Indian Army Commander: China’s Presence in Pakistan-administered Kashmir “Increasing Steadily”, China’s First Aircraft Carrier May Be Nearly Ready, Photos Released Days Before Robert Gates Visit to Beijing, Taiwan Inaugurates Missile Ships amid Buildup Vow to Offset the Perceived Military Threat from China, Former Minister of Railways Executed for Act of Sabotage and Espionage Charges in North Korea, Pyongyang Strengthens Submarine Drills Near Border, Threatens Action for US-South Korea Military Exercises, Sri Lankan Army Commander in Indonesia Defence Relations to Be Enhanced, Iran’s Oil Exports to China Increased 62%, Tehran Moscow Underline Increasing Cooperation in Oil Gas Fields, Russia Begins Refuelling Iran Nuclear Plant, China and Russia Fingered in German Industrial Espionage, Washington Gears for High-Stakes Sea-Based Missile Defense Test, With Eye on South China Sea U.S. Might Place Troops in Australia, Russia to Continue Military Conscription for Next 10-15 Years
China’s Presence in PoK “Increasing Steadily”: Army Commander
China’s presence in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) is “increasing steadily” and its troops are “actually present” along the Line-of-Control, a top Army commander said, adding the Chinese footprints are “too close for comfort” for India.
“Chinese presence in Gilgit-Baltistan and the Northern Areas is increasing steadily… There are many people who are concerned about the fact that if there was to be hostility between us and Pakistan, what would be the complicity of Chinese. Not only they are in the neighbourhood but the fact that they are actually present and stationed along the LoC,” Northern Army commander Lt Gen KT Parnaik said here last week while addressing a seminar.
He said China’s links with Pakistan through PoK “lends strength” to the “nexus” between the two countries which is a cause of “great security concern” for India.
“As part of (China’s) ‘strings of pearls’ policy, Chinese footprints are too close for comfort,” Parnaik added.
The Army commander said such a nexus between the Chinese and Pakistani military “jeopardises our regional strategic interests in the long run and and facilitates speedy and enhanced deployment of Pakistan armed forces to complement China’s military operations and thus outranks India.”
He said China has been found to be involved in the construction of numerous roads and and several hydro-power projects inside PoK.
Beijing is laying a web of roads that run across areas as distant from each other as Skardu in PoK and Kunming in China near Myanmar border.
China has already constructed roads connecting all its highways to logistic centres and major defence installations that dot the border with India and the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in south-eastern Jammu and Kashmir.
The Times of India | April 5, 2011
____________________
Chinese Warship May Be Nearly Ready
The Chinese state news agency has posted photographs of an aircraft carrier under reconstruction that appears to show the warship near completion. Captions with the photos said that the work would end soon and that the carrier was expected to sail later this year.
[...] Xinhua’s headline with the photos said: “Huge warship on the verge of setting out, fulfilling China’s 70-year aircraft carrier dreams.” One caption said: “A few days ago, domestic online military forums consecutively published photographs of the Varyag aircraft carrier being reconstructed at China’s Dalian shipyard. From the pictures, we can see that this project is entering its final stage.” The caption noted that construction on the ship’s bridge was almost done, with the exception of a radar system.
[...] The appearance of the photos came just days before Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates visited China. Military officials tested the fighter while Mr. Gates was in Beijing, which led to a puzzling and awkward diplomatic moment between Mr. Gates and President Hu Jintao.
Continue Reading >> The New York Times | April 7, 2011
____________________
Taiwan Inaugurates Missile Ships amid Buildup Vow
Taiwan’s President Ma Ying-jeou inaugurated a squadron of missile boats Thursday as he pledged to continue the island’s military buildup to offset the perceived military threat from China.
The fleet of 10 locally manufactured missile boats joined the navy following a ceremony presided over by Ma at the northeastern naval base in Suao.
Ma, the initiator of detente with the island’s giant neighbour, said tensions with the mainland have eased significantly since he came to power in 2008 but insisted Taiwan needed a deterrent against Beijing which claims the island as part of its territory.
Continue Reading >> AFP | April 7, 2011
____________________
Two Former Ministers Executed in North Korea – Seoul Newspaper
[...] The newspaper reported that the North Korean former minister of railways, who occupied the post in 1998-2000, was executed over the blast case at a railway station in April 2004. This explosion was qualified as an act of sabotage targeted against a special train of a North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, who was on the way back from China.
The minister was accused of classified information leakage. The routes and the schedule of Kim’s trips were accessible only for his bodyguards and secretaries, as well as the railway minister.
Continue Reading >> ITAR-TASS | April 4, 2011
____________________
N. Korea Strengthens Submarine Drills Near Border
North Korea has intensified submarine drills near the tense Yellow Sea border with South Korea, putting Seoul defence officials on alert, a report said Thursday.
JoongAng Ilbo newspaper, citing a Seoul military source, said the North had been staging exercises involving five or six submarines at the Bipagot submarine base on its west coast since last month.
They feature the signature 325-tonne submarines as well as the new and bigger Shark-class submarines called K-300, it said.
“It’s highly unusual for them to beef up submarine drills in March so we’re intensely monitoring the situation,” said the source.
Continue Reading >> AFP | April 7, 2011
____________________
N. Korea Threatens Action for US-SKorea Drills
North Korea warned Friday that its military would not remain a “passive onlooker” if South Korea and the United States continued joint military drills, state media reported.
The threat came from Ri Yong-Ho, a vice marshal of the North’s armed forces, at a meeting attended by top government, military and party officials in Pyongyang.
Continue Reading >> AFP | April 8, 2011
____________________
SL, Indonesia Defence Relations to Be Enhanced
Sri Lankan Army Commander Lieutenant General Jagath Jayasuriya’s official visit to Indonesia has resulted in further strengthening the longstanding and excellent defence relations between the two nations and their armed forces.
Army sources say that it also provided opportunity to explore further defence cooperation between the two countries.
Continue Reading >> Daily News | April 6, 2011
____________________
Iran’s Oil Exports to China Increased in 2011
The Islamic Republic of Iran’s crude oil exports to China increased 62 percent in the first two months of 2011, Xinhua reported.
In January-February 2011, Iran’s crude exports to China increased 62 percent compared to the same period last year.
During the mentioned time, China has totally imported 45.73 million tons half of which has been supplied by the countries in the Middle East.
Iran’s crude oil exports to China reached 4.11 million tons during the two months. Iran has been second biggest crude supplier to China.
Saudi Arabia exported 8.19 million tons of oil to China and it was ranked first supplying 20 percent of the Asian country’s oil demand during the same period.
Mojnews | April 6, 2011
____________________
Tehran, Moscow Underline Increasing Cooperation in Oil, Gas Fields
Iranian Deputy Vice-President for Economic Affairs Ali Aqa Mohammadi and Chief Executive of Russia’s Gazprom Company Alexei Miller in a meeting in Moscow underscored the necessity for the further promotion of mutual cooperation between the two countries in the oil and gas sectors.
Continue Reading >> Fars New Agency | April 7, 2011
____________________
Russia Begins Refuelling Iran Nuclear Plant
Russia on Friday resumed loading fuel into Iran’s first nuclear power plant after it had to be removed because of an apparent technical fault, news reports said.
Continue Reading >> AFP | April 8, 2011
____________________
China and Russia Fingered in German Industrial Espionage Alert
Industrial espionage by China and Russia is becoming easier thanks to computer hacking, officials warned German business leaders on Thursday, adding that police need data logs to track computer break-ins.
A conference heard that the annual cost to German companies of data theft was at least 20 billion euros (nearly 30 billion dollars).
[...] “Russia and China are the main sources of so-called industrial espionage in Germany,” Schroeder said.
Continue Reading >> Monsters and Critics | April 7, 2011
____________________
U.S. Gears for High-Stakes Missile Defense Test
The United States is preparing for its first test of a sea-based defense against longer-range missiles of a type that officials say could soon threaten Europe from Iran.
Continue Reading >> Reuters | April 7, 2011
____________________
With Eye on South China Sea, U.S. Might Place Troops in Australia
American troops might soon find themselves serving in Australia as the United States looks for better access to the South China Sea, the source of much friction between China and many other Pacific nations.
During testimony on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Adm. Robert Willard, the commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, said Australians would like to see an increase of U.S. military activities Down Under.
[...] U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said he has a group studying the idea of U.S. troops rotating through existing Australian bases, but he doesn’t want to create any new permanent bases in the Pacific. And he remained diplomatic when asked whether such a plan would be about keeping China in check.
[...] The United States and Australia have been on the same side of every major war since World War I. Australia has the largest group of troops from a non-NATO country fighting in Afghanistan.
Continue Reading >> CNN | April 8, 2011
____________________
Russia to Continue Military Conscription for Next 10-15 Years – Medvedev
The Russian Armed Forces will continue using a mixture of conscripts and contracted recruits for the next 10-15 years, President Dmitry Medvedev said on Monday.
Russia is in the process of reforming its armed forces by shifting the focus away from a largely inefficient body of conscripted soldiers toward a smaller professional army.
Continue Reading >> RIA Novosti | April 4, 2011
Russia Hopes Turkey Will Eventually Give the Green Light to the South Stream Gas Pipeline Project, “Turkey to OK South Stream When Conditions Met”, “Project is Not in the Best Interest of Ukraine and the Country is Working against it”, Iran Plans to Invest $90 Billion in South Pars Gas Field, U.K. Royal Dutch Shell Drilling 17 Gas Wells in China, Beijing Urges Quick End to American-Led Airstrikes in Libya, Considers the Security Situation in the Asia-Pacific as “Volatile”, Points to the U.S. Reinforcement of Military Alliances and Rising Suspicions in the Region, Seeks to Reinforce Trust With Neighbours, Will Stick to a Defensive Military Doctrine, The World’s Largest Arms Importer is Now India Not China, South Korea U.S. Conduct Large Military Exercise in Yellow Sea, Singapore Thailand U.S. Conclude Military Drill, Naval Exercises Between the Philippines and Malaysia, Venezuela’s $15 Billion Weapons Purchase Concerns Latin America, Joint Ghana U.S. Jungle Warfare Exercise Ends
Russia hopes Turkey will approve South Stream
Russia hopes Turkey will eventually give the green light to the section of the South Stream gas pipeline project that crosses its territory, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday.
Turkey has not given its consent to the laying of part of the 15.5-billion-euro marine pipeline across its Black Sea territory. South Stream is designed to diversify Russian gas export routes, and will stretch to Bulgaria’s Black Sea coast and then on to Italy and Austria.
[...] The land section of the pipeline will go across Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, Greece, Slovenia, Croatia and Austria, with whom Russia has already signed intergovernmental agreements.
Continue Reading >> RIA Novosti | March 22, 2011
____________________
“Turkey to OK South Stream When Conditions Met”
Energy Minister Taner Yıldız said Turkey would still abide by the terms of a 2009 agreement with Russia over a proposed underwater pipeline that will carry natural gas to Europe bypassing Ukraine.
South Stream, controlled by Russian Gazprom and Italian Eni, is planned to carry Russian natural gas under the Black Sea to Bulgaria and on to Europe via Italy and Austria. In an exclusive interview with Today’s Zaman, Yıldız reaffirmed the Turkish position on the $21.5 billion pipeline project called South Stream, saying nothing had changed on the Turkish side. “We are still waiting for the environmental impact studies, as well as feasibility studies, on South Stream to see if the required criteria demanded by Turkey are met. If met, there is no question we would give our approval to the project,” he said.
Continue Reading >> Today’s Zaman | March 26, 2011
____________________
Minister: Ukraine Works Against South Stream
The South Stream natural gas pipeline project is not in the best interest of Ukraine and the country is working against it, according to Ukrainian Minister of Energy Yuriy Boyko.
Boyko said his country is undergoing “tense discussions” with Russia, the main country supporting the project, set to deliver gas to southern and central Europe, bypassing Ukraine.
“South Stream is a political project of our Russian partners, who want to create an excess of transit capacities for gas, like what they did back in the day for oil,” said the Ukrainian minister, quoted by MIGnews.
Boyko said that in collaboration with Ukraine’s “EU partners,” the country will be putting efforts so that in the end the pipeline be not built.
Sofia News Agency | April 2, 2011
____________________
Iran Plans to Invest $90B in South Pars
Iran’s Oil Ministry plans to invest about $90 billion in South Pars gas field in the current Iranian calendar year (started March 21), Oil Minister Masoud Mirkazemi said.
According to Mirkazemi, about $60 billion of the mentioned amount will be allocated to the upstream projects and about $30 billion to the downstream sector, SHANA News Network reported.
The official also noted that an extra $20 billion will be invested in the petrochemical projects of the giant field.
Mirkazemi further said that the Oil Ministry plans to complete the developing projects of all the remaining phases of the field within 35 months.
The Iranian oil minister also stressed the need for foreign investment in the site to speed up the projects, saying that once all the phases of the South Pars come on stream, the field can produce 25 million cubic meters of natural gas and about 40,000 barrels of liquefied natural gas per day, making the country’s annual revenue from the field hit $110 billion, Press TV reported.
The South Pars gas field is located in the Persian Gulf in the border zone between Iran and Qatar. The field’s reserves are estimated at 14 trillion cubic meters of gas and 18 billion barrels of liquefied natural gas.
Payvand Iran News | April 1, 2011
____________________
Shell Drilling 17 China Gas Wells
U.K. oil major Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSA.LN) is drilling 17 wells in China, including for tight gas and shale gas, Reuters reported Sunday, citing Chief Executive Peter Voser.
If drilling is successful, Shell plans to spend $1 billion a year during the next five year years on shale gas in China, Voser was quoted as saying.
MarketWatch | March 20, 2011
____________________
China Urges Quick End to Airstrikes in Libya
China escalated its opposition to American-led airstrikes on Libya on Tuesday, joining Russia and India in calls for an immediate cease-fire and suggesting that coalition forces were imperiling civilians by exceeding the United Nations-mandated no-fly zone.
[...] China’s response to the campaign has been the most forceful, warning that the assault could bring about a “humanitarian disaster.” In a news briefing Tuesday, Jiang Yu, a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, called for an end to hostilities. “We’ve seen reports that the use of armed force is causing civilian casualties, and we oppose the wanton use of armed force leading to more civilian casualties,” she said.
China was one of five countries to abstain from the United Nations resolution that authorized the allied airstrikes against the forces of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, which have been seeking to crush a rebellion against his four-decade rule. Russia, Brazil, India and Germany also abstained, while South Africa joined nine other Security Council members in supporting the resolution approved last week.
In its decision to abstain rather than block the resolution through its veto power, China said it was heeding the wishes of the Arab League and the African Union.
Continue Reading >> The New York Times | March 22, 2011
____________________
China to Reinforce Trust With Neighbours
The Chinese government on Thursday said it viewed the security situation in the Asia-Pacific as “volatile”, pointing to the United States “reinforcing” regional military alliances and rising suspicions among China’s neighbours.
In a national defence white paper issued on Thursday, China said it would seek to expand confidence-building measures with its neighbours, as well as stick to a defence policy that was defensive in nature.
The white paper, the seventh that China has issued since 1998, portrayed a strained regional security environment, describing the Asia-Pacific region, in particular, as “volatile.”
“Relevant major powers are increasing their strategic investment,” said the paper. “The United States is reinforcing its regional military alliances, and increasing its involvement in regional security affairs.”
Continue Reading >> The Hindu | March 31, 2011
____________________
The World’s Largest Arms Importer is Now India, Not China
India has spent US$80 billion to modernize its military to keep up with China and now, India has become the world’s number one arms importer according to Swedish think-tank keeping tabs on global arms transactions. India makes up 9 percent of global arms purchases while China has 6 percent of market share in comparison.
“India has ambitions to become first a continental and [then] a regional power,” Rahul Bedi, an analyst with London-based Jane’s Defence Weekly, told AP.
“Just from what they have already ordered, we know that in the coming few years India will be the top importer,” said Siemon Wezeman, a senior fellow at SIPRI told the International Business Times.
SIPRI’s report stated India’s defense budget for the coming fiscal year is in the region of $32.5 billion, 40 percent more than in 2009. In addition, India will spend over $50 billion in the next five years to modernize its military – including purchasing new fighter jets and aircraft carriers.
“The kind of purchases that India is buying, no country in the world buys,” added Bedi of Jane’s Defence Weekly. India has also been importing 82 percent of its weapons from Russia and plans to purchase 250 to 300 advanced fifth-generation stealth fighter jets worth $30 billion in the next decade.
SIPRI also included in its report:
Average volume of global arms transfers in 2006-2010 increased 24 percent from 2001-2005.
Asia and Oceania accounts for 43 percent of arms imports, Europe for 12 percent, 17 percent in the Middle East, 12 percent in the Americas and 7 percent in Africa.
The largest arms importers are locate in Asia with India accounting for 9 percent of all imports, 6 percent in China, 6 percent in South Korea and 5 percent in Pakistan.
USA remains the world’s largest exporter of military equipment and totals 30 percent of global arms exports in 2006-2010; of which 44 percent were exported to Asia and Oceania, 28 percent in the Middle East and 19 percent to Europe.
EconomyWatch | March 30, 2011
____________________
S. Korea, US Conduct Large Military Exercise in Yellow Sea
A large-scale South Korea-U.S. military exercise in the Yellow Sea seeks to prepare for North Korea`s use of nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, submarines and special forces to destroy or blockade major infrastructure in the South.
Continue Reading >> Donga.com | March 24, 2011
____________________
Singapore, Thailand, US Conclude Military Exercise
Singapore, Thailand and the United States concluded the trilateral “Exercise Cope Tiger 2011″ at Korat Air Base in Thailand on Friday.
[...] About 100 aircraft and 34 ground-based air defence systems were deployed.
[...] More than 2,300 personnel took part.
Continue Reading >> Channelnewsasia | March 26, 2011
____________________
Military Exercises Strengthens RP-Malaysian Relations
The ten-day military exercises between the Philippine Navy and the Royal Malaysian Navy, which concluded March 25, has been beneficial to both parties and was a success in its purpose, the Naval Forces West (NFW) claimed. The activity opened on March 16.
Continue Reading >> Zamboanga Today | April 1, 2011
____________________
Hugo Chavez’s $15 Billion Weapons Purchase Concerns Latin America
With the acquisition of hundreds of tanks, helicopters and bulletproof vehicles as well as submarines and missile networks, Venezuela is arming itself at a speed unprecedented in the history of the South American country.
Continue Reading >> McClatchy | March 21, 2011
____________________
Joint Ghana, US Military Exercise Ends
The Africa Partnership Station (APS) 2011 jungle exercise, conducted by personnel of the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF) and the United States Marines, has ended at Achiase Jungle Warfare in the Eastern Region.
[...] The two-week training exercise comprised 100 troops from GAF and 42 US Marines.
Continue Reading >> Vibeghana | March 22, 2011
Russia Demands Punishment for Japanese Radicals Who Desecrated Flag, to Build Bangladesh’s First Nuclear Plant, Mongolia to Build Railway Link to Russian Port to Avoid “Overdependence on China”, Russia Ratifies Deal with U.S. Allowing Transit for Military Equipment and Personnel Across Russia to NATO Forces in Afghanistan Easing Reliance on Convoy Routes through Pakistan, Former Pakistan Chief of Army Staff : Nuclear Scientist AQ Khan is “Next Target of U.S. Agents”, India Rated “High Risk” Economy for Investors, Chinese Envoy : Pakistan Can Be Economic Powerhouse, China and Pakistan to Enhance Military Co-operation, “Have Strategy to Invade India and Nepal”, Sarah Palin to Visit India, Bangladesh’s Army Chief in Sri Lanka on “Goodwill Visit”
Russia to Demand Punishment for Japanese Radicals Who Desecrated Flag
The Russian embassy in Tokyo is preparing a note to the Japanese foreign ministry demanding to launch criminal investigation into the recent desecration of the Russian flag, a diplomat said.
Japanese right-wing campaigners dragged the Russian flag along the ground outside the Russian Embassy in Tokyo on February 7, demanding the return of a group of disputed Pacific islands. The embassy sent a protest note to the Japanese Foreign Ministry just after the incident.
Later that day, the Russian embassy in Tokyo had also received an envelope containing a bullet and a letter which said “The Northern Territories are Japanese land.”
Continue Reading >> RIA Novosti | February 22, 2011
____________________
Russia to Build Bangladesh’s First Nuclear Plant
Russia has agreed to build energy-starved Bangladesh’s first nuclear power plant, which will generate a total of 2,000 megawatt of electricity.
Bangladesh’s decades-old gas-fired power plants are unable to generate enough electricity for the country’s 150 million people. Businesses complain that the shortages interfere with production.
Continue Reading >> The Daily Telegraph | February 25, 2011
____________________
Mongolia to Build Railway Link to Russian Port
Land-locked Mongolia will build a 1,000 km (620 mile) railway to enable it to export its vast but largely untapped mineral wealth via a Russian port.
[...] Analysts say Mongolia’s government plans to build the Russian route because it is worried about overdependence on China, its southern neighbour and a huge market for Mongolia’s resources.
Continue Reading >> Reuters | February 22, 2011
____________________
Russia Ratifies Military Transit Deal with U.S.
Russia’s parliament approved a deal with the United States on Friday to allow transit for military equipment and personnel across Russia to the NATO force in Afghanistan, easing reliance on Pakistan as a transit route.
[...] Currently, about 80 percent of NATO’s supplies cross through Pakistan. But NATO has been trying to reduce its dependence on convoy routes through Pakistan where they are prey to Islamist militant attacks.
[...] The transit deal stops short of opening the Russian route for weapons for the NATO mission in Afghanistan, where Moscow fought a disastrous 1979-89 war which still haunts Russia and which killed 15,000 Soviet troops.
Russia’s NATO envoy has said the deal would not allow NATO to ship tanks or combat-ready armored personnel carriers (APCs) through Russian territory.
Continue Reading >> Reuters | February 25, 2011
____________________
Former Pak Army Chief Claims Nuclear Scientist AQ Khan is “Next Target of U.S. Agents”
Former Pakistan Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General (r) Mirza Aslam Beg has claimed that the American agents’ network is spread throughout the country, and that their next target is disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan.
[...] Khan is known as the architect of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, and is accused of illegally transferring nuke know-how to China, North Korea and Iran.
Continue Reading >> Sify | February 26, 2011
____________________
India Rated ‘Extreme Risk’ Economy for Investors
India – along with Russia, Indonesia, Nigeria and the Philippines – has been rated a ‘high risk’ growth economy for investors. In a ranking of 175 countries by the Global Risks Atlas 2011 released this week, Afghanistan, Somalia and Sudan have been dubbed ‘extreme risk’ nations because of weak governance, internal conflicts and regional instability.
Continue Reading >> Sify | February 25, 2011
____________________
Pakistan Can be Economic Powerhouse : Chinese Envoy
Pakistan is a gifted nation that fulfils all the prerequisites to become an economic power, a diplomat said on Friday.
Addressing business community at the residence of Raza Khan, Chairman Coordination Committee of the Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI), Ambassador of China to Islamabad Liu Jian said that improved law and order coupled with continuity of enabling economic policies can attract huge investment in this great business destination.
[...] The ambassador said that the current bilateral trade volume between the two countries stood at $8.7 billion, up by $2 billion from last year, which is unsatisfactory as it can be increased manifold.
Continue Reading >> The News International | February 20, 2011
____________________
China and Pakistan Pledge to Enhance Military Co-operation
[...] China attaches great importance and is devoted to pushing forward relations between the two militaries, Chen Bingde, Chief of General Staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, told visiting General Khalid Shameem Wynne, Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee of Pakistan.
China is willing to work with Pakistan to develop the mechanism of defense and security talks, deepen strategic cooperation and contribute to the peace, stability and common development in the region and the world, Chen said.
[...] The Pakistani army is willing to continue to strengthen friendly communication and cooperation with the Chinese army, and make more efforts to safeguard the two countries’ development and security interests.
Continue Reading >> Defence Professionals | February 24, 2011
____________________
China, Pakistan Have Strategy to Invade India: Mulayam Singh
Alleging that China and Pakistan are having “a strategy to invade India,” Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav on Tuesday asked Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to give an assurance to Parliament that the country is safe from a possible external aggression.
“China and Pakistan can invade India. They are having a strategy to invade India. The House must be assured that India is safe, when PM gives reply,” Yadav said in the Lok Sabha participating in a discussion on the motion of thanks to the President for her address to Parliament.
Referring to developments in Ladakh, Tibet and Arunachal Pradesh where China is allegedly building Army threatening India’s sovereignty, he said, “They are occupying one inch of territory every day. We could not regain our lost territory. They are claiming our land.”
The former defence minister said he was aware that China is ready to attack India.
“China is our No 1 enemy. It is time to save our country,” he said.
“Their armed forces are ready. They may invade at any time. Nepal would also be occupied,” Mulayam feared and called for a “Himalayan policy” to check a possible Chinese invasion.
[...] Criticising the country’s foreign policy, he said, it is in the hands of the US.
“Who are our friends? We don’t have any friends like USSR,” said the leader, whose party has 22 MPs who support the government from outside.
[...] He said both Nepal and Sri Lanka used to enjoy good relations with India in the past but that is not so now.
Continue Reading >> The Times of India | February 22, 2011
____________________
Sarah Palin to Visit India Next Month
Republican leader Sarah Palin will make her first trip to India next month to attend a conference and speak on her vision of America.
Continue Reading >> The Economic Times | February 24, 2011
____________________
Bangladesh’s Army Chief Here on Goodwill Visit
General Mohammed Abdul Mubeen, Bangladesh’s Chief of Army Staff, at the invitation of his Sri Lankan counterpart, arrives in Sri Lanka on Wednesday (23) on a five-day goodwill visit.
Continue Reading >> Ministry of Defence | February 22, 2011
Russia Summons U.S. Envoy Over Japan Islands Dispute, Restates Kuril Position, Japan “Shrugs its Shoulders”, Creates Spy Agency Targeting North Korea and China for First Time After Second World War, China Calls for Talks on North Korea, Rejects American’s Appeal of Spy Charge, U.S. Dismisses Bilateral Talks with Pyongyang, Wikileaks Cables Show China Using Debt to Pressure U.S. on Taiwan, Chinese Regime Portrayed as Clamping Down to Prevent Middle-East-Style Protests, Former U.S. Defense Chief Backs Sale of F-16 Jets to Taiwan, North Korea Reportedly Showing Signs of Nuclear Test, Building New Missile Launch Site, Conflict Looms Over U.S. Military Presence in Australia, U.S. to Boost Naval Forces in Asia, Warns China on Pacific Provocation as China Develops Aircraft Carrier, South Korea Spied on Indonesian Delegation, Indonesia Denies Report, to Observe Cambodia-Thailand Border Conflict, Turkey to Sell Armoured Combat Vehicles to Malaysia
Russia Summons U.S. Envoy Over Japan Islands Dispute
The Russian foreign ministry on Monday summoned the US ambassador to Moscow over comments in which Washington reportedly backed the Japanese position in a simmering territorial row with Russia.
[...] “In this connection, the Russian Federation once again laid out it principled and unwavering position on Russia’s sovereignty over the south Kurils.”
Continue Reading >> AFP | February 21, 2011
____________________
Russia Restates Kuril Position While Japan Shrugs its Shoulders
[...] Tokyo-based Moscow News reader Keiran Drea said that the issue was making little impact on most Japanese people – despite scenes of violence outside the Russian embassy, which got significant coverage in Russia.
Continue Reading >> The Moscow News | February 22, 2011
____________________
Japan Creating Spy Agency for First Time After Second World War
Japan is creating an espionage agency for the first time since the end of the Second World War, amid growing tensions with its superpower neighbour China and nuclear-armed North Korea.
[...] The new unit, modelled on MI6 and the CIA, will also be tasked with gathering information to prevent terrorist attacks against Japanese targets, according to a US government cable obtained by WikiLeaks.
[...] worsening of relations with China and the unpredictability of the North Korean regime means that Tokyo can no longer rely on its allies for intelligence about the activities of its enemies.
China and Japan clashed over the disputed Senkaku islands in the East China Sea last year, and Japan has become increasingly apprehensive of North Korea’s nuclear and missile programmes.
Continue Reading >> The Daily Telegraph | February 21, 2011
____________________
China Again Calls for 6-Party Talks Soon
Visiting Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi again emphasized the need for the resumption soon of the stalled multinational talks on North Korea’s denuclearization, indicating the lingering opinion gap with Seoul over how to deal with the North’s ongoing nuclear ambitions.
Continue Reading >> Korea Herald | February 23, 2011
____________________
China Rejects American’s Appeal of Spy Charge
A Chinese court on Friday rejected an appeal by American geologist Xue Feng against his eight-year jail sentence for spying, despite a long-running campaign by Washington to free him, including a personal plea by President Obama.
[...] Mr. Xue’s sentencing last summer sent a chill through foreign investors in China and the people who make their money analyzing its economy. He was found guilty of obtaining and trafficking in state secrets after he unearthed information on Chinese oil wells for his former employer—U.S. petroleum research firm IHS Inc.
Continue Reading >> The Wall Street Journal | February 18, 2011
____________________
U.S. Dismisses Bilateral Talks with Pyongyang
The United States Tuesday dismissed any bilateral dialogue with North Korea on easing tensions on the Korean Peninsula, urging the North to first improve ties with South Korea.
Continue Reading >> Korea JoongAng Daily | February 24, 2011
____________________
Wikileaks Cables Show China Used Debt to Pressure U.S. on Taiwan
China has sought to use its massive U.S. debt holdings to influence American financial policy and deter arms sales to Taiwan, according to diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks.
Continue Reading >> National Journal | February 22, 2011
____________________
China Clamping Down to Prevent Mideast-Style Protests
A previously unknown group has called on the Chinese to replicate the popular protests in the Middle East by staging their own peaceful “jasmine rallies” in cities across China every Sunday afternoon, to demand an end to corruption, greater accountability and an independent judiciary.
Continue Reading >> The Washington Post | February 23, 2011
____________________
Former U.S. Defense Chief Backs Sale of F-16 Jets to Taiwan
Washington, Feb. 22 (CNA) Former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Tuesday that he supports the sale of U.S. F-16 C/D fighter jets to Taiwan in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act.
[...] But Rumsfeld said that if a cross-strait conflict erupts, it would be an example of terribly handled diplomacy, because such a conflict would be totally unnecessary.
However, he said, he thinks there is little possibility that such a conflict will occur since both Taiwan and China have been engaged in economic and tourist exchanges.
Rumsfeld said he believes Taipei and Beijing can solve their differences with good behavior and wise diplomacy.
Continue Reading >> Focus Taiwan | February 23, 2011
____________________
North Korea Shows Signs of 3rd Nuke Test
Seoul is closely monitoring activities at a North Korean nuclear site amid signs that Pyongyang is preparing for a third nuclear test, government sources said Sunday.
The vigilance comes after South Korean and U.S. intelligence authorities spotted the North digging additional tunnels at the Musudan-ri Launch Facility for a possible underground atomic test, a source told Yonhap News Agency.
Continue Reading >> Korea Times | February 20, 2011
____________________
North Korea ‘Building’ New Missile Launch Site
North Korea appears close to finishing a new missile launch site, according to analysis of satellite images taken in the last month, which show an almost completed 100ft tall launch tower, suggesting a step forward in Pyongyang’s inter-continental ballistic missile programme.
Continue Reading >> The Guardian | February 16, 2011
____________________
Conflict Looms Over US Military Presence in Australia
For two decades, the issue of US bases in Australia has remained dormant. The Government and community seem to have become comfortable with their presence, as long as they are perceived as passive.
[...] Nevertheless, the issue of US bases might be about to re-emerge as a hot-button political issue.
Continue Reading >> ABC | February 22, 2011
____________________
U.S. to Boost Naval Forces as China Develops Carrier
The U.S. navy will continue to upgrade its military capabilities in the Pacific given its steadfast commitment to the region, a U.S. vice admiral said on Monday, while urging China’s growing navy to avoid provocation.
[...] “It is our sincere hope that as China continues to develop a blue-water navy, one which may soon include an aircraft carrier, it will employ that navy in a way that is responsible and constructive,” said Vice admiral Scott Van Buskirk during a visit to Hong Kong.
[...] Following on from Gate’s comments that China’s military advances in cyber and anti-satellite warfare technology could challenge the ability of U.S. forces to operate in the Pacific, Van Buskirk said the United States would upgrade its hardware there.
Continue Reading >> Reuters | February 21, 2011
____________________
Alleged Espionage Attempt Embarrasses South Korea
[...] It was reported earlier this week that three unidentified people who broke into a hotel room of visiting Indonesian presidential envoys last week were actually officials at South Korea’s National Intelligence Service (NIS).
The intruders intruded into the hotel room in downtown Seoul in an apparent attempt to steal laptops and fled after being walked in on by a member of the Indonesian delegation.
The Indonesian delegation, led by Indonesia’s coordinating economic minister Hatta Rajasa, was visiting Seoul last week at the invitation of President Lee Myung-bak. The delegates, six of whom are ministerial-level officials, asked for support of the South Korean government and local firms for their major economic projects.
Continue Reading >> People’s Daily | February 22, 2011
____________________
Indonesia Denies Report South Korean Spies Stole Military Data
The South Koreans who entered the hotel room of Indonesian officials visiting Seoul didn’t steal military data, Indonesia’s Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro said, denying a report by the Chosun Ilbo newspaper.
The incident occurred on a different floor than the one officials from the Indonesian Defense Ministry were staying, Yusgiantoro told reporters in Jakarta today. An official from the Indonesian Industry Ministry saw the South Koreans in his room and a laptop that was taken from the room was returned, Coordinating Minister for the Economy Hatta Rajasa said.
Chosun reported today South spies broke into the Lotte Hotel room in Central Seoul on Feb. 16 to find out what price Indonesia may bid for weapons and trainer jets. The report cited an unidentified South Korean government official, and didn’t say how the person knew the details of the case.
Bloomberg | February 22, 2011
____________________
Indonesia to Observe Cambodia-Thailand Border Conflict
Amidst the recent border conflicts between Thailand and Cambodia, both countries have accepted Indonesia to observe both sides of the border, officials said Tuesday.
An Indonesian team of observers will be deployed to the region where they will observe and report accurately, as well as impartially on complaints of violations and submitting its findings to each party, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) said.
Continue Reading >> Channel 6 News | February 22, 2011
____________________
Turkey to Sell Armoured Combat Vehicles to Malaysian Military
Turkish defense industry company FNSS signed Tuesday a $600 million deal with Malaysia’s DEFTECH to sell armoured combat vehicles to Malaysian military.
[...] The deal is important for Turkish defense industry as it is the largest amount in defense industry exports of the country at one time.
Continue Reading >> World Bulletin | February 23, 2011
China to Station Troops in North Korea
China is in discussions with North Korea about stationing its troops in the isolated state for the first time since 1994, a South Korean newspaper reported Saturday.
The Chosun Ilbo newspaper quoted an anonymous official at the presidential Blue House as saying that Beijing and Pyongyang recently discussed details of stationing Chinese soldiers in the North’s northeastern city of Rason.
The official said the soldiers would protect Chinese port facilities, but the location also gives access to the Sea of Japan (East Sea), while a senior security official was quoted as saying it would allow China to intervene in case of North Korean instability.
AFP | January 15, 2011
China’s Game-Changer : An Antiship Ballistic Missile?
Could Chinese ‘Carrier-killer’ missile reshape sea combat?
Fox News | January 7, 2011
Japan Throws Aside its Pacifist Post World War II Military Doctrine
The Japanese government encouraged by the United States round-the-clock show of military capabilities against global adversaries has just decided to switch its own long-held post WWII pacifism into a more confrontational one.
Tokyo cited the rise of China’s military and its military presence around disputed islands as the reason behind change in its military doctrine. Japan’s claims on the Kuril Islands are also increasing tensions with Moscow. The Japanese economy experienced rapid growth after WWII devastations until a decade ago when the last Asian financial crisis seem to have permanently damaged its once innovative export-driven economy under the merci of China or even South Korea.
On Friday the administration of Naoto Kan, decided to confront Chinese military buildup and North Korea’s progress in the field of nuclear technology. Tokyo plans almost 24 trillion yen defense spending for five years. Like most Western industrial nations’ blind pursuit of US-led casino capitalism, Japan today suffers under huge public debt that is at least twice the size of its GDP.
Apparently, since it would be difficult to harness a behemoth like China, both Tokyo and Washington may be seeing the rising tensions on the Korean Peninsula as a lifetime opportunity. Elimination of South Korea’s industrial exports after a devastating war with powerful North Korea would ensure that both Japan and U.S. could have the chance to fill in after South Korean exports, thus giving themselves some temporary comforts. That might explain why recently Washington and Tokyo drew up joint military agreement to counter China, while at the same time US and South Korea separately conduct their joint military maneuvers near disputed areas.
A newly published report by the Japanese military reflected the growing anxiety over China’s rising power, rapid modernization of its military and maritime activities. It noted, ‘These movements, coupled with the lack of transparency in its military and security matters, have become a matter of concern for the region and the international community’ The reported also viewed North Korea’s rapid development in the field of nuclear technology as a present and grave destabilizing factor to the security of our country and the region.
Hamsayeh | December 17, 2010
North Korea as a Buffer State for China
Lawrence Wilkerson: Wikileaks cables may show that China no longer need North Korea as a buffer state.
TheRealNews | December 5, 2010
South Korean Spies Intercepted Plans for Yeonpyeong Island Attack in August
The National Intelligence Service intercepted hints that North Korea was planning to shell Yeonpyeong Island, three months before the attack, it emerged on Wednesday.
Members of the National Assembly Intelligence Committee quoted NIS Director Won Sei-hoon as saying the agency knew from wiretapping that the North Korean regime ordered the military to prepare to attack the five islands in the West Sea. He said the NIS submitted the intelligence report to President Lee Myung-bak.
Committee members said since the North is constantly making such threats, the government apparently failed to take it seriously.
The Chosunilbo | December 3, 2010
China Considers Options After North Korean Strike
China Director Jennifer Richmond examines Beijing’s diplomatic options with Pyongyang after the Nov. 23 artillery attack on Yeonpyeong Island.
Stratfor | November 30, 2010
Philippines prepares for possible mass evacuation from South Korea
Philippine President Benigno Aquino has held talks with Japanese Ambassador Makoto Katsura in Manila on the possible immediate evacuation of some 50,000 Filipinos from South Korea to Japan, NHK television reported on Saturday.
President Aquino’s concerns come after reports of a U.S. naval task force led by the George Washington nuclear-powered aircraft carrier that will join South Korean warships in naval exercises on November 28-December 1.
The drills will be held in the wake of a recent military clash between North Korea and South Korea. The South claimed it returned fire after the North opened artillery fire on Yeonpyeong Island in the Yellow Sea on Tuesday, killing at least two South Korean marines and two civilians. Sixteen others were injured, along with three civilians.
Aquino held an extraordinary meeting with government officials to inform them of the need to be prepared for the evacuation of Filipinos living and working in South Korea, adding that their evacuation to the Philippines would take much time and “the closest country to South Korea is Japan.”
THK television neither reported on how such an evacuation would occur nor on Japan’s actions should it need to accept 50,000 Filipino refugees.
The situation on the Korean Peninsula remains tense and South Korea has boosted its military presence on Yeonpyeong Island.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei on Friday said, citing the upcoming U.S.-South Korean naval drills in the Yellow Sea, that China strongly opposes any foreign states’ military maneuvers in its exclusive economic zone.
China has always remained a close ally to North Korea.
The USS George Washington, which carries 75 combat aircraft and a crew of over 6,000, has left its naval base in Yokosuka, Japan, and will arrive in the Yellow Sea on Sunday to begin military maneuvers with South Korea, which many see as irritating the already tense situation between the North and South.
RIA Novosti | November 27, 2010
Importance of the Koreas’ Northern Limit Line
Analyst Rodger Baker explains the history of the Korean Peninsula’s Northern Limit Line and how it relates to North Korea’s economic and strategic goals.
Stratfor | November 24, 2010
US Warships Head to South Korea
The US aircraft carrier George Washington has left Yokosuka US Navy port in Japan to join exercises with the South Korean naval force planned for next week. A US Navy press release said the exercise was planned before North Korea’s artillery attack on a South Korean island. South Korea’s troops are on high alert following the military skirmish that left at least four dead and has greatly heightened tensions on the peninsula. The joint exercise in the waters west of the Korean peninsula will start on Sunday and last for four days.
Russia Today | November 24, 2010
U.S. Tactical Nukes May Return to South Korea
If North Korea’s going to flaunt its new uranium-enrichment facility to the world, South Korea isn’t going to sit back and take it. Seoul is considering a request for the U.S. to return tactical nuclear weapons to the Korean peninsula for the first time in 15 years. Remember when President Obama was going to put the world on a “path to zero” nukes?
Over the weekend, a U.S. scientist revealed that North Korea took him on a tour of its new “ultra-modern” uranium-enrichment plant at Yongbyon, ending longstanding doubts about Pyongyang’s home-grown capabilities at turning uranium into nuclear fuel. (Though it’s unclear whether the plant is already enriching uranium.) South Korea’s defense minister quickly cooked up a response, the Korea Herald reports: consider asking the U.S. to bring its nuclear weapons back.
Wired | November 22, 2010
Currency War and the G-20
Analyst Peter Zeihan examines the potential for currency war between the United States and China and what is expected to emerge from the G-20 summit.
Stratfor | November 10, 2010
Nigeria intercepts Iranian missile containers possibly destined for Gaza
Rocket launchers, grenades and other explosives camouflaged as building material were seized in the Nigerian port of Lagos.
Nigeria’s secret service said on Tuesday it had intercepted 13 containers of weapons from Iran in what Israeli defense sources believe may be part of a new smuggling route from Iran to Hamas in Gaza.
Rocket launchers, grenades and other explosives camouflaged as building material were seized in the Nigerian port of Lagos after being unloaded from an Iranian ship.
Nigerian media reports said the ship, which came from Iran, docked in Lagos’ port for a few hours only, unloaded 13 containers and sailed on.
The bill of lading said the shipment consisted of building materials, Nigerian State Security Service spokeswoman Marilyn Ogar said.
“On opening the first container, the service operatives discovered rocket launchers, grenades and other explosives,” Ogar said, adding the weapons were concealed among crates of floor tiles.
The SSS had received intelligence ahead of time about the intention to smuggle weapons in containers via Lagos and was prepared for it, reports said.
Nigerian National Security Adviser Andrew Owoye Azazi declined to say what ship carried the weapons into the port. He said the federal government would destroy the weapons.
According to the Nigerian media, the clearing agent in charge of unloading the containers from the ship offered to bribe the Nigerian customs officers to transfer the containers to an off-dock terminal, where they could be screened outside the port. The customs officials alerted the security services, who ordered the containers opened.
Israel and Nigeria maintain security, trade and diplomatic relations. About a year ago Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman visited Nigeria, accompanied by Nitzan Nuriel, director of the Counter-Terrorism Bureau.
A Foreign Ministry source said the Israeli Embassy in Nigeria was conducting talks with the SSS and the Nigerian foreign ministry in an attempt to find out more about the weapons and the investigation into the affair.
A senior defense source said preliminary information suggests the weapons’ seizure has exposed a possible new arms smuggling route from Iran to Hamas, via Africa. He said the Iranians may have run into difficulties sending arms to Hamas via the Red Sea to the Sudan region and from there to Gaza via Sinai, following the beefed up international supervision on the movement of Iranian ships.
“Perhaps the Iranians were planning to unload the weapons in Nigeria and transfer them by land to Sudan and Sinai,” the senior source said.
On the last day of the Israeli offensive Cast Lead in Gaza, Israel and the United States signed an agreement to fight arms smuggling from Iran to Hamas.
They set up a work team of several Western States for sharing intelligence and stopping Iranian arms smuggling via the sea to Gaza.
In March 2009 foreign media reported that Israel Air Force airplanes attacked a convoy of weapons smugglers in Sudan on its way to Gaza. Thirty-nine of the people in the convoy were killed and civilians in the area were wounded. Israel refused to confirm its involvement in the attack.
Defense officials said this could be Iran’s third attempt at arms smuggling by sea that has been intercepted in the course of the past year.
In November 2009, the Israel Navy boarded the vessel Francop in the Mediterranean Sea. The ship was carrying hundreds of tons of weapons from Iran to Syria or Hezbollah in Lebanon.
In September this year an arms delivery from Iran to Syria was intercepted in Italy’s Calabria port. A few days later an arms shipment from North Korea to Syria was captured in a Greek port.
Haaretz | October 28, 2010
China Strategically Undercuts US In Middle East
The Middle East Region has always figured high in China’s Grand Strategy not only in terms of lucrative markets for China’s economy and energy security but far more importantly in geopolitical terms. Hemmed-in by the vast Pacific Ocean under United States military control and supremacy, in China’s Grand Strategy a “Look West” Strategy as opposed to the “Look East” Strategy of her peer Asian rival has received concerted strategic focus. This is the driving factor in Chinese policy formulations towards the Middle East and Central Asia.
China views the Middle East Region as a strategically lucrative region where China can exploit the disequilibrium generated by the United States strategic acts of commission and omission in the last decade or so. The Region was therefore ripe for China’s strategic undercutting of the United States.
Undoubtedly, the United States has been the predominant strategic and military power in the Middle East historically during the Cold War era and would continue to do so throughout this century notwithstanding the turbulence generated by the Middle East Region lying at the “crossroads of radicalism and technology”
China is fully aware that it cannot dislodge the United States from the Middle East even with its burgeoning military capabilities, but that does not mean that China will ease up her strategic blueprint to unsettle the United States’ regional hegemonic control of the vital energy resources critically important for China’s strategic and political rise.
China unlike East Asia, views the Middle East Region as a springboard which can facilitate China’s grasping the superpower status by an intrusive strategic and military presence facilitated by Middle East nations resentment of United States unbridled control of the Region. China perceives that Arab nations and others in the Middle East look upon a ‘rising China’ as a strategic insurance against United States as a countervailing Power, or failing that as an important ‘political leverage’ that can be used by them to withstand United States pressures.
This predominant feeling is best captured by the observations of a noted Egyptian analyst who states that: “The Arab World is still weeping for the golden dawn of the Cold War”. Contemporarily, it seems that this Region is expecting that China would provide an opposing pole against the United States in the Middle East and that the Middle East is ripe for a United States-China Cold War.
In the coming years in the global power games, one can expect China to increase her footholds and her strategic footprints in the Middle East Region far more expansively to strategically undercut United States strategic control of the Middle East Region. It needs to be emphasized that China has carved out a sizeable line-up of major powers in her favor by use of her ‘soft power’ and supplies of missiles arsenals to countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran and others.
Lately China introduced a new element of use of ‘hard power’ ( symbolic demonstration) by drawing in Turkey into joint air force exercises conducted in Turkish air- space with these Chinese Air Force fighter planes refueling stop-overs at Pakistani and Iranian air-bases.
This Paper intends to examine the following related issues to China’s strategic undercutting of the United States in the Middle East:
China’s Upsurge in Forging a Substantial Strategic Presence in the Middle East: China’s Strategic Ambitions and the Geopolitical Facilitators
Pakistan as a Force-Multiplier in China’s Growing Enlargement of Strategic Presence in the Gulf Region of the Middle East: Perspectives
China: Will it Strategically and Militarily Confront the United States in the Event of a Middle East Showdown?
United States Options in the Middle East
China’s Upsurge in Forging a Substantial Strategic Presence in the Middle East: China’s Strategic Ambitions and the Geopolitical Facilitators
China’s upsurge in forging a substantial strategic presence in the Middle East is a follow-up of the gains it has made in incrementally expanding its strategic presence over the last 20-25 years. China’s pattern established so far has focused on weaning away strong US-allies in the Region like Saudi Arabia and reinforcing the military capabilities of nations and entities opposed to the United States like Iran, Libya, the Lebanon armed militias and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.
The sinister overtones of China establishing its strategic footprints in the Middle East were manifested in China supplying long range ballistic missile ( IRBMs ) directly and by proxy through North Korea to Saudi Arabia and Iran and giving access to nuclear weapons technology of Chinese-origin through Pakistan to Saudi Arabia, Libya and Iran.
Interwoven into these strategic moves by China has been a wide array of economic and trade linkages which China has crafted over the years which strengthen the political and economic dependency of Middle East nations on China.
The deductions that need to be recorded from the above pattern are as follows;
China’s IRBMs supplies, access to Chinese-origin nuclear weapons technology. and sizeable supplies of conventional weapons supplies to a highly volatile region like the Middle East indicate that China is not a responsible stakeholder in Middle East security and stability. The Middle East is a strategic pawn of China in its global tussle with the United States.
The charge against China gets further aggravated that China had no compunction in arming known regional military rivals like Saudi Arabia and Iran and thereby further aggravating regional flashpoints and tensions.
China had no compunction in strong military linkages with Israel which was hated in the Middle East by both Arab and non-Arab Muslim states.
China’s current upsurge in forging a substantial presence in the Middle East Region needs to be understood in the context of China’s strategic ambitions which are:
Constrained in East Asia by United States supremacy, China perceives that despite United States hegemonic (Chinese perceptions) hold in the Middle East, the Middle East offers China prospects of establishing a substantial strategic presence in the Region.
China’s strategic ambitions to emerge as a global superpower can be facilitated by the Middle East nations as the Middle East today looms large as the centre of strategic gravity in the global strategic calculus.
China perceives that as opposed to Russia with limited economic resources, China is better placed to emerge as the alternative power in the United States and fill the strategic vacuum that may ensue if it exits Afghanistan. With a cascading deleterious effect on the Gulf Region
China’s strategic calculations would conclude that in terms of China’s power projection for a greater global role the Middle East Region provides a fertile springboard for the same.
The geopolitical factors facilitating China’s strategic upsurge in the Middle East can be attributed to the following:
The Middle East nations are strategically inclined to welcome a Chinese strategic embrace impelled by the desire to find in China a countervailing power to the United States.
The Middle East nations feel that even if China cannot provide countervailing power against the United States directly, China can still provide strong leverages to Middle East nations to withstand United States pressures on conflictual issues
Geopolitically China and the Middle East have convergent perspectives that United States global power and sustainability is on the wane after the events in Afghanistan and that opens avenues for both of them to move closer.
China today stands backed strongly by three Muslim nations in this part of the world namely Saudi Arabia. Iran and Pakistan, two of whom are located on either side of the Gulf and the third Pakistan, on the Eastern flank of the strategic Straits of Hormuz All three can be said to be instrumental in paving the way for China’s greater strategic foothold in the Middle East..
Pakistan as a Force Multiplier in China’s Growing Enlargement of Strategic Presence in the Gulf Region of the Middle East: Perspectives
Pakistan’s insidious role in furthering China’s strategic presence in the Gulf Region more specifically has been little noticed or commented upon by the global community. Pakistan has been a strategic ally and a loyal foot-soldier of furthering China’s strategic designs in Greater South West Asia which includes the Gulf Region.
One can list four strategic entanglements of Pakistan with China which greatly facilitate China’s designs to strategically undercut the United States in the Middle East. These are:
Gwadar Naval Base access to China for naval presence in the Indian Ocean, North Arabian Sea and The Gulf.
The Karakoram Corridor being provided to China by Pakistan integrating the existing Karakoram Highway linking Pakistan and China with planned road links and railway lines linking China with Gwadar
Pakistan aiming for restoration of a Pak-friendly and China-friendly Taliban regime in Afghanistan so that the vulnerabilities of the above two to US military actions is liquidated.
Pakistan has a Chinese-origin nuclear weapons technology and thereby generating grave risks for United States overall security.
The significant point to note is that Pakistan is providing land-access and air-access to China to touch base in the Middle East and Gwadar in Pakistan is a strategic-enabler for a Chinese naval presence in the Gulf Region. It is also significant that even Iran unlike Pakistan has yet to provide use of its naval bases to China.
All of the above would emerge as force-multipliers for China, courtesy the Pakistan Army, to strategically undercut the United States embedment in the Gulf and the Middle East.
China: Will it Strategically Confront the United States in the Event of a Middle East Military Showdown?
Noted American strategic analysts have rightly opined that China’s strategy against the United States in the Middle East would revolve around the principles of “neither peace nor war” and further that “China will avoid both partnership and direct confrontation with the United States”.
Taking off from the above summations, one can safely assert that in the churning dynamics of the Middle East, China would ever be alert to ambush and undercut the United States strategically in this vital region, crucial for United States strategic interests.
The foremost recent example of this is China’s strategic cozying-up to Turkey at a moment when Turkey stands disillusioned with the West and the United States. Take the case of the Iranian nuclear program which is a bugbear to the United States where Russia has veered around to side with the United States but China is holding out in favor of Iran .
The Middle East in the coming years is likely to witness an intensified “Cold War” by China to strategically undercut the United States in the Middle East. China is cashing in on the Middle East nations led by Saudi Arabia loosening their linkages with the United States.
Finally, one would like to assert that even in the event of any remote eventuality of a showdown; China would be reluctant to enter into any military conflict with the United States over the Middle East.
Contrarily, China would not hesitate to enter into an armed conflict with the United States over any US military intervention in Pakistan. Without Pakistan as a loyal foot-soldier of China’s Grand Strategy in the Middle East and the Islamic World, the entire Chinese blueprint for undercutting the United States in the Middle East would unravel and China gets reduced to strategic confinement in East Asia.
United States Options in the Middle East
In brief outline, United States must attempt to incorporate the following major ingredients in its Middle East policy formulations to checkmate China’s strategic designs:
Israel should not be pressurized to forego its vital national security interests impacting on its survival in the cause of a Greater Middle East Peace. Peace in the Middle East is not possible until leading Arab countries recognize Israel as a sovereign State within its present boundaries.
Turkey must be wooed and won over again by the West and the United States from its present strategy more prompted by its disillusionment with European opposition to its membership of the European Union. Turkey is the natural regional power of the Middle East and the United States should attempt to give allowances for its yearnings.
Iran was once a staunch ally of the United States. Attempts should be made to win it over once again despite any Saudi Arabian pressures on the United States to the contrary.
Russia needs to be co-opted by the United States into a workable partnership for strategic management of the Middle East.
Pakistan which is not only a regional spoiler state in South Asia has now emerged as “The Chinese Pitch-Fork” to assist China’s undercutting the United States strategically in this region. The United States urgently needs to “reset” its policy buttons on Pakistan..
The United States at no cost should strategically exit from Afghanistan. An effective and strong United States embedment in Afghanistan would foil and pre-empt China’s strategy to undercut United States strategically in the Middle East.
Finally, its is my feeling that the United States out of deference to Pakistan Army’s sensitivities has in the past decade or so ,in a very subtle manner motivated India to “Look East”. The time has now come for the United States to encourage India to “Look West’ towards a greater role in the Middle East.
China’s ‘soft power’ strategy in the Middle East can be matched more effectively by India’s matching ‘soft power’ approaches in the Middle East. India has a longer historical, economic and cultural links with the Middle East than China. Ironically, India gave China an access to the Middle East at the Bandung Non-Aligned Nati- heartedness.
Concluding Observations
In China’s Grand Strategy to grab superpower status, the Middle East Region figures as the “master-key” where China could reasonably expect to displace the United States predominance as compared to East Asia..
China so far has relied on making strategic headway in the Middle East by an imaginative use of ‘soft power’ and by cashing –in on grudges of Middle East nations towards the United States However, what is now unfolding in China’s strategy to undercut the United States in the Middle East strategically, is a muted use of ‘hard power’ ingredients too.
The United States would be well advised to divert its focus from a Middle East Peace Settlement to that of exploring urgently policy options that would enable the United States to pre-empt China from strategically under-cutting the United States in the Middle East.
The United States needs to recognize that a Middle East Peace Settlement is not on the horizon as the Middle East nations perceive the United States as a waning power in the face of China’s rising power. The United States need s to reset this misperception right.
The United States ‘master-key’ to foil China’s strategic undercutting of the United States in the Middle East lies in a sustained and effective political and military embedment in Afghanistan.
Suman Sharma is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs analyst. He is the Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group
Eurasia Review | October 27, 2010
Understanding Asia-Pacific Sea Power
In this first in a series on the region’s navies, The Diplomat looks at how to measure naval power—including the US and China’s.
It’s a sobering thought that even analysts steeped in naval affairs disagree about how to tally up who exactly has the strongest fleet. Writing in the Washington Post last month, Robert Kaplan declared in passing that China had constructed ‘the world’s second-largest naval service, after only the United States.’
In contrast, though, other reputable commentators maintain that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) in fact now boasts the world’s largest fleet. For example, in August, The Economist published a story titled ‘Naval Gazing’, noting that the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies said China now has more warships than the United States. And sure enough, accompanying the story was a graphic showing that the PLAN has edged ahead of the US Navy in terms of ‘major combatants.’
Surely seasoned defence officials have a reliable formula for comparing navies? Not necessarily. Speaking in front of the Navy League in May, US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates questioned the need to keep investing in a mammoth fleet and rattled off statistics intended to convey the US Navy’s overwhelming size and strength.
For example, he noted that the US Navy ‘operates 11 large carriers…In terms of size and striking power, no other country has even one comparable ship.’ It ‘has 57 nuclear-powered attack and cruise missile submarine—again, more than the rest of the world combined.’ And ‘the displacement of the US battle fleet—a proxy for overall fleet capabilities—exceeds, by one recent estimate, at least the next 13 navies combined.’
According to US Chief of Naval Operations Gary Roughead, who spoke in Canberra recently, it will take years for the PLAN to master tactics and procedures for handling aircraft-carrier task forces at sea, even after a Chinese carrier does eventually take to the water. If carrier operations represent the gold standard for naval power, naval mastery remains a long way off for Beijing.
Top US defence officials are clearly trying to send foreign and domestic audiences a message: that the United States’ overwhelming material superiority, coupled with China’s technological backwardness, will keep the peace in Asian waters. By implication, the United States and its allies can rest easy.
But faulty assumptions can in turn lead to faulty strategy.
So, how should we evaluate naval power? The number of platforms clearly matters, and yet calculating a fleet’s strength is about more than crunching the numbers. By our count (taken from GlobalSecurity.org), the PLAN boasts 1,045 vessels of all types—more than double the number available to the United States. According to the Naval Vessel Register, the US Navy is currently comprised of 287 ships, of which 257 are in full commission and ready for service. Add in the 163 civilian-crewed non-combatant vessels of the Military Sealift Command (51 of which are laid up in reduced operating status) and the grand total is 450 ships at US policymakers’ disposal.
But using such figures to rate the PLAN as twice the strength of the US Navy is clearly nonsensical. And indeed, the figure of 1000+ Chinese vessels includes surveillance vessels, oceanographic survey ships and tugboats (not to mention creaky old scows that would contribute little in a fleet-on-fleet engagement).
So what about Secretary Gates’ use of tonnage as a reliable indicator of overall capability? Well, if it were, Danish shipping firm Maersk Line would boast a fleet far more imposing than the US Navy. Emma Maersk, the biggest freighter in a 500-ship fleet, tips the scales at 156,907 tons—over half again the displacement of the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, which comes in at a petite 98,235 tons. Indeed, some super-sized crude carriers displace a remarkable 550,000 tons. Yet clearly, no one would mistake such behemoths for warships.
Displacement is a crude measuring stick even among combatants. The Spanish Armada far outweighed the English Navy and yet Medina-Sidonia’s ponderous men-of-war found themselves outranged, outgunned and outmanoeuvred when they attempted to invade the British Isles in 1588.
Historian Peter Padfield estimates that Howard and Drake’s fleet commanded a decisive two-to-one advantage in long guns over the Armada.Though smaller than their adversaries, English men-of-war boasted a far superior ratio of firepower to tonnage. In a hypothetical fight between a (now-retired) Iowa-class battleship, the premier surface combatant of its day, and today’s DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers, bet on the Burke every time. Speedy long-range antiship missiles would trump the Iowa’s enormous weight of shot unless the battleship managed to close in to gun range. Displacement: 58,000 tons for the dreadnought, 9,494 tons for the latest DDG-51s.
None of this is lost on Beijing. In fact, Chinese commanders count on employing packs of small, nimble, hard-hitting fast attack boats to contest an adversary’s attempts to impose sea control along the mainland seaboard. Stealthy Type 022 Houbei catamarans displacing about 220 tons are designed specifically to use hit-and-run tactics against larger warships. Armed with long-range anti-ship cruise missiles, they punch well above their weight. US naval forces operating close to Chinese shores disregard craft like the Houbeis at their peril.
Size matters, then, but it isn’t everything. Manpower is another related statistic that can again be misleading when taken in isolation. The US Navy’s authorized manpower comes to 329,000 men and women, the US Marine Corps another 202,000. This is around double the total end-strength for the Chinese sea services. It takes more sailors to man a heavier fleet, and the Marines pack a hefty punch of their own. But again, much depends on operational circumstances. Unless a fleet encounter involves ground operations, for example Marines embarked in amphibious transports, it contributes little to the outcome. (Marine pilots embarked in carrier air wings are another matter).
So the most we can say for tonnage and manpower as yardsticks is this: if two fleets are built for the same purposes and missions and one displaces more than the other, then the heavier fleet is probably the stronger. Bigger ships generally carry more munitions, more fuel and more protection, which translates into the ability to fight for longer across greater distances and absorb more damage. That’s probably what Gates meant to convey. But this is no ironclad rule, as the example of the Armada shows. Shipbuilding and weapons-development philosophies make an enormous difference.
But all this speculation over a navy’s fighting power could be redundant depending on another critical factor—where a fight takes place. One navy doesn’t necessarily need to match another one on paper. Seldom, if ever, will an entire navy battle another (especially in a place where it can’t augment its strength with land-based air, sea and missile assets). So to prevail, a fleet only needs to be stronger at one particular point on the map.
If that point lies in home waters, so much the better for the defender. In the 1890s, sea-power theorist Alfred Thayer Mahan implored the United States to construct a navy powerful enough to dominate the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico and to defeat the largest hostile fleet (probably British or German) likely to attempt mischief in US waters. If the United States wanted to safeguard shipping lanes connecting US East Coast seaports with the Far East, proclaimed Mahan, it needed a navy able to ‘fight, with reasonable chances of success, the largest force likely to be brought against it’ in the Caribbean or the Gulf. To ‘maximize the power of offensive action,’ which was ‘the great end of a war fleet,’ he said the United States needed a modest force of ‘capital ships’ capable of ‘taking and giving hard knocks’ in a toe-to-toe fight.
Mahan, then, was unconcerned about outbuilding the entire British Royal Navy or German High Seas Fleet. As a regional fleet, the US Navy merely needed enough armoured warships to win the battle most likely to take place in the sea lanes leading to the Central American canal then under construction. Similar logic guides Chinese naval strategy today. The PLAN only needs sufficient strength to prevail against the largest naval contingent likely to challenge it in sea areas Beijing deems important, most notably the Yellow, East China and South China seas. China need not win—or even run—a ship-for-ship arms race with the United States and US allies such as Japan to achieve its goals.
As long as the PLAN contents itself with fighting within range of shore-based aircraft, small surface and subsurface combatants and antiship missiles, that weaponry must be factored into the fleet’s overall strength. As Gates pointed out, the all-nuclear US submarine force can fight at great distances. But the PLAN has amassed an even larger undersea fleet optimal for lurking in nearby waters—the waters that will count in any future Sino-American clash. Nor do all the aircraft carriers and missile-toting destroyers in the world mean much if the US Pacific Fleet dare not venture within range of Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles and so can’t bring its offensive firepower to bear.
So, who has the strongest navy? The perhaps unsatisfying answer is that it really does depend. It matters little whether the United States or China owns the largest fleet on paper—what matters is which nation can mass superior combat power in critical waters in conjunction with allied forces.
By charting the total inventory of major combatants on either side, the IISS study probably comes closest to an accurate assessment because it at least tries to gauge combat potential, counting the ships best positioned to determine the outcome of a fleet engagement. Even so, there’s no substitute for aggregating all relevant data on fleet composition, taking into account the political, strategic and geographic context unique to maritime Asia. Each navy commands considerable advantages; neither holds an obvious decisive edge.
Kaplan, the Economist, Gates and Roughead have started a debate that teaches a valuable lesson about evaluating Chinese and other nations’ sea power. Analysts must take care not to rely on (or cherry pick) indicators that either inflate or underestimate the progress of Chinese naval modernization. The complexity and dynamism of the PLAN defies easy description or prognosis. PLAN-watchers and the statesmen they advise around Asia and the rest of the world must strive for a nuanced, multidimensional, geographically informed understanding of naval power, lest they base their strategies on faulty assumptions.
James Holmes and Toshi Yoshihara are associate professors of strategy at the Naval War College and co-authors of ‘Red Star over the Pacific: China’s Rise and the Challenge to US Maritime Strategy’. The views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of the Naval War College or the US government.
The Diplomat | October 21, 2010
Hackers in China steal South Korean secrets
Hackers in China have stolen secrets on South Korea’s defense and foreign affairs by using bogus emails claiming to come from Seoul officials and diplomats, the intelligence agency said Friday.
The National Intelligence Service uncovered the hacking early this year and warned government offices about the danger of such emails, a spokesman told AFP.
Hackers sent emails in the names of South Korean diplomats, presidential aides and other people familiar to Seoul officials.
Attached files containing viruses were disguised as important documents, such as analyses on North Korea’s economy.
When a recipient clicked on the attachment, the virus started downloading documents in his or her computer, the spokesman said.
Lawmaker Lee Jung-Hyun of the ruling Grand National Party told parliament Thursday that a “considerable volume of classified documents” was feared to have been leaked from the defense ministry and the foreign ministry.
The foreign ministry said it had asked overseas diplomatic missions to be extra alert to such hacking attempts.
The South’s intelligence service in June investigated a major “distributed denial of service” cyber attack on the main government website by hackers traced to China.
The security ministry said at the time its cyber security team had been on alert for such attacks as tensions rose with North Korea.
The South’s spy chief blamed North Korea for cyber attacks from China-based servers that briefly crippled US and South Korean government and commercial websites in July 2009. US officials were uncertain of the origin.
Seoul military officials say the North has an army unit of elite hackers.
Space War | October 15, 2010
Why Do Currency Wars Start?
Because when one country plays with its exchange rate, everyone else has to.
Responding to Japan’s unilateral intervention to weaken the yen, followed by similar moves from Colombia, Thailand, South Korea, and other countries, Brazilian Finance Minister Guido Mantega recently declared that the world is “in the midst of an international currency war.” In an effort to recover from the global economic crisis, these countries are attempting to stimulate their exports by making their currencies cheaper. These efforts add to the longstanding tensions between Western nations and China over the latter’s monetary policy, which many say keeps the yuan artificially low. Could things be getting out of hand?
IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn, among others, has also warned against countries using currencies as “policy weapons.” French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde has urged countries to talk about “peace and not war.” But U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has denied that there’s a currency war going on and says there’s “no risk” of one breaking out.
So what exactly is a currency war and how do we know when we’re in one, anyway?
We are when we say we are. A “currency war” is more of a political than an economic condition. Governments frequently intervene in their currency markets, increasing the money supply to stimulate trade and reduce unemployment, or decreasing the supply to combat inflation. The problem is that in an interlinked global economy, currencies don’t rise or fall in a vacuum. When China keeps the yuan artificially low versus the U.S. dollar, it keeps the cost of Chinese goods low in the United States, contributing to a trade imbalance. That provides a steep incentive for the United States to retaliate by lowering its currency as well. Of course, because two countries can only have one exchange rate, this race to the bottom isn’t likely to benefit either party.
When many countries devalue their currencies at the same time in an effort to make their exports more competitive, it forces other countries — Brazil for instance — to join in to prevent their currencies from rising. Countries often see currency wars as a zero-sum game — one wins and the others lose. But the widespread devaluation can have a devastating effect on all. Unstable exchange rates can deter international investment, slowing the pace of global economic recovery. And of course, currency wars can have secondary political effects. When countries are fighting over currency, they’re less likely to agree to bilateral trade. Additionally, currency pressures could make China less likely to go along with U.S. efforts to contain Iran or North Korea.
Unlike real wars, currency wars don’t have defined start dates, but they can be ended with something like peace treaties. In 1936, Britain, France, the United States signed the Tripartite Agreement to address the currency imbalances that had resulted from Britain and the United States leaving the gold standard in the midst of the Great Depression. On the eve of World War II, with an even greater enemy on the horizon, the three countries agreed to refrain from devaluing their currencies.
In 1985, when Japan not China was the rising Asian economic power, the governments of Britain, France, Japan, the United States, West Germany signed the Plaza Accord, under which the dollar would be allowed to depreciate against the yen.
Some are now calling for a new international agreement to stabilize the current round of depreciation. But, obviously, the world economy has changed quite a bit in the last 25 years. The growing power of emerging economies such as Brazil, China, India, and South Korea make it much harder for a few finance ministers in a hotel room to hammer out a deal. Moreover, previous efforts at stabilizing global exchange rates have caused the parties involved to lose faith when they’re ultimately undermined by domestic policies.
So as with real wars, declaring one is often far easier than ending it.
Joshua E. Keating
Foreign Policy | October 14, 2010
Aligning Sino-Russian Energy Interests
Analyst Matt Gertken examines the present alignment of Russian and Chinese energy interests, and why that alignment is likely to be temporary.
Stratfor | September 28, 2010
Why Is the U.S. Rehearsing for a Chinese Invasion of Japan?
When the U.S. Navy’s 60,000-strong Seventh Fleet joined with the Japanese military last month to simulate “re-invading” part of Japan that had been taken by an outside force, the hypothetical invader went un-named for reasons of diplomatic decorum. But that didn’t stop a senior Japanese military official from boasting to a national newspaper, “We’ll show China that Japan has the will and the capability to defend the Nansei Islands. [The exercises] will serve as a deterrent.” Even if he had said nothing, everyone involved understood that the U.S. and Japan were rehearsing a counter-attack against a possible Chinese invasion of Japan. Since then, an unrelated and seemingly minor dispute over a Chinese trawler captain arrested in Japanese waters has spiraled into a heated, ongoing standoff between leaders of both nations. Japan refuses the release the fisherman, despite China suspending all relations between its officials and Japan’s–often a prelude to war–and threatening “strong countermeasures.” Is China’s invasion of Japan nigh? Is it only a matter of time?
“No one’s worried about China invading Japan,” Abe Denmark, an expert with the Center for New American Security on U.S. security policy in East Asia, assured me. “This is about a long-standing disagreement between China and Japan that flares up occasionally. And it’s flared up recently.” In other words, this kind of tension is more or less routine for Sino-Japanese relations, and it’s not leading to war anytime soon. But China’s increasingly aggressive foreign policy and the volatility of China’s relationship with Japan–not to mention with the rest of its East Asia neighbors–is a very real concern for the U.S. The recent U.S.-Japan military exercises were just one part of a concerted effort to entrench U.S. military influence in East Asia and bring long-term stability to a rapidly changing and often contentious part of the world. Someday in the future, our influence abroad, and in East Asia especially, will wane. The Obama administration wants to guide East Asian politics in a direction that will be most beneficial to long-term American interests.
The more time that the U.S. spends working with foreign militaries such as Japan’s, the more those militaries, and thus the nation they represent, institutionalize dependence on the U.S. Japan is willing to go along with this because it sends a message to potential enemies–especially China–that an attack on Japan would also be an attack on the U.S. Regular U.S.-South Korea joint military exercises, most recently in July, have the same effect. The exercises strengthen communication and coordination between our military and theirs, making us better partners should war arrive and increasing the deterrence effect. They also help justify our enormous military presence on their soil–something that has been politically controversial in Japan. And they reinforce a tradition of cooperation in which the people and politicians of Japan, South Korea, etc., see the U.S.–not China–as their natural, cultural ally. That kind of trust can last a long time.
Trust and cooperation are hard to find among the nations of East Asia, which never quite established a European-style practice of collectivity. Nowhere is the inability to resolve minor disputes–and the frightening potential for those skirmishes to escalate uncontrollably–more apparent than across the region’s countless tiny islands. To put it simply, no one knows whom they belong to but everybody wants them. As China and Southeast Asia industrialize, islands and their resources are becoming more desirable. “A lot of this is a remnant from periods of instability in East Asia’s past,” Denmark told me. “Over the years, different countries have controlled different islands.” Competing claims have led to many inflammatory incidents such as Japan’s arrest of the Chinese fisherman and naval skirmishes between China and Thailand. There are a handful of ways to determine ownership, but some of them are contradictory, and political leaders often have more faith in military confrontation than lobbying the United Nations.
Enter Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who in July worked hard to peacefully resolve an island dispute between China and Thailand. The U.S. interest here is four-fold: establish a mechanism for peaceful conflict resolution, so that war is less likely; build precedent for the rule of international law, so that China can’t simply use its navy to bully its neighbors; keep the U.S. involved in East Asian politics so we aren’t shut out; and prevent China from dominating the South China Sea. The oil-rich sea lane has become a strategically crucial link from East Asia to the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, Africa, and beyond. Those connections are rapidly becoming some of the most important and most heavily trafficked trade routes of the global economy. Whoever controls the South China Sea will also control the ability of navies–whether Chinese, American, Indian, or NATO–to project force across the Eastern and Western hemispheres.
But why should all of this matter so much to the U.S.? After all, our military is many times stronger than China’s and we still control most of the Earth’s seas and skies. The word that many scholars use when talking about long-term U.S.-Sino relations is “multi-polar,” which reflects the growing belief that China will one day join the U.S. as the world’s second superpower, fundamentally reshaping a world currently defined by American dominance. The question isn’t will China rise, it’s what happens when it does. If we simply let current trends continue, it’s entirely foreseeable that China could cajole, persuade, or bully the rest of East Asia under its influence. The U.S. can handle Chinese competition, but a unified East Asia could undermine the U.S. in any number of ways. Limiting our freedom of movement in the Pacific and Indian oceans would only be the beginning.
Another risk of inaction could be regional war. As China expresses more dominance over its neighbors, if regional diplomatic institutions remain too weak to ensure peaceful conflict resolution, it’s possible that China could come to blows with states such as Thailand or, yes, Japan. War is always terrible, but the modern military conflicts of East Asia have been especially brutal, costly, and destabilizing. If a regional war broke out, the U.S. would have nothing but bad options–enter into war against China? cut off economic ties? sit it out and watch the rest of Asia cower to Chinese dominance?–all of which would spell disaster for long-term American interests.
There’s little question that China will eventually join us as a world superpower. Rather than fighting the inevitable or pretending it isn’t so, Clinton’s State Department is laying the groundwork for a multi-polar world that is as beneficial and acceptable to the U.S. as possible. That includes reinforcing East Asian multilateral institutions, rehearsing regional avenues of conflict resolution, and entrenching U.S. military cooperation with China’s neighbors. Strange though it may seem, sometimes the best way to promote peace is by practicing war.
Max Fisher – Max Fisher writes primarily about foreign affairs and national security. He previously produced the Atlantic’s Food Channel and has written for The New Republic and Conde Nast Traveler.
The Atlantic | September 23, 2010
U.S. Forges Closer Military Ties with Vietnam
Washington has recently taken several steps to boost its military relationship with Vietnam as part of a broader Obama administration strategy aimed at undermining Chinese influence in East and South East Asia.
Last week, the two countries held their first-ever defence dialogue in Hanoi. At a joint press conference on August 17, US Deputy Assistant Defence Secretary Robert Scher declared that the talks represented “the next significant historic step in our increasingly robust defence relationship”. Previous security talks, which began in 2008, were conducted by the US State Department and Vietnamese foreign ministry, rather than defence officials.
While nominally the topics involved marine security and international peace keeping, both sides obviously discussed China’s military presence in the region. “I did share at our meeting our impressions of Chinese military modernisation,” Scher told reporters. Last week, the Pentagon released its annual report to Congress, expressing concerns about China’s military expansion and warning that its “limited transparency… increases the potential for misunderstanding and miscalculation”.
The dialogue followed provocative comments by the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at an Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) regional forum in Hanoi last month. Clinton declared that the US had “a national interest” in ensuring “freedom of navigation” in the South China Sea. Her remarks cut across China’s claims to sovereignty over much of the South China Sea. Earlier this year, Beijing told senior US officials that the maritime area constituted one of China’s “core interests,” like Taiwan and Tibet.
Clinton also intruded into the longstanding territorial disputes in the South China Sea between China and ASEAN countries, including Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines. She offered “to facilitate initiatives and confidence-building measures” aimed at establishing an international code of conduct. Washington’s “offer” was aimed at undermining Beijing’s efforts to settle the disputes on a bilateral or regional basis, and provoked an angry reaction from Chinese officials.
Prior to the US-Vietnam security dialogue, the huge aircraft carrier, the USS George Washington, and several destroyers arrived off the Vietnamese coast—ostensibly to mark 15 years since the normalisation of relations between the US and Vietnam in 1995. On August 8, US naval officers hosted a delegation of Vietnamese military and government officials, who flew out to the aircraft carrier.
As both sides were well aware, the real purpose of the exercise was to forcefully underscore US claims to “freedom of navigation” in the South China Sea. Speaking to reporters as US warplanes took off from the deck, Captain David Lausman, commander of the USS George Washington, declared: “These waters belong to nobody, yet belong to everybody. China has a right to operate here, as do we and as do every country of the world.”
Two days later, on August 10, the USS John S. McCain, a guided missile destroyer, docked at Da Nang in Vietnam to conduct the first-ever joint military exercises with the Vietnamese navy. The US described the program as a “series of naval engagement activities” focussing mainly on non-combat training, such as damage control and search and rescue. US and Vietnamese naval vessels did not operate together at sea, but the exercise was clearly a step in that direction.
Last month the US navy held large-scale joint operations with South Korea in the Sea of Japan, to the east of the Korean Peninsula, in which the USS George Washington was involved. The exercise was in part a show of force after the sinking of the South Korean warship, the Cheonan, in March, allegedly by North Korea. While the war games were moved from the Yellow Sea after Beijing’s protests, the Pentagon has since announced the further joint naval exercises in coming months with South Korea in this sensitive area close to the Chinese mainland.
Commentaries in the Chinese press clearly expressed Beijing’s concerns regarding what one columnist described as the “Pentagon’s gunboat policy”. Another column in the state-owned People’s Daily by Li Hongmei, headlined “Vietnam advisable not to play with fire,” warned: “Vietnam’s actions now are very selfish… It might well overestimate the capacity of Uncle Sam’s protective umbrella. It is advisable for Vietnam to give up the illusion it can do what it likes in the South China Sea under the protection of the US Navy. Should China and Vietnam truly come into military clashes, no aircraft carrier of any country can ensure it will remain secure.”
Like governments throughout the region, the Stalinist regime in Vietnam is engaged in a delicate balancing game amid the growing rivalry between China and the US. Visiting Beijing this week, Vietnam’s vice defence minister, General Nguyen Chi Vinh played down ties with the US and described China as “a good friend of Vietnam”. China and Vietnam have already established military relations. Since 2006, the two countries have held at least nine joint naval patrols in the Gulf of Tonkin. Vietnam has hosted three port calls by the Chinese navy this year.
Nevertheless, there remains considerable suspicion and rivalry between the two countries. With the support of the US, China launched a devastating border war against Vietnam in 1979 aimed at undermining the regime, which had just ousted China’s ally Pol Pot in neighboring Cambodia. China and Vietnam clashed in 1988 over their disputed claims to the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea.
Despite the bitter legacy of US imperialism’s war in Vietnam until 1975, Hanoi has had no scruples about developing closer economic and strategic relations with Washington. Having transformed the country into a cheap labour platform, the Vietnamese regime is reliant on the US as its top export market and source of foreign investment. Over the past year, the two countries have been negotiating a nuclear deal that would pave the way for US corporations to construct nuclear power plants in Vietnam, which already faces energy shortages.
While cautious not to offend Beijing, Hanoi has been forging closer defence ties with the US. Defence analyst Carlyle Thayer writing in the Wall Street Journal on August 19 observed: “Vietnam started last year to engage in a very delicate game of signalling that it views an American military presence in the region as legitimate. Last year, for example, Vietnamese military officials flew to the USS John C. Stennis to observe flight operations in the South China Sea. Later that year, Vietnamese Defence Minister Phung Quang Thanh stopped off at Pacific Command in Hawaii on his way to Washington and was photographed peering through the periscope of a US nuclear submarine. The cooperation intensified this year when Vietnamese shipyards repaired two US Military Sealift Command ships.”
Vietnam clearly calculates that closer US ties will provide it with greater bargaining power in its disputes with China in the South China Sea. A US Congressional Research Service paper on US-Vietnam relations published last month noted: “Vietnam reportedly intends to use its chairmanship of ASEAN in 2010 to ‘internationalise’ the disputes by forming a multi-country negotiation forum which would force China to negotiate in a multilateral setting. Vietnamese officials have begun to ask their US counterparts more frequently and with greater intensity whether the United States will support Vietnamese efforts to combat what they see as China’s encroachment in the South China Sea. In a news conference releasing the Vietnamese Defence Ministry 2009 White Paper, Deputy Defence Minister Nguyen Chi Vinh [the same general who is now in China] said that sovereignty disputes in the South China Sea have created ‘concerns and new challenges for Vietnamese national defence.”
At last month’s ASEAN forum, Clinton clearly answered Vietnam’s appeals for US backing in the South China Sea in the affirmative. She also declared that the Obama administration was prepared “to take the US-Vietnam relationship to the next level”—as has now been rapidly demonstrated by the first security dialogue and first joint naval exercise between the two countries.
While Vietnam is looking for US backing in its disputes with China, the US is engaged in a far broader and more dangerous strategy of forging and strengthening alliances and security arrangements with a string of countries around China’s borders—from Japan and South Korea in North East Asia to Vietnam, the Philippines, Singapore and Australia, through to India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia.
The South China Sea, however, has a particular strategic significance as the main sea-lane through which China ships the bulk of its energy imports from the Middle East and Africa. Since the end of World War II, a key element of American strategic thinking has been to ensure naval control over key “choke points” such as the Strait of Malacca, thus holding a trump card over its potential rivals, including China and Japan, in the event of war. Washington’s determination to hold on to its advantage is thus a direct threat to China, with the potential to further inflame the tense relations between the two major powers.
World Socialist Website | August 26, 2010
Recent Comments