	Generational Dynamics
	Forecasting America's Destiny ... and the World's

\| HOME \| WEB LOG \| COUNTRY WIKI \| COMMENT \| FORUM \| DOWNLOADS \| ABOUT \|

Generational Dynamics Web Log for 23-Aug-2010
23-Aug-10 News -- China is ready for war

Web Log - August, 2010

23-Aug-10 News -- China is ready for war

A new Pentagon report describes China's military capabilities and strategy

Pentagon releases 'Military and Security Developments' on China

In 2005, I quoted General Zhu Chenghu, a top-level Chinese army officer, as saying what would happen if America interfered with Taiwan: "If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond. We ... will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian [a city in central China]. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds . . . of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese." (See "Furious Chinese ambassador harshly threatens U.S. over Taiwan.")

That threat seemed distant in 2005, but according to a new DOD report on Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China (PDF) General Zhu's threat could be carried out today.

According to the report:

"China is modernizing its nuclear forces by adding more survivable delivery systems. For example, in recent years the road mobile, solid propellant [DongFeng] DF-31 and DF-31A intercontinental range ballistic missiles (ICBM) have entered service. The DF-31A, with a range in excess of 11,200 km [7,000 miles], can reach most locations within the continental United States (CONUS)."

In addition, "China is developing and fielding large numbers of advanced medium-range ballistic and cruise missiles, new attack submarines equipped with advanced weapons, increasingly capable long-range air defense systems, electronic warfare and computer network attack capabilities, advanced fighter aircraft, and counter-space systems."

While China's nuclear capabilities are far less than those of the U.S., and China claims to have a "no-first use" policy towards nuclear weapons, the strategy is to threaten unacceptable damage on the enemy:

"Beijing’s official policy towards nuclear deterrence continues to focus on maintaining a nuclear force structure able to survive enemy attack and respond with sufficient strength to inflict unacceptable damage on the enemy. The new generation of mobile missiles, maneuvering and MIRV warheads, and penetration aids are intended to ensure the viability of China’s strategic deterrent in the face of continued advances in U.S. and, to a lesser extent, Russian strategic intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; precision strike; and missile defense capabilities."

Thus, it seems to me, that General Zhu's threat could be carried out today -- and I have no reason to believe that Zhu was lying or even exaggerating. Thus, from China's point of view, if there were a war and all cities east of Xian were destroyed, China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) would still maintain the capability to launch missiles that would destroy hundreds of American cities.

Strategic priorities

The report lists the following strategic decisions that guide China's leaders:

perpetuating CCP [Chinese Communist Party] rule;
sustaining economic growth and development
maintaining domestic political stability;
defending China’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity;
and securing China’s status as a great power.

According to the report, "China’s leaders describe the initial decades of the 21st century as a “strategic window of opportunity,” meaning that regional and international conditions will generally be conducive to China’s rise to regional preeminence and global influence, and seek to prolong that window of opportunity as much as possible."

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, there are several problems with these priorities.

The first issue is economic. China's economy almost crashed in the last half of 2008, along with the global economy. China recovered, along with the global economy, by massive stimulus and bailout programs injecting some $10 trillion into the world economy. By the Law of Diminishing Returns, this cannot continue to be effective, and anyway, the political era of big bailouts seems to be over for a while. Furthermore, China is the midst of a real estate bubble of almost unbelievably gargantuan proportions. Mainstream economists agree that China cannot continue with its current rate of growth, and yet it needs to in order to prevent social unrest.

And that's the second problem. China has a long history of massive nationwide rebellions, and the CCP knows it as well. There are tens of thousands of "mass incidents" every year, and the number of growing. The CCP has held things together by means of a powerful security force and stimulus spending, but the right kind of trigger could trigger an economic panic and a social rebellion.

The Pentagon report recognizes this, and says:

"Communist Party leaders continue to rely on nationalism, based on China’s economic achievements and increased international profile, to improve the legitimacy of the Party. However, this approach contains risks. Although China’s leaders have stoked patriotic sentiment to manipulate public opinion and deflect domestic criticism of the CCP, they are aware that these forces can be difficult to control once begun and could easily turn against the state."

I listen to commentators on tv all the time who complete ignore generational changes and social unrest. It's incredible to me how naļve so-called experts are, but at least the Pentagon report appears to recognize the issue.

Taiwan, Tibet and South China Sea

The report identifies Taiwan, Tibet and South China Sea as China's three main territorial disputes.

We've discussed each of these at length in the past, but here we only wish to focus on the Taiwan issue.

"Despite a reduction in tensions following the March 2008 election of Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou, the possibility of a military conflict with Taiwan and U.S. military intervention remain the PLA’s most pressing long-term military concerns. A potential cross-Strait conflict will drive China’s military modernization as long as China’s leaders judge that the permanent loss of Taiwan could seriously undermine the regime’s political legitimacy and hold on power."

The report lists seven "red lines" which, if crossed, would lead to a Chinese military attack on Taiwan:

Formal declaration of Taiwan independence;
Undefined moves toward Taiwan independence;
Internal unrest on Taiwan;
Taiwan’s acquisition of nuclear weapons;
Indefinite delays in the resumption of cross-Strait dialogue on unification;
Foreign intervention in Taiwan’s internal affairs; and,
Foreign troops stationed on Taiwan.

The report indicates that Beijing might use a "measured approach" at military action, or "surprise to force rapid military and/or political resolution before other countries could respond."

According to the report, "If a quick resolution is not possible, Beijing would seek to: Deter potential U.S. intervention; Failing that, delay U.S. intervention and seek victory in an asymmetric, limited, quick war; or, Fight to a standstill and pursue a political settlement after a protracted conflict."

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, these choices are not really choices, since the U.S. and China would be at full scale war within days or, at most, weeks. Both countries are in generational Crisis eras, and so any trigger at this time would escalate.

As I've said many times, the U.S. could be at war with China tomorrow over Taiwan. Thus, China's seven "red lines" listed above are also red lines for the United States.

I've heard so-called experts claim that we could simply choose not to come to Taiwan's defense. I can't emphasize too strongly what a fantasy this is. In a generational Crisis era, there would be an immediate, overwhelming American political response to counter China's invasion of Taiwan.

(As a modern day example of what can happen, I like to point to the 2006 war between Israel and Hizbollah that took place mostly on Lebanon's soil. In that war, Israel panicked, miscalculated, and attacked Hizbollah and Lebanon within four hours after the kidnapping of two soldiers -- with no plan, and no clear objectives. Once the war began, Israel blundered from one objective to another, one plan to another. The entire war was pursued through improvisation. See "How Israel panicked in pursuing the summer Lebanon war with Hizbollah.")

Finally, I have to point out that American has no choice but to defend Taiwan in case of a Chinese invasion. We have a defense agreement with Taiwan, and if America decided to "let Taiwan go," then countries like Japan and Israel, with whom we also have defense agreements, would go into nationwide panic, creating worldwide instability.

Cyber warfare: China is ALREADY at war

The report pays special attention to cyber warfare, and indicates that China has already begun action in this arena:

"Cyberwarfare Capabilities. In 2009, numerous computer systems around the world, including those owned by the U.S. Government, continued to be the target of intrusions that appear to have originated within the PRC. These intrusions focused on exfiltrating information, some of which could be of strategic or military utility. The accesses and skills required for these intrusions are similar to those necessary to conduct computer network attacks. It remains unclear if these intrusions were conducted by, or with the endorsement of, the PLA or other elements of the PRC government. However, developing capabilities for cyberwarfare is consistent with authoritative PLA military writings.

In March 2009, Canadian researchers uncovered an electronic spy network, apparently based mainly in China, which had reportedly infiltrated Indian and other nations’ government offices around the world. More than 1,300 computers in 103 countries were identified."

China responded specifically to the cyber warfare portions of the report with an immediate rebuttal in Xinhua:

"Chinese experts on Tuesday refuted claims by the Pentagon released in a report that China is developing cyberwarfare capabilities, saying that the U.S. military was attempting to blacken China's image.

"I've never heard about any plans by China to develop its cyber attack forces, not to mention China's so-called 'organized cyber intrusion," Hu Qiheng, president of the Internet Society of China (ISC) told Xinhua on the sidelines of the China Internet Conference, which opened here Tuesday.

"It is a mere fabrication that China is using computer technologies to intrude on other countries' sovereignty," Hu said."

China disliked the entire Pentagon report, but it's interesting that they singled out the cyber warfare section for specific denials.

Obstacles and limitations for China

In the past, I've pointed out some fairly substantial military disadvantages that China has versus the United States, especially social instability and inexperience in foreign wars. The report also focuses on some of these weaknesses.

One example is their lack of experience in "Integrated Joint Operations":

"China’s military has been working for several years to develop the capability to conduct integrated joint operations (IJO), a concept the PRC believes essential to modern warfare. IJO are characterized by the integration of multiple service elements under a joint command headquarters, making full use of advanced information technology and a networked command platform. China’s research, training, and preparations for joint operations have evolved substantially since the promulgation of its first joint campaign doctrine in the late 1990s, but serious challenges limit the PLA’s ability to conduct IJO through at least 2010. ...

Obstacles. China’s military leaders recognize and acknowledge that one of the primary obstacles to IJO is that many PLA commanders have little or no training for, or experience operating in, a joint environment. Key challenges include a shortage of commanders and staff qualified for such operations; a lack of understanding of the capabilities, equipment, and tactics of the other services; and a lack of advanced technology to enable communication and information sharing among the services."

This illustrates a point that I've made several times in the past. Whatever you may think of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, they've given America a great deal of experience in actual field use of new technologies, where the Chinese have no such experience.

There are similar issues with the Navy:

"The introduction of more mobile systems will create new command and control challenges for China’s leadership, which now confronts a different set of variables related to deployment and release authorities. For example, the PLA has only a limited capacity to communicate with submarines at sea, and the PLA Navy has no experience in managing a SSBN fleet that performs strategic patrols with live nuclear warheads mated to missiles. Land-based mobile missiles may face similar command and control challenges in wartime, although probably not as extreme as with submarines."

China's reaction to the Pentagon report

China's official response was posted in Chinese on the Ministry of Defense web site. The following is the machine translation of the entire statement (with some grammatical corrections). It's worth reading in its entirety.

"Defense Department spokesman: China firmly opposes the U.S. Department of Defense report

2010-08-18 15:19:30 Source: Department of Defense Web site of: Gilbert Time :2010-08-18 15:19:30

Department of Defense Web site on Aug. 18 Xinhua Li Jia Report: China's Defense Ministry spokesman Colonel Geng Yansheng 18 interview that: U.S. Department of Defense recently released the 2010 annual "China-related military and security Development Report." The report ignores the objective facts, accusing China's normal national defense and army building, rendering Taiwan a so-called "military threat" by the mainland, accused the United States suspended military exchanges between China hampered military cooperation. The Chinese side expresses its resolute opposition.

China unswervingly take the road of peaceful development, firmly pursues a defensive national defense policy, and does not engage in arms race or pose a military threat to any country. China's military development is reasonable, appropriate, and is to defend national sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, but also to adapt to the rapid development of the world's new military changes in the trend. Chinese military has actively conducted exchanges and cooperation, and safeguards world peace and regional stability.

China always attaches importance to China-US military relations, and has made unremitting efforts. The report published by the United States is not conducive to the improvement and development of military relations. We ask the U.S. side to look at China's national defense and army building, to stop two armed forces is not conducive to Sino-US relations and mutual trust of the words and deeds, to stop publication of "China-related military and security Development Report", for the improvement and development of military relations to create a good atmosphere and conditions."

This response undoubtedly comes right from the top -- from President Hu Jintao. So what does it mean? Is this another Adolf Hitler promising "peace in our time" to a Neville Chamberlain? Or does Hu sincerely believe what he says, and has no intention of using the huge military force that he's overseeing?

I actually believe that Hu is sincere. Born in 1942, Hu is a member of the "Artist archetype" generation that grew up during very bloody Communist Revolution that ended in 1949. And like America's Silent Generation, they spend their lives doing everything possible to prevent a recurrence of the last crisis war. (See my similar discussion a couple of days ago about Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in "21-Aug-10 News -- Mideast peace talks to begin on Sept 2.")

When I think of someone in this generation, I often think of President Bush's Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. He was a perfectly nice guy, always polite to everyone, and you'd think that he wouldn't hurt a fly. But one day at a press conference, he was asked a question about collateral damage from bunker-buster bombs. His response was very genial, as I remember: "We're not trying to be nice to these people; what we want is to KILL them."

That, I think, illustrates how people like Rumsfeld, Abbas and Hu think. Growing up during the horrors of a generational crisis war, they suffer a kind of generational child abuse that makes them indecisive leaders who devote their lives to doing everything to prevent a recurrence of the crisis war. But the other side is that they know that a new war may well be inevitable, and when a decision is made (by others in the government) that they must pursue war, then they'll do so vigorously and ruthlessly. They're indecisive decision makers, but they're powerful implementers.

I wrote about this in 2006, when Hu came to Washington and presented a gift to President Bush -- A silk edition of the famous Chinese war classic, Sun Tzu's The Art of War. (See "Eerie similarity: Chinese President Hu Jintao and Donald Rumsfeld.")

No one in the press that I saw even commented on what might be the significance of this gift, but to me it was clear. He was sending the message, "I don't want a war, but you must realize that you may take some steps that will result in war." However, it was not just a message of threat; it was a message of sadness.

The American public's obliviousness

On Sunday on CNN, I heard Nina Hachigian of the Center for American Progress say the following, with regard to our relationship with China:

"And it will be increasingly tense, I agree with you. But I also don't think this is the world of 100 years ago where we have to worry about China's military threat to us. I don't think that's it. We now have these global factors that impact both of us. The global financial crisis saw the U.S. and China together enacting large stimulus packages to prevent the whole economy from falling off a cliff. We also work together on terrorism. We work together on food security. We've worked together on North Korea, although not that well lately. And there are these huge imbalances, and yet global warming. If we and China don't work together, we're all sunk."

I'm totally astonished by statements like this. Does she really not know that Britain and Germany also worked together on many things, and fought two wars anyway?

In an article a couple of years ago ("The gathering storm in the Caucasus"), I quoted John Maynard Keynes, in his 1920 book, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, describing the world economy prior to World War I:

"The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea in bed, the various products of the whole earth ... he could at the same moment and by the same means adventure his wealth in the natural resources and new enterprises of any quarter of the world....

[He] regarded this state of affairs as normal, certain, and permanent, except in the direction of further improvement ... The projects and politics of militarism and imperialism, of racial and cultural rivalries, of monopolies, restrictions, and exclusion ... appeared to exercise almost no influence at all on the ordinary course of social and economic life, the internationalization of which was nearly complete in practice."

We're in the same international atmosphere today. In 1914, it all came crashing down when Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated by a Serb high school student, triggering the massive war. If a high school student could trigger a war in 1914, then anyone could do it today.

Additional links

Through well over two millennia of Chinese history, the glorified emperors were those who expanded Chinese territory; those who made concessions and ceded land to the barbarians are condemned as the "criminals of history." This Taiwanese perspective on the Pentagon report relates to Chinese history, and shows why no compromise is possible on Taiwan. China Post

The situation in the South China Sea has deteriorated lately, and three key players have emerged - China, the United States and Vietnam. These are the three "elephants" who are dancing in the region, endangering stability. And when the elephants are dancing, the smaller creatures get trampled. RSIS

The Pentagon report on China has increased Taiwan's anxieties about the possibility of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. As a result, Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou is pleading for the U.S. government to provide advanced F-16 war planes so that Taiwan can defend itself from China. RTT News

In an effort to avoid further hostile reactions from China, the U.S. has decided that the forthcoming joint naval drills with South Korea in the Yellow Sea will not involve the nuclear powered aircraft carrier U.S.S. George Washington. The George Washington did participate in the last joint exercises, but they took place in the Sea of Japan, which is farther from Chinese territory. JoongAng

The North Koreans have a Twitter account, and as soon as it posted its first tweets, the South Korean government blocked South Koreans from accessing the site. Reuters

Pakistan is not the only region being drowned by torrential rains and vast floods. The Yalu River, which acts as a border between China and North Korea, has been overflowing its banks in both countries, creating the worst floods in a decade. Over 100,000 people had to be evacuated. Guardian

A "black swan" is the popular term for an event that should happen only once every 100 years, but happens anyway. It's exactly the kind of event that might trigger a war with China, as I've been discussing above. Actually, "black swan" events can only happen during certain generational eras, usually crisis eras, and in crisis eras, they really aren't so improbable. Here's how to prepare for the next "black swan," and to profit from a market calamity -- unless it doesn't work. WSJ (Access)

Hamas canceled direct peace talks with Fatah and the Palestinan Authority, after the Palestinian Authority agreed to have direct peace talks with Israel. Jerusalem Post

Violence is continuing in the south of Yemen between security forces and militants from Al-Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), with multiple killings on Saturday. Yemen has also been fighting against militants in the Shia-dominated areas of northern Yemen, and there are fears that the Yemen government will collapse. Al-Jazeera

As we've written many times, Iran is in the most volatile period of a generational Awakening era, and you can expect further chaos of the kind that forced Richard Nixon to resign in 1974. In fact, a political split is growing within the conservative factions of Iran, triggered by president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's chief of staff Esfandiar Rahim-Mashaei. Rahim-Mashaei said that Iran's Shia Islam is the only true form of Islam -- undermining the intentions of the hardliners to gain hegemony over the entire Arabian peninsula, which is mostly Sunni. RFE/RL and Asia Times.

On hot days, Chinese men like to roll up their shirts and expose their stomachs. These men are called "bang ye," which means "exposing grandfathers," even though men of all ages do it. They don't care when they draw smirks from fashion-conscious passersby. Officials in Beijing and Shanghai have been trying to discourage the uncouth habit, without much success. LA Times

(Comments: For reader comments, questions and discussion, see the 23-Aug-10 News -- China is ready for war thread of the Generational Dynamics forum. Comments may be posted anonymously.) (23-Aug-2010) Permanent Link
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Donate to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

Web Log Pages

Current Web Log

Generational Dynamics Web Log for 23-Aug-2010 23-Aug-10 News -- China is ready for war