Russia and China To Hold Joint Military Exercises

[Cloud Cover]

This development has been a long standing concern to the USA, Australia and Japan. The ressurection of the joint USSR/China pact in Asia will surely trigger reciprocal military reactions througout the region if these two turkeys can make their forces and equipment work with each other.


http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2004/12/27/china-russia041227.html?print

  C.B C . C A  N e w s  -  F u l l  S t o r y :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Russia, China to hold 2005 war exercises
Last Updated Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:05:15 EST
MOSCOW - Russia and China will, for the first time, hold joint military manoeuvres next year, Russia's defence minister said Monday.

The manoeuvres will take place on Chinese territory in the second half of 2005, Sergei Ivanov said, according to ITAR-Tass.

The exercise will be "quite large," involve both countries' air forces and navies and will include submarines, he said.

The new co-operation between the two countries is "not targeted at any third party," Chinese Defence Minister Cao Gangchuan said earlier in the month.

He said fostering military ties would serve the interest of regional peace and help the two armies learn from each other.

Beijing and Moscow have built up military and political ties since the Soviet collapse in 1991, driven in part by a joint desire to counterbalance U.S. global dominance.

Written by CBC News Online staff

Copyright ©2004 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation - All Rights Reserved

 

[Edward Campbell]

Well, no worries, this will not stop them from squaring off, now and again, and holding joint, two sided live fire 'exercises' up on the Amur River.

China is Russia's worst nightmare.

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch ...

 

[aesop081]

Well, no worries, this will not stop them from squaring off, now and again, and holding joint, two sided live fire 'exercises' up on the Amur River.

China is Russia's worst nightmare.

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch ...

Let's think about that for a sec....2 countries with nuclear weapons squaring off with each other......thats supposed to be a good thing ???

 

[jmackenzie_15]

Let's think about that for a sec....2 countries with nuclear weapons squaring off with each other......thats supposed to be a good thing ???

they arent fighting each other , and if they ever wanted to in the future, they definately would not hold co-operative wargames in which they would have direct access to their strategies and the way their armed forces operates.


what you should be more concerned about is the worlds next military superpower and one of the worlds former ones looking to hold onto a relevant place in world politics holding joint wargames against an OPFOR that uses NATO tactics. "joint wargames against an OPFOR that uses NATO tactics."

 

[Spartan]

BBC News
Russia and China plan war games  

Ivanov has just returned from defence talks in China
Russia and China - former Cold War foes - will hold an unprecedented military exercise in the second half of 2005.
The war game, involving naval ships and aircraft, will take place on Chinese territory, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov said.

China has become a major market for Russian weapons. In the past five years these exports have risen to $5bn.

Russia and China have developed what they call a strategic partnership since the end of the Cold War.


Russia will not bring large numbers of servicemen to the exercises, but mostly state-of-the art weapons, including submarines and probably strategic bombers, Mr Ivanov was quoted as saying.

Main supplier

Russian observers say that China gets half of Russia's weapons exports.

Mr Ivanov visited China earlier and described his discussions on Russian weapons deliveries as "record-breaking".

Moscow and Beijing share the concept of a multi-polar world - opposing what they see as US global dominance.

Mr Ivanov said that in 2005 Russia would also hold joint exercises with other former Soviet countries, Nato and, separately, with France.

Perhaps a more real reason for the exercises- Weapon sales.
and this last line I found incredibly interesting

Mr Ivanov said that in 2005 Russia would also hold joint exercises with other former Soviet countries, Nato and, separately, with France.

Trying to play with everyone for what purpose?

 

[Torlyn]

what you should be more concerned about is the worlds next military superpower and one of the worlds former ones looking to hold onto a relevant place in world politics holding joint wargames against an OPFOR that uses NATO tactics. "joint wargames against an OPFOR that uses NATO tactics."

So why wouldn't they?  I mean, the Americans run war games with their allies, why shouldn't Russia and China?  I dunno, this doesn't seem to be that great a concern to me.  Can someone enlighten?

T

 

[aesop081]

they arent fighting each other , and if they ever wanted to in the future, they definately would not hold co-operative wargames in which they would have direct access to their strategies and the way their armed forces operates.


what you should be more concerned about is the worlds next military superpower and one of the worlds former ones looking to hold onto a relevant place in world politics holding joint wargames against an OPFOR that uses NATO tactics. "joint wargames against an OPFOR that uses NATO tactics."

I know ther are not fighting each other...I CAN READ !!  I was commenting on an earlier post...........China and russia have a long history of hostility towards each other.....i can only assume you know that.  This is not the first time as well that they hold some kind of military cooperation........

 

[Storm]

Trying to play with everyone for what purpose?

How about make as many friends as possible, learn about the way others operate, and be able to operate either with or against as many different forces as possible? Seems they're just trying to keep options open, and training as militaries do. The west doesn't have a monopoly on joint training.

I don't see it as a big deal if their OPFOR is using NATO tactics. If there's a powerful alliance that you're not a part of, whether you're on good terms with it or not, it would be sheer negligence not to train against its tactics. It doesn't mean they're planning an invasion or anything, just training for "what if" scenarios.

 

[jmackenzie_15]

So why wouldn't they? I mean, the Americans run war games with their allies, why shouldn't Russia and China? I dunno, this doesn't seem to be that great a concern to me. Can someone enlighten?

T

yeah we all have allies we practice wargames with, except the guys on the other end of the world are practicing on the idea of fighting AGAINST us, not with us.Considering China is quickly becoming the worlds biggest military powerhouse (its projected within the next decade that they will equal and surpass the United States in terms of military strength) this is not a comforting idea.

Who cares who china is playing wargames with... who ARENT they playing with?

The United States.

 

[JBP]

yeah we all have allies we practice wargames with, except the guys on the other end of the world are practicing on the idea of fighting AGAINST us, not with us.Considering China is quickly becoming the worlds biggest military powerhouse (its projected within the next decade that they will equal and surpass the United States in terms of military strength) this is not a comforting idea.

Who cares who china is playing wargames with... who ARENT they playing with?

The United States.

Umm.. I'm not normally one to stick up for the US of A, but take a look at this simple fact and it'll scare you. Sure China will have a gigantic military in a decade or so, but would they really be able to support and feed all those troops and equipment?

Rank Country Military expenditures - dollar figure  Date of Information
1 United States  $ 370,700,000,000  March 2003 
2 China  $ 60,000,000,000  2003 est. 
3 France  $ 45,238,100,000  2003 
4 United Kingdom  $ 42,836,500,000  2003 
5 Japan  $ 42,488,100,000  2003

The USA spends the most money by FAR on military expenditures... A whole entire digit more. Try this website, quite abit of information...

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2067rank.html

Anyway, my two cents. The USA will probably still have the best ass-kicking army a decade from now with the most high-tech toys and equipment and better trained troops.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Considering China is quickly becoming the worlds biggest military powerhouse (its projected within the next decade that they will equal and surpass the United States in terms of military strength) this is not a comforting idea.

I don't think so. Got any evidence to back that up? Their objective may be to dominate the region, but they don't have a farts chance in a windstorm of overtaking the USA in terms of force power. I would also think the second most powerful surface fleet in the world [Japan] might have something to say on the matter as well. Without Russia, China is thankfully isolated.

 

[Edward Campbell]

China is a major regional power; soon â “ maybe as soon as a year â “ China will displace the USA as Japan's leading trading partner: that limits Japan's strategic options.

China and Russia are ancient and natural enemies.   China needs resources â “ huge amounts and soon; Eastern Siberia, just across the Amur River is a resource treasure house and has a bit of lebensraum, to boot.

China welcomes closer and closer ties with Russia â “ why not?   China has nothing to lose    ... Russia buys time.

 

[pbi]

Keeping in mind that this is just a single gesture, how long did we think it would be before there was a serious attempt to challenge the unipolar world concept? Neither the Russians nor the Chinese, I'm pretty sure, are enamoured of the idea of  playing second fiddle to the US. IMHO we should be careful of assumptions about China's military capabilities that are based on its economic situation today: IMHO that situation is changing, and as in any authoritarian state, a disproportionate amount of resources can be diverted to technology and military production as opposed to quality of life stuff. As for the past issues between the two powers (Amur-Ussuri, etc)  I woulod suggest that countries do not have to like each other (or even trust each other...) to team up: look at the USSR and Nazi Germany in the 1920s and 30s, or the USSR and the Western Allies in WWII. China may only be a regional power now, but that is the way all world powers begin. The world changes, and noone sits on top forever. Cheers.

 

[Kirkhill]

Add another ingredient to the mix.  Chirac is desperate to get Europe to allow him to tranfer technology LEGALLY to China as part of his grand plan to counter the American cowboys.  Case in point is the Galileo counter-point to the American GPS system.  Europe and China are sponsors of the Galileo system already.

Based on track record in Iraq, what odds that Chirac hasn't already sold technology to China?  He is also very fond of Vladimir Putin.

What odds that Canada at some time might have to fish or cut bait and make a decision as to who our friends are for real?

 

[JBP]

Add another ingredient to the mix.  Chirac is desperate to get Europe to allow him to tranfer technology LEGALLY to China as part of his grand plan to counter the American cowboys.  Case in point is the Galileo counter-point to the American GPS system.  Europe and China are sponsors of the Galileo system already.

Based on track record in Iraq, what odds that Chirac hasn't already sold technology to China?  He is also very fond of Vladimir Putin.

What odds that Canada at some time might have to fish or cut bait and make a decision as to who our friends are for real?

Hmm. Most frightening when you think about it. It's like everyone is slowing (or not so slowly) picking sides. No, more correctly, everyone has picked sides already almost and we're fence-sitting. It seems all is left is a few places to "draw the line in the sand" and see who steps over first...

I don't like the idea of West vs. East. Not good, only strategic way China could beat USA would be nuclear. Just like how when NATO was formed to defend against 20,000 Russian MBT's the only strategic defense was to nuke them too.... Ugly thoughts and points you bring up Kirkhill.

If France is so agitated by the USA and that defiant and China and Russia already hate the USA, it seems inevitable that at some point some type of confrontation will commence. WW 3 for real?!? The Black Sea? Sea of Japan? All we need now is for Russia+China+North Korea to start having military training and then we'll all know what's going on!

Even though I'm not a big fan of the USA, I can't deny they've been there for us when we needed them at points and times and haven't let us down that way. Whether it be transporting our troops or rescueing our civilians from Iraq (a thread on here some time ago). I don't see us choosing the "other" side...

 

[jmackenzie_15]

The USA spends the most on its military, do you know how much a tomahawk missile costs?

china will have a huge military in a decade or so? they have a huge military NOW. Military service in china is mandatory if im not mistaken.Theyre communists and theyre govnernment could probobly whip up and conscript 100 million soldiers if they wanted to.The population of the country is 2 billion.

Chinas economy is getting better by the second, booming even, alot of the military equipment theyre getting/producing is state of the art.

Keeping in mind that this is just a single gesture, how long did we think it would be before there was a serious attempt to challenge the unipolar world concept? Neither the Russians nor the Chinese, I'm pretty sure, are enamoured of the idea of playing second fiddle to the US. IMHO we should be careful of assumptions about China's military capabilities that are based on its economic situation today: IMHO that situation is changing, and as in any authoritarian state, a disproportionate amount of resources can be diverted to technology and military production as opposed to quality of life stuff. As for the past issues between the two powers (Amur-Ussuri, etc) I woulod suggest that countries do not have to like each other (or even trust each other...) to team up: look at the USSR and Nazi Germany in the 1920s and 30s, or the USSR and the Western Allies in WWII. China may only be a regional power now, but that is the way all world powers begin. The world changes, and noone sits on top forever. Cheers.

exactly.China has been a country for like, what, 2000 years? to the united states' few hundred? their society and culture is leaps and bounds stronger and more unified than ours or the americans.Theyre an ambitious and hard working people, and theyve been steadily increasing their military and economic power and if I didnt know better, it would seem to me theyre looking to take the crown of world superpower for themselves.Like this guy said, they arnet going to play second fiddle to the united states forever, and i dont see why the idea of the united states being overthrown as the biggest superpower in the world is unbeleivable.The United States is losing alot of its influences over other countries due to some of the unpopular foreign policy choices theyre making.Not to mention Bush has put the country more in debt than you would beleive, and he still has years to make it worse, all the while the Chinese are more quickly building and constructing and taking their vitamins so to speak.

Somebody said about how the chinese would pay to feed and clothe their troops, it would be just as difficult, or less difficult than it would be for the united states.China has a hell of a lot more taxpayers than the americans do.Plus theres that whole communist government we can do whatever we want thing going on =p

IMO, in reality, the united states would NOT defeat China in war, for the main reason that, the strength and unity of their society far outdoes ours or the americans.The americans have sufferred 1500 dead and 7000 wounded in iraq, and alot of the country wants them to pull out.Thats without seeing the bodies coming home on tv, since thats kindof a downer .

 

[jmackenzie_15]

Even though I'm not a big fan of the USA, I can't deny they've been there for us when we needed them at points and times and haven't let us down that way. Whether it be transporting our troops or rescueing our civilians from Iraq (a thread on here some time ago). I don't see us choosing the "other" side...

how much do you think they would do for us if we werent their biggest trading partner.The American government is about making money and imperialsm and militarization.If we suddenly became a poor, resourcless third world nation overnight, do you think they would help us out just cause we're 'friends' ? Not a chance.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

WINGNUT ALERT......WINGNUT ALERT

 

[jmackenzie_15]

:

I love the inabilty to consider someone else's point of view around here, its so refreshing.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I wish I had the time to go through all the holes in your "viewpoint" but I have to go on duty, I'm sure one of the historians will do it in my absence.