China's SCS Strategy Thread

[Ultra]

AHAHAHAHA, what did I say? Do you guys remember?

See, I knew Trump is a wildcard. He is tearing up the "one China" doctrine because he is a GAMBLER! He knew if he keep pressing the soft spot of Taiwan issue China is going to give.
There is not much China can do when Trump keep pressing the issue, Trump will use Taiwan as leverage to get as much as he want out of it.

The sad thing is Taiwan will become the sacrificial lamb, the pawn in someone's hand.

Coming back to the topic, I am certain Trump will continue this "wildcard" behavior especially in SCS, he will press the issue like a child picking the scab. much more than Obama to get MAXIMUM PUBLICITY.

 

[hlcc]

AHAHAHAHA, what did I say? Do you guys remember?

See, I knew Trump is a wildcard. He is tearing up the "one China" doctrine because he is a GAMBLER! He knew if he keep pressing the soft spot of Taiwan issue China is going to give.
There is not much China can do when Trump keep pressing the issue, Trump will use Taiwan as leverage to get as much as he want out of it.

The sad thing is Taiwan will become the sacrificial lamb, the pawn in someone's hand.

Coming back to the topic, I am certain Trump will continue this "wildcard" behavior especially in SCS, he will press the issue like a child picking the scab. much more than Obama to get MAXIMUM PUBLICITY.

Take a look at his track record after the election. He got a series of highly symbolic "wins" with very little if any real substance (the Carrier deal, the supposed Ford deal, the supposed Softbank investment etc)

 

[hlcc]

On the other hand, my humble opinion is, if China want's to be strong for incoming Unmentionable Showdown with Unmentionable Country, democracy is the No1 thing. More important than J-20 or Type 095. Because, many people in China are ready to trade it's freedoms for prosperity, but what to do when prosperity is gone due to blockade by Unmentionable Country? If they don't get freedom before that, there will be big potential for revolution in case of serious economical hardships/reverses in conflict.

I'd think the exact opposite seems more likely. Just take a look at Russia.

 

[abc123]

I'd think the exact opposite seems more likely. Just take a look at Russia.

You mean USSR and it's dissolution?

Well, if you think that the old USSR was country made on solid foundations, it may seem so. I don't think so.

And if you think about Russia, when has Russia seen real democracy? When President has sent tanks on Parliament or when bunch of old communists in Parliament tried to keep communism? When Government enabled massive robbery of national wealth or when they used that stolen money to win elections?

 

[solarz]

Come on. When was the last time when unity of China was seriously threatned? Tibetan mutiny in 50s? Was even that serious/had a chance to suceed? Han-Chinese are 95% of Chinese population, all the minorities ( including HK & Macao ) have no chance whatsoever for any serious attempt against unity of China.

On the other hand, my humble opinion is, if China want's to be strong for incoming Unmentionable Showdown with Unmentionable Country, democracy is the No1 thing. More important than J-20 or Type 095. Because, many people in China are ready to trade it's freedoms for prosperity, but what to do when prosperity is gone due to blockade by Unmentionable Country? If they don't get freedom before that, there will be big potential for revolution in case of serious economical hardships/reverses in conflict.

That's because you believe China's economy is at the mercy of the US, who can grant it or take it away at whim.

Needless to say, that's a load of BS.

The value of trade is that it goes both ways. Blockading China means losing a huge amount of business, which in turn translates to economic depression in not only the US, but in virtually every nation in the world. Remember how the western media was panicking with the falling Chinese stocks? They weren't interested in the stocks themselves, but in what they measure. A Chinese economic recession would have global repercussions, none of which would be good for the western economy.

Now imagine a certain country being foolish enough to blockade China.

As for the tired old refrain about "legitimacy", a government is only as legitimate as the people's belief in its legitimacy. There is no magical system to confer legitimacy. For all their vaunted democracy, the US is the country currently facing a crisis of legitimacy, not China.

 

[abc123]

That's because you believe China's economy is at the mercy of the US, who can grant it or take it away at whim.

Needless to say, that's a load of BS.

The value of trade is that it goes both ways. Blockading China means losing a huge amount of business, which in turn translates to economic depression in not only the US, but in virtually every nation in the world. Remember how the western media was panicking with the falling Chinese stocks? They weren't interested in the stocks themselves, but in what they measure. A Chinese economic recession would have global repercussions, none of which would be good for the western economy.

Now imagine a certain country being foolish enough to blockade China.

As for the tired old refrain about "legitimacy", a government is only as legitimate as the people's belief in its legitimacy. There is no magical system to confer legitimacy. For all their vaunted democracy, the US is the country currently facing a crisis of legitimacy, not China.

Firstly, I don't believe that.

Secondly, to establish some basic facts:

a) is China self-sufficient in oil production? No.

b) from where does China buys that oil? From all around the world.

c) How China delivers said oil? Mostly with tankers trough Strait of Malacca.

d) is the PLAN capable to defeat the US Navy in say, Indian Ocean or SCS and ensure free flow of oil? No, it isn't.

So, now: Of course that, during peace, US will not necessarilly destroy trade with China. But if, and that's not IF anymore, US sees China as No1 threat to it's global hegemony, why wouldn't they, during the war with stakes so high ( you can't say that global hegemony is a small thing ), use every weapon in their arsenal, including the blocade to break China into submission?

 

[solarz]

Firstly, I don't believe that.

Secondly, to establish some basic facts:

a) is China self-sufficient in oil production? No.

b) from where does China buys that oil? From all around the world.

c) How China delivers said oil? Mostly with tankers trough Strait of Malacca.

d) is the PLAN capable to defeat the US Navy in say, Indian Ocean or SCS and ensure free flow of oil? No, it isn't.

So, now: Of course that, during peace, US will not necessarilly destroy trade with China. But if, and that's not IF anymore, US sees China as No1 threat to it's global hegemony, why wouldn't they, during the war with stakes so high ( you can't say that global hegemony is a small thing ), use every weapon in their arsenal, including the blocade to break China into submission?

You're forgetting why China needs most of that oil: to manufacture goods for the rest of the world.

In times of economic blockade, all it matters is that China produces sufficient oil for its own consumption.

Furthermore, China is developing land-based oil delivery lines, further improving its oil security.

 

[hlcc]

You mean USSR and it's dissolution?

Well, if you think that the old USSR was country made on solid foundations, it may seem so. I don't think so.

And if you think about Russia, when has Russia seen real democracy? When President has sent tanks on Parliament or when bunch of old communists in Parliament tried to keep communism? When Government enabled massive robbery of national wealth or when they used that stolen money to win elections?

No, I meant the current situation in Russia. The Russian government failed to diversify their economy, and when oil prices crashed their entire economy went down the drain. Fortunately for Putin, the Western powers enacted a series of fairly harmless sanctions against Russia and he was able to use the sanctions as convenient scapegoat for all of Russia's economic problems and deflect away all blame against him for failed economic policies & military adventurism. As a result, Putin's approval rating is still sky high and even though their standard of living has plummeted recently the Russian people actually rallied around him instead of turning against him.

 

[abc123]

No, I meant the current situation in Russia. The Russian government failed to diversify their economy, and when oil prices crashed their entire economy went down the drain. Fortunately for Putin, the Western powers enacted a series of fairly harmless sanctions against Russia and he was able to use the sanctions as convenient scapegoat for all of Russia's economic problems and deflect away all blame against him for failed economic policies & military adventurism. As a result, Putin's approval rating is still sky high and even though their standard of living has plummeted recently the Russian people actually rallied around him instead of turning against him.

Well see how long will that support last when all the money from Oil Stabilisation Fund is spent and workers start being laid off.

 

[solarz]

Trade can only be wielded as a weapon if one side holds overwhelming advantages over the other. As it stands, it would be very difficult to argue that any nation, or even groups of nations, holds sufficient leverage against China.

Blockading China would have devastating consequences for the world economy, especially the developed nations that have come to take Chinese manufactured goods for granted. Massive lay-offs, cascading bankruptcies, astronomical inflation, civil unrest, and the collapse of institutions such as the EU, are just some of the likely consequences.