Posted on 04/07/2007 4:15:17 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
'Transparency' is not how Sun Tzu and China's PLA approach war
By Lev Navrozov
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Monday, April 2, 2007
The less the potential target of an attack knows about the attacker뭩 future war, the better this is for the attacker strategically. To 밺eclare war?is the top of Western strategic absurdity. However, even Hitler was European enough to declare war on Stalin뭩 Russia (with some delay) and on the United States (in 1941). He also forbade the development of chemical and bacteriological weapons. In the post-Roman Western Europe the top military officers were aristocrats who did not kill their enemies as criminals did and do, but challenged them to a duel. Hence the declaration of war뾲he challenge to a duel.
On the other hand, Sun Tsu, the Chinese strategist of the 4th century B.C., believed that war should begin not like a European aristocrat뭩 challenge of another European aristocrat to a duel, but like a sudden strike (on the head) by a criminal (stealing from behind) with his bludgeon (shashou jian). The beginning of a war should be its victorious end.
The book 밬nrestricted War,?written by two high-ranking officers of the 밅hinese Liberation Army?and published officially by the military press in Beijing in 1999, says:
Regardless whether we are talking about Hitler, Mussolini, Truman, Johnson, or Saddam, none of them have successfully mastered war.
Much military information about the West is known to China due to Western public discussions of military problems in legislature, at universities, and in the media.
The West is thus 뱓ransparent.? Americans have insisted that China must also be 뱓ransparent,?just like another United States with Hu Jintao as president. Many Americans perceive China as children in a nursery perceive a gangsters?den which the children take for another nursery. In 1997, Michael Pillsbury, an American expert on China, published a collection of articles, written by the Chinese military and entitled 밅hinese Views of Future Warfare.? Thus, for some China seemingly became 뱓ransparent.?
But what about Marx, Lenin, and Mao, who remain China뭩 Founding Fathers, and one could imagine that the book would proceed from their views of war, no more, American than those of Sun Tsu. On one of the tapes recorded in China, I heard the Internationale, the hymn introduced by Marx, which begins:
Arise, ye prisoners of starvation, The entire world of hungry slaves. . . . The hymn does not contain the word 뱖ar.? Not war, but the liberation of the entire world.
Indeed, the Westerners know that China뭩 armed forces are called the People뭩 Liberation Army. It is to liberate the world, and it is too late to change the name to 밅hina뭩 Defense Army.? Still, the Chinese military in Pillsbury뭩 book speak not of the liberation of the rest of the world, but of defense in conventional terms as though China were just a country on guard against numerous (but unnamed) aggressors.
Well, the title of Pillsbury뭩 421-page book is 밅hinese Views of Future Warfare.? Not of 밊uture Chinese Warfare,?but of 밊uture Warfare?in general. That is, the book is about American views or West European views of future warfare, described by the military of Chinese dictatorship. China is thus a Chinese-speaking Western country, describing its defense in Chinese, translated by Pillsbury into English.
A previous aspirant to world domination or world liberation was the National Socialist Workers?Party, with Hitler as its 뱇eader.? Before 1939, Lloyd George said that he wished Hitler were at the head of the British government, while after 1938 Hitler became in the English-speaking countries a cartoon뾬r the 뱕illain?in an old-fashioned melodrama, indistinguishable from his Soviet image. In short, he became the worst man on earth, and as such he wanted world domination, since his vanity was boundless as befitting the worst man on earth.
But was his push for world domination motivated only by vanity?
Why did he attack Russia? He was afraid that Stalin would attack him뾭reemptively. He preempted Stalin뭩 preemption. What else? He wanted to convert the natural resources of Russia into a navy and air force against which the English-speaking would not be able to defend themselves. Thus he would dominate the world.
But no, it wasn뭪 just vanity.
It is not generally realized in the West today that though Western constitutionalism is soft and disorderly, it does not crumble as the Soviet dictatorship did in 1991. On the other hand, dictatorship is ruthless and regimental, but vulnerable from within.
After his first military defeat at Moscow at the end of 1941, Hitler began the extermination of Jews to prevent his betrayal by his subordinates to the United States. This is the 밄lutkitt?of criminal gangs. He pretended that the extermination was conceived, ordered, and carried out by his closest subordinates, while 밾e knew nothing about it,?and some Western historians still believe this childish pretense of his. It is true, though, that personally, not politically, he had nothing against Jews, which is also a shocking news to some Western experts.
Several attempts on Hitler뭩 life were planned after an army of about 80,000 German soldiers surrendered and was marched through the streets of Moscow. The most nearly successful assassination attempt on Hitler was made on July 20, 1944, by Col. Graf [!] Claus von Stauffenberg, who exploded a bomb at a conference at Hitler뭩 headquarters in East Prussia. Hitler was not killed, but only wounded, yet he became increasingly ill and fatigued, and then prematurely senile if not insane, up to his suicide.
The dictator can prevent this 뱎ersecution in reverse?only by having conquered the world, which Hitler failed to do because he launched conventional war in 1939 instead of putting all available resources into the development of his nuclear weapons.
The dictatorship of China is developing an array of post-nuclear super weapons, such as nano weapons. Nor is the dictatorship of China engaged in a conventional war, which would absorb all the resources of the country.
The road to world domination is clear뾲here is no way to the preservation of the dictators?power and lives except this road, over which Hitler stumbled when he launched conventional war instead of the most intense development of nuclear weapons.
What do we know about a future Chinese 뱇iberation?of the world? Post nuclear super weapons are being developed in laboratories inside mountains. Thus the laboratories do not have walls, roofs, or floors that could be detected from the outside and drilled through to learn what they are engaged in. Nor are the mountains transparent.
On the other hand, Michael Pillsbury뭩 book contributed to the hope that the dictatorship of China, with its laboratories inside the mountains, is as militarily 뱓ransparent?as is the United States, with its dozens of millions of 밿llegal aliens,?roaming all over the country and across its borders.
Lev Navrozov can be reached by e-mail at navlev@cloud9.net.
Monday, April 2, 2007
Ping!
Sorry for the mix-up for source name.:-(
Okay, please explain to me what a nano weapon is.
A good statement of a non-obvious fact.
Democracies are stronger than they appear to be. Dictatorships are weaker than they appear to be.
That's because the rifts within a democracy are on the surface, with general consensus within the society at a deeper level, while dictatorships are the reverse.
I think this author has inhaled too much No2
Nearly twenty years ago I read Sun Tsu in the Griffith translation. A great deal of my historical reading came together abruptly. It is head and shoulder the most important single book I have read, the most important of literally tens of thousands read before or since.
War came together for me all at once, and so, therefore, did politics.
bump
China is starting to grow a middle class. The problem with Communism is that it takes a large number of poor people being ruled by a small number of rich corrupt people to implement. It takes the idea of "a chicken in every pot" to sound better than "you can have an abundance".
When Communist take over a healthy Capitalist society it drains it of its resources until it is dead and the people revolt. China has been a weak Communist country for many years. Its only strength has come from its capitalist reforms. To turn back now would cause some serious upheaval amongst the Chinese. If China was so ready to strike why would they also be so interested in showing off (Olympics) to the rest of the world.
I see China as becoming a major power but not a major Communist power. Its only hope to start a war is to take Taiwan by force, but why cut off its nose and its cash cow the US.
Good for you. You could find a way to beat people who were too much into Sun-tzu. The knowledge of Sun-tze gives some people false confidence that they can always outwit their enemy with such cunning tricks and maneuvers, and perpetuate contempt for their adversary, while they play down serious flaws of their own.
If you play up their sense of superiority and encourage them to ignore their flaws, you win. In short, you win by playing dumb.:-)
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.