"modern Chinese analysis of Midway" Topic

link

The last point, that the Japanese seriously expected the US to negotiate after Pearl Harbor, is mind-boggling.

As, of course, is the whole notion of picking a fight with a moralistic republic with a sucker-punch. A republic whose major problems were thousands of factories with nothing to make and millions of men with no work to do.

It's uncomfortable to realize that the Chinese are learning all the "right" lessons from Midway.
It's as if they aren't about to underestimate the US as the Japanese did.

It's even more uncomfortable to think that maybe they don't need to be so cautious.

The last point, that the Japanese seriously expected the US to negotiate after Pearl Harbor, is mind-boggling.

There was a lot of racism in WWII, & the Japanese were no exception.

The Japanese looked on the US as being soft, too enamored with movies, cars, & living an easy life, that if they landed several serious blows, the US would beg for peace from the culturally superior Japanese. So when your attitude is that your opponent is racially, culturally & morally inferior, that attitude isn't hard to understand.

Damon.

Well, one of the lessons is that America kept fighting. Which might put off anyone who learns that lesson.

We're still in Afghanistan. That says more about our stubbornness than about our sense.

Well when was the last time the PC fought a modern Naval battle ? Just an interesting observation …

That says more about our stubbornness than about our sense.

Well we went to war with Japan after they attacked us at Pearl. We invade A'stan, after 9/11 … to hunt down those responsible for those attacks. Which ended up including both AQ and the Taliban. But that is for another topic …

The USN was demonstrably unprepared for war in 1941: torpedos that didn't work, outdated planes, and so forth. But I suspect the Japanese shoould have studied the naval buildup between 1861 and 1865, to get a sense of growth potential. And perhaps, should have contemplated that the US built the canal after the French (arguably the most advanced country in the world at the time) failed.

And I agree with Garand and Legion.

U.S. Devastator dive bombers

This is the point at which it lost me.

Yes, embarrassing mistake for someone of the authors background

"Well when was the last time the PC fought a modern Naval battle ? Just an interesting observation …2

When was the last time the US did? The last "modern" naval battle standfast a few skirmishes was in 1982

Our still being in Asscrackistan has more to do with our stupid leadership, IMO.

Not when you hear that AQ IS alive and well in Afghanistan, working with the Taliban, and is planning attacks overseas, as soon as later this year, or next.

They have a sophisticated comms network (in some cases even using old methods which are hard if not impossible to track), and that last October we conducted a couple of attacks into Syria, reportedly based upon intel gleaned from the killing of one of their top leaders a while before that.

With the wide open southern border of the USA now, another terrorist attack, or attacks in the country is/are inevitable.

My guess is that WILL occur, sooner, rather than later, though of course it's also a great opportunity for them to insert sleeper cells into our country for use later.

Presumably the idea is that China would win a conventional war by either forcng the US Navy to stay out of range of their ASM assets or be destroyed in detail. The question is how do you do that without precipitating preemptive air strikes to destroy the ASM assets or retaliatory strikes against Chinese land targets and maritime assets by the US submarine force and the US Air Force. The deaths of tens of thousands of American Sailors after a Chinese Midway would probably result in calls of vengeance not the peaceful resumption of shipments to Walmart. Much like war with the Soviets, a hot war with the US is one that could too easily and in nuclear Apocalypse. Lets hope that peaceful coexistence remains a viable path for the West.

Big difference between 1941 and 2021 is that China is now the factory of the world, not the US.

US has let a number of key strategic industries decline or disappear entirely be it traditional ones such ad shipbuilding or modern ones like rare earth minerals processing and production of microprocessors.

When was the last time the US did? The last "modern" naval battle standfast a few skirmishes was in 1982

True enough, but I still feel the USN/USA will have the edge.

LostPict +1

But arealdeadone makes good points too.

However the US has been in combat recently. The PRC … when they invaded Vietnam in '79 …

But hopefully we never will have to find out …

Well, China has its own full set of problems, starting with demographics. And a BUNCH of dangerous neighbors.

There can't be too many conditions that pose a greater threat to the general peace than a power that believes its strategic situation will only worsen over time. That's exactly the view that the German and Austro-Hungarian General Staffs held in 1914, and it's the view the Japanese leadership held in 1941. China's overall strategic situation is unlikely to improve over the long term, particularly given its demographics, and the rising interest it's neighbors are taking in arming to thwart its ambitions. That does not make for short-term stability. Add to that a lack of a sophisticated cultural understanding on the part of Western leaders (how many ministers in any Western government can read Mandarin?), and the situation is ripe for all kinds of missed signals and misunderstandings.

In 1941, there were two situations that inadvertently reinforced aggressive tendencies on the part of Japan. One was the oil embargo, which promised fuel shortages and national immobilization in the future, the other was the power vacuum in the region caused by the war in Europe. French and Dutch power had collapsed completely, and the capture of the British Strategic Appreciation by the German raider that sank the "Automedon" revealed how thinly stretched the British were. Ironically, I suspect the Japanese didn't realize how much logistical considerations would limit the application of American power in the Pacific for the first two years of the war, because if they had, they might have foregone the attack on Pearl Harbor. Regardless, they knew the window was going to be short and the odds were long- even Tojo, a reckless man if ever there was one, expressed it as "like jumping off the veranda of the Kiyomizu Temple!"

But they did it. And the fact that it was such a crazy, long-odds shot goes a long way toward explaining why none of the intelligent, sober men who ultimately guided their own nations to victory realized it was about to happen- because they themselves knew it was too crazy to contemplate.

Let's hope the Chinese leadership takes a more sober approach. I think, like the Japanese, they can never win in the long run: their structural weaknesses are too great. But they could make an awful mess of the world before they are ultimately defeated.

Yes, I agree.

However the US has been in combat recently.

An irrelevance as the US has been involved in COIN operations which have resulted in degradation of conventional capabilities.

The US in Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya has complete air, artillery, electronic, logistical supremacy.

This might have created some bad habits.

Note many of the generals in WWI had experience in COIN (putting down colonial rebellions).

They completely didn't understand the modern battlefield despite potential lessons from everything from the ACW and Crimea to Japanese siege of Port Arthur in 1904-05 and the Balkan Wars.

And in any case the USN hasn't had any real combat experience for decades and the last time the US air forces faced a potentially dangerous opponent was 1991 (and that was the farce of the Iraqi air force but the US did wage that war like the Iraqis were a serious threat).

---

I would argue the new USMC doctrine is actually a result of decades of operating in permissive environments with a reactive enemy.

The USMC premise assumes China will let the USMC deploy on critical islands to threaten shipping (remember forced entry is out).

The assumption is clear – it is assumed that China is like Libya or Serbia or Iraq 2003 or Afghanistan in 2001 and will just sit and react to US moves.

There is no assumption of Chinese acting proactively or offensively (noting last US opponent that actually reacted offensively was North Vietnam)

On a tactical level … combat experience is a plus …

Sure, but the navy doesn't have combat experience at a tactical level.

And the air force doesn't have any in a contested environment.

I believe that is why all branches of the US Military train for war. Well … at least they used to. With what I see coming out from the Pentagon, etc., currently. I'm not so sure anymore ?

Seems the real enemy is from within … for both ends of the spectrum …

Yeah, I'm guessing the Chinese don't preach that "diversity is our strength," particularly to the Uighars.

OTOH, it's very easy to overestimate the Chinese maritime threat. The PLAN's experience with big ships and fleets was mostly acquired in the last decade, so it remains to be seen if they have built the organizational culture they need to employ the hardware effectively. China, for all its vastness and population, is not really a military empire, in the sense that it was amassed by conquest. It's really a more-or-less ethnically homogeneous nation that grew up into the enormous open spaces, protected for much of its history by the Himalayas and the wastelands of Central Asia. The place of soldiers in Chinese culture and history is more equivocal than you might think. Dictatorships tend to work hard at making armed forces appear to be more formidable than they actually are, and it would not surprise me greatly if much of the ballyhooed Chinese military strength is less formidable than it appears.

Add to that, it has a serious maritime vulnerability so great it's almost an Achilles Heel: much of the oil on which China depends heavily comes from the Middle East, around the whole length of India (a hostile country), through the choke point at Singapore, and highly vulnerable to interdiction by Australia, the US, or Britain. This is a vulnerability that's in some ways worse than Japan's in 1941, and the idea of building railroads across Central Asia would be a very poor substitute for the tanker trade.

Grounds for a sigh of relief? Not at all- but we are often more cognizant of our own weaknesses than those of prospective enemies.

Nine pound round,

Great post.

And the Chinese are well aware of these limitations and are thus investing heavily in a mercantile empire through Belt & Road.

Military strength is somewhat of an irrelevance in the nuclear age. The Chinese understand that so invest heavily in the economic sphere. Indeed Germany is now the most powerful it's ever been in Europe despite having a completely decrepit military.

The Chinese military's main purpose is deterrence. It has no global offensive capability. The primary Chinese offensive force are banks, companies, infrastructure projects, workers and propaganda units.

Best way to limit Chinese capabilities is for US to be good friend with Russia. Unlike Japan 80 years ago today China can count on Russian wast resources. In big and long game US and Russia could be good friends with mutual benefits

Every Chinese corporation operating overseas – every one – is, at least indirectly, an arm of the state. If you don't think so, invite them for a meeting, and schedule a reputable security company to sweep the meeting room for bugs afterwards. China is hostile, it does take a zero-sum game view of the world, and it will use force or lethal means to get what it wants. It may be the world's leading expert right now in how to do that without firing an undeniable shot. That ought to concern everyone.

The initiative to build a railroad across Central Asia should tell you how seriously they take the maritime choke point problem. It's economically unviable; the only serious justification for it is to transport oil if the straits are closed.

The PRC/CCP are "winning" without going to war and without firing a shot. Sun Tzu would be proud …