Op-Ed: Thai view on the new AUKUS alliance

[Denim]

8 minutes ago, LawrenceN said:

AUKUS is a step in the right direction, but holding China at bay when they decide to take Taiwan is gonna be tough despite the alliance, due to the resources needed to fight that war from a distance. I hope it doesn't involve nukes. 

 

What the Chinese are doing now is testing the waters. They have a well tried ' inching ' policy. My Chinese boss explained this to me a long time ago. When they want to undertake a seemingly dangerous or difficult objective they don't throw caution to the wind and have at it straight off. 

They inch forward and gnaw away at their objective in such small steps that their adversaries continually back off rather than start a full blown confrontation for such a small latest step.

 

The Chinese are doing this now with Taiwan, trying to grind everyone down so that they hope everyone will ask the same question as Eric Loh. ' Is it worth it '

 

The West has been down this road before. What did we learn ?  There will be no ' Peace in our time ' by allowing a continual inching by aggressive dictatorships. If you give a bully an inch he will want the whole yard. There should be economic measures taken right now to make China realize that by continually upping the anti there will be an 'inching' of repercussions to match their own .

 

The Cuban crisis was averted by taking a strong stance , not by playing softball.

[HAPPYNUFF]

At last   common sense prevailed  against the Colonel Blimps and Admiral Disasters in Australia and someone had the guts to scrap that obscene  French contract.   You do realise the  original  contract price, in 2016 was $60 billion  Australian dollars,  by 2021,  with not a single sub  even  begun, the price had grown to $90 billion  Australian, with the last of  6 submarines  to be delivered in 35,,, yes 35  years from now..   Dont rush   Frenchie, we arent in any great hurry????

[dinsdale]

15 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The CCP was formed by the people who were discontented with the miseries inflicted by colonists. China history is filled with revolutions and uprisings when the country rulers didn’t delivered to the citizens. CCP government is not infallible if they can’t deliver the expectations of the people. Chinese now have a much better standard of living, extreme poverty has been drastically reduced and they are proud of China achievements in science and innovations. 
 

Cowed into silence is a myth. They have freedom of speech no difference from the others. However China like other Asian countries don’t share the same extent of freedom of speech of the west that has creat division and disunity among the people. 

 

US has shown that an elected leader can caused lasting and extensive damage to the country and democracy even if he was voted out. 
 

 

Hello 50 cent army. Spend your 50 cents wisely. How many 50 cent posts today? Freedom of speech in China. You really have to be kidding. 

[NanLaew]

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

There were some war games where a collins sub sunk a US nuclear sub.

They 'destroyed' more than one maybe 18 years ago. Cling to those 'victories' mate.

[Eric Loh]

3 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Hello 50 cent army. Spend your 50 cents wisely. How many 50 cent posts today? Freedom of speech in China. You really have to be kidding. 

Where do you draw the line between freedom of speech and offensive post. 

[Mr Meeseeks]

2 hours ago, BobinBKK said:

These people don't know how to use a simple spellchecker? Anyway... The only "destabilizing factor" for Thailand here is not being able to play the US and China against each other the same way they did with Great Britain and France.

Thailand was in the middle of two Empirical realms, the Glorious British Raj and French Indochine. 

 

Pure geographical luck. 

[dinsdale]

12 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Where do you draw the line between freedom of speech and offensive post. 

What you posted would be the latter for almost everyone who lives in Hong Kong where freedom of speech is no longer tolerated by the dictator Xi Jinping.

Edited September 21, 2021 by dinsdale

[Rookiescot]

For the last ten years or so China has been very aggressive.

Operating debt diplomacy in many third world countries. Countries the west sends aid to but China takes money and resources out of.

Then there is the matter of simply claiming the whole South China sea as its own. Building islands and garrisoning them with troops and aircraft.

China has also been busy amassing the largest submarine fleet in the world.

It has border disputes with virtually ALL of its neighbors. Occasionally this spills over into violence. Just ask India about that.

It has repeatedly claimed Taiwan as its own and indeed sanctions any country which recognizes Taiwan's independence. It regularly violates Taiwanese airspace and territorial waters.

It ignores international condemnation of its atrocities against minority groups within its own borders.

It routinely ignores international copyright laws. It actively engages in cybercrime. 

It is in short a rogue state.

The sooner the west unites to counter this the better because China will not change its ways until it is eventually stood up to.

The best way to achieve this is through trade sanctions and tariffs on Chinese goods. Chinas domestic market is not big enough to sustain its economy. Once that house of cards starts to crumble so will the CCP. 

[BobinBKK]

1 hour ago, phetphet said:

Not incorrect if using UK English

Yeah, well, I don't...

[JustAnotherHun]

The world seems to be devided in good and evil. Who belongs to the evils is decided by the good ones.

And as everybody knows after countless Chinese wars and invasions, they're not the good ones.

[dinsdale]

18 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

They 'destroyed' more than one maybe 18 years ago. Cling to those 'victories' mate.

The Australian Armed Forces are regarded as one of the best in the world. 

[Mr Meeseeks]

6 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

The Australian Armed Forces are regarded as one of the best in the world. 

By whom and on what basis?

 

In WWII the Japanese and Germans were by far the superior to their Allied counterparts. 

[dinsdale]

2 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

By whom and on what basis?

 

In WWII the Japanese and Germans were by far the superior to their Allied counterparts. 

They lost.

[Aussieroaming]

Thailand have to make a line in the sandbox now, support China against the filthy anglo saxon falang hordes by buying their own submarines to protect the asian way of life or welcome falang tourism. What's it going to be Thailand?

[Artisi]

49 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Yes neither do they have military bases all over the world. 

Luckily 

[TKDfella]

I have only read about this in the news but I don't know any of the real details so am not qualified to state an opinion on AUKUS. But I really don't see what Thailand officialdom is concerned about as something like this was bound to happen at some point. The countries involved surely will have had thoughts that Thailand has been close with China and would have hardly 'consulted' with the Thai gov. on the issue. I read over the w/e that Pres. Xi apparently communicated that he wanted the 're-unification' of Taiwan to happen during his time rather than leave it to the next generation, so one wonders what will happen to expats here if war breaks out over this.

[Rookiescot]

1 minute ago, TKDfella said:

I have only read about this in the news but I don't know any of the real details so am not qualified to state an opinion on AUKUS. But I really don't see what Thailand officialdom is concerned about as something like this was bound to happen at some point. The countries involved surely will have had thoughts that Thailand has been close with China and would have hardly 'consulted' with the Thai gov. on the issue. I read over the w/e that Pres. Xi apparently communicated that he wanted the 're-unification' of Taiwan to happen during his time rather than leave it to the next generation, so one wonders what will happen to expats here if war breaks out over this.

We might need to slaughter the livestock (goldfish) and seek shelter in the nearest bar.

[Moonlover]

The author of this piece seems to have got this issue completely round his neck. He writes:

 

'For decades, ASEAN has been urging all nuclear powers to accede to the Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapons-Free Zone (SEANWFZ).

 

Supplying nuclear powered submarines to Australia does not, in any way breach this understanding. A nuclear powered submarine is not a nuclear armed submarine. There are no nuclear weapons involved.

 

He needs to go away and do his homework.

 

 

 

Edited September 21, 2021 by Moonlover

[Artisi]

2 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

I have only read about this in the news but I don't know any of the real details so am not qualified to state an opinion on AUKUS. But I really don't see what Thailand officialdom is concerned about as something like this was bound to happen at some point. The countries involved surely will have had thoughts that Thailand has been close with China and would have hardly 'consulted' with the Thai gov. on the issue. I read over the w/e that Pres. Xi apparently communicated that he wanted the 're-unification' of Taiwan to happen during his time rather than leave it to the next generation, so one wonders what will happen to expats here if war breaks out over this.

Hope any re-unification is a little more subtle than the re-unification of Tibet, thousands slaughtered, land ransacked and re-populated with mainland Chinese to dilute the Tibetan culture. 

[Burma Bill]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

Bangkok views the latest US move as a destabilizing factor

As dictated by the Chinese "paymasters"????????

[Mr Meeseeks]

7 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

They lost.

They did but that was mostly down to the US joining the war and Hitler's poor judgement on the Eastern front.

 

We are talking performance of the armed forces, specifically land armies. Forget about the Luftwaffe and German Navy for a minute. 

 

In most land based engagements prior to 1943 the Germans came out on top and even were formidable in retreat and when they were on the back foot after Allied victory in North Africa. Up until that point, the British and ANZACs (among other troops) rarely won any engagements against the Germans, much to Churchill's fury.

 

Indeed, without Ultra decrypts of German intelligence the war would have likely been lost. 

 

As to the Japanese, they had inferior weaponry but their infantry fought doggedly, and were generally man to man, superior and more determined fighters than any of the Western allies.

[Eric Loh]

15 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

The author of this piece seems to have got this issue completely round his neck. He writes:

 

'For decades, ASEAN has been urging all nuclear powers to accede to the Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapons-Free Zone (SEANWFZ).

 

Supplying nuclear powered submarines to Australia does not, in any way breach this understanding. A nuclear powered submarine is not a nuclear armed submarine. There are no nuclear weapons involved.

 

He needs to go away and do his homework.

 

 

 

To be fair to the author, nuclear submarine are inextricably linked with nuclear weapons. All 6 countries in the world that possesses nuclear submarines have nuclear weapons. Nuclear submarines powered with the same enriched uranium that is used in bombs. You don’t acquire nuclear submarines just to cruise around.
 

Australia has forfeited their status as a country linked to the Treaty of Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

 

I personally think it’s a wrong policy as their alliance with US is strong and can provide the nuclear deterrent. Australia action runs contrary to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in this part of the world. Make this region unsafe against nuclear mishap.  

[GreasyFingers]

4 hours ago, steven100 said:

This is a good move and the correct move by Australia, UK and the US.  I have said all along that Australia should and must have a greater US military presence in Australia's top end,   even just for training and as a deterrent.  The Pine Gap is fine as it's a special communications post, however, a large military base should be located in NT or the Top end. 

So you have not been to Darwin in the NT or Derby in WA, as well as the upgrading of airports for the war machines.

 

Apart from that the subs wont be supplied for at least 10 years. Probably longer if the F-35 is any guide.

[Rookiescot]

18 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

To be fair to the author, nuclear submarine are inextricably linked with nuclear weapons. All 6 countries in the world that possesses nuclear submarines have nuclear weapons. Nuclear submarines powered with the same enriched uranium that is used in bombs. You don’t acquire nuclear submarines just to cruise around.
 

Australia has forfeited their status as a country linked to the Treaty of Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

 

I personally think it’s a wrong policy as their alliance with US is strong and can provide the nuclear deterrent. Australia action runs contrary to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in this part of the world. Make this region unsafe against nuclear mishap.  

So why has China not been more proactive in preventing North Korea from obtaining nukes?

[mfd101]

38 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

They did but that was mostly down to the US joining the war and Hitler's poor judgement on the Eastern front.

 

We are talking performance of the armed forces, specifically land armies. Forget about the Luftwaffe and German Navy for a minute. 

 

In most land based engagements prior to 1943 the Germans came out on top and even were formidable in retreat and when they were on the back foot after Allied victory in North Africa. Up until that point, the British and ANZACs (among other troops) rarely won any engagements against the Germans, much to Churchill's fury.

 

Indeed, without Ultra decrypts of German intelligence the war would have likely been lost. 

 

As to the Japanese, they had inferior weaponry but their infantry fought doggedly, and were generally man to man, superior and more determined fighters than any of the Western allies.

And the relevance of all that to the state of play in 2021 and 2030 and 2040 is ... ?

[Pravda]

Does anyone know what happened to CANZUK alliance? I feel Canada is always left out.

[GreasyFingers]

46 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

As to the Japanese, they had inferior weaponry but their infantry fought doggedly, and were generally man to man, superior and more determined fighters than any of the Western allies.

Much better at treating their POWs too.

[mfd101]

37 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Australia has forfeited their status as a country linked to the Treaty of Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

 

I personally think it’s a wrong policy as their alliance with US is strong and can provide the nuclear deterrent. Australia action runs contrary to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in this part of the world. Make this region unsafe against nuclear mishap.  

Piffle. Nuclear propulsion and nuclear weapons are 2 entirely different matters. Australia's strategic problem is that it is so remote from the Asian mainland and its maritime area of interest is so vast, the only practical solution in preparing for maritime warfare (ie trying to deter it) is nuclear propulsion for its subs. Diesel-fueled with electric batteries is just hopeless in the circumstances.

 

What has made the difference now is that the US & UK technology means that the nuclear fuel for the subs is packaged and will last for some 30+ years without maintenance or refueling ie without Oz having to develop the full nuclear-capable industrial package.

 

But the industrial package for nuclear power installations across Oz will inevitably follow by the 2030s, opposed to the end by the infinitely head-in-the-sand Oz Labor Party. When you have a huge continent with 90% of the population in 6 or 7 cities, the small nuclear-module power installations that are coming down the track are the obvious carbon-free way to go.

Edited September 21, 2021 by mfd101

[Rookiescot]

2 minutes ago, Pravda said:

Does anyone know what happened to CANZUK alliance? I feel Canada is always left out.

Canada only has diesel electric subs. This agreement was for the supply of nuclear powered (not armed) submarines. 

For all that I like Canada (I think its a fantastic place with great people) I'm not sure how much expertise they would have brought to this.

 

[mfd101]

3 minutes ago, Pravda said:

Does anyone know what happened to CANZUK alliance? I feel Canada is always left out.

No such thing. Canada is part of the Five Eyes intelligence-gathering and -exchanging agreement.