5) China: Options. Lesson thirtyseven

What, then, does the future have in its womb? China is the world’s second largest economy. China, which is a hybrid system, partly communist and partly super-capitalist, has now replaced the United States as Asia’s largest trading partner. CIA WORLD FACTBOOK 2018-2019 estimated that China’s defense budget in 2016 was 1.9 percent of GDP. But China does not publish open documents describing the country’s military doctrine or strategy. However, China is said to not make any major secret of which new systems and platforms are produced. I can imagine that China will continue its economic growth, develop its prosperity and raise the standard of living for more and more Chinese citizens. We can then end up in a situation where;

A) The western powers and China will end up in a conflict and with armed forces will fight for trade routes and commodity assets and the oil from the Arab world and Africa. In that case, colonialism will increase in one way or another and the Arab world and Africa will lose. At present time, this scenario is unlikely as long as China is dependent on shipping of oil and agricultural products through the Malacca Strait, which is one of China’s weak spots, for its raw material-consuming industry and its vehicles and food for its demanding population. China hardly controls its own backyard, the South China Sea. China’s military fleet cannot match US Navy before the next 20-30 years. China has only got one or two aircraft carriers, but they have a strong but largely outdated submarine weapon including 7 nuclear-weapon submarines (2012).

B) The western powers will do everything to sugar the financial bids for Africa’s raw materials, and do everything to convince them that they should let our side make investments in different countries and that they should sell the products to our side. China will do the same. In this scenario, the third world will gain greater influence. Depending on how the scenario develops, it may be to our advantage alt. to our disadvantage that China has invested in agricultural production in Africa.

C) The western powers and China eventually end up in a cold war with reasonably civilized competitive conditions where Africa and the Arab world does not get too much influence.

 

Choose which alternative you prefer and then act accordingly. There is nothing that excludes B from following on C following on A, or any other combination of these three options. I am not mixing Russia into the compote so it won’t be so complicated, but it is probable that China and Russia will enter into a deeper unholy alliance, because it was like that already. China has electronic technology and Russia has commodity resources and natural resources, it is the perfect “reasoning marriage” to use General Major Karlis Neretnieks words. Fortunately, western and Chinese immorality are on different levels, so that the Chinese do business with morally corrupt countries in Africa while the West condemns it, if we can. At the same time, western powers are doing business with morally corrupt Arab countries and also arming these countries to the teeth in the process. But what options for war are then available to China if alternative A becomes dominant? There are two options that I see, and both require a strong Chinese fleet and control over the South China Sea;

1. China builds or invests in, from east to west, the port of Tanjung Priok in Jakarta Indonesia, and Port Klang, Penang and Tanjung Pelepas in the Malacca Strait in Malaysia. The sea route then goes on to the Indian Ocean to Hambantota on the island of Sri Lanka off India’s south coast. In Hambantota there is a port which China has bought. China needs, in order to be able to threaten the western world, to control the well-trafficked Malacca Strait between the island state of Sumatra northwest Australia and the peninsula Malaysia, where 40 percent of world trade, and 80 percent of China’s oil imports go through. But also 100 percent of Japan’s and 90 percent of South Korea’s oil imports go through the Malacca Strait. China can if they control the mentioned seas and straits, and have bases in Gwadar, colonize selected African countries and exert harmful influence on its east Asian neighbors, on African commodity nations, on the Middle East and Europe and the US. If necessary, they can attack European interests via the Djibouti strait between the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea at the Horn of Africa and further through the Suez Canal, but they must then be able to dispose of Djibouti with the exclusive right among the Great Powers. In short, the Malacca Strait is the key to world domination and it is the United States that still has the upper hand. Commodities worth 1 billion dollars passes the Strait of Hormuz at the Persian Gulf every day. 85 percent of that oil goes to Asia, 8 percent goes to Europe and 7 percent goes to the US and others. It is because of the strategic Malacca Strait, the Sunda Strait and the Lombok Strait that the United States has an expeditionary troop of 1,250 Marine soldiers in the small town of Darwin in the Northern Territory of Australia. The United States has long had a Marine Corps in Darwin, which was supposed to be greatly strengthened according to a decision by Obama. Probably if the Chinese attack Europe in an Attila style women conquer campaign, it is first initiated by cruise missile attacks from apparently civilian or military Naval ships against military targets and then follows a landing up through Greece-Bulgaria-Romania and on rails through Greece-Serbia-Hungary into Central Europe.

2. In this option, China still has to secure the Malacca Strait and keep Australia and New Zealand at bay alt. invading port cities, keeping their shipping routes to the Middle East and Africa open while keeping the Americans 3rd fleet in California, Washington and Hawaii and the smaller 7th fleet in Apra Harbor Guam and in Yokosuka Japan away from uploading in the Pacific sea. China surprise attacks and strikes the US expeditionary Marine Corps in Australia and the bulk of the US fleet in the Pacific Ocean, the US base in Djibouti at the Horn of Africa, the marine base of the small island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and the 5:th fleet in the Persian Gulf, leaving the opportunities open to China to control selected parts of Africa and the Persian Gulf, while giving Europe an opportunity to stay out of the war by delimiting the Chinese influence plus the assets of the raw material countries in Africa, but above all leaving the oil countries in north Africa free so that they can sell or exchange oil for weapons with the Europeans. This scenario is less likely due to the US nuclear super power status.

 

China was demanding a 35-year lease with Greece for the port of Piraeus, if they were to help the Greeks by buying government bonds. The port has now been incorporated under Chinese trustee. The port of Piraeus is well protected in the Greek archipelago in very close proximity to the capital Athens. So you know what awaits you Greeks! The Chinese must control the strategically important western gateway to the Mediterranean. And perhaps they make a mark on Italy’s foot or at least take Sicily, Malta and knock out the fleet base in the Taranto Gulf on Italy’s boot hills in a first step and then disembark in the coastal areas of Slovenia, or disembark in Slovenia’s capital Trieste in the Gulf of Trieste in the northern Adriatic Sea east of Italy. All available ports will be used. Then follows a deployment up to Central Europe through Austria. They will certainly try to discourage the United States from intervening, and they may even be able to buy the United States by a delimitation of China’s own influence in the oil-producing countries of Africa. The Chinese must initially strike France’s and Britain’s strategic submarines already in port if possible. The Chinese also need to bridge the logistically gigantic distances if they want to control the western gateway to the Mediterranean. They are trying to solve this problem through recent investments in Spain and Portugal (2017). It is possible to achieve, but the Chinese-controlled ports i.e. the logistics nodes then become opportune targets. Therefore, the whole scenario is a gamble. Thus, we can expect a Chinese surprise attack and deployment of anti-ship missile systems and air defense systems on the British base in Gibraltar to take control of the Gibraltar strait.

China will not attack Europe by road with green forces on any route in the next decade. India and Pakistan stand in the way of the Chinese, so they cannot with an army forcefully access Europe on the south land route. But in order to afford to attack Europe by land, China first needs normal trade relations with India and Pakistan. Therefore, the Chinese are planning new routes to link Beijing with Pakistan and India via Kazakhstan to the north. The Kremlin is either trying to counter this or not.

The ideal way for the Chinese to deploy directly to Europe is via Kazakhstan-Uzbekistan-Turkmenistan and then Iran and Turkey. Should they take the possible route north through Kazakhstan and Russia or west of the Caspian Sea via Iran, then Russia must allow the Chinese to pass by either Volgograd, or directly through the oil installations in the Caucasus in a situation where the oil in the Caucasus will be cut off by the Chinese. If the Chinese circumvent Russia, then they must finally cross a narrow strait called the Bosphorus in Istanbul Turkey before reaching Europe, which is far from ideal whether it is intended to be via the three bridges or via ferries or both bridges and ferries. The train tunnel requires control of the energy network, it is not that easy as just loading on combat vehicles on a train trailer. But China’s ability to invade parts of Europe in an Attila style women conquer campaign can shift to China’s favor if China controls the Malacca Strait and preferably the Balabac Strait, the Makassar Strait, the Mindoro Strait, the Lombok Strait and the Sunda Strait.

In particular, China already has access to the port of Hambantota in Sri Lanka off India’s southeast coast and have built military bases in Gwadar in Pakistan and they have a base in Djibouti on the Horn of Africa. They have also built a military runway on a Kambodian island and they have invested in a Kambodian Naval base in the Gulf of Thailand, according to publically released images, from American imaging satellites, in 2020. That’s not even within the arbitrary Chinese Nine-dash line. China may be able to project enough military and economic power in the Gulf of Thailand to put pressure on Thailand to let the Chinese dig a canal through the narrow country which will make sure that Chinese merchant ships in the future can pass between the Gulf of Thailand and the Bengal Bay to reach the Indian Ocean without even having to pass the Malacca Strait. Another known project is that China has built a railway from Djibouti to Addis Ababa in central Ethiopia. The railway line may have, or is of logistical advantage.

A brand new railway will be built between Budapest in Hungary and Belgrade in Serbia, which connects to an already existing railroad between Belgrade and the port city of Piraeus near Athens in Greece, a port which the Chinese already run under their own control. However, the Chinese must invade Gibraltar in a surprise attack first, and deploy air defense systems and anti-ship missiles there, before they can attempt an invasion of Europe’s inland from the Mediterranean, which would be fairly easy given that the British normally lack qualified and relevant military systems in Gibraltar. An attack in advance on Gibraltar becomes the trigger that reveals that a major war has started. Therefore, one should be vigilant when Chinese aircraft carriers and other warships visit mainly Spanish and Portuguese ports, especially in combination with supposedly civilian Chinese ships.

The train tunnel under the strait of Bosphorus I do not believe much in initially in an invasion scenario. The Chinese do not know anything about the capacity of bridges or ferries yet. The whole endeavor would be a blind operation with a gigantic and long logistics chain that would be very vulnerable. But if they succeed in establishing the new Chinese silk road project “Silk Road Economic Belt” in the future, then maybe they can succeed with an invasion scenario by land.

 

Homework:

How do you figure the Turks will react when they learn about this coming Chinese venture? Will they go along with it in order not to pay the ultimate price in women losses and losses of Turkish lives?

Surely the Iranians would let the Chinese transit through their country?

Do the Chinese first have to make the country of Afghanistan their private brothel as once the Mongols did before them in history, in order for the Chinese to gain possession of a build up area and a grain storehouse before they embark on the further invasion of Europe?

Please motivate your opinion.

Roger M. Klang, defense political spokesman for the Christian Values Party (Kristna Värdepartiet) in Sweden

4) To be or NATO be. Lesson twentynine

Putin visited Finland in June-July 2016 in conjunction with Russia’s up to date biggest readiness control exercise, which was carried out on August 25-31, 2016. It was an informal visit, and according to Russia, they didn’t sign any agreements. Sauli Niinistö and Putin discussed “the relations between Finland and Russia and the situation in Europe”. Before that Putin and the Finnish president Sauli Niinistö met as recently as March 2016 in Moscow.

Nato held a summit in the first week of July 2016, where it was agreed to deploy four reinforced battalions in the Baltic countries and in Poland, which Russia naturally opposed.

At a previous meeting in Finland the Moderate (Moderaterna = alleged right wing political party in Sweden) Karin Enström, Vice Chairman of the Swedish Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, criticized Niinistö for meeting with Putin. Niinistö replied that Sweden does not keep up with what is happening in the world and that, e.g. The United States has an active dialogue with Russia. But you have to understand that Finland is cornered by Russia and that it was no coincidence that Putin took a trip over the border in conjunction with the Russian mass mobilization. What were discussed there can determine Sweden’s fate.

The country that wants to annex the Baltics and is located in the east, gain a huge advantage, if they undisturbed under false pretences that no Natoland is going to be affected, first can seize the large Swedish island of Gotland in the middle of the Baltic Sea. If they seize Gotland they can create a total A2AD (Anti Access/Area Denial) over large parts of Scandinavia and the whole of the Baltic Sea with advanced long range air defense systems.

I think that Russia will try to find cracks in the Swedish-Finnish relations. They hope that one country will not apply for NATO membership without the other country also doing so, and that there will therefore be no membership for any of the countries. In one way, the True Finns (political right wing party in Finland) are dangerous which have worked to strip the Swedish-speaking part of the Finnish people of their civil rights. It may come back to haunt them. I believe that Finland is more dependent on hooking on a Swedish membership than Sweden is dependent on hooking on a Finnish membership. Finland, with NATO’s eyes, can probably be more easily sacrificed than Sweden. It can put Finland in a difficult situation if Sweden joins the NATO organization without a co-signing together with Finland. It’s what happened when Sweden joined the EU. The Finns haven’t forgotten.

In the above diagram you can see who the weakest link in the chain is. It’s Germany. For my part, although Sweden is not a member of NATO, I am prepared to help defend a NATO nation in the Nordic region, if it is small, like the Baltic States or Iceland. But promises of military aid without first showing that you are really prepared to follow up on it are not worth much. So I am ready, if I were an authorized statesman, to let our Visby-class corvettes and our submarines, from time to time patrol the waters of the Baltic States in peacetime. I have already made a Baltic ex officer assurances and thus I cannot back down.

I am also ready to support Finland in different ways. But it doesn’t matter what I say, or even what our defense minister Peter Hultqvist says, if we do not have a plan for how the help should be executed in peacetime and in wartime or if we don’t have the means to help in any decisive way. We are not alone in not having a plan. NATO lacks or lacked a functioning plan since the United States doesn’t have any land-based persevering deterrent like medium-range ballistic missile systems with versatile types of war heads, like the Russian Iskander-M, which is deployed in Kaliningrad. The United States has phased out most of its tactical nuclear arsenal and the one that is available is not land-based, it is air and sea based.

This is the fourth and last lesson concerning Sweden, Finland and NATO. I hope I haven’t left the Finns with a grudge towards this patriotic Swede. I am prepared to help the Finns with whatever help we can allow ourselves to give to them, even officers and fighting units in Swedish uniform. A hypothetic war in the twentytwenties will be much more qualitatively materiel focused than in the Russo-Finnish winterwar in 1939-1940, and I am afraid that we are not going to be willing to supply the advanced materiel the Finns are going to need without also controlling its contributive forms. That means that wherever there is advanced Swedish equipment, it is going to be operated by Swedish personnel under Swedish command. At least if I have anything to say about it.

But first we need a solid plan and binding agreements.

Homework:

Can Sweden and Finland prevent that Russia could find cracks in our Swedish-Finnish relations? If so, how?

Please motivate your answer!

Roger M. Klang, defense political Spokesman for the Christian Values Party (Kristna Värdepartiet) in Sweden

3) To be or NATO be. Lesson twentyeight

I don’t think that an attack against Sweden will be of a military nature, but the attack will come in the form of a prolonged cyber operation and/or through an economic conspiracy against us. The only thing that can discourage the Russians from committing a cyber attack on Sweden is if we have an ability to attack Russia with the same means.

Georgia’s president Mikhail Saakashvili believed that NATO would intervene if Russia attacked Georgia militarily. But Georgia is more isolated localized geographically because there are only two access roads by land from the Nato country Turkey. Plus, the airport at Georgia’s capital Tbilisi is isolated. In addition, Turkey has a long history of turncoat policy regardless of the consequences for northern NATO countries and others, and it is the Turks who controls the straits of the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus into the Black Sea. A NATO intervention was hardly possible.

Georgia 2008 was the famous “litmus test”. It will of course be more of a risk-taking for Russia to attack Sweden before we can join NATO than it was to attack the isolated Georgia. But players come in plenty. Professor Rolf Tamnes, Norwegian historian and professor at the Department of Defense Studies (Institutt for forsvarsstudier – IFS), emphasizes that Russia does not trust Swedish non-alignment, since the extensive cuts in the Swedish defense force is considered as an incentive to seek external help, for example from NATO and the United States.

Apparently, it is not clear abroad what Swedish “non-alignment” stands for. In my opinion, it stands for freedom to choose alliance partners according to our own preferences. We should make this clear to the world, even if the outside world then will reject us even more, because uncertainties benefit us even less. We are sitting in the fox trap regardless.

How may Russia evaluate their geo-economic field and balance it with the geomilitary field?

1) Russia prefer to look at it as if the outside world is dependent on what they have to offer in the form of Russian gas and oil, but I believe that they realize that Germany may make themselves independent from the geostrategic Gazprom and thus Russia. They must keep the Germans happy.
2) It is almost a required condition that Russia is able to simultaneously attack the entire Baltics and parts of Scandinavia not to mention Iceland, if they intend to be able to count on free passage through Öresund, Kattegat and Skagerack, and they must be able to keep their main trading countries, e.g. the Netherlands and France.
3) This in turn requires that the United States first, nearly lose its superpower status. We therefore have no interest whatsoever in the United States losing its superpower status.

But I think that Sweden as a state must grant access to our territory for US troops on Swedish soil if we are to join NATO. It is not enough to receive a Naval ship visit from time to time, which we could also do as a non-aligned country in peacetime. I am not particularly happy to let 5,000 American hungry hearts invade a Swedish small town or one of our Baltic Sea islands in peacetime. Maybe we can do as Norway and let the US stock up materiel in Swedish bunker rooms?

Homework:

The US may have bases in Sweden as a requirement for a Swedish membership. Above all, an air defense base on one of our Baltic Sea islands and access to our airbases and ports. Otherwise the US will never have the time window to intervene in Scandinavia and even less in the Baltic countries, before Russia has swallowed parts of us. If the United States cannot intervene in time on our latitudes and longitudes, then it makes no sense for us to join NATO and we will probably then be denied membership.

But there is also the possibility to accomodate American service members families and thus unburden some pressure on our communities and our society as a whole. Let them contribute to our society and at the same time make it possible for them to use public services such as hospitals and schools at the same low cost as for Swedes. The schools should even be free of charge. I have absolutely no problems with Americans as a people.

Do you agree or not agree? Please motivate your position.

Roger M. Klang, defense political Spokesman for the Christian Values Party (Kristna Värdepartiet) in Sweden