War Games: Dress Rehearsal for a Real War by Erick San Juan
“Chinese strategy in the South China Sea is expansionary in aim, incremental by design and realist in orientation.”
A revelation made by three PLAN officers on the real goal of China in the South China Sea from the article of Ryan Martinson and Katsuya Yamamoto posted at The National Interest (July 9, 2017) - Three PLAN Officers May Have Just Revealed What China Wants in the South China Sea.
“Jin, Hui and Wang reflect mainstream thinking in the PLA Navy, their views suggest that the new bases were always intended to alter the military balance in the South China Sea—regardless of how Chinese diplomats prefer to highlight their civilian character. Chinese decision-makers probably believe that the balance now tilts strongly in China’s favor, and this is unlikely to change until American completes its great “pivot” to Asia, if it ever does.
We take some comfort in the trio’s apparent desire to avoid armed conflict in the South China Sea. However, their attitudes suggest that the Chinese military may be too cocksure about its own ability to manage a military crisis at sea. Particularly worrisome, America is the assumed adversary, but never do the authors even mention the role nuclear weapons might play in a crisis.”
For obvious reason that China or its head President Xi Jinping is too stubborn and will never engage in multilateral talks nor even acknowledge the ruling at the Permanent Arbitral Tribunal in The Hague that favors the Philippines on its territorial claim.
In its designed intention to expand and increase its territory, setting up military installations is just secondary to ensure that they have a strong foothold on the said extension from the mainland. And the mere fact that the US is the assumed adversary in their grand design, a military conflict is surely in the offing and the region (and the rest of the world) should be wary on who will strike the first nuclear missile.
It jive with the analysis of Prof. Graham Allison of Harvard Kennedy School warning the US and China could fall into a "Thucydides Trap", a war between Greeks, a dominant superpower and Sparta, the challenger.
Another was the lecture of RAND think tank last August 2016 entitled "War With China, Thinking Through the Unthinkable talking about who will strike first if a crisis overheated.
As I have written before and lectured since 1998, war between the US and China is inevitable, it can be delayed but it will materialize into a shooting war and it could be sooner given the provocations and tension in the South China Sea.
Like the month-long Exercise Talisman Sabre 2017 war games. This year is the largest ever of the biennial training and interoperability exercise hosted by Australia, with more than 30,000 troops, including personnel from the United States, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and Canada participating.
However, as China continues to grow, and the United States continue to pursue total military supremacy, the system now threatens to inflame the very thing it was designed to prevent, large-scale conflict between the region’s most powerful states. The very scenario simulated in Talisman Sabre.
With conflict of this scale considered likely enough to necessitate such enormous preparations, Australian politicians, policymakers, and media outlets should be deeply engaged in a public dialogue centered around defining national interests, defense priorities, and how our relationships with other states reflect these. Instead, Australia sleepwalks along the path of military expansion and confrontation, incapable and unwilling to diverge from American security priorities where they do not reflect our own.
While the public relation branches of the defense forces involved only ever refer to the objectives of the exercise with ambiguous terms like “high end war-fighting”, in bare fact, Talisman Sabre simulates a large-scale confrontation between conventional forces, requiring coordination between all branches of the US military, as well as those of their Asia-Pacific allies. It is a dress-rehearsal of the new American battle doctrine, the Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons (JAM-GC), which was developed to ensure continued US military dominance of the Western Pacific and the South China Sea, in the face of growing Chinese military capabilities.
In 2015, during the last iteration of Talisman Sabre, the Australian public was treated to a rare moment of political candour when Greens Senator Scott Ludlam publicly criticized the event, stating that he did not believe that it was in the nation’s best interests “to be preparing for a war with China”. (Source: War games could inflame what they aim to prevent: conflict with China by Stuart Rollo [writer focused on Asia-Pacific politics] @the guardian)
Opposition to such huge military exercise (war games) even from among Australia’s government officials (elected) is not new because they know the already tensed situation in the region will only be aggravated by such military war games by involving big players.
There are bigger problems coming (soon) that the Duterte administration will have to face and find solutions to in order to survive, not for him alone but for the whole country. Let us help this administration if Duterte will realize the nation's predicament and threats. If possible make a Council of Advisers to augment the National Security Council to address immediately what trouble we're facing. Whether we like it or not he is our president and if ever he will fail, the whole Filipino nation will be dragged and we will be 'Fili-finish'.
“Chinese strategy in the South China Sea is expansionary in aim, incremental by design and realist in orientation.”
A revelation made by three PLAN officers on the real goal of China in the South China Sea from the article of Ryan Martinson and Katsuya Yamamoto posted at The National Interest (July 9, 2017) - Three PLAN Officers May Have Just Revealed What China Wants in the South China Sea.
“Jin, Hui and Wang reflect mainstream thinking in the PLA Navy, their views suggest that the new bases were always intended to alter the military balance in the South China Sea—regardless of how Chinese diplomats prefer to highlight their civilian character. Chinese decision-makers probably believe that the balance now tilts strongly in China’s favor, and this is unlikely to change until American completes its great “pivot” to Asia, if it ever does.
We take some comfort in the trio’s apparent desire to avoid armed conflict in the South China Sea. However, their attitudes suggest that the Chinese military may be too cocksure about its own ability to manage a military crisis at sea. Particularly worrisome, America is the assumed adversary, but never do the authors even mention the role nuclear weapons might play in a crisis.”
For obvious reason that China or its head President Xi Jinping is too stubborn and will never engage in multilateral talks nor even acknowledge the ruling at the Permanent Arbitral Tribunal in The Hague that favors the Philippines on its territorial claim.
In its designed intention to expand and increase its territory, setting up military installations is just secondary to ensure that they have a strong foothold on the said extension from the mainland. And the mere fact that the US is the assumed adversary in their grand design, a military conflict is surely in the offing and the region (and the rest of the world) should be wary on who will strike the first nuclear missile.
It jive with the analysis of Prof. Graham Allison of Harvard Kennedy School warning the US and China could fall into a "Thucydides Trap", a war between Greeks, a dominant superpower and Sparta, the challenger.
Another was the lecture of RAND think tank last August 2016 entitled "War With China, Thinking Through the Unthinkable talking about who will strike first if a crisis overheated.
As I have written before and lectured since 1998, war between the US and China is inevitable, it can be delayed but it will materialize into a shooting war and it could be sooner given the provocations and tension in the South China Sea.
Like the month-long Exercise Talisman Sabre 2017 war games. This year is the largest ever of the biennial training and interoperability exercise hosted by Australia, with more than 30,000 troops, including personnel from the United States, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and Canada participating.
However, as China continues to grow, and the United States continue to pursue total military supremacy, the system now threatens to inflame the very thing it was designed to prevent, large-scale conflict between the region’s most powerful states. The very scenario simulated in Talisman Sabre.
With conflict of this scale considered likely enough to necessitate such enormous preparations, Australian politicians, policymakers, and media outlets should be deeply engaged in a public dialogue centered around defining national interests, defense priorities, and how our relationships with other states reflect these. Instead, Australia sleepwalks along the path of military expansion and confrontation, incapable and unwilling to diverge from American security priorities where they do not reflect our own.
While the public relation branches of the defense forces involved only ever refer to the objectives of the exercise with ambiguous terms like “high end war-fighting”, in bare fact, Talisman Sabre simulates a large-scale confrontation between conventional forces, requiring coordination between all branches of the US military, as well as those of their Asia-Pacific allies. It is a dress-rehearsal of the new American battle doctrine, the Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons (JAM-GC), which was developed to ensure continued US military dominance of the Western Pacific and the South China Sea, in the face of growing Chinese military capabilities.
In 2015, during the last iteration of Talisman Sabre, the Australian public was treated to a rare moment of political candour when Greens Senator Scott Ludlam publicly criticized the event, stating that he did not believe that it was in the nation’s best interests “to be preparing for a war with China”. (Source: War games could inflame what they aim to prevent: conflict with China by Stuart Rollo [writer focused on Asia-Pacific politics] @the guardian)
Opposition to such huge military exercise (war games) even from among Australia’s government officials (elected) is not new because they know the already tensed situation in the region will only be aggravated by such military war games by involving big players.
There are bigger problems coming (soon) that the Duterte administration will have to face and find solutions to in order to survive, not for him alone but for the whole country. Let us help this administration if Duterte will realize the nation's predicament and threats. If possible make a Council of Advisers to augment the National Security Council to address immediately what trouble we're facing. Whether we like it or not he is our president and if ever he will fail, the whole Filipino nation will be dragged and we will be 'Fili-finish'.
No comments:
Post a Comment