China - and the dangerous drift to war in Asia

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
Interesting article in the Canadian "The globe and mail" newspaper.
"To see the world from the Asian point of view requires overcoming decades of accumulated – and willfully cultivated – ignorance about Asia. To this day, Asian perspectives are often inflected through Western prisms; they can only add colour to an unshakable conventional Western narrative, but nothing more. Yet the presumption that today’s Western trends are global quickly falls on its face."

Welcome to the Asian century
 
It's a bit difficult to decide where to put this one, as it could be considered either a Saudi Arabia story or a China story. Saudi crown prince arrives in China to boost relations amid tensions with the West | CBC News
Saudi prince Mohammed bin Salman arrived in China on a visit covering trade and diplomatic matters.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman arrived in China on Thursday on the latest stop of a sweep through Asia that seeks to boost relations with the kingdom's neighbours amid frictions with the West.
This follows a visit by Saudi Arabia's main rival Iran the previous week.
Bin Salman's visit to Beijing follows one earlier this week by a high-powered delegation from Saudi Arabia's chief strategic rival, Iran.
China are also building strong ties with Israel.
China has also pursued robust ties with Israel.
Despite China facing criticism in western countries over issues involving the Muslim Uighur minority in China, the only Muslim country to criticize China over this issue is Turkey.
China is facing growing international criticism over its treatment of its Muslim minority groups as part of a wide-ranging crackdown on religion and minority languages.
Thus far, Turkey has been the only majority Muslim country to criticize Beijing, with its Foreign Ministry this month calling the treatment of minority Uighurs "a great cause of shame for humanity" and saying it is "no longer a secret" that China has arbitrarily detained more than a million Uighurs in "concentration camps."
Despite Saudi Arabia claiming to be the protector of Muslims throughout the world, they have remained silent about the Uighur issue. This is believed to be a reflection of their appreciation for China's own policy of not interfering in the internal affairs of other countries.
Saudi Arabia's Al Saud royal family has long cast itself as the defender of Muslims across the world. Its king describes himself as the protector of Islam's two holiest mosques at Medina and Mecca. (...) Saudi Arabia's silence on the Uighur issue is partly explained as a show of appreciation for China's non-interference policy in other states' domestic affairs, which contrasts with Western states' linkage of foreign and economic relations and human rights, said Jonathan Fulton, a political scientist at Abu Dhabi's Zayed University.
It also reflects the acceptance of China framing the problem in terms of responding to Islamic political radicalism, something that many Arab countries can relate to as being a threat to themselves as well.
It also reflects China's success in framing its policies toward Muslim minorities as a struggle against political Islam, Fulton said.
"Many Arab countries are also concerned with Islamist political groups ... and see these as ideological threats to their governments," he said.
China's foreign minister stated that bin Salman's visit reflects the growing ties between their two countries.
Commenting Wednesday on the crown prince's visit, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said recent years have "seen a positive momentum in our co-operation with fruitful outcomes in various areas such as infrastructure and space satellites."
"We hope that through this visit we will enhance our relations enhance mutual trust, deepen co-operation ... and inject momentum into our bilateral relations," he said.
Previously on this trip bin Salman has visited India and Pakistan. His next stop is South Korea.
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
Back in the day RN ships had ginormous Union flags painted on the upper deck or on top of a turret so that when passing through the Taiwan channel … the US wouldn't bomb them by mistake.
 

riksavage

Old-Salt
I highly recommend ARRSE followers read 'This Kind of War - T.R. Fehrenbach'. Written back in the 60's. Pulls zero punches about fighting the CHI-COMMS.

The Chinese where the only nation in one hundred years to completely destroy a US Division (2nd) in the field.

The book helps you understand why the Americans never talk about the Korean War. A very candid read, good in audio book too.

There's a great story about the Turks. They sent a Brigade, which was wiped out by the Chinese. The Turkish officers where known to throw their fur hats on the ground and claim they would not retreat from the spot where it landed. They didn't and subsequently vanished off the map. The US Gov sent an envoy to Turkey to extend its condolences. The Turks responded by saying they were sent to Korea to fight and die, a line similar to Gen. Pershing (WWI).

The North Koreans were bastards. One US unit came across 500 US/ROK captured soldiers buried to the waist and used for bayonet practice. North Korean soldiers were so brutalised by the Japanese occupation they had zero empathy for POW's or civvies.

Many of the Chinese officers had marched/fought in the Sino-Japanese and Chinese Civil War and were experienced commanders (Russian trained). Their men could match the marching speeds/daily distances of the Roman Legions, with next to bugger all kit/food. The US army believed in putting a wheel under every soldier, an approach totally unsuited to Korea's mountainous terrain
 
Last edited:

DogCobra

Crow
I highly recommend ARRSE followers read 'This Kind of War - T.R. Fehrenbach'. Written back in the 60's. Pulls zero punches about fighting the CHI-COMMS.

The Chinese where the only nation in one hundred years to completely destroy a US Division (2nd) in the field.

The book helps you understand why the Americans never talk about the Korean War. A very candid read, good in audio book too.
I never read the book you reference but some notes I would make, In the Battle of the Ch'ongch'on River the 2nd division was not completely destroyed as in 100% annihilation. That said it's loses were massive. 4000 casualties, almost all of it's artillery and half of the rest of it's equipment. Speaking of the Turks, the route of the Turkish Brigade in the battle contributed to the mauling the 2nd took during their retreat.

There is a lot of talk around the decline in US power relative to other nations. The talk seems to imply that Russia or China would not take massive causalities in a serious war. The 2nd Division was routed in that one battle but the Chinese by most accounts took double the casualties and then another 20k casualties from the weather after the battle. This battle also led to the Chinese to over reach in the 1950 spring offensive and see an entire Chinese Corp (60th) heavily mauled and 180th Chinese division destroyed in a battle. In the same vain see the battle of the Imjin River to see how an outnumbered British army performs.
 

riksavage

Old-Salt
The reference to the US 2nd Divs. destruction was not an observation made by the author, but that of the US high command at the time. It ceased to exist as a credible fighting force.

The Chinese were able to infiltrate more than 600K men across the Yalu River without being detected by UN air, who flew unimpeded across the peninsula. Once the fighting started they fully embraced high casualty rates on a par with those suffered fighting the Japs and Nationalist armies. They had zero airpower, minimal artillery, but were well aware of US/allied weaknesses and exploited them to max. They followed Mao’s ideology and flowed like water around UN formations using a ’V’ formation. The tips of the 'V' would wrap around the flanks and close off the rear supply chain. They made excellent use of the terrain and kept to hills/mountains, leaving the UN troops to move along poorly constructed road networks. The Chinese, by encircling the opposition caused a complete collapse of morale amongst the majority of units. The USMC being an exception. When the 2nd Div withdrew back to force 'Nottingham' (UK Brigade), the rear units (artillery, bottle washes and cooks) acted as rearguard. The artillery fired all their rounds, removed the breaches from the guns and thermite charged the barrels.
 
Last edited:
Japanese PM Abe is currently doing the diplomatic rounds, and is expected in Ottawa this weekend. He is expected to promote the idea of closer defence cooperation between Japan and Canada.
www.cbc.ca/news/politics/japan-korea-south-china-sea-abe-trudeau-1.5108302?cmp=rss
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is expected to pitch closer defence cooperation with Canada, among other things, when he visits Ottawa this weekend.
Part of the reason for this is apparently Japan are concerned about whether they can continue to rely on the US and so are looking for additional allies.
"The fact that the U.S. seems to be withdrawing from the rest of the world and that we may not necessarily ... be able to rely upon the United States to guarantee freedom of movement in those areas is a concern."
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
Going quite nicely for China so far, she has fortified (and in so doing destroyed their environment) various atolls in the S China Sea and got clean away with it - little people can stamp their feet all they like but China now has total air coverage of that area, and is now building up a carrier force for eventual Pacific use. She can also use Huawei to take over the internet bit by bit, comfortably relying on people like TM to be too stupid to see the dangers..
 
Presumably if an aircraft crashed as a result there's no functional difference between that and a missile attack?
There were roughly 1,000 laser attacks on aircraft in the UK in 2017. Lasers | UK Civil Aviation Authority
In one incident in July 2017, a UK airliner was targetted by a green laser during its approach to land. While the aircraft landed safely, the laser temporarily impaired the vision of one of the pilots who had to hand control over to the co-pilot. On the ground, the pilot was deemed unfit to fly until they recovered normal vision. This event was an unnecessary and avoidable distraction to flight crew during a high workload phase of flight and could have led to serious injury of the crew.

Laser attacks are most common near large city airports. They happen across the UK and are not limited to large commercial aircraft. General aviation and emergency helicopter flights are also targeted. This is of great concern to single pilot operations where there is no other crew member to deal with the distraction or potential incapacitation of a pilot.
This is a routine problem everywhere.
 
I don't know why, I assumed that this was some superdooper eye-zapping military laser with evil Chinese Government backers.

So it might have been a bored fisherman acting like a mong?
Just exactly who is behind these many thousands of attacks in the UK, US, and all across the rest of the world over a period of many years and why they are doing it is something that I have never seen a good explanation of. I am also curious as to why more effort hasn't been put into dealing with the issue despite the numerous reports. I have read news reports that aircraft thousands of feet up have been successfully targetted with lasers while flying over western countries, so how whomever is doing this manages to aim their kit is an interesting question as well.

As for the incident in the referenced link, we can only speculate. However, given the extent of illegal fishing that takes place around the world, including illegal locations, gear, and methods, it is easy to imagine motivations for wanting to deter surveillance by aircraft that may be involved in fisheries patrol as part of their duties.

It should be noted by the way that the news story itself says that they don't know where the fishing vessels were from, so any connection to China is purely speculative. To add to the problem there may have been boats from multiple countries present in the area. Recall where I noted above that aircraft thousands of feet up have been successfully targetted while flying over western countries, so however it is done is apparently effective at quit long ranges.
 

Latest Threads

Top