China's SCS Strategy Thread


AndrewS

Major
Registered Member
Probably just an American reconaissance aircraft squawking a Filipino callsign on Mode-S transponder, which therefore jeopardizes Filipino (or any civilian aircraft for that fact) that flies near or within Chinese airspace
Yes.

It means the USA wants China to mistakenly shoot down a civilian aircraft from Malaysia or the Philippines.

The Philippines has some leverage to stop this happening, as it can withhold cooperation on the US bases in the Philippines.

Malaysia has less leverage, but I can't imagine neighbouring Singapore or Thailand being too happy either.
 

AndrewS

Major
Registered Member
Just noticed that there is a new English language website which is publicising US military activities in the South China Seas.

SOUTH CHINA SEA STRATEGIC SITUATION PROBING INITIATIVE
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

At the end of the day, the China is the world's largest raw materials importer and manufactured goods exporter.
The vast majority of these pass through the South China Seas, so the Chinese military wants trade to flow, even if there is some kind of military conflict.

In comparison, the US military would want to shut down trade in the South China Seas.
But the small coasts nations surrounding the South China Seas rely on ocean shipping to survive
 

plawolf

Brigadier
BRI isn’t about counter blockade, it’s about linking Asia and Europe while at the same time creating a whole new market in between.

No country could effectively blockade Chinese sea trade now without taking down global trade as collateral damage. Not even the US would dare to do that as aside from the colossal damage it would do to itself, it would also unite the entire world against it. And even if the US was desperate enough to try that, it would still now work. Because the most critical imported resource for China in terms of a war time situation is oil and gas. While China does import significantly from the ME, SA and Africa, which would be vulnerable to interdiction, it already have significant pipelines in place with Russia, the volume from which, together with domestic production and new energy sources, would be more than enough to sustain China’s wartime economy and industry more or less indefinitely.
 

halflife3

Junior Member
Registered Member
China is not Japan or Germany. China does not lack fossil fuels. They have significant reserves of coal, and 60% of China's energy consumption comes from coal. They have abundant reserves of crude oil, with more being discovered recently. Although not enough to be exported, it is enough to sustain itself. China's oil consumption per capita is very low, around 7 barrels per day compared to 60 for US.

China also has the largest currently known shale gas deposits, although they are harder to extract than American shale gas. China is not in a hurry to develop and enter a similar "shale revolution" so soon. US shale fracking companies borrowed heavily to jump start and develop the technologies to make extracting shale gas economically viable. And so far, things are not looking good and many are going bankrupt because of the recent oil gluts caused by the price war by OPEC and Russia to squeeze American fracking companies out of business since crude oil is still much cheaper to extract than shale oil and gas. Combined with the COVID-19 recession, its a double whammy for them.
 

Hendrik_2000

Brigadier
BRI isn’t about counter blockade, it’s about linking Asia and Europe while at the same time creating a whole new market in between.

No country could effectively blockade Chinese sea trade now without taking down global trade as collateral damage. Not even the US would dare to do that as aside from the colossal damage it would do to itself, it would also unite the entire world against it. And even if the US was desperate enough to try that, it would still now work. Because the most critical imported resource for China in terms of a war time situation is oil and gas. While China does import significantly from the ME, SA and Africa, which would be vulnerable to interdiction, it already have significant pipelines in place with Russia, the volume from which, together with domestic production and new energy sources, would be more than enough to sustain China’s wartime economy and industry more or less indefinitely.
That is right China produce about 50% of energy need from domestic source The rest are source from import But mostly use for transportation. 90% of China electricity is produced by coal And with the proliferation of public transportation like commuter train, High speed train, Subway and electrical buses There will be transportation maybe not as convenience as with private car but you can get from point A to point B.

This dependence is now mitigated with proliferation of pipeline from Central Asia and Russia. In the future import from Russia will explode They are building 2nd and 3 rd pipe line from Russia now Together they constitute about 15% of China energy need. China has a lot of oil and gas resources in SCS, Bohai bay etc most of them just now being explored

Embargo will cause pain but it will not stop the country all together unlike in Japan during WW II
 

hullopilllw

Junior Member
Registered Member
BRI isn’t about counter blockade, it’s about linking Asia and Europe while at the same time creating a whole new market in between.

No country could effectively blockade Chinese sea trade now without taking down global trade as collateral damage. Not even the US would dare to do that as aside from the colossal damage it would do to itself, it would also unite the entire world against it. And even if the US was desperate enough to try that, it would still now work. Because the most critical imported resource for China in terms of a war time situation is oil and gas. While China does import significantly from the ME, SA and Africa, which would be vulnerable to interdiction, it already have significant pipelines in place with Russia, the volume from which, together with domestic production and new energy sources, would be more than enough to sustain China’s wartime economy and industry more or less indefinitely.
BRI just so happen to pierce through all 3 of :

Mahan's The Influence of Sea Power
Spykman's Rimland Theory
and
Mackinder's Heartland Theory
 

Untoldpain

New Member
Registered Member
Explain please.
I can certainly give you a excerpt on the first point.

The Influence of Sea Power upon History

The Influence of Sea Power Upon History: 1660–1783 is a history of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
published in 1890 by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. It details the role of sea power during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and discussed the various factors needed to support and achieve sea power, with emphasis on having the largest and most powerful fleet. Scholars considered it the single most influential book in
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Its policies were quickly adopted by most major navies, ultimately leading to the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. It is also cited as one of the contributing factors of the United States becoming a great power.


Mahan began the book with an examination of what factors led to a supremacy of the seas, especially how Great Britain was able to rise to its near dominance. He identified such features as geography, population, and government, and expanded the definition of sea power as comprising a strong navy and commercial fleet.

Although Mahan's influence on foreign powers has been widely recognized, only in recent decades have scholars called attention to his role as significant in the growth of American overseas possessions, the rise of the new American navy, and the adoption of the strategic principles upon which it operated. Mahan's strategic theories continue to be influential into the 21st century, especially in the newly emerging naval powers India and China.
 

AndrewS

Major
Registered Member
An interesting piece below on the unfinished China/Taiwan Civil War from the Lowy Institute, stating that an actual war could last a decade.

In a crisis to compel unification, the scope and intensity of China’s means, modes and measures could increase exponentially. It probably does not need to invade the island quickly, and if successful (by no means assured), then fight a ruinous counterinsurgency for decades. For China, the first and most important goal would not be to quickly “win” in a conventional military sense. Instead it would be to “not lose” while it sets the conditions for eventual victory – a victory that the CCP will frame in political rather than strictly military terms.

The CCP probably could afford to continue to be patient as it executes a series of strategic campaigns. It will be prepared for this war to last for months, perhaps years, and even for a decade if necessary. It will be analogous to other struggles for national unification – those in Vietnam, Korea, Germany and even the US Civil War.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Top