Hu Jintao tells China navy: Prepare for warfare

BBC News - Hu Jintao tells China navy: Prepare for warfare

Interesting. I have always believed that the PLA has one advantage over other militaries in terms of it's secrecy.

This secrecy allows it's opponents to keep guessing what it's motives, capability, equipment etc. are ( don't want to go into much detail about that in this post lol ). A strategic & tactical advantage in my opinion.

Now the South China sea is under dispute, with it's vast natural resources & trade routes being claimed by several nations.

I must ask, what are the PLAN's capabilities in this region compared to other nations' navies ? Can they actually pose serious threat enough to claim the entire South China sea as their own ?

Eeshaan said:

BBC News - Hu Jintao tells China navy: Prepare for warfare

Interesting. I have always believed that the PLA has one advantage over other militaries in terms of it's secrecy.

This secrecy allows it's opponents to keep guessing what it's motives, capability, equipment etc. are ( don't want to go into much detail about that in this post lol ). A strategic & tactical advantage in my opinion.

Now the South China sea is under dispute, with it's vast natural resources & trade routes being claimed by several nations.

I must ask, what are the PLAN's capabilities in this region compared to other nations' navies ? Can they actually pose serious threat enough to claim the entire South China sea as their own ?

Click to expand...

With their military yes they can. On the other hand can they get away with back stabbing many of their neighbors in the eyes of the world since they export so much? I see a peaceful settlement eventually, any aggression will be met with economic scantions from the free world if not the UN. Why fight your neighbors over unpopulated reefs in the South China Sea?

Sea Toby said:

With their military yes they can. On the other hand can they get away with back stabbing many of their neighbors in the eyes of the world since they export so much? I see a peaceful settlement eventually, any aggression will be met with economic scantions from the free world if not the UN. Why fight your neighbors over unpopulated reefs in the South China Sea?

Click to expand...

The south China sea has a vast amount of natural resources that have not been exploited as of now. In addition to being one of the busiest trade routes in the world.

China does have a vastly smaller navy than the US, but still does operate a sizeable fleet in the region :

1 Aircraft carrier
3 Amphibious transport dock (LPD)
25 Destroyers
47 Frigates
63 Submarines

By The Way, according to the Chinese claim for territorial waters, their claimed territorial waters are literally right up to the shores of Brunei. How is that possible !?

Eeshaan said:

By The Way, according to the Chinese claim for territorial waters, their claimed territorial waters are literally right up to the shores of Brunei. How is that possible !?

Click to expand...

Long (if selective) historical memory would be my guess. China traces it's history back so far* that they have a historical claim to just about everything within a thousand miles of their borders (and many things outside that).

The rest of the world has a rather different take on that of course which is where the quibbling over minor islands comes in. If China can stake an indisputable claim to Scrap Of Rock A then they can also stake a claim to anything within it's internationally accepted territorial waters (say, oil).

Of course several other nations also want those resources and don't much like the idea of the PLAN having a legitimate reason to wave their guns around any nearer their own soereign territory than they already do, hence the current status quo of many heavily disputed islands of no normally conceivable importance.

*In fact they trace it to the point where their claims on most things are about as credible as Elizabeth II's claim to the French throne under the Second Treaty Of London, that is to say absurd and obsolete. Nevertheless as a point of pride and internal diplomacy it suits their turn to retain certain claims.

The PLAN has some secrets that is true. You must remember China is currently building alots ships. One question I must ask is the US checking out the shipyards to confirm what there doing? Now you have a Chinese official saying to prepared for warfare. He shouldn't have said that now anyone in there right mind will be ready for this. To build a navy like US it took years to do and wasn't a cake walk at that and had to spent lots of money. Overall in 20 years from now the PLAN will be different.

Not sure what the big deal is every time a Chinese official states the obvious: "our military should prepare for war." Isn't that what they should be doing? What do you expect him to say?

Eeshaan said:

BBC News - Hu Jintao tells China navy: Prepare for warfare

Interesting. I have always believed that the PLA has one advantage over other militaries in terms of it's secrecy.

This secrecy allows it's opponents to keep guessing what it's motives, capability, equipment etc. are ( don't want to go into much detail about that in this post lol ). A strategic & tactical advantage in my opinion.

Now the South China sea is under dispute, with it's vast natural resources & trade routes being claimed by several nations.

I must ask, what are the PLAN's capabilities in this region compared to other nations' navies ? Can they actually pose serious threat enough to claim the entire South China sea as their own ?

Click to expand...

I agreed with that PLA has an advantage no one really know there objective. All this Chinese official did reinforce what the world already knew.

NICO said:

Not sure what the big deal is every time a Chinese official states the obvious: "our military should prepare for war." Isn't that what they should be doing? What do you expect him to say?

Click to expand...

It's quite different to say "Our military should always be ready & able to wage war efficiently", than saying, "Get ready for war". That's basically what the premier's message to the Navy meant.

it clearly shows an agressive shift in Chinese policy in the area. But that aside, what matters is the ability for the nations who also have a claim to those waters, to militarily be able to hold off a naval offensive of any sort by China.

Eeshaan said:

It's quite different to say "Our military should always be ready & able to wage war efficiently", than saying, "Get ready for war". That's basically what the premier's message to the Navy meant.

it clearly shows an agressive shift in Chinese policy in the area. But that aside, what matters is the ability for the nations who also have a claim to those waters, to militarily be able to hold off a naval offensive of any sort by China.

Click to expand...

The simple answer to this is that China's sabre-rattling. They've done it before to show they're not happy. I don't see why everyone expects them to back down when its obvious they're not interested in doing so.

Consider the following. For rather vague reasons, the US has decided to place combat troops in Australia. I'm still waiting to hear a plausible reason for this. What nearby nation can threaten the Australians? Probably not Indonesia, Malaysia or Vietnam. We also know that the Chinese government has been feeling VERY threatened by this move.

From a Chinese perspective, they're simply acting like what any of the European colonial powers did a century ago and now the world is saying bad things about them. A century ago, when the Chinese protested, they got foreign armies invading. One can see the irony here where colonialism comes back to haunt the West. The Chinese have adopted that same methodology BECAUSE it worked so well.

Further, the government must been seen by the citizens of the PRC as taking a strong stand against what is perceived to be something of an escalation. So this move makes some sense. Hu Jintao is not saying prepare for an offensive war but if push comes to shove, be ready to smash someone's face soon. I really don't see this turning into much.

If North Korea can shell a South Korean island and sink a South Korean warship and not cause open conflict, then there's no way the South China Seas, US troops in Australia and a few words are going to cause a much more ... sensible government to go to war with one of its rivals.

I'm honestly surprised no one's picked up on this and taking it so seriously.

NICO said:

Not sure what the big deal is every time a Chinese official states the obvious: "our military should prepare for war." Isn't that what they should be doing? What do you expect him to say?

Click to expand...

Nico, he's more than "just some official" mate. IIRC he's Secretary of the CCP, Head of State, Chairman of the Military Commission and that last position is arguably the most powerful in China. What he says goes. End of story. IIRC he is due to retire, however I think his comments are to remind the PLAN of its primary mission, to remind the senior generals in the PLA just where their loyalties lay, and show the party and the people that the PLAN is worth all the treasure that it is consuming. Finally it is a message to all the foreign devils that the PLAN is going to be a force to reckoned with and that China is asserting its place in the world as a preeminent nation. It is a very political message but in China all messages involve politics of one form or another.

From a Chinese perspective, they're simply acting like what any of the European colonial powers did a century ago and now the world is saying bad things about them. A century ago, when the Chinese protested, they got foreign armies invading. One can see the irony here where colonialism comes back to haunt the West. The Chinese have adopted that same methodology BECAUSE it worked so well.


So what you are saying is that china has adopted the same colonial methodology because it worked so well for the west back in the day???

CheeZe said:

Consider the following. For rather vague reasons, the US has decided to place combat troops in Australia. I'm still waiting to hear a plausible reason for this. What nearby nation can threaten the Australians? Probably not Indonesia, Malaysia or Vietnam. We also know that the Chinese government has been feeling VERY threatened by this move.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone thinks the troops are there to protect Australia directly. Theres no one that can mount and invasion into Darwin (and why would you?). Its just going to be a very convient place to station marines and train along side Australian forces. China doesn't like anyone playing its sand pit (which covers anything with in 8,000km of any chinese claim).

China doesn't like people having a say in its policy. Having greater US influence in its region will do that. To have a highly capable (and reasonably respectable) regional player like Australia will all the latest Gucci kit (well some of it, and regionally we are doing ok) and close US training will mean China won't be able to pick on smaller countries and interfer unhindered in the region.

I wouldn't read too much into this. I think China should be careful about getting carried away and losing focus (like the Indians?). If China really wanted to rival the US they would have to start a building plan like Japan did before WW2. As impressive as the Chinese are they aren't doing that, yet. This isn't the first time an asian power has modernised and then tried to pick a fight.

So what you are saying is that china has adopted the same colonial methodology because it worked so well for the west back in the day???

Click to expand...

Colonialism is a very mixed bag. Define working well? In some cases some powers were able to extract some money for a short amount of time.

I was wondering, the US deployement to Australia might have something to do with the increased tesions regarding the Spratly Islands specifically, in addition to the general stablity of the area ? More of an intervention force incase things go bad, than being there for defense of Australia.

Check this article out :

India-China face-off in South China Sea: Report - India - DNA

China has a very large claim of territory in the sea, literally up to the shorelines of countries like Brunei, even going as far as claiming that they do not welcome Indian oil & gas exploration in Vietnamese waters.

File:South China Sea claims.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/58573.pdf

Article 4 in the above document states that the Socialist Republic of Vietnam excercises sovereign rights over the exploration, exploitation, preservation and management of all natural resources in the 200 mile continental shelf of Vietnam.

Yet the Indian INS Airavat was told by Chinese authorities that it had entered Chinese waters, also that the Chinese government opposes any exploitation of natural resources in that area, which actually is Vietnam's soereign economic territory.

Cailet said:

Long (if selective) historical memory would be my guess. China traces it's history back so far* that they have a historical claim to just about everything within a thousand miles of their borders (and many things outside that).

The rest of the world has a rather different take on that of course which is where the quibbling over minor islands comes in. If China can stake an indisputable claim to Scrap Of Rock A then they can also stake a claim to anything within it's internationally accepted territorial waters (say, oil).

Click to expand...

Aren't these islands of strategic value, in addition to being surrounded by a vast amount of natural resources in their territorial waters ? That in itself is a big cause for these disputes IMHO.

Naval bases on islands like these do provide strategic, logistical and power projection advantages to nations with navies that wish to have an increased global footprint ( which IMHO is the key for a nation to achieve a Superpower-like status that nations like the USA has ).

NICO said:

Not sure what the big deal is every time a Chinese official states the obvious: "our military should prepare for war." Isn't that what they should be doing? What do you expect him to say?

Click to expand...

It's political rhetoric and i agree a redundant statement. Hu telling the Chinese military to prepare for war is like Obama telling firefighters to be prepared for fires and some calls regarding heart attacks etc...First thing comes to mind is "duh". so what we should really be asking is why would the Chinese make such a statement in the first place. Sounds like they are testing the resolve of the USN and local nations to see how far some are willing to go.

OpinionNoted said:

From a Chinese perspective, they're simply acting like what any of the European colonial powers did a century ago and now the world is saying bad things about them. A century ago, when the Chinese protested, they got foreign armies invading. One can see the irony here where colonialism comes back to haunt the West. The Chinese have adopted that same methodology BECAUSE it worked so well.


So what you are saying is that china has adopted the same colonial methodology because it worked so well for the west back in the day???

Click to expand...

Yes, I am. And as far as one-liners go, that one barely made it past the start gate. But I can see where you might have been going with the triple question marks. The non-interventionist policy is shifting and in doing so, China has two recent (last 100 years) models of foreign policy to choose from. First is the semi-isolationist policy which they've held to since 1949, exception being the Korean War. However, it's become clear that they will need to secure their global economic assets with more than just words.

So, they must adopt a more interventionist policy. And who has used interventionist policies effectively in the past 100 years? The US, the UK, Japan, Germany. I'm not saying that they're going to start blowing up railroads or sending foreign contingents to fight for causes they support. But they will assert themselves whenever and where-ever they feel they should. Because the one thing they can count on is that the US does not want push to come to shove because a war with China would ruin everyone's year. So China feels fairly confident with prodding its neighbours with a pokey stick. Prodding mind you, not shelling them because of suspicions like North Korea.

China doesn't like people having a say in its policy. As impressive as the Chinese are they aren't doing that, yet. This isn't the first time an asian power has modernised and then tried to pick a fight.

Click to expand...

I'm from Singapore. I'm a lot closer to China than you are. I don't particularly see the threat as being all that large. Your comparison fails to account the vast differences in government. Japan began its modernisation in 1860 with the intent of being able to militarily oppose and defeat the western powers. By the 1930's, any form of moderate civilian government had been ousted by military leaders. China is not currently being run by military leaders and its focus is economic dominance. Its younger officers are not running around promoting war and plotting against the government (see Mukden Incident). Nor is China annexing and colonizing areas by force. The fact that there are even talks and disputes shows that China is not resorting to the military as its answer the way Imperial Japan did. Military assets are simply a means of backing up claims and providing security.

Though I note one parallel that you may not have come upon. Both China and Japan were forced open (to be exploited) by gunboat diplomacy. I wonder who gave these Asian nations the idea that might makes right. Again, colonialism finally coming back to bite the west in the arse.

My question still remains, why is China's ascent as a superpower considered so dangerous to the West? Is it only because the US and its allies want to remain top dogs? Or something else?

China's defence spending is nowhere near that of the US. That alone should prove that they're not pouring money into a rapid military mobilization like Japan did.

Eeshaan said:

BBC News - Hu Jintao tells China navy: Prepare for warfare

Interesting. I have always believed that the PLA has one advantage over other militaries in terms of it's secrecy.

This secrecy allows it's opponents to keep guessing what it's motives, capability, equipment etc. are ( don't want to go into much detail about that in this post lol ). A strategic & tactical advantage in my opinion.

Now the South China sea is under dispute, with it's vast natural resources & trade routes being claimed by several nations.

I must ask, what are the PLAN's capabilities in this region compared to other nations' navies ? Can they actually pose serious threat enough to claim the entire South China sea as their own ?

Click to expand...

I've been saying this for a while. I think that China's military development is no longer that secret. If you can read and understand Chinese, you can actually pick up a lot of stuff on the Internet about PLA development. Most of the recent high profile military projects are completely open and you can see pictures of them on the internet. They are a little harder to dig, because most of the information on it are on Chinese website and forums. However, there really is no excuse for foreign intelligence to not know more about PLA modernization.

CheeZe said:

My question still remains, why is China's ascent as a superpower considered so dangerous to the West? Is it only because the US and its allies want to remain top dogs? Or something else?

China's defence spending is nowhere near that of the US. That alone should prove that they're not pouring money into a rapid military mobilization like Japan did.

Click to expand...

The military industrial complex lobby is very strong here in America. Having threats around the world helps justify a bloated defense budget even during times of budgetary crisis. China is also a really large economic threat to America. If you look back in the 80s when Japan was rising, there was a lot of fear that Japan would overtake America as the dominant economic power of the world. That's even though Japan is supposedly one of America's great allies. And finally, China is the first country to truly challenge America and Western powers in different area of power. If we classify power in these categories: economic power, financial power, political power, military power and cultural power. From that, I'd say China is challenging America in the first 3 right now and is looking to challenge America in the last 2.

The current world order post WWII (excluding the communist blocs) have generally accepted American leadership that is closely supported by its Western NATO allies + Japan + Australia. Every major world organization is lead by America. America and its allies have overwhelming military presence around the world. The world's major financial organizations like world bank and imf are headed by major Western banks. Western products and movies are enjoyed and desired by most countries around the world. All of this in the end is backed by the overwhelming economic and manufacturing power of America.

Now, China joined the world order maintained by America after 1979. It has profited greatly in the past 30 years from this arrangement. However now that it has achieved comparable economic and manufacturing power, it has the finance strength to challenge the existing world order. Contrary to the popular beliefs, China would challenge America even if its government is democratically elected. The question is whether or not the Western world can handle a more assertive China.

In the recent times, we've already seen public opinions swinging against European leaders because they appeared to be asking China to bail them out. They are worried that China might demand Europe to end the embargo as a condition for bailing them out. Now, do you think the Europeans would have the same strong opinion about asking America to bail it out? It's clear that Europeans find it somewhat humiliating to be the weaker partner in negotiation with China. Does it feel humiliated if it's the weaker partner in negotiation with America? You can substitute Japanese for Europeans for the above questions. I could go on with examples from that too, but I have to head out now, lol.

I want to apologize to the mods about my flippant : "what do we expect the premier to say". It just bothers me that we take a phrase and make it sound like China or anybody for that matter is going to war tomorrow.

As previous good posts noted, there really is no excuse for Western agencies not to know what is going on in military developments in China. A lot of info is out there, ok, it's in Chinese, news flash CIA!, you need some people to read Chinese and check on those Chinese internet sites!!! Shoot, I just use Google translator and I glean a few things. You can probably find some papers on thoughts and ideas being developed in China about use of their own forces and you figure they will expose more of this info as time goes by. China isn't as secretive as it used to be, just look at J20. Would China have shown so much 20 or even 10 years ago? Wasn't there a recent article on DT about a Chinese general explaining how it is difficult for them to know and explain about defense? It was interesting to see that they actually were trying to be more open but needed help/practice/time at it.

I would also like to know what China is supposed to do. It has the most population, give or take with India, one of the largest and fastest growing economies, one of the oldest histories and cultures, finally for close to 200 years it was dominated by outside countries, yes, they haven't forgotten. Their closest competitor is the US which has a large economy and lots of natural resources and one of the most powerful military's around with plenty of practice at it. Most of the countries surrounding China are friends or allies to USA: Japan, S Korea, Australia, Taiwan, Singapore, Philippines,Thailand..... Somewhat friendly: India (growing friendship), Pakistan (weakening friendship)...

I don't think China has such an enviable position compared to the US's position. So again, what is China supposed to do, just sit tight and wait? For US and allies to make sure they have all the resources, not build up their military so they are always in a position of weakness? Trust that no one will mess with lines of communication and sea lines, sure just trust the US Navy will be there and protect them for China?

Eeshaan said:

Aren't these islands of strategic value, in addition to being surrounded by a vast amount of natural resources in their territorial waters ? That in itself is a big cause for these disputes IMHO.

Naval bases on islands like these do provide strategic, logistical and power projection advantages to nations with navies that wish to have an increased global footprint ( which IMHO is the key for a nation to achieve a Superpower-like status that nations like the USA has ).

Click to expand...

No. The Spratley Islands are uninhabited islands, well reefs, no one really claimed until after the UN put into effect the EEZs. See this You Tube video how wet the reefs are:

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2ZrFphSmc"]China´s massacre in Spratly islands [real footage 1988] - YouTube[/nomedia]

While some will they are islands, standing and defending on land up to your waist in the sea in my opinion isn't an island.

From Wiki:
The Spratly Islands are a group of more than 750 reefs,[1] islets, atolls, cays and islands in the South China Sea. The archipelago lies off the coasts of the Philippines and Malaysia (Sabah), about one third of the way from there to southern Vietnam. They contain less than four square kilometers of land area spread over more than 425,000 square kilometers of sea. The Spratlys are one of three archipelagos of the South China Sea which comprise more than 30,000 islands and reefs and which complicate governance and economics in that region of Southeast Asia. Such small and remote islands have little economic value in themselves, but are important in establishing international boundaries. There are no native islanders but there are, at least for now, rich fishing grounds; and initial surveys indicate the islands may contain significant reserves of oil and natural gas.

About 45 islands are occupied by relatively small numbers of military forces from Vietnam, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of China (Taiwan), Malaysia and the Philippines. Brunei has also claimed an EEZ in the southeastern part of the Spratlys encompassing just one area of small islands above mean high water (on Louisa Reef.)