Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread

[a_majoor]

America and Tiawan's coalition partner can bring a very potent force to the table ( from strategypage.com)

The Mighty Japanese Navy
by Harold C. Hutchison
February 25, 2005

The JMSDF (Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force) is arguably the second-best navy in the Pacific, trailing only the United States Navy. The JMSDF has a large number of modern surface warships and the third-largest submarine force in the Pacific, and it could be a potential player in any fight in the Formosa Strait, due to the fact that Japan's ties with Taiwan have become much closer.

The primary surface vessels in the JMSDF are the destroyers. Japan's had a long tradition of building a superb destroyer force â “ in World War II, their destroyers were arguably the best in the world. The best destroyers in the JMSDF are the Kongo-class DDGs. These 7,250-ton ships carry 90 vertical-launch cells for SM-2MR missiles (with a range of 111 kilometers), and are equipped with the Aegis system. They are, in essence, copies of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers in U.S. Navy service, with a few small exceptions (no Tomahawk capability, an Italian 5-inch gun, and some Japanese electronics). It is probably the best surface combatant outside the United States Navy. Japan also has a smaller force of older guided-missile destroyers, the Hatakaze and Tachikaze classes. These two destroyer classes are roughly equivalent to the Charles F. Adams-class destroyers. Japan also has four helicopter-carrying destroyers, primarily used for anti-submarine warfare.

Two other modern destroyer classes are entering service: The Murasame (4,550 tons) and Takanami-class (4,600 tons) destroyers both have vertical-launch cells, but both primarily focus on anti-submarine warfare. They usually carry a mix of vertically-launched ASROC and Sea Sparrow missiles. The two ship classes will comprise fourteen ships total. The major difference between the two ship classes are their main guns. The Murasame has a 76mm gun, the Takanami, a 5-inch gun. Two other classes of destroyer, the Asagiri and Hatsuyuki are also present in strength (20 ships between the two of them).

Japan's other major asset is its large force of advanced diesel-electric submarines (eighteen subs). The Yuushio, Harushio, and Oyashiro classes displace anywhere from 2,450 tons to 3,000 tons. Each carry six 21-inch torpedo tubes, with a total of 20 weapons (either Harpoon anti-ship missiles or Type 89 torpedoes). These subs would be a potent force against the Chinese Navy.

The JMSDF has some problems. Training is difficult, since Japan's waters have many commercial fishing and merchant vessels. Japan is usually able to squeeze in only about ten days of training for mine warfare, when fishing is not so good. The JMSDF also is short on underway replenishment vessels â “ a total of four such ships are available to refuel forty-seven destroyers. The new submarines have also been expensive ($500 million apiece), a problem when the Japanese Constitution limits defense spending to one percent of Japan's Gross National Product. Similarly, the Kongos were built to mercantile standards to save money â “ which means they cannot take as much damage as a Burke-class destroyer. Furthermore, Japan's efforts to build an aircraft carrier have run into opposition. The official design for the replacement for the Haruna and Shirane-class DDHs have shown a full superstructure and forward and aft helicopter pads. However, alternative designs have looked like a small aircraft carrier. At 13,500 tons, these are not much smaller than an Independence-class light carrier from World War II.

The JMSDF also has problems with political support. Often, Japan's security needs (such as the ability to protect oceangoing trade) have been subordinated to concerns about whether a posture is too aggressive. This has gone back to 1981, when proposals to ensure defense of sea lanes was controversial â “ despite Japan's experience under submarine blockade in World War II. Also, Japan's had problems getting sufficient personnel â “ it has been under authorized strength in the past (a shortfall of 3.5 percent existed in 1992). Ultimately, Japan's ability to overcome the political issues and to get an adequate number of trained personnel will determine how well it can carry out its mission of defending Japan.

A mix of the good (potent destroyer force), the bad (limitations on training, and political support, limited replenishment ability) and the ugly (Warships built to mercentile standards!). Perhaps some lessons for our Navy here as well.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

China Steps Up Pressure on Taiwan

By ELAINE KURTENBACH
BEIJING (AP) - China unveiled a law Tuesday authorizing an attack if Taiwan moves toward formal independence, increasing pressure on the self-ruled island while warning other countries not to interfere. Taiwan denounced the legislation as a ``blank check to invade'' and announced war games aimed at repelling an attack.

The proposed anti-secession law, read out for the first time before the ceremonial National People's Congress, doesn't say what specific actions might invite a Chinese attack.

``If possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted, the state shall employ nonpeaceful means and other necessary measures to protect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity,'' Wang Zhaoguo, deputy chairman of the NPC's Standing Committee, told the nearly 3,000 legislators gathered in the Great Hall of the People.

Beijing claims Taiwan, split from China since 1949, as part of its territory. The communist mainland repeatedly has threatened to invade if Taiwan tries to make its independence permanent, and new law doesn't impose any new conditions or make new threats. But it lays out for the first time legal requirements for military action.
Taiwan's leaders warned that the move could backfire by angering the island's voting public.
Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, which handles the island's China policy, said the law gives China's military ``a blank check to invade Taiwan'' and ``exposed the Chinese communists' attempt to use force to annex Taiwan and to be a regional power.''

``Our government lodges strong protest against the vicious attempt and brutal means ... to block Taiwanese from making their free choice,'' the council said in a statement.
Taiwanese Defense Ministry spokesman Liu Chih-chien said large-scale military exercises would be held from mid-April to August to build confidence in the island's military preparedness. Troops will practice knocking down Chinese missiles and fighting communist commandos.
Mainland lawmakers immediately expressed support for the measure, which is sure to be approved when they vote March 14. The NPC routinely approves all legislation already decided by Communist Party leaders.

``We must join hands and absolutely not allow Taiwan to separate from China,'' said Chang Houchun, a businessman and NPC member from southern China's Guangdong province.
Chinese officials say the law was prompted in part by Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian's plans for a referendum on a new constitution for the island that Beijing worries might include a declaration of independence.
Chen says the vote would be aimed at building a better political system, not at formalizing Taiwan's de facto independence.

The proposed law says Beijing regards Taiwan's future as an internal Chinese matter, rejecting ``any interference by outside forces.''
``Every sovereign state has the right to use necessary means to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity,'' said Wang.
The law says China's Cabinet and the government's Central Military Commission ``are authorized to decide on and execute nonpeaceful means and nonpeaceful measures.''
The United States has appealed to both sides to settle Taiwan's status peacefully, with no unilateral changes by either side. Washington is Taiwan's main arms supplier and could be drawn into any conflict.

In Taipei, Chen Chin-jun, a legislative leader of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, said the island wants peace and trade with China.
However, he said, ``We will not accept any resolution to allow the Chinese Communists to unilaterally decide Taiwan's future, and it will only antagonize the Taiwanese.''
China and Taiwan have no official ties and most direct travel and shipping between the two sides is banned. But Taiwanese companies have invested more than $100 billion in the mainland and the two sides carry on thriving indirect trade.

Until recently, China's military was thought to be incapable of carrying out an invasion across the 100-mile-wide Taiwan Strait. But Beijing has spent billions of dollars buying Russian-made submarines, destroyers and other high-tech weapons to extend the reach of the 2.5 million-member People's Liberation Army.
Chinese leaders have appealed in recent months for Taiwan to return to talks on unification. But they insist that Taiwanese leaders first declare that the two sides are ``one China'' - a condition that Chen has rejected.
In an apparent attempt to calm Taiwanese public anxiety, Wang said the law promises that Chinese military forces would try to avoid harming Taiwenese civilians. He said the rights of Taiwanese on China's mainland also would be protected.

 

[winchable]

Crap, better work on my mandarin.

 

[a_majoor]

Concentrate on your principles of marksmanship first!

 

[winchable]

I meant for when they send us to Taiwan to repel the Chinese.
Wasn't saying I was giving up already!

Or were you just reminding me to practice my principles, which makes sense either way I suppose..

Would Taiwan be able to repel a PLA invasion?
Bit simple a question I suppose which would invoke a very long response, but I can't think of how to be more specific.

 

[a_majoor]

Short answer: it depends.

China could launch a gigantic attack under a wave of up to 700 medium range missiles, which would overwhelm the immediate defenses, but also shoot China's bolt. China would have to be very confident of a political or military environment which would preclude outside intervention.

The coalition of the willing would most likely be the United States and Japan, with other interested nations ranging from India to Australia, depending on how they see the Chinese threat. If China shoots its bolt, the coalition forces will basically counterattack and push the Chinese out. If China tries to maintain a reserve, the Tiawanese will have the ability to keep fighting as well. Either way it would be very messy.

Would Mr Dithers support Tiawan against China? Canada's record against naked agression hasn't been to sterling lately....China also sees Canada as a resource base; buying up oil and mineral rights and seeing us as "hewers of wood and drawers of water" for the 21rst century.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

the law promises that Chinese military forces would try to avoid harming Taiwenese civilians. He said the rights of Taiwanese on China's mainland also would be protected.

Yeah, right.



I suspect this has something to do with the recent declaration on the part of the US and Japan that the Taiwan Strait is a "common strategic objective": which is to say that it is more of a reaction to US posturing (more on this here: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2005/03/04/2003225416 ).

Interestingly, I was reading just the other day (in the context of this announcement) that Japan now arguably has the second 'best' Navy in the Pacific!  http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/200522521.asp

 

[CBH99]

If China is serious about reclaiming Taiwan, which it appears it is - its going to be a LONG road ahead before the western powers, or the coalition, will be able to push the Chinese back.

China is a regional power.  They have the largest army on earth, and the largest air force on earth.  Now, in respect, their air force is still in the process of being modernized, and a majority of their aircraft are still 1960's and 1970's vintage aircraft.  But thats changing rather quickly, as they aquire more and more Russian electronics for their aircraft.

They also have a large brown water navy, that is armed to the teeth.  Sure, the Chinese don't have much in the name of blue water capability, but they don't need it.  They have a powerful brown water navy, that is more than capable of handling anything in the Taiwan Straight.  Their submarines, fast attack craft, and capital vessels are more than plenty enough to secure their objectives - and their missile arsenals could devastate Taiwan's defenses before Taiwan even has a chance to mobilize them.

Bottom line, China could secure Taiwan militarily rather quickly.  Once that is accomplished, its going to take an aweful lot of thick military muscle to push them back.  The United States is already spread thin with their occupation of Iraq, which means they won't be able to do much unless its primarily naval activity.  It'll be messy, any way you look at it.

 

[Cpl.Banks]

Maybe the Us wont be able to put all its muscle into it but NATO and the U.N will condem the attack on Taiwan in less than a heart beat and most if not all(including Canada) allies will start putting together a force to tackle this threat. At least for our sakes Can you picture it PLA troops in Vancouver then in Edmonton then Calgary etc...Taiwan has also put alot of money into getting an anti-missile capability and out of those 700 missiles i bet less that half will find their mark!hopefully...
UBIQUE!!!!!!!1

 

[Sandbag]

IMHO, first China definitely wouldn't "shoot its bolt" with 700 missiles, nor would it be a simple matter of any coalition "counterattacking" and pushing China out of one of its provinces.  This is a message to Taiwan, the US and Japan in no uncertain terms, thus "putting the ball in their court" so to speak.  Think of it from the Chinese perspective versus ours for a minute, this is a province of theirs that has special status like Hong Kong, Shanghai, etc.  I believe the Chinese are saying to Taiwan, accept it, (of course there is the big or else included in that!).

Don't forget China is a regional power, but considers itself "middle earth" when it comes to any Asian, NE Asian politics.  Thus it will always react to what it considers its national and strategic interests.  The question is what should we do about it, if anything?

 

[Pikache]

IMHO, first China definitely wouldn't "shoot its bolt" with 700 missiles, nor would it be a simple matter of any coalition "counterattacking" and pushing China out of one of its provinces. This is a message to Taiwan, the US and Japan in no uncertain terms, thus "putting the ball in their court" so to speak. Think of it from the Chinese perspective versus ours for a minute, this is a province of theirs that has special status like Hong Kong, Shanghai, etc. I believe the Chinese are saying to Taiwan, accept it, (of course there is the big or else included in that!).

The question is 'Is Taiwan really a mere province of PRC?'

I don't know about you, but I'd rather support a democratic regime than a communist one.

Don't forget China is a regional power, but considers itself "middle earth" when it comes to any Asian, NE Asian politics. Thus it will always react to what it considers its national and strategic interests. The question is what should we do about it, if anything?

Or do we let aggression go unpunished?

However, there is another equation to this problem; what about North Korea? If China does draw US and Japanese involvement, North Korea might just decide to go for broke and invade South Korea.

 

[Sandbag]

We should never let aggression go unpunished IMO, but correct me if I am wrong Canada doesn't recognize Taiwan in the same manner as the US, Japan, Aust?  So, other than issuing condemnations, what do you think our govt would do?

Regarding North Korea, I agree it is definitely a factor, and you come up with a logical conclusion.  It always continues to be a threat to NE Asia stabilization.  So how do you seriously mitigate that threat while trying to assist our southern neighbour in resolving a Taiwan "situation" for lack of a better word?

 

[JBP]

If North Korea entered the fray, I believe we would have a true WW3 on our hands.

I have heard from people who've lived in Taiwan that it's beautiful and deserves it's own independence, which I believe they do. But, if they really want to get pushy and tell China to go suck a d*ck, we seriously better start practicing our marksmanship principles...

Could any of you folks honestly see anyone simply not doing ANYTHING and just watching it happen like we all know what's going on in Africa? I doubt the world would stand for it. And let's imagine one step further, not only a pseudo China-North Korean alliance, but Russia joins in also. What do we have then?

A sh*tstorm!!!

IMHO that is...

:-\

 

[291er]

Definitely better work on your principles of marksmanship if we get sent to repel the Red Chinese.....with an Army/Navy/Air Force of an est. 100 million, and approx 150 million in reserve, we may be a bit outnumbered.  Let's see, around 50,000 in the CF...that equates to a ratio of 5000 to 1, so I certainly hope you're a better shot than I.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

I think we should allow continued unfettered access to our markets to these rotten totalitarian pricks so they can use their newfound wealth to expand their armed forces and bully their democratic neighbour.

I find the fact that corporate interests are overriding fundamental principles in this case to be truly pathetic....



Matthew    

P.S.  I intentionally have not bought Chinese products (and yes I check labels) for the last two years because this bugs me so much.

 

[oyaguy]

I think China's latest move, is what the forum suggests, sabre rattling.

Still, if it came to a shooting contest, even the US might have to take a backseat.

The way the US has financing their budgets, the last few years, could bite them where it hurts when it comes to something like Taiwan, for the reasons the Chinese could precipitate a debt crisis by dumping all the US treasury bonds China has bought to keep their currency low.

I personally think the greatest challenge facing the Chinese {mainlanders}, is there will come a day of reckoning of how the country should be governed. The Chinese aren't blind to democracy. It will be a delicate balancing act for China's leaders, as they want to liberalize the economy, without giving up their powers. Generally the liberalizing of the economy, will lead to the liberalizing of the politics.

One can hope.

 

[Pikache]

I think China's latest move, is what the forum suggests, sabre rattling.

Still, if it came to a shooting contest, even the US might have to take a backseat.

The way the US has financing their budgets, the last few years, could bite them where it hurts when it comes to something like Taiwan, for the reasons the Chinese could precipitate a debt crisis by dumping all the US treasury bonds China has bought to keep their currency low.

And considering how much of US market is tied to China...

I personally think the greatest challenge facing the Chinese {mainlanders}, is there will come a day of reckoning of how the country should be governed. The Chinese aren't blind to democracy. It will be a delicate balancing act for China's leaders, as they want to liberalize the economy, without giving up their powers. Generally the liberalizing of the economy, will lead to the liberalizing of the politics.

One can hope.

Well, the Chinese are pretty good keeping populace quiet.

 

[oyaguy]

Well, the Chinese are pretty good keeping populace quiet.

So far, but China isn't say... a North Korea which doesn't give a damn about nothing. China is trying to modernize and open the dam of capitalism, just a little... hopefully without sweeping away the old power structures, but eventually somethings got to give. Rarely does democracy come before capitalism {successfully mind you}, but democracy almost always, comes after capitalism.

I honestly think something like Tianamen Square will happen again, and again and again, and eventually it will take down the government. This could happen tomorrow, ten years from now, or another 20 years from now. This is assuming the Chinese government doesn't do anything to liberalize the government.

{

And considering how much of US market is tied to China...

Actually that is a mark against China. China is running up the trade surpluses against the US. So if trade just dried up... it would mean MacDonalds would have to look elsewhere for their happy meal toys, and China would have a hole in their budget with no real means of fixing it. A lot of the goods the Chinese export aren't exactly necessary, and can be gotten elsewhere.

 

[daniel h.]

Short answer: it depends.

China could launch a gigantic attack under a wave of up to 700 medium range missiles, which would overwhelm the immediate defenses, but also shoot China's bolt. China would have to be very confident of a political or military environment which would preclude outside intervention.

The coalition of the willing would most likely be the United States and Japan, with other interested nations ranging from India to Australia, depending on how they see the Chinese threat. If China shoots its bolt, the coalition forces will basically counterattack and push the Chinese out. If China tries to maintain a reserve, the Tiawanese will have the ability to keep fighting as well. Either way it would be very messy.

Would Mr Dithers support Tiawan against China? Canada's record against naked agression hasn't been to sterling lately....China also sees Canada as a resource base; buying up oil and mineral rights and seeing us as "hewers of wood and drawers of water" for the 21rst century.

Of course China sees us as that, and doesn't that piss you in the Canadian military off?

I used to think Canadian leaders were just stupid. Then I realized that in a world where many transnational corporations are worth more than some countries, effective democracy was simply not possible.

I looked for a link to prove this and couldn't find it, but apparently American global tobacco company Philip Morris is worth more than the economy of Norway and the economy Saudi Arabia. [really]

How is democracy possible when private, undemocratic companies have more wealth than countries?

 

[daniel h.]

If China is serious about reclaiming Taiwan, which it appears it is - its going to be a LONG road ahead before the western powers, or the coalition, will be able to push the Chinese back.

China is a regional power.   They have the largest army on earth, and the largest air force on earth.   Now, in respect, their air force is still in the process of being modernized, and a majority of their aircraft are still 1960's and 1970's vintage aircraft.   But thats changing rather quickly, as they aquire more and more Russian electronics for their aircraft.

They also have a large brown water navy, that is armed to the teeth.   Sure, the Chinese don't have much in the name of blue water capability, but they don't need it.   They have a powerful brown water navy, that is more than capable of handling anything in the Taiwan Straight.   Their submarines, fast attack craft, and capital vessels are more than plenty enough to secure their objectives - and their missile arsenals could devastate Taiwan's defenses before Taiwan even has a chance to mobilize them.

Bottom line, China could secure Taiwan militarily rather quickly.   Once that is accomplished, its going to take an aweful lot of thick military muscle to push them back.   The United States is already spread thin with their occupation of Iraq, which means they won't be able to do much unless its primarily naval activity.   It'll be messy, any way you look at it.

Are sheer numbers enough to overcome the lack of individual expense on training China's soldiers? Are Taiwanese soldiers any better? I'll still take the Canadian army down 5000-1 versus a bunch of Ak-47s which could hit everything----or nothing. ;D