The US response to China (catch all)

[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?

[davidbfpo]

Hat tip to WoTR for this review by Claude Berube who teaches at the U.S. Naval Academy:http://warontherocks.com/2015/07/gho...-storm-rising/

The last passage:

The work has plenty to keep readers attentive, including military history and pop culture references such as direct and indirect homages to the Battlestar Galactica reboot, Star Trek, Red Dawn, and Tron. This is a book best savored in as few sittings as possible. The authors are clear enough in their message that America is vulnerable, and they’re right. But they’re also correct that innovative thinking will save us in the end

[davidbfpo]

Hat tip to WoTR for this short article, which starts with:

The lessons of the Maginot Line extend well into the 21st century, as China constructs a coastal and offshore defensive belt to defend both its maritime and territorial claims with high-tech and static capabilities. With its Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) strategy, China aims to force the U.S. military to operate at a much greater distance from the Chinese mainland.

Link:http://warontherocks.com/2015/08/chinas-maginot-line/

[Bob's World]

China's actions are consistent with those of rising powers throughout history, only colored by their own unique geography, history and culture.

They are doing what we would do in their place, only with more patience and wisdom. I am reminded of the joke of the Old Bull and the Young Bull standing on a hill top looking down at a herd of cows. The US being the young bull in this fable, and China the old.

If US policy is one of strategic stasis, then it means we must keep putting more and more energy into the system, creating a pressure cooker effect as the relative balance of power shifts between the US and China in the region (and in general). But unless China collapses internally ( a distinct possibility that they are very aware of), at some point the pressure cooker will blow.

A policy of strategic evolution is more appropriate. But there are no right answers, and any tradeoffs, regardless of how wise or reasonable, will be labeled by many as "appeasement." Usually those who throw out terms like "appeasement" and "you can't abandon our allies" as rationale for sustaining strategic stasis are also closely related to the chicken hawks who will clamor for war over some small incident that challenges those rigid policies.