"China as the next evil empire wargaming super power?" Topic

What I mean is, you had the British Colonial Empire at the end of the 1800's through the 1960's fighting brushfire wars throughout all corners of the world.

After WWII, the Soviet Union picked up the cap of the evil empire, either fighting actual or proxy wars around the world. They also still provide endless gaming fodder for the war that never happened, the invasion of the West.

Post-1991, the US stepped in as the closest thing to the big bad target in town with 2 wars, 3 other "hot zone" countries, and troops in harms way in countless other regions ("Peace Keepers"..etc…).

With the US heading towards a prolonged double-dip recession and likely as a result to scale back its military fingerprint over the coming years, does that make Communist (PLA) China the new/next "bad guy" in town (strictly wargaming-wise, non-politically speaking, of course!) for near-future and perhaps even sci-fi gaming considerations?

I'll keep the poll question fairly simple; Does a hypothetical "growing PLA political/military state" over the next 50 years figure in your current/ upcoming wargaming?

Yes
A "conditional" yes (explain)
No
Dont wargame moderns/ near-future/ sci-fi.

No, because I think, living in Peking, that democracy will come very soon to China, before 5 years, either peacefully (à la South Korean/ Taiwanese way) or through a Jasmine revolution.

I see no evil empire in this world for the next 20 years at least.

Financial Times
September 30, 2011

Analysis

A Show Of Force

Fears are growing over the hold China's well-equipped Army has on foreign policy

By Kathrin Hille

When the US announced its decision last week to help Taiwan upgrade its fleet of ageing fighter aircraft, the response was swift and sharp. China should take "smart and devious revenge", advised Major General Luo Yuan, deputy secretary-general of the academy of military sciences. He went on to demand "a tooth for a tooth from those who violate China's interests", suggesting his country learn from Russia and deploy missiles against America.

The biblical language and the cold war references make it difficult not to perceive China's military as a belligerent force bent on confronting the US. In the past two years, a series of fierce outbursts from men in uniform, combined with constant friction with neighbours, and the People's Liberation Army's rapidly growing capabilities, have triggered complaints about an assertive, even aggressive, Beijing. Many outside China believe that the PLA is behind this push.

"Is the military now driving China's foreign policy?" asked Iskander Rehman, an Indian security analyst, in an article this year. The answer is yes and no. But the balance may still shift, with substantial implications for the Asia-Pacific region and beyond.

No.
A nationalist Russia would be far keener on foreign military endeavours.

I don't wargame moderns / near-future.

Interesting article Rhino!

Yoakly. I dont think current Federalist Russia has the finiacial ability in the next 50 years to project much overt military power beyond its borders. Its having enough trouble within its current borders. But I get your point.

@Renaud, I take your point but think honestly its quite a bit over optimistic. I read a recent article that stated that when polled after the 9-11 terrorist attacks, 90% of online Chinese comments supported the terrorists attacks.

When interviewed on the 10th anniversary, many of those who posted the negative comments 10 years earlier and had supported the terrorists stated they had made those comments based on what they had been told/fed from their own government line (ie. anti-US dogma).

When you combine this with the recent released youtube videos of the Chinese Military giving classes on how to launch cyber attacks on US based computer web sites, it does seem that the PLA and its govt. are in a long term preperation process for warfare with (or at least containment of) the west.

They also have a hugely anti-islamic military, political and propoganda campaign going on currently in their far western provinces that dont get much press (unsurprisingly) in the west.

All of this doesnt spell "teetering on democracy" to me. But I appreciate your first hand input.

Keep the votes coming.

China's growing thirst for oil will lead them to deploy forces abroad. Either they will fill the power vacuum in the Mid-east as the US withdraws or they will fight with their neighbors over the Spratleys. Time will tell. As for now China is a free rider, benefitting from US involvement in the Gulf without having to spend blood and treasure to ensure their own access to oil.

@ Uesugi: these ten years, chinese public opinion has tremendously changed, even among the military. With the help of the Internet information revolution, they have become very critical against their own government. According to latest polls, 70% of the chinese citizens wish to emigrate. The popularity of nationalist ideas has sunken in september 2008, following the scandal of contaminated baby milk produced by state run companies. Next year, the leaders are changing in China, but the next president will very likely be the last emperor of communist China. Civil society will put him under heavy pressure, with some rising economic and social issues as well.

It wouldn't surprise me to see China really reaching out and trying to control their own resource-flows. I mean, you think it's bad when the US drops a couple corps in the middle east, at least they will leave after a few years.

I won't take odds on PLA troops leaving if they were ever deployed outside their own territory, and China is very dependent on Middle East oil.

Yes – it's all about resources….

It has been all about resources since at least the Neolithic. I don't want to have ninnys screaming 'blue fez, blue fez' so I'll just suggest looking at countries like China and Russia that operate with a completely different philosophy than the U.S. Which nations are older and which will last longer?

Without going all Blue Fezzy on folks here, I'll simply say "No. I don't see China as the next "evil empire"…I actually see that moniker going towards The United Nations instead…"

"actually see that moniker going towards The United Nations instead"

I don't see that at all the UN has almost NO power, they could not invade Liechtenstein.

I see the Chinese as no longer communist in the Mao sense. They have rediscovered the joys of making money. Over the years, they have been very reluctant to do anything military beyond the borders of the old Celestial Empire: Tibet, Korea, and Vietnam were all Chinese tributary states under the Empire. In the 1960s they mounted a major diplomatic offensive thruout Africa.
Frankly, I think you could supply Bei Ching with electric power by hooking Mao up to a generator at the rate he must be spinning in his grave over the New China.

I expect China to act in its own self-interest. I don't expect that to align with the interests of other states. Their 'thirst' for resources extends far beyond oil. Look at their purchases of corn and soybeans.

It makes for interesting times ahead. But from a gaming standpoint, yes. But I need to do something with all those old Mongoose PLA miniatures.

I'm still in shock at the idea that the British Empire was "evil".

Doug

I'm still in shock at the idea that the British Empire was "evil".

19th century China certainly thought it was…

Not currently, but I suspect that may change.

There's a good chance of more naval and/or air skirmishes in the coming years between the Chinese and their neighbors, and/or US naval vessels and aircraft in the region.

As they strengthen their military, they will become even more bellicose.

"I'll just suggest looking at countries like China and Russia that operate with a completely different philosophy than the U.S. Which nations are older and which will last longer?"

Interesting statement.

Nation wise they are older, but state wise they are much younger. The PRC has only been around since the '40s and the current Russian Republic dates back to the 90's. The US is, roughly, 235 years old and has only faced one invasion (by the UK) and one civil war (1861-1865).

Those facts considered, my money is on the US.

Context is everything. My perception is that the Chinese consider themselves the latest ruling faction of a civilization which stretches back over four thousand years of history. From that perspective 235 years is a drop in the bucket.

The old argument that a capitalistic economy will lead to democracy has been the catch phrase since Bush 41. It hasn't and will not happen anytime soon if ever. Yes you can have a form of capitalism within a dictatorship.

That catch phrase just gave American Corporations (Evil Empires?) an excuse to tap into a huge Chinese market and to export American jobs to a country with no unions, horrible working conditions and few labor or environmental laws.

China has bought so much of our debt and so many American Corporations are vested in China. That any type of military conformation is not in in best interest of either nation.

Unless China blatantly invades somebody there will not be a military clash between the PRC and USA. Everyone is making too much money. For example GM sales more cars in China than they do in the USA. An armed conflict or even an arms race with the PRC? Highly unlikely.

Unfortunately, history is replete with examples of philosophical imperatives overruling economic self-interest.

Rallynow, you seem to be fixated on the US vrs China aspect only of the topic. There are lots of other areas for the PLA to insert itself into in the next 50 years that will not cause the US to react, such as Uzbekistan, Kyrgistan, Northern Sudan, India, Vietnam, etc.
.
.

Agreed. I just don't care about the other areas. Invading India would run the risk of American and/or Russian intervention so I doubt they would risk it. Although a Sino-Russian conflict maybe interesting.

You guys always seem to think that warfare is a credible way to acquire resources.

It doesnt work that way. The cheapest way to acquire resources is to buy them, war is far too expensive.

NOW – if China were to face a resource embargo, then we have a causus bellum.

I'll just suggest looking at countries like China and Russia that operate with a completely different philosophy than the U.S. Which nations are older and which will last longer?"

Interesting statement.

Nation wise they are older, but state wise they are much younger. The PRC has only been around since the '40s and the current Russian Republic dates back to the 90's. The US is, roughly, 235 years old and has only faced one invasion (by the UK) and one civil war (1861-1865).

Those facts considered, my money is on the US.
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you want to talk about Russia its wrong to date it from the 1990s – what about Russia under the Tsars – its a bit artificial to date a state only from its latest inception when its existed before. Next thing you'll be trying to convince us that the UK is only 60 odd years older than the USA. And the question was nation not state anyway – ref the longevity of the USA though, surely on current demographics it'll be the Estados Unidos and not the USA :-)

"Context is everything. My perception is that the Chinese consider themselves the latest ruling faction of a civilization which stretches back over four thousand years of history. From that perspective 235 years is a drop in the bucket".

True, but the current socialist regime is founded on socialism and repression, which I doubt will survive in the long run, especially once the Chinese learn how others live, and the freedoms they enjoy.

True, but the current socialist regime is founded on socialism and repression, which I doubt will survive in the long run, especially once the Chinese learn how others live, and the freedoms they enjoy.

Read up on Qin (~200BC) legal processes sometime. Lots of repression, and a not-quite-socialist thought process.

Modern technology makes it much harder to step on dissenting voices, but it also means that you can have a 'deniable voice' like the retired Generals.

I've said it before, but in 1912 the world was at least as globalized as it is today, people said that the interconnected economies would make war impossible, and we still ended up with two huge wars within 25 years.

I see the Chinese starting to 'venture' into … not colonialism, they don't really do that, but more 'supply line protection'.

I think China has already peaked, look at their rapidly aging population without a 1st world economy to support all those old people.

Madmike1 wrote:

I think China has already peaked, look at their rapidly aging population

Jolly clever of them to age more rapidly than the customary rate of sixty minutes per hour, which is what I do.

Which reminds me of my favourite joke of last week, from the New Scientist:

The barman says "We don't serve faster-than-light neutrinos here."

This neutrino walks into a bar.

All the best,

John.

That was dreadful – me I am changing my birthday to 29th February so I age 15 minutes in the hour.

BTW, ck Fighting Dirty, for an account of US support to the Tibetans after the Chinese moved into the area.

Well, China is going to suffer a *nasty* demographic crunch here pretty soon. The one-child policy combined with the Confucian desire to have a male offspring has left parts of China with an awful lot of young men with zero chance of marriage inside China.

We're talking serious population crash in about 50 years.

I doubt it.

Most of them are moving west.

Perhaps Indian ones…..