We need to be the grownups with China

ARTICLE: China's New Missile May Create a 'No-Go Zone' for U.S. Fleet, By Tony Capaccio, Bloomberg, Nov. 17, 2009

You have to remember here: the U.S. Navy doesn't pursue anti-ship missiles like China does because, quite frankly, there aren't any navies out there worth blowing up. But from China's perspective, there is ONE navy worth protecting against.

So big surprise: #2 develops an anti-access strategy on #1.

Is it a waste of China's resources? Yes, it most certainly is.

Is it clumsily provocative? Absolutely, but immature rising powers are wont to behave in this fashion--go figure.

But here's the continuing reality: we may end up signaling for years about the reality of our interdependence on global security before China eventually abandons the bilaterally-focused defense buildup and starts building a force more suitable to its actual worldwide security needs. As the more powerful of the two parties, we have to make the first moves--plain and simple.

And as the more mature party, we have to have more patience.

I know, I know, the Chinese think in centuries and all that bullshit. But I see nothing in their force modernization that suggests that whatsoever. Instead, they're thinking about as short-term and unimaginatively as they can.

Symmetricizing our vision to their narrow one is not the answer, no matter what the knee-jerks on the hard Right declare in their intense indignation.

We need to continue playing the longer game, just like we did with the Sovs while we taught them the meaning of MAD.

(Via WPR's Media Roundup)

Comments

[Jeff J]

I am no military expert but the thought of US carriers operating against any semi-advanced country the way we operated against Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and the like reminds me of the mindset in regards to battleships before Taranto and Pearl Harbor. Carriers are already sitting ducks when you are talking about this potential type of war. The US has taken Vietnam era dumb bombs, cheaply added a guidance package to create smart bombs and taken down entire states in a matter of weeks. Makes me wonder if Lou Dobbs went to work for Bloomberg.

[William R. Cumming]

Now we know how the British navy felt about the race between Germany and Britain before the first world war. Or was it the US that drove British fears of loss of dominant world navy? Time for another Washington Treaty of 1922 so China and US waste their resources on other things than navies?

[Tom Barnett]

Fazal,

China needs to elevate above security-dilemma dynamics where their admittedly defensive choices provoke unwanted offensive efforts by us, and vice versa.

As the older and more experienced superpower, as I said above, it behooves us to make the first steps, even unilaterally.

While China still spies very aggressively, even if we pull back from their coast. Yes. But how much do we gain or lose with that concession?

China does not yet seem like it's getting anywhere close to that sort of cost-benefit thinking. It's all, what the world owes me and very little about what China owes the world. That's the profile of an immature great power, very similar to the U.S. around 1870-1900 (we got better with TR).

Name calling to you, perhaps, but placing the behavior within historical/developmental context to me.

[Guest469]

The primary job of the Chinese (Communist) military is to secure Chinese sovereignty. While it is fortunate that the present Gov't in Taipei and Washington are cooperative in keeping this issue peaceful, Chinese defense planners cannot assume that it will always remain this way.

Beijing's nightmare scenario will be an aggressive US with her Asian allies plus India all lined up to "contain" China in her own coastline and strangle the Chinese economy.Do you know that China still maintains short ranged "Coastal artillery"? They expect to lose their navy and continue the fight on their own shoreline. The ASBM is another glorified Coastal artillery piece. A big selling point of the Houbei class (Type 022) missile boat is that they can be assembled at smaller yards under the assumption that all major ship building facilities will be destroyed.

War is a luxury to Americans. You can choose to fight or leave. You could abolish your military and scarcely impact American security at all. China doesn't have that luxury.