China's Navy Breaks out to the High Seas

[News_Editor]

A navy officer waves as China’s hospital ship “Peace Ark” leaves a military port for the Philippines to assist to the victims of Typhoon Haiyan, on Nov. 21, 2013. (Photo: Reuters)

HONG KONG: In late October, flotillas of Chinese warships and submarines sliced through passages in the Japanese archipelago and out into the western Pacific for 15 days of war games.

The drills, pitting a red force against a blue force, were the first in this area, combining ships from China’s main south, east and north fleets, according to the Chinese military. Land-based bombers and surveillance aircraft also flew missions past Japan to support the navy units.

In official commentaries, senior People’s Liberation Army (PLA) officers boasted their navy had dismembered the so-called first island chain”the arc of islands enclosing China’s coastal waters, stretching from the Kuril Islands southward through the Japanese archipelago, Taiwan, the Northern Philippines and down to Borneo.

Named Manoeuvre 5, these were no ordinary exercises. They were the latest in a series of increasingly complex and powerful thrusts through the first island chain into the Pacific. For the first time in centuries, China is building a navy that can break out of its confined coastal waters to protect distant sea lanes and counter regional rivals.

Beijing’s military strategists argue this naval punch is vital if China is to avoid being bottled up behind a barrier of US allies, vulnerable to a repeat of the humiliation suffered at the hands of seafaring Europeans and Japanese through the colonial period. “It tells Japan and the United States that they are not able to contain China within the first island chain,†says Shen Dingli, a security expert and professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University. “So don’t bet on their chances to do so at a time of crisis.â€

In the process, the rapidly expanding PLA navy (PLAN) is driving a seismic shift in Asia’s military balance. China, traditionally an inwardly focused continental power, is becoming a seagoing giant with a powerful navy to complement its huge ship-borne trade.

“As China grows, China’s maritime power also grows,†says Ren Xiao, director of the Centre for the Study of Chinese Foreign Policy at Fudan University and a former Chinese diplomat posted to Japan. “China’s neighboring countries should be prepared and become accustomed to this.â€

China’s strongly nationalistic Communist Party leader, Xi Jinping, has thrown his personal weight behind the maritime strategy. In a speech to the Politburo in the summer, Xi said the oceans would play an increasingly important role this century in China’s economic development, according to accounts of his remarks published in the state-controlled media.

“We love peace and will remain on a path of peaceful development but that doesn’t mean giving up our rights, especially involving the nation’s core interests,†he was quoted as saying by the official Xinhua News Agency.

Blue Water Ambitions

China is also making waves in the South China Sea, where it has territorial disputes with a number of littoral states. But it is the pace and tempo of its deployments and exercises around Japan that provide the clearest evidence of Beijing’s “blue water†ambitions. Fleets of pale grey, PLA warships are a now a permanent presence near or passing through the Japanese islands.

An acrimonious standoff over a rocky jumble of disputed islands in the East China Sea, known as the Senkakus in Japan and Diaoyu in China, has given China an opportunity to flex its new maritime muscle. Beijing has deployed paramilitary flotillas and surveillance aircraft to this zone for more than a year, where they jostle with Japanese counterparts.

Tension flared dangerously last week when China imposed a new air defense zone over the islands, demanding that foreign aircraft lodge flight plans with Beijing before entering this area. In defiance of the zone on Tuesday, two unarmed US B-52 bombers on a training mission flew over the islands without informing Beijing. The flight did not prompt a response from China.

“The policy announced by the Chinese over the weekend is unnecessarily inflammatory,†White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters in California, where President Barack Obama is traveling.

Washington and Tokyo immediately signaled they would ignore the restriction. The Obama administration also reminded China that the treaty obliging the United States to defend Japan if it came under attack also covered the disputed islands.

Particularly unnerving for Tokyo are the increasingly common transits of powerful Chinese naval squadrons through the narrowest straits of the Japanese archipelago, sometimes within sight of land.

This puts East Asia’s two economic giants, both with potent navies, in direct military competition for the first time since the 1945 surrender of Japan’s two million-strong invasion force in China. Drawing on a reservoir of bitterness over that earlier conflict, the demeanor of both sides signals this is a dangerous moment as US naval dominance in Asia wanes. Even if both sides exercise restraint, the risk of an accidental clash or conflict is ever present.

“China and Japan have to come to terms with the fact that their militaries will operate in close proximity to each other,†says James Holmes, a maritime strategist at the US Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, and a former US Navy surface warfare officer. “Geography compels them to do so.â€

Coordinated Crossing

As the Manoeuvre 5 drills got under way, PLA Senior Colonel Du Wenlong said he was looking forward to units from the three regional Chinese fleets simultaneously crossing three key chokepoints—two through the Japanese islands, and one between Taiwan and the Philippines, according to reports in the official Chinese military media. It is unclear if the warships performed a coordinated transit. But the exercises and the response of the Japanese military contributed to a spike in tension.

“The PLAN has cut up the whole island chain into multiple sections so that the so-called island chains are no longer existent,†Colonel Du was quoted as saying.

In this and earlier exercises, the PLA provided daily commentaries and details of the ships, courses and drills, with pointed mention of transit points past Japan.

PLA officers or military commentators, in typical communiqués, say China has “demolished†or “fragmented†the island chain in a “breakthrough†into the Pacific—language that suggests the crossings are somehow opposed rather than legal transits through international waters.

Tokyo dispatched warships and aircraft to track and monitor the Chinese fleet in response to the latest drills. Japanese fighters also scrambled to meet Chinese bombers and patrol aircraft as they flew out to the exercises and back. Japan’s Defense Ministry later released surveillance photographs of a Chinese H6 bomber flying between Okinawa and Miyako Island on Oct. 26.

All this attention clearly irritated the PLA leadership. Beijing accused Japan of a “dangerous provocation†and lodged a formal diplomatic protest, complaining that a Japanese warship and aircraft disrupted a live fire exercise.

While the drills were under way, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe warned that his country would not be bullied. “We will express our intention as a state not to tolerate a change in the status quo by force,†he told a military audience on Oct. 27. “We must conduct all sorts of activities such as surveillance and intelligence for that purpose.â€

Naval commentators suggest the bellicose rhetoric shows that both sides are struggling to adjust to their new rivalry. “Chinese hardliners do regional tranquility no service by talking about splitting Japan and so forth,†says American naval strategist Holmes, co-author of an influential book on China’s maritime rise, “Red Star Over the Pacific,†with colleague Toshi Yoshihara. “And, the Japanese do regional tranquility no service by being alarmed when China’s navy transits international straits in a perfectly lawful manner.â€

Part of the problem for Japan is that it has been slow to adjust to China’s rise, according to some Chinese foreign policy analysts, and is now excessively anxious. “For so many years they looked down upon China which was big but weak,†says Ren, the former Chinese diplomat. “Now the situation is different and they have to face up to the new reality.â€

Some senior Japanese officers accept that China is within its rights to traverse international waters between the Japanese islands. Likewise, they say, the Japanese are entitled to track and monitor these movements and exercises.

“The Japanese Self Defense Force’s reaction is also in full compliance with international laws, regulations and customs,†says retired Vice Admiral Yoji Koda, a former top Japanese naval commander. Koda adds that the Japanese military routinely monitors Russian naval operations around Japan without friction or protest.

Rise of Seafaring Powers

The ideological keel of Beijing’s modern bid to become a maritime power was laid down as China’s economic revival in the early 1980s flowed through into sharply increased military budgets. The starting point for China’s leading maritime thinkers is the trauma of European and Japanese colonization.

“The Qing Dynasty was badly defeated in naval warfare by overseas imperialist powers, leading to the decline and fall of the dynasty,†wrote Zhang Wenmu, a professor at Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, in a 2010 article published in China’s official state media.

Another premier Chinese maritime strategist is Ni Lexiong, a professor at Shanghai’s University of Political Science and Law. He has documented how China’s failure to properly fund its navy was a factor in its 1895 defeat in the first Sino-Japanese war and the subsequent loss of Taiwan.

Zhang and Ni are regarded as China’s leading advocates of the theories of the American naval officer, strategist and historian Alfred Thayer Mahan. Both subscribe to one of Mahan’s principal ideas: A truly powerful nation must have thriving international trade, a merchant fleet to carry these goods and a strong navy to protect its sea lanes. Mahan’s works, considered visionary in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, are still avidly read and absorbed in Chinese naval schools, Chinese military analysts say.

The rise of earlier seafaring and trading powers—Portugal, Spain, Holland, Great Britain, the United States and Japan—have also provided important lessons for strategic thinkers. The vision and influence of the late Admiral Liu Huaqing, known as the father of the modern Chinese navy, also remains strong.

Liu, who died in 2011, rose to become overall commander of the PLA and a member of the Communist Party’s Politburo standing committee, the country’s supreme ruling body. While Liu was head of the navy in the 1980s, it was an obsolete, coastal fleet. But Liu was determined that China needed a blue-water fleet and aircraft carriers if it was to match the power of the United States and its allies.

Fundamental to the thinking of many Chinese strategists and military and political leaders is the conviction that China would be foolish to rely on the United States to protect its shipping. They acknowledge that the US Navy has guaranteed freedom of navigation since the end of World War Two, underwriting an explosion in global trade to the benefit of most other countries, including China.

The figures bear this out. China last year overtook the United States as the world’s biggest trader, according to official data from both countries. Up to 90 percent of Chinese trade is carried by sea, including most of its vital imports of energy and raw materials, shipping experts estimate. But Beijing’s strategists fear the US could interrupt this trade at a time of crisis or conflict.

Almost all of China’s naval thinkers also agree that recovering Taiwan is crucial to realizing the dream of maritime power. Restoring “national unity†is a longstanding goal of the ruling Communist Party. But the self-governing island itself has immense strategic value, sitting astride sea lanes that are also vital for Japan and South Korea.

Control of Taiwan would open a huge breach in the first island chain around China. PLA warships and aircraft based on the island could extend China’s military reach far into the Pacific and much closer to Japan, without the need to first pass through potential choke points or channels in the chain.

“Taiwan is a part of the first island chain,†says Fudan University’s Shen. “Instead of being integrated into mainland China, it has been used as a part of the US first island chain strategy.â€

Abandoning the Maoist Strategy

China’s turn to the sea has boosted the status of the navy, long the poor relation of the armed forces. The PLA, traditionally a massive ground force, was built around the Maoist strategy of drawing an invading enemy deep into the hinterland, where it could be destroyed through attrition.

Military strategists say this was thinkable before the country industrialized. Now that the eastern seaboard is the throbbing engine of the world’s second-ranked economy, fighting a war here would be catastrophic for China, win or lose, they say. Far better to meet challenges at sea or on the territory of a hostile nation.

The late Admiral Liu is credited with sharply increasing the navy’s share of the defense budget, outlays that have paid for a rapidly expanding fleet. In its annual assessment of the Chinese military published earlier this year, the Pentagon said the Chinese navy, now the biggest in Asia, deployed 79 major surface warships and more than 55 submarines, among other vessels. And the PLAN last year commissioned its first aircraft carrier.

Wu Shengli, the powerful admiral who now leads this force, is widely regarded as the most influential naval officer since Admiral Liu. Wu is also a member of the Central Military Commission, China’s top military council.

PLAN warships are now highly visible in all major oceans, with an active schedule of ship visits to foreign ports. The Chinese navy is part of the international anti-piracy force in the Gulf of Aden. These deployments are heavily publicized in the state-controlled media as the navy becomes a symbol of China’s growing international prestige.

This openness also applies to combat exercises. The US and other major powers routinely chastise China for a lack of transparency surrounding its three-decade military build-up. But it is difficult to accuse Beijing of secrecy when it comes to recent naval operations near Japan. The state-run media and a stable of specialist military newspapers, journals, web-sites and television channels devote blanket coverage to the deployment of warships, submarines, aircraft and patrol vessels on missions near China’s neighbor.

Some military commentators say Japan shouldn’t overreact to these messages, as they are primarily aimed at a domestic Chinese audience.

“The PLAN is a relatively young organization building up their capabilities and certainly not the ‘senior service’ in China,†says Alessio Patalano, a specialist on the Japanese military at King’s College in London. “It’s important for its leadership and its members to establish their credentials and increase their profile.â€

For exercise Manoeuvre 5, the Chinese navy followed the US practice of embedding journalists. Regular television reports from the Type-052 guided missile destroyer Guangzhou showed the 6,500-tonne warship ploughing through heavy seas on route to the exercises. Officers and sailors were interviewed at battle stations while they tracked targets and prepared missile launches.

Tokyo is keeping careful score. In its latest Defense White Paper, published in July, the Japanese military charted steadily expanding PLA deployments near Japan since 2008, documenting bigger visiting fleets, more powerful warships and increasingly complex exercises involving helicopters, support vessels and land-based aircraft.

Encirclement

After decades confined to its coastal seas, the PLAN began regular voyages from the East China Sea into the Pacific early last decade. At first, Chinese warships mostly used the wide Miyako Strait between Okinawa and Miyako Island, according to statements from the Chinese and Japanese militaries. Since then, in a series of firsts, they have transited all the other important channels between the Japanese islands, according to Japan’s White Paper.

Then came encirclement.

In July, five PLA warships steamed out of the Sea of Japan through the Soya Strait, known as the La Perouse Strait in Russia, which divides the Russian island of Sakhalin and Hokkaido. The Chinese fleet continued on around the Japanese islands and back to China.

“The move marks the first trip by the Chinese navy circumnavigating the Japanese archipelago,†said a report on China’s official military website.

Some Chinese strategists reject fears that deploying a powerful navy increases the odds of conflict. “I am more confident than many outside observers that China will behave out of the nation’s fundamental interests, namely, to take a path of peaceful development,†says Ren. “There is no reason to change this option.â€

For Japan, there might even be an upside. Chinese warships used to be mostly confined to home waters, and thus hidden. Now, they can now be monitored.

“The more exercises the PLAN conducts on the high seas around Japan, the better for the [Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force] to judge and collect the PLAN’s warfare capabilities and intents,†says Koda, the retired Japanese admiral. “The PLAN cannot intimidate Japan by these types of exercises.â€

The post China’s Navy Breaks out to the High Seas appeared first on The Irrawaddy Magazine.

Source: Irrawaddy.org

[LawrenceChee]

Excellent move to protect their own interests as long as they stay peaceful

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[drx13]

I wonder how much of a navy they might be if they had to rely on techologies they developed ,still be junks.

[jimmybcool]

I'm OK with it other than the fact they are bullying their neighbors around in claiming land and surrounding waters that they never claimed before. And are belligerent about it.

[Publicus]

The dictators in Beijing know that before they can become a global power in their designs to dominate the world they first need to become a regional power.

That's what the naval buildup is about, to subjugate the navies of Japan and India, Australia as well not to mention the US Navy.

Navy chief Admiral Wu Shengli is 70 years old now so he's no longer a rising star. The problem with the military there is that the PLA runs everything.

Admiral Wu for example is a graduate of the Surveying and Mapping College of the People’s Liberation Army and then of the Dalian City Naval Academy, the latter still having a curriculum much more like that of the US Merchant Marine Academy than the US Naval Academy.

This is the problem concerning Beijing's military forces, i.e., naval and air force officers come out of the army. Beijing has begun to change this severe incompetency, but it will be another two or three generations before Beijing starts having naval officers in the Navy (and Air Force officers in the Air Force).

Beijing also needs to establish a national naval academy that has a naval academy curriculum, instead of having a 'sort of' naval academy in a city, Dalian, that still has what is in fact a Merchant Marine curriculum. Yes, Dalian is a high tech center but the naval academy there needs a naval curriculum, not a merchant marine curriculum, and a modern naval academy curriculum at that.

It's only recently that the PLANavy has begun to venture out to the area of the continental shelf. It seldom undertakes drills or training exercises because no one knows quite what to do with a naval warship, much less with a battle group of 'em.. That's because it's the PLAN - the People's Liberation Army Navy.

And the only practical and best way for the PLAN to access the western Pacific is through the Miyako Strait which is controlled by Japan, so if I were the Boyz in Beijing I might want to be a bit more of a hospitable neighbor than they have been, with the Senkaku Islands and Air Defense Identification Zone and all of that.

You can have all the naval warships and their firepower RMB can buy but you can't do much with them when PLA officers with some naval training and experience are given the rank of captain or admiral and put in command.

Edited December 1, 2013 by Publicus

[jimmybcool]

The dictators in Beijing know that before they can become a global power in their designs to dominate the world they first need to become a regional power.

That's what the naval buildup is about, to subjugate the navies of Japan and India, Australia as well not to mention the US Navy.

Navy chief Admiral Wu Shengli is 70 years old now so he's no longer a rising star. The problem with the military there is that the PLA runs everything.

Admiral Wu for example is a graduate of the Surveying and Mapping College of the People’s Liberation Army and then of the Dalian City Naval Academy, the latter still having a curriculum much more like that of the US Merchant Marine Academy than the US Naval Academy.

This is the problem concerning Beijing's military forces, i.e., naval and air force officers come out of the army. Beijing has begun to change this severe incompetency, but it will be another two or three generations before Beijing starts having naval officers in the Navy (and Air Force officers in the Air Force).

Beijing also needs to establish a national naval academy that has a naval academy curriculum, instead of having a 'sort of' naval academy in a city, Dalian, that still has what is in fact a Merchant Marine curriculum. Yes, Dalian is a high tech center but the naval academy there needs a naval curriculum, not a merchant marine curriculum, and a modern naval academy curriculum at that.

It's only recently that the PLANavy has begun to venture out to the area of the continental shelf. It seldom undertakes drills or training exercises because no one knows quite what to do with a naval warship, much less with a battle group of 'em.. That's because it's the PLAN - the People's Liberation Army Navy.

And the only practical and best way for the PLAN to access the western Pacific is through the Miyako Strait which is controlled by Japan, so if I were the Boyz in Beijing I might want to be a bit more of a hospitable neighbor than they have been, with the Senkaku Islands and Air Defense Identification Zone and all of that.

You can have all the ships and their firepower RMB can buy but you can't do much with them when PLA officers with some naval training are in command.

Spot on observations IMO. I know a lot of people fear the military buildup of China. Like their plans to build real aircraft carriers and the like to match up to the US Navy. I don't want to come across as cocky or jingoist, but it won't happen in the next 20 years. Lots of people have tried to build and deploy aircraft carriers. Many have failed. And I'm not talking about undeveloped nations. Real first world countries with intelligent engineers and technicians find it difficult to deploy full flat top carriers capable of launching and retrieving a real air wing. At this time I believe the US is the only nation to actually have deployed carrier groups. Excepting the jump carriers with the VTOL Harrier type jets.

Same goes for nuclear submarines. Add in the training required to develop the right kind of officers and crews and China is so far away from being a legitimate military threat to the US Navy that it won't happen in the next 20 years. China is only a military power on it's own continent, and with ballistic missiles. The missiles are useless in a struggle with Japan, and they can't project their land power. This could change if they apply enough money to it and copy professional militaries from the US or UK or several others that are competent. It will take time.

[Publicus]

The Boyz in Beijing have ICBMs that can deliver nuclear warheads to the United States but that's not at all the route they believe they should take.

Beijing (and Iran) focus instead at the new conventional warfare, i.e., naval and air forces integrated with units of cyber warfare. In the instance of the CCP-PRC there are the additional components of anti-satellite and inner space warfare and other similar New Warfare platforms.

So in the New Warfare naval forces no longer exist per se. They are integrated with air forces and both together are further integrated with ground based missiles, cyber warfare, satellite and inner space warfare, electromagnetic pulsing warfare and the like.

Beijing (and Iran) are a long way from being there while the United States is much closer to it than anyone else.

The US however still needs to beef up its New Warfare platforms' capabilities, to include accelerating a naval shipbuilding program that will enable deployment of the desired 60 surface ships into the Pacific instead of having only 50, by 2015. Sixty by 2015 appears increasingly unlikely, however - more like by 2020 (which is close enough for government work)..

Yes, Beijing is focused on continental defense under the new concept of Anti-Access, Area Denial, or A2-AD warfare. It needs to integrate its ground, air and sea forces into one combined command which can use missiles launched from ground, sea and aircraft to deny the US access to the defense of Taiwan and Japan - eventually the Philippines, ultimately Australia.

In response, the United States in 2011 approved the New Warfare concept of AirSea Battle, which is designed to overcome Beijing's developing A2-AD systems of defense and their concomitant offensive platforms..

US AirSea Battle integrates the Navy and the Air Force into one battle group to sustain an initial A2-AD strike against it, then to conduct a robust counterattack that first, neutralizes the A2-AD forces, then launches deep into the continental mainland to destroy "the enemy's" (Beijing's) offensive capabilities. All the while AirSea Battle aggressively neutralizes and overcomes "the enemy's" capabilities in cyber warfare, satellite and inner space warfare, any possible electromagnetic pulsing weaponry and the like.

The Boyz in Beijing are a very long way from having the technology online to establish the desired A2-AD architecture or to have the quality of missiles and ships, the quality of naval commanders, to include the quality of Air Force commanders, to pull off such a scheme. But implement it they will.

Countries such as China and India have long given their army 50% of the defense budget, but now have begun to focus more on naval forces and also the Air Force. First things first, however, so presently there is the naval buildup of each. Missile research and development already is well underway in the PRChina as new varieties of A2-AD missiles are coming online regularly..

Japan meanwhile needs to do little more than bring in a couple of new computers and connect some new lines to its existing computers and it too will be ready for AirSea Battle. While Beijing's Navy far outdoes Japan's Navy in tonnage, the consensus is that Japan's Navy (and Air Force) are the most skilled and superbly trained, best equipped and best led Asian force in the region.

Edited December 1, 2013 by Publicus

[FDog]

If ots ok for the US to go there why is it not ok for China to go there. Nothing wrong with it at all.

[LawrenceChee]

All the assessments are educated guesses because unlike the USA which showcases everything for the world to see (silly) ..the PLA have wisely kept their cards to their hearts and without knowing what your enemy can do ...it's silly to strike against that

I love discovery & national geo channels ...never seen an army give away so much free intel like Uncle Sam

Chinese is a force to reckon with ...USA is too far away for its assets in this theatre and everyone knows that

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[ExpatOilWorker]

In response, the United States in 2011 approved the New Warfare concept of AirSea Battle, which is designed to overcome Beijing's developing A2-AD systems of defense and their concomitant offensive platforms..

US AirSea Battle integrates the Navy and the Air Force into one battle group to sustain an initial A2-AD strike against it, then to conduct a robust counterattack that first, neutralizes the A2-AD forces, then launches deep into the continental mainland to destroy "the enemy's" (Beijing's) offensive capabilities. All the while AirSea Battle aggressively neutralizes and overcomes "the enemy's" capabilities in cyber warfare, satellite and inner space warfare, any possible electromagnetic pulsing weaponry and the like.

I guess the 3,000 km of underground tunnels are there to ensure the PLA have a fresh fighting force after the first wave of attack.

Is Beijing currently expanding their aircraftcarrier fleet and if so by how many and when will they go into service?

[impulse]

All the assessments are educated guesses because unlike the USA which showcases everything for the world to see (silly) ..the PLA have wisely kept their cards to their hearts and without knowing what your enemy can do ...it's silly to strike against that

If you think we've seen it all, you haven't been following the tabloids. Or studying your history.

Edited December 1, 2013 by impulse

[FDog]

All the assessments are educated guesses because unlike the USA which showcases everything for the world to see (silly) ..the PLA have wisely kept their cards to their hearts and without knowing what your enemy can do ...it's silly to strike against that

If you think we've seen it all, you haven't been following the tabloids. Or studying your history.

Recent history has shown that the most effective way of fighting the US is not to fight them on their own terms but to go back to stone age tactics which has stymied their superpower arsenal and tactics.

Keeping it simple.

But really, so what if China goes on a boat tour. Big deal, lots of countries do it.

[Lokie]

I wonder how much of a navy they might be if they had to rely on techologies they developed ,still be junks.

Yeah, like Gunpowder, Medicine, Paper and the Compass - Never under estimate your adversary (see note *)

They would have to be good though to match the firepower/resources and experience of a Nimitz class battle group in conventional terms of course

* The Art of War*

from the centuries old teachings of a guy who knew a thing or two about defeating an enemy as studied by many a military officer worldwide from Sandhurst to Westpoint (The guy was General Sun Tza, erm he happened to be Chinese too)

The Chinese are doing exactly what the US do with carrier battle groups - Power Projection (taking it to their back yard)

[folium]

Naval expansion is all the rage at the moment, and not just in China.

Peter the Great's famous saying, much repeated by naval types, is the driving influence behind this: " A ruler that has but an army has one hand, but he who has a navy has both".

Russia is throwing serious time, energy and money into rebuilding its naval capacity and intends to be a major naval player over the next 2 decades, with both its traditional focus on submarines, plus extensive surface capability. See below

http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Articles/Detail/?id=150713

http://www.da.mod.uk/colleges/arag/document-listings/special/Special%20Series%2010_10_Web.pdf/view?searchterm=russian%20navy

Meanwhile in India:

http://thediplomat.com/2013/06/indias-quiet-big-naval-splash/?allpages=yes

http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/india-is-just-starting-the-long-voyage-to-naval-power-status#full

Good news if you are in the naval procurement/sales world.

[impulse]

I wonder how much of a navy they might be if they had to rely on techologies they developed ,still be junks.

Yeah, like Gunpowder, Medicine, Paper and the Compass - Never under estimate your adversary (see note *)

Ya got anything from the last 20 generations?

[folium]

All the assessments are educated guesses because unlike the USA which showcases everything for the world to see (silly) ..the PLA have wisely kept their cards to their hearts and without knowing what your enemy can do ...it's silly to strike against that

If you think we've seen it all, you haven't been following the tabloids. Or studying your history.

Recent history has shown that the most effective way of fighting the US is not to fight them on their own terms but to go back to stone age tactics which has stymied their superpower arsenal and tactics.

Keeping it simple.

But really, so what if China goes on a boat tour. Big deal, lots of countries do it.

You could argue that military victory is more a case of having clear objectives known to all and sufficient/appropriate resources to get the job done. See First Gulf War/Desert Storm, Falklands, Nagorno-Karabakh, Vietnam (from Hanoi's perspective), etc for good examples of this.

[folium]

I wonder how much of a navy they might be if they had to rely on techologies they developed ,still be junks.

Yeah, like Gunpowder, Medicine, Paper and the Compass - Never under estimate your adversary (see note *)

Ya got anything from the last 20 generations?

Ah, the "Needham Question"...

http://www.economist.com/node/11496751

http://designmind.frogdesign.com/articles/will-we-ever-see-another-four-great-inventions-from-china.html

And for a lighter-hearted look at Chinese inventions, including one for potential use with the Chinese navy; sea cucumbers or mines?

http://qz.com/134036/these-crazy-inventions-are-the-latest-sign-that-entrepreneurship-in-china-is-alive-and-well/

Edited December 1, 2013 by folium

[sustento]

I wonder how much of a navy they might be if they had to rely on techologies they developed ,still be junks.

Yeah, like Gunpowder, Medicine, Paper and the Compass - Never under estimate your adversary (see note *)

Ya got anything from the last 20 generations?

It's not all that long ago that Japan was the copycat nation. There are plenty of bright folks in China.

[impulse]

All the assessments are educated guesses because unlike the USA which showcases everything for the world to see (silly) ..the PLA have wisely kept their cards to their hearts and without knowing what your enemy can do ...it's silly to strike against that

If you think we've seen it all, you haven't been following the tabloids. Or studying your history.

Recent history has shown that the most effective way of fighting the US is not to fight them on their own terms but to go back to stone age tactics which has stymied their superpower arsenal and tactics.

True, but recent actions on the part of the USA have been taking one side or another in what are really internal civil wars, or against one faction in a country of many factions.

Lot different if you've identified a whole country as the enemy and don't worry about hearts and minds or collateral damage.

Gulf War 1 was the last action where the objectives were clear and the enemy wasn't living on the same block as the good guys. You saw how that one went.

Edited December 1, 2013 by impulse

[impulse]

I wonder how much of a navy they might be if they had to rely on techologies they developed ,still be junks.

Yeah, like Gunpowder, Medicine, Paper and the Compass - Never under estimate your adversary (see note *)

Ya got anything from the last 20 generations?

It's not all that long ago that Japan was the copycat nation. There are plenty of bright folks in China.

I won't disagree with that.

But name one earth changing invention out of China in the last 20 generations.

[sustento]

Ya got anything from the last 20 generations?

It's not all that long ago that Japan was the copycat nation. There are plenty of bright folks in China.

I won't disagree with that.

But name one earth changing invention out of China in the last 20 generations.

They don't need earth changing inventions to build a competent navy.

[Ulysses G.]

I think that is quite impressive for a communist country with a backward navy, no fanciful war plans and all the usual rhetorics of how bad they are...

Maybe, but not impressive in military terms.

America's miltary failures have been in occupying countries where we were not wanted. No one in the U.S. wants to occupy China.

Edited December 1, 2013 by Ulysses G.

[impulse]

Ya got anything from the last 20 generations?

It's not all that long ago that Japan was the copycat nation. There are plenty of bright folks in China.

I won't disagree with that.

But name one earth changing invention out of China in the last 20 generations.

They don't need earth changing inventions to build a competent navy.

No, but 100+ years of naval experience can't hurt the odds.

BTW, I'm not slamming the Chinese people. I know a lot of them and some are extremely smart and innovative. But they live in a system that rewards contacts and relationships and not creativity and accomplishment.

And regarding aircraft carriers, I think the next major war will show the carrier to be as obsolete and vulnerable as WWII showed the battleship to be.

Edited December 1, 2013 by impulse

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies deleted. Stay on topic please.

[drx13]

Inventions/Discoveries..Chinese stuff all serendipitous.

I have read David Needham and he proves my point.

My most viewed movie "Midway"

Number of Mainland Chinese Nobel Laureates in the Sciences ? take guess!

Singaporean Teachers reluctant to take students to their Science Museum.."But Sir. where are the Chinese inventions?"

Russia gave China nuclear know how in the 50's

Most popular books there are "Endangered Species CookBook", "Rhino Horn Medicine"

FYI I worked in China since 1974 , even have a Chinese wife..so do have an axe to grind.

[Publicus]

I wonder how much of a navy they might be if they had to rely on techologies they developed ,still be junks.

Yeah, like Gunpowder, Medicine, Paper and the Compass - Never under estimate your adversary (see note *)

They would have to be good though to match the firepower/resources and experience of a Nimitz class battle group in conventional terms of course

* The Art of War*

from the centuries old teachings of a guy who knew a thing or two about defeating an enemy as studied by many a military officer worldwide from Sandhurst to Westpoint (The guy was General Sun Tza, erm he happened to be Chinese too)

The Chinese are doing exactly what the US do with carrier battle groups - Power Projection (taking it to their back yard)

Agreed that Beijing is making big noises over producing aircraft carriers and suitable aircraft so it can really bully both neighboring countries and distant ones. It also took the Boyz in Beijing a long time to lift the anchor and get underway to the Philippines after typhoon Haiyan.

I would note that China has been overrun by the Mongols and the Manchus each of which established ruling dynasties over extended periods of time.

For a century the Brits showed 'em what a modern Navy looked like.

The United States and allies got China out from under World War 2.

With all due respect to Sun Tsu, Chinese generalship and warfighting abilities over the millennia have left a lot to be desired.

Edited December 1, 2013 by Publicus

[Ulysses G.]

The Chinese have always proved adept at fighting with each other.

[slipperylobster]

I think China is playing it the only way they can. However, it is they that do not have the Logisitcal capabilities to move troops and supplies quickly. The United States has plenty of assets in Asia...especially in Korea, Japan, and Guam...as well as facilities/logistical and command support in Singapore, Austrailia, and most importantly, now, back in the Philippines.

[Publicus]

In response, the United States in 2011 approved the New Warfare concept of AirSea Battle, which is designed to overcome Beijing's developing A2-AD systems of defense and their concomitant offensive platforms..

US AirSea Battle integrates the Navy and the Air Force into one battle group to sustain an initial A2-AD strike against it, then to conduct a robust counterattack that first, neutralizes the A2-AD forces, then launches deep into the continental mainland to destroy "the enemy's" (Beijing's) offensive capabilities. All the while AirSea Battle aggressively neutralizes and overcomes "the enemy's" capabilities in cyber warfare, satellite and inner space warfare, any possible electromagnetic pulsing weaponry and the like.

I guess the 3,000 km of underground tunnels are there to ensure the PLA have a fresh fighting force after the first wave of attack.

Is Beijing currently expanding their aircraftcarrier fleet and if so by how many and when will they go into service?

My guess is that the CCP would be crazy not to dig out a bunch of strong and durable tunnels given that other governments have long ago done the same, such as the United States, Canada, Russia, more recently Iran and a few others.

I think you know Beijing has reversed doctrine in favor of developing aircraft carriers and their battle groups. It'll be another generation before Beijing has even several so perhaps by then the PLAN can have some actual naval commanders to captain such ships, instead of naval commanders coming out of the PLA..

Still I wonder however if the CCP might be all that serious about its otherwise clear intention. After all, they've recently developed a carrier killer ballistic missile that is supposed to be able to hit a moving carrier. The US has the missile, too.

So if the carrier killer missile is supposed to make the aircraft carrier obsolete, why should we believe the CCP when they say they're going to go big time to construct a lot of carriers?

Both sides have the operational carrier killer ballistic missiles.

[Credo]

The aircraft carriers might be obsolete, but they may be the only technology readily available at this time. China needs to act rather quickly because Asian countries are getting their act together. The start of ASEAN is one example.

Whether they are a good technology or not, they are good for intimidating the neighbors, who have even less and must rely on the US for a significant amount of protection.