Posted on 10/15/2013 3:01:26 PM PDT by JerseyanExile
On July 8, 2013, the pro-PRC Chinese-language newspaper, Wenweipo, published an article titled “????50????????? (Six Wars China Is Sure to Fight In the Next 50 Years)”.
The anticipated six wars are all irredentist in purpose – the reclaiming of what the Chinese believe to be national territories lost since Imperial China was defeated by the Brits in the Opium War of 1840-42. That defeat, in the view of Chinese nationalists, began China’s “Hundred Years of Humiliation.”
Below is the English translation of the article, from a Hong Kong blog, Midnight Express 2046. (The year 2046 is an allusion to what this blog believes will be the last year of Beijing’s “One County, Two Systems” formula for ruling Hong Kong, and “the last year of brilliance of Hong Kong.”)
Midnight Express 2046 (ME2046) believes this article “is quite a good portrait of modern Chinese imperialism.” What ME2046 omits are:
the original Chinese-language article identifies the source of the article as ??? (ChinaNews.com).
The Chinese-language title of the article includes the word by (?), which means “must” or “necessary” or “surely.” That is why the word “sure” in the English-language title of the article.
China is not yet a unified great power. This is a humiliation of the Chinese people, a shame for the children of the Yellow Emperor. For the sake of national unification and dignity, China has to fight six wars in the coming fifty years. Some are regional wars; the others may be total wars. No matter what is the nature, each one of them is inevitable for Chinese unification.
Though we are enjoying peace on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, we should not daydream a resolution of peaceful unification from Taiwan administration (no matter it is Chinese Nationalist Party or Democratic Progressive Party). Peaceful unification does not fit their interests while running for elections. Their stance is therefore to keep to the status quo (which is favorable to the both parties, each of them can get more bargaining chips) For Taiwan, “independence” is just a mouth talk than a formal declaration, while “unification” is just an issue for negotiation than for real action. The current situation of Taiwan is the source of anxiety to China, since everyone can take the chance to bargain more from China.
China must work out a strategy to unify Taiwan within the next ten years, that is, by 2020. By then, China will have to send an ultimatum to Taiwan, demanding the Taiwanese to choose the resolution of peaceful unification (the most preferred epilogue for the Chinese) or war (an option forced to be so) by 2025. For the purpose of unification, China has to make preparation three to five years earlier. So when the time comes, the Chinese government must act on either option, to give a final answer to the problem.
From the analysis of the current situation, Taiwan is expected to be defiant towards unification, so military action will be the only solution. This war of unification will be the first war under the sense of modern warfare since the establishment of the “New China”. This war will be a test to the development of the People’s Liberation Army in modern warfare. China may win this war easily, or it may turn out to be a difficult one. All depends on the level of intervention of the U.S. and Japan. If the U.S. and Japan play active roles in aiding Taiwan, or even make offensives into the Chinese mainland, the war must become a difficult and prolonged total war. On the other hand, if the U.S. and Japan just watch and see, the Chinese army can easily defeat the Taiwanese. In this case, Taiwan can be under control within three months. Even if the U.S. And Japan step in at this stage, the war can be finished within six months.
After unification of Taiwan, China will take a rest for two years. During the period of recovery, China will send the ultimatum to the countries surrounding the Islands with the deadline of 2028. The countries having disputes on the sovereignty of the Islands can negotiate with China on preserving their shares of investments in these Islands by giving up their territorial claims. If not, once China declares war on them, their investments and economic benefits will be taken over by China.
At this moment, the South East Asian countries are already shivering with the Chinese military unification of Taiwan. On one hand, they will be sitting by the negotiation table, yet they are reluctant to give up their interests in the Islands. Therefore, they will be taking the wait-and-see attitude and keep delaying to make the final decision. They will not decide whether to make peace or go into war until China takes any firm actions. The map below shows the situation of territorial claims over the Spratly Islands. (Map omitted)
Besides, the U.S. will not just sit and watch China “reconquesting” the Islands. In the 1st war mentioned above, the U.S. may be too late to join the war, or simply unable to stop China from reunifying Taiwan. This should be enough to teach the U.S. a lesson not to confront too openly with China. Still, the U.S. will aid those South East Asian countries, such as Vietnam and the Philippines, under the table. Among the countries surrounding the South China Sea, only Vietnam and the Philippines dare to challenge China’s domination. Still, they will think twice before going into war with China, unless they fail on the negotiation table, and are sure they can gain military support from the U.S.
The best option for China is to attack Vietnam, since Vietnam is the most powerful country in the region. Beating Vietnam can intimidate the rest. While the war with Vietnam goes on, other countries will not move. If Vietnam loses, others will hand their islands back to China. If the opposite, they will declare war on China.
Of course, China will beat Vietnam and take over all the islands. When Vietnam loses the war and its islands, others countries, intimidated by Chinese military power, yet still with greediness to keep their interest, will negotiate with China, returning the islands and declaring allegiance to China. So China can build the ports and place troops on these islands, extending its influence into the Pacific Ocean.
Up till now, China has made a thorough breakthrough of the First Island Chain and infiltrated the Second one, Chinese aircraft carrier can have free access into the Pacific Ocean, safeguarding its own interests.
China and India share a long border, but the only sparking point of conflicts between the two countries is only the part of Southern Tibet. China has long been the imaginary enemy of India. The military objective of India is to surpass China. India aims to achieve this by self-development and importing advanced military technologies and weapons from the U.S, Russia and Europe, chasing closely to China in its economic and military development.
In India, the official and media’s attitude is more friendly towards the U.S, Russia and Europe, and is repellent or even hostile against China. This leads to unresolvable conflicts with China. On the other hand, India values itself highly with the aid from the U.S, Russia and Europe, thinking it can beat China in wars. This is also the reason of long-lasting land disputes.
Twenty years later, although India will lag behind more compared to China in military power, yet it is still one of the few world powers. If China uses military force to conquer Southern Tibet, it has to bear some losses. In my opinion, the best strategy for China is to incite the disintegration of India. By dividing into several countries, India will have no power to cope with China.
Of course, such plan may fail. But China should at least try its best to incite Assam province and once conquered Sikkim to gain independence, to weaken the power of India. This is the best strategy.
The second best plan is to export advanced weapons to Pakistan, helping Pakistan to conquer Southern Kashmir region in 2035 and to achieve its unification. While India and Pakistan are busy fighting against each other, China should take a Blitz to conquer Southern Tibet, at the time occupied by India.
India will not be able to fight a two front war, and is deemed to lose both. China can retake Southern Tibet easily, while Pakistan can control the Kashmir. If this plan cannot be adopted, the worst case is direct military action to take back Southern Tibet.
After the first two wars, China has rested for around ten years, and has become a world power both in terms of military and economy. There will only be the U.S. and Europe (on the condition that it becomes a united country. If not, this will be replaced by Russia. But from my point of view, European integration is probable) able to cope with China in the top three list in world power.
After taking back Taiwan and Spratly Islands, China has great leap forward in its military power in army, navy, air force and space warfare. China will be on the leading role in its military power, may be only second to the U.S. Therefore, India will lose this war.
In the mid-21st century, China emerges as the real world power, accompanied with the decline of Japan and Russia, stagnant U.S. and India and the rise of Central Europe. That will be the best time for China to take back Diaoyu Island and Ryukyu Islands.
Many people may know that Diaoyu Island is the land of China since the ancient times, but have no idea that the Japanese annexed Ryukyu Island (now named as Okinawa, with U.S. military base). The society and the government of China is misled by the Japanese while they are discussing on the issues of the East China Sea, such as the “middle-line” set by the Japanese or “Okinawa issue” (Ryukyu Islands in Chinese), by coming to think that Ryukyu Islands are the ancient lands of Japan.
What a shame for such ignorance! From the historical records of Chinese, Ryukyu and other countries (including Japan), Ryukyu has long been the vassal states of China since ancient times, which means the islands are the lands of China. In this case, is the “middle line” set by Japan in the East China Sea justified? Does Japan have anything to do with the East China Sea? (Those who have no idea in these details may refer to “Ryukyu: An indispensable part of China since the ancient times” written by me)
The Japanese has robbed our wealth and resources in the East China Sea and unlawfully occupied Diaoyu Island and Ryukyu Islands for many years, the time will come that they have to pay back. At that time, we can expect that the U.S. will be willing to intervene but has weakened; Europe will keep silent; Russia will sit and watch the fight. The war can end within half of a year with overwhelming victory of China. Japan will have no choice but to return Diaoyu Island and Ryukyu Islands to China. East China Sea becomes the inner lake of China. Who dare to put a finger on it?
Though there are advocates for reunification of Outer Mongolia at the moment, is this idea realistic? Those unrealistic guys in China are just fooling themselves and making a mistake in strategic thinking. This is just no good to the great work of unification of Outer Mongolia.
After taking Taiwan, we should base our territorial claims on the constitution and domain of the Republic of China (some people may raise a question here: why should we base our claims on the constitution and domain of the Republic of China? In such case, isn’t the People’s Republic of China being annexed by the Republic of China? This is a total bullshit. I will say: the People’s Republic of China is China; the Republic of China is China too. As a Chinese, I only believe that unification means power. The way which can protect the Chinese best from foreign aggression is the best way to the Chinese people.
We also need to know that the People’s Republic of China recognizes the independence of Outer Mongolia. Using the constitution and domain of the People’s Republic of China to unify Outer Mongolia is naked aggression. We can only have legitimate cause to military action using the constitution and domain of the Republic of China. What’s more, it is the case after Taiwan being taken over by China. So isn’t it meaningless to argue which entity being unified?). China should raise the issue of unification with Outer Mongolia, and to take propaganda campaigns inside Outer Mongolia. China should also pick the groups advocating the unification, aiding them to take over key posts in their government, and to proclaim Outer Mongolia as the core interests of China upon the settlement of Southern Tibet issue by 2040.
If Outer Mongolia can return to China peacefully, it is the best result of course; but if China meets foreign intervention or resistance, China should be ready to take military action. Taiwan model can be useful in this case: giving an ultimatum with deadline in the Year 2045. Let Outer Mongolia to consider the case for few years. If they refuse the offer, then military action takes off.
In this moment, the previous four wars have been settles. China has the political, military and diplomatic power to unify Outer Mongolia. The weakened U.S. and Russia dare not to get involved except diplomatic protests; Europe will take a vague role; while India, Africa and Central Asian countries will remain silent. China can dominate Outer Mongolia within three years’ time. After the unification, China will place heavy troops on frontier to monitor Russia. China will take ten years to build up elemental and military infrastructure to prepare for the claim of territorial loss from Russia.
The current Sino-Russian relationship seems to be a good one, which is actually a result of no better choice facing the U.S. In reality, the two countries are meticulously monitoring the each other. Russia fears the rise of China threaten its power; while China never forgets the lands lost to Russia. When the chance comes, China will take back the lands lost.
After the victories of the previous five wars by 2050, China will make territorial claims based on the domain of Qing Dynasty (similar way by making use of the domain of the Republic of China to unify Outer Mongolia) and to make propaganda campaigns favoring such claims. Efforts should also be made to disintegrate Russia again.
In the days of “Old China”, Russia has occupied around one hundred and sixty million square kilometre of lands, equivalent to one-sixth of the landmass of current domain of China. Russia is therefore the bitter enemy of China. After the victories of previous five wars, it is the time to make Russians pay their price.
There must be a war with Russia. Though at that time, China has become an advanced power in navy, army, air and space forces, it is nevertheless the first war against a nuclear power. Therefore, China should be well prepared in nuclear weapons, such as the nuclear power to strike Russia from the front stage to the end. When the Chinese army deprives the Russians’ ability to counter strike, they will come to realize that they can no longer match China in the battlefield. They can do nothing but to hand over their occupied lands and to pay a heavy price to their invasions
Go monthly!!
I do not put a lot of stock in articles like this.
It assumes that each war will be won. There is the implicit inevitability doctrine found in Marxist thought running all through this.
I also know, having lived there that most people in China have no real desire for most of these wars. They are really patriotic until they actually have to send their poorly trained army into a fight 10’s of thousands of them start dying.
The Fed is STILL pumping 85 BILLION a month into the system (A TRILLION a year). Much of those ELECTRONIC entries are flowing to China — and others — as interest on what we’ve borrowed from them. If those bucks REMAIN overseas, inflation will continue to edge up slowly. Many of those bucks are coming back as those lenders BUY large chunks of America. Should they start coming back here in huge numbers, inflation will go to Wiemar Republic levels fairly quickly.
The Chinese are smart enough to grasp that, even if we DO repay, we’ll be doing so in “money” worth far less than those they loaned us.
Another scenario is that obozo will continue to weaken and purge our military and, if we resort to repudiating that foreign debt, we could see Chinese aircraft carriers — which they are now building — off our coasts as they demand we honor those repayments. Such repudiations have almost always triggered wars!
Beijing, Shanghai and other Chinese cities will be glowing and washed up by irradiated waters from the (now former) Three Gorges Dam if it thinks it can invade India and get away. They know it and that’s why the fool who wrote this article has to be an amateur.
The US cannot afford a Chinese stronghold in the Indian Ocean.
Good luck China.
India has nukes. Japan could have them any time they want.
Probably so could Taiwan.
China will also demand Singapore which has a majority Chinese.
They also once occupied Korea and Vietnam. They got thrown out of both. Now noone wants North Korea.
I agree with you. That crazy Chinese author is a fool. War against Russia is not the first against a nuclear power. India has nukes. By the timeframe indicated, India can devastate China as you say. India won't be an easy target.
This assumes they will win against Vietnam. Just like they didn’t in the 70’s.
I do believe that China will simply seize the Spratlys.
They can do it relatively cost free. No one will be willing to go to nuclear war over a few rocks.
Of course, if they get away with it, the rest of the list becomes more likely.
A small regional war, maybe in the middle east, to keep our attention accompanied by a few bags of money under the table to key politicians should be enough to keep us from intervening on Taiwan’s behalf. We’ll lodge diplomatic protests and maybe a few passionate speeches, but we won’t be able to spare any carriers.
There is a big wild card here, and one that is getting worse for both China and India. An excess of male babies and a shortage of female babies.
Between the two, in the short term there will be at least 30 million men with zero opportunity for employment or marriage. With each decade that number may increment by another 10 million. But why does this matter?
For these men to have *anything*, they must fight for it. If there is no war, then they will likely cause a civil war.
A civil war in China and India would be horrific. But a ready alternative to this would be if both countries would draft giant armies to fight each other in the high altitude frozen mountains at the border.
Conscript armies with just small arms and field artillery, with both sides keeping their professional armies in reserve, in case there is an enemy breakthrough.
In short, it would be much like World War I but at ten times the scale. And much like the 12 battles of the Isonzo, between Austro-Hungary and Italy, the war would be a lower tech bloodbath. Its unstated purpose the killing off of millions of excess men, not for either side to win.
Stupid author. Japan rules The Sea of Japan. Too China-biased, Japan has fought off invasion by China and Mongols way back to 1274 and 1281. The Chinese were overconfident then, same as now.
Since we are doing nothing abut the ROPers.... I say Give China the entire middle east sans Israel...
More likely, Singapore might well seek a voluntary union with China at some point. The two countries have a very good relationship now, Singapore has been letting in hundreds of thousands of PRC workers to counteract the birth rates of Muslim Malays and Hindu Indians (though they'll never admit keeping Singapore dominated by ethnic Chinese is their real goal) and if their relationships with Muslim-dominated Malaysia or Indonesia ever go sour - not an unrealistic possibility - they know they can't count on the USA any more for legitimate military help. The idea of an informal union with China and the construction of a huge, new PRC naval base in Singapore might suddenly become very appealing to the current government.
Would you please elucidate me on this judgement as I am apparently clueless about the situation in the Southern Seas.
Thank you.
To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. -Sun Tzu, the Art of War
Who knows? It might be the main reason the Chinese want to take them back.
I think China will pick a fight with Viet Nam to save face after their humiliation in 1979. It’s not like America is gonna step in and defend that nation, right? And then China will have extensive ports in southeast Asia to go on the offensive with.
It is a huge temptation for China to invade Taiwan within the next 2 years with such an incompetent duffus as US president as we have right now.
From earlier threads, I had posted this on my home page:
___________________________________________________________________
Posted by Kevin OMalley to nickcarraway On News/Activism
01/12/2005 12:07:37 PM PST · 17 of 25
Here is my swag on what is going to happen in Taiwan, posted on an earlier thread,
“China Rapidly Modernizes for War With U.S.”.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1285398/posts
1) The one-child policy has created a testosterone-rich generation the likes of which no one on earth has ever seen. China will have an entire army of what they call “little dictators” who have few prospects of finding women, and they will be very aggressively pushing their old-guard superiors for action on the Taiwan issue. The final straw will be that they’ll be promised wives when they invade Taiwan.
2) Their army is as much as 200 Million strong, which was the size predicted in Revelation in the Bible, called “The Kings of the East.” They can afford casualties in the range of 10 million, which is 5 times bigger than our army ever was. China has some unfinished business with Vietnam, having fought to a standoff in 1979. They might do a run through Vietnam first so that their troups are more battle-hardened and arrogant, knowing that the US didn’t exactly win there. The added bonus is they get one of the largest warm water ports in the world.
3) Taiwan has never declared independence. It’s not like the brave Estonians standing up to Russia when communism fell. They’re like an impudent child claiming to have sovereignty over China. Their fatal miscalculation is that they know they’ll need Americans to fight for them if they are in a war, but Americans will be reluctant to shed blood for an ally that didn’t have the courage to declare independence until they were invaded on an “internal dispute”. The chinese will hammer away at this in the press.
4) Chinese weapons policy has been to cycle through older generations of weaponry and stay about one generation behind the latest stuff. They sold their old silkworm missiles to the Iranians and used that money to upgrade their newer missiles, which are inferior to US missiles but they only need to be functional. The plan is to overwhelm defenses with superior numbers. No ship can stand up to 50 supersonic silkworm missiles aimed at it. They have similar tactics for other systems, such as anti aircraft missiles.
5) The chinese went up against Americans in Korea. They sent in 300 thousand infantry up against a much smaller American force. The key was that they only had rifles for about 1 in 5 personnel. So they would tell one to go as far as he could till he got shot, then the 2nd one would pick up the rifle & keep charging, and so on. Today, every one of those infantrymen has an automatic rifle. They are not as well equipped as their US counterparts but they can afford a lot of casualties. Vietnam, Iraq, Somalia and other engagements proved that you can’t replace feet on the ground with air superiority. No matter how advanced the air force is nor how many smart bombs get dropped, the US won’t be able to dislodge a standing army without sending in massive troup numbers and experiencing casualties. If our press made a big deal about losing 1000 US soldiers in Iraq, they’ll have a heydey with 500 thousand casualties. Seeing the press reaction emboldens the Chinese.
6) China is building a blue-water navy including submarines. They might be able to achieve a standoff in the surrounding ocean, limiting the ability to resupply american troups while the chinese troups will pillage Taiwan. Once America loses 2 nuclear powered aircraft carriers (with the resulting radioactive plumes), the calculation is that the U.S. will lose stomach for more fighting.
7) The trick to defeating these strategies with minimal casualties will be special forces operating in Taiwan. They will need to have the ability to direct standoff weapons fire onto individual tanks and squad units in order to be effective.
8) The most likely outcome will be that Taiwan will be a giant pile of rubble. Casualties could run as high as WWII. If China wins, it could be a Pyrrhic victory. If the US wins, it will take a whole generation to repair and rebuild. I think the Chinese view towards weakness or perceived weakness is a little bit like how Germany viewed the U.S. after we sent 10,000 men wandering in the hills to find Pancho Villa, to no avail. The Germans perceived it as weakness and went ahead with their war plans.
9 posted on Sunday, September 23, 2007 9:47:37 PM by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
___________________________________________________________________
!
I figure the US should announce a “3 China” policy, and treat Mainland China, Chinese Formosa and Chinese Taiwan rather like people treat Britain, US, and Canada: Independent with common interests.
Will the sole-heir be willing to sacrifice their life when so much more is at stake?
Regards,
TS
The best answer to that is the Taiping Rebellion, which happened about the same time as the US Civil War, but lasted for 14 years. British estimates are that 30 million people were killed.
It began with missionaries, who gave a religious tract pamphlet to the wrong guy. He took one look at it and said that he was Jesus’ younger brother. A ridiculous amount of charisma and two competent generals later, China was having civil war battles where “You could not walk and touch earth” over a five square mile area, because of all the dead bodies.
The prospect of spiritual descent you mentioned never came up.
If China miraculously managed to occupy India and use its coastline to regulate trade and seal off the Indian Ocean from America, it would be akin to allowing Japan to dominate the Pacific during WW2.
Except that China would have the ability to control both the Pacific and the Indian oceans, from a common arc of solid land. It would give China the necessary base platform from which it would then be able to dominate the world.
America cannot afford to let that happen, which is why when China and India go to war, the US will be dragged into it. It has done so for far less - in Iraq - where trillions in treasure and thousands in American lives were sacrificed.
The idiocy of an article like this is that it is predicated on the assumption that the means of warfare will not change in the coming decades.
By 2030 there's a good chance that every one of the top 30-40 nations in the world in terms of total GDP will have access to enough nuclear weapons (and the means to deliver them) to destroy China's ten largest cities in a matter of hours.
For many advanced nations, we've probably already reached the point where winning a major war costs more than losing one.
Heck -- I have yet to meet someone from China who can even drive a car well. How the hell are they going to dominate the world? LOL.
The idea that winning a war cost more than losing one was what permitted Hitler, to get his running head start in the arms race of the late 1930s.
“Never again for king or country!” was what pacifists said in the 1920s. Stanley Baldwin as prime minister of the UK played to them as he trumpeted British unreadiness for war. He counseled despair, after all, the bombers would always get through! A.A. Milne wrote a book called “Peace with Honour” in 1934 in which he recommended that people refuse to fight against an aggressor. After all what would an aggressor do? gather up people and murder them by the millions?
Well, yes, that was exactly Hitler’s plan. And Hitler committed Germany to carrying it out to the extent he could, as did Stalin.
To be fair, A.A. Milne wrote another book “War with Honour” in 1940 in which he walked back his previous recommendation. (A.A. Milne is most well known for his children’s books that revolve around a toy bear belonging to his son, Christopher Robin.)
I figure Vietnam would defeat China again, as they have several times already.
All good points, but as I sit here in 2013 and look at Germany and Great Britain today, I do find myself asking why the hell the British even bothered fighting in World War II. Don’t you?
I don’t have any question. Germany and USSR as allies were soon to murder thousands of poles, millions of Jews, and would have murdered hundreds of millions unless stopped.
England fighting Germany, and Finland fighting USSR combined to make fighting Soviet Union look easier to Hitler than continuing against England. Soviet Union destroyed 80% of the German army, but lost 14.5 million soldiers and 35 million civilians in the process.
Soviet Union lost over a million second lieutenants! Who gets to be a second lieutenant in any army? A bright young man with potential. What a heavy price!
England had sloughed off Ireland after WWI, and based on that good result, decided to slough off India after WWII. The African empire was never worth much. Singapore was obviously not able to be defended, so Britain benefited from shedding its colonial burdens. That the socialists squandered the gains on inefficient programs wasn’t the fault of the WWII british strategy.
Go figure.
Maybe A.A. Milne was right the first time.
Considering that Nazi Germany was about mass murder, I think fighting them to prevent mass murder made all kinds of sense.
German advantages in the quality of their education system and cultural work ethic give them advantages. When those advantages were made to serve mass murder, they had to be fought. Once shorn of the vicious nature of the Nazi party, the advantages are still advantages.
The question is what happens when Germany’s neighbors refuse to repay what Germany has loaned them. If Germany is forced to take the loss, it will lead to a backlash certainly against loaning more money to the deadbeats, and perhaps against the work ethic that created the surplus that was loaned. If Germany refuses to take the loss, and demands repayment in kind, then how much of the PIGS should Germany get? (PIGS=Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain) What does it mean to give part of the PIGS to Germany? How do you convince an Italian he should work an extra two hours rather than drinking wine and soaking up rays? How will Germany handle the resentment of its own people and the foreigners to whom it loaned the money?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
