Posted on 06/21/2004 12:55:23 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
The U.S. government has cited China as the No. 1 threat to global security for the second time in less than a month.
Both the Pentagon and the Commission on U.S-China Economic and Security Review cited Beijing as a major threat to U.S. national security. The two reports noted the growing military capability of China combined with its predatory economic policy is aimed directly at the United States.
The latest report released by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission was approved by a "unanimous vote of all eleven Commissioners." According to the Commission China's co-operation on international security matters is "un-satisfactory."
The Commission examined in depth the extent of ongoing co-operation between China and the United States on traditional national security matters, most particularly China's assistance in re-solving the North Korea nuclear weapons crisis. The Commission believes that China's performance in this area to date has been unsatisfactory, and we are concerned that U.S. pressure on trade disputes and other unrelated aspects of the relationship may have been toned down by the administration as a concession for China's hoped-for cooperation on this and other vital security matters."
Economic War
According to the report, China is deliberately using economic warfare against America to seek a "competitive advantage over U.S. manufacturers."
"Economic fundamentals suggest that the Chinese yuan is undervalued, with a growing consensus of economists estimating the level of undervaluation to be anywhere from fifteen to forty percent. The Chinese government persistently intervenes in the foreign exchange market to keep its exchange rate pegged at 8.28 yuan per dollar, and through these actions appears to be manipulating its currency valuation," states the report.
The Commission also noted that China is violating its pledges to the World Trade Organization and that U.S. investors may actually be investing in the PLA military expansion.
"China has deliberately frustrated the effectiveness and debased the value of the WTO's TRM (Transitional Review Mechanism) which was intended to be a robust mechanism for assessing China's WTO compliance and for placing multilateral pressure on China to address compliance shortfalls."
"Without adequate information about Chinese firms trading in international capital markets, U.S. investors may be unwittingly pouring money into black box firms lacking basic corporate governance structures, as well as enterprises involved in activities harmful to U.S. security interests," noted the report.
Weapons for Oil
The Commission report also noted that China continues to proliferate advanced weapons to many of its client states including North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. In addition, China now appears to be willing to trade weapons for oil.
"China's growing energy needs, linked to its rapidly expanding economy, are creating economic and security concerns for the United States. China's energy security policies are driving it into bilateral arrangements that undermine multilateral efforts to stabilize oil supplies and prices, and in some cases may involve dangerous weapons transfers," stated the report.
"China has sought energy cooperation with countries of concern to the United States, including Iran and Sudan, which are inaccessible by U.S. and other western firms. Some analysts have voiced suspicions that China may have offered WMD-related transfers as a component of some of its energy deals," noted the Commission.
New Weapons
The Commission report also revealed that Russia has sold China a more advanced version of the deadly SUNBURN (3M83 Moskit) cruise missile. Nikolay Shcherbakov, adviser to the director general of the Altair Naval Scientific Research Institute of Electronic Engineering, is reported as saying that "we are supplying China with new-generation equipment. We have been allowed to supply MOSKIT supersonic antiship cruise missiles with twice the range - 240km instead of the existing 120."
The Commission also noted a growing concern that China would use nuclear weapons to attack and defeat U.S. forces in the event of a war over Taiwan.
"Recognizing the possible involvement of the U.S. military, the current scholarship on China's R & D finds that PRC strategists believe that a superior navy could be defeated through the disabling of its space-based systems, as for example, by exo-atmospheric detonation of a nuclear warhead to generate an electromagnetic pulse," stated the report.
In addition, the Commission noted that China is pursuing an advanced laser weapon for use against Taiwanese and U.S. forces.
"It has recently been reported that China has successfully developed a laser cannon with a range of more than one hundred kilometers and might have already deployed it in Fujian Province facing Taiwan."
Shooting War in 2005
The Commission's report painted a deadly and growing picture of the Chinese threat with a possible conflict only a year away.
"The China Affairs Department of the Democratic Progressive Party published a report on China's basic military capabilities in which it said that Beijing had developed a 'sudden strike' strategy to attack Taiwan. This story discussed a scenario in which an attack would consist of an initial seven-minute shock and strike missile barrage that would paralyze Taiwan's command system, followed by seventeen minutes in which Taiwan's air space will be invaded by fighter jets. Within twenty-four hours of the strike, 258,000 Chinese troops could be deployed in Taiwan. China's fast-growing military modernization and expansion is aimed at a possible war between 2005 and 2010, according to the report," stated the Commission report.
In early June the Pentagon released a Congressionally mandated report on Chinese military developments. The Pentagon report outlined the double-digit increases in Chinese defense spending and major weapons purchases from Russia.
China currently is third in total defense spending, behind the U.S. and Russia, with nearly $100 billion a year now budgeted for the PLA. The Pentagon report noted that the PLA double-digit increases are expected to continue through 2010.
According to the report, the Chinese build-up of ballistic missiles has changed the balance of power in the Pacific, threatening to start a war over Taiwan. China currently has an estimated 550 short-range missiles opposite Taiwan.
"China most likely will be able to cause significant damage to all of Taiwan's airfields and quickly degrade Taiwan's ground based air-defenses and associated command and control through a combination of SRBMs (short range ballistic missiles), land-attack cruise missiles, special operation forces and other assets," stated the Pentagon report. The Pentagon report noted that China is increasing its long-range missile capability and is expected to expand its inventory to 30 such missiles by the end of 2005. The Pentagon anticipates the Chinese long-range nuclear missile force will exceed 60 before the end of the decade.
Nuclear War
The Pentagon report also warned that Chinese military strategists are considering the use of nuclear weapons against U.S. and Taiwanese forces. According to the Pentagon, a nuclear weapon detonated at high altitude would create an "electromagnetic" shock wave that will disrupt U.S. communications and scramble sophisticated military computers. "PLA theorists who have become aware of these electromagnetic effects may have considered using a nuclear weapon as an unconventional attack option," stated the Pentagon report.
Chinese authorities have reacted explosively to the recent reports, especially over the U.S. commitment to Taiwan. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao underscored the unstable nature of China's relationship by threatening to use military force to seize control of the tiny island nation.
According to the official PRC news Xinhua, China will never tolerate "Taiwan independence", neither will China allow anybody to split Taiwan from the motherland with any means.
"The Taiwan independence activities are the greatest threats to the peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait," stated Liu. The official PRC spokesman also asked the United States to stop selling advanced weapons to Taiwan under any pretenses and refrain from sending wrong signals to Taiwan.
Chew harder.
AM: I have politely asked this person to stop posting to me, and said that I would do likewise. He cannot post with out attacking, and I know that FR has a policy that they enforce in these situations. Please enforce it. TUVM.
You can't answer the question because you don't know do you. And you conveniently want to ignore the fact that while manufacturers are scrambling to retool and relocate, very significant downtime can occur. Significant enough to shut down manufacturing for months or years. Your insult belies the fact that you do not have knowledge in this area, whereas I do.
Do not post to Don Joe anymore.
Copy all.
AC, I think you meant to say that the US government borrows lots of money from overseas.
And the question then neatly reverses itself.
How would China recover their money?
Exactly. Sorry for the confusion there.
It is beneath me to return your barbs, but suffice to say I have forgotten more about rocket science and ICBMs than you have ever known or even hope to know.
So you're seriously arguing, as a self-proclaimed expert on ICBMs, that the ChiComs will be able to launch a nuclear strike with no US retaliation?
That kind of statement doesn't even pass the laugh test...
Certainly, as compared with those early and heady days of the late 1980s and early 90s when greenfield site were sprouting like lychees throughout South China, and I was shrouded in optimism guzzling Tsing Tao stout in Shang Hai, the dependence on Taiwanese and US investment in the PRC is much less. Today, they overtly court the ASEAN overseas Chinese, the Euros, the CISers, and the wealthier quarters in the Islamic world. Therefore, it would seem that the counteracting effects of Taiwanese and US investment on PRC restraint are markedly less than they were even 10 years ago. Of this, we must make note.
Japan seems to maintain a very unique relationship with Taiwan. Unlike other areas which Japan conquered from the late 1800s on, those ethnic Chinese and other non Chinese who were living on Taiwan prior to 1945 do not seem to harbor much ill will toward Japan. Many proudly speak Japanese and are quite well versed in Japanese cultural elements. This is a cause of rage on the part of Chinese who live on the mainland as well as even some KMT who live on Taiwan. I have reviewed the Asiawind forum (see link on my links page)and from time to time, they all get into bellyaching mode about how "Japenese Imperialists" on Taiwan want to foment "separatist" mentality and how it is part of a supposed conspiracy to create a new neo-Bushido Japan. From my perspective, what they are doing is talking themselves into prewar hatred of Japan (and Japanophile Taiwanese) and, by proxy, the West. I hope I am wrong - however, it really does resemble the way Stalin prepped his population for war and the way Hitler did the same.
Actually, I am in the biz and wanted to make a slight correction. Most of those Taiwanese companies who build computers now have mostly R&D and adminstrative operations on Taiwan, and perhaps low volume new product lines there, however their highest volume lines, due to labor cost and anti competitive domestic content rules on the part of the PRC, are over on the mainland already. In other words, with the issuance of a single command from Beijing, within a few hours time, the major production capacity would be "owned" lock stock and barrel by the CCP and their designates. Marx wrote of seizing the means of production. Deng Xiao Ping, and his followers studied this well.
It's called blockade. Look into it. Stop and think before you laugh.
This is war, not commerce.
They are the same thing. Example: Reagan defeating USSR. The cold war was won without firing a shot. We can do the samething to the communists in China. Manufacturing jobs are coming back. Don't believe me, look at the numbers yourself. We have more leverage over china than you think.
The influx of money is having a negative effect on the communist party's control of the country. It's people are being educated at a record pace and recently private property was established. The mere fact that they allowed private property means that more and more people have a stake in the direction of the country. This is de-centralizing their absolute power. Captialists have been incorporated into the communist party. Who thought that was possible 15 years ago? Free elections are happening in all rural areas. Their financial sector is a basketcase right now. Why? Because the market forces have become greater than the government's power to control it.
We've exported our manufacturing infrastructure. We have placed ourselves at the mercy of our avowed foe. We have made ourselves dependent on an enemy for our very survival.
Dependent on our enemy for survival eh? Here's a fact:
"China’s imports of goods are roughly one-quarter of GDP, well above the share for the United States and Japan (for which the comparable ratio is around 10 percent)."
Souce = "China's Trade and U. S. Manufacturing Jobs", N. Gregory Mankiw, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. Testimony Before the House Committee on Ways and Means. Washington, D.C. October 30, 2003.
Who is more dependent on whom? I got this fact from a mere google search. It was more productive then laughing. The total imports for the US is 10% of our GDP and China accounts for 10% of our total imports.
Total imported goods from China to US: $152 billion (2003)
Total imported goods to US: $1.5 trillion (2003)
Our trade deficit with China is $125 billion. The US has a $10 trillion economy. OH NO! If we lose china as a trade partner we are all gunna DIE!! I'm not saying china has no impact on our economy, but gee whiz, look at the big picture here. We are spending $87 billion a year in Iraq , the drunken sailors in congress sneeze and they spend billions of dollars and I think just the pork spending by congress is equal to the total trade we have with China. All of this is happening during a strong economic expansion.
Contrast that with China's GDP. China has GDP of roughly $1 trillion. If the US yanks $152 billion out of China, it will have a greater effect. Further, foreign direct investment is equal to 40% of their GDP. Foreign investment deposits are about 1/3 of GDP. Guess where the majority of that foreign investment is coming from? Who is dependent on whom? After 30 days of a complete pull out of US capital and going to war with the US, who will be on their knees first?
Sure, China has a crazy streak and therefore should still be viewed as a threat. But I like our chances at peace.
Thank you so much for the ping!
Ah yes indeed, we can count on the Japanese to apply the principles of demand flow manufacturing and material staging in Kanbans even to building nukes! Gotta love 'em!
What would they do? Hmmmmm.... recall their ambassador from Tokyo? ;)
Of note - most of the non Chinese alternatives for low cost EMS are located in ASEAN and E. Europe. It is not a far stretch to envisage scenarios where *all* of these would be seized. In the case of ASEAN, an overland blitz on the heels of SRBM, IRBM and land based CMs would proceed down the autobahns now nearing completion from the Chinese heartland into central Thailand. In the case of E. Europe, resurgent anti Western neo-Communists or Nazis would nationalize the EMS facilities and Western based technologies. Some will call this tin foil, them them I say, you need to learn more.
Japan would probably be lifting the tarps off of their nuclear forces and saying, "You caused this problem, you had better fix it, and you'd better f***ing well make sure it doesn't splatter on us."
Also of no small note are the substantial relationships the PRC has with Pakistan and Iran. They also well engaged with the Saudis and Sudan. All for one and only one reason.
Please reread my original statement. I did not say that. In scenarios where there are additional nuclear players (terrorists, Russians, whoever), Chicom confidence level in their capabilities comes into play and won't be lost on our war game strategists concerned with those capabilities. You can bet this increasing capability is part of the equation when considering our anti-missile defense requirements as well as our retaliatory strike requirements. While a Chicom first strike is the ultimate threat, the assigned risk level to that is undoubtedly low (hence, your laugh), yet is increased as their capabilities increase. But, of course, you understand nothing of threat analysis so your ill-informed response was expected. BTW, I consult with threat analysts on a relatively regular basis.
You can have the last word. No more pearls before swine.
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.