Russia and China

[marcinmoka]

Resurgance of the Bear : The Shape of Russia to come

By Marcin M.

The recent CSIS strategic report on Russia

( http://csis.gc.ca/en/publications/commentary/com90.asp ) accurately predicted the recent announcement by the Russian Deputy Prime Minister, Sergei Ivanov, that Russia will be increasing the size of their Pacific Fleet as a means to safeguard themselves amidst a region with plagued by increasing tensions.

From a geopolitical standpoint, it would be rather futile for Russian strategists to place all of their proverbial "eggs in one basket" by concentrating it's recent military rebuilding towards non existent threats from the NATO/EU/US centered west.After all , Europe relies on Russian energy, while Russia is too dependant on these sales as sources of revenue and capital investment. This mutual dependency is coupled with the fact that Russia is aware of Europe's passive approach to Geo-political issues.

Despite Europe criticisms regarding their democratic track record attempts to diplomatically press for reform in the traditional Russian Sphere of Influence, they are well aware that these "soft" attempts will never run the risk of a more hostile expansion into what the Russians deem to be theirs. Even the recent rows with the Baltic and Central European states (Belarus, Missile Defence) are more just issues of ego and long standing resentment than severe threats to either parties security. And despite Putin's condemning speech (some would argue in retaliation to Cheney's), one could equally say the same for the current chill in US- Russia relations.

It is a surging China which is worrying Russian military planners and foreign policy strategists. China is Asia's only other real superpower, more potent economically, but lagging severely in military terms, (granted they are making great strides recently, so much so they do not disclose their spending). The lack of an established Chinese defence industry puts Russia, the only regional military power, in a tough predicament as they try to save their own industry by supplying their potentially hostile neighbours all while wanting to maintain superiority in their own deterrent force. This careful balancing act is even trickier since the more China grows into it's role, the more they will be seeking out the energy and resources they so desperately lack. With Africa firmly in their grip, heavy handed economic expansion into the central Asian states which once comprised the Soviet Union will be inevitable, and as demonstrated with Taiwan and Tibet, they have no reservations about clashing with the West.

But for the time being, Russia is just too weak, (and hopefully too mature) to attempt exerting explicit control over their former vassals. One would hope that they, as the Americans have discovered a century earlier, that influence is more powerful instrument than control, whereas China seems to have adopted Catherine the Greats old credo, "The only way I can secure my borders is to expand them".

а следующая ДЕСЯТИЛЕТИЕ? That is the question we would all like to know. While Putin, a calculating, pragmatist, will undoubtedly retain enormous influence in Russian foreign policy for years to come, such is the nature of Russian politics that anything can happen, even a betrayal. But a closer alliance with the West, in facing the Chinese dragon can prove to be a plausible scenario, and pardon the expression, term, but a westward looking" Союз ", albeit a capitalist one.

What do you think will be the interplay between these two nations? Will it overshadow the current Russia/ West tensions?

Any predictions?

* I think just as interesting would be future Chinese/Middle Eastern tensions, and how that could affect the bigger picture.

[ScottSA]

Good analysis.

I'd hesitate to call China a "superpower" at this point; it may be relative to the rest of Asia, but sheer numbers don't mean much militarly anymore and China's economic power, in spite of all the monetary hoopla, is largely dependent upon western markets and the wage differential between the two. If China ever did begin to achieve an economic superpower status, that wage differential will have long disappeared. They are decades behind the US in terms of technology.

I'm also not sure China is as expansionist as you suggest; Tibet is important to it for strategic reasons as a defensible point against anything wandering in from India, and Taiwan is important because it's the last holdout of those pesky nationalists. As far as tweaking the tail of the tiger in the former soviet satrapies, I don't imagine they're ready to go there yet.

I don't think this is true: "...influence is more powerful instrument than control...". It's not, it's just cheaper, and only sometimes cheaper. The US has far more control over Iraq now than it did before the war, in spite of influencing the bejeesus out of it and everyone else in the region through economic policy and arms transfers.

I do think its likely that the US and Russia will ally at some point. Russia has always been on the fringes of Europe, not only geographically but politically and culturally as well, as has, some would argue, Britain. Whether it's an alliance against China or continental Europe or both remains to be seen, but that is at least a decade in the future.

I agree that the traditional coldwar enmity between Nato and Russia is no longer a concern, and a rejuvenated Pacific fleet serves to increase Russia's ability to project force along the Pacific seaboard and is possibly a vieled threat to China, given that China's navy consists of several rusted bathtubs and a fleet of rubber ducks.

I also agree that Russia is too weak to start getting uppity. It can have all the technology in the world, but if it lacks the economic muscle to use it, technology is just a bunch of chickenmarks on paper, or better yet something to sell to oil rich maniacs. Its expanded Pacific fleet may be nothing but a much needed overhaul.

[marcinmoka]

Thanks!

But first, let us define Superpower. Sure, they are not anywhere near the level of the US, whereas the EU is just filled with non stop infighting and bickering over irrelevant matters. Besides, despite the squabbling and the certain egos of a few prominent Europeans (as well as Americans), the US and EU are allies and shall continue to be so.

Anyhow, China, can be considered an up and coming super power because of the power they hold in the world. Sure it's nowhere near that of America, but they are starting to flaunt their veto power on the UNSC, and flexing their muscle in Africa. Don't forget, while the USSR never quite had the economic foothold (income disparities were tremendous) of the US, they too were considered a super power, though that was primarily due to their military capacity.

With China taking over that role, they replaced military strength with economic muscle. While they are dependent on exports, don't forget, we the developed nations are equally dependent on their imports to sustain our own level of prosperity. Globalization is a blessing, but can also potentially be a curse if political entities ignore the fact that their own self interest is directly linked to the self interest of other parties. In theory, this prompt a new level of cooperation and understanding, but the problem remains that we do not always let reason be our guiding factor.

* To clarify, by "expansionism", I do not mean explicit military intervention, but rather seeking a great deal of favour amongst the corrupt elite of the nations they deem crucial to their well being, and actively supporting less than desirable behavior ( ex. Sudan).

[GostHacked]

ScottSA

They are decades behind the US in terms of technology.

Check out where most of your latest modern electronics come from. Where are they manufactured? I think China is quite up to speed with the modern technology. And since it is cheaper to have these high tech units built in China, it would seem to me that it wont take long for China to become great in technology and economics in their own right. With the Corporate West looking to turn a profit anywhere they can, if it means outsourcing your labour force to other countries, then it will be done. Is that what Globalization is??

[ScottSA]

ScottSA

They are decades behind the US in terms of technology.

Check out where most of your latest modern electronics come from. Where are they manufactured?

I guess I should have made a distinction between military/dual use and consumer technology. They are very far behind in terms of the former.

[DogOnPorch]

What's interesting about Communist China is that they are literally fighting against the clock in terms of becoming a 1st World nation with a consumer based market economy. They must achieve this goal before they either overpopulate or pollute themselves out of their own home. If they do not manage to achieve this, they could well slip into a terrible economic crisis which might well be impossible to recover from. For this reason alone China likes to keep things nice n' quite so as not to provide any bumps on the way towards their ambitious goal.

As for being a superpower...not so easy. Part of being a superpower is being able to project one's military, without assistance from others, anywhere on the globe. China's navy and airforce are not up to this task. China puts on a good show, but on the modern battlefield, that gigantic army just makes for more dead soldiers. Especially due to Red China's horrible command and control structure...similar to the Red Army pre-1943.

Only the UK and the US are still 'superpowers'...at least in my opinion...perhaps France in a pinch.

----------------------------------------------------------------

A great country worthy of the name does not have any friends.

---Charles de Gaulle

[August1991]

I always find these discussions vaguely amusing. One moves countries around the gameboard as if they were single big pieces. And the analysis plays on the stereotypes of the past century when it should be obvious that this new century offers distinctly new problems. In short, the op reads like a pedestrian undergrad paper.

Anyway, let me call you on this seemingly minor point:

After all , Europe relies on Russian energy, while Russia is too dependant on these sales as sources of revenue and capital investment.

What do you mean by that phrase? Specifically, what do you mean by "capital investment"?

[Jerry Galinda]

"Communist China" - communist -word which may misleading. Only such a "rhetorical" word in the case of China.

[marcinmoka]

Check out where most of your latest modern electronics come from. Where are they manufactured? I think China is quite up to speed with the modern technology.

Producing Gameboys and having the capacity to design wide bodied aircraft are two completely different beasts.

By technology, let us say moreso original design and development, more so than production of circuit boards.

And the analysis plays on the stereotypes of the past century when it should be obvious that this new century offers distinctly new problems.

Which are? I'd genuinely like to hear your insights.

* I could of went further and tried to incorporate such issues as risks of pandemic, and other external factors, but hey, I am just a (young) pedestrian, and with exams, have far too little time to write something major.

I'm basing all this off readily available current affairs sources and historical precedents.

I have neither a crystal ball nor access to classified info, and am just making do with what I've got.

What do you mean by that phrase? Specifically, what do you mean by "capital investment"?

The money required to develop said sources of Energy, especially in such underdeveloped regions host to the Shaklin NG projects. Gazprom would not be able to finance those on their own, and need the money and technology of the likes of Total, Statoil, BP, Shell.

Did that clear things up?

Cheers!

[ScottSA]

And the analysis plays on the stereotypes of the past century when it should be obvious that this new century offers distinctly new problems.

I'd be interesting in hearing about these obvious and distinctly new problems.

[DogOnPorch]

"Communist China" - communist -word which may misleading. Only such a "rhetorical" word in the case of China.

What should we call it? "Happy Fun Time China?"

Last time I looked they still fly the red banner of the revolution. The five stars standing for the Party and the 4 social classes united by the revolution. The Republic of China still flies the banner of the Nationalists.

Political correctness...bah.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where do correct ideas come from? Do they drop from the skies? No. They come from social practice, and from it alone; they come from three kinds of social practice, the struggle for production, the class struggle and scientific experiment.

---Mao Tse-Tung

[kuzadd]

What's interesting about Communist China is that they are literally fighting against the clock in terms of becoming a 1st World nation with a consumer based market economy. They must achieve this goal before they either overpopulate or pollute themselves out of their own home. If they do not manage to achieve this, they could well slip into a terrible economic crisis which might well be impossible to recover from. For this reason alone China likes to keep things nice n' quite so as not to provide any bumps on the way towards their ambitious goal.

As for being a superpower...not so easy. Part of being a superpower is being able to project one's military, without assistance from others, anywhere on the globe. China's navy and airforce are not up to this task. China puts on a good show, but on the modern battlefield, that gigantic army just makes for more dead soldiers. Especially due to Red China's horrible command and control structure...similar to the Red Army pre-1943.

Only the UK and the US are still 'superpowers'...at least in my opinion...perhaps France in a pinch.

----------------------------------------------------------------

A great country worthy of the name does not have any friends.

---Charles de Gaulle

You forgot Russia, but, no fear, the US hasn't forgot.

[DogOnPorch]

You forgot Russia, but, no fear, the US hasn't forgot.

I feel Russia is no longer a true superpower. It couldn't invade across water at the drop of a hat, for example. It's Navy has gone to crap, frankly (thus the need to revamp their Pacific Fleet). Its only trump card is in nuclear weapons. In a land battle in Europe, Russia might still be a superpower-ish nation. Big army with good generals and modern command control. But, back in the 70s-80s, keeping up with NATO nearly put Russia in the poor house.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyone who doesn't regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains.

---President Vladimir Putin

[M.Dancer]

But russia never planned on any massive sea borne invasions. The whole purpose of the Red Army was to battle in central Europe. It's navy consisted of ICBM subs or surface units as soveriegnty enforces in the PAcific. As such, it is still a formidable power.

[DogOnPorch]

Yup...agree. Thus my comment re: Europe and Russia. Their navy has always been more an offset for the US and Royal Navies. Their few carriers are more for fleet air defence than strikes. China was to turn one into a floating hotel and casino (Varyag) but it seems like it is being refited for active duty. Nice big target...lol.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/wor...ina/cv-pics.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------

A ship is always referred to as she because it costs so much to keep one in paint and powder.

---Admiral Chester Nimitz

[Jerry Galinda]

"Communist China" - " – communist – in the case of China it’s an “empty” word because about 70 % of china economy – it’s a private economy.

Communism – it’s only a slogan, façade, decoration – not reality.

Btw – do you know where I have “political correctness” ?? – happily for you – you don’t know my language.

[DogOnPorch]

Any multi-party elections in Red China? No.

Any parties other than the Communist Party? No.

Freedom of speech in Red China? No.

Freedom of information in Red China? No.

etc etc etc

Sounds like totalitarian Communists to me.

As mentioned...they've exchanged Mao jackets for suits...but they're still the same fellows that shoot monks in the snow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDdeW2qhZ2M

But they seem to have you fooled...so propaganda does work.

---------------------------------------------

Passivity is fatal to us. Our goal is to make the enemy passive.

---Mao Tse-Tung

[marcinmoka]

But on the topic of technology, circuit boards are far different than this:

(Su-37 "Terminator)

Despite the protypes first flying over a decade ago, China could not even conceivably design anything like this.

P.S. Excuse the grammatical mistakes in the video and thickness of the accent, but it is IMPRESSIVE to watch. A jet which can perform sommersaults at 70kmph, and literally, stop on a dime in mid flight.

[DogOnPorch]

Russian aircraft are some of the absolute best on the planet.

Communist Chinese aircraft tend to be either direct copies or depend heavily on stole...errr...borrowed technology. The J-10 is sort of a cross between an F-16 and a Mirage. Their J-7 is a MiG-21 produced without a legal license...then exported for profit to 3rd World nations.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Would you rather have butter or guns? Preparedness makes us powerful. Butter merely makes us fat.

---Reichsmarschall Hermann Goering

[ScottSA]

But on the topic of technology, circuit boards are far different than this:

(Su-37 "Terminator)

Despite the protypes first flying over a decade ago, China could not even conceivably design anything like this.

Very cool.

A couple months ago the Chinese succeeded in shooting down one of their own satelites; a feat perfected by the US sometime in the early 80s.

[DogOnPorch]

Heh...the Chi-Coms have even taken laser pot shots at US satellites as they pass over. How provocative of them.

http://defensenews.com/story.php?F=2121111

--------------------------------------------------------

The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition.

---Dr Carl Sagan

[marcinmoka]

A couple months ago the Chinese succeeded in shooting down one of their own satelites; a feat perfected by the US sometime in the early 80s.

And that had to have been the stupidest decision on behalf of Chinese military planners. Come to think of it, it was probably done without their input and ordered by bureaucrats wishing to show "force".

Did they ever stop and think about the impact of thousands of pieces of satellite fragments traveling at super high velocity in satellite orbit. There are already tons up there, and that is partly why the US and former USSR stopped doing such tests, since we should not try and add more. Thus the reason why laser based disabling of satellites has won preference.

It would be a true case of irony if one of their own principal military satellites were rendered useless through an encounter with their own debris.

[Jerry Galinda]

I can’t agree with you – because you describe the regime, dictatorship.

This characteristic isn’t only connected with communism, communist countries.

What is interesting in the case of China – the mixture of political regime , private economy and free market.

What is curious – that money, wealth of middle class isn’t connected with rule, impact on ruling, governing.