Friends this is the prediction Rudradev ji made in Sep. 2011 about 'Why China would attack us, I am only taking last few parts but urge everyone who has not read it to read in full:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1449423
Rudradev ji wrote:Because it may be that China really wants a war. Against India, with Pakistan as its ally.
China has been acting for the last several years, more aggressively than ever towards all its neighbours. Not ONE conciliatory move is made, but panga is taken with Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines AND India at every opportunity. Why?
Because China needs a war. Or at least, one very powerful faction in the Chinese govt, including the PLA, is convinced that China needs a war.
Why does this faction think China needs a war?
It's like this. Throughout the '90s, the Chinese accumulated what they thought was going to be their greatest source and permanent guarantee of wealth; forex reserves of Western currencies, and more importantly, debt owed by Western governments. Mainly the US government.
That component... debt holdings, in the form of US treasury bonds and such, grew enormously through the '00s, as the US borrowed money to finance its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Meanwhile, Chinese export markets in the US also grew enormously in the '00s... until things reached a point where Chinese industries relied on US consumer markets to absorb a very large portion of their output.
When the '08 financial crisis hit the Western world, especially the US, China's b@lls went into their mouth. It was a double-threat for China. On the one hand, all the US debt they held could become devalued in case of a depression. On the other hand, if US consumers stopped buying things, Chinese industries (which relied on US markets to absorb their output) would suffer. The resulting impact felt at home, by the Chinese economy, could have devastating consequences for a totalitarian regime.
So what option does a country have when so much of its wealth is in the form of debt? It must monetize the debt. It must turn the debt into something real, as soon as possible, before that wealth (in the form of treasury bonds) becomes more and more devalued as a result of its debtor's financial troubles.
How can China monetize the debt it holds? Here are some ways.
1) It can demand that the US pay up. But the US doesn't have money. If the US prints money, then China's own holdings become further devalued (as it happened with QE2, which further aggravated the situation.) Same for other Western countries, such as EU nations, which are also reeling financially.
2) It can print money and inject it into its own economy to increase domestic consumption. But this will inevitably lead to inflation, and cause civil unrest. Very bad idea, beyond narrow limits. Keeping tight control over money supply is much healthier from a totalitarian regime's point of view.
3) It can invest money into tinpot countries and gain goodwill. To some extent China has been doing this. But sooner or later, some returns have to be there no? So far, what returns have been generated by China's magnanimous projects in Sudan, Zimbabwe etc.?
4) It can start a war. It can arm up, invest wholesale in defense R&D, in procurement of foreign weapons systems and manufacture of its own weapons systems. And it can use these weapons systems in the pursuit of other kinds of power... geostrategic power. An additional benefit to this method of monetizing its debt is that it does not lead to civil unrest (at least as long as China can claim victory) but rather, to an upsurge in jingoistic nationalism that strengthens the position of an authoritarian government.
There you have it. Starting a war is likely considered a good option, given the prevailing economic situation, by a powerful faction within the ruling establishment of China. The US and West do not care if China starts a war with India; it will damage two of their biggest competitors. And Pakistanis of Section B, above, very much want this to happen and want to participate on the Chinese side.
The ONLY thing that would make the Chinese hesitate in starting a war with India would be India's possession of a credible nuclear deterrent. And what has Bharat Karnad told us, between the lines, about that?
In summary, I am guessing that the GOI has understood all this. It understands that the danger of a two-front aggression by China and Pakistan is not just real but imminent. It has calculated that we cannot win, and that we cannot count on external help to win. It may have calculated (ref: Karnad) that we do not even have a credible nuclear deterrent to prevent this from happening.
So in a sense, just as we are the only hope for Pakis of Sections D and E... Pakis of Sections D and E are our only hope to avert disaster. That's why we're seeing the policies we're seeing, IMHO.
Rudradev ji wrote: Gakakkad ji, the answer to your question "why go to war, why not just invest in weapons" is borne out by a truism which we have seen in action ever since WW I. The existence of a military industrial complex in modern states, inevitably leads to military conflict.
China has ALREADY been investing in weapons R&D, manufacture and procurement since the late '90s, more and more throughout the last decade. Now it is doing so even more intensely as a means of monetizing its debt. But as this happens, the pressure to use what has been accumulated, is also rising. Let me try to explain with an example.
Every year in the CPC politburo, different factions have to come up with requests for budget allocation. One very powerful faction may be the Militarists... PLA plus defense/armaments contractors. They are the ones who stand to benefit, when China decides to monetize its debt by investing in weapons R&D and procurement.
But there are other factions also. Let us say, in 2003, the Militarists put forth a budget of $10 billion (just a random figure.) Meanwhile, some party member from Shenyang wants $2 billion to build a Hello Kitty amusement park. Some other guy from Harbin wants $5 billion for a dam/irrigation project.
The Militarists insist that they should get the priority. After all China is in danger. Japan is acting tough on Senkoku Island. India has recently tested nukes and they might weaponize soon. Dalai Lama said something threatening in his speech.
Also, CPC economic czars favour the idea of spurring the economy by spending on defense, so the Shenyang guy and the Harbin guy are denied. The money is granted to the Militarists to manufacture SSNs and aircraft carriers.
This goes on every year. Let us say in 2009, the Militarists want $20 billion. They say that Taiwan is behaving very aggressively, Vietnam is taking control of the Spratly Islands, India is raising mountain divisions in "South Tibet" etc.
This time the Shenyang Hello Kitty guy and the Harbin Dam/Irrigation guy are more adamant in their refutation. They say, "we already had to go without funds because you Militarists were talking about Japan/Senkoku and Indian nukes in 2003. You got your money, what did you do with it? How are we more secure?"
However, once again the CPC czars favour the idea of monetizing the debt by spending on defense. So they give the Militarists $20 billion to spend on JF-17s, BMP knockoffs, IRBMs and whatever else.
But at the same time, pressure from the factions opposed to the Militarists is rising. Pretty soon the Militarists have to show results to justify all the money they have been getting, and the money they plan to keep getting in future.
One day in 2011, news comes that India is about to test the Agni V. This is a moment-of-truth for the Militarists. They HAVE to do something to justify the funds they have been getting all this time, at the expense of other interests, in order to keep future tranches of money flowing.
Note that at this time, even the opposition from the other Non-Militarist factions in the Politburo works in favour of starting a war. In my example, the Harbin guy and the Shenyang guy will start asking: "you have been taking money for years and years, while we have had to do without the Hello Kitty Amusement Park and the Dam. Now you tell us that India may soon have missiles capable of reaching Harbin! Meanwhile your precious SSNs and Carriers are rusting in the harbour. You have been given what you asked for in terms of budget, how are you going to serve our interests?"
The Militarists have painted themselves into a corner with their justifications for building a Military Industrial Complex. Their only choice is to say, now is the time, and manufacture a case for war. They go to town with propaganda, declaring that Vietnamese aggression in the South China Sea has reached unacceptable limits; that the ally Pakistan is now more anti-US than ever before; that the US is now weak and not likely to interfere in any war prosecuted by China; that India must be crushed before it deploys Agni III and test Agni V. They drum up a war-beat of "now or never."
Conflict is then a fait accompli; as it was for the Germans in 1914, the Americans in 1965 and 2003, the Russians in 1980. The political dynamics of a Military Industrial Complex will necessarily shift the equilibrium towards war. Whether it's a constitutional monarchy or a democracy or a socialist republic or a dictatorship doesn't matter. It always happens.
Of course, the factions opposed to the Militarists in the CPC politburo, will right at this moment be advancing the same counter-arguments against war that you have cited. India can cause a lot of pain in retaliation; Security Council will not support us; other countries like SoKo/Japan will get more nervous.
But given historical precedent, all these sensible reasons are simply ignored or consumed by war hysteria, which the Militarists are trying to build up. For everything there is a counter argument: India will only become more powerful given time, we must consolidate "Southern Tibet" or we will lose our chance, India must be taught a lesson before it commits to increasing naval presence in the South China Sea or forming a military alliance with US/Japan/Australia. Given the political momentum, war is inevitable.
*****
Now to Kanson's question about Taiwan. If PRC wanted a war, why would they pick India and not Taiwan? I think the answer is, they're still not sure (despite US' apparent weakness) that US and Japan will not rush to Taiwan's defense. However, they may calculate that this is not true of India. With Pakistan on their side, and US staying out of the conflict, the PRC Militarists may feel more confident of securing a military "victory" against India than one against Taiwan.
Also, Kanson, about Agni V testing this year. If it happens, it is a good thing. It is a sign that we are not idly waiting with the axe over our heads, that we are trying to close the window of opportunity for China to prosecute a two-front war against us. Still, for the present Agni V is untested and I don't know if Agni III is even deployed. IF what Bharat Karnad says is true, 20kT weapons is the most we have. So the assessment, that GOI is trying very hard to avoid war by courting certain factions within Pakistan, holds good.
Fortunately, as we all know, Agni V was successfully tested since the time I made this post.
Rajesh ji, if possible add this to the first post of this thread.
