, as they are now showing an 'exclusive' report from aboard the P8 maritime patrol plane:http://pzfeed.com/cnn-exclusive-inside-a-u-s-spy-plane/

[Bill Moore]

I look forward to reading Peter Singer's new book, "Ghost Fleet," even it does appear to be focused mostly on all domains (cyber, air, space, and maritime) except land and human (if you accept the concept of human domain). I think Peter is correct in that our strategies are failing to incorporate uncomfortable what if's, and the implications of those what if's, and how to adapt.

http://theweek.com/articles/565740/c...-world-war-iii

The Communist Party no longer rules China. In its place is a plutocratic-military regime known as the Directorate. The regime severs its ties with the U.S. — which it perceives as a declining empire holding China back from vital energy resources. With Russian support, China launches a surprise attack on the U.S. Pacific Fleet, resulting in its near total destruction.

"In a future battle of high technology, much of the technology will negate itself," he added. "So there's an irony that in a world of robotics, the internet, satellites, that the fight could play out like the battles of World War II."

In Ghost Fleet, the Directorate destroys America's satellites, blinds its warships and fighter jets with electronic noise, and clogs its communications networks with malware. This creates a "digital fog" that makes war just as confusing as America's historical naval battles with Japan.

[flagg]

I look forward to reading Peter Singer's new book, "Ghost Fleet," even it does appear to be focused mostly on all domains (cyber, air, space, and maritime) except land and human (if you accept the concept of human domain). I think Peter is correct in that our strategies are failing to incorporate uncomfortable what if's, and the implications of those what if's, and how to adapt.

http://theweek.com/articles/565740/c...-world-war-iii

I've read "Ghost Fleet".

I was expecting it to be a 21st century digital generation Red Storm Rising.

I was pretty disappointed.

While I think it does a decent job of looking at the genuine threat posed by a fascist/capitalist/expansionist China and it tried to pull together all of the warfighting domains, I think it did so superficially and simply.

I feel they went quite wide(necessarily across the warfighting domains), but also quite shallow.

Too shallow in many aspects(political/economic warfare/effect and commentary on US and its core allies).

Some bright spots for sure, worth the read, but I don't think it's worth getting your Red Storm Rising hopes up.

-----

On an unrelated note. I've just finished a few books on RECONDO/LRRP operations in Vietnam.

It has left me thinking about the application of similar doctrine in the Pacific Ocean.

Large(r) numbers of small(er), cheap(er), stealth(ier) littoral/blue water "LRRP ships"(and submarines) that are capable of organic self-defense and organic offensive ambush, but largely a sensor net for prompt global strike.

But still capable of performing maritime policing/counter-piracy/presence patrols.

Meshed with satellite and manned/unmanned aerial ISR platforms.

In a "LRRP ship" context, if it's valid/relevant, the Littoral Combat Ship seems to make sense if that's part of it's intent.

But I wonder if the Chinese are closer to providing a regionally operational "maritime LRRP" capability with their sea/air/space sensors partnered with DF-21D?