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.
Really? So you're discounting the Russian oil sales to China? And the fields in the South China Sea are of no significance? And the Iranians wouldn't even consider a WMD for oil deal with China? None of that could happen, right?
In this case, it may be a positive. The Chinese one-child policy has, as I recall, resulted in a demographic imbalance - more young males than females. A war could restore the balance, and thus improve societal harmony.
In other words, they're going to increase the size of their army about 80-fold in nothing flat.
And, of course, their economy will prosper without those funny green pieces of paper coming in, AND paying for a 100,000,000-man army...
Your entire scenario is based on a starving chinese population. I don't see it.
OK, I will explain this patiently:
(1) China imports food.
(2) China imports oil.
(3) If China goes to war, China loses (1) and (2).
(4) Without (1) and (2), China's population starves.
(5) Drafting 100,000,000 troops that you can't feed or move does not significantly help the situation.
And what is killing millions of people to Communists?...its nothing, they do it before breakfast.
One more time:
1,000 starving peasants. 1 soldier.
Unless he's got magic bullets that can kill ten people at a time, and he never misses, he's going to become someone's breakfast.
You have no idea what our navy is capable of. You havn't even factored in our submarines. Their military equipment and strategies are still geared in the WW2 era. Their only hope is to do their damage and get out before we show up.
Get back with me when you know what a COSCO ship is, and what a call ordering them to turn around means.
Until then, thanks for the laughs. I tried visualizing a US sub commander surfacing, then getting on the horn and ordering a COSCO container ship to "haul your ass out of port NOW and get on over to California, Mister!", and I fell over, doubled up with gut-wrenching laughter.
Thanks.
I give us 30 days of non-supply from China before we're on our knees.
How long can china last without our influx of money? It works both ways. We can get the same items elsewhere for a little more money. Who the hell is going to pick up the buying spree if the US stops spending? ...
Wow, you really don't get it, do you.
This is war, not commerce.
The PLA thanks you for your blinkers.
"I" remember "you" from the pre-WWII era. You told me, "Don't be silly -- why would Japan attack us? Who would they get to buy their crap?" My kind couldn't reason with your kind then, and I see that Mr. Santayana's statement is proven true.
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.
Vote for Kerry if you actually believe this one.
Sell Lenin's philosophical heirs rope if you really believe your own tripe.
G'day, mite.
Unfortunately, long before those males can be socialized into the army, they will be socialized into a culture of lawlessness. Try reading some of George Gilder's early wirk regarding the roles played by men and women in preserving and transmitting civilization.
Are you saying that there is NO other industrial infrastructure in the world, anywhere, except China?
No Walmart and there will be riots in America.
Bingo. You get it. Poobie still doesn't.
I notice he left out of his comic book ending the part about chinese (American-design) ICBMs landing on the continental USA when they retaliate for our foolhardy attempts to board their container ships. He also left out the part about the attempts being demonstrably foolhardy, when the Chinese crews scuttle the COSCO ships.
I suggest that all the people hyperventilating about "Unrestricted Warfare" read enough history to understand what happens to countries that try to apply "Unrestricted Warfare."
And I suggest you go bother someone else.
You don't reply to my posts, and I won't reply to yours, OK?
Frankly, life is too short for your continued stream of anklebiting, and I've had my full dose of it.
Byt bye now.
Considering that China can get to Siberia a hell of a lot easier than they can get to Taiwan, and have a long-standing claim on Siberia, yes, I am discounting that prospect.
And the fields in the South China Sea are of no significance?
After the USN visits them, yes.
And the Iranians wouldn't even consider a WMD for oil deal with China?
An oil-WMD deal between China and Iran does the Chinese no good if the oil is in Bandar Abbas, is needed in Shanghai, and has to transit a naval blockade.
None of that could happen, right?
You obviously do not play wei qi.
Did you factor in the black ink they'll garner when they nationalize the infrastructure we're presently building them? Walmart alone is creating a massive retail structure in country.
Think of how their soldiers would overwhelm us if they came on our shores.
And then laugh it off if you wish.
The good news is that we're pretty close to ending the transfer of our industrial base to China.
The bad news is that the reason is, there ain't much left to transfer.
The worse news is that even if we tried to stop (let alone reverse) the process, we're in bad shape -- really bad shape. The brainpower necessary to man the infrastructure has largely gone to retirement, to the grave, or offshore.
We're screwed.
Your comic-book ending ignores the inevitable American retaliation for a nuclear strike.
How many national leaders are willing to die by being crushed, incinerated, and irradiated just to keep us from getting a container ship full of DVD players?
He also left out the part about the attempts being demonstrably foolhardy, when the Chinese crews scuttle the COSCO ships.
Ah, yes, in your world, everyone else is willing to commit suicide just to keep the Americans from getting another shipment of pet chew toys.
So you're suggesting that the U.S. Navy is going to blockade China? Poohbah, that is one of the most pathetic statements I have ever read. You have my pity.
I must disagree.
The shock of an attack by China would be enough to get Americans behind a mission there.
In fact, defending Taiwan would be an easier sell than Iraq?
Why? Because Americans aren't too fond of the Chinese; we just get along with them for business purposes. We still recognize their despotic government. Once they attack Taiwan, we would have a clear reason to go in. The whole argument about a preemptive war that occurred before Iraq would not take place then.
What, are they going to retain Louis Farrakhan to organize the Million Man Swim?
Yes, communists have never desired to spread their ideology or desired for territorial expansion. We have reached the age of Pax.
They are so dependent upon us that our dependence upon them would basically be canceled out.
Hopefully commit seppiku, but they would probably go crazy instead and start nuking everybody.
In a few short years we've gone from "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall," to "Mr. Lenin, please buy this rope."
Paging George Santayana...
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.