Reaction from Recent Putin's trip to India
Putin recently made a trip to India and signed a plethora of deals worth $10 billion. The deals include several nuclear power plants and military contracts worth $4 billion. I find it interesting that the Western media's over-reaction to this trip. A common theme seems to be that the good relationship developed with India during the Bush Administration is getting squandered by Obama Administration's policies. Obama's policies were described as ignoring India while favoring engagements with "bad countries" like China and Pakistan. And due to America's neglect, India has ran back to its traditional all-weather friend Russia. And Russia is sick of China copying its weapons and value India far more.
Needless to say, I found much of these articles to be comical. While it is true that India is getting less attention from America with Obama in power, I really don't think it had much to do with these contracts. When Bush signed that landmark nuclear power deal with India, other nuclear power exporters like Russia and France were also excited that they now have an NPT-exception to sell to India. It should be to no one's surprise that India chooses to diversify its nuclear power purchases between US, France and Russia to get the best available technology for the lowest price. That is what China is doing right now with building AP-1000, EPR, Candu and AES-91 at the same time. It seems like India is a huge nuclear energy market, so I don't think American firms like Westinghouse, GE and McDermott would be missing out.
The military agreements that came out from this trip seem to be the new terms for the Gorshkov refitting project, additional Mig-29Ks and more signings to the 5th generation fighter project. All three of these agreements are basically additional agreements to existing projects. Does it really surprise anyone that India wants to conclude this Gorshkov saga and use the same naval fighter on all of its aircraft carriers? These decisions were made in the earlier part of this decade and really do not have anything to do with the current political climate. And with the first flight of T-50, India clearly thinks that this is the best and fastest way for it to get into the 5th generation of fighter jets. There were also talks of India purchasing additional Su-30MKIs from Russia. I think that will also happen due to the delays in the MRCA and LCA projects. Russia has always been a reliable supplier to India. There really is no reason for India to cut them out just because Western countries are join in now. America has already scored several major contracts like the P-8I and C-130J orders. It is still in competition for utility helicopters, Project 17A, missile defense, various army RFPs and the MRCA project. So while the Russians continue to sell well to India, America is in no way getting left out.
I also do not see Russia selling certain weapon systems to India as an indication that its relationship with China is decreasing. It is true that Russia is fairly pissed out at China for declining purchases and allegedly copying several of its export (although as I have stated in the past, it really is nowhere as bad as the Russians claim). However, that is due to China's much improved military industrial complex and increased military cooperation with Ukraine and Belarus (at the expense of Russia) than weapons not being available. Over the last few years, military exports have become a much smaller part of the bilateral relationship. Otherwise, the leaders of the two nations would not be meeting so often.
In conclusion, Putin's trip to India is reaffirms the decade long friendship of the two countries. The military cooperation between the two countries will continue to flourish. However, people should not see this as a rebut to the US/India relationship. India is already a power to be reckoned with and will become a superpower at sometime this century. Its relationship with Russia cannot possibly go back to the cold war period, when it was a little brother to one of the two super powers. Its relationship with US will only expand as it becomes more and more involved in the world economy. And sadly, its relationship with China will become only more complex as their growing economic ties are overshadowed by the mutual distrust. Things will never go back to the way they were in the cold war days.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Varyag is out
Well, these pictures came out this weekend.
Shows that Varyag has left the dry docks in Dalian with the modified island. Although at this point, they really haven't put any of the sensors on the island yet. Looks like all of the dry dock work has been done and they will start to really install on the electronics now.
What I hear is that they completely redesigned the inside of the ship. They put a lot of serious investment into putting Varyag back into service, so it may serve past just having training purpose. Just waiting patiently for the next stage now.
Shows that Varyag has left the dry docks in Dalian with the modified island. Although at this point, they really haven't put any of the sensors on the island yet. Looks like all of the dry dock work has been done and they will start to really install on the electronics now.
What I hear is that they completely redesigned the inside of the ship. They put a lot of serious investment into putting Varyag back into service, so it may serve past just having training purpose. Just waiting patiently for the next stage now.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Latest SIPRI report
In the recent times, SIPRI posted a new report regarding the military sales in the five year period from 2005-2009. There are some reports on it regarding to China's affect on the military sales in this period.
I think this article from WPR pretty much summarized what all the other articles have been saying.
It is quite clear that a lot of the Southeastern Asian nations are building up their forces during the past 5 years. That is confirmed by the report. However, I can't really definitively say that all of the countries are aiming at China. In the case of Vietnam, it's quite obvious that the recent purchases for the Kilo submarines and Su-30 fighter jets were aimed at China. I have talked about those purchases before and have labeled them as basically a waste of money. In the case of Indonesia, their purchases have pretty much been to just replace American weapons after America stopped supplying parts for those weapon systems. In fact, one could argue that those purchases were made in response to Australia and Singapore rather than China. It also explains why China has no qualms about selling weapons to Indonesia. In the case of Malaysia and Singapore, I think their purchases are aimed at each other as well as China. In many cases, one would ask why Malaysia needs to spend so much money on its defense. One could say that they are fearful of Chinese rise, but one could also say that they are just fearful of the more modern arsenal of Singapore. In both countries' cases, the rise in military import is also a cyclical issue. For example, Singapore only needs to buy fighter jets every x number of years. It just happens that it made a major purchase for F-15SGs during this 5 year period.
It did surprise me that China remained the largest importer of weapons during this period, because it seemed to have been so long since they actually bought anything meaningful. The report also acknowledged that China have only been buying some helicopters and engines for different platforms since 2007. Although, they did receive some S-300PMU2 from the Russians in 2008. Looking back, a large part of their purchases made in the wake of Bush's approval for Taiwan military sales were delivered in 2005 and 2006. I would expect the figures to drop quite a bit in the next 5 years, which would cause China to loose the title of the world's top importer of weapons. That would certainly be a good thing. However, they still do have quite a few items that would be considered foreign purchases like the Zubr deal, Ka-28/Mi-171 purchases, possibly another batch of AL-31FN for J-10, more RD-93s for JF-17s, D-30KP2 for H-6Ks, diesel engines for 054 series, engines for Z-8/Z-9/Z-10/Z-15. They could also potentially buy S-400 and Il-76/78s from the Russians, but we will have to wait and see.
I also read an article where the Russians complained that China is not buying more weapons from them. The truth is that they just need to get used to the fact that what they are selling is not all that appealing.
I think this article from WPR pretty much summarized what all the other articles have been saying.
It is quite clear that a lot of the Southeastern Asian nations are building up their forces during the past 5 years. That is confirmed by the report. However, I can't really definitively say that all of the countries are aiming at China. In the case of Vietnam, it's quite obvious that the recent purchases for the Kilo submarines and Su-30 fighter jets were aimed at China. I have talked about those purchases before and have labeled them as basically a waste of money. In the case of Indonesia, their purchases have pretty much been to just replace American weapons after America stopped supplying parts for those weapon systems. In fact, one could argue that those purchases were made in response to Australia and Singapore rather than China. It also explains why China has no qualms about selling weapons to Indonesia. In the case of Malaysia and Singapore, I think their purchases are aimed at each other as well as China. In many cases, one would ask why Malaysia needs to spend so much money on its defense. One could say that they are fearful of Chinese rise, but one could also say that they are just fearful of the more modern arsenal of Singapore. In both countries' cases, the rise in military import is also a cyclical issue. For example, Singapore only needs to buy fighter jets every x number of years. It just happens that it made a major purchase for F-15SGs during this 5 year period.
It did surprise me that China remained the largest importer of weapons during this period, because it seemed to have been so long since they actually bought anything meaningful. The report also acknowledged that China have only been buying some helicopters and engines for different platforms since 2007. Although, they did receive some S-300PMU2 from the Russians in 2008. Looking back, a large part of their purchases made in the wake of Bush's approval for Taiwan military sales were delivered in 2005 and 2006. I would expect the figures to drop quite a bit in the next 5 years, which would cause China to loose the title of the world's top importer of weapons. That would certainly be a good thing. However, they still do have quite a few items that would be considered foreign purchases like the Zubr deal, Ka-28/Mi-171 purchases, possibly another batch of AL-31FN for J-10, more RD-93s for JF-17s, D-30KP2 for H-6Ks, diesel engines for 054 series, engines for Z-8/Z-9/Z-10/Z-15. They could also potentially buy S-400 and Il-76/78s from the Russians, but we will have to wait and see.
I also read an article where the Russians complained that China is not buying more weapons from them. The truth is that they just need to get used to the fact that what they are selling is not all that appealing.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Lushae Jewelry Review
This is going to be a random musing, different from my normal posts.
A couple of weeks ago, I received an email from Sarah of Lushae Jewelry to give a review of a product from her website. She was very nice about everything (I got the item to review for free!) and I looked through a decent selection of Jewelry on her website. For all the guys out there (I figure that's the majority of my reader), this is a good website to visit to get presents for your wives and girlfriends. They have different types of rings, earrings and necklaces on sale. I find the prices to be pretty good. I found similar items in a store like Swarovski to be much more expensive. And I normally consider Swarovski to be pretty affordable. This is a picture of the Edwardian necklace that I ended up getting (obtained from their website + its specifications:
Stone Colors: Clear / White
Lead Free: Yes
Setting Type: Prong
Clasp: Spring Ring
Item Weight: 5.5g
Carat Weight: 5.7ct
Chain: 16in + 2in Extender
Length: 31mm
Width: 24mm
Height: 6mm
I have to say that the picture above really doesn't do justice for the actual necklace. You can't really go wrong with a White Gold Rhodium layer, which makes it shine. And also since it is a type of platinum, you don't really have to worry about rusting or anything like that. The design itself is done really with a nice touch. I can't say much except that a female friend of my selected it and she really likes the design! All in all, I think all my readers out there will be able to find something intriguing on this website that they can afford (mostly in the $60-70 range) to buy for a loved one. The designs are simple, but elegant and attractive.
A couple of weeks ago, I received an email from Sarah of Lushae Jewelry to give a review of a product from her website. She was very nice about everything (I got the item to review for free!) and I looked through a decent selection of Jewelry on her website. For all the guys out there (I figure that's the majority of my reader), this is a good website to visit to get presents for your wives and girlfriends. They have different types of rings, earrings and necklaces on sale. I find the prices to be pretty good. I found similar items in a store like Swarovski to be much more expensive. And I normally consider Swarovski to be pretty affordable. This is a picture of the Edwardian necklace that I ended up getting (obtained from their website + its specifications:
Stone Colors: Clear / White
Lead Free: Yes
Setting Type: Prong
Clasp: Spring Ring
Item Weight: 5.5g
Carat Weight: 5.7ct
Chain: 16in + 2in Extender
Length: 31mm
Width: 24mm
Height: 6mm
I have to say that the picture above really doesn't do justice for the actual necklace. You can't really go wrong with a White Gold Rhodium layer, which makes it shine. And also since it is a type of platinum, you don't really have to worry about rusting or anything like that. The design itself is done really with a nice touch. I can't say much except that a female friend of my selected it and she really likes the design! All in all, I think all my readers out there will be able to find something intriguing on this website that they can afford (mostly in the $60-70 range) to buy for a loved one. The designs are simple, but elegant and attractive.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Chile Earthquake
I'm sure many of you guys have already heard this news. In case you have not, you can check some of the latest on the different news sites and channels. I don't have much to say at the moment other than let's keep the Chilean people in our prayers. And I hope that the international community can help Chileans as much as Haitians.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Future of Chinese naval helicopter
As PLAN really started to expand in the mid-2000s, we noticed a growing need for naval helicopters. And as military shipbuilding program continued in the past few years, the need for more helicopters only grew greater. In the Sichuan earthquake of 2008, everyone saw China's lack of helicopters and how that slowed down the rescue efforts. In the recent naval deployments to the Gulf of Aden, PLAN became even more aware of its helicopter shortage. One of the analysts wrote that the 3-ships flotilla to Aden was hampered by only having 2 helicopters. Helicopters have been really important in chasing down pirates and rescuing ships that are under-siege. The Chinese flotilla has obviously been hampered operationally due to this problem. On top of that, PLAN will need more order more naval helicopters for its future carrier and escorts.
The existing fleet of naval helicopters consist of Z-9Cs, different variants of Z-8s and Ka-28s. Ka-28s are used primarily for the destroyers and 054As. In the 90s, the ordered 8 Ka-28s from Russia as part of the Sov purchase for ASW and SAR missions. I think they have added some more Ka-28s since (we've seen Ka-28 pictures with newer serial numbers), but the total would still be around 12 to 16. There are about 18 ships in PLAN with hangars designed for Ka-28s (including 4 Sovs, 4 052B/Cs, 2 054 and 6 054As), so they really don't have enough Ka-28s. You end up with situations where one of these ships would be carrying the smaller Z-9C or with no helicopter at all. Recently, they ordered 9 more Ka-28s from Russia to support the new DDGs and 054As under construction. Six of the nine Ka-28s have already been delivered. I think more Ka-28s are needed before the next generation of naval helicopter becomes available. In the recent years, Z-9s have proliferated in PLA as all of the production bottlenecks have finally been resolved. They are even exporting 6 Z-9Cs to Pakistan as part of the F-22P deal. Surprisingly though, I have not really seen pictures of new Z-9Cs coming into service, even though it appears that PLAN is satisfied with their performance. Despite it's small size, ASW version of Z-9Cs have been designed to carry torpedoes and dipping sonar. In gulf of Aden, Z-9s have also been put to good use to hunt down pirates. My guess is that PLAN just wants to wait until Z-15 is ready to join service, but that will probably take another 5 years. And finally, Z-8s are making quite a comeback in PLAN. We've seen Z-8 productions ramping up in the recent year with newer variants like Z-8K, Z-8KA and Z-8KH joining service with PLA and PLAAF. They are also building civilian versions of Z-8 for firefighting and transportation, but we've also seen many new Z-8J/Hs joining service. Z-8J/Hs have been seen operating off 051Cs, 866, replenishment ships and 998. With newer large ships coming into service, I certainly expect to see more variants of Z-8s getting orders. At this point, Z-8s are really too big to operate on any of the destroyers, Frigates or smaller warships, so the current production level is more than sufficient. In general, I think more small and medium size helicopters like Z-9Cs and Ka-28s are needed for all their new frigates and destroyers, but the larger warships are doing okay with all the new variants of Z-8s.
Having looked at the current state of naval helicopter in PLAN, what does the future hold? I think that the current hi-lo combination of Ka-28 and Z-9Cs are nearing the end of their shelf life. The Z-15 and 10 ton helo projects will form the backbone of naval helicopter in the future. Z-15 would take over the role of Z-9Cs on frigates and smaller ships. Compared to Z-9C, it is larger, can carry more mission equipments (whether for ASW or SAR), have longer ranger/speed, have better flight performance and far more advanced avionics. The 10-ton project would take over the role of Ka-28 on destroyers and amphibious ships. It would basically become the Chinese equivalent of SH-60. Recently, we heard the news that China is trying to use European turboshaft engines for Z-15 instead of PWC turboshaft engine. The US government pressure against PWC for exporting PT67 turbo shafts to China put a temporary halt to the Z-10 project. At the same time, China had no problems in continuing Z-9G production, because it obtained all the necessary export licenses to have local production of Arriel-2C turboshaft engine. Fearing that US government might do something similar to prevent PT67 engines from being installed on PLAN Z-15s, China is seeking for alternative suppliers. If the US government somehow pressures the Europeans to also back off, China would then turn to the Ukrainians (Motor-Sich) or wait for a local engine to become available. I think that's what will happen with the 10 ton helo project. We have not heard much about it, because it is not a collaborative effort like Z-15. We do know that it will most likely start off with an engine from Motor-Sich (which produces engine for Mi-17) before shifting to the domestic engine WZ-10. Since China is developing this alone, I would expect it to finish development after Z-15 joins service. This would also explain why Ka-28 is getting newer orders, while Z-9C is not. And finally, we have seen a recent news that China put in an order for 9 Ka-31 from Russia. Back in 2006, they ordered 15 Ka-31s, but that contract never got fulfilled due to the IL-76 fiasco. I had thought that the Z-8 AEW project would take away the need for Ka-31s, but I guess PLAN does not feel confident that Z-8 AEW will be fully ready by the time Varyag gets fixed up. Z-8 AEW is apparently going to use the new AC-313 (which is a heavily modified version of Z-8 currently under development) as its platform. I can see that Varyag would use mostly Ka-31 and test out some Z-8s. Once Z-8 AEW becomes mature, the future carriers should be using it instead of Ka-31s.
In conclusion, China has ordered 18 kamov helicopters recently, because the domestic options are not ready yet. Once the domestic projects are complete, we can expect to see a force consisting of Z-15 for smaller ships, 10-ton helo for middle ships and Z-8s for larger ships and carriers.
The existing fleet of naval helicopters consist of Z-9Cs, different variants of Z-8s and Ka-28s. Ka-28s are used primarily for the destroyers and 054As. In the 90s, the ordered 8 Ka-28s from Russia as part of the Sov purchase for ASW and SAR missions. I think they have added some more Ka-28s since (we've seen Ka-28 pictures with newer serial numbers), but the total would still be around 12 to 16. There are about 18 ships in PLAN with hangars designed for Ka-28s (including 4 Sovs, 4 052B/Cs, 2 054 and 6 054As), so they really don't have enough Ka-28s. You end up with situations where one of these ships would be carrying the smaller Z-9C or with no helicopter at all. Recently, they ordered 9 more Ka-28s from Russia to support the new DDGs and 054As under construction. Six of the nine Ka-28s have already been delivered. I think more Ka-28s are needed before the next generation of naval helicopter becomes available. In the recent years, Z-9s have proliferated in PLA as all of the production bottlenecks have finally been resolved. They are even exporting 6 Z-9Cs to Pakistan as part of the F-22P deal. Surprisingly though, I have not really seen pictures of new Z-9Cs coming into service, even though it appears that PLAN is satisfied with their performance. Despite it's small size, ASW version of Z-9Cs have been designed to carry torpedoes and dipping sonar. In gulf of Aden, Z-9s have also been put to good use to hunt down pirates. My guess is that PLAN just wants to wait until Z-15 is ready to join service, but that will probably take another 5 years. And finally, Z-8s are making quite a comeback in PLAN. We've seen Z-8 productions ramping up in the recent year with newer variants like Z-8K, Z-8KA and Z-8KH joining service with PLA and PLAAF. They are also building civilian versions of Z-8 for firefighting and transportation, but we've also seen many new Z-8J/Hs joining service. Z-8J/Hs have been seen operating off 051Cs, 866, replenishment ships and 998. With newer large ships coming into service, I certainly expect to see more variants of Z-8s getting orders. At this point, Z-8s are really too big to operate on any of the destroyers, Frigates or smaller warships, so the current production level is more than sufficient. In general, I think more small and medium size helicopters like Z-9Cs and Ka-28s are needed for all their new frigates and destroyers, but the larger warships are doing okay with all the new variants of Z-8s.
Having looked at the current state of naval helicopter in PLAN, what does the future hold? I think that the current hi-lo combination of Ka-28 and Z-9Cs are nearing the end of their shelf life. The Z-15 and 10 ton helo projects will form the backbone of naval helicopter in the future. Z-15 would take over the role of Z-9Cs on frigates and smaller ships. Compared to Z-9C, it is larger, can carry more mission equipments (whether for ASW or SAR), have longer ranger/speed, have better flight performance and far more advanced avionics. The 10-ton project would take over the role of Ka-28 on destroyers and amphibious ships. It would basically become the Chinese equivalent of SH-60. Recently, we heard the news that China is trying to use European turboshaft engines for Z-15 instead of PWC turboshaft engine. The US government pressure against PWC for exporting PT67 turbo shafts to China put a temporary halt to the Z-10 project. At the same time, China had no problems in continuing Z-9G production, because it obtained all the necessary export licenses to have local production of Arriel-2C turboshaft engine. Fearing that US government might do something similar to prevent PT67 engines from being installed on PLAN Z-15s, China is seeking for alternative suppliers. If the US government somehow pressures the Europeans to also back off, China would then turn to the Ukrainians (Motor-Sich) or wait for a local engine to become available. I think that's what will happen with the 10 ton helo project. We have not heard much about it, because it is not a collaborative effort like Z-15. We do know that it will most likely start off with an engine from Motor-Sich (which produces engine for Mi-17) before shifting to the domestic engine WZ-10. Since China is developing this alone, I would expect it to finish development after Z-15 joins service. This would also explain why Ka-28 is getting newer orders, while Z-9C is not. And finally, we have seen a recent news that China put in an order for 9 Ka-31 from Russia. Back in 2006, they ordered 15 Ka-31s, but that contract never got fulfilled due to the IL-76 fiasco. I had thought that the Z-8 AEW project would take away the need for Ka-31s, but I guess PLAN does not feel confident that Z-8 AEW will be fully ready by the time Varyag gets fixed up. Z-8 AEW is apparently going to use the new AC-313 (which is a heavily modified version of Z-8 currently under development) as its platform. I can see that Varyag would use mostly Ka-31 and test out some Z-8s. Once Z-8 AEW becomes mature, the future carriers should be using it instead of Ka-31s.
In conclusion, China has ordered 18 kamov helicopters recently, because the domestic options are not ready yet. Once the domestic projects are complete, we can expect to see a force consisting of Z-15 for smaller ships, 10-ton helo for middle ships and Z-8s for larger ships and carriers.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
The recent row over China/US relations
As George Bush once said, the relationship between US and China is complicated. In many ways, I think China is one of the few policy areas that Bush got almost everything right. He started presidency with much anti-China rhetoric, but left the office as one of the most pro-China president in US history. It is my personal view that having a positive, engaging and pragmatic relationship with China is the most beneficial path that any US administration can take. Some people in the China-blue group (like Bill Gertz, John Bolton and Donald Rumsfeld) favoured antagonizing China through more support with Taiwan, labeling China as a threat/competitor and creating an encirclement of China through alliance with Australia, Japan and India. Bush started off in that corner, but he slowly moved to great engagement with China while maintaining strong relationships with regional allies like Australia and Japan. I think he basically did a really good of adapting to the rise of China, the increased role of China as America's creditor and the interconnected economic relationship between the two countries. He started started the strategic dialog with China, which I think really helped the bilateral relationship. I think he was absolutely right in going to the Beijing Olympics when the pressure was on him not to. By the end of his presidency, he had built a really good working relationship with China and a good understanding of the country. He was able to work with China on critical political and economical issues, even though the two sides had vastly different views. I think China really appreciated that.
The Obama administration was definitely very China friendly in the first year. A major reason is America's need for China to continue to buy US treasury bond in the midst of the economic meltdown in America. A lot of people got nervous or angry by the fact that Obama/Hilary put human rights on the back burners, but I think that is overplayed. I always think that it's far more effective to encourage China and explain the importance of human rights privately rather than embarrassing the Politburo in public. I do think that Obama gave in too much to China in some of the early negotiations like his visit to China, because it emboldened China to ask for more and give in less to US in future negotiations. In many ways, this is the expected path. Washington insiders cannot expect America to negotiate from a position of absolute strength like during Clinton years, because China is just so much stronger now economically and politically. I don't really want to put military in there, because China's recent success comes from its status as the world's leading creditor nation. As history as shown, power flows to where money is and that is playing out again in China today. Now that Washington has elevated China to be the other super power of the world in the past world, it would be hard to push back Chinese ambitions. We have a problem now where the Chinese leadership also has to satisfy and listen to the growing middle class that is more nationalistic and confident than ever. So, as Washington is pressing Obama to get more out of China, the Chinese population is also pressuring the Politburo to not give up any of its new found power. With this kind of power struggle between the two countries, it's not surprising that we have run into the current row.
Now, to turn on our attention to the point of contentions of the recent weeks: Taiwan, Tibet, Google and Iran. If we start with Iran, we all know what the issue is here. China has a lot of money invested in the country and relies on Iran for future energy supply. You know we can say a lot about the type of regime in the country, but US is also dealing with a lot of unsavory characters in the Middle East. The question is whether or not it makes sense for China to support tougher sanctions in Iran. I actually think it does, but there is obviously a limit that China can go without risking all of its major contracts in Iran. The reason to support tougher sanctions on Iran are many. Even though Iran may not be as actively developing nuclear weapon or as further along in its development as the Israelis think, it does openly taunt the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The danger to China is that more countries will seek for nuclear weapon and countries like Japan and South Korea will also develop it. I don't think China is willing to accept that kind of strategical change. The more immediate threat comes from Israel. Now, the Israeli gov't seemed to have given the Obama administration a deadline in harsh sanctions against Iran before it launches strikes against Iran's nuclear targets. If that happens, Iran could cause all sort of problems in the Middle East if it manages to carry out its threat of shutting down oil/gas supplies in that region. Surging energy prices and instability in Middle Easts are definitely things that China would be afraid of. I'm really not sure how this will turn out. I can see that Israel will continue to ask for more from US and US will continue to ask for more support from China/Russia. At the end, I really don't think US will get what it wants from China.
As for Google, I think this is more about China's general cyber espionage effort against US governments and corporations rather than just Google. Let's face it, these "attacks" against Google were attempts to get emails of human right activists rather than bringing down Google's servers. It is not like we don't know that China's human rights record is rather poor. Rather than complaining to the Chinese gov't and the media, the US government should run a similar cyber effort against China. And I think they are doing that, because China also claims to face a lot of cyber attacks. So in the end, I really don't have a lot of sympathies for the US government or Google. Google is making a lot of noises about leaving China, but it is still operating in China with the self imposed censor turned on (despite its public claims otherwise). Like all other big corporations, it's number 1 goal is to make more money. If it thinks that the cost of business outweighs the benefits, then it will leave the country. Clearly, the other 30 target firms are not going anywhere. The US government is in a position to fight fire with fire. If US wants to remain the IT leader of the world, then it should be able to create security and infiltrate other networks better than any other countries in the world. I think this issue will die down as soon as Google finds a solution with the Chinese gov't. I really don't think it will leave the country, because it does not want to totally abandon the search engine and especially the cell phone market for the future.
As a result of not receiving Chinese support on some issues, I think the recent moves are calculated actions by the Obama administration saying that we are not going to play "nice guy" with you anymore. Taiwan and Tibet are certainly the two things that agitate China more than anything else. To much of the Western world, Taiwan is just an Asian nation with a democratic gov't threatened by China and Tibet is a land occupied by the brutal repression of China. Of course, the sympathetic image of Tibet is played up by the non-threatening zen-like image of Dalai Lama. The image of Dalai Lama as this international loved religious leader has basically elevated Tibet freedom ahead of many other larger and more repressed groups. One would really have to study Chinese history to see why the Chinese gov't and its people have such a dislike to Taiwan Independence and Dalai Lama.
To the Chinese people, the 100 years from 1840 to 1949 was its century of humiliation where it had to give up part of its sovereignty and surrender its land to foreigners. It is important to take back all that it was forced to give up during that period. When China was negotiating with UK for the return of Hong Kong, Deng Xiaoping actually told Margaret Thatcher that "China is not Argentina" and that China would take Hong Kong back by force if necessary. So to Chinese people, Taiwan is a reminder that China was forced to give up land to foreign occupiers during that century. To Chinese people, Tibet was a backward, feudal region that was briefly taken away early this century and was liberated of those oppressive Lamas and foreigners in 1950s. Of course, there are strategic element to it. The navy does not think that it can truly operate beyond the first chain until the hostile ROCN is no longer at its door step. The army believes that it needs Tibet as a buffer zone and natural barrier that protects the nation from the Indians. There are obviously more to it. Most Chinese people believe that Han people everywhere are really Chinese and should rejoin China. They find the Dalai Lama request for true autonomy (This Forbes Article contains the key facts) to be more appalling for the following reasons:
Therefore, the divergence of opinion on the military sale to Taiwan stems from how the West and China sees Taiwan. Most Westerners believe that Taiwan is a separate sovereign entity that should only rejoin China if it wishes to do so. Therefore, Americans see these military sales as fulfilling the Taiwan Relation Act by providing Taiwan with additional defensive deterrent. The weapons themselves are very advanced, but they are defensive in nature and are not going to change the military balance across the straits. The best hope for Taiwan is still to make peace with China and maintaining strong relationship with America. So, what is the problem? Well, most Chinese people believe that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China that no other country should interfere with. Therefore, any sales to Taiwan is looked as containing Chinese power, violating its sovereignty and interfering with its internal affairs. While this might have been acceptable in the past, the increasingly confident Chinese public are no longer willing to keep quiet to such snobs. The meeting with Dalai Lama stokes anger in China for similar reasons. The Politburo has to make a lot of noise and take what appears to be strong actions to satisfy the public. In the past, we have often heard cases where the government publicly criticizes another head of state meeting Dalai Lama, but then telling them privately that things will be business as usual. I tend to think that will happen again here. They will make a lot of noise and suspend military contacts, but those things will be re-established sometimes next year. I don't think the Obama administration needs to meet Dalai Lama again or sell weapons to Taiwan again for a few years, so things should smooth out by later this year. At the end of the day, it is in China's interest to have strong working relationship and military exchanges with America. The PRC leadership is too pragmatic to let this drag on. On the other hand, I think the sanctions against US companies could happen. Since US has been sanctioning Chinese companies for years for doing business with Iran, I think punishing American companies for helping Taiwan is pretty logical. They really don't do much business with Lockheed and Raytheon, so any kind of sanctions against them would be quite symbolic. They do a lot of business with Boeing, but Boeing is selling very minimal to Taiwan. The trickiest case here is Sikorsky and its parent company UTC. They do a ton of business with UTC. In fact, PLA even operates some blackhawk helicopters, some unmanned version of S-300C and PWC engines on some helicopters/air planes. Can they really sanction a company that they sort of depends on for some secondary defense project? Especially now that Eurocopter announced recently that they are also selling to Taiwan. Can China sanction Eurocopter when it is partners with Eurocopter on so many projects? We will see. I tend to think that any sanctions against US/EU companies over weapons sale to Taiwan at the moment would not be more symbolic than anything else. Maybe they will warn these companies that any future sales would be met with harsher sanctions.
In general, I think we have entered a phase where the Politburo has to be more vocal against US government and companies for support toward Taiwan and Tibet, because the public and the military demand it. Politburo can no longer accept explanations like "the previous administration did it" or "these weapons are only defensive" or "we have to do it for political reasons" and remain quiet, because it has to satisfy the local population and the military too. At the moment, the retaliatory actions will remain mostly air like in previous occasions, but they will be a lot stronger in the future if US decides to sell an offensive platform like F-16 to Taiwan. Basically, the balance of power between the two nations is shifting and the Chinese responses against perceived US snubs are only going to get stronger.
The Obama administration was definitely very China friendly in the first year. A major reason is America's need for China to continue to buy US treasury bond in the midst of the economic meltdown in America. A lot of people got nervous or angry by the fact that Obama/Hilary put human rights on the back burners, but I think that is overplayed. I always think that it's far more effective to encourage China and explain the importance of human rights privately rather than embarrassing the Politburo in public. I do think that Obama gave in too much to China in some of the early negotiations like his visit to China, because it emboldened China to ask for more and give in less to US in future negotiations. In many ways, this is the expected path. Washington insiders cannot expect America to negotiate from a position of absolute strength like during Clinton years, because China is just so much stronger now economically and politically. I don't really want to put military in there, because China's recent success comes from its status as the world's leading creditor nation. As history as shown, power flows to where money is and that is playing out again in China today. Now that Washington has elevated China to be the other super power of the world in the past world, it would be hard to push back Chinese ambitions. We have a problem now where the Chinese leadership also has to satisfy and listen to the growing middle class that is more nationalistic and confident than ever. So, as Washington is pressing Obama to get more out of China, the Chinese population is also pressuring the Politburo to not give up any of its new found power. With this kind of power struggle between the two countries, it's not surprising that we have run into the current row.
Now, to turn on our attention to the point of contentions of the recent weeks: Taiwan, Tibet, Google and Iran. If we start with Iran, we all know what the issue is here. China has a lot of money invested in the country and relies on Iran for future energy supply. You know we can say a lot about the type of regime in the country, but US is also dealing with a lot of unsavory characters in the Middle East. The question is whether or not it makes sense for China to support tougher sanctions in Iran. I actually think it does, but there is obviously a limit that China can go without risking all of its major contracts in Iran. The reason to support tougher sanctions on Iran are many. Even though Iran may not be as actively developing nuclear weapon or as further along in its development as the Israelis think, it does openly taunt the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The danger to China is that more countries will seek for nuclear weapon and countries like Japan and South Korea will also develop it. I don't think China is willing to accept that kind of strategical change. The more immediate threat comes from Israel. Now, the Israeli gov't seemed to have given the Obama administration a deadline in harsh sanctions against Iran before it launches strikes against Iran's nuclear targets. If that happens, Iran could cause all sort of problems in the Middle East if it manages to carry out its threat of shutting down oil/gas supplies in that region. Surging energy prices and instability in Middle Easts are definitely things that China would be afraid of. I'm really not sure how this will turn out. I can see that Israel will continue to ask for more from US and US will continue to ask for more support from China/Russia. At the end, I really don't think US will get what it wants from China.
As for Google, I think this is more about China's general cyber espionage effort against US governments and corporations rather than just Google. Let's face it, these "attacks" against Google were attempts to get emails of human right activists rather than bringing down Google's servers. It is not like we don't know that China's human rights record is rather poor. Rather than complaining to the Chinese gov't and the media, the US government should run a similar cyber effort against China. And I think they are doing that, because China also claims to face a lot of cyber attacks. So in the end, I really don't have a lot of sympathies for the US government or Google. Google is making a lot of noises about leaving China, but it is still operating in China with the self imposed censor turned on (despite its public claims otherwise). Like all other big corporations, it's number 1 goal is to make more money. If it thinks that the cost of business outweighs the benefits, then it will leave the country. Clearly, the other 30 target firms are not going anywhere. The US government is in a position to fight fire with fire. If US wants to remain the IT leader of the world, then it should be able to create security and infiltrate other networks better than any other countries in the world. I think this issue will die down as soon as Google finds a solution with the Chinese gov't. I really don't think it will leave the country, because it does not want to totally abandon the search engine and especially the cell phone market for the future.
As a result of not receiving Chinese support on some issues, I think the recent moves are calculated actions by the Obama administration saying that we are not going to play "nice guy" with you anymore. Taiwan and Tibet are certainly the two things that agitate China more than anything else. To much of the Western world, Taiwan is just an Asian nation with a democratic gov't threatened by China and Tibet is a land occupied by the brutal repression of China. Of course, the sympathetic image of Tibet is played up by the non-threatening zen-like image of Dalai Lama. The image of Dalai Lama as this international loved religious leader has basically elevated Tibet freedom ahead of many other larger and more repressed groups. One would really have to study Chinese history to see why the Chinese gov't and its people have such a dislike to Taiwan Independence and Dalai Lama.
To the Chinese people, the 100 years from 1840 to 1949 was its century of humiliation where it had to give up part of its sovereignty and surrender its land to foreigners. It is important to take back all that it was forced to give up during that period. When China was negotiating with UK for the return of Hong Kong, Deng Xiaoping actually told Margaret Thatcher that "China is not Argentina" and that China would take Hong Kong back by force if necessary. So to Chinese people, Taiwan is a reminder that China was forced to give up land to foreign occupiers during that century. To Chinese people, Tibet was a backward, feudal region that was briefly taken away early this century and was liberated of those oppressive Lamas and foreigners in 1950s. Of course, there are strategic element to it. The navy does not think that it can truly operate beyond the first chain until the hostile ROCN is no longer at its door step. The army believes that it needs Tibet as a buffer zone and natural barrier that protects the nation from the Indians. There are obviously more to it. Most Chinese people believe that Han people everywhere are really Chinese and should rejoin China. They find the Dalai Lama request for true autonomy (This Forbes Article contains the key facts) to be more appalling for the following reasons:
- The land requested by Dalai Lama is not just the current Tibet autonomous region, but also includes large parts of surrounding provinces.
- These lands are requested despite the fact that Han population have long been the majority in some of those areas.
- The so called autonomy actually sounds more like sovereignty, because Chinese troops is no longer allowed on the land. There is no way that PLA can accept this due to the strategic implications against India.
- Dalai Lama requested China to stop transferring Han population to Tibet, but that has never actually happened. How can the 3 million Tibetans remain in majority if PRC actually tried to relocate Han people there?
- Dalai Lama, the former feudal ruler of Tibet with many slaves, is insincere when it comes to democracy for Tibetans.
Therefore, the divergence of opinion on the military sale to Taiwan stems from how the West and China sees Taiwan. Most Westerners believe that Taiwan is a separate sovereign entity that should only rejoin China if it wishes to do so. Therefore, Americans see these military sales as fulfilling the Taiwan Relation Act by providing Taiwan with additional defensive deterrent. The weapons themselves are very advanced, but they are defensive in nature and are not going to change the military balance across the straits. The best hope for Taiwan is still to make peace with China and maintaining strong relationship with America. So, what is the problem? Well, most Chinese people believe that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China that no other country should interfere with. Therefore, any sales to Taiwan is looked as containing Chinese power, violating its sovereignty and interfering with its internal affairs. While this might have been acceptable in the past, the increasingly confident Chinese public are no longer willing to keep quiet to such snobs. The meeting with Dalai Lama stokes anger in China for similar reasons. The Politburo has to make a lot of noise and take what appears to be strong actions to satisfy the public. In the past, we have often heard cases where the government publicly criticizes another head of state meeting Dalai Lama, but then telling them privately that things will be business as usual. I tend to think that will happen again here. They will make a lot of noise and suspend military contacts, but those things will be re-established sometimes next year. I don't think the Obama administration needs to meet Dalai Lama again or sell weapons to Taiwan again for a few years, so things should smooth out by later this year. At the end of the day, it is in China's interest to have strong working relationship and military exchanges with America. The PRC leadership is too pragmatic to let this drag on. On the other hand, I think the sanctions against US companies could happen. Since US has been sanctioning Chinese companies for years for doing business with Iran, I think punishing American companies for helping Taiwan is pretty logical. They really don't do much business with Lockheed and Raytheon, so any kind of sanctions against them would be quite symbolic. They do a lot of business with Boeing, but Boeing is selling very minimal to Taiwan. The trickiest case here is Sikorsky and its parent company UTC. They do a ton of business with UTC. In fact, PLA even operates some blackhawk helicopters, some unmanned version of S-300C and PWC engines on some helicopters/air planes. Can they really sanction a company that they sort of depends on for some secondary defense project? Especially now that Eurocopter announced recently that they are also selling to Taiwan. Can China sanction Eurocopter when it is partners with Eurocopter on so many projects? We will see. I tend to think that any sanctions against US/EU companies over weapons sale to Taiwan at the moment would not be more symbolic than anything else. Maybe they will warn these companies that any future sales would be met with harsher sanctions.
In general, I think we have entered a phase where the Politburo has to be more vocal against US government and companies for support toward Taiwan and Tibet, because the public and the military demand it. Politburo can no longer accept explanations like "the previous administration did it" or "these weapons are only defensive" or "we have to do it for political reasons" and remain quiet, because it has to satisfy the local population and the military too. At the moment, the retaliatory actions will remain mostly air like in previous occasions, but they will be a lot stronger in the future if US decides to sell an offensive platform like F-16 to Taiwan. Basically, the balance of power between the two nations is shifting and the Chinese responses against perceived US snubs are only going to get stronger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)