Russia vs China

[Lancer]

If the unresolved border disputes of the past should start up again, does Russia lose Siberia or just their piece of Mongolia? Or do they nuke each other into the stone age?

[Zkribbler]

IF it does heat up, it'll just be a border dispute. A couple of border guards get shot, a couple of acres change hands, hostile notes are exchanged, and then either the UN or the US brokers a deal.

[Darius871]

Way to spoil the fun Z.

[Lancer]

No, China wants Siberia!

[LordShiva]

Right now, and for the forseeable future, Russia can kick China's ass militarily. The world's view of China's power is hugely inflated - fact remains, they have a rickety, largely obsolete military, quite dependent on Russia for spare parts. Moreover, China is also dependent on Russia and it's C. Asian friends for energy. Finally, restive populations in Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang wouldn't help any Chinese military action.

[Zkribbler]

Wellll, the way the Chinese economy is going, and the way the Russian economy is going, I ssay wait a few years and the Chinese can buy Siberia from the Russians.

Or should we claim that Siberia is really eastern Alaska, which we already bought from the Russians?? It's our dammit! We already bought and paid for it!

[Lancer]

Though what you say s impressive LordShiva, you're avatar is even more so. The wife loves it.

The situation with China won't continue forever, yes? They should be able to field a modern army soon with all the $ they're raking in.

Also, they have a new tank and are working on a stealth plane. I'll see if I can find some links...after I take Dolores shopping.

[Lancer]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Wellll, the way the Chinese economy is going, and the way the Russian economy is going, I ssay wait a few years and the Chinese can buy Siberia from the Russians.

Or should we claim that Siberia is really eastern Alaska, which we already bought from the Russians?? It's our dammit! We already bought and paid for it!

Don't give them any ideas Zkrib. What we don't need is an army tied down and coming between our two main adversaries.

[Zkribbler]

We probably wouldn't need an army, but we would need a lot more boarder patrol agents to keep out the illegals jumping over the Great Wall of China in search of American jobs.

[LordShiva]

Correct, China will only get stronger vis a vis Russia.

However, I still think the likelihood of conflict is extremely miniscule. China's growing dependence on Russia for energy will make it loath to indulge in border skirmishes that would earn it nothing but a few square kilometres of barren land. Anything more ambitious is also unlikely. Siberia is too big and too useless - the oil and gas are too far away to make an adventure attractive, and even then, it's far far cheaper for China to just buy it off Russia than spend the billions required to build up a strong enough military, wage a protracted war with a power armed to the teeth with nukes, hold yet more rebellious provinces, and sustain the huge diplomatic hit that such a move would entail.

IMO, anyway.

[Vince278]

Re: Russia vs China

Serb's input here is inevitable.

Originally posted by Lancer
Or do they nuke each other into the stone age?

That would only be a century or two.

[Lonestar]

China would curbstomp Russia. Hell, China has a better training regime than Russia does at the moment.

[GePap]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Right now, and for the forseeable future, Russia can kick China's ass militarily. The world's view of China's power is hugely inflated - fact remains, they have a rickety, largely obsolete military, quite dependent on Russia for spare parts. Moreover, China is also dependent on Russia and it's C. Asian friends for energy. Finally, restive populations in Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang wouldn't help any Chinese military action.

I disagree with this.

1. China has numbers on its side, but more importantly, they are closer to the action- China can concentrate forces in the reigon of war faster, and its supply lines are shorter. China also has a much greater economy, and could fund a war better than Russia. Chinese equipment might be or generally lesser quality, or equal, but China's demographic and economic edge, plus being closer to the war area would mean a more likely Chinese victory. Thise "restive populations" are well in control by the Beijing government, plusthere is no reaosn why Central Asian countries would back Russi over China, specially when China has more (money) to offer, and no history of past imperial control.

[Whoha]

Re: Russia vs China

Originally posted by Lancer
If the unresolved border disputes of the past should start up again, does Russia lose Siberia or just their piece of Mongolia? Or do they nuke each other into the stone age?

Nukes.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by GePap
I disagree with this.

1. China has numbers on its side, but more importantly, they are closer to the action- China can concentrate forces in the reigon of war faster, and its supply lines are shorter. China also has a much greater economy, and could fund a war better than Russia. Chinese equipment might be or generally lesser quality, or equal, but China's demographic and economic edge, plus being closer to the war area would mean a more likely Chinese victory. Thise "restive populations" are well in control by the Beijing government, plusthere is no reaosn why Central Asian countries would back Russi over China, specially when China has more (money) to offer, and no history of past imperial control.

I disagree with this.

China's equipment is of far inferior quality. Despite funding problems, Russia still has technology on its side, and since the oil and gas have started flowing, have been pouring money back into the military. China has the edge in manpower, but a sore disadvantage in armour - Russian tanks are more numerous and better serviced than Chinese, and would chew up whatever China threw at them over land.

In the air - no contest. China most advanced jets are older versions of Russia's fleet of Sukhois and MiGs, and are fewer in number. An in terms of missiles, probably the only country that can match Russia in short- and medium- range (not to mention ICBMs) is the U.S.

Re: supply lines: The Chinese side of the frontier isn't as developed as you make it sound. The Chinese Far West is much harder to get to than Russia's central steppes, and the road and rail links would be easily dealt with from the air. Besides, Chinese military concentrations are biased towards Taiwan.

Re: C. Asian "republics" - they're still allied to Russia, members of the C.I.S., dependent on Russian investment, and most importantly, home to several large Russian military bases. Even without the ex-Soviet strongmen with their pro-Russian leanings in charge, the presence of those troops on their soil would convince any ruler about whose side to be on.

Russia would probably lose Vladivostok, since the Far East is harder for them to get to. But not before the entire Pacific Fleet sailed for Shanghai harbour and bombed the **** out of it. China's navy, which is far from blue water, would be no match for Russian subs, allowing Russian boats to sail up and down the Chinese coast shelling/firing missiles at everything between Beijing and Hong Kong. And without the oil-laden ship lanes, China's economy chokes within a week or two.

But, the most important reason for why China would not kick Russia's ass is that neither side has any interest whatsoever in conflict.