NationStates Jolt Archive


Theory on US Foreign Policy

Wolfish
05-07-2005, 19:14
Please note – this is musing. Let me know your opinion.

1. The US knows that China is growing stronger (economically and militarily).

2. The US knows it’s in a difficult position with relation to the Taiwan situation.

3. The US knows that China is currently courting economic allies to curtail the US’s ability to generate military allies should it come to conflict over the “two Chinas”.

Therefore, the US has taken a “hawkish” role in the mid-east and subcontinent to put in place virtual puppet administrations in Iraq and Afghanistan to provide for a base of operations should it come to armed conflict with China.

Now, a reasonably argument is that the US would already have such bases in South Korea and Japan, but neither are well positioned tactically, and could easily be cut off.
Begark
05-07-2005, 19:19
Naw. More likely the threat China may pose is the reason for the US-India defense pact. I don't think Afghanistan and Iraq have much to do with it. (Say what you will about Iraq, but Aghanistan was definitely about terror.)
LazyHippies
05-07-2005, 19:27
Please note – this is musing. Let me know your opinion.

1. The US knows that China is growing stronger (economically and militarily).

2. The US knows it’s in a difficult position with relation to the Taiwan situation.

3. The US knows that China is currently courting economic allies to curtail the US’s ability to generate military allies should it come to conflict over the “two Chinas”.

Therefore, the US has taken a “hawkish” role in the mid-east and subcontinent to put in place virtual puppet administrations in Iraq and Afghanistan to provide for a base of operations should it come to armed conflict with China.

Now, a reasonably argument is that the US would already have such bases in South Korea and Japan, but neither are well positioned tactically, and could easily be cut off.

No, the US bases in South Korea and Japan are perfectly positioned for that situation, as is the Naval base in Guam. The expeditionary nature of the modern US military makes geographic location less relevant anyway.

Did you know the air force regularly flies missions out of Boston all the way to Iraq? Its not a big deal, theyve been doing it since Gulf War I.
Andaluciae
05-07-2005, 19:31
No, the US bases in South Korea and Japan are perfectly positioned for that situation, as is the Naval base in Guam. The expeditionary nature of the modern US military makes geographic location less relevant anyway.
Beyond that the Phillipines (and bizzarely enough, Vietnam!) form a useful containment ring around the PRC.

One must understand that a war with China would have to NOT be a land war. It would be a big blockade, all 12 supercarriers, land-based bombers and the works, all sealing the PRC in, while holding steady the front in Korea and India. Eventually strangulation is the only method to defeat the PRC, not land invasion and occupation.
Sabbatis
05-07-2005, 19:49
I see China in the next decade or so remaining a regional, not global, power in the military sense. The developing relations between India and the US to me indicates the need to contain that threat. And India's recent overtures to the Chinese will possibly defuse long-standing tensions on the border as India grows militarily with the possibility of creating a blue-water navy to provide control of the Gulf of India.

As China's economic relationship with the west increases it seems it might become too expensive a proposition to fight over Taiwan. Even were they to win that battle at great cost, their economic losses would be staggering.

I suspect that our strategy is to contain China via developing good relations with India and Pakistan, and to assist China economically through trade, etc.

It seems likely that Asia could eventually create an economic partnership similar to the EU, years down the road. It's not clear at this point how the west considers this, or whether that's necessarily a bad thing. But increasing prosperity in the region will certainly benefit more than just the Asian nations.
Wolfish
05-07-2005, 19:50
Beyond that the Phillipines (and bizzarely enough, Vietnam!) form a useful containment ring around the PRC.

One must understand that a war with China would have to NOT be a land war. It would be a big blockade, all 12 supercarriers, land-based bombers and the works, all sealing the PRC in, while holding steady the front in Korea and India. Eventually strangulation is the only method to defeat the PRC, not land invasion and occupation.

It'd be difficult to maintain a blockade while the PRC rains missiles down on Tokyo though. Do you not invision a US air campaign?
Sarkasis
05-07-2005, 19:56
The politic of containment has been used against the USSR...

And currently, against both Iran and China.

Just look at how many countries bordering Iran have been either "liberated" by the US, or have aligned themselves on the US (military bases for green dollars). The only 2 exceptions are Russia and Armenia.
Drunk commies deleted
05-07-2005, 19:57
It'd be difficult to maintain a blockade while the PRC rains missiles down on Tokyo though. Do you not invision a US air campaign?
The US and some of it's allies are working on missile defense systems. Have been for a while now.

If the US needs to send it's planes to strike military targets in mainland China it could do so. There would be losses, but the Chinese airforce and air defenses aren't really strong enough to stop us. Especially with stealth aircraft on our side.
Sarkasis
05-07-2005, 20:02
Have a look at my "Asia Strategic Map"

http://www.seshat.ca/temp/asia_strategic_small.jpg

It's annotated in French. Here's a description of the codes used:

(X) - State that is either under military or diplomatic pressure, or being actively "observed"

Blue dot - State with US military base, or joint/shared military base

Grey dot - Future military base (or under negociation)

Red pentagon - Military occupation (with year)

Colored star - Color-coded revolution (with year)

Grey star - Social troubles, proto-revolution or political "stirring"
Sabbatis
05-07-2005, 23:55
Have a look at my "Asia Strategic Map"

http://www.seshat.ca/temp/asia_strategic_small.jpg

It's annotated in French. Here's a description of the codes used:

(X) - State that is either under military or diplomatic pressure, or being actively "observed"

Blue dot - State with US military base, or joint/shared military base

Grey dot - Future military base (or under negociation)

Red pentagon - Military occupation (with year)

Colored star - Color-coded revolution (with year)

Grey star - Social troubles, proto-revolution or political "stirring"

Nice map, thanks.

Did you follow the thread by Aryarvartha here:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=429104

The reason I mention it in context of this thread is that the oil reserves in Eurasia may be guiding long-term US strategy in the region. China naturally has a huge appetite for oil now, and that will only increase over time.

What role does the location of petroleum resources play in guiding the US and China's foreign policy?
Andaluciae
05-07-2005, 23:58
It'd be difficult to maintain a blockade while the PRC rains missiles down on Tokyo though. Do you not invision a US air campaign?
An air campaign goes without saying though. Mainly counter-force bombing, blast the weapons emplacements to bits, take out their nuclear arsenal and the like. As time goes on some counter-value bombing would also be tolerable. But only against war-industry factories.
Minalkra
06-07-2005, 00:08
I seriously doubt China is looking into military expansion at this particular time. China is, and has been since Mao's death, a factional power. The interweaving power plays within China's governing class will keep them occupied until a powerful leader comes along to reunite them. And besides, they are prospering. Despite the propaganda they pump into their own airwaves, the rulers of China have little to gain and all to loose with a war with the West. Though they ARE becoming more powerful, I think that that will work to lessen any chance of a war as they will realize that peaceful co-existance works wonder for their personal checkbooks.
[/moronic_uneducated_rant]
New Tawin
06-07-2005, 00:23
China

steel to U.S. not much.

making war weapones like hell. yes.

war. maybe.

war to U.S. dont know.