Author Topic: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread  (Read 1383413 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 124,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,563
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3650 on: January 28, 2020, 02:45:39 »
With the deathtoll at 100 Chinese companies are telling workers to stay home. This may help to limit exposure. Of course prison labor might see a spike in deaths.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51260149

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3651 on: January 28, 2020, 16:41:30 »
Piece mainly on UK with Germany noted--how long can Canada stay largely under the radar?

Mark
Ottawa

Justin and His Compradors must be praying BoJo can sell his approach to Huawei/5G to Americans and that we then can get them to accept something similar for Canada. Meanwhile delay, delay, delay a decision:

Quote
UK will allow Huawei to help build its 5G network despite US pressure

The British government said Tuesday [Jan. 28] that it will allow China's Huawei to help build the country's next generation of super-fast wireless networks, a decision that could undermine trade and intelligence ties with the United States.

The announcement follows months of public debate in the United Kingdom over how to respond to concerns raised by the US government about potential national security risks posed by Huawei components and the threat of Chinese cyber attacks.

UK mobile operators will be able to use Huawei equipment in their 5G networks but the company will be excluded from "security critical" core areas, according to a statement from the government.
The Trump administration had been pressing for a total ban on Huawei products, alleging that Beijing could use the equipment for snooping. It had warned that US-UK intelligence sharing could be put at risk.

Under Chinese law, Chinese companies can be ordered to act under the direction of Beijing. Huawei has consistently denied that it would help the Chinese government to spy.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has come under intense pressure, including from within his party, to agree to the US demands on Huawei. He discussed the issue with President Donald Trump in a phone call on Friday. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tweeted Sunday that Britain faced a "momentous" decision on 5G.

Huawei already has a significant presence in UK wireless networks, and has been operating under supervision by government security agencies since 2003.

"We've always treated them as a 'high risk vendor' and have worked to limit their use in the UK and put extra mitigations around their equipment and services," Ian Levy, technical director of the National Cyber Security Centre, said in a blog post [emphasis added]...

Huawei, which is a leader in 5G technology and also one of the world's biggest sellers of smartphones, has seen its business targeted in a concerted campaign by the United States. But its products are often described as superior and cheaper than those sold by European rivals Nokia (NOK) and Ericsson (ERIC). Some experts say that Huawei owes part of its success to favorable loans from the Chinese state, an assertion the company disputes.

The UK government said "high risk vendors" like Huawei will be excluded from all safety critical infrastructure, security critical "core" functions of the network and sensitive locations such as military sites and nuclear power stations.

The company will also be limited to supplying 35% of network equipment and base stations, or carrying 35% of network traffic [emphasis added].

"The government is certain that these measures, taken together, will allow us to mitigate the potential risk posed by the supply chain and to combat the range of threats, whether cyber criminals, or state sponsored attacks," the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said in a statement...
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/28/tech/huawei-5g-uk/index.html

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 124,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,563
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3652 on: January 29, 2020, 01:16:00 »
Australia will quarantine citizens on Christmas isla.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51290312

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3653 on: January 31, 2020, 21:11:35 »
Justin and His Compradors must be praying BoJo can sell his approach to Huawei/5G to Americans and that we then can get them to accept something similar for Canada. Meanwhile delay, delay, delay a decision:

Mark
Ottawa

What do Aussies understand about Huawei/5G that Brits, and likely our gov't don't?

1)

Quote
The man who stopped Huawei: A former spook speaks out

In late 2017, one of Australia’s top intelligence officials selected a team of his brightest telecommunications and cyber experts and assigned them a high priority task.

Simeon Gilding’s job at the Australian Signals Directorate was one of the most secretive in the agency - no mean feat in a place in which even the lowest order business is marked "classified". He was in charge of the people trying to launch attacks on Australia’s adversaries by hacking into phone and computer systems.

In an interview with The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald, Gilding says he asked his team to work out how a foreign adversary could attack Australia’s 5G network based on one critical assumption: that this adversary was able to assert control over the company that was actually supplying and maintaining key components of the 5G network.

Next, Mr Gilding told them to figure out what defences could be put in place to prevent such an attack.

The answers he got informed Australia’s stunning 2018 decision to block Chinese firm Huawei from bidding to build the nation’s 5G network. It also throws into stark relief a decision made this week in Britain when, on Thursday, the UK government announced it would not follow Australia’s lead. Gilding's counterparts in British intelligence had produced a very different assessment to that of Gilding’s ASD officers: in the UK, Huawei will be welcomed to participate in the 5G rollout.
The internet of everything

This technology, literally the fifth generation of mobile broadband, will be a crucial component of the "internet of things". It will connect every appliance in our homes and will carry the massive flows of data when trucks, trains, cars, power stations, hospitals and water utilities are automated and driverless. If a network is compromised, those doing the hacking could potentially infiltrate a host of critical infrastructure.

Gilding, who left ASD last year, insists he directed his team to find a way to mitigate the risk that the Chinese government could compel Huawei to compromise these digital superhighways in Australia.

“We wanted to come up with a package of mitigations to let Huawei in, and we put our best people on it,” says Gilding, who has never before been interviewed by the Australian media. “But we found we couldn’t.”

As it stands, cyber offensive teams run by spy agencies in places like China, the US and Australia must expend considerable time and effort to penetrate a secure network. “The costs are very high and it takes a huge amount of work by a big team,” Gilding says.

But if a cyber offensive team — government-employed hackers — can compel the actual company that is running the network to follow its orders, then the task becomes much, much easier.

Huawei argues that despite being headquartered in an authoritarian country where the Chinese Communist Party’s intelligence and military apparatus reign supreme, it operates free of government influence. But Gilding doesn’t buy this. He also insists his problem is not with Huawei, but with the Chinese state’s record of cyber attacks on Australia - and the fact that it has the power to direct private firms to follow its commands.

“We are not anti-China by any means. It is just that China has form over a decade of large-scale hacks of our networks.”

Mistaken assumptions

The British decision to involve Huawei was, according to Gilding, based on the mistaken assumption that a country can apply “traditional” defences to stop a cyber attack launched with the help of a company running part or all of a 5G network. Gilding says this underestimates the capability of Chinese state hackers, who he calls “top tier.”

In carrying out Australia's assessment, his own team concluded that if they could coerce a network controller such as Huawei to insert complex code during a system update, they could gain control of parts of a 5G network and never be detected.

“They [the British] think they can manage the risk but we don’t think that is plausible given Huawei would be subject to direction from hostile intelligence services.”

Huawei Australia’s spokesman Jeremy Mitchell says ASD’s assessment relied on at outdated understanding of how 5G will work. He argues that multiple vendors can help run parts of a 5G network, mitigating the risk of compromise.

“We think the UK decision has been based on a long investment in finding how this technology works” by Britain’s intelligence experts, says Mitchell. “ASD had relied on a old version of 5G technology.”

Mitchell also says that if ASD’s concern is really about China, then it should equally apply to the other key players in the 5G debate, Nokia and Ericsson, as both manufacture in China and could also theoretically face demands from the government. Huawei is hoping the British decision will be replicated across the world and may even force a rethink in Australia and the US...[read on]
https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-man-who-stopped-huawei-a-former-spook-speaks-out-20200131-p53wi6.html

2) More from Australian Strategic Policy Institute (by the Simon Gilding quoted above):

Quote
5G choices: a pivotal moment in world affairs

It is disappointing that the Brits are doing the wrong thing on 5G, having not exhausted other possibilities. Instead they have doubled down on a flawed and outdated cybersecurity model to convince themselves that they can manage the risk that Chinese intelligence services could use Huawei’s access to UK telco networks to insert bad code.

5G decisions reflect one of those quietly pivotal moments that crystallise a change in world affairs.

This is partly because the technology itself promises to be revolutionary, connecting not just humans but every device with a chip in it with super-fast, high-bandwidth and low-latency communications. That means if you have the keys to 5G networks, you will be trusted with the nervous system running down the backbone of every country which uses your gear and contracts you to service it. That includes critical infrastructure and safety-critical systems on which the lives and livelihoods of our citizens depend—traffic, power, water, food supply and hospitals. You get to be ‘The Borg’.

But 5G is also a touchstone for the coming age because it is the first in a line of revolutionary and highly intrusive emerging technologies in which China has invested heavily. Through means fair and foul, China has built world-leading companies with high-quality, competitive offerings for everything from video surveillance and industrial control systems to artificial intelligence and internet services via hyperscalers such as Tencent and Alibaba. So any decision to exclude Chinese companies from 5G is a threat to China’s economic and strategic positioning.

Having been caught off guard by BT’s decision to use Huawei equipment in the core of its network, in 2010 the UK government set up a Huawei-funded cybersecurity transparency centre ‘to mitigate any perceived risks arising from the involvement of Huawei in parts of the UK’s critical national infrastructure’ by evaluating Huawei products used in the UK telecommunications market.

Australia has taken a different approach and reached a different conclusion. I was part of the team in the Australian Signals Directorate that tried to design a suite of cybersecurity controls that would give the government confidence that hostile intelligence services could not leverage their national vendors to gain access to our 5G networks.

We developed pages of cybersecurity mitigation measures to see if it was possible to prevent a sophisticated state actor from accessing our networks through a vendor. But we failed.

We asked ourselves, if we had the powers akin to the 2017 Chinese Intelligence Law to direct a company which supplies 5G equipment to telco networks, what could we do with that and could anyone stop us?

We concluded that we could be awesome, no one would know and, if they did, we could plausibly deny our activities, safe in the knowledge that it would be too late to reverse billions of dollars’ worth of investment. And, ironically, our targets would be paying to build a platform for our own signals intelligence and offensive cyber operations...[read on]
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/5g-choices-a-pivotal-moment-in-world-affairs/

3) A Canadian intelligence history expert (he really is, but cyber stuff?) on our following UK's lead:

Quote
Britain has let Huawei in. Will Canada follow?

Wesley Wark is an expert on national security and intelligence and currently a visiting professor at the Centre on Public Management and Policy at the University of Ottawa. He provides consultancy advice to Canadian universities on strategic policy for cybersecurity research.

The British government announced on Tuesday its long-simmering decision on Huawei and next-generation 5G telecommunications development. This is a decision that will ring around the world – in Beijing, in Washington and in Ottawa.

The British authorities have decided to identify Huawei as a High Risk Vendor (HRV) but allow it a “restricted role” in building 5G networks. The security restriction is meant to keep Huawei equipment and software out of the more sensitive core elements of the network, which involve data management, storage and routing, while allowing Huawei to contribute to periphery hardware elements (antennae and base stations) – an essential but less sensitive part of the system.

Under the new British rules, Huawei equipment will only be allowed to constitute a maximum of 35 per cent of the total network periphery. Network providers will have three years to sort this out. Huawei will also be prevented from contributing any telecommunications gear to sites deemed to be infrastructure critical to national security (government operations, military bases etc.).

The decision is both expected and surprising. The previous Conservative government of Theresa May had come to a similar decision but was stymied by media leaks, which led to the downfall of a cabinet minister and a virulent political debate. No one could guess whether Boris Johnson would follow in Ms. May’s tracks and especially whether he would feel able to resist the intense U.S. pressure campaign to have Britain ban Huawei altogether. That campaign featured visits by high-level U.S. security officials, briefings on secret dossiers and even, according to media reports, a personal call between U.S. President Donald Trump and the Prime Minister. A pressure campaign targeting a close Western ally doesn’t get any more intense than that.

The threat raised by the Americans was loss of trust in Britain as an ally and, in particular, a cut-off from the vital intelligence-sharing arrangement known as the Five Eyes, which dates back to a postwar agreement signed between the two countries in 1946.

The British decision may mollify Beijing – or that at least must be the hope in London. Post-Brexit Britain will be looking to enhance its trade with China. The Chinese government, as Canadian officials know well, has deemed Huawei a “national champion” and exemplar of China’s new technological stature in the world.

The partial ban on Huawei will not mollify hard-liners in the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress, but the British government hopes that it will be understood and supported by the U.S. intelligence community and private sector. What Mr. Trump will do in response to the failure of his pressure campaign will be fascinating to watch.

In Ottawa, all eyes will be on the British decision and on Washington’s reaction. Britain’s 5G announcement has long been awaited and may be considered a shield by the Liberal government, should it consider adopting a similar policy on Huawei.

Public Safety Minister Bill Blair, who plays a key role in the 5G decision, has indicated that Canada will base its policy on national-security calculations, but will also consider economic and geopolitical factors (read: U.S. and Chinese reactions).

The British decision provides a model that sensible Canadian policy should quickly follow to ensure that Canada does not lag in 5G implementation. 5G will ultimately revolutionize lives, at least in major urban centres. All advanced countries will want to be leaders and innovators, not laggards.The model is one of identifying security risks and mitigating them, not practising blanket bans with serious economic costs more for political and ideological purposes(and pleasing fair-weather allies) than security reasons.

If the Canadian government does follow the British path, there will be lots of work to do to adapt the philosophy of risk-management to Canadian circumstances. Decisions will have to be made on how exactly to define restrictions on companies like Huawei, how to establish security standards for all 5G providers, how to test and monitor compliance with security protocols, and how to regulate and protect data flows and try to erect some walls around Canadians’ privacy in a 5G world. Big government – at least in the sense of regulation, law and monitoring – will have to find ways to deal with potential Orwellian 5G Big Brothers.

A 5G decision, taken on its own security terms, may also provide an opening for the Canadian government to apply additional pressure on the Chinese government to release the two Michaels; Mr. Kovrig and Mr. Spavor have now been detained for more than a year. This is not linkage politics or an appeasement-style “prisoner exchange” but a simple message to say that Canada makes its own sovereign-security decisions, is not a cat’s paw of the U.S. and is not animated by anti-Chinese sentiment.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-britain-has-let-huawei-in-will-canada-follow/

Clever bit of quietly playing the racist card in the last sentence. Of cource Canada should not be "animated by anti-Chinese sentiment"--but we certainly should be animated by anti-Chicom sentiment.

Mark
Ottawa
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 21:40:25 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3654 on: January 31, 2020, 21:38:37 »
Then just remember this from 2012--US concern about Huawei long-standing and nothing to do with Trump:

Quote
Former Nortel exec warns against working with Huawei
Brian Shields, former Nortel security adviser, alleges Huawei hacked company for 10 years

Canadian companies should not work with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei, a former security adviser at Nortel warns.

Brian Shields, who was the senior systems security adviser at failed Canadian telecommunications company Nortel, says working with Huawei is too big a risk. Shields alleges Huawei spent years hacking into Nortel's system and stealing information so it could compete with Nortel on world markets.

"These kind of things are not done by just average hackers. I believe these are nation-state [kinds] of activity," he told the CBC's Greg Weston, blaming China for the hacking.

"It was on behalf of Huawei and ZTE and other Chinese companies that could have used this information to compete against us in the marketplace. It gave them a strategic advantage. How can you survive when you have a competitor basically right there knowing all your moves, what you're doing, what you see as the future products?" Shields said.

The U.S. intelligence committee warned in a report Monday of the risk of spying that comes with working with Huawei and another Chinese telecommunications firm, ZTE. The committee said U.S. regulators should block attempted mergers and acquisitions by the firms, and that the government should avoid using components from those firms in their systems.

The head of the U.S. intelligence committee, Mike Rogers, told CBC News that Canada should also be wary
[emphasis added].

The world’s second-largest telecommunications equipment supplier, Huawei is already providing high-speed networks for Bell Canada, Telus, SaskTel and Wind Mobile.
'It can't be trusted'

Shields says Canadians should be reluctant to let the company build systems and provide parts to companies here.

There's too great a potential for monitoring or breaking into companies with otherwise good security — or even the government, he says, "because the telecom's backbone that's being used to provide this communication, the hardware or software that's running, it can't be trusted."..
In a separate interview airing Thursday on CBC Radio's As It Happens, Shields alleges Huawei spent 10 years hacking into Nortel's system. He's now advising Canadian companies not to work with the Chinese company.

"Absolutely they should not. If they care about the core infrastructure of the Canadian communications, this is a huge risk," Shields said.

"Remember, they've got this Communist Party over there right in their corporate offices. What are these people doing? Why is it such a close relationship with the Chinese government?"

Shields says there was a major change in the economic environment, which he believes was due to the hacking, which allowed Nortel's competitor to use information it otherwise wouldn't have had access to.

"When 2000 came along, then it was a downward slide. And that coincidentally is the year when Huawei started selling on the international market. How coincidental," Shields said.

Shields has previously blamed Chinese hackers for Nortel's demise [https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/nortel-collapse-linked-to-chinese-hackers-1.1260591].
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/former-nortel-exec-warns-against-working-with-huawei-1.1137006

Plus this post from 2014 about Huawei in Ontario:

Quote
Huawei’s Bigger Way in Canada
...

...
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2014/11/03/mark-collins-huaweis-bigger-way-in-canada/

Mark
Ottawa
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 22:27:51 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3655 on: February 06, 2020, 16:01:21 »
Further to this,

Quote
...
Despite Canadians’ negative feelings about China, Beijing’s jailing of the two Michaels on spurious allegations, and the stiff trade sanctions that China has slapped on Canadian agricultural imports, Ottawa remains hell-bent on its China First Policy. Prominent Canadians who have had close business ties to China, such as former prime minister Jean Chretien and Ottawa’s new ambassador, Dominic Barton, continue to rally Canadian business leaders to cash in on the bonanza over there [emphasis added]...
https://milnet.ca/forums/index.php/topic,2941.msg1591481.html#msg1591481

now near the start of a post:

Quote
Dominic Barton, or, is Canada's Goose Being Cooked by the Dragon?
...
Our recently-appointed ambassador to China, Dominic Barton (a serious exemplar of Canadians of the comprador persuasion), testified February 5 before a special House of Commons committee on Canada-China relations that the opposition parties forced PM Justin Trudeu’s unwilling minority government to establish. Samples from three news stories...
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/06/dominic-barton-or-is-canadas-goose-being-cooked-by-the-dragon/

Update: And note the US', er, laser focus here (and serious concern long predates Trump) to which Justin Trudeau's gov't should truly pay great heed:

Quote
FBI Director Slams Chispies; Attorney General Slams Huawei
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/06/fbi-director-slams-chispys-attorney-general-slams-huawei/

Mark
Ottawa

« Last Edit: February 06, 2020, 20:05:40 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3656 on: February 10, 2020, 19:22:09 »
The start of a post that I hope summarizes the current Canada/Huawei/5G situation, based on excellent Globe and Mail reporting:

Quote
Huawei's 5G vs Canadian National Security, or, Do Our Cringing Capitalist Compradors Win?

Further to this post,

Quote
FBI Director Slams Chi-Spies; Attorney General Slams Huawei

here’s a nicely leaked story in the Globe and Mail. The newspaper has been admirably on the Chicom case for quite some time (see from 2015: “Spookery in Canada: China, CSIS and…the Ontario Government“); overall this coverage firmly illustrates the need for well-staffed, well-paid and smart media (whatever the platform) if a democracy is in any sense to make informed and intelligent decisions:

Quote
Canada’s military wants Ottawa to ban Huawei from 5G
...
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/10/huaweis-5g-vs-canadian-national-security-or-do-our-cringeing-capitalist-compradors-win/

Mark
Ottawa
« Last Edit: February 10, 2020, 19:26:36 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 199,755
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,852
  • Freespeecher
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3657 on: February 12, 2020, 00:26:32 »
Possible shape of the economic reset after the Coronavirus fades or burns out:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4323286-china-brutal-post-coronavirus-economic-reset

Quote
China: A Brutal Post-Coronavirus Economic Reset
Feb. 11, 2020 6:11 PM ET|3 comments  | Includes: CHN, CN, CXSE, FCA, FLCH, FXP, GXC, KGRN, PGJ, TDF, WCHN, XPP, YANG, YINN, YXI
Albert Goldson   

Summary
China’s post-coronavirus economic landscape will look far different from today with profound political, economic, and social changes.

Chinese and foreign businesses will reduce operations while developing the type of emergency protocols and disaster recovery plans reserved for politically volatile countries in the extraction industries for future similar.

China’s government lack of credibility and inability to act rapidly to national emergencies may have planted the seeds of Hong Kong activism amongst the Mainlanders.

The coronavirus crisis continues to be highly fluid, and for this reason, the ability to accurately quantify its current and near-time economic impacts on the Chinese and world economies is impossible. To put it bluntly, the figures thrown around are nothing more than "back of the napkin" assumptions. Regardless, the current and near-future best guess financial figures for every industry are dire as everyone is in crisis management mode. Notwithstanding, let's take a beyond the horizon look at a post-coronavirus China.

The good news is that once crisis eventually comes to an end, the ensuing economic, financial and social damage will lead to steps to recovery.

The widespread mandatory lockdowns encompassing almost 60 million Chinese inhabitants mostly in the province of Hubei where the virus emerged in the city of Wuhan perversely serve as an economic cleansing - a pause and then reset - that will provide the fast-forward of what China actually looks like based on economic fundamentals.

After the coronavirus is contained, Chinese and foreign businesses will undertake a deep assessment of how to move forward. For sure China-specific contingency plans will be developed for future crises such as the coronavirus. Everyone was shockingly unprepared because a Black Swan calamity in the # 2 economy in the world was remote. An explanation might be that not only was the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak considered "ancient history", it never resulted in mass quarantine or adversely impacted an exploding Chinese economy.

Demand Destruction Dilemma
The challenge now is post-coronavirus China with respect to economic growth and its impact domestically and internationally. I believe that the coronavirus serves as a catalyst to its other troubling crisis that I articulated in my 31 January 2020 SA article China's Crisis Management Stress Test that fast forwards China to its actual economic growth figures as dictated by fundamentals and exposes and confirms embarrassing flaws in the system.

With every business adversely impacted by the coronavirus outbreak, it's unlikely that any of them will want to return to pre-outbreak levels because of unprecedented demand destruction across all industries. Recovery and ramp-up will be painfully slow, and businesses will be justifiably quite cautious because it will be impossible to assess the cross-section of inter-connectivity and their unique industry-specific operational and financial abilities and needs. The challenge is that businesses usually face a supply issue, rarely a demand collapse which makes it difficult to project growth. No business is bad business.

Globally, the IMF has unofficially reported world economic growth at about 3% in 2019. As the coronavirus progresses, China, as the world's #2 economy under lockdown, will certainly put downward pressure on global growth towards 2.5%, which the IMF considers as recessionary. Domestically, China's 2020 growth GDP could fall to 4% or even lower contingent on the virus's strength and duration.

On the micro-level, businesses and private citizens realize the harsh realization that government protection with accurate and timely information is not forthcoming with respect to personal survival, not economic well-being. Chinese governmental leadership will not change its approach to handling this or any other future crisis and will continue to operate within the same rigid political protocol framework.

Chinese businesses may be more pragmatic and put in place internal protocols to handle future problems up to the point that it doesn't make the government lose face with respect to their inability to handle such dilemmas. The threshold will probably be not to distribute any future protocols rather they will be held privately by a tight trusted circle of executives.

Foreign businesses operating in China will reduce operations, develop emergency protocols and disaster recovery plans usually reserved for politically volatile countries. Employee evacuation plans are par for the course typical for companies operating in the extraction industries and will henceforth become standard procedure in China, the # 2 economy in the world.

During a protracted lockdown with respect to the coronavirus, China's heavily indebted enterprises (governmental and private) may not be able to retain their workers and be forced to lay them off. This could create and exacerbate social instability; a quickly manifesting threat because it's an issue of life or death, survival not political freedom like in Hong Kong. Few in the current generation know about economic hardship are accustomed to a high standard of living.

On the street, this crisis has indelibly changed the Chinese citizens' opinion on the government's ability to protect them. The future mindset will be one of self-preservation de facto future urban preppers: food, medicine and survival necessities. It's the Chinese government's worst nightmare: losing credibility in the medium to long term for immediate control - and ironically pushing the citizenry towards potential Hong Kong activism but on a higher level - literally life or death survival vs political freedom. It's a potential powder keg if the crisis worsens.

From a political perspective, regardless of whether democracy or autocracy, the "high table" leadership is rarely agile and doesn't engage in behavior modification even if it means their long-term survival. They deal problems exclusively with a blunt instrument. In China, dissent is politically dangerous because there are too many powerful interests endemic throughout the economy.

Long article, but well worth the read
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Bread Guy

  • Bread Baker & Info Curator (still learning @ both)
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 455,370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,955
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3658 on: February 13, 2020, 13:49:14 »
10 Feb 2020, USA DOJ:
Quote
A federal grand jury in Atlanta returned an indictment last week charging four members of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) with hacking into the computer systems of the credit reporting agency Equifax and stealing Americans’ personal data and Equifax’s valuable trade secrets.

The nine-count indictment alleges that Wu Zhiyong (吴志勇), Wang Qian (王乾), Xu Ke
(许可) and Liu Lei (刘磊) were members of the PLA’s 54th Research Institute, a component of the Chinese military.  They allegedly conspired with each other to hack into Equifax’s computer networks, maintain unauthorized access to those computers, and steal sensitive, personally identifiable information of approximately 145 million American victims.

“This was a deliberate and sweeping intrusion into the private information of the American people,” said Attorney General William P. Barr, who made the announcement. “Today, we hold PLA hackers accountable for their criminal actions, and we remind the Chinese government that we have the capability to remove the Internet’s cloak of anonymity and find the hackers that nation repeatedly deploys against us. Unfortunately, the Equifax hack fits a disturbing and unacceptable pattern of state-sponsored computer intrusions and thefts by China and its citizens that have targeted personally identifiable information, trade secrets, and other confidential information.”

According to the indictment, the defendants exploited a vulnerability in the Apache Struts Web Framework software used by Equifax’s online dispute portal.  They used this access to conduct reconnaissance of Equifax’s online dispute portal and to obtain login credentials that could be used to further navigate Equifax’s network.  The defendants spent several weeks running queries to identify Equifax’s database structure and searching for sensitive, personally identifiable information within Equifax’s system.  Once they accessed files of interest, the conspirators then stored the stolen information in temporary output files, compressed and divided the files, and ultimately were able to download and exfiltrate the data from Equifax’s network to computers outside the United States. In total, the attackers ran approximately 9,000 queries on Equifax’s system, obtaining names, birth dates and social security numbers for nearly half of all American citizens ...
13 Feb 2020, Chinese military media (links to archive.org capture of article):
Quote
“The Chinese military has never engaged in any form of cyber theft. The US accusation is groundless and totally hegemonic,” said Senior Colonel Wuqian, spokesperson for China's Ministry of National Defense, in a written statement published on Thursday.

The US Department of Justice recently announced charges against four Chinese military members for hacking a US credit reporting agency in 2017. In response, Senior Colonel Wu Qian said on Feb. 13 that the US accusation is groundless, totally hegemonic and judicial bullying. China firmly opposes this and strongly condemns it.

Wu Qian pointed out that China is a staunch defender of international cyber security. The Chinese government has always firmly opposed and cracked down on illegal cybercrimes in accordance with the law. The Chinese military has never engaged and participated in any form of cyber theft.

He said that it is an open secret with irrefutable proof that the US has long been violating international law and basic norms governing international relations by conducting large-scale, organized and indiscriminate cyber espionage, monitoring and surveillance activities against foreign governments, enterprises and individuals. From the case of WikiLeaks to Edward Snowden, the US still owes an explanation to the international community ...
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 10:53:34 by milnews.ca »
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3659 on: February 13, 2020, 15:11:33 »
Getting real hard to see an early resolution the Meng Wanzhou/Huawei/Kovrig/Spavor matters:

Quote
U.S. charges Huawei, CFO Meng Wanzhou with conspiracy to steal trade secrets and racketeering

The U.S. government on Thursday [Feb. 13] filed a superseding indictment against the Chinese smartphone maker Huawei Technologies Co and its Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou.

The indictment was filed in the federal court in Brooklyn, New York.

The superseding indictment charges Huawei with conspiring to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and conspiring to steal trade secrets from six U.S. technology companies in order to grow the company.

It also contains new allegations about the company’s involvement in countries subject to sanctions, such as Iran and North Korea.

The trade secret theft relates to internet router source code, cellular antenna technology and robotics.

Neither Huawei nor a lawyer for Meng immediately responded to requests for comment.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/international-business/us-business/article-us-files-superseding-indictment-against-huawei-technologies-cfo/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline CloudCover

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 57,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,643
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3660 on: February 13, 2020, 18:43:06 »
... Move!! ...

Offline Bread Guy

  • Bread Baker & Info Curator (still learning @ both)
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 455,370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,955
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3661 on: February 14, 2020, 10:53:57 »
Is Telus run by the CCP politbureau? https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/telus-5g-huawei-1.5462994
I take it you're not buying the Chinese military's denials, then?  ;D
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3662 on: February 14, 2020, 14:41:36 »
The start of a post that I hope summarizes the current Canada/Huawei/5G situation, based on excellent Globe and Mail reporting:

here’s a nicely leaked story in the Globe and Mail. The newspaper has been admirably on the Chicom case for quite some time (see from 2015: “Spookery in Canada: China, CSIS and…the Ontario Government“); overall this coverage firmly illustrates the need for well-staffed, well-paid and smart media (whatever the platform) if a democracy is in any sense to make informed and intelligent decisions:
...
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/10/huaweis-5g-vs-canadian-national-security-or-do-our-cringeing-capitalist-compradors-win/

Mark
Ottawa

Note who's saying this--Justin Trudeau better wake up right fast:

Quote
‘Nancy Pelosi and Donald Trump see Huawei the same.’ 5G in Europe aligns America’s top political rivals

MUNICH ― U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi backed President Donald Trump’s warning to European allies that letting Chinese telecom giant Huawei build their next-generation communication network, or 5G, poses a grave threat ― a rare note of bipartisan harmony after a divisive impeachment.

In front of the cameras and behind the scenes at the international Munich Security Conference, Pelosi, Trump administration officials and lawmakers of both parties warned allies that China’s communist leaders could force the company to use its equipment for cyber espionage and and other subversive aims.

“Nations cannot cede telecommunications infrastructure to China for financial expediency,” said Pelosi, D-Calif. “Such an ill-conceived concession will only embolden [Chinese President Xi Jinping] as he undermines democratic values, human rights, economic independence and national security.”

With her remarks, Pelosi lends a strong voice to the Trump administration’s hard push for a blanket ban. She’s taken a less abrasive tack toward America’s European allies than the Trump administration, and sources say her position is fueled by years on the House Intelligence Committee and by constituents in the Bay Area, near Silicon Valley.

Pelosi said there was no bipartisan divide on the topic.

“We have an agreement in that regard, we put it in our [2020] national defense authorization bill because we believe it is a real danger,” she said. “We have to be very careful about how we go forward.”

Pelosi cast the adoption of Huawei equipment as enabling an autocracy over democracy, saying that the “most insidious form of aggression” would be to allow a communications network to be “dominated by a government who does not share our values.”

“We must invest in other viable options that will take us into the future while preserving our values and institutions,” she said, adding that Western leaders ought to build “something together that will be about freedom of information."..
https://www.c4isrnet.com/congress/2020/02/14/nancy-pelosi-and-donald-trump-see-huawei-the-same-5g-in-europe-aligns-americas-top-political-rivals/

Mark
Ottawa

Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline GR66

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 66,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 751
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3663 on: February 14, 2020, 16:21:45 »
Note who's saying this--Justin Trudeau better wake up right fast:

Mark
Ottawa

In some ways it doesn't matter if the risk of using Huawei can be mitigated in our 5G network like some (CSIS and the UK) suggest.  The fact is that we are deeply integrated with the US as our most important defence and trading partner.  If they refuse to let Huawei equipment be used due to the perceived risk then using that equipment ourselves with hurt our relationship with them. 

There may be an economic and technological cost to NOT using Huawei equipment but I doubt it would be as high as the political and economic cost that we'd face if we DO use Huawei equipment.

Offline CBH99

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 49,240
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,265
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3664 on: February 14, 2020, 17:14:47 »
Our economic and political relationship with the US will always be more important than any with China, period.  Especially over the long run.

That loyalty needs to be strong, and deeply ingrained in both countries if both countries are to protect each other - and that is a VERY real requirement.  Today.  Not at some point in the future.  Today.

I'm not a tech guy, but I'm guessing the Chinese can still do plenty of catastrophic damage even with a 30% share in the IT infrastructure in place.  I'm not sure how 'limiting' them to 30% somehow 'protects us' when information is exchanged at lightning speed throughout the network, and it also automatically gives them a 30% foot in the door if they choose to be dicks.  And it's the Chinese, they've already proven they aren't our friends.


Someone should also be telling Telus "absolutely not" - especially doing so before the Canadian government has made a decision on the 5G issue.
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 314,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,196
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3665 on: February 14, 2020, 21:39:30 »
Our economic and political relationship with the US will always be more important than any with China, period.  Especially over the long run.

That loyalty needs to be strong, and deeply ingrained in both countries

Loyalty? You mean like 'friendship', right?

"Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests." Lord Palmerston

“To stand on the firing parapet and expose yourself to danger; to stand and fight a thousand miles from home when you're all alone and outnumbered and probably beaten; to spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary.”
— Jerry Pournelle —

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3666 on: February 15, 2020, 12:05:10 »
Note who's saying this--Justin Trudeau better wake up right fast:

Mark
Ottawa

Now this after Nancy Pelosi in above post--Trump admin. is making all this rather confusing (as usual?):

Quote
US won't change intelligence sharing policy with UK despite Huawei decision

Munich (CNN) The Trump administration will not change its intelligence sharing policy with the United Kingdom despite contentious disagreements over the UK's recent decision to rely on China's Huawei to help build its next generation of super-fast wireless networks, senior administration officials said Friday.
Robert Blair, a top adviser to President Donald Trump who was recently named special representative for international telecommunications policy, said the United Kingdom would have to take a "hard look" at its decision to use Huawei equipment, but asserted that "there will be no erosion in our overall intelligence sharing."

The Trump administration had been pressing for a total ban on Huawei products, alleging that Beijing could use the equipment for snooping. It had warned that US-UK intelligence sharing could be put at risk.
Last month, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson opted to go ahead with plans to let the Chinese company develop Britain's 5G network as part of his agenda of "leveling up" regions across the country through improved infrastructure.

Trump "tore into" Johnson in a phone call after the announcement was made, according to a person familiar with the call.

Following the UK decision, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the US would have a conversation with the UK "about how to proceed" after its decision. He noted that the US needed to evaluate what the UK's decision on 5G actually means.

"It's a little unclear precisely what they're going to permit and not permit so we need to take a little bit of time to evaluate that," Pompeo said in January. "But our view is we should have western systems with western rules and American information should only pass across a trusted network. We'll make sure we do that."

The UK argues that there is currently no alternative to Huawei and so it's forced to rely on the Chinese company until there is a compatible western technology...
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/14/politics/us-uk-intelligence-sharing/index.html

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3667 on: February 15, 2020, 15:51:13 »
And then this--what is going on?
Quote
Senior US delegation to fly to London to urge government to change its position on Huawei
In what will be seen as a sign of strain in UK-US relations, the delegation is expected to deliver a “b-----king” to British officials

A delegation of senior US officials, including Donald Trump’s acting chief of staff, will fly to London on Wednesday to raise concerns over Boris Johnson’s decision to give Huawei 5G access.

Mick Mulvaney is planning to come to Downing Street to “call for government to change its position,” a source close to the White House delegation said.

In what will be seen as a sign of strain in UK-US relations, the delegation is expected to deliver a “b-----king” to British officials, the source said.

They added: “One thing is on the agenda, and it’s not a trade deal. It is Huawei.”

Mr Johnson is set to publish the UK's mandate for trade talks with the US after next week’s half term recess.

It came amid concerns over the UK’s decision to downgrade its presence at the Munich Security...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/02/14/senior-us-delegation-fly-london-urge-government-change-position/

How tough will the admin. be on intelligence sharing with Canada, given the close intertwining of our networks, the power imbalance in the Americans’ favour, and the much greater benefit we get from the sharing than they do? Interesting times ahead.

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3668 on: February 15, 2020, 19:07:05 »
This post and "Comments" tries to pull several of Trump admin. and Huawei/5G developments together--title and conclusion:

Quote
What Exactly is US Policy on Five Eyes Intelligence Sharing and Huawei/5G?
...
Will the US be tougher on intelligence sharing with Canada, given the close intertwining of our networks, the power imbalance in the Americans’ favour, and the much greater benefit we get from the sharing than they do? Interesting times ahead.
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/15/what-exactly-is-us-policy-on-five-eyes-intelligence-sharing-and-huawei-5g/comment-page-1/#comment-14546

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3669 on: February 18, 2020, 17:59:52 »
Post on China and US universities, Canadian angles at end:

Quote
See What China is up to at US Universities
...
One really wonders how much the Chicoms are up to in Canada since almost nothing becomes public and criminal cases are astonishingly rare. But see this [Harvard] case...

   
Quote
Canadian government scientist under investigation trained staff at Level 4 lab in China

    Still no answers in probe of government scientists expelled from National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg

One is almost tempted to think that CSIS and the RCMP are at least tacitly discouraged by our politicians in power and by senior civil servants from looking too closely at what the PRC is doing in this country. Especially now given the Meng Wanzhou extradition conflict with China and the taking hostage in response of Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. And then there’s that dicey little matter of Huawei/5G.
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/18/see-what-china-is-up-to-at-us-universities/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3670 on: February 24, 2020, 16:28:05 »
One shudders to think what US may soon be saying to us about Huawei/5G:

Quote
Furious senior Tories blast the government’s ‘incomprehensible’ attitude to Huawei and demand ministers act on the ‘deadly serious’ 5G warning from the US that intelligence sharing is at risk

    US officials today met UK officials in Downing Street to discuss Huawei decision
    White House said giving Huawei role in 5G will impact on intelligence sharing
    Senior Tories now increasingly concerned and urging No10 to reconsider move
    Owen Paterson said granting Huawei a role in 5G network is 'incomprehensible'

Senior Tory MPs have demanded ministers act on 'deadly serious' warnings from the US that the involvement of Huawei in the construction of the UK's 5G network will put intelligence sharing at risk.

Owen Paterson, the former Cabinet minister, said the government's attitude to the Chinese tech giant was 'incomprehensible' given White House opposition to using the firm.

Mr Paterson is one of many Conservative MPs who are urging Downing Street to reverse its backing for Huawei and his intervention came after Donald Trump's acting chief of staff had crunch talks on the issue in Number 10 today.

Mick Mulvaney is understood to have led a delegation of US officials in a meeting with UK counterparts including Sir Edward Lister, one of Boris Johnson's top advisers.       

The meeting came after Mr Mulvaney told an event last night that the UK's 5G decision on Huawei will have a 'direct and dramatic impact' on intelligence sharing with the US.   

Washington has urged its allies not to do business with Huawei due to security concerns. But Huawei has always denied that it poses a security risk.

Mr Johnson announced at the end of January that the firm would be given a limited role in the UK's 5G network.

The decision sparked fury across the Atlantic and there is a growing Tory rebellion on the issue...[read on]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8023923/Donald-Trumps-acting-chief-staff-issues-stark-Huawei-warning-UK.html

Rather a barracking as the Brits say.

Mark
Ottawa

Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3671 on: February 25, 2020, 16:56:16 »
Start of a lengthy post:

Quote
The Dragon vs the Kangaroo and the Beaver

1) The head of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation pulls few punches short of actually naming the People’s Republic of China. ‘Twould be nice if his Canadian counterpart, the Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) would speak so frankly but our current Liberal government would never permit that (see also the end of this section of the post):
   
Quote
Australia spy chief warns of “unprecedented” foreign espionage threat [actually counter-spy chief]...
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/25/the-dragon-vs-the-kangaroo-and-the-beaver/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,160
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3672 on: February 29, 2020, 14:02:19 »
Start of a post, note my comments on defence aspects at end:

Quote
Canada and the Indo-Pacific Century: A Military/Naval Role?

Our former ambassador at Beijing, David Mulroney (tweets here, is very tough on the Chicoms), has some very good suggestions below but one on defence that I think should be avoided; first on China and India:

Quote
Navigating a New Canadian Course in the Indo-Pacific

This talk was delivered at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute’s annual dinner on February 19, 2020 [video here]
...
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/29/canada-and-the-indo-pacific-century-a-military-naval-role/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline CBH99

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 49,240
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,265
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3673 on: February 29, 2020, 18:41:59 »
Realistically, I don't know how much of an effective force we could contribute to a conflict against China anyway.

Between Japan, South Korea, USA, Australia -- as well as smaller countries such as Thailand, Vietnam, etc -- there are plenty of players, already allied, in any sort of military conflict against China.


We have 1 AOR & a handful of frigates available at any given time, and they are usually tied up in NATO operations around Europe, Persian Gulf, Africa.  Maybe, MAYBE we'd have 1 submarine available (Which we did have a deployed sub in that region of the world, monitoring North Korea sanctions), and that's about it.

On the air side, we could contribute a handful of fighters, a refueller, and maybe a few cargo planes to help with allied logistics.



Between the naval side & air side of things, sure...we could send over a force that could help contribute/reinforce allied efforts, and perhaps take up some secondary tasks so the adults can focus on the warfighting. 

I would think a solid focus on ASW between the Cyclones & new CSC, and being a real partner to the USN in the Atlantic would be a better & more useful area to focus our resources.    :2c:
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 314,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,196
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread
« Reply #3674 on: March 01, 2020, 23:53:26 »
Realistically, I don't know how much of an effective force we could contribute to a conflict against China anyway.

Between Japan, South Korea, USA, Australia -- as well as smaller countries such as Thailand, Vietnam, etc -- there are plenty of players, already allied, in any sort of military conflict against China.


We have 1 AOR & a handful of frigates available at any given time, and they are usually tied up in NATO operations around Europe, Persian Gulf, Africa.  Maybe, MAYBE we'd have 1 submarine available (Which we did have a deployed sub in that region of the world, monitoring North Korea sanctions), and that's about it.

On the air side, we could contribute a handful of fighters, a refueller, and maybe a few cargo planes to help with allied logistics.



Between the naval side & air side of things, sure...we could send over a force that could help contribute/reinforce allied efforts, and perhaps take up some secondary tasks so the adults can focus on the warfighting. 

I would think a solid focus on ASW between the Cyclones & new CSC, and being a real partner to the USN in the Atlantic would be a better & more useful area to focus our resources.    :2c:

So we're doing (part of) a great job, according to Sun Tzu :)

"Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak. If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him." Sun Tzu

“To stand on the firing parapet and expose yourself to danger; to stand and fight a thousand miles from home when you're all alone and outnumbered and probably beaten; to spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary.”
— Jerry Pournelle —