• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread

China to build high-speed rail lines...in California?

New York Times link

BEIJING — Nearly 150 years after American railroads brought in thousands of Chinese laborers to build rail lines across the West, China is poised once again to play a role in American rail construction. But this time, it would be an entirely different role: supplying the technology, equipment and engineers to build high-speed rail lines.

Chinese government has signed cooperation agreements with the State of California and General Electric to help build such lines.
The agreements, both of which are preliminary, show China’s desire to become a big exporter and licensor of bullet trains traveling 215 miles an hour, an environmentally friendly technology in which China has raced past the United States in the last few years.

“We are the most advanced in many fields, and we are willing to share with the United States,” Zheng Jian, the chief planner and director of high-speed rail at China’s railway ministry, said.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California has closely followed progress in the discussions with China and hopes to come here later this year for talks with rail ministry officials, said David Crane, the governor’s special adviser for jobs and economic growth, and a board member of the California High Speed Rail Authority.

China is offering not just to build a railroad in California but also to help finance its construction, and Chinese officials have already been shuttling between Beijing and Sacramento to make presentations, Mr. Crane said in a telephone interview.

China is not the only country interested in selling high-speed rail equipment to the United States. Japan, Germany, South Korea, Spain, France and Italy have also approached California’s High Speed Rail Authority.

The agency has made no decisions on whose technology to choose. But Mr. Crane said that there were no apparent weaknesses in the Chinese offer, and that Governor Schwarzenegger particularly wanted to visit China this year for high-speed rail discussions.

Even if an agreement is reached for China to build and help bankroll a high-speed rail system in California, considerable obstacles would remain.

China’s rail ministry would face independent labor unions and democratically elected politicians, neither of which it has to deal with at home. The United States also has labor and immigration laws stricter than those in China.

In a nearly two-hour interview at the rail ministry’s monolithic headquarters here, Mr. Zheng said repeatedly that any Chinese bid would comply with all American laws and regulations.
(...)
 
The RoCN/the Taiwan Navy/Guo Min Hai Jun have unveiled a new planned missile corvette:

Defense News link

Taiwan Displays Plans For Missile-Carrying Corvette
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 12 Apr 2010 07:03 

TAIPEI, Taiwan - Taiwan has unveiled the first images of a high-tech missile corvette specifically designed to counter the threat of China acquiring an aircraft carrier, officials and media said April 12.

A computerized graphic of the 1,000-ton "carrier killer," which has so far been kept secret from the public, has gone on display at Taipei's military museum, run by the defense ministry.

The vessel will be capable of cruising at speeds of up to 34 miles (55 kilometers) per hour and boast technologies helping it to evade radar detection, the Taipei-based Apple Daily reported, citing military officials.

The Taiwanese Navy hopes to arm the corvette with Taiwan's home-grown Hsiungfeng III supersonic ship-to-ship missile, according to the report.

The military museum did not provide any details, while the defense ministry declined to comment on the report.

The report came after the head of Taiwan's National Security Bureau, Tsai Teh-sheng, told parliament in November that China has started building its first aircraft carrier.

Taiwanese military analysts expect China to need at least 10 years to build its first operating carrier group complete with carrier-based fighters and other warships.


But they warn that once the Chinese arms build-up is completed, it will have a far-reaching strategic impact on the region.

Ties between China and Taiwan have improved markedly since China-friendly Ma Ying-jeou became the island's president in 2008, vowing to adopt a non-confrontational policy toward the mainland. But China still regards Taiwan as part of its territory awaiting reunification, by force if necessary.
 
Maybe the real reason Google decided to pull up stakes in China:

http://thesecretsofvancouver.com/wordpress/so-what-would-happen-if-china-cracked-google/tech-goodies?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DiscoveringTheSecretsOfVancouver+%28Discovering+The+Secrets+Of+Vancouver%29

So What Would Happen If China Cracked Google?
April 19th, 2010 Posted in Tech Goodies

Wondering just how badly Google has been compromised? And if I should be worried as a user of a ton of Google apps.

Always more to the story …

… losses included one of Google’s crown jewels, a password system that controls access by millions of users worldwide to almost all of the company’s web services, including e-mail and business applications.

The program, code named Gaia for the Greek goddess of the earth, was attacked in a lightning raid taking less than two days last December, the person said. Described publicly only once at a technical conference four years ago, the software is intended to enable users and employees to sign in with their password just once to operate a range of services.

The intruders do not appear to have stolen passwords of Gmail users, and the company quickly started making significant changes to the security of its networks after the intrusions. But the theft leaves open the possibility, however faint, that the intruders may find weaknesses that Google might not even be aware of, independent computer experts said.

The new details seem likely to increase the debate about the security and privacy of vast computing systems such as Google’s that now centralize the personal information of millions of individuals and businesses. Because vast amounts of digital information are stored in one place, a single breach can lead to disastrous losses.

The theft began with a single instant message sent to a Google employee in China, according to the person with knowledge of the inquiry, who spoke on the condition he not be identified. By clicking on a link and connecting to a “poisoned” Web site, the employee inadvertently permitted the intruders to gain access to his (or her) personal computer and then to the computers of a critical group of software developers at Google’s headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. Ultimately, the intruders were able to gain control of a software repository used by the development team.

The details surrounding the theft of the software have been a closely guarded secret by the company. Google first publicly disclosed the theft in a Jan. 12 posting on the company’s Web site, which stated that the company was changing its policy toward China in the wake of the theft of unidentified “intellectual property” and the apparent compromise of the e-mail accounts of two human rights activists.

Rest here.

What’s interesting is that this morning there were a rash of stories on US web security. Here’s a sample of the warning.
 
China Prepares for CIDEX 2010
By WENDELL MINNICK
Published: 23 Apr 2010 08:23 

The China International Defence Electronics Exhibition (CIDEX 2010) is set for May 12-14 at the Beijing Exhibition Center.

Organized by the China National Electronics Import and Export Corp. (CEIEC), CETC International Co., and Beijing Xinlong Electronics Technology Co., CIDEX is the "most professional and authoritative defense electronics exhibition in China, covering both military and civilian applications," show organizers said.

Sponsored by the General Equipment Headquarters of the People's Liberation Army, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, and China Electronics Corp., CIDEX 2010 is expected to break previous records in attendance with more than 300 exhibitors from 13 countries and 20,000 visitors expected this year.

"Promoting informationization of China's army will be the core task of the construction of Chinese army in the next five years," show officials said. Therefore investments in equipment for China's military have been rising steadily each year.

"In this context, foreign manufactures and companies specialized in defense electronics are planning to enter the Chinese market and enhance … influence in China through certain channels."

The 3rd International Forum on Applications of Testing and Instruments will also be held during the exhibition, with several sessions touching on the latest advancements in equipment and systems. The forum will be held at the Beijing Hotel, and is organized and sponsored by CEIEC and Electronics World magazine.

Speakers will include Lin Jinghan, product manager, Measurement and Automation Business Unit, Taiwan-based ADLINK Technology; Wei Dong, product engineer German-based Rohde and Schwarz China; Ji Weidong, global marketing director, Beijing Rigol Electronic Technology Co.; Li Hailong, New York-based LeCroy Corp.; Su Jin, senior customer support manager, U.S.-based Tektronix Technology (China) Co.; Xu Yun, technical marketing engineer, Texas-based National Instruments; and Gao Ning, director, Information Products Division, Beijing Aerospace Control Technology Development Co.

Wei will talk about microwave signal analysis and measurement technology, Lin will give a paper on ADLINK's high performance PXI platform for military testing, and Li will discuss high-speed signal receiver jitter tolerance test solutions.
 
China's Navy Gets Its Act Together, and Gets Aggressive

Abe Denmark directs the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the Center for a New American Security. This is his first post for Danger Room.

China's decades-long military modernization effort is paying off. After assembling a revamped arsenal of new ships, subs, planes, and missiles, the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is showing that they can use all those assets together, in an operation far from its shores. This display of improved military capabilities have occurred in conjunction with messages to the U.S. indicating a more aggressive approach from Beijing on China's claims over disputed waters of the South China Seas. The United States must respond to this emerging challenge with a responsible approach that keeps tensions low while sending a clear message to Beijing that the U.S. will not accept China's efforts to unilaterally control Southeast Asia's maritime commons.

The South China Morning Post recently reported that destroyers, frigates, and auxiliary ships from the North Sea Fleet (based in Qingdao) passed through the Bashi Strait between the Philippines and Taiwan to conduct a major confrontation exercise in the South China Sea. A few days later, Sovremenny guided missile destroyers, frigates, and submarines from the East Sea Fleet (based in Ningbo) passed through Japan's Miyako Strait without warning Tokyo and conducted anti-submarine warfare exercises in the Pacific waters southeast of Japan. There have also been reports of naval aviators from several bases in the Nanjing and Guangzhou military regions conducting long-range exercises that incorporated radar jamming, night flying, mid-air refueling, and simulated bombing runs in the South China Sea.

While provocative in their own right, these exercises are a sign that China's Navy has taken a major step forward. The SCMP article quotes an unnamed Asian defense attach¨ We've never seen anything on this scale before - they are finally showing us they can put it all together.

The implications of putting it all together are significant. The U.S. military's ability to dominate the skies over any battlefield is not just due to its technological superiority, but its ability to incorporate capabilities together to support one another. Anti-submarine warfare and mid-air refueling are very difficult and complex operations to undertake, requiring good technology, effective command and control, and highly skilled operators. China's ability to conduct these operations demonstrates a significantly increased prowess in complex military operations.


These exercises are also notable for their location and their timing. By transiting the Miyako Strait and operating in highly contested waters, China is sending a signal to the region that it is developing the ability to back up its territorial sea claims with more than just rhetoric. These exercises were conducted a few weeks after Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg and NSC Senior Director for Asia Jeff Bader visited Beijing. As reported by the New York Times, they were told that the South China Sea is a core interest for the PRC. This is an important phrase for Beijing ¨C it raises the South China Sea to the same level of significance as Taiwan and Tibet ¨C and suggests a newly aggressive and provocative approach.

China has long claimed that the South China Sea is within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and that the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) forces foreign militaries to seek permission from Beijing before they can transit through. Of course, xix other countries in the region also claim all or part of the South China Seas. So the United States has long identified EEZs as international waters through which military vessels can freely pass. We do not favor one claim, or one claimant country, over another. We urged then, as we do today, the maintenance of a calm and non-assertive environment in which contending claims may be discussed and, if possible, resolved, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates noted in a 2008 speech, All of us in Asia must ensure that our actions are not seen as pressure tactics, even when they coexist beside outward displays of cooperation.

By labeling the South China Sea as a core interest and conducting these exercises just days later, China has issued its reply: China will aggressively back its claims with a robust military capability.

The other, more implicit, message from Beijing could not be more stark: China's military is growing more capable, and the PLA Navy is now at the vanguard of China's military modernization effort. By acquiring advanced military technologies and developing the ability to conduct complex operations far from shore, China is changing military balances throughout the region with implications far beyond a Taiwan-related scenario.


The U.S. and China have been in a similar position before. The 2001 collision between a Chinese jet and an American EP-3E in international airspace over the South China Sea caused a significant downturn in U.S.-China relations. Disturbingly, aggressive Chinese behavior toward American naval assets in the South China Seas in recent years, as happened in 2009 with the USS Impeccable, suggest that a naval EP-3 incident is a distinct possibility in the future.

While the U.S. has been adjusting its posture in the Asia-Pacific region to account for China's military modernization, it must recognize that there is a political dynamic at play that should not be ignored. The South China Sea and the adjacent littoral waters off the coasts of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore will be the most strategically significant waterways of the 21st century. Already, 80 percent of China's oil imports flow through the Strait of Malacca, and Japan and Korea are similarly dependent on access to those waters.
The United States should continue to pursue the calm and non-assertive approach described by Secretary Gates at Shangri-La, and has been doing so through the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) dialogue with China. Yet there are two other avenues for the U.S. to ensure those important waterways remain open.
First, the U.S. should ratify the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which defines Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) as international waterways through which warships may make innocent passage. While the U.S. has long operated within its dictates, ratifying UNCLOS would add the weight of international law to American objections to claims of sovereignty over international waters.

Second, the U.S. should adhere to the Law of Gross Tonnage, and regularly conduct freedom of navigation exercises through the South China Sea to ensure its continued openness. Continuing to treat the South China Seas as international waters will prevent habits of deference to Chinese claims from forming. This is not a bellicose or an aggressive approach, but is rather a continuation of long-standing American and international policies towards international waterways.

China's claims of sovereignty over the South China Sea, if left unchallenged, would make Beijing the arbiter of all international maritime traffic that passes through, which the U.S. cannot allow. As we can see from the U.S. Defense Department¡¯s annual reports to Congress on the Chinese military (pdf), China has been developing these capabilities for some time, and there is no sign that its ambitions have yet been satisfied.

Bottom line: this is just the beginning

Read More:
link

Plus a Japanese report detailng the recent transit by several Chinese warships through the Miyako Strait off Okinawa, without informing Japan:

video link
 
Should be interesting to see how the Chinese navy continues to develop .  On another note I have always been amazed on how some countries can develop really large armed forces and others can't or won't what ever there their government decides . 
 
On one of the CCTV (China Central Television) channels, I've noticed a lot of military related shows demonstrating China's new technologies and capabilities to the population. During the credits of one of the shows, it was set-up like a low-budget '80's music video - flashing between black and white to colour to sepia to flourescent highlights on pictures of ships, tanks, aircraft, field exercises, and even politicians in suits. There was even a loud '80's electronic soundtrack to go with it. Another show is a game show that takes different military personnel to compete against each other in different exercises - on the range, driving armoured vehicles through obstacle courses, etc. I asked someone at work and they said it was only for bragging rights and the participants didn't actually win anything on the show. They mentioned they have seen more and more of these types of shows lately also.
 
Taiwan continues to prepare for this scenario even if cross-strait relations have been more conciliatory under Taiwan's current President Ma Ying Jieou.

link

Taiwan Exercise Focuses on Possible China Assault
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 27 Apr 2010 05:49
HUALIEN, Taiwan - Taiwan's military has lifted the veil on how it would respond to a massive Chinese air attack, showing that the island still takes the risk of war very seriously despite improving ties.

On April 27, journalists were invited for the first time to a drill simulating aerial assaults on Taiwan's major air bases and testing the military's ability to recover quickly from such a shock.

The maneuvers, staged at a military air base near Hualien city in eastern Taiwan, played out a scenario in which runways were bombed by waves of bombers or missiles from the mainland.

"The drill is aimed to test our ability to repair runways as soon as possible so that fighter jets can take off should the air base be attacked," Taiwanese air force spokesman Lt. Gen. Pan Kung-hsiao said.

The exercise involved hundreds of troops, some operating heavy engineering equipment such as bulldozers, hydraulic shovels and bomb disposal engines.

Pilots and logistic supply staff also demonstrated emergency procedures for four French-made Mirage fighter jets, which were ready for take-off six minutes after being scrambled.

Military analysts say any Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be preceded by saturation air bombardment meant to wipe out civilian and military airports and key government facilities, and paralyze transportation systems
.

The exercise came after a Chinese flotilla, including two submarines and eight other ships, conducted drills in the East China Sea near Okinawa and then moved to the Pacific Ocean, according to Japanese media.
The appearance of the Chinese fleet - the largest assembly of Chinese warships ever spotted in the region, according to Japan's defence ministry - has triggered alarms in Taiwan.

Taiwan's Deputy Defense Minister Chao Shih-chang warned in parliament April 26 the operation indicated China was now able to bypass the island's fortified west and attack the island from the east.

Ties between Taipei and Beijing have improved markedly since Ma Ying-jeou of the China-friendly Kuomintang party came to power in 2008, pledging to boost trade links and allowing in more Chinese tourists. But Beijing still maintains it could use force against the island.
 
 
A major scandal emerges, revolving around Taiwan's purchase of the 6 Lafayette-derived Kang Ding Class Frigates back in 1991, IIRC.

Defense Industry Daily website

Taiwan’s Frigate Corruption Investigation: Full Steam Ahead
05-May-2010 19:47 EDT

In 1991, Taiwan’s $2.8 billion buy of 6 Kang Ding Class multi-role stealth frigates from France, purchased the navy’s current high-end surface combatants. These ships are derivative of the Lafayette Class, which has been used as the base platform for several nations’ frigate designs – but they have critical weaknesses due to technologies not transferred to Taiwan.

That’s not the only weakness associated with this purchase. A major bribery scandal involving hundreds of millions of dollars has percolated for several years – and is also associated with a murder. It’s now associated with a court ruling that could reach $861 million, including almost $240 million in repayments from Thales itself…

(...)

Business Week link


Taiwan Seeks $861 Million From Thales Warship Dispute (Update1)
May 05, 2010, 4:06 AM EDT
By Yu-huay Sun

May 5 (Bloomberg) -- Taiwan is seeking $861 million from Thales SA, after an international arbitration court ruled in favor of the island in a dispute over a warship purchase, Martin Yu, a defense ministry spokesman, said by phone today.

Thales, a French defense contractor, said May 3 it has been told to pay 630 million euros ($818 million) over an “alleged breach of the terms pertaining to the use of intermediaries” relating to a contract to supply six frigates to Taiwan. Yu said Taiwan added related costs to the arbitration court’s award.

Thales will “initiate all available proceedings and actions against this award,” the company said. In a May 3 statement Thales said it “disputes the very grounds of this decision.”

Taiwan’s government signed a contract with Thomson-CSF SA, now called Thales, in 1991 for the frigates, according to the Web site of the Ministry of National Defense in Taipei. The agreement banned payments of commissions to intermediaries, which Thales violated, according to the ministry.

--Editors: Dirk Beveridge, Stan James



 
 
Reuters link

CALGARY, Alberta (Reuters) - Penn West Energy Trust will sell a 45 percent stake in a planned oil sands project to China Investment Corp for C$817 million ($805 million), the latest in a series of Canadian companies turning to China for cash to develop the massive resource.


Canada's No. 2 energy trust, said on Thursday it will contribute oil sands properties near Peace River, Alberta, valued at C$1.8 billion, into a partnership, while China Investment will provide C$312 million in up-front cash and then pay C$505 million in development costs for the project.


CIC will also take a 5 percent stake in Penn West, agreeing to acquire 23.5 million units at C$18.18 each, raising C$435 million for the trust.


The agreement is the latest Chinese foray into Canada's oil sands, the largest oil reserves outside the Middle East, as the world's third largest economy looks to lock up energy sources to power its booming growth.


Just last month, Sinopec Group agreed to pay $4.65 billion for a 9.03 percent stake in Canada's largest oil sands project, Syncrude Canada Ltd.


For Penn West, the deal gives it the financial heft to build an oil sands project that it wouldn't otherwise have developed.



"As an income trust, there's no way, when you pay out half you cash to investors, that you could get that thing up and running," said Jason Fleury, a spokesman for Penn West. "We viewed these assets as having huge potential but had great capital requirements."


Penn West's oil sands asset range over 237,000 acres. The company did not say how much bitumen, a tarry form of oil, the properties contain, saying only that the resource holds significant resources.


"They were looking for options for their oil sands properties but didn't have any immediate development plans," said Kyle Preston, an analyst with Canaccord Genuity. "But I don't think they had the capital or capacity to focus on it themselves."


Preston added: "Overall this is a brilliant transaction. They get a ton of cash up front and get to move forward with development."


The properties are currently producing 2,700 barrels of oil equivalent a day but Fleury said they will need a large-scale commercial pilot project.


The development will use thermal technology to produce the reserves, where steam is pumped into the ground to liquefy the bitumen so it can flow to the surface.



Penn West had been talking to CIC for about 11 months before announcing the agreement.


The deal is the state-owned sovereign wealth fund's second big investment in Canada. Last year it took a 17.2 percent stake in mining firm Teck Resources .


The closing of the financing and formation of the joint venture is expected by June 1.


Units of Calgary, Alberta-based Penn West rose 83 Canadian cents, or 4.3 percent, to C$20.28 by midday on the Toronto Stock Exchange.


($1=$1.01 Canadian)
 
Hong Kong voters push for more democracy in their current "one-country, two systems" arrangement:

Canadian Press link

1 hour, 12 minutes ago


By Min Lee, The Associated Press

HONG KONG - Hong Kongers voted Sunday in territory-wide special elections triggered by five opposition legislators who resigned in the hopes of pressuring Beijing to implement full democracy in this former British colony.


The five former lawmakers, who represent each of Hong Kong's five major electoral districts, quit in January with the intention of setting up a showdown against pro-Beijing candidates that will serve as a de facto referendum on democracy.


While Hong Kong has continued to enjoy Western-style civil liberties under Chinese rule, its top leader is picked by a committee stacked with Beijing loyalists and its 60-member legislature is half-elected, half chosen by interest groups.


Beijing has condemned the democracy activists' campaign and Hong Kong's leading pro-China political parties announced a boycott.


With the five ex-legislators likely to win re-election overwhelmingly against a smattering of unknown candidates, political analysts question if the campaign will influence the Chinese government. Still, the democracy activists have pressed ahead, arguing that a strong turnout on Sunday will pressure Beijing.


The five candidates made a last-minute appeal for votes on Sunday, canvassing restaurants where locals were enjoying...

(...)
 
All totalitarian governments face two related problems:

1. The 'people' want to participate in validating their government. Even in very conservative democracies, like Japan and Singapore, where a change in "ruling party" is extraordinarily rare* the electoral process provides a social safety valve that allows people to reaffirm their 'consent' to be governed; and

2. It is hard to determine what people are thinking or wanting - the larger and more diverse the country the worse the problem. Thus, in Singapore, which is a fairly homogeneous, small city state with a very free press, etc, it is fairly easy to "take the pulse" of the nation. In China, which is huge and diverse (there are, really, about five or six "Chinas" - the rich, sophisticated east Coast, the coexisting poor, struggling East Coast, the developing central provinces, Xinjiang and Tibet and so on) , the problem of "taking the pulse" is frighteningly complex.

Elections help with both problems and the Chinese are allowing encouraging what appear to be free and fair elections in villages, rural areas and small towns. Hong Kong and Singapore are much envied by many people in e.g. Shanghai - not for their wealth or sophistication any more, Shanghai is just as rich, sophisticated and modern - but for the lack of corruption, which puts real, measurable money in almost everyone's pockets and for the 'openness' of the society and the government. The old men in Beijing are having to listen; it's not clear that they "hear" yet but I think they are listening.

Is China likely to become a democracy any time soon? No. Is Hong Kong likely to become more and more democratic? Yes.


----------
* Note that Taiwan is the exception that proves the rule, a very conservative society with hihgly polarized politics
 
I have seen speculation about this over the years, but I can't say that this definitively proves the story or not:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/7720461/USSR-planned-nuclear-attack-on-China-in-1969.html

USSR planned nuclear attack on China in 1969

The Soviet Union was on the brink of launching a nuclear attack against China in 1969 and only backed down after the US told Moscow such a move would start World War Three, according to a Chinese historian.

Andrew Osborn in Moscow and Peter Foster in Beijing
Published: 6:09PM BST 13 May 2010

USSR planned nuclear attack on China in 1969

The extraordinary assertion, made in a publication sanctioned by China's ruling Communist Party, suggests that the world came perilously close to nuclear war just seven years after the Cuban missile crisis.

Liu Chenshan, the author of a series of articles that chronicle the five times China has faced a nuclear threat since 1949, wrote that the most serious threat came in 1969 at the height of a bitter border dispute between Moscow and Beijing that left more than one thousand people dead on both sides.

He said Soviet diplomats warned Washington of Moscow's plans "to wipe out the Chinese threat and get rid of this modern adventurer," with a nuclear strike, asking the US to remain neutral.

But, he says, Washington told Moscow the United States would not stand idly by but launch its own nuclear attack against the Soviet Union if it attacked China, loosing nuclear missiles at 130 Soviet cities. The threat worked, he added, and made Moscow think twice, while forcing the two countries to regulate their border dispute at the negotiating table.

He quotes Soviet ministers and diplomats at the time to bolster his claim.

On 15 October 1969, he quotes Soviet premier Alexei Kosygin as telling Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev that Washington has drawn up "detailed plans" for a nuclear war against the USSR if it attacked China.

"[The United States] has clearly indicated that China's interests are closely related to theirs and they have mapped out detailed plans for nuclear war against us," Kosygin is said to have told Brezhnev.

That same day he says Anatoly Dobrynin, the Soviet ambassador to Washington, told Brezhnev something similar after consultations with US diplomats. "If China suffers a nuclear attack, they (the Americans) will deem it as the start of the third world war," Dobrynin said. "The Americans have betrayed us."

The historian claims that Washington saw the USSR as a greater threat than China and wanted a strong China to counter-balance Soviet power. Then US President Richard Nixon was also apparently fearful of the effect of a nuclear war on 250,000 US troops stationed in the Asia-Pacific region and still smarting from a Soviet refusal five years earlier to stage a joint attack on China's nascent nuclear programme.

The claims are likely to stir debate about a period of modern history that remains mired in controversy.

Mr Liu, the author, admits his version of history is likely to be contested by rival scholars. It is unclear whether he had access to special state archives but the fact that his articles appeared in such an official publication in a country where the media is so tightly controlled is being interpreted by some as a sign that he did have special access.
 
There are "underground cities" in Beijing, Shanghai and other major Chinese cities, dug, mainly by hand, throughout the late sixties and seventies and even into the eighties. University, high school and even elementary school students all took 'shifts' digging the tunnels, along with workers and senior citizens. I have no idea how well grounded the fear was, but it, the fear, was real.

The Chinese believed, then, that they could survive a Russian nuclear attack and then rise up from the smouldering ruins and meet and defeat the Russian barbarians. They feel the same about the American barbarians today.
 
Manufacturing.Net - May 17, 2010

BEIJING (Kyodo) -- China's Air Force has refused to accept 16 J-11B fighters manufactured by a domestic aircraft maker due to technical problems, the Kanwa Defense Review magazine said in its June issue, quoting a Western intelligence source in Beijing.

China is believed to have developed the new fighter based on technology from the Russian fighter Sukhoi Su-27, sparking speculation that the maker, Shenyang Aircraft Corp., may have failed to employ Russian technology accurately.

Shenyang Aircraft, based in Liaoning Province, manufactured 16 J-11B fighters in 2009.

"When the Air Force was checking them up for delivery, J-11B had abnormal vibration after taking off," the magazine quoted the source as saying. "As a result, the Air Force refused to accept the aircraft."

A Chinese military source said the J-11B was not chosen for exhibition at the National Day military parade in October last year due to doubts over technical feature of the fighter, according to the magazine.

Manufacturing.net link

Plus:

Taiwan inagurates a "stealth" missile patrol boat squadron:

Channel News Asia link
 
CNN link


American made ... Chinese owned


By Sheridan Prasso, contributing editor

May 7, 2010: 9:35 AM ET


(Fortune) -- About a mile past the Bountiful Blessings Church on the outskirts of Spartanburg, S.C., make a right turn. There, tucked into an industrial court behind a row of sapling cherry trees not much taller than I am, past a company that makes rubber stamps and another that stitches logos onto caps and bags, is a brand-new factory: the state-of-the-art American Yuncheng Gravure Cylinder plant. Due to open any day now, it will make cylinders used to print labels like the ones around plastic soda bottles. But unlike its neighbors in Spartanburg, Yuncheng is a Chinese company. It has come to South Carolina because by Chinese standards, America is darn cheap.

Yes, you read that right. The land Yuncheng purchased in Spartanburg, at $350,000 for 6.5 acres, cost one-fourth the price of land back in Shanghai or Dongguan, a gritty city near Hong Kong where the company already runs three plants. Electricity is cheaper too: Yungcheng pays up to 14¢ per kilowatt-hour in China at peak usage, and just 4¢ in South Carolina. And no brownouts either, a sporadic problem in China. It's true that American workers are much more expensive, of course, and the overall cost of making a widget in China remains lower, and perhaps always will.


But for hundreds of Chinese companies like Yuncheng, the U.S. has become a better, less expensive place to set up shop. It could be the biggest role reversal since, well ... when Nixon went to China. "The gap between manufacturing costs in the U.S. and China is shrinking," explains John Ling, a naturalized American from China who runs the South Carolina Department of Commerce's business recruitment office in Shanghai. Ling recruited Yuncheng to Spartanburg, and others too: Chinese companies have invested $280 million and created more than 1,200 jobs in South Carolina alone.

Today some 33 American states, ports, and municipalities have sent representatives like Ling to China to lure jobs once lost to China back to the U.S.
: Besides affordable land and reliable power, states and cities are offering tax credits and other incentives to woo Chinese manufacturers. Beijing, meanwhile, which has mandated that Chinese companies globalize by expanding to key markets around the world, is chipping in by offering to finance up to 30% of the initial investment costs, according to Chinese business sources.

What would Henry Luce think?

The enticements are working. Chinese companies announced new direct investments in the U.S. of close to $5 billion in 2009 alone, according to New York City-based economic consultancy the Rhodium Group, which tallied the numbers for Fortune. That's well below Japanese investment in the U.S., which peaked at $148 billion in 1991, but a big jump from China's previous investments, which had been averaging around $500 million a year. Chinese firms last year acquired or announced they were starting more than 50 U.S. companies. And when China finally allows the value of its currency, the yuan, to appreciate -- and it's just a question of when -- Americans can expect to see Chinese projects, small today, really take off and have an impact on the U.S. economy. This could be a good thing for relations between the two countries. "It will take many years to balance out the flow of U.S. investment into China," says Dan Rosen, a principal at the Rhodium Group. But, he says, China's aggressive interest in U.S. investment suddenly gives Washington some leverage as it seeks to negotiate with Beijing on tariffs, trade issues, and economic policy.
None of that matters much in Spartanburg. Skilled workers at American Yuncheng will earn $25 to $30 an hour, line operators $10 to $12. That's a lot more than the $2 an hour that unskilled labor costs in China, but the company can qualify for a state payroll tax credit of $1,500 per worker (for any company creating more than 10 jobs). And by being closer to companies like Coca-Cola, Yuncheng can respond more quickly when they need new labels designed to show that a product has reduced its fat content or added more flavor. If business goes well, company president Li Wenchun expects to double the size of his operation, maybe in five to 10 years, and employ up to 120 Americans. "I'd like it to be next month, but it depends on how fast we develop the market here," he tells me through a Mandarin interpreter.

So far there's little sign of anti-Chinese sentiment among South Carolinians, who watched their state lose its cotton-based textile-manufacturing industry to low-cost countries like China. Fortune asked Sen. Jim DeMint, a Republican torchbearer for conservative causes, what he thinks of communists creating work in his home state. "South Carolina is one of the best places in the world to do business, and that's why so many international companies are moving jobs into our state" is his only reply.

Brenda Missouri, a 43-year-old leaks tester who works for appliance maker Haier, speaks about her employer in glowing terms. Haier was the first Chinese company to build a factory in the U.S. -- a refrigerator plant in Camden, S.C., in 2000. "They're good business folks; they get the job done," she says. As for communism? "Doesn't matter," she shrugs. "It's money that makes the difference."

Chinese companies, American workers

Last December the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations dispatched me to Corpus Christi to give a speech about the Chinese and their economy. Why? Because, they told me, the region is about to become home to the largest-ever Chinese-built factory in the U.S., a $1 billion plant by Tianjin Pipe Group to manufacture seamless pipe for oil drilling. If everything proceeds as planned -- the company received its air-quality permit on April 14 and hopes to break ground by fall -- Tianjin Pipe expects to employ 600 Texans by 2012 and to provide an estimated $2.7 billion to the local economy over the next decade. Corpus Christians, it turned out, wanted to know more about their new neighbors who are expected to relocate 40 to 50 families to Texas.

Upon arrival, I find it impossible not to notice the resemblance of Corpus Christi's long, curving coastline on the Gulf of Mexico to the one near Tianjin on the Bohai Sea between northern China and Korea. Some 75 U.S. locales competed for the factory, but when Chinese delegations from Tianjin Pipe visited Corpus Christi, the townspeople made them feel at home by welcoming the visitors to backyard barbecues. They even enlisted the Taiwan-born former owner of the local Chinese restaurant, Yalee Shih -- perhaps the only woman in town who could speak Mandarin -- to help them navigate cultural nuances. Shih, who also sits on the board of the Texas State Museum of Asian Cultures, delicately helped prevent a multimillion-dollar translation error over building costs that might have cost Corpus Christi the project, and also quashed what would have been an impolitic gift of clocks -- which to the Chinese symbolize death or the end of a relationship -- from a local retailer. She and others in the region's business community plan to help guide their new residents through life in America, like how to buy a car, how to rent a house, as well as where to go to buy fragrant rice instead of Uncle Ben's.

In the end, while feeling at home helps, it does come down to business, says J.J. Johnston, executive vice president and chief business development officer of the Corpus Christi Regional Economic Development Corp. "They like the strategic location of our region, the convenient access to materials coming in -- mostly scrap metal and pig iron -- and the ability to export to North and South America through the port of Corpus Christi," he says.

There are other incentives. On April 9 the U.S. Commerce Department imposed import duties of up to 99% on the type of seamless pipe that is to be manufactured by Tianjin Pipe -- a reprisal prompted by the United Steelworkers union. The Chinese company, the world's largest maker of steel pipe, had said it could not afford to export to the U.S. if tariffs were over 20%. Now its pipe will be made in America. "It's just another reason they have to have a U.S.-based production facility," says Johnston.
Even without tariffs, Tianjin had been looking to expand -- as are many Chinese companies once they reach about $100 million in annual sales. "Chinese companies, as they get bigger, have to start thinking about their global positioning," says Clarence Kwan, who runs the Chinese Services Group at Deloitte, which advises Chinese companies on doing business in the U.S. Officially the Chinese government has given approval to over 1,200 Chinese investments in the U.S., but that number is considered low because it doesn't count those made via Hong Kong -- where many Chinese companies earn equity capital from being publicly traded -- or tax havens like the Virgin Islands, where Chinese investment may stop first before flowing to the U.S. Plus, investments below $100 million don't need Beijing's nod and may be approved at the local level.

Chinese companies see America as more than a manufacturing center. So far this year they have announced plans to build a wind-energy turbine plant and wind farm in Nevada that will create 1,000 American jobs; purchased the 400-employee Los Angeles Marriott Downtown out of foreclosure; and acquired a shuttered shopping center in Milwaukee, with plans to turn it into a mega-mall for 200 Chinese retailers. In some cases Chinese companies are resuscitating American outfits that had been left for dead. About 70 miles west of Spartanburg, near the Georgia border, past signs reading "24-hour fried chicken," another Chinese company is hiring engineers -- metallurgical and mechanical, some from nearby Clemson University. In June 2009, Top-Eastern Group, a tool manufacturer based in China's coastal city of Dalian, acquired a factory here along with three other facilities from Kennametal, one of America's largest machine-tool makers, after the U.S. company, based in Latrobe, Pa., reported a $137 million loss (citing a slowdown in industrial activity) in the quarter before the sale.


China: scapegoat or threat
This plant, in Seneca, S.C., makes drill bits. And in the months since his purchase of it for $29 million, Top-Eastern founder Jeff Chee has invested another $10 million to upgrade machinery, built a $3 million logistics center, brought back Kennametal's furloughed workers, hired 120 more, and now has his 260-employee plant working overtime filling orders for the Cleveland Twist Drills, Chicago Latrobe, Putnam, and Bassett brands he acquired. He brought back the company's old name, which was Greenfield Industries before Kennametal acquired it in 1997, and emblazoned it on a sign out front.

General Electric's former CEO , Jack Welch, he volunteers, is his inspiration. "I've read a lot of books, and I learned a lot from him," Chee says in broken English amid the sharp smell of grinding steel. "One person can change a lot." As one of China's self-made entrepreneurs, who started Top-Eastern in 1994 with just $500, Chee now has worldwide sales of more than $120 million, 4,000 employees, and factories in Germany and Brazil. He visits the South Carolina plant monthly to make sure all is proceeding as planned, and employs American managers to run it in his absence rather than bring over Chinese. "There's good, experienced people and good know-how already here," he says.

How can he make a drill bit factory profitable where Kennametal had struggled? By increasing productivity with new equipment and cutting costs, he says. Plus, Chee forges his own steel, and he owns the mines back in China for two of its more expensive components, tungsten and molybdenum. The fact that he can source from himself means he keeps the margins -- and now his tools are officially made in the U.S. The cost of making those products is much higher than in China, he says, "but the problem is customers just accept 'made in U.S.A.' products, so I have no choice. Lots of customers here have government contracts that have 'made in U.S.A.' requirements."

And how do the employees feel about having a Chinese entrepreneur come to their rescue? "Just because it's a Chinese owner, they don't really care," says Scott Henderson, a 47-year-old manufacturing manager who had been furloughed one week a month along with his workers before Chee bought the factory. "They're all happy to be working 40 hours a week." They also have the opportunity for overtime, and a third, graveyard shift has been added to serve a nearly 40% rise in orders. "I feel great about it," says Sam Marcengill, a 24-year-old technician at the plant. Last year he was laid off for six months before Chee's purchase gave him his job back. Now he's on overtime, 48 hours a week. "The work's a lot more steady. It's better. Personally I'm a lot better off. It's a great thing."

Never mind the hiccups Chinese companies experienced when they tried to enter the U.S. before. In 2005, Washington famously blocked China's National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOO C) from buying Unocal, and Chinese appliance maker Haier failed to acquire Maytag. Now, like the Japanese in the 1980s -- when U.S. trade frictions combined with Japan's boom blossomed into Honda and Toyota manufacturing plants -- the Chinese are here to stay. Their presence initially made some folks uneasy. A few years ago a caller to The Rush Limbaugh Show complained that as he was driving past the Haier plant in Camden, the Chinese flag was flying higher than the American flag and the South Carolina state flag out front. It was an easy mistake to make by anyone looking at the three equal-height flagpoles from an angle.

Conservative media joined in and called for protests, and the public rang the factory to complain. The Chinese executives at Haier had no idea flags were such a big deal, and it became their bugaboo. The complaints continued until about a year and a half ago when Haier America factory president Joseph Sexton, who was new to the job, decided to fix it. He had two of the poles lowered so that the U.S. flag looks highest from all angles.


It took Haier some time to work through the issues of being a Chinese employer in a small, historic Southern town (pop. 6,682) lined with stately antebellum houses and home to two Revolutionary War battlefields. "Having a Chinese manager didn't work. That's why they took all the Chinese managers out of here," says Haier's human resources director, Gerald Reeves, who was one of the first hired by Haier and guided the Chinese through the realities of American-style personnel management -- including convincing them that they needed to offer health insurance. He once even asked John Ling, South Carolina's man in Shanghai, to fly home from China to talk to a manager who was arousing employee resentment by publicly embarrassing the workers, Chinese-style, for their mistakes.

Now the only way to know you're in a Chinese factory is by looking up at the large Chinese flag hanging from the rafters -- alongside an American one, of course -- and by the very Chinese motivational slogans on the walls: "Spirit of entrepreneurship -- strive for a clearly defined objective and make the impossible possible without an excuse" reads the banner over the refrigerator testing line. And if you come in February, Sexton organizes a Chinese New Year party with food and outdoor firecrackers.

What is perhaps most startling about the Haier factory is that it is actually shipping goods back to China. Best known for its mini-fridges for dorm rooms and studio apartments, Haier's U.S. plant also makes large units, good for supersized American McMansions but too large for a typical Chinese household. Now a growing number of wealthy people in China want to supersize too, so Haier has realized it can ship a small number, maybe 4,000 a year, of its highest-end refrigerators home and sell them for $2,600 apiece -- more than China's average annual income of around $2,000. (Haier also ships U.S.-made refrigerators to India, Australia, Mexico, and Canada.) There aren't enough wealthy customers yet to make it worthwhile retooling any of the 29 Haier factories in China, but the nearby deepwater port in Charleston, S.C., makes export easy enough. "There are folks in China who want high-end products," says Haier America factory president Joseph Sexton. "China is a much different place than people think."

Chinese newcomers would do well to learn from Haier's missteps as well as its great strides. "They're coming with little experience into a highly sophisticated market, and they are bound to make mistakes," says Karl Sauvant, executive director of the Vale Columbia Center on Sustainable International Investment at Columbia University and a law lecturer there, who in February published an edited volume titled Investing in the United States: Is the U.S. Ready for FDI From China?

"This is the thing the Japanese did fairly successfully: You have to be a good corporate citizen, source locally, contribute to causes and charities in the local community, and be familiar with how to navigate the corridors of Washington," says Sauvant. "And in key managerial positions you should have Americans." Legal questions, such as whether Chinese companies operating in America would be subject in U.S. courts to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act for business practices in, say, India or elsewhere have yet to be tested, he says. And then there's the issue of the local sensitivities exhibited in the Haier flag-flying incident.

Unlike Japan, China is no U.S. military ally -- despite President Obama's naming China a "strategic partner," instead of the "strategic competitor" label it had under the Bush administration. Politically it remains a communist country, despite its capitalist economy. There's obviously more to overcome.

Chinese investors say they don't care too much about politics, but hope their entry into the U.S. can be a positive force. "This will definitely help U.S.-China relations," remarks Li, the manager of the print-cylinder factory Yuncheng, as he guides me on a tour. "Increasing communication makes the two sides closer." Even if it doesn't, business is business. "Good products are borderless," he notes. And there's always a Chinese proverb to cite: "It takes 10 years to make a sword," says Li. In other words, keep at it till you get it right, and the outcome will be strong and lasting. And perhaps transform into the plowshare that sows a mutually beneficial harvest for America and China both.
 
Nothing surprising in the last post, except that I've been to "gritty" cities, in America, Asia and Europe and I've been to Dongguan and Dongguan is not "gritty".
 
Another speculative look at the relationship between Russia, China and the United States based on the reported thwarting of a Soviet nuclear attack against China in the 1960's:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/05/china-soviet-and-american-relations.html#more

China Soviet and American Relations During the 1960s and Proposed and Blocked Nuclear Attacks

The UK Telegraph published an article which repeats an assertion that the Soviet Union was on the brink of launching a nuclear attack against China in 1969 and only backed down after the US told Moscow such a move would start World War Three, according to a Chinese historian, Liu Chenshan.

    Liu Chenshan, the author of a series of articles that chronicle the five times China has faced a nuclear threat since 1949, wrote that the most serious threat came in 1969 at the height of a bitter border dispute between Moscow and Beijing that left more than one thousand people dead on both sides. Liu Chenshan writing was in a publication sanctioned by China's ruling Communist Party

Note: Getting a true understanding of the geopolitical events and relationships is important for understanding how relations between Russia, China and the United States are likely to develop in the future. It is also important to understand the actual level of risks for wars of the nuclear and non-nuclear variety.

The Foreign Policy Journal indicates that this is old news and that they believe the memoirs of Richard Nixon’s aide John Haldeman who seems to have first broken the nuclear attack story in his memoirs in 1978.

    Haldeman stated that for years the USSR had been trying to warn the USA not to allow China to become a nuclear power. This claim by Haldeman seems to directly contradict the claim by Liu that Nixon, when responding to the 1969 Soviet request for neutrality, did so not only because he regarded China as a means of containing Russia, but also because he was still “smarting from a Soviet refusal five years earlier to stage a joint attack on China’s nascent nuclear programme.”

    If we place this all into context, I believe that the 1978 Haldeman version is more likely than that of Liu’s present contention. If the USA had asked for support from the USSR to bomb China’s nuclear programme in 1964, this was a year following Sino-Russian border conflicts amounting to 4000 dead. In 1960, there had been 400 clashes; in 1962, 5000. The USSR would have no sentimental, comradely, ideological, diplomatic, or geo-political reasons to oppose such a US proposal and then change her mind five years later and make a similar suggestion to the USA.

    The relationship between China, the USA, and the USSR is quite contrary to how it is generally perceived. A more accurate scenario is that the USA backed Mao and the USSR backed Chiang Kai-shek. Stalin, prior to Mao’s assumption to power, regarded him as a Trotskyite. While Stalin had previously backed Mao as a counter to a Trotskyite coterie in China headed by Prof. Chen Tu-hsiu, Mao’s onetime mentor, by 1938, Mao was being denounced in the USSR as a Trotskyite.

    During World War II, while the USA was pushing Chiang to make an alliance with Mao against the Japanese, Stalin was counselling Chiang against this. Gen. George Marshall warned Chiang in 1946 at a crucial time that if he persisted in pursuing the beleaguered Red Army into Northern Manchuria, U.S. aid would stop. This provided Mao with a base from which to recuperate and finally defeat Chiang. On the other hand, Stalin’s aid to Mao was granted according to Russian interests as distinct from communist fraternity, one particularly dramatic example of which was the demand for repayment in food that resulted in 10,000 peasants dying of starvation in Yenan. This was a prelude to the debilitating Sino-Soviet Treaty that was to result in the “Great Famine” for the same reason.

    For now, the two giant neighbours have been thrust together by their shared suspicion of America and they cooperate as tactical allies, working in the United Nations Security Council to contain Washington’s power. But this affinity is based on little more than having the same rival. The empty lands of the Russian Far East, far closer to Beijing than Moscow, contain major sources of tension between the two powers.

    …The quest for raw materials is the central goal of the country’s foreign policy. And virtually every natural resource imaginable is found just over the border. Here, beneath steppe and tundra, are large reserves of natural gas, oil, diamonds and gold, while millions of square miles of birch and pine provide immense supplies of timber. All this amounts to an astonishing combination: a densely packed country trying to keep its economy roaring ahead by laying its hands on natural resources, living alongside a largely empty region with huge mineral wealth and fewer inhabitants year on year. Russia and China might operate a tactical alliance, but there is already tension between them over the Far East. Moscow is wary of large numbers of Chinese settlers moving into this region, bringing timber and mining companies in their wake.

    The most compelling reason that confrontation between the USA and China is unlikely is that the economies of the two are symbiotic, which cannot be said in regard to the relationship between China and Russia or Russia and the USA.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
Nothing surprising in the last post, except that I've been to "gritty" cities, in America, Asia and Europe and I've been to Dongguan and Dongguan is not "gritty".


I forgot I had this picture; it is Dongguan city centre. Now, of course, Dongguan has an industrial area that looks a lot like the industrial area of most other Chinese cities - which is to say rather like the industrial areas of American, other Asian and European cities. But Dongguan, like many other Chinese cities, is aiming for better value added industries because other countries are already able and willing to undercut China on low skill industrial jobs.


PS: the lady is my friend's cousin.
 
Back
Top