View Full Version : China's military is only a paper dragon
mojaveman
09-24-2014, 20:17
China might have the numbers but I think in many ways they still have a lot catching up to do with the west.
http://theweek.com/article/index/264774/why-the-chinese-military-is-only-a-paper-dragon
Paper Dragon maybe, but it is large enough that even if it just fell on us it would do a LOT of damage.
Remember the War China fought with Vietnam...even with the proximity and use of chem weapons they did not do well at all.
That is awhile ago but many of the conditions still exist as it pertains to power projection.
I do not underestimate their abilities but I do not overestimate either.
Case study:
WWII the Germans had superior tactics etc in Russia. They killed 10 to one or higher, some say 100:1 at times on the eastern front. The Russians lost more troops killed than any other Army in history, and they did not count their penal Bn.s as casualties so add a few million more there. The Russians did not care, they kept throwing troops into the slaughter and when the Germans ran out of bullets they got over ran. That is an over simplification of the situation, but it sure as hell applies to China.
I would agree.
But I'm trying to look at that quantity over quality advantage from a different perspective.
I'm thinking the future is looking less like human wave kinetic conflict, and more of the non-kinetic "every citizen a potential sensor" in both physical and cyber realms.
One line of thinking could argue that the sheer volume of citizens on the internet and susceptible to nationalist/populist shaping could possess some form of advantage.
What concerns me is the cyber realm.
In the private sector, especially when it comes to easily replicable products/services the ability for a single alpha-nerd employee to act as a force multiplier for company competitive advantage and profit has never been greater at any point in human history and it is continuing to trend in that direction.
Much like how SF view things, better to have 12 outstanding men than 1200 mediocre ones.
But to get to the 12, takes starting with a certain volume....and China has the potential volume.
So potentially, China(and India, and others) has the ability to vet and train cyber rockstars.
I tend to think the solution is aligned with a smart immigration policy. As long as foreigners want a top flight education and the opportunity to stay, then the US has a competitive advantage to steal more than it's share of organic talent.
What concerns me in the physical realm is the declining ability for the US/West to seize and hold certain bits of ground if it felt compelled to do so.
Urban ghettos everywhere are exploding in population while western force projection boot numbers are fast declining.
When I look at what the Russians are doing in Ukraine, and the significant potential for the Chinese to do the same in Asia Pacific with a mix of soft/hard power using a Chinese counterfeited version of Russia's New Generation Warfare, I think the potential threat from China is enormous.
50 carrier battle groups, 150 nuclear attack subs, and 1000 F22s couldn't stop tens of thousands of civilian clothed Chinese SOF/intelligence/paramilitaries infiltrating det by det into vulnerable countries China wants in it's sphere of influence.
Destabilize with UW, and step in to protect ethnic Chinese minorities(Chinese diaspora is massive and everywhere).
A concurrent activity would be to "ethnically climate change" the local environment before, during, and after.
That's a Counter UW elephant for SF to eat....a massive multi-decade long job one bite at a time.
Chinese fighter planes going kerplunk trying to learn carrier operations is funny.....because as stated here, the US has a century of lessons learned, institutional knowledge, and IP to conduct combat operations against a peer threat.
It's going to take a LONG time for China to operate a carrier battle group that can live more than 5 minutes past the start of a conventional war.
It's the unconventional threat that I worry about....death of US influence by a thousand detachment sized discrete and deniable-ish infiltrations.
Remember the War China fought with Vietnam...even with the proximity and use of chem weapons they did not do well at all.
That is awhile ago but many of the conditions still exist as it pertains to power projection.
I do not underestimate their abilities but I do not overestimate either.
I agree completely.
But a couple of points:
We are at 35 years since that conflict, which is nearly two generations born since then, so the societal/political fear and wisdom of the cost of conflict is a distant memory and could heighten the risk of future stupidity and externally focused political distraction for when(not if) China suffers a financial event that undermines the tacit agreement between the people and the government.
Chinese military doctrine, investment, and training will have changed enormously since 1979(if only for a smaller, better equipped, and better trained portion of the entire Chinese PLA).
I would think China would be far more likely to focus future foreign military distractions on places with a higher % of ethnic Chinese minorities and/or extremely weak sovereign states.
What do you think of China taking a very close interest in Ukraine and Russia's New Generation Warfare, much like China studied the collapse of the Soviet Union?
Tell that to those who had to fight the Red Chinese in Korea. They were a be to move Infantry units at lightening speed that often shocked the Americans who by the way at the time one of the largest most combat experienced Armies in the world.
True they may not be able to project power but do not make the mistake of underestimating them-
The Reaper
10-03-2014, 10:33
....the Americans who by the way at the time one of the largest most combat experienced Armies in the world.
You had me right up till then.
The U.S. Army in 1950 was a shadow of its former self, in terms of troop strength, combat experience, readiness, and equipment.
TR
Peregrino
10-03-2014, 11:28
You had me right up till then.
The U.S. Army in 1950 was a shadow of its former self, in terms of troop strength, combat experience, readiness, and equipment.
TR
Concur. That's why military professionals (used VERY loosely in some cases) adopted the "No more Task Force Smiths" mantra to push training and readiness - a mantra that politicians continue to ignore for temporary political advantage.
Team Sergeant
10-03-2014, 11:40
Concur. That's why military professionals (used VERY loosely in some cases) adopted the "No more Task Force Smiths" mantra to push training and readiness - a mantra that politicians continue to ignore for temporary political advantage.
What's that phrase;
"If you do not learn from history you're dammed to repeat it."
Every time I think about that saying I think of the mess we're currently in with islam and the mooslems. I'm waiting for the mooslems to piss off the Chinese to the point that they slay them all......
...history is stupid
Spending tax payer money and buying votes is fucking AWESOME
The ability to defend the homeland (from both internal and external threats) or fight with someone along contiguous borders vs the ability to project and sustain combat power half a globe away are two very different animals.
China has some major issues regarding these capabilities - but don't we all.
Richard
The Reaper
10-03-2014, 13:27
The ability to defend the homeland (from both internal and external threats) or fight with someone along contiguous borders vs the ability to project and sustain combat power half a globe away are two very different animals.
China has some major issues regarding these capabilities - but don't we all.
Richard
China is doing just that, projecting power and Chinese globally, via non-overt diplomatic / informational / military / economic means.
They are utilizing their full spectrum of power.
I would say that our globally deployable military force projection probably exceeds everyone else combined.
Our soft power projection, not so much.
TR
China is doing just that, projecting power and Chinese globally, via non-overt diplomatic / informational / military / economic means.
They are utilizing their full spectrum of power.
I would say that our globally deployable military force projection probably exceeds everyone else combined.
Our soft power projection, not so much.
TR
I would agree.
F35s can't deter or counter mass guest worker "ethnic climate change" in Africa.
I would agree.
F35s can't deter or counter mass guest worker "ethnic climate change" in Africa.
Don't forget the Caribbean. They're all over the islands, building football pitches, modern docks, concert venues, etc.