+ Reply to Thread
Page 105 of 107
FirstFirst ... 5 55 95 103 104 105 106 107 LastLast
Results 1,041 to 1,050 of 1062

Thread: China threat?

  1. #1041

    Quote Originally Posted by buglerbilly View Post
    US military remains dominant in Asia, but China is rising

    By: Christopher Bodeen, The Associated Press, March 7, 2017 (Photo Credit: Mark Schiefelbein/AP)

    BEIJING — China's announcement of a 7 percent rise in military spending for the year came shortly after U.S. President Donald Trump called for a 10 percent increase in America's defense budget, prompting renewed scrutiny of how the two countries' capabilities compare.

    While the U.S. military remains the dominant force in Asia and the world, China has been moving from quantity to quality and is catching up quickly in equipment, organization and capability. It's also increasingly able to project power far from its shores. Rapid economic growth, lavish spending and a desire to regain China's historical role as East Asia's leading power are helping drive the moves.

    Below is a comparison of the present state of the two militaries, based on figures found in recent U.S. government research on China's capabilities and information from defense think tanks and government websites. Some figures are estimates or approximations.

    The big picture

    China's People's Liberation Army has a total of 2.3 million personnel under arms, constituting the world's largest standing military. It provides only partial information about its order of battle, the PLA's mission and future plans, although outside analysts have produced detailed estimates. U.S. military end strength varies depending on need, but as of Jan. 31, there were 1.4 million active service members spread throughout the services.


    China announced this week that defense spending would rise by 7 percent this year to 1.044 trillion yuan (U.S. $151.632 billion). While China has the world's second-largest defense budget, it's just a fraction of what the U.S. spends, even if analysts' estimates of hidden additional spending are taken into account. Trump's request for an additional $54 billion in spending would bring the U.S. defense budget to a record $603 billion, and that's before including tens of billions of dollars for overseas military operations. If approved, the increase would mean the U.S. was spending 3.4 percent of its gross domestic product on defense, up from 3.2 percent of GDP last year. China says its budget this year would equal 1.3 percent of GDP.

    Ground forces

    Owing to the PLA's origins as a guerrilla army and former tensions along its land border with Russia, the ground forces continue to dominate, with 1.6 million personnel and a weighty emphasis on armored vehicles (9,150) and heavy artillery (6,246). The U.S. army boasts 460,000 personnel with another 182,000 in the Marines. It has a smaller emphasis on artillery (1,299) and armored vehicles (8,848), but places a greater emphasis on air support and special forces operations.

    Air power

    The U.S. can boast more than 13,000 aircraft of all types to China's nearly 3,000. The gap is especially great in helicopters, where the U.S. has more than 6,000 to China's 802. Despite having fewer aircraft, some of which are under the Chinese navy, China's air force has 398,000 personnel to 308,000 for the U.S. Air Force. Both air forces are seeking to upgrade their aircraft, although the introduction of the fifth-generation F-22 and F-35 jets puts the U.S. several years ahead. China's stealth fighters remain in the prototype stage, although it has managed to replace more than half of its fighter fleet with fourth-generation aircraft.


    China's navy has many more vessels (714 to 415), but the U.S. has more where it counts in terms of power projection. The U.S. has 10 aircraft carriers to China's one (although more are being built); 62 destroyers to China's 32; and 75 submarines to China's 68. The U.S. Navy has 323,000 personnel to China's 235,000, reflecting the breadth and depth of a service that operates worldwide. China's navy has made strides in that direction since it established a permanent overseas presence by joining in multinational anti-piracy patrols off Somalia in 2008, and has begun exercising in the Western Pacific beyond the "first island chain" that blocks its access to open seas.

    Missile command

    The PLA has a completely separate branch, the Rocket Force, to operate its formidable arsenal of short-, medium- and long-range missiles, including those capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Estimates say China has a stockpile of approximately 260 nuclear warheads for delivery by nearly 150 land-based ballistic missiles, 48 sea-based ballistic missiles as well as bombers. The U.S. has an estimated 1,740 nuclear warheads deployed for delivery by the same means. China's development of the DF-21D ballistic missile that is thought capable of threatening aircraft carriers has garnered much attention, although it remains untested in a conflict.

    Overseas presence

    China hasn't fought a conflict outside its borders since it invaded Vietnam in 1979 and officially eschews overseas alliances. Nonetheless, the PLA has been expanding abroad, from garrisons atop man-made islands in the South China Sea to United Nations peacekeeping operations, joint naval exercises with Russia in the Mediterranean and the construction of its first overseas base in the Horn of Africa nation of Djibouti. The U.S. military, in comparison, currently operates in more than 100 countries, maintains a worldwide network of alliances and is engaged in major conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and, increasingly, Syria.
    Am I the only one who thinks that the image displayed here is of a plastic model?

  2. #1042

    Well, it's a file picture, so who knows.............

  3. #1043

    AFRICOM commander says China's base in Djibouti to be completed in coming months

    Jeremy Binnie, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

    12 March 2017

    The military base that China is building in Djibouti will be completed "later this summer", General Thomas Waldhauser, the commander of the US military's Africa Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on 9 March.

    Noting the proximity of the Chinese base to the US military's Camp Lemonnier, Gen Waldhauser said he was concerned about operational security. "I've talked to their [Djibouti's] president and expressed our concerns about some of the things that are important to us about what the Chinese should not do at that location."

    He said China's base in Djibouti would support its naval presence in the region, but also noted the 'one road, one belt' strategic plan that China announced in 2013 includes the development of a maritime trade route to Europe.

    (149 of 223 words)

  4. #1044

    Quote Originally Posted by buglerbilly View Post
    Well, it's a file picture, so who knows.............
    If you Google "china military parade 2015" you will find this image and a lot of others from the same vantage point.

    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    It is by the juice of sapho that thoughts acquire speed,
    the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning.
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

  5. #1045

    China's premier calls for return to talks on North Korean nukes

    By: The Associated Press, March 15, 2017 (Photo Credit: Ng Han Guan/AP)

    BEIJING Chinese Premier Li Keqiang called Wednesday for new talks to reduce tensions on the Korean Peninsula ahead of a visit to the region this week by U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson that is expected to focus heavily on efforts to end North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile programs.

    Li said China was a strong supporter of U.N. resolutions aimed at nudging the North toward ending its programs. He added that China had "fully complied" with economic sanctions on Pyongyang.

    He acknowledged the rising tensions on the Korean Peninsula and northeast Asia in general, saying any conflict would be disastrous for all sides.

    "So what we hope is that all the parties concerned will work together to deescalate the situation, get issues back on the track of dialogue and work together to find proper solutions," Li said at his annual news conference held on the final day of the annual legislative session.

    China is Pyongyang's most important diplomatic ally and economic partner and has been under growing pressure from the U.S. to use its influence to rein in actions by the North seen as provocative.

    China has long urged a resumption of six-nation denuclearization talks on hold since North Korea withdrew from them in 2009. China says, however, its leverage over Pyongyang is limited. Still, China last month suspended imports of North Korean coal for the rest of the year, depriving the Kim Jong Un regime of a crucial source of foreign currency.

    Tillerson arrives in Beijing on Saturday following visits to U.S. allies Japan and South Korea.

    Complicating his mission to Beijing are China's strenuous objections to the initial deployment to South Korea of a U.S. missile defense system that have strained relations between Seoul and Beijing and sparked a snowballing economic boycott against South Korea among some Chinese.

    In addition to assuaging China's concerns, Tillerson will also seek to arrange a much-anticipated visit by President Xi Jinping to the United States.

    Tensions have escalated over North Korean moves to accelerate its weapons development. The North conducted two nuclear tests and 24 ballistic missile tests last year, deepening concern in Washington that it could soon develop a nuclear-tipped missile capable of reaching the U.S. mainland.

    Last week, North Korea launched four missiles into the ocean off Japan as the U.S. and South Korea began annual drills. The allies call the drills routine. Pyongyang regards them as an invasion rehearsal.

    Hoping to kick-start discussions, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi last week suggested that North Korea might suspend its nuclear and missile activities in exchange for a halt to the joint U.S.-South Korea drills.

    The U.S. swiftly dismissed the proposal, and Li did not repeat it.

    However, the premier did indicate that China was growing weary of the constant tensions and threats of conflict surrounding its formerly close communist neighbor.

    "It's just common sense that no one wants to see chaos on his doorstep," he said.

  6. #1046

    Saudi king's visit highlights China's Middle East engagement

    By: Gerry Shih and Christopher Bodeen, The Associated Press, March 16, 2017

    BEIJING — Saudi Arabia's monarch began a visit to Beijing on Thursday that highlights growing ties underpinned by China's thirst for Saudi oil and the kingdom's status as a key link in Beijing's bid to connect China to Europe through infrastructure development.

    King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud Salman*went immediately into talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping following a formal welcoming ceremony at the Great Hall of the People, the seat of China's legislature. The 81-year-old king's visit is part of a monthlong swing through Asia in a push to develop a less oil-dependent growth strategy.

    During Salman's visit to Tokyo earlier this week, the Saudi sovereign wealth fund announced a new $25 billion technology fund with telecom giant Softbank.

    Beijing for its part is rolling out a trade and investment initiative across Central Asia and the Middle East called "One Belt, One Road," and the Chinese government sees the desert kingdom as a regional linchpin.

    In opening remarks at their meeting, Xi said he looked forward to discussing projects under development and said results so far "have surpassed our expectations."

    Security ties between the two have also grown significantly, with the Royal Saudi Air Force deploying Chinese unmanned attack drones and the two militaries holding joint counterterrorism exercises in western China. Chinese naval defense vessels have also visited the Saudi port of Jeddah as part of increasingly active maneuvers in the Gulf of Aden.

    Chinese officials say their overriding security interest in the Middle East is to prevent ethnic Uighur fighters, who have left western China and joined militant groups in Syria and Iraq, from returning to strike at China.

    "China's Uighur ethnic minority is a key if sometimes underappreciated factor in Beijing's Middle East strategy," said Andrew Scobell, a political scientist at the think tank Rand.

    Xi has signaled his desire to play a bigger role in the region as part of China's quest for resources, markets and increased global influence on a par with its economic heft. In a major speech before the Arab League in Cairo last year, Xi indirectly alluded to how the U.S. presence had waned and how China hoped to present an alternative.

    "Instead of looking for a proxy in the Middle East, we promote peace talks," Xi said. "Instead of attempting to fill the vacuum, we build a cooperative partnership network for win-win outcomes."

    A relative newcomer to the Middle East's complicated politics, China has tried to maintain friendly ties with all sides, despite sometimes conflicting geopolitical interests.

    Beijing has backed Syrian President Bashar Assad in his country's conflict, while Saudi Arabia has insisted on Assad's ouster and has supported the Syrian opposition, including Islamic militant groups unfriendly to China over Beijing's sometimes harsh treatment of its Muslim minority.

    China has also maintained close ties to Saudi Arabia's bitter enemy Iran.

    Salman, who is traveling with a 1,500-strong company of businessmen, princes and support staff in close to a dozen aircraft, is next due to visit the Indian Ocean island nation of the Maldives. Along with Japan, he earlier visited Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei.

  7. #1047

    China, Saudi Arabia sign $65B in cooperation deals

    By: The Associated Press, March 17, 2017

    BEIJING — Saudi Arabia's monarch met with China's premier on Friday, a day after the two nations signed a memorandum of understanding on investment cooperation valued at $65 billion.

    The landmark agreement aims to boost joint efforts in fields including energy, investment, finance, culture and aerospace, part of Saudi Arabia's drive to develop a growth strategy less dependent on oil.

    Beijing meanwhile is rolling out a massive trade and investment initiative across Central Asia and the Middle East called "One Belt, One Road" that sees the desert kingdom as a regional linchpin.

    Despite the eye-catching sum noted in the memo, the actual value of such commitments is usually much smaller once projects begin.

    Saudi Arabia had been China's biggest supplier of imported crude oil before being overtaken by Russia last year, and the kingdom's state-owned oil producer, Aramco, is a partner with state-owned China Petroleum & Chemical Corp. The two operate a refinery in Fujian province along with other Chinese projects.

    The signing of the agreement, which involves 35 separate projects, followed talks Thursday between*King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud Salman*and President Xi Jinping, during which the Chinese leader said results of their burgeoning cooperation had already "surpassed our expectations."

    Security ties between the two have also grown significantly, with the Royal Saudi Air Force deploying Chinese unmanned attack drones and the two militaries holding joint counterterrorism exercises in western China. Chinese naval defense vessels have also visited the Saudi port of Jeddah as part of increasingly active maneuvers in the Gulf of Aden.

    However, China is also a close partner of Saudi Arabia's archrival Iran, and has backed the government of President Bashar Assad in the Syrian conflict, while Saudi Arabia has insisted on Assad's ouster and has supported the Syrian opposition, including Islamic militant groups.

    The 81-year-old Saudi king's visit is part of a monthlong swing through Asia. Accompanied by a 1,500-strong retinue of businessmen, princes and support staff in close to a dozen aircraft, he has already visited Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei.

    He was to travel next to the Maldives but postponed that visit because of the spread of swine flu in the Indian Ocean island nation, according to the president's office.

  8. #1048

    Taiwan says their missiles can reach mainland China

    By: Ashley Bunch, March 17, 2017 (Photo Credit: Sam Yeh/AFP via Getty Images)

    WASHINGTON - Taiwan has publicly claimed it’s capable of launching missiles that will hit mainland China, confirmed Minister of National Defense Feng Shih-kuan when asked by a lawmaker.

    "It is the first time the ministry has confirmed this," lawmaker Wang Ting-yu told AFP, adding that Taiwanese missiles may be able to travel more than 1,500 kilometers.

    In the four-yearly report to parliament Shih-kuan delivered, there was also a pledge to create an enhanced military to protect Taiwan.

    Currently, China sees Taiwan as a renegade province, and Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense says China has more than 1,500 missiles aimed at the island nation.

    "Should the enemy insist on invading, we will weaken their capabilities by striking enemy troops at their home bases, fighting them at sea, crushing them as they approach the coastlines and wiping them out on the beaches,” the report says.

    Ties have worsened since Beijing-skeptic Tsai Ing-wen became president, bringing an end to an eight-year rapprochement, AFP reported.

  9. #1049

    1914 Redux? Growing Asia-Pacific Tensions Demand New US Strategy

    By Maj. Paul Smith

    on March 20, 2017 at 4:01 AM

    American Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is paying his first visit to Asia this week. Just before he left, Acting Assistant Secretary of State Susan Thornton told reporters the Trump Administration “will have its own formulation” of the Pacific pivot, or the rebalance to Asia declared by the Obama Administration.

    “Pivot, rebalance, etcetera, that was a word that was used to describe the Asia policy in the last administration. I think you can probably expect that this administration will have its own formulation. We haven’t really seen in detail, kind of, what that formulation will be or if there even will be a formulation,” she said.

    In this timely op-ed, Maj. Paul Smith, who works in the J-9 of U.S. Pacific Command but is, of course, writing in a personal capacity, compares today’s international security situation to that preceding World War I and sees worrying parallels. He calls for a reassessment of our strategy toward China. Read on. The Editor.

    The global environment today eerily resembles that of Europe in the early twentieth century, when a rising tide of nationalism swept through the continent. That nationalism led to increased trade competition, networks of intertwined and complicated alliances and social and political ferment that sparked a war that eventually spread to engulf much of the world in the flames of World War I.

    Are we headed towards another global conflict? If so, then where? Most importantly, can this crisis be averted?

    The geopolitical climate most similar to pre-war Europe lies within the Asia-Pacific. This region consists of a highly complex web of interwoven treaties and alliances, is home to the world’s most formidable rising power, and has historical flashpoints, that if triggered, could lead to armed conflict.*These same issues had been present in Europe for years before the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand began the chain of events that eventually plunged, first Europe then much of the world, into the Great War.

    In the early 1900s a general sense of calm had swept over Europe in the 40 years of peace that followed the Franco-Prussian War. Many Europeans felt that with increased financial and economic interdependence, war had become too unprofitable for either side and was therefore not likely. But Germany, now united, used this period to increase its political, economic, and military clout. That led to its increased stature amongst the traditional European powers, but German nationalism demanded global parity.

    As political tensions rose across Europe, Germany allied itself with the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Italy to limit the likelihood of attack by other European nations. This was followed immediately by France, Russia, and the United Kingdom entering into an alliance. That led*to increased German fears of encirclement and tensions on the European continent mounted. With the existence of these two opposing blocs, a war between two nations would mean war between them all.

    Amidst the political wrangling between nations each alliance grouping sought to balance the power of the others, triggering a European arms race. Between 1908 and 1913, Germany increased its defense spending from $286.7 million to over $460 million. As German military clout increased, the rest of Europe rushed to restore the balance of power on the continent by vastly increasing their militaries.

    Even amidst the increase in arms, philosophers and scholars continued to discuss the end of war as they knew it. Unfortunately for the millions of young men that would soon be engaged in battle they were right, not about the end of war, but that war as it had been known would change drastically unleashing violence as never seen before. European nations’ armies swelled in both numbers and lethality as the dawn of the industrial age brought with it innovative and terrifying weapons which would soon be unsheathed on the field of battle.

    As Europe divided itself into heavily armed rival treat blocs, several long simmering issues grew to become potential flashpoints. France was unhappy with the treaty that ended the Franco-Prussian War and wanted*to regain control of the Alsace-Lorraine region. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was in decline and the empire began*fracturing along ethnic lines. The traditional great European powers were also frustrated by Germany’s ascent, which set the scene for the Thucydides Trap — the likelihood of conflict between a rising power and a currently dominant one.

    Then shots rang out in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914. Archduke Ferdinand and his wife Sophie died. Austria declared war on Serbia. Within weeks all of Europe was embroiled in the first truly global conflict, World War I.

    Following the almost unimaginable destruction and loss of life wrought during World War I and World War II, the international community was determined to prevent another cataclysmic global confrontation. The United Nations was formed. The Bretton Woods monetary system was built. NATO was created. Nearly three quarters of a century later their efforts have been largely successful. In that time, America has risen to be the world’s sole superpower and has, with several allies, crafted a rules-based international order that continues to foster that peace.

    One hundred years after the final shots of World War I rang out, there are several potential challenges to that peace lurking on the wavetops in the Asia-Pacific, a highly diverse and potentially volatile region containing a nuclear-armed rogue nation, the world’s three largest economies; the United States, China, and Japan, and historical rivalries that predate the liberal rules-based international order. Nationalism, coupled with rising competition for natural resources, have led to a 400 percent increase in military spending and an increasingly complex web of bilateral and multilateral treaties over the past 30 years, mirroring continental Europe in the years prior to the outbreak of WWI.

    As power shifts, the question that must be addressed is whether or not America is willing to yield to a multi-polar world. It seems that the groundwork is being laid within the Asia-Pacific region for another Thucydides Trap. Several potential protagonists within the Asia-Pacific could challenge the United States’ global hegemony in the years to come. But none bears a closer resemblance to Germany following the Franco-Prussian War than does China.

    Chinese economic strength first drew the attention of the established Western powers after it adopted a market economy in the late 1970s. China emerged from the 2008–2009 financial crisis relatively unscathed, in stark contrast to Europe and America. Their rapid recovery led to increased demand for parity in international affairs, challenges to the rules-based order, and what some consider attempts to establish a regional sphere of influence within Asia. To advance its presence on the world stage, China continues peaceful endeavors, such as its establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and other economic investments as part of its One Belt, One Road initiative. In a manner eerily reminiscent of Germany in the early 1900s, China is now using the gains from its industrial revolution to turn its economic and industrial clout towards arms production.

    China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has begun reorganizing to increase its effectiveness, invested in power projection platforms to extend its military reach, and focused heavily on advanced technological platforms such as*unmanned aerial vehicles and stealth fighters. China has also undertaken massive land reclamation efforts in the South China Sea and, in recent months, has begun construction of military infrastructure on several of these new fake islands. This build up may soon enable China to militarily control a transit route through which approximately 30 percent of the world’s maritime trade passes, including about $1.2 trillion in ship-borne trade bound for the United States.

    Several Asia-Pacific nations have begun to respond to the potential threat posed by the rising dragon that is China. To balance Chinese expansionism, East Asian nations are designing new defense cooperation agreements and are increasing their defense spending. The threat posed by China has even helped to overcome historical differences. Most recently, Vietnam has begun purchasing arms from the United States. Japan has reversed security laws in place since the end of World War II to allow its military to become more involved regionally, and it is crafting bilateral defense agreements with Indonesia and Vietnam. This response to China has not only been militarily focused. The Philippines challenged China’s maritime claims*in the South China Sea at the International Tribunal of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague. The tribunal ruled overwhelmingly in favor of the Philippines, utterly rejecting Chinese claims to what it calls the Nine Dash Line.

    The Asia-Pacific is home to five of America’s seven mutual defense treaties; the Philippines, Thailand, Republic of Korea, Japan and Singapore. A majority of these nations are embroiled in some level of opposition to China. In spite of the tribunal’s ruling, China has shown no signs of slowing down the build-up of man-made islands in the South China Sea. Japan and China have long argued over who owns several islands in the East China Sea. South Korea has asked the United States to deploy advanced missile defense equipment which led to Chinese restrictions on trade with the Republic of Korea. Recently, China delayed a ship carrying Singapore Armed Forces’ equipment as it returned from a training exercise in Taiwan. None of these actions in and of themselves would seem likely to cause a global conflict, but the United States is bound by our mutual defense treaties to support our allies. As tensions rise in the Asia-Pacific, it is difficult to determine what spark might ignite the powder keg.

    Rising Chinese nationalists use their dynastic past to call for expansion on the global scale. They demand control of the South China Seas based on the Nine Dash Line, and the Chinese state media incites national pride to help mask issues at home. That same fervor is a double-edged sword, however. As the government seeks to build national pride, actions that are viewed as an embarrassment in the realm of international relations may incite the populous to rally against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). For the CCP elite, a conflict may be the lesser of two evils since political accommodation could result in the collapse of the government at the sword of nationalism.

    As we near the 100th anniversary of America’s entrance into World War I, the stage appears set again for another global reordering, with consequences that could affect the world either through military action, or indirectly, through a disruption of the rules-based international order. Are we destined for World War III? What role should the United States play in addressing these issues? Modern history has demonstrated that when the United States adopts a nationalistic or isolationist foreign policy, the likelihood of war increases. While past conflicts primarily focused on the European continent, the similarities between the early 20th century European political climate and today’s Asia-Pacific make it easier to imagine a clash here between China and the United States. Despite what seems to be the popular allure of “America First”, the United States cannot afford to withdraw within our borders, or reduce the strength of our alliances. A revised strategy is required to address the rising tensions in the Asia-Pacific.

    Any policy regarding China must fully incorporate the social theories that apply within their society, the global trends likely to affect the region, and the elements available to the United States to effect change.*America’s Rebalance to the Pacific (which Breaking Defense likes to call the Pacific Pivot) is escalating tensions between the U.S. and China by ignoring the rising nationalism within China. That nationalistic narrative focuses on China as a victim, is exacerbated by troop buildups, increases in military training with other regional actors, and building rhetoric that paints the Chinese as adversaries. Given the current perception that the United States is looking to contain China and prevent its ascension as a multipolar world power, it is time to reconsider the current U.S. strategy.

    A multi-pronged approach implementing several elements of national power is necessary to encourage China to become a world power that abides by international rules and laws. The most powerful tool available to the U.S. is its economy, which should be leveraged through international trade agreements. Despite the apparent death of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), a potential replacement agreement should be developed with China as a core member. Including China in a multinational agreement has a larger effect than just increased trade; it would reduce tensions in the Asia-Pacific region by increasing the reasons for China to adhere to the current rules-based international order.

    Paradoxically, increased military to military engagement between the U.S. and China is vital. Currently, there is more mysticism than realism towards Chinese military capabilities, due to the limited interactions between our armed forces. By increasing the amount of contacts and familiarity between the two forces it becomes more difficult to cast the other as a villainous aggressor. More focus on joint training events such as the Rim of the Pacific Exercise (RIMPAC), the world’s largest maritime exercise with participants from over 20 nations including the U.S. and China, will help reduce the likelihood of conflict erupting due to miscommunication. Additionally, increased contact could reduce the virulence*of Chinese nationalists looking to foster the image of China as a victim of the West.

    Strategies that are not willing to adopt a less adversarial approach to China in the Asia-Pacific feed directly into a growing Chinese nationalism that could spark existing tensions between the U.S. and China into the flames of war. Only a strategy leveraging the U.S. economy and military to build stronger and broader ties between China and America will defeat growing Chinese nationalism and reduce tension in the Asia-Pacific.

    The views expressed in the op-ed are those of Maj. Paul Smith and do not necessarily reflect the views of Pacific Command, the Navy or the Defense Department.
    Last edited by buglerbilly; 21-03-17 at 03:43 AM.

  10. #1050

    Vietnam asks South Korea for support with South China Sea issue

    Gabriel Dominguez, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

    21 March 2017

    Vietnam's prime minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc has asked South Korea to support his country's stance on "the South China Sea issue", the Vietnamese government said in a 20 March statement.

    "The prime minister proposed that South Korea continue to support the position of Vietnam and ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] on the South China Sea issue and help Vietnam strengthen its law enforcement capacity at sea," Hanoi said in a statement on its website following a meeting between Nguyen Xuan Phuc and South Korean foreign minister Yun Byung-se.

    The statement did not provide further details in this regard. South Korea is Vietnam's biggest foreign investor and one of the Southeast Asian nation's largest trading partners.

    (139 of 486 words)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts