Image of a Liaoning carrier group in 2014
Posted on 03/04/2016 1:23:50 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
China is building aircraft carrier battlegroups and plans to deploy them not only in the disputed East and South China seas, but also to protect the country’s overseas interests.
Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo, who served as a national political adviser and sits on the navy’s advisory board on cybersecurity, told the state-run Xinhua News Agency that building aircraft carriers served to “defend China’s sovereignty of the islands and reefs, maritime rights and overseas interests”.
The defence ministry confirmed this year that China was building its second aircraft carrier, its first wholly home-made one.
Xinhua mentioned China’s growing interests overseas, including the increasing numbers of nationals travelling abroad and its direct investments. It also noted a need to protect overseas ethnic Chinese.
“Protecting the economic, political status and occupational safety of overseas Chinese is paramount to safeguarding China’s domestic economic development and its reform and opening-up,” Yin said, adding that such protection required strong naval power like aircraft carrier battlegroups.
Xinhua said since the opening up programme began in 1980s, overseas Chinese accounted for 60 per cent of total foreign direct investment in China.
Beijing’s relations with some Southeast Asian countries was strained in the early years of the People’s Republic, with some wary of Beijing’s support for local Communist movements as well as suppression of ethnic Chinese who commanded the domestic economies of some countries in the region.
With China now having outbound investments in 155 countries and 120 million citizens travelling abroad last year, Yin said aircraft carriers were needed to protect China’s overseas assets and its nationals abroad.
Yin said China’s aircraft carriers were to safeguard its rights and sovereignty, not to invade or threaten its neighbours. China’s doctrine of “proactive self-defence” would not change.
The Liaoning, China’s first and so far only aircraft carrier, has conducted drills in the South China Sea on a few occasions since it was commissioned in 2012.
But so far the carrier has been used mainly for training purposes rather than playing any practical combat role.
Ni Lexiong, a Shanghai-based military analyst, said Chinese aircraft carriers were unlikely to visit the South China Sea in the near future.
“Sending aircraft carriers would be a strong diplomatic statement. It is a demonstration of a country’s power and strong will to use force,” said Ni.
Image of a Liaoning carrier group in 2014
But it really doesn’t matter whether Boeing makes airplanes in America or China. /s
Ping
“Quantity has a quality of its own.” — The Red ChiComs will flood the Pacific with naval forces, thanks to the $550B+ annual trade surplus with the USA. The Gomers spend a huge portion of GDP on their military. They’ve sold us the rope with which we are hanging ourselves. GHWB never should have unlinked human rights with trade; one of the biggest foreign policy FUBARs ever.
Blockading it with two or three carrier fleets and some Marine Expeditionary Forces would be a good start.
Ed
Scaredy cat Ted said last night he would send out more of our fleet to counter their fleet, and he doesn’t seem like a military tactician at all, just somebody with military toys at his fingertips. He wants war to satisfy his special interest donors. Its the truth.
War creates jobs, but does it have to?
And bill clinton helped
They’ve had 7 years to plan it so might as well go through it. No consequences from our end.
What does Trump propose?
He's gonna build a wall around China. They're going to call it the "Great Wall of Trump" ;-)
I have no idea, if and when he has to cross that river he will address it then.
-Blockading it with two or three carrier fleets and some Marine Expeditionary Forces would be a good start. —
US diplomacy has gone from do-what-I-say-or-I-kick-your-butt to really, we should talk. How much do you want for an agreement? We will pay whatever you want. No, it does not have to be enforceable. We just need something to show the proletariat.
I don’t think you want to put large naval forces in an area filled with shallow reefs and navigational choke-points. You could send a SEAL Team onto several of those reefs and clear them out in 10 minutes plus bring back all the hardware & comm gear for analysis. What happened? Oh, Typhoon!
Those islands are very vulnerable. But going at them with B-52’s when they are defended by SAMS is just playing their game.
1. Cut off all trade with China until they vacate those so-called islands.
2.Freeze all Chinese assets in the US (including real estate) until they vacate those so-called islands.
If the US could get Europe and free Asia to go along, that would make it even better.
Of Course, China could retaliate by seizing all US assets in China. So then we'd all be using older IPhones for awhile. It could get a bit uncomfortable for consumers.
We pay enough in interest alone to China every year to cover their entire defense budget.
And none of that reduces the principal we owe them.
(Yeah, the national debt matters. Deficit spending matters.)
Good point. I forgot about that. Add it to the list. If China doesn't vacate those "islands", cancel our debt to them.
That alone just might get their attention.
I have no doubt Trump might think of doing that even though the effect it would have on U.S. economy and U.S. companies and consumers would be catastrophic.
If the US could get Europe and free Asia to go along, that would make it even better.
You're basically calling for a war with China and you expect the rest of the world to join in? Seriously?
A tad bit of an exaggeration there, FRiend. A refusal to trade does not imply a war. Heck, this sort of thing is done all the time, the latest being the trade embargo with Iran. Another one of note was the long trade embargo with Cuba.
To be sure, such moves are not always effective. And as you noted, there will be a blow-back effect on the US economy. But what's the alternative? Just allow China to claim that whole marine region?
The US has over 100 years experience with aircraft carriers, and it matters. The Japanese built very high quality aircraft carriers, but did not have as many lessons, and it cost them a war.
In a “chicken and egg” paradox, to make a carrier work you need a crew very experienced with operating a carrier, working in orderly concert at all times. And you must have exemplary damage control, or little problems become disasters in short order.
So how do you create a carrier that works?
Dunno if you read your history, but a ‘refusal to trade’ (esp. oil and metal scrap) led to 07 Dec 1941.
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.