Feeding the Dragon, Hurting the Alliance

[mindseye]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

Mongolia has spent almost all the time since it's independence as a Soviet satellite (remember the joke about Ulan Bator being closer to Moscow than Kiev was?). I'm sure Being a Chinese satellite for a while is a welcome change.

Just read an article on how Chinese has pretty much eclipsed Russian as the secondary language of Mongolians. English usage is growing quickly as well. Mongolians see which way the wind is blowing.

[Spiffor]

Random tidbit, since the thread has been brought up.

Two weeks ago, I idled in front of German TV, and there were talks about the issue. It was presented as a controversial issue among German politicians (rather than an exclusively diplomatic matter). From what I understood, the Greens were openly hostile to the decision.

I don't know if the issue has died down now, or if the Greens (key members of the coalition in power) managed to make more noise about it afterward. In any case, it's encouraging to see there is an organized domestic opposition to this project, at least in Germany

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by GePap
China's big problems are getting control of the air, and control of the sea.

The PRC already has a whole bunch of Su-27 and has permission to make several more hundreds of them. They has also been getting the more advanced Su-30MKK. I don't see air superiority being a problem.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


The PRC already has a whole bunch of Su-27 and has permission to make several more hundreds of them. They has also been getting the more advanced Su-30MKK. I don't see air superiority being a problem.

Air superiority is not just about planes, or even having nice planes. First, are the avionic suites on those planes as good as those on American and ROC planes? Probably not. MOre importantly, dot he Chinese have the same long range radar capabilities and C&C facilities to direct the battle? I doubt it.

So, while the SU-27 might be as fast and even more powerful than say a F-15, planes rarely dogfight anymore. Combat is decided at long ranegs with missiles- so the question is, who can see whom first, and fire first. That is determined not by airframes and engines but avionics, radar, and C&C facilities. China is lacking significantly in all of those, and in fact imporvements in those systems would be the greatest benefit of imports from Europe.

[Drake Tungsten]

In any case, it's encouraging to see there is an organized domestic opposition to this project, at least in Germany

[Patroklos]

Thank you. China is making a new version of the Mig-21 and it is somewhat advance. That fighter should be in service this year. This fighter is 3 or 4 generation of the old Mig-21. When you see the picture of it, it look nothing like the Mig-21.

I think we have some Sabre's and Shooting Stars laying aroung. We will just slap a coat of paint on them and call them modern. Nice try China.

The PRC already has a whole bunch of Su-27 and has permission to make several more hundreds of them. They has also been getting the more advanced Su-30MKK. I don't see air superiority being a problem.

That will be fine for superiority over China, but not Taiwan. We would probobly destroy most of those on the ground anyways.

And as I have mentioned before, you are all rating the US military's performace from a peace time perspetive. Don't think for a second that all the stops would be pulled out for China.

[Straybow]

Originally posted by GePap
Why would the de facto control fo Taiwan by force as opposed to the current de jure control matter to anyone but the US and Japan?

Isn't that the problem being discussed here? It doesn't matter to the peaceniks, commie-rats, and euroweenies that millions of people would be oppressed in a situation that might be hastened by breaching the arms embargo.

As long as those millions are very distant and of another skin color they don't care.

PS: PRC doesn't have de jure control, it has de jure recognition which ROC has not.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by GePap


Air superiority is not just about planes, or even having nice planes. First, are the avionic suites on those planes as good as those on American and ROC planes? Probably not. MOre importantly, dot he Chinese have the same long range radar capabilities and C&C facilities to direct the battle? I doubt it.

So, while the SU-27 might be as fast and even more powerful than say a F-15, planes rarely dogfight anymore. Combat is decided at long ranegs with missiles- so the question is, who can see whom first, and fire first. That is determined not by airframes and engines but avionics, radar, and C&C facilities. China is lacking significantly in all of those, and in fact imporvements in those systems would be the greatest benefit of imports from Europe.

Not only completely correct, but no obvious spelling errors either. Nice post!

[Drake Tungsten]

We've both complimented him on his posting today. What in the hell is going on?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
We've both complimented him on his posting today. What in the hell is going on?

Post vernal equinox giddiness?

[Drake Tungsten]

That must be it...

Speaking of the vernal equinox, it's a national holiday here in Japan, but it fell on a Sunday this year. No matter. They gave us Monday off anyway, just as they do for every other national holiday that falls on a weekend. I love this country!

[GePap]

I had a nice class with a very nerdy prof in the UofC that happened to have taught air strategy at the War College. very informative-thought the guy was the only person I have seen keep a little creepy smile while talkling about the declining effectiveness of more nuclear strikes against a state...

Oh, and it seems pressure from the Bushies and the new Taiwan bill have styalled the move to end the embargo:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/22/politics/22diplo.html?hp&ex=1111554000&en=7b5ce1eb411b2cf7&ei=5094&partner=homepage

European Union Said to Keep Embargo on Arms to China
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN

Published: March 22, 2005

WASHINGTON, March 21 - Yielding to pressure from President Bush and threats of retaliation from Congress, the European Union has put off plans to lift its arms embargo on China this spring and may not press the issue until next year, American and European officials said Monday.

The officials said that in addition to American pressure, European nations have been shaken by the recent adoption of legislation by the Chinese National People's Congress authorizing the use of force to stop Taiwan from seceding. The Chinese action, they said, jolted France and undercut its moves to end the embargo before June.

"Europe wants to move forward on the embargo, but the recent actions by China have made things a lot more complex," said a senior European official. "The timeline has become more difficult. The timeline is going to have to slip."

The embargo was imposed after China's crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989, and although some countries have eased their restrictions, it has curbed the supply of weapons to China while also becoming a major irritant in China's relations with the West.

A senior State Department official said European "signals" of a shift in position had been transmitted in the last few days, most notably by Javier Solana, the European Union's foreign policy chief, and by a comment from the British foreign secretary, Jack Straw, over the weekend.

Mr. Straw said in a television interview in Britain on Sunday that the problems of lifting the embargo "have actually got more difficult rather than less difficult," and that the Chinese action on Taiwan had created "a difficult political environment" that had stirred concern by both conservatives and liberals in Europe.

In Beijing early Monday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Mr. Straw's "sobering comments" reinforced the United States' continuing concern that lifting the embargo now would alter the balance of military forces in the region and undercut American efforts to get China to improve its human rights record.

Ms. Rice returned from Asia on Monday evening after several tough comments directed at China and, less directly, at Europeans. With tensions building in the Taiwan Strait, she said, and China seeking advanced technology for its navy, the sale of European equipment would jeopardize American efforts to secure the area.

"After all, it is American forces here in the Pacific that have played the role of security guarantor," Ms. Rice said.

European officials say the European Union will not back off its commitment, made last December and pressed by President Jacques Chirac of France, to lift the embargo at some point, but that doing so now would not be worth jeopardizing relations with the United States.

American and European officials said internal European politics had played a role in the timing of the planned easing of restrictions: Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain was willing to go along with the move, but he did not want it to occur while he serves as president of the European Union.

The presidency alternates among the union's 25 members every six months. Mr. Blair, who takes over at the end of June, could not be seen as defying American wishes on such a critical issue, those officials said. Some European and American officials said action on the embargo would probably wait until next year, after he has stepped down.

In the past few weeks, Europeans have pressed their case for lifting the embargo with the administration and with Congress, arguing that the rules covered lethal weapons but not the high-tech equipment that the United States worries about, like equipment that could help China with its command and control systems and tracking submarines and ships.

A top European envoy, Annalisa Giannella, was sent by Mr. Solana to Washington last week to make the case that Europe would expand a "code of conduct" restricting such equipment and set up a regime that would be effectively tighter than the current one. But Ms. Giannella was said to have persuaded no one, especially in Congress.

Indeed, administration and European officials say that Europeans have been taken aback by the ferocity of Congressional opposition to lifting the embargo, led by such Republican heavyweights as Senators Ted Stevens of Alaska and John McCain of Arizona.

Mr. Bush and his top aides have been increasingly vocal over the last couple of months in their demands that the arms embargo not be lifted. In addition, President Bush was reported by administration officials to have told the Europeans in Februrary that even if he went along with lifting the embargo, Congress would not. Congress has been alarmed by Chinese military expansion since the 1990's, when it opposed moves by President Clinton to expand military sales to the Chinese.

After Ms. Giannella's visit, Congressional leaders reiterated their opposition to lifting the embargo, in some cases threatening retaliation by blocking purchases of European military equipment for American forces.

The senior State Department official noted that Ms. Giannella "said she was here on a listening mode" and was "pummeled" on Capitol Hill. "The alarm bells tipped off Brussels that this wasn't going to work," he said, referring to the headquarters of the European Union.

President Chirac first proposed lifting the embargo in late 2003, arguing that it was obsolete. European diplomats say that France is not so much interested in selling arms to China as using the possibility of such sales as a way to sell commercial equipment, from Airbus planes to computers.

The European Union cannot take any action without a consensus. Mr. Bush and Ms. Rice have impressed enough European leaders with their stance that consensus to move on the embargo is now unlikely.

"You won't see a backing away from the commitment," said a European official. "But there's no consensus to act right now."