Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

China's Global Strategy-I

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 30 Jul 2015 02:33

I hope to collect news and analyses to discern China's global strategy.

Here are BRF links to China threads:


ramana wrote:Am collecting links to all the China threads in BRF.



I) News and Discussion of People's Republic of China

II) Understanding the ChineseLets Understand the Chinese

III)China Military watch China Militry Watch

IV) China Economy WatchPRC Economy Watch

V) Understanding the UighersUnderstanding the Uighers

VI) US and PRC relationship and India US PRC relationship and India

VII) US and China in Pakistan US and China in Pakistan

VIII) China Watch Thread-1 China Watch Thread-1

IX) Managing the Chinese Threat Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat

In this thread I also want to collect Indian opinion/assessment of China from all web based publications.



A short history is in order.

China is unique in that only small number of dynasties ruled over four thousand years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynasties ... se_history


The two thousand years were relatively benign. However internal fissures and external pressures ruled over next two thousand years: Three Kingdoms, Mongol Invasions, Western colonial drugs exploitation.

All this dynastic rule ended with the 1948 Communist rise to power in China.

Even here China feared external enemies; USA, Soviet Union, and USA again.
Internal fissures: Gang of Four, Cultural Revolution, Great Leap forward, Tian Mein Square, Falun Gong, Uighers

So the constant is external pressures and internal fissures dominate Chinese history.

Yet in this chaos there is a Chinese global strategy emerging.

China grew economically in the post Cold War and became the factory of the world.
This built enormous financial muscle.

We see China is slowly venturing out from its Forbidden Kingdom mode and setting up outposts in far away Africa and South America.

It is using its financial clout to setup financial(AIIB) and political institutions(SCO etc.)

So the big question is there a Chinese global strategy and if so what is it?

Paul Kennedy in "Rise and Fall of Great Powers" writes that there is no one document that will outline a country's grand strategy but by looking at what a country does one can deduce it
Last edited by SSridhar on 18 Sep 2017 17:02, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Added the ninth thread on China to the list

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby svinayak » 30 Jul 2015 05:56

China from 1949-1962
China from 1963-1972
China from 1973-1985
China from 1986-1994
China from 1995-2008
China from 2009-2015

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1299
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Pulikeshi » 30 Jul 2015 07:56

""Near Seas" vs. "Far Seas""

One key theme is the connection of the Caspian and Persian seas to the "Near Seas"

Image

PS: Why does [img=100x50] not work??


Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1299
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Pulikeshi » 30 Jul 2015 08:14

Is there such a thing as China's Monroe Doctrine?

http://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/challenging-us-preeminence-chinas-grand-strategy-and-the-monroe-doctrine/

If it were part of a “grand strategy,” it would be constructive to ask whether there is an assertive grand strategy at play or not. If so, does this project represent part of an assertive policy/strategy? Being able to locate this project in these terms is useful for seeing or putting together a more detailed map of Chinese strategy. Mixed signals have come to characterize China’s “unpredictable” foreign policy. Last year, Yinhong wrote about China’s President Xi Jinping, stating that he “frequently refers to the ‘Chinese Dream,’ or ‘the great resurgence of the Chinese nation.’ Coinciding with this, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) goal to build up modernized forces has shifted to the simpler but more comprehensive and forceful aim of ‘being capable of fighting, and fighting victoriously.’”

China’s actions spurred ideas about “China’s Monroe Doctrine” with the establishment of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), which the US tested, and pushing for extensive “strategic space” around China, and other actions that have led to a the historical end of Japan’s security policies and the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s move to reinterpret and reform Japan’s constitution. Moreover, China has assumed a considerable role in ameliorating the economic situation in Russia brought on by post-Crimea annexation sanctions from the European Union (EU) and the US.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1299
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Pulikeshi » 30 Jul 2015 08:23

http://thediplomat.com/2015/07/chinas-elegant-flawed-grand-strategy/

The 2011 Chinese White Paper “China’s Peaceful Development,” lists the six core Chinese interests as

  1. State Sovereignty
  2. National Security
  3. Territorial Integrity
  4. National Reunification
  5. China’s political system established by the Constitution and overall social stability
  6. Basic safeguards for ensuring sustainable economic and social development.

If the grand strategy is limited to such thinking....

In the CCP’s perfect world, its growing military and political capabilities will allow it to create a new great power relationship with the United States based on the understanding of non-interference in each other’s core interests. Through the CCP’s “humane authority,” it will establish an alternative international system based on a new set of norms that will win it friends and allies. China’s ambiguous policy of active defense along with its anti-access capabilities will deter any outside threat to its core interests. This will ensure the proper environment for the CCP to continue its peaceful development, and will strengthen CCP legitimacy, meeting the overarching objective of regime survival.


Here is China's problem:

American strategic thinker Edward Luttwak describes this problem as the paradoxical logic of strategy. According to the logic of strategy, as China grows economically, it will spend more on military capabilities, as it develops more military capabilities other states will fear China’s rise and will counter-balance against China and seek to constrain China through economic and strategic means. For China, pursuing its current grand strategy has not resulted in increased moral legitimacy and attractive power; instead it is triggering an Asian security dilemma, encouraging increased military spending by other powers in the region like Japan and South Korea while driving countries like Vietnam and Singapore to closer alignment with the United States.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17607
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Philip » 31 Jul 2015 16:03

A very comprehensive analysis of the PLAN to date.
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33153.pdf

China Naval Modernization: Implications for
U.S. Navy Capabilities—Background and
Issues for Congress


Interestingly,in the sub quietness graph,the Kilo 636.3 is considered quieter than even an Amur/Lada.

Here is a good IDSA analysis.
China's Naval Strategy
Srikanth Kondapalli, Research Fellow, IDSA

http://www.idsa-india.org/an-mar00-3.html

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 17 Jul 2017 23:25

Up.

DrRatnadip
BRFite
Posts: 326
Joined: 31 Dec 2016 00:40

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby DrRatnadip » 17 Jul 2017 23:59

It might have discussed here but posting an old article which helps to grasp china basics using simple maps..

http://www.businessinsider.com/5-maps-t ... egy-2016-1

In effect, China is an island in Eurasia. It can move money around and sometimes technology, but not large modern armies.
Therefore, China is not a threat to its neighbors, nor are they a threat to China. China's primary strategic interest is maintaining the territorial integrity of China from internal threats. If it lost control of Tibet or Xinjiang, the PRC's borders would move far east, the buffer for Han China would disappear, and then China would face a strategic crisis. Therefore, its goal is to prevent that crisis by suppressing any independence movement in Tibet or Xinjiang.

An equally urgent task is to assure that social conflict does not arise between the coastal region and the Han interior
. The loss of foreign export opportunities has placed pressure on the coast. Beijing's interest in maintaining stability in the interior requires transfers of money from the coast. However, the coast's interests are focused on the United States, Europe, and the rest of Asia since these are the coast's trading partners and the interior is incapable of purchasing the coast's products. No stimulus imaginable can raise the interior's income levels to the point that this area could become a market for the coast given the poverty they live in currently. This would be a multi-generational project.

This is not a new problem for China. Prior to Britain and the Opium Wars in the 19th century, China was enclosed, isolated, and relatively united. When the British opened China, massive inequality between the coast and the interior arose with the coastal region being more integrated into the global economy than into China's economy. This led to regionalism and warlords, as each region had unique interests. Mao went into the interior on the Long March, raised a peasant army, destroyed the regional leadership, and enclosed China. China was poor but united. With his death, China went into the next phase of its cycle-reopening itself and betting that this time the coastal-interior split wouldn't arise.

The split has arisen, but the political consequences have not yet played themselves out, and the strategy of the Communist Party is to forestall this by a combination of repressing any sign of opposition and a massive purge among the economic leadership. This is designed to both hold the coastal wealthy and the interior poor in check. Whether this will work depends on whether the People's Liberation Army, essentially a domestic security force, can withstand the forces tugging it in various directions. Notably, a purge and reorganization has just begun in the PLA.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 18 Jul 2017 01:15

Last Night a retired US general (Gen. Jack Keane) came on Fox Business News hosted by Lou Dobbs. He was commenting on China opening a military base in Djibouti in Somalia.
He said China is set on replacing US as the future power and is avoiding the Soviet Union mistakes.
It has already checkmated in East Pacific.
Its building up its naval power and though its not strategic but is becoming a conventional naval power to reckon.

And now wants to place itself in Djibouti which is the corner of Eastern North Africa and Arabian Sea.



However Djibouti already houses five different military bases and the Chinese base is right next to the US one.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Vips » 03 Sep 2017 20:42

China does a media meet for the BRICS Summit.

Dog and Pony show organised by CGTN in a program discussing the challenges before BRICS. Who does it invite from India? Of course NDTV. The other Indian analyst's participating in the show were either CGTN's Indian staffers or Peking University graduates!!!

Vishnu Som unnecessarily created false equivalence between Indian Media and Chinese media for the war rhetoric during the Doklam episode. He did not point out that Global times which was giving the threats was owned and controlled by the chinese government, while the chinese host trivialized it by saying Global times is just one of the media house in China while there were many in India (that were irresponsible).

From Russia it was RTV and Peter Lavelle who spouts anti-West, anti Google, anti Youtube lines. Perfectly understandable - he attended college in Poland and has been living in Eastern Europe for the last 25 years.

In a show that was to discuss challenges before BRICS, they talked about Bad USA, Bad Trump, Bad G7, Bad IMF being controlled through Veto by USA. Climate Change and USA being irresponsible and Chinese host again claiming credit for sticking with Paris accord (as if they were doing any favor).

Would be interesting to check the background on the Brazilian and South African participants.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 03 Sep 2017 21:48

Way I look at it is with the TN test China's Eastern minion Noko has checkmated East Pacific countries: SoKo, Japan and Taiwan and possibly US. Now these have to deal with NoKo.
In the West China's other minion Pakistan has checkmated India where it threatens nukes even if its generals have constipation.
In essence China has achieved checkmate of Asian rivals with minions and it can be above all this and appear global power.
NoKo TN test is a fait accompli before BRICS summit.

Lets see how it pans out.
Pakistan has become a basket case and China has to take it over to ensure viability.
NoKo will soon reach that state.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 18 Sep 2017 09:49


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17607
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Philip » 18 Sep 2017 11:17

Ramana,quite correct.I had said many a time that NoKo and Pak must be treated as satellite provinces of China in formulating any strategy to counter it.
The Chinese grand strategy has been openly said sev. years ago,that by 2050 they wqill replace the US as the dominant global power,economically and militarily.All other states must kowtow to it.India must dare not make any attempt to challenge Chinese domination as a matter of Chinese "right",in their opinion.Should we try and challenge it,another mil. lesson is what the Chinese plan for us,until we succumb to its hegemony. The Chinese were ill-prepared at Doklam,which unfortunately for them,coincided with the BRICS summit,the NoKo crisis-of the utmostr importance to China s it could've seen US troops militarily involved on its borders and off its coastal waters.

India standing firm on the ground is what is needed to stop the Chinese from rolling over smaller entities,economically,diplomatically and militarily.As Mao famously said,"power comes out of the barrel of a gun". The US v.badly slipped up a few years ago when China made its first atoll grab in the ICS.
Had the US either countered this atoll grab militarily against China,or even better,grabbed other atolls supposedly claimed by China before the Chinese launched their second phase,expanding the atolls' footprints ,in the name of protecting intl. sov. rights,whatever,the Chinese would've been checkmated.I think that the Philippines too did something similar,but on islands v.close to its mainland and not important enough for China. The Chinese then launched their third phase,installing missiles and advanced radars,etc.,while building airstrips with runways long enough for various Chinese transports to fly in troops and supplies.

Checkmating China in the ICS is now too late a mission."That ship has sailed".However,the next phase of Chin mischief,after the "Mischief Reef" take-away,is to forestall any further Chinese squat in the IOR littoral nations,esp. Sri Lanka and the Maldives,vital for India's security.India must pl;an hostile military action to prevent this from happening at any cost in the future. We have to be pro-active with these two nations. Mischief on the part of the Maldivians-v.dangerous ruling dictatorship,are willing like Pak and some L:ankans,to sell their soul to the Chinese,so that their despotic regimes can survive.A "full-court press" must be made with traditional African nations/friends,and we should similarly get our foot into the door first in setting up mil. facilities,however small.We've obtained some limited mil rights with the Seychelles and Mauritius in being allowed to set up radar/surveillance facilities on their territory.Supplying the Mauritian CG and African nations with CG/naval OPVs,patrol craft,etc.,would be one way in which to firm up ties further.An OPV has been built for the Lankans,another in the dockyard being completed. India must press for a comprehensive def. relationship with SL that overrides any secret clauses or loopholes in the SL-Chin H'tota agreement that some suspect.

Here I've even suggested in another td. that India and Japan can checkmnate China by building a rail link to the island from Rameswaram/Dhanushkodi,like the chunnel linking France and the UK. Colombo has a v.ambitious "Megapolis" project,linking all the majotr settlements on the South coast/western region of the island with light trains too.The Japanese could take the elad here too and do have considerable influence in the island.A JV between India and Japan for the same would be hard to beat. MOre on such ideas later.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17607
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Philip » 18 Sep 2017 11:46

In continuation,unless smaller nations band and bind together in a bloc,the Chinese will armtwist them into becoming serfdoms and vassal states. India made a start with SAARC,but thaty entity has been a disaster tx. to Paki perfidy.Therefore,I propose,as said sev. times for a new entity to replace it and thus prevent Chin poaching of IOR littoral members.

SAFE not SAARC:
South Asian Federation Economique,could even be SAEF,pronounced "safe",a good word emphasising security.
SAFE should focus on eco integration first,avoid political interference,with one caveat that every member gives a solemn undertaking not to allow terrorist activity against another member on its soil and to deport those engaged in doing so.This will automatically rule out Pakistan,the mill-stone of SAARC,and ensure the success of SAFE. The fundamentla aim is to ensure prosperity amongst the member states through trade,cultural and touristic activities primarily,also setting a foundation for further joint diplomatic cooperation.In many respects it would be a S.Asian ASEAN. India,Sri Lanka,BDesh,Burma,Afghanistan,the Maldives,Bhutan.Nepal, members with Mauritius,the Seychelles, and other IOR littoral states could attend as observers.

SAFE could then also resolve cross-border issues like the current Ro crisis amicably between its members when border controls,etc. have been worked out. A separate cell for resolving bi-lateral issues just like the Ro crisis to be set up so that the members can swiftly defuse such incidents should they happen before outside entities stir the pot.

Here is a link to the founding fathers of the EU.What India should do on a war footing is to find similar leaders in the SAFE states who can agree upon the same in principle and execute the idea. The SAFE permanent HQ could be Colombo,to avoid the impression of an Indian domination of the entity.It is also equidistant from all potential member states.

https://europa.eu/european-union/about- ... fathers_en
The Founding Fathers of the EU

Konrad Adenauer | Joseph Bech | Johan Willem Beyen | Winston Churchill | Alcide De Gasperi | Walter Hallstein | Sicco Mansholt | Jean Monnet | Robert Schuman | Paul-Henri Spaak | Altiero Spinelli

The following visionary leaders inspired the creation of the European Union we live in today. Without their energy and motivation we would not be living in the sphere of peace and stability that we take for granted. From resistance fighters to lawyers, the founding fathers were a diverse group of people who held the same ideals: a peaceful, united and prosperous Europe. Beyond the founding fathers described below, many others have worked tirelessly towards and inspired the European project. This section on the founding fathers is therefore a work in progress.

PS:Ramana,perhaps this could warrant a sep td.?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21717
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: China's Global Strategy

Postby SSridhar » 18 Sep 2017 18:34

ramana wrote:So the big question is there a Chinese global strategy and if so what is it?


On February 17, 2017, Xi Jinping enunciated the Global Strategy of China. This was the clearest statement yet of where China wants to be globally after the famous Deng Xiaoping's exhortation to 'bide time' and 'rise peacefully'.

Xi said, and I paraphrase, that China's aims are two. One, China wants a new World Order that would be just and China wants to build it. Two, China wants a new security architecture and China wants to build it.

The choice of the venue was also important. It was China's National Security Convention and as expected, Xi is the Chief of this group too. Apparently, this is a powerful new organization within the CCP.

Internally, it wants to maintain the supremacy of the CCP and thus its governance structure, retain its vice-like grip on far-away regions of Xinjiang & Tibet while continuing to reiterate the One China policy with respect to Taiwan and attempting to annexe the Indo-China Sea (the 'Core Interests') and thirdly make China a high-income economy. Externally, China is trying to fundamentally disturb and alter the existing order, one in which it will and it alone will be be at the pinnacle while professing to stand for 'peace and harmony'. Its idea of of peace is everyone else accepting its benign superiority and paying it tributes while its idea of harmony is Sinicization of the other population. Thus, China is a revisionist power.

How is it going about its task? Xi's ruthless campaign against corruption is as much as to consolidate his position as to strengthen the CCP. His assumption of so many roles is also to ensure that CCP's writ runs everywhere. Mao's Cultural Revolution was a similar attempt but something along those lines cannot be implemented in modern day and age. Hence the new tactic. On the 'Core Interests' we all know what China is doing and so need not be elaborated. The BRI straddles both the internal & external domains and very cleverly too. BRICS was a clever grouping to try to undermine the US and its allies. BRI necessitated AIIB. Thus Bretton Woods institutions are targetted. These are well known.

You mentioned Djibouti. In November 2014, the Namibian Times leaked an official Chinese report that talked of 18 foreign naval bases in such places as Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Djibouti, Yemen, Oman, Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, Seychelles, Madagascar and Namibia. Slowly, they are taking shape though many disbelieved the Chinese plan at that time. It is much like the String of Pearls. Though some question this as a figment of imagination by a RAND Corp. analyst, the encirclement is taking shape, whatever name one may give it.

The Chinese PLAN policy makers and the top politicians of the Standing Committee and the Politburo have also internalized the Thayer Mahan's doctrine that naval power is essential to achieve great power status. His monumental work is a compulsory read within PLAN. Of course, history has also taught them that lesson. First, it was the short forays of Zheng He in the 15th century. The Mongol pressure then turned the Chinese inwards-looking and 'sea power' was banned by the Emperors. So, neither before, nor after the brief interlude in the 15th century, was China a naval power. China had to watch mutely as Vasco da Gama of Portugal, followed by the Spanish, Dutch, French and British powers entrenched Western influence in Chinese neighbourhood. Then, the British Navy's operations in the 19th century simply outclassed China in the Opium Wars which also led to the ceding of Hong Kong. Later, the US Navy has been controlling the maritime domain stretching through Pacific, Indian Ocean and into the Gulf and the gap in sea-power between the two is still vast. China had to ignore building up its Navy as it needed to build up the Army first against various land-based adversaries, particularly the USSR, India and Vietnam, until the 80s. China has the longest land-border in the world, over 21000 Kms and it has also the largest number of neighbours, fourteen. When Chairman Mao took over, the borders of China were not well defined. There were problems in Yunnan, Tibet, Xinjiang & Inner Mongolia. It thus remained a Continental Power, a situation from which it needed to come out as its national power began to increase in the two decades after the entente with the US in 1971-72. It has since the 1990s set a frenetic pace to achieve its naval ambition.

We know that the Chinese take a long term view and are patient. The new-found aggression by Xi cannot therefore be a break from the past. We may not know which of his predecessors exactly formulated the strategy to change the 'world order' and its 'security architecture', appropriately dubbed as the 'Two Guiding Principles'; but, we know that Xi is earnestly implementing those. It is for this reason that he would like to be at the helm for another two or three terms by which time he hopes to complete the project. That is why he is assuming all powers (Party general Secretary, President, Commander-in-Chief, Chief of National Security etc. etc.) and is unwilling to identify a heir-apparent. The occupation & militarization of the Indo China Sea is to control the throat of Indo-Pacific. The Chinese have several dilemmas to tackle: the energy-security dilemma, the Malacca dilemma, the Hormuz dilemma, the Indian dilemma, strategic-security dilemma etc. along with this 'throat dilemma' which is very crucial because a rampaging combination of US, India, Japan and Vietnam navies (let's not include the doubtful Australians here) can bottle up the PLAN within the Chinese territorial waters of this throat. It wants to break-out of this claustrophobic setting. The total disregard of the UNCLOS ruling comes from this dilemma. The inability to conclude a Code of Conduct (CoC) with the ASEAN until recently also stemmed from that.

To answer your question, yes, there is a strategy which is revealing in bits and pieces. But, the contours are visible in the forms of Indo-China Sea, completely inimical stand against India, a complex and nuanced relationship with the US in all gamuts of transaction with it, increasing naval power projection and PLAN's plans, BRI and allied actions, increasing assertiveness with which it speaks in international fora, disregard for international treaties, brazenness etc. These are all behaviour of a super-power (the US & USSR behaved similarly too) and China is mimicking them either because it is arrogant or it thinks that's how a superpower should behave to win a pole position or both.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2852
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Rudradev » 18 Sep 2017 19:54

^^Superbly summed up and highly enlightening as always, SSridhar garu. The above should be part of the "required reading" opening post for all China-related threads IMHO.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6851
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby JE Menon » 18 Sep 2017 19:56

^^^indeed. An education.

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 703
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby TKiran » 18 Sep 2017 20:48

SS sir,

While China was formulating it's global strategy, India was in "blind spot".

Do you agree with this assessment?

What I mean to say is that, while the Chinese paid due diligence in assessing and formulating a strategy, which they may succeed, India could turn out to be a "Kebab mein Haddi", as they didn't do due diligence when it comes to India.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 18 Sep 2017 22:40

No. India is no spoiler as you are implying.

Its a concurrent game not a sequential game.

When we are discussing China why do you bring in India?

Do you want to divert the thread?

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 703
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby TKiran » 19 Sep 2017 00:43

Ramana sir, not​ at all deviating from the topic, Han in general are very diligent, even culturally, but they don't have any strategy when it comes to India (realistic assessment and policies based on that assessment). Even if they had some tactical policies to play balance of power games based on false assumptions, they all failed. It's my own assumption that India was in blind spot, trying to understand if my assessment was correct or if it's completely wrong.

I can give any number of examples when Chinese completely wrongly assessed it's adversary. And that adversary has been only India, with all other adversaries, China has policies, sometimes wrong policies, but their assessment was correct.

I don't have any confusion regarding concurrent nature of game.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 19 Sep 2017 01:29

That's Ok. The minute you called them Han you showed your mind bias.


Let me be clear. I am not interested in dragging India into every thread where we are trying to understand the opponents.

We are trying to see what is China's strategy and claim it has failed.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 19 Sep 2017 01:55

I forgot to add Ravi Rikhye understanding of China long term plan published in Swarajya magazine.


ramana wrote:
ramana wrote:Ravi Rikhye has written a short note on China's aims in the Pacific Ocean and how it already has achieved the first part.
The piece will come in Swarajya magazine this weekend.


Here is link to the tweet:

Tweet

Guam: Second Step In China’s Naval Plan To Own The Pacific?


TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 703
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby TKiran » 19 Sep 2017 07:34

China's strategy has been unique for the last 4 decades. For a revisionist power, it has only adversaries all around its periphery. Koreans hate Chinese, but North Korea has been it's munna. Pakistanis and in general Muslims hate China, but today Pakistan is it's munna. Russia doesn't have anything in common with Chinese, but Russia is seeking Chinese friendship, on whose coattails China was riding during the cold war. Europe has been subjugated through trade, who were great traders. East Asian tigers have been subjugated through market access.

Vietnam had been a very tough one to subdue, but eventually, Vietnam has also been subjugated as it was made as a nation which does not matter.

Australia is being used as a place for their population to emigrate to and eventually colonize in decades to come.

Everything is going on by script.

In Panchatantra, there's a story of a jackal, it shows obedience to a Lion, and gets a prey killed but asks the Lion to take a bath and it will look after the prey. Then it will ask a tiger to make a bite on the prey to make sure that the tough skin was holed, but scared away the tiger saying that lion is coming. When lion comes, it says that the prey is now "jooti" and not suitable for king's meal. (It's not sequential but concurrent game). While tiger was used and thrown, it scares away a cheetah by saying that it's not cheetah's game. But when another jackal comes for the prey, the original jackal fights.

There's a lot I can say about India, but without bringing India into picture, based on Panchatantra, all I can say is that the only way to stop Chinese strategy is through alliances, but China would try to break the alliances, so there's a difficult but sure shot counter strategy possible to bring China to its natural balance.

The major deficiency in China strategy is its inability to form alliances, trust deficit. Well the path they chose doesn't have any room for accommodation of any other power, major or minor. Constantly scheming to weaken the others. If any power blinked, use and throw. If anybody resisted, bide time and change tactics, and weaken the opponent.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 20 Sep 2017 08:21

TKiran wrote:The major deficiency in China strategy is its inability to form alliances, trust deficit. Well the path they chose doesn't have any room for accommodation of any other power, major or minor. Constantly scheming to weaken the others. If any power blinked, use and throw. If anybody resisted, bide time and change tactics, and weaken the opponent.



The Romans had similar strategy and ended up converting to Christianity.

In other words China needs buffer states and vassal states yet these can turn around at right opportunity.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21717
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby SSridhar » 20 Sep 2017 14:03

The inability of the Chinese to form 'alliances' comes from their Imperialist outlook. It was required of every visiting diplomat from a foreign country to kneel three times and prostrate nine times before the Emperor. The Chinese only want vassal states, like North Korea or Pakistan. The same mindset is exhibited in BRI. For example, China offered to include India's ‘Spice Route’ and ‘Mausam’ projects within its Maritime Silk Road component of the BRI. How condescending! China's haughty harangues during Doka La crisis come from the same mindset.

China's wars with Imperial powers, what it calls a 'Hundred Year Shame', such as Britain, France and most importantly Japan have taught them that destruction of another equal or bigger power was always preferable. The defeat by Japan, who are actually a lost Sinic tribe by Chinese folklore, was a particularly searing and humiliating one. They therefore see a rising power or an existing power as a competitor on the horizon. So long as they cannot treat anyone as their equal, they cannot form an alliance.

They may be acquiring 'friends' lately with their deep pockets, but their high interest rates and cunning methods to usurp sovereignty from smaller countries, do not portend a much lasting 'friendship'. The desperate countries fall into a honey-trap and will immensely regret later, as it has already happened in Myanmar or Sri Lanka. Bangladesh has just escaped, though only for the time being, I suppose. But friendship with Russia, Iran, the Sudan, Thailand, and Zimbabwe to cite a few are also quite fragile. Do they have any ally today other than Pakistan? NoKO under the maverick Kim Jong Un is certainly not an ally. And, Pakistan has long ago capitulated to become a Chinese province and in any case cannot aspire to become an ally.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3999
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Peregrine » 20 Sep 2017 23:31

China hits back at Donald Trump's remark over South China Sea in UN speech

BEIJING: Beijing hit back at US President Donald Trump's veiled criticism of its territorial claims in the disputed South China Sea, countering that the United States was a greater threat to sovereignty.

In his speech to the UN General Assembly+ on Tuesday, Donald Trump decried "threats to sovereignty" in Ukraine and the resource-rich South China Sea, without explicitly mentioning Russia or China.

"We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders, and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow," Trump said.

China asserts sovereignty over almost all of the strategically vital waters in the face of rival claims from its Southeast Asian neighbours, and has rapidly turned reefs into artificial islands capable of hosting military planes.

The United States has conducted three "freedom of navigation" operations near islands held by China to challenge Beijing's maritime claims since Trump took office in January.

"For some time now, some countries have used the pretext of freedom of navigation to bring their planes and fleets near the South China Sea," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said.

"Actually, I think this is the behaviour that has threatened the sovereignty of South China Sea countries," Lu told a regular news briefing.

Lu said the situation in the sea "has been cooling down", thanks to efforts by China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

"I hope that this situation can be respected by relevant countries," he said.

The spokesman also called for "restraint" in response to Trump's warning that he will "totally destroy" North Korea if it threatens the US or its allies.

Lu reiterated Beijing's call for efforts to bring the nuclear issue "back to the right track of peaceful settlement through dialogue and consultation."

Cheers Image

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 848
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby KrishnaK » 21 Sep 2017 09:05

SSridhar wrote:The inability of the Chinese to form 'alliances' comes from their Imperialist outlook.
It is impossible to form deep alliances without having an open and transparent political system.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 554
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ArjunPandit » 21 Sep 2017 09:32

KrishnaK wrote:
SSridhar wrote:The inability of the Chinese to form 'alliances' comes from their Imperialist outlook.
It is impossible to form deep alliances without having an open and transparent political system.

Actually it is the other way round a transparent political system is subject to public scrutiny. In the end the deep alliances of WW2 were actually on hte axis side where the relation was beyond transactional, there was a mutual understanding about the spheres of influence etc. On the other hand allied 'alliances' were mostly transactional

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1669
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby chola » 21 Sep 2017 10:16

Cheen has no real alliances but probably the widest network of trade partners in the world. Unlike us, they trade massively with all their enemies.

That should show you their strategy

Profit first, second and third. Their naval and air buildup is an effect of their manufacturing base not of their martial nature. They'll follow their trade routes and use the growing weight of their infrastructure and equipment to intimidate and change facts on the ground/sea but not make actual war.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21717
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby SSridhar » 21 Sep 2017 10:44

KrishnaK wrote:
SSridhar wrote:The inability of the Chinese to form 'alliances' comes from their Imperialist outlook.
It is impossible to form deep alliances without having an open and transparent political system.

KrishnaK, but the point I am trying to make is whether the Chinese are interested in any alliance at all; whether their DNA would allow them to form alliances?

BTW, I have just posted an excellent article differentiating 'alliances' and 'strategic partnerships' in the Neutering thread where it is more relevant.

Added later: On the question an 'open & transparent political system', again the question is do the Chinese of the Mainland want it? They are so used to Imperial system and followed by the closed Communist system, save for a brief period of Sun-yat-sen. Anyway, that discussion would be OT here.

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 703
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby TKiran » 21 Sep 2017 11:53

ArjunPandit wrote:
KrishnaK wrote: It is impossible to form deep alliances without having an open and transparent political system.

Actually it is the other way round a transparent political system is subject to public scrutiny. In the end the deep alliances of WW2 were actually on hte axis side where the relation was beyond transactional, there was a mutual understanding about the spheres of influence etc. On the other hand allied 'alliances' were mostly transactional

Arjunpandit sir, while what you said is right, the context of WWII is different. The Germans in those days were "racially superior", Japanese were also "racially superior", so were Italian. So there was natural affinity for "racially superior" races to come to a common understanding to divide the world amongst themselves. Such commonality of ideology of racist superiority doesn't exist today except with the Han.

But still there is a possibility of Han making transactional alliance also at the nick of the time. There's an example of such alliance in Mahabharata, during Aranya parvam, when dharmaraja says, "शत्रूणां वयं पंचोत्तर शतं" and sends Arjuna to rescue Duryodhana. How probable such scenario is certainly debatable. (For example, Han and Japanese fighting Indians). May be it's a probable scenario to assume Han and Taiwan would fight together with Indians when Indians are trying to do a Bangladesh to Tibet. Beyond that, there are no natural allies for Han.

VishalJ
BRFite
Posts: 941
Joined: 12 Feb 2009 06:40
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby VishalJ » 21 Sep 2017 16:32


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 21 Sep 2017 19:16

ArjunPandit wrote:
KrishnaK wrote: It is impossible to form deep alliances without having an open and transparent political system.

Actually it is the other way round a transparent political system is subject to public scrutiny. In the end the deep alliances of WW2 were actually on the axis side where the relation was beyond transactional, there was a mutual understanding about the spheres of influence etc. On the other hand allied 'alliances' were mostly transactional



Not so fast. At the surface level the axis were tied together by their national socialism rubric. However they were not deeply allied and worked at cross purposes.
The Allies on the other hand had a deep alliance between Great Britain with the colonies and USA. They could bring in the Soviet Union because of their own deep alliance.

Please see the video posted here:

viewtopic.php?p=2211258#p2211258

KrishnaK, While at it let me comment on your posts.

Deep alliances are formed by shared interests and the knowledge the sinking of one partner will drown you.
USA had deep alliance with the GB precisely for this reason. If GB falls to Nazi Germany its the end of the Anglo-Saxon world system.

In Indian context the Cholas and Eastern Chalukyas had deep alliance which our historians gloss over due to Marxist lens. We can discuss this in the Hisotry thread.....

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: China's Global Strategy-I

Postby ramana » 21 Sep 2017 19:57

SSridhar wrote:
Added later: On the question an 'open & transparent political system', again the question is do the Chinese of the Mainland want it? They are so used to Imperial system and followed by the closed Communist system, save for a brief period of Sun-yat-sen. Anyway, that discussion would be OT here.


SS, Its perfectly germane to this thread as discussing strategy without knowing the national aims or goals makes it devoid of substance.

Like most MEA policies.

Please do continue here.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3999
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

China's Global Strategy-I

Postby Peregrine » 24 Sep 2017 00:19

Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat

Working with India to take bilateral ties forward post-Doklam: China

KOLKATA: China and India are working together to "take forward" their relationship leaving behind the Doklam episode, the Chinese Consul General here has said.

Chinese Consul General Ma Zhanwu also asserted that by working together cooperation and exchanges can be further enhanced.

"India and China are working together. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping had a meeting on September 5 to discuss how to enhance the relationship," Zhanwu said here on Friday night while addressing an event to mark the 68th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China.

"As long as the two countries work together, we will able to enhance and develop exchanges and cooperation," he said.

Asked if both the countries have left behind the Doklam episode , Zhanwu said "Yes we have left that behind and are working together to take forward the bilateral relationship".

Prime Minister Modi had met President Xi on the sidelines of the 9th BRICS Summit on September 5

The two leaders had agreed that both the countries should put in more effort to strengthen the cooperation between their security personnel and ensure that Doklam-like incidents do not recur.

The Chinese and the Indian troops were engaged in a prolonged standoff in the Doklam area of the Sikkim sector since June 16 after the Indian side stopped the construction of a road by the Chinese Army.

On August 28, external affairs ministry announced that New Delhi and Beijing have decided on "expeditious disengagement" of their border troops in the disputed Doklam area.

Cheers Image


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chinmay, sum, TKiran and 33 guests