[BITList] The Carrier Of Asia-Pacific Troubles

[x50type at cox.net]

FYI
ct

From: x50type at cox.net 
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 7:01 PM
To: Ronald L Sutton 
Subject: Re: Fwd: The Carrier Of Asia-Pacific Troubles

Vice Admiral Ota (Retd.) is a former director of Defense Intelligence Headquarters in the Japan Defense Agency and from Japan’s pov he is probably right.
however, from our pov it makes no difference whether they have one or twenty one carriers – they already own us, they don’t have to flex their military muscles.
we have spent our way into losing any kind of sparing with china.
of course we could try to tell them what to do as per syria, libya, iraq,  et al - but I’m sure we would not even do that – would it not be pointless?, . 
ct

From: Ronald L Sutton 
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 2:50 PM
To: Colin 
Subject: Fwd: The Carrier Of Asia-Pacific Troubles

>From WSJ; more Chinese Carrier

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:  The Carrier Of Asia-Pacific Troubles 
      Date:  Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:31:37 -0400 (EDT) 
      From:  AlanCabot at aol.com 

     
     



The Carrier Of Asia-Pacific Troubles 

An aircraft carrier gives Beijing tremendous capabilities and could worsen regional tensions.

The Wall Street Journal, August 11 

 


The trials of China's first aircraft carrier, which put to sea on Wednesday, mark the beginning of a major transition in naval doctrine. All the world's navies can be divided into two types. The "sea denial" type, which China belonged to up until now, aims to block the possible dominance of other navies, for instance by using submarine or mine warfare. The other type, which includes the United States, United Kingdom and Japan, aims for control of the sea. China has declared its intention to join this elite club.

Aircraft carriers will provide Beijing with tremendous capabilities and flexibility. So far, Chinese air coverage has been geographically limited because it employs land-based planes. The increased power projection made possible by carrier-borne aircraft will pose a challenge for Japan. Aircraft of the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, for example, freely patrol in the vicinity of Chinese oil rigs in the East China Sea. This freedom is going to be limited once a Chinese aircraft carrier deploys in the region.

My friends in the U.S. Navy aren't as worried. China's investment in aircraft carriers will be a waste of money, they say, because a Chinese carrier will be highly vulnerable to American nuclear attack submarines during a time of war. But that doesn't reassure the Japanese. Since the Japanese navy does not field nuclear attack submarines, a Chinese carrier could pose a serious threat to Japanese territorial integrity. Other navies in Asia, which also lack strong submarine capabilities, must share the same fear.

Another operational gain for China is in anti-air warfare. This has been one of the historical disadvantages of the Chinese Navy—they haven't been successful at checking or interdicting enemy aircraft. Possessing an aircraft carrier will allow it to overcome that handicap by using carrier-borne fighters to intercept the enemy.

More broadly, carriers will give Beijing greater strategic reach. By 2050, the Chinese Navy hopes to possess at least three carrier battle groups for each of its three fleets.

Chinese maritime strategy shifted from coastal defense to offshore defense during the early 1980s, and now it could shift again, this time to far-sea defense. In March the State Council published "China's National Defense in 2010," stating that China is implementing a military strategy of active defense. A similar 2008 document noted that the defense policy is "purely" defensive in nature—the word "purely" is missing in the 2010 edition. That's a key indicator of Beijing's motives. 

All this has Japan worried. China's 1992 Territorial Water Law claims the East China Sea, which includes the Senkaku Islands that Tokyo administers (Beijing calls them the Diaoyutai Islands). Beijing first claimed rights over these islands in 1970 after a United Nations body announced the possibility of submerged energy resources there. It has been harassing Japanese coast guard ships near these islands since then.

Equally pressing is the South China Sea, over which the 1992 law also makes claims. In fact, China's first operational carrier would probably belong to the South China Fleet; no other country in that region has a powerful navy, so it will be easier to conduct operations there.

Beijing has been very assertive in the South China Sea and has consequently heightened tensions in the region. This year, Vietnam cried foul about the cutting of a cable of a surveillance ship and the Philippines complained about the harassment of a resources observation ship. Still, Chinese officials maintained at the Shangri-La Dialogue in June that the South China Sea is generally stable.

One problem is that China interprets international law at her convenience. And those interpretations differ significantly from those of other nations. For example, China has conducted ocean surveillance operations in the exclusive economic zones of other countries, including Japan. Yet Beijing doesn't allow other navies the freedom of navigation in her EEZ.

The bigger problem, as its strategic outlook suggests, is that China is not a status quo power, unlike Japan or the U.S. Chinese leaders say that the country has no hegemonic aspirations and that its rise is peaceful—that Beijing is to be trusted. That it now has the guns to back up its strategic motives engenders mistrust, not confidence. 

The big question is how the West, including Japan, should cope with China's expanding maritime strategy. Japan, the U.S. and other democracies need to improve their power-projection capabilities to check the rise of authoritarian China. That is the thinking behind the Air Sea Battle concept that the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments published last year, and the launch of the first Chinese carrier is another indication that Tokyo and Washington should waste no time implementing it.

Vice Admiral Ota (Retd.) is a former director of Defense Intelligence Headquarters in the Japan Defense Agency.                                                             

=======================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.bcn.mythic-beasts.com/pipermail/bitlist/attachments/20110812/058407b6/attachment-0001.shtml