Filipinos march June 12 outside the Chinese Embassy in Makati, Metro Manila, as they mark Independence Day with a protest on continued Chinese intrusions in Philippine waters. (Ezra Acayan/Getty Images)

Gregory Winger is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Cincinnati. He is also a fellow with the National Asia Research Program and a participant in the Pacific Forum’s U.S.-Philippines’ Next Generation Leaders Initiative.

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/06/23/little-known-agreement-that-could-lead-us-china-war/

The post The little-known agreement that could lead the U.S. and China to war first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

U.S. Marines participate in an amphibious assault exercise in Chonburi, Thailand, in February 2020: the Marines will be sea-based and able to sail into the waters of the South China Sea.   © Sipa/AP

Admiral James Stavridis was 16th Supreme Allied Commander of NATO and 12th Dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. He spent the bulk of his operational career in the Pacific, and is author of “2034: A Novel of the Next World War.”

The Atlantic Council’s publication of The Longer Telegram, which lays out a sweeping blueprint for a U.S. strategy to face China, provides significant clues about a new lay-down of American forces around east Asia.

Whether the new Biden administration fully embraces the paper’s aggressive stance remains to be seen, but elements are under serious consideration. Certainly, the new team at the National Security Council, led by highly respected Asia hand Kurt Campbell and a deep bench of Asia experts, will be looking at a wide variety of options for the military component of a new overall strategic posture.

One of the key elements in the military component is a series of “red lines” to which the U.S. would respond militarily.

These include “any nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons action by China against the U.S. or its allies or by North Korea; any Chinese military attack against Taiwan or its offshore islands, including an economic blockade or major cyberattack against Taiwanese public infrastructure and institutions; any Chinese attack against Japanese forces in their defense of Japanese sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands, which China claims as the Diaoyu, and their surrounding exclusive economic zone in the East China Sea; any major Chinese hostile action in the South China Sea to further reclaim and militarize islands, to deploy force against other claimant states, or to prevent full freedom of navigation operations by the U.S. and allied maritime forces; and any Chinese attack against the sovereign territory or military assets of U.S. treaty allies.”

At U.S. Indo-Pacific headquarters, strategic, operational, and tactical teams are putting together new approaches for deploying American forces. These new options will be sent back to the Pentagon as part of the overall “posture review” being undertaken by new Secretary of Defense General Lloyd Austin. What will emerge?

One option is an enhanced role for the U.S. Marine Corps, which traces so much of its pre-9/11 operational history to the Pacific going back to World War II. Under the dynamic intellectual leadership of Marine Corps Commandant Dave Berger, gone are the large troop formations, armored capability, and land-based Marine tactics of the “forever wars” in the Middle East.

Instead, in the context of a U.S.-China strategy, the Marines will be resolutely sea-based and able to sail into the waters of the South China Sea, well inside the island chains China relies on for defense. Once inside, they will use armed drones, offensive cyber capabilities, Marine Raiders — highly capable special forces — anti-air missiles, and even ship-killer strike weapons to attack Chinese maritime forces, and perhaps even their land bases of operations. The Chinese militarized artificial islands in the South China Sea would be juicy targets, for example. In essence, this will be guerrilla warfare from the sea.

An airstrip and buildings on China’s man-made Subi Reef in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, pictured in April 2017: juicy targets.   © AP

In addition to a new Marine tactical and operational approach, the U.S. Navy will be undertaking more aggressive patrols throughout the waters off China. Some will say this is merely the military equivalent of “driving doughnut holes in your neighbor’s lawn.” But the strategic concept is clever: to gradually include other allied warships in this aggressive freedom of navigation patrols. Doing so internationalizes the pushback on Chinese claims of sovereignty over the South China Sea.

In particular, the Pentagon is hoping to include British, French, and other NATO allies in the effort. Indeed the recent NATO defense ministerial in Brussels involved consultations over the alliance’s role in facing the rising military capability of China. Over time, the U.S. would like to convince Australia, New Zealand, India, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Vietnam to participate in such deployments. The U.S. overall maritime strategic posture is predicated on creating a global maritime coalition to face the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s highly capable forces.

In addition to the sea service’s activities, the U.S. Air Force will likely be shifting additional long-range land-attack bombers and fighters to Pacific bases that are widely distributed across Asia, including some very remote sites on smaller islands. These so-called spokes will be supported from larger bases in Guam, Japan, Australia, and South Korea. The concept, dubbed Agile Combat Employment, adds a high degree of mobility to the currently concentrated combat power of both fighter and attack aircraft deployed in the region.

Finally, the U.S. Army will increase both combat power and mobility to deploy units forward in support of the red lines along those advocated in the telegram, including enhanced capability based in South Korea and Japan but easily capable of deploying to smaller islands throughout the region.

Both the Army and Air Force would be on the forward edge of additional training and exercises with the Taiwanese as well. Look for increased emphasis from the new American Space Force to focus intelligence and reconnaissance on the theater, as well as enhanced offensive cyber options from the U.S. Cyber Command, in coordination with the National Security Agency.

Taken together, it seems clear that the U.S. military is stepping up its presence and combat capability in the Western Pacific, and positioning for a conflict with China over the coming decades.

The Longer Telegram provides an important clue as to what options the Pentagon and the White House are considering as part of an expected new strategy to face the rise of China. Hopefully, skillful diplomacy and the intertwined economies of the two great powers will preclude the outbreak of war — but U.S. military planners are busy these days.

Source: https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/How-the-US-military-is-preparing-for-a-war-with-China

The post How the US military is preparing for a war with China first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

President Trump further indicated that he is considering a preventive military strike on the North if the sanctions failed to denuclearize the communist nation. But such a so-called “bloody nose” strike against North Korean missile sites and nuclear facilities stands an excellent chance of becoming a bloody disaster.

China won’t tolerate an unprovoked attack on North Korea, and President Moon will not support the use of South Korean forces as part of a U.S. military strike against North Korea.

South Koreans loathe the regime of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. But very few think that initiating a war on the Korean Peninsula will hasten reunification, let alone lead to lasting peace. In fact, 59 percent of South Koreans oppose a pre-emptive strike on North Korea’s nuclear facilities.

Consequently, if President Trump authorizes military action against North Korea, the most probable outcome will be war with China and the immediate expulsion of U.S. military forces from South Korea. President Moon will have no other choice if he is to avoid conflict with China.

And, contrary to expectations in Washington, Japan will decline to participate in Washington’s “bloody nose” extravaganza in any meaningful way. Tokyo will privately welcome a conflict that removes North Korea from the map, but will not put the Japanese home islands at risk to help Washington in its war with China.

The net result will be embarrassment on a global scale for Washington and the American people. The Trump presidency could well be destroyed.

On the other hand, it’s useful to point out that President Xi Jinping of China has actually cooperated with Washington to push North Korea to the brink of economic implosion. Xi has told Kim Jong Un that if he attacks his neighbors or the U.S., Beijing will not assist North Korea in any way.

The importance of Xi’s stance to U.S. military planners cannot be overstated. Military planning is always based on a mix of known capabilities relating to friendly and opposing weapon systems, as well as unknowable aspects of a potential opponent’s behavior. Predictably, in American military planning untested assumptions are often frequently shaped by wishful thinking.

Fortunately for the U.S., President Xi has taken precautions to disabuse Washington of any wishful thinking. If America initiates hostilities against North Korea, China will not sit on the sidelines.

According to South Korean sources, if we attack North Korea the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s Northern Theater Command is preparing the Chinese 78th Army Group for intervention on the ground to cope with the potential collapse of the North Korean state.

The Northern Theater Command in Manchuria also includes the 79th Army Group. Together, the two Chinese Army Groups positioned in Manchuria field 855 tanks, 819 Infantry Fighting Vehicles, 200 self-propelled guns, rocket artillery, missile defense units, support troops and several hundred attack aircraft – a force of roughly 300,000.

None of these points suggest that America’s nuclear arsenal could not quickly and thoroughly erase the North Korean state from the map. While that’s something that Washington can accomplish, a high-end conventional conflict with China on the Korean Peninsula is a contingency for which the U.S. armed forces are not prepared.

Any use of nuclear weapons to compensate for U.S. conventional military weakness – regardless of yield – would likely trigger a nuclear exchange with China that no sane person wants.

It is time to reconsider the wisdom of military action against North Korea. In their first meeting, President Moon asked President Trump to accelerate the transfer of wartime command of all Korean and U.S. armed forces on the Korean Peninsula to a Korean Army four-star general. President Trump was perplexed.

President Trump’s advisers had not prepared him for the question. For decades, a U.S. Army four-star general has exercised absolute authority over the South Korean-U.S. Combined Forces Command, the warfighting headquarters responsible for the defense and, if necessary, the defeat of external aggression against South Korea.

President Moon is the latest South Korean leader to conclude that without unambiguous South Korean national command authority over the armed forces on its soil, South Korea is not really a sovereign nation. He has a point.

The truth is that Washington is not equipped to “solve the problem” on the Korean Peninsula, largely because the problem is not ours to solve. South Korea is a brilliant success story. Now the United States mission on the Korean Peninsula is complete.

Seoul, not Washington, must now work with Beijing and Tokyo to solve the problem. For Washington, Step One is to signal American support for President Moon’s initiative of an inter-Korean dialogue.

Step Two is to turn over command of the Combined Forces Command to a South Korean four-star general as soon as possible. Make it clear that the destiny of the South Korean people rests in their own hands.

The post An attack on North Korea could start a US-China war — Don’t do it first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.