Chinese & Indian navies spar in Indian Ocean

[Michael]

Chinese warships sent to fight piracy in waters off Somalia were stalked by an Indian attack submarine and the two sides became locked in a tense standoff for at least half an hour, mainland media reported yesterday. After rounds of manoeuvring during which both sides tried to test for weaknesses in the other’s sonar system, the two Chinese warships managed to force the Indian submarine to surface. The Indian vessel left without further confrontation.

The incident was reported by Qingdao Chenbao yesterday and was widely carried by major mainland websites such as Sina.com and QQ. Both Beijing and New Delhi were silent about the matter.

This is the first reported military standoff between China and India since a bitter border war in 1962.
Source (http://rockymountainnavy.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/dragon-trails/)

This is very interesting. There is quite a bit of discussion going on out there trying to figure out how the Chinese forced the Indian spy-sub to the surface. If that in fact occured, that suggests the Chinese navy and anti-submarine defences are far, far more advanced than anyone suspected.

This could yet be another 'demonstration' aimed at the USA. China has already done this twice in the last 2-3 years (China blatantly took out one of thier own satelites with a missile - just a few months after they surfaced one of their subs less than a mile from a US carrier). Both times, China demonstrated a level of military sophistication far beyond what was expected of them. I'm guessing this was 'round 3' of sending a message to the USA. If so, it was a mighty impressive message (on par with the previous two).

Actually, the Chinese shooting down of a US spy-plane a couple of years ago may in fact have been a 'demonstration-message' as well.

[phungus420]

I fear the day China reaches Naval parity with the US. It is possible they will view that power as the time to invade Taiwan, and the results of such an invasion are in all ways horrifying. Either it'll lead to the conquest of an independent and stable democracy by an Autocratic empire, or it'll result in nuclear war.

[Michael]

I fear the day China reaches Naval parity with the US. It is possible they will view that power as the time to invade Taiwan, and the results of such an invasion are in all ways horrifying. Either it'll lead to the conquest of an independent and stable democracy by an Autocratic empire, or it'll result in nuclear war.
Yes, it is quite possible that we could be looking at a new phase of geo-power politics between USA and China in the coming decades. If that's the case, I think the Chinese will prove to be a more wiley adversary than the Soviets were.

At the same time, I'm not a 'hawk' on China at all. I respect their desire to expand their military power at this time as it is 'expected' for their growing stature as a nation. They are a permanent member of the Security Council and as such, they ought to have more military power than they presently possess (such as a 'blue water fleet'). It can be argued that China has a legitimate need for increased military power and they have reasonable interests in protecting the Mulacca Straits from increasing piracy. Likewise, the Chinese are assisting in the anti-piracy action around Somalia.

However, I'm sure I'm not the only one who's getting a bit nervous about the degree of speed and remarkable effectiveness in the way the Chinese are going about this whole enterprise. While it is reasonable for China to increase and sophistication of their military preparedness, it is a bit scary the way China seems to be so strategically and tactically focused on specifically preparing to face the US mililitary. :eek:

And yes, I certainly agree that Taiwan is a MAJOR target of Chinese military interest. I do believe they will go to war over the issue if you push them far enough, but will likely not attack if they believe they can win Taiwan back without blood (like HK and Macao, etc).

[Michael]

I found an other source reporting on this incident - from India.

Source (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/indian-submarine-spooked-chinese-warship-rep.../419210/)

Looks like the Indian Navy is admitting to the 'incident' but denying they were forced to surface. Hard to tell who's zooming who here.

[Americano]

I fear the day China reaches Naval parity with the US. It is possible they will view that power as the time to invade Taiwan, and the results of such an invasion are in all ways horrifying. Either it'll lead to the conquest of an independent and stable democracy by an Autocratic empire, or it'll result in nuclear war.

Why would China invade Taiwan? Their economies are so intertwined it makes no sense.

[Dominick]

Why would China invade Taiwan? Their economies are so intertwined it makes no sense.
Sheer nationalism. It's "theirs" and they want it back.

[Michael]

Why would China invade Taiwan? Their economies are so intertwined it makes no sense.
The threat of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan stands mostly as a check on Taiwan.

Taiwan is the home of the Kumintang (Chaing Kai-Chek's army retreated there in 1949 after being defeated by Mao). For years, Taiwan has claimed to be the "true China" (and has been massively supported by the USA because of this - USA was Chaing Kai-Chek's principal ally during the Chinese Civil War). This is an insult to China.

China thus has a strong sovereign interest in restoring Taiwan to China. It is fundamentally part of China and always has been. China views Taiwan as an illegal seccesion and has always vowed to restore it to China.

In other words, the only reason that Taiwan is separate and not a province of China is due entirely to the US military. China considers this an offensive and obnoxious act of the USA. China will restore Taiwan, mark my words. Only the US threat of war to defend Taiwan has kept Taiwan free of direct Chinese control. That's been a 'cold war' for almost 50 years now.

[Americano]

The threat of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan stands mostly as a check on Taiwan.

Taiwan is the home of the Kumintang (Chaing Kai-Chek's army retreated there in 1949 after being defeated by Mao). For years, Taiwan has claimed to be the "true China" (and has been massively supported by the USA because of this - USA was Chaing Kai-Chek's principal ally during the Chinese Civil War). This is an insult to China.

China thus has a strong sovereign interest in restoring Taiwan to China. It is fundamentally part of China and always has been. China views Taiwan as an illegal seccesion and has always vowed to restore it to China.

In other words, the only reason that Taiwan is separate and not a province of China is due entirely to the US military. China considers this an offensive and obnoxious act of the USA. China will restore Taiwan, mark my words. Only the US threat of war to defend Taiwan has kept Taiwan free of direct Chinese control. That's been a 'cold war' for almost 50 years now.

I'm well aware of the circumstances, but China is not going to invade Taiwan and has had no intent to do so since the 1980s. Taiwan will rejoin the fold after the remnants of extremist nationalism have expired, much the same as Hong Kong reverted to mainland control, as a separate state.

Taiwan was formerly one of the major purchasers of US debt before we went debt insane, which provided the MIC with the perfect opportunity to 'protect US interests' in Taiwan. For those who view ideology as the rationalization to 'defend' any country, keep in mind that Taiwanese seed capital, manufacturing expertise and trade status with the US was what gave the mainland it's initial start in attracting the global capital that turned China into a dominant industrial power.

I think it ironic that Americans 'protected' Taiwan while Taiwan was a major factor in helping China facilitate the labor migration that took something like 16-million American manufacturing jobs and broke the back of the undereducated US middle-class that formerly drove the US economy.

[phungus420]

A purist rational actor model is not effective in predicting the actions of states. China will retake Taiwan, and their will to do so is not entirely logical. Claiming they wol't invade it by force lacking a coordinated & superior US military defense is overly idealistic and can only be argued from a purist rational actor model perspective. It's a good model, probably the most effective, but it is not entirely accurate, and it fails to predict, or explain some of the more common sense events like this, or China's invasion of useless Indian wasteland in the 60s, Germany's invasion of Russia in WWII, etc.

[Michael]

I agree that China would go to war over Taiwan if they believe that to be necessary. Chinese emotional attachment to Taiwan is very strong.

However, I also believe that China will do everything they can to achieve the re-unification of Taiwan with the mainland by peaceful means.

Like good strategists, the Chinese are proceeding peacefully here - but keeping their powder dry (as it were).

As always, the future of Taiwan rests entirely and completely on the US Government and thier willingness to go to war over the issue. We know what China is going to do about Taiwan. We don't know what the US is going to do - that's the big unknown.

[Donkey]

I have a technical question: how exactly does one force a submarine to surface?

[Americano]

I have a technical question: how exactly does one force a submarine to surface?

Did you see the cartoon? funny.

[Michael]

I have a technical question: how exactly does one force a submarine to surface?
Normally by using live ordinance.

However, there are some other possible explanations. It was likely a diesel powered Indian sub and thus, there are limits on how long it can stay underwater - it might have needed to surface just for air or low batteries - this is the most likely scenario given the 'cat and mouse' game that preceeded the action might have pushed the Indian sub to its maximum duration underwater.

Secondly, the area of water where this took place is known for shallow shoals this might also account for the surfacing of the Indian sub.

These are the only two 'plausible' explanations I've found for this. Both explanations would suggest the Indian sub may have surfaced of its own accord, for reasons of its own.

[Michael]

What I think is most significant about this episode is the Chinese navy engaging in "blue water" action. This is a HUGE change in Chinese policy (going back to the 14th century).

I also consider it significant that this Chinese fleet operation so far from Chinese waters is that it is an operation in partnership with UN/NATO. China is definitely 'stepping up' in the world and this has to be seen as significant.

We are only twenty years away from China becoming the largest economy on the planet. Historically speaking, the nation that controls the largest economy has always been the militarily most powerful nation (there are strong connections between economic, political and military power).

What does give some cause for alarm is the fact that there is apparently some kind of world-wide 'boom' going on in naval building (pun intended!). I've read that (worldwide) more naval ships have been ordered/built in the last ten years than in the previous twenty.

China, India and Brazil have all been building lots of new ships, though mostly just Destroyer and/or Frigate class ships. Frigates are smaller than Destroyers and have always been the smallest category of ocean-going warships. None of these nations have ever been naval powers. They are starting from scratch here, creating a new operational wing to their military capabilities.

Btw, India is likely to have two fully operational aircraft carriers (possibly three) within the next few years while both UK and France have new carriers in the works. China as not yet ordered any aircraft carriers, but they've been studying it and rumors are that they may do so in the next couple years.

It does strike me as "interesting" this 21st century naval arms building. On the whole, it does look like a 'good thing', representing a improvement in balance of power issues and more diversity in power relationships. I don't think that the Cold War era of 'dueling superpowers' or the shortlived American 'mono-power' era are sustainable or stable patterns of security. I favor a multipolar system as much more functional for optimal worldwide security. The "NATO" principle looks like it could be quite flexible as an international military organization - possibly serving as a model for a Pacific or Indian Ocean versions to serve in 'partnerships'.

(In other words, I favor a reduction in US military spending and an increase in everyone else's military spending - over-concentration of military power is unhealthy for world peace and security).

[Greendruid]

What does give some cause for alarm is the fact that there is apparently some kind of world-wide 'boom' going on in naval building (pun intended!). I've read that (worldwide) more naval ships have been ordered/built in the last ten years than in the previous twenty.

China, India and Brazil have all been building lots of new ships, though mostly just Destroyer and/or Frigate class ships. Frigates are smaller than Destroyers and have always been the smallest category of ocean-going warships. None of these nations have ever been naval powers. They are starting from scratch here, creating a new operational wing to their military capabilities.

Btw, India is likely to have two fully operational aircraft carriers (possibly three) within the next few years while both UK and France have new carriers in the works. China as not yet ordered any aircraft carriers, but they've been studying it and rumors are that they may do so in the next couple years.

It does strike me as "interesting" this 21st century naval arms building. On the whole, it does look like a 'good thing', representing a improvement in balance of power issues and more diversity in power relationships. I don't think that the Cold War era of 'dueling superpowers' or the shortlived American 'mono-power' era are sustainable or stable patterns of security. I favor a multipolar system as much more functional for optimal worldwide security. The "NATO" principle looks like it could be quite flexible as an international military organization - possibly serving as a model for a Pacific or Indian Ocean versions to serve in 'partnerships'.

(In other words, I favor a reduction in US military spending and an increase in everyone else's military spending - over-concentration of military power is unhealthy for world peace and security).

I'm wondering if this is at all a reflection of the NW passage opening up for trade routes ??? All of the arctic nations seem to be very serious about what they own nowadays. The rest of the powers that be may be intent on simply maintaining their naval sovereignty in what is likely to be a naval expansion for the present and emerging economic trade powers who are likely to use this "new" route.