Miscellaneous News

Rettam Stacf

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yeah, it doesn't make sense but the point I want to make is the effect of the loss would be unpredictable, the no sail zone could be selectively enforced on US ships, their allies and the countries in the region that might flip to their side, or as a tool of political settlement for the countries that flipped because of the loss of military power. It all really depends on how it plays out.

Yes, I agree.

No sail zone in SCS for US and her allies' warships, that I can see. No sail zone for all maritime traffic, not possible.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Colonel
Registered Member
Bro as a resident in the region, all we want is a peaceful neighborhood, Period! We don't want to choose side and even tiny Singapore who is a hostage of the US had the courage to say so. The US is trying hard to appease us BUT with $15 million that is an insult, so China won the American lost. The crucial element is the Philippine, without us the strategy of containment will move to the 2nd Island chain with Guam as a fulcrum. So how about SK and Japan? will they stay true as a pillar of American strategy? The fact is the history in that region they never saw China as a threat cause the Chinese never invaded them, when they went in to help and they never overstay their welcome and return home. So what about Taiwan will SK and Japan intervene, if China sink an Aircraft Carrier they will declare their neutrality ASAP, they don't want to be a frontline state. The American knew without them these 2 countries will be at war with each other the so called Strategic Pillar stand in shaky ground.

My opinion after 6 years of Duterte, the flashpoint have move to Taiwan, everybody in ASEAN believes in diplomacy as they knew the new Philippine gov't will stay the course. Lets be honest most of the leaders in ASEAN lack the strength of Character to say NO to America, the reason for Duterte popularity in the region, he can Voice the region concern vigorously without fear of repercussion.
And the Taiwanese are not stupid, even the Virgin Heroine is having second thought, this Ukraine War is an eye opener for most country in the region, the American pledges and promises hold NO strategic value, BUT uncertainty and destruction.
I am also from ASEAN.

Of course, I can confidently say that - For the ASEAN region, apart from the few extreme ones who would like to see the world burn as long as they can achieve their objectives, most of us would like to preserve the current status quo as it is. Or at least, change the status quo into something more fair and better for everyone without having to resort to killing anyone.

In retrospect, there are only two powers in the Western Pacific region that could significantly alter this status quo - China and the United States.

And what events would cause the significant alteration of this status quo (i.e. flashpoints)? Conflicts over Taiwan, conflicts over Diaoyu, and conflicts in the South China Sea.

But just as you said, the flashpoint has squarely moved over to Taiwan. And as mentioned above, maintaining the current China-Taiwan status quo is the vital for maintaining the status quo across Western Pacific.

All of us agree that Taiwan separating from China through formal independence and/or hosting foreign troops would be a red line that Beijing would never tolerate if crossed. And who is the main driving power that supports and fans the flames so that Taiwan's can inch closer to China's red lines? The United States.

Which relates to my next point: It has been more than 70 years since the People's Republic of China is formed. And Beijing has been patiently waiting for Taiwan to reunify with the motherland.

70 years is a long ass time to wait. Would it be too long to wait another 20 years? In the pragmatic eyes of China, not really.

China has ample amounts of both time and patience on the Taiwan issue. In fact, China can just sit around and grind her own axe while watching the US-led Lackey Inc. deconstruct themselves over some superficial "woke humanity values bla bla bla". That means unless the status quo and red line is being violated, China would prefer to allocate more of her focus on the economy and wellbeing of her own citizens than the military.

However, the same cannot be said about that certain island towards the southeast, and that certain superpower across the ocean.

Just take a look at the series of actions and behavior taken by Taipei under Vegetable English, and Washington DC under the oligarch-media-military industrial compl- Oops, I mean, the Orange Man and Sleepy Brandon over the past years, and you understand that they are itching for a conflict, so that China can be dragged down to mud and the US-led Lackeys Inc. stay clean and clear (despite they clearly aren't).

In fact, Taipei and Washington DC are what the world should be worry about, NOT Beijing.

Back to the first point: What I mentioned about the various scenarios that could play out regarding China-ASEAN affairs due to the conflict on Taiwan is a response to @Overbom's post #38199.

Do I really think that ASEAN should just throw themselves completely into China's or US' embrace? Not really.

IMO, it's fine for ASEAN to be included and integrated into China's sphere of influence, considering that China-ASEAN relations date back for more than two thousand years. China is also the natural neighbour of ASEAN, so you can't just run away even if you want to - China will always be the neighbour of ASEAN, whether you like it or not.

However, that does not mean ASEAN countries should just become dogs and lackeys to China. Becoming dogs and lackeys would be like how the EU and certain few countries in the Western Pacific have became today.
 
Last edited:

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
It's not just prestige, however. It's about power projection and the ability to stave off any foreign contenders in the Western Pacific.

Scenario 1: China vs Taiwan would be 1 vs 1.

Scenario 2: China vs Taiwan with direct intervention from the US-led Lackey Inc. (i.e. US+Japan+South Korea+Australia+UK) would be 1 vs 6.

Even if South Korea and the UK chicken out and decide to stay neutral, it would still be 1 vs 4.

To put it simply:

Scenario 1 = You fighting alone against only one opponent;
versus
Scenario 2 = You fighting alone against multiple opponents.

Which fight would would hurt you more? And which fight would carry more implications and effect later on?
but the probability of winning in China vs. Taiwan 1v1 is very high and even in scenario 2 it's a coinflip. The US - and it really is just the US - has to question whether they can afford to lose most of their Pacific assets.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Colonel
Registered Member
but the probability of winning in China vs. Taiwan 1v1 is very high and even in scenario 2 it's a coinflip. The US - and it really is just the US - has to question whether they can afford to lose most of their Pacific assets.
I am just responding to Overbom's post #38199.

I mean, you can consider those as the results of my personal little military and geopolitical wargaming.

Does it necessary represent real life? Maybe. Or maybe not.

I'm not a fortune teller.
 
Last edited:

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member
Registered Member
Do I really think that ASEAN should just throw themselves completely into China's or US' embrace? Not really.

IMO, it's fine for ASEAN to be included and integrated into China's sphere of influence, considering that China-ASEAN relations date back for more than two thousand years. China is also the natural neighbour of ASEAN, so you can't just run away even if you want to - China will always be the neighbour of ASEAN, whether you like it or not.

However, that does not mean ASEAN countries should just become dogs and lackeys to China. Becoming dogs and lackeys would be like how the EU and certain few countries in the Western Pacific have became.
Nah, I doubt China and ASEAN relationship will become that of master-vassal like that of US and its allies.

With that said, China is big and powerful, that is not something that can be ignored, and so it will 'outweight' ASEAN when on the negotiating table.

So what to do?
Pull more people to the table, which means try and make RCEP bigger, maybe reform the SCO to also have ASEAN etc. Even maybe going for some Asia and Africa 'org' or table, or like Asia and middle east as well as ofc Asia and latin america.

Besides the above, there will always be a part of 'being at the mercy' of the hegemon, afterall if say China attacked an ASEAN country, they would not be able to do much.
Luckily that is a really off and unlikely scenario, and we have good evidence of good diplomatic behaviour of China to other countries (BRI, RCEP etc.), might this change after China kicks out the US? Maybe, but I don't think it will fundamentally change that much.
 

ansy1968

Brigadier
Registered Member
but the probability of winning in China vs. Taiwan 1v1 is very high and even in scenario 2 it's a coinflip. The US - and it really is just the US - has to question whether they can afford to lose most of their Pacific assets.
@FairAndUnbiased Bro IF there is a conflict, China may lost BUT the American will be hugely weakened, That is reason why the US want the Japanese and the SK to get involved, so that in the Pacific there will be no regional power to challenge their vulnerability. They only trust their fellow Caucasian Anglo Saxon Australia not the Orientals.
 

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
Nah, I doubt China and ASEAN relationship will become that of master-vassal like that of US and its allies.

With that said, China is big and powerful, that is not something that can be ignored, and so it will 'outweight' ASEAN when on the negotiating table.

So what to do?
Pull more people to the table, which means try and make RCEP bigger, maybe reform the SCO to also have ASEAN etc. Even maybe going for some Asia and Africa 'org' or table, or like Asia and middle east as well as ofc Asia and latin america.

Besides the above, there will always be a part of 'being at the mercy' of the hegemon, afterall if say China attacked an ASEAN country, they would not be able to do much.
Luckily that is a really off and unlikely scenario, and we have good evidence of good diplomatic behaviour of China to other countries (BRI, RCEP etc.), might this change after China kicks out the US? Maybe, but I don't think it will fundamentally change that much.
I agree, and I do hope China won't fundamentally change their attitude into that of bullying hegemony like US if they become an undisputed power. Here I want to share an article from Global times on what Deng have said at UN General Assembly:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
"China is not a superpower, nor will she ever seek to be one. If one day China should change her color and turn into a superpower, if she too should play the tyrant in the world, and everywhere subject others to her bullying, aggression and exploitation, the people of the world should identify her as social-imperialism, expose it, oppose it and work together with the Chinese people to overthrow it."
This is a pledge China made to the international community and the code of conduct for international relations that it has always followed. Despite changes in the international landscape, China's commitment to "never seek hegemony" has never changed, and its original aspiration to "uphold peace" has never wavered.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Colonel
Registered Member
Nah, I doubt China and ASEAN relationship will become that of master-vassal like that of US and its allies.

With that said, China is big and powerful, that is not something that can be ignored, and so it will 'outweight' ASEAN when on the negotiating table.
Besides the above, there will always be a part of 'being at the mercy' of the hegemon, afterall if say China attacked an ASEAN country, they would not be able to do much.
Luckily that is a really off and unlikely scenario, and we have good evidence of good diplomatic behaviour of China to other countries (BRI, RCEP etc.), might this change after China kicks out the US? Maybe, but I don't think it will fundamentally change that much.
Fair points made.

A person can change with the flip of a coin. Countries certainly aren't an exception.

Although, I would say that China is more solid, crystal-clear and straight-forward with her objectives and goals than the West. You can actually know what China really wants to achieve and become without needing any secondary thoughts.

That is also another reason why I tend to look forward to a bipolar or a multipolar world with more cooperation and healthy competition between the polarS, rather than a unipolar world of which the sole superpower can do whatever the fvck they like at the expense of everyone else.

Deng's quote mentioned by @Coalescence in the post #38229 sums up pretty well.
Pull more people to the table, which means try and make RCEP bigger, maybe reform the SCO to also have ASEAN etc. Even maybe going for some Asia and Africa 'org' or table, or like Asia and middle east as well as ofc Asia and latin america.
Agreed.

The recent tour around Oceania by Foreign Minister Wang Yi to sign loads of cooperative agreements on various fields, the anticipated expansion of BRICS and the proposal of the Global Security Initiative by President Xi can be considered as similar efforts to your points in order to uplift China's status and power on the world stage. Those, alongside the BRI and other similar bilateral cooperative joint-projects between China and many other nations.

China have to start being proactive and "aggressive" on the international arena. Time waits for no one.
 
Last edited:

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Pull more people to the table, which means try and make RCEP bigger, maybe reform the SCO to also have ASEAN etc. Even maybe going for some Asia and Africa 'org' or table, or like Asia and middle east as well as ofc Asia and latin america.
BRICS expansion is good thing. As a big ASEAN power, Indonesia should be included. And down the line, even Vietnam should join.

Vietnam is a snake country, but if China is even willing to tolerate this black sheep, it sends a big signal to the rest of the countries that China is willing to engage them, no matter how "bad" they are, as long as they stay clear of China's red lines and give it face.

IMO China isn't demanding much, the only issue is what China is prepared to offer to "buy" them out. RCEP is an important first step. CPTPP is also a part of this (I still think that China genuinely wants to join it, although it is also willing to wait years for that to happen)

Then there are the BRI, BRICS, SCO and the new Global Security Initiative. China should aim to standardise and institutionalise these organisations (GSI is very new, it will take years for that)
 

FriedButter

Major
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Chinese food security push poses threat to US – report​

A new government report claims Beijing’s agricultural policies could be dangerous for Americans

China’s efforts to achieve food security represent a threat to the US, according to an American federal agency focused on trade with Beijing.

Another point to why the Neocons wanted to turn Russia into a puppet state. They cannot win an easy war against China if they have unfetter access to basic commodities. Slow panic in the pacific. Their entire strategy is to make China dependent on the West for survival with semiconductors next to be knocked off.
 
Top