George Friedman continues to ponder about U. S.-China confrontation:
The Chinese see the United States in three ways. First, the U.S. has an extremely powerful Navy. Second, the U.S. is highly unpredictable in how it responds to challenges. The Chinese saw this unpredictability in Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, Operation Desert Storm, Iraq and so on. At times, the U.S. does not respond. Other times it over-reacts, from the Chinese point of view. Third, the U.S. prefers economic sanctions that at times include physically blocking the trade of a given country.
Given these three facts about China’s potential adversary, China finds itself in an extremely difficult position. It cannot match American naval power. It cannot predict what the U.S. will do. To the extent that the U.S. might choose, sanctions that include interference with Chinese trade are the most likely opening move. Therefore, the geography of the Western Pacific archipelago poses a potential threat to core Chinese national interests.
I don’t believe that China can accomplish all of its goals by either of the means that Mr. Friedman outlines (direct military confrontation or supporting insurgencies to destabilize other countries in the region). One of those goals is getting the respect that the Chinese believe they are being denied. They won’t get that by either of those means.
All that and now they’ve got to figure out how to read a Twitter thread.
Who is going to be writing insurance policies on cargoes going to or from China in the face of a US blockade? The Chinese government would have to do it. Do they have the infrastructure and capability for that? Especially if we are also trying to squeeze them financially and cutting access to banks?
And what factory relying on a just-in-time supply chain is going to base its production schedule on goods coming from an embargoed China?
In a war game it would be very complicated to blockade China, but in reality it would be much easier. We would only need to seize a single supertanker of oil, or a couple of container ships to make the point. The Chinese navy would be bottled up, and their trade would be squeezed hard.
A pair of American attack submarines noodling around the Philippines would be more than enough to convince the big shipping companies to stay away. The kriegsmarine damn near starved Britain, and would have if they’d been a bit cleverer and Turing had been a bit slower, and in that case there were two parties – the US and Britain, an origin and a destination, both on the same side, sharing the same goal. What is China’s equivalent of the UK? Who out there in the wide world would defy a US blockade to help China?
Besides, you don’t need to blockade all of China, you could easily cut off Hong Kong, Hangzhou and the port of Shanghai and seriously degrade China’s economy. Three pinpoint blockades. If the Chinese launched anti-ship missiles, we could retaliate against the launch points without probably enlarging the war.
I’d love to see not the opinions of the Chinese military, but of Chinese business leaders and party weasels. Betcha they’d be a whole lot less optimistic even than the not wildly optimistic Chinese military.
China’s situation is very tenuous and they’re aware of it. They’re the beneficiaries of the worldwide system of trade that we make possible. They chafe under that but they know they benefit by it and it would be enormously costly for them to build their own system.
The people the Chinese can really screw with are the Russians. They could move a motorized division to the Manchuria border and Putin would wet himself. Vladivostok is Russian only as long as the Chinese allow it to be. The rail line would be pitifully easy to cut. And that is one long, remote, harsh border to defend when you’re a country of 140 million with the GDP of Brazil, and your other neighbors are the ‘Stans and NATO. The Chinese could break Russia’s power, tying up their army and driving Russia out of the Pacific.
Not sure why they’d want to, just saying if I were Poot I’d be worried about my eastern borders not my western ones.
Is the U.S. known for physically blocking the trade of any country? Implicitly we do that as part of war, but the sentence suggests that this is part of simple economic sanctions. Outside of the thirteen days or so during the Cuban missile crisis, I draw a blank here.
I think the larger issue is China sees itself as a rising power, and believes that the U.S. would do what it would do when challenged by an upstart and prevent that from happening.
Which is why I wouldn’t be too concerned about any lasting Russian-Chinese alliance.
It’s why the people trying to pass off Trump’s groveling to Putin as part of some grand strategy to reshape major power relationships are nuts. Putin cannot mess with China, not now, not ever.
People think Trump couldn’t be blackmailed by the FSB but that’s nonsense. His tax returns might do it. Video of Trump with an underaged girl would do it. Or a boy of any age. But really, all you’d need to control the future defiler of the White House is a shot of a tiny penis. Most people have a vulnerability and Trump is pitifully insecure.
“Video of Trump with an underaged girl would do it. Or a boy of any age. But really, all you’d need to control the…..defiler of the White House….”
You are confusing Trump with Bill Clinton and his disgusting, enabling wife as she bleats about a VRWC.