-
Originally Posted by Davexl
Originally Posted by Davexl
<snip>
Neutralising China's paramilitary forces from occupying littoral states EEZ's, Affirming the standing of UNCLOS international law, China's CCP pulling its head in.
So if the current US administration were, in the pursuit of re-election and internal political objectives, to go to war with China what would be a set of realistic military objectives for the US military?
That was always the question which bedevilled NATO for decades. Would the USA really "push the button" for Denmark? And today, would the USA really "push the button" for Vietnam?
The USA has spent decades not ratifying UNCLOS. Will it really "push the button" on behalf of an agreement that it is not, strictly speaking, a part of?
In practical, concrete terms, what would "China pulling it's head in" actually involve? Who would define the head-pulling? Who would monitor the head-pulling? What sanctions would apply if the head were not pulled far or fast enough?
-
Originally Posted by GTM 3442
So if the current US administration were, in the pursuit of re-election and internal political objectives, to go to war with China what would be a set of realistic military objectives for the US military?
That was always the question which bedevilled NATO for decades. Would the USA really "push the button" for Denmark? And today, would the USA really "push the button" for Vietnam?
The USA has spent decades not ratifying UNCLOS. Will it really "push the button" on behalf of an agreement that it is not, strictly speaking, a part of?
In practical, concrete terms, what would "China pulling it's head in" actually involve? Who would define the head-pulling? Who would monitor the head-pulling? What sanctions would apply if the head were not pulled far or fast enough?
I doubt any 'regime' whether Trump's or Xi's would want to "push any buttons" for say Vietnam or the Philippines. I would imagine some kind of limited exchange, inflicting a kind of "bloody nose" on China to help counter the grey zone tactics that China employs with its maritime militias for example.
Since the re-engagement of the Philippines with its long term military agreement with the US and re assertion of its 2016 Arbitration result, and with Vietnam onside with the US as Chairman also of ASEAN, and ASEANs strong statements repudiating China 'sovereign' rights over the bulk of the South China Sea - the US has significantly stepped up and become much more assertive in taking the battle of wills to China.
What happens as a result of this is way above my pay-grade, but we have seen how quickly the situation has deteriorated over Hong Kong for example and even today in NZ, China has angrily denounced us after NZ formally withdraws from our extradition treaty with Hong Kong.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12351738
Will it affect our trade, affect Fonterra or A2 Milk, log exports, meat exports etc we'll have to see...We are balancing our interests on a knife edge, as is Australia.
All science is either Physics or stamp collecting - Ernest Rutherford
-
"We are balancing our interests on a knife edge, as is Australia. " Also commentary by Singapore on the US attitude towards China...
Australia tells U.S. it has no intention of hurting relationship with China
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...-relationship/
All science is either Physics or stamp collecting - Ernest Rutherford
-
And, Indonesia eyes Eurofighters (ex Austria) to Check China's Threat on the Southern reaches of the South China Sea...
https://asiatimes.com/2020/07/indone...chinas-threat/
All science is either Physics or stamp collecting - Ernest Rutherford
-
Originally Posted by Davexl
What is the value of fifteen second hand fighter jets without the unified command and control structures, both military and political, both national and international, to allow them to be used as an effective part of a greater, more capable whole.
As Saudi Arabia is discovering, and as many have discovered before them, hardware alone offers only an empty promise of salvation.
-
And if the Chinese government were to decide that New Zealand dairy products did not meet China's stringent food quality standards, which tune would New Zealand dance to?
Keith Woodford has recently done an interesting series of posts on who can afford the fruits of New Zealand agriculture.
-
Originally Posted by GTM 3442
And if the Chinese government were to decide that New Zealand dairy products did not meet China's stringent food quality standards, which tune would New Zealand dance to?
Keith Woodford has recently done an interesting series of posts on who can afford the fruits of New Zealand agriculture.
We definitely need to diversify our export market further away from China. The UK deal thus far, looks like a lame duck. Not surprising really.
-
Originally Posted by GTM 3442
President Trump will no more go to war with China over the Spratlys or Scarborough Shoal than President Eisenhower would go to war with China over Quemoy and Matsu.
I think you're right. I've been reading a couple of books relating to insider accounts of the Trump administration (e.g. The Room Where it Happened), and there is a clear pattern emerging that when the decisions get tough, Trump backs down. An escalation of the current cyber conflict is quite likely.
-
And via the Financial Times:
US to pull nearly 12,000 troops out of Germany
"The Trump administration is pulling nearly 12,000 troops out of Germany in a controversial move set to add to tensions within Nato.
The decision comes after President Donald Trump last month vowed to cap US troops stationed in Germany at 25,000 unless Berlin spent more on defence for the transatlantic security alliance. "
Seems like another reckless decision by the Trump led "regime" that doesn't make any strategic sense whatsoever, whatever you think of Germany's spending.
Mind you - look at NZ's dismal Defence contribution - here's the wake-up call...
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/ne...uncertain-age/
All science is either Physics or stamp collecting - Ernest Rutherford
-
As crazy as Trump has been he has somehow pulled his fellow nationalist Modi off India's non-aligned fence and got them used to the idea of collective co-operation and containment. That and another strategic blunder by Xi Jinping in building that road along/into India's territory and allowing an attack on their troops. The four (US, Japan, India and Aus) aren't as clever a strategy as TPP was but it's a solid foundation for future expansion and co-operation.
Other East Asian nations (South Korea, Taiwan and Japan) managed very successful transitions from authoritarian, even dictatorial regimes to thriving market based social democracies. Was worth trying with China but I feel their sense of manifest destiny and historical grievance is stronger. Hopefully will just take a bit longer.
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks