Posted on 09/02/2015 10:18:45 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Type 022 Fast Attack Missile Craft Houbei Class of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLA Navy) test fires C-803 antiship missile. PLAN Photo via Global Military Review
“Improved maritime strike capability has given Chinese warships a much greater chance of competing against their U.S. counterparts” and improved naval air defenses allow its warships “the ability to operate at increasingly great distances from shore”—major advances in large part speeded by arms, vessels and technology sales from Russia since the end of the Cold War.
Those were two observations contained in a new report from the Washington, D.C.-based think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, released Tuesday. Paul Schwartz, the author of Russia’s Contribution to China’s Surface Warfare Capabilities: Feeding the Dragon, said in discussing the report, “collectively [those factors] represent a great leap forward” and “these systems [from new surface warships to sea- and air-launched anti-ship missiles, etc.] are making a real difference.”
He expects sales of technology and arms from Russia to China to continue into the future, especially in radar systems. Already the improved Chinese naval air defenses capabilities “complicate the task of U.S. pilots,” reminiscent of the difficulties the Americans faced in the Vietnam War.
For Russia, the sales amounted to $32.1 billion for 1999–2014 and helped keep it afloat as the Soviet Union collapsed. For the Chinese, they provided an opening to military technology that had been shut off following the Tiananmen Square massacre.
The transfers are not simply going from Russia to China. Schwartz added China has tried to interest the Russians in buying its latest frigate because of Russia’s shipbuilding problems. Beijing also has advanced drones, better information technology and command and control systems that could be of interest to Moscow.
Jeffery Mankoff, director of the CSIS’s Russia and Eurasia program, noted that Russia has also been selling modernized naval and air systems to Vietnam and India, neighboring rivals of China.
In the discussion that followed Schwartz’s presentation, Thomas Karako, a senior fellow at CSIS said, in anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) “China is using mass to challenge us”—allowing it to target fleet, allies and bases. “The U.S. is going to have to invest more in standoff weapons and penetration weapons,” as well as maritime missile defense against new conventional threats.
While directed energy and rail guns offer promise for the future, Karako quoted Adm. Bill Gortney, Northern Command commander, as saying for the immediate future it will still be missiles shooting down other missiles.
The unanswered question is whether the relationship between China and Russia is really a long-term one, or a marriage of convenience, said Zach Cooper, a fellow at the CSIS.
“Both counties are dissatisfied with the status quo”—Russia in Eastern Europe and China in the islands off its coast. Both “are using a similar technique of hybrid warfare” to get their way, stopping short of provoking a wider conflict that would draw in the United States. He cited the Chinese sending its coast guard vessels, rather than warships, into disputed waters as an example of this.
But the two nations do not always see eye-to-eye on Russia’s role in the Far East, Chinese hard-bargaining on energy sales from Russia, or Beijing’s reverse-engineering of technology sold to it rather than buying more. The report said of the reverse engineering, “Insult was added to injury when China began to sell some of those systems on the arms export markets, thereby undercutting Russian exports of the original system.”
For now, because of economic sanctions against Russia for its actions in annexing Crimea and backing separatists in eastern Ukraine, Moscow is further and further removed from interacting with the West.
Schwartz said, “China is still very integrated with the West,” economically.
Even with all China’s investment in maritime capabilities, Cooper and Schwartz predicted, it would take a decade or two to field a capable force to counter the United States at sea. China is only now fielding an aircraft carrier, which will be primarily used for training, although it plans on building three in the future. It also does not have a recent maritime history comparable to the United States and Japan so that means developing an officer corps knowledgeable about blue-water operations, a professional noncommissioned officer corps and ending its reliance on the draft to meet manpower needs.
Right now, “Russia is selling China the rope to hang the U.S. Navy,” Karako said.
Other important future large sales could include Russia’s S-400 air defense system, Su-35 aircraft and LADA-class diesel-electric submarines.
The report concluded: “Prospects for increased arms sales from Russia to China seem greater now than they have been in many years, and not solely in the maritime domain.”
http://csis.org/files/publication/150824_Schwartz_RussiaContribChina_Web.pdf
So how much vodka is needed before you can understand the instructions?
S/O
Stealth aircraft were invented long before they were ever officially seen.
To think nothing new has come along to tip the scales in our favor dramatically is insane.
Go ahead China. Whistle past that graveyard.
Russia isn’t really too bright.
The two biggest onset threats to Russia are China and Iran’s nuclear weapons program.
Russia supports them both.
the Japanese thought they were much better than the United States Navy too , and look at where it got them. the Great Pacific Ocean is still full of sharks waiting to consume the bodies of the Chinese who ships we have sunk
*******************************************************************
From the Sino-Russian Joint Statement of April 23, 1997:
"The two sides [China and Russia] shall, in the spirit of partnership, strive to promote the multipolarization of the world and the establishment of a new international order."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI29Ag01.html
______________________________________________________________
"Joint war games are a logical outcome of the Sino-Russian Friendship and Cooperation Treaty signed in 2001, and reflect the shared worldview and growing economic ties between the two Eastern Hemisphere giants."
http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2005/09/war-games-russia-china-grow-alliance
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170287,00.html
______________________________________________________________
Sept 11, 2014
China and Russia to build major seaport: report
China and Russia will build one of the largest ports in north-east Asia on Russia’s Sea of Japan coast, reports say, in a further sign of the powerhouses’ growing alliance.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-11/china-and-russia-to-build-major-seaport-report/5738036
I've wondered about that myself.
Back when Russia and Britain played "the great game" in NW India and Afghanistan, Russia's end in view was to obtain sufficient sway over the Baluchs and Iranians to get them the blue-water ports on the Indian Ocean they craved. It almost happened for them when the Tudeh, the Iranian Communist Party, was stalking Prime Minister Mossadegh, a naif who had no idea how dangerous the Communists were.
The Russians still let the Iranians play them, and now the Chinese are playing them, too. Maybe Vlad, the president of the new "Sick Man of Europe", feels he has no choice but to play along.
We’ll we did underestimate Japanese capabilities in the beginning. Their torpedo technology was better in the beginning (Pearl Harbor and Savo Island) as examples. We caught up and passed them pretty quickly though
IMO, we are entering the most dangerous international situation our country has ever faced.
While we have a vast military technological advantage over the rest of the world, our country has very weak leadership, and the military serves under and at the direction of that civilian leadership.
China et al. know this may (probably will) all change in 16 months, and they realize it is now or never if they want to expand their sphere of influence.
No doubt we can prevail no matter what, but our weak leadership invites an attack that will be very damaging and costly to the US.
It is interesting the US is still investing heavily in manned systems (F35, for example), while other countries are concentrating on unmanned systems. The Pentagon and US military planners envisioned eliminating pilots from our fighter/bomber aircraft as far back as the late 60s, yet they are still the focus of our R&D.
Competing for what? Dock space at Norfolk, Mayport, San Diego and Kitsap? Sorry, they are all a little filled up at the time.
I don’t know what to make of Putin either. Ultimately, he seems to be haunted by former U. S. S. R. prowess, and reminiscent to the point of wanting those days back. Ultimately, that’s not going to happen. He’ll make some moves to satisfy his longing, and wind up frustrated. The frustration is what we need to be wary of. What will it cause him to do, to fulfill his fantasy.
He wants to be a global player. His arrangement with China makes him feel like he is. All he is achieving is to become a feather in China’s cap. He is being played. To be honest, so are we.
We need to stop it. Just quite cooperating with China. Pull our businesses out of there, sit back, watch it deflate.
If it’s having a hard time right now with normal relations, imagine pulling our income stream out of there.
All of a sudden, nothing but banana peels for Chinese leaders to walk on. Try funding your fleet on that China.
Watch as first one bank, then most of them melt down. Watch their market collapse.
We don’t need to tolerate what is going on.
Returning to Russia for a moment, we helped create this guy.
No, we didn’t get him elected, but we could have played along and helped fulfill his need to feel like a global player. We could have held summits. We could have made some flashy agreements of little importance. We could have fed his ego, without creating a monster.
Instead we failed to keep in close contact. We ignored him. We created an environment where he would search for partners to exploit.
And now we’re seeing the results. He has contact in China, Iran, Syria, and Egypt. We really mismanaged this situation Bush (GHWB) through Obama, we ignored Russia. That was a massive strategic mistake.
Their chrysanthemum stamped Arisaka rifles and later models were crap ; slow and noisy . We had Garrands and Thompsons .
Rations wise : meat & potatoes sustains better than rice and bugs
Then there was the Hellcat , the Corsair and the P-38s . Not to mention the P-51s and the B-29s
Nimitz Class carriers , Ohio Class battleships
All this said , the individual Japanese soldier was as vicious of a foe that America has ever fought . The Islamist of today are toilet paper by comparison . The Japs thought that their esprit de corps would be enough . It wasn’t
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.