WAR 09-19-2015-to-09-25-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
(181) 08-29-2015-to-09-04-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...04-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(182) 09-05-2015-to-09-11-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...11-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(183) 09-12-2015-to-09-18-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...18-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

_____

I was going to add thread links last week but got bogged down with the meat world and the flurry of "stuff" that's hitting the fan.

_____

Japan enacts bills easing pacifist constitution's limits on military
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...ng-pacifist-constitution-s-limits-on-military

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-backs-japans-new-military-expansion-but-china-concerned-1442644956

U.S. Backs Japan’s New Military Expansion, But China Concerned
U.S. ready to work together with Tokyo, but Beijing highlights security concerns of Asian neighbors

By Jun Hongo
Sept. 19, 2015 2:42 a.m. ET
0 COMMENTS

The U.S. says it is looking forward to closer cooperation with Japan after the country’s parliament passed legislation expanding its international military powers, but China cautioned Tokyo against disturbing regional peace and stability.

Japan lawmakers early Saturday gave final approval to new laws that, for the first time in the 70 years since World War II, will give the government power to use the military in international conflicts, even if Japan itself isn’t under attack.

Following the passage of the law, the bipartisan leadership of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations and the Armed Services committees said Japan can now take a larger role in regional and global security.


Related

Japan Parliament Approves Overseas Military Expansion
5 Ways Japan Could Use Its Restricted Military Under New Law
5 Things to Know About Japan’s Vote on Its Military Role
Japanese Students Protest Expansion of Militarism
Abe’s Security Bills Near Passage Despite Protests
U.S., Japan Announce New Security Agreement
.

“The new measures adopted by Japan today will contribute to international peace and security while strengthening the vital alliance between our two countries,” the Republican and Democratic Senators said in a joint statement.

In the statement, the Senators said the U.S. was looking forward to working with Japan “under the revised US-Japan Defense Guidelines.” That agreement, which was unveiled in April, is aimed at overhauling the two countries’ security arrangements and paving the way for a more robust participation of Japan’s Self-Defense Forces in disaster relief, peacekeeping operations, missile defense and other military missions.

At the time, U.S. officials said the new agreement wasn’t about China, but Beijing has treated both the pact and the Japanese legislation with suspicion. While Japanese officials were careful to avoid provoking China, the need to boost deterrence against a growing Chinese military was constantly in the background during the debate over the legislation.

Hong Lei, a spokesman for China’s foreign ministry, expressed concern in a statement published on the ministry’s website Saturday, saying the passing of the legislation raises questions about whether Japan will “deviate from the path of peaceful development it has been following” since the end of WWII.

In the statement, Mr. Hong said China urged Japan to “take seriously the security concerns of its Asian neighbors,” and “act with discretion on military and security issues.” The statement also said Japan should “do more to promote regional peace and stability, rather than the opposite.”

After the vote, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who has long been pushing for the change, said the law is designed to prevent future wars.

But protesters and politicians opposed to the change argue the activities permitted by the new law violate Japan’s postwar pacifist constitution, which prohibits the nation from using force to settle international disputes.

On Saturday morning, demonstrators rallied near parliament against the legislation and, after the vote result was announced, called on voters to reject lawmakers who backed the bill at the next elections.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/19/us-pakistan-militants-idUSKCN0RJ0AP20150919

World | Sat Sep 19, 2015 5:16am EDT
Related: World

Pakistan bombs Taliban hideouts after deadly raid on military base
PESHAWAR, Pakistan | By Jibran Ahmad

Pakistani jets killed 16 suspected militants in bombing raids near the Afghan border on Saturday, and police arrested dozens of people, security officials said, the day after Taliban militants killed 29 people in an attack on an air base.

The attack on the base on Friday was the deadliest ever militant attack on a Pakistani military installation and is likely to undermine already rocky ties with Afghanistan.

Hours after the attack, Pakistan's military chief pointedly noted that communications intercepts showed the Pakistani Taliban gunmen were being directed by handlers in Afghanistan.

Saturday's air force raids targeted militant bases in the Tirah Valley, which straddles the Afghan border and is a main smuggling route between the two countries, two Pakistani security officials said.

"All those killed in the bombing were Pakistani militants," said one security official in the northwestern city of Peshawar.

On Friday, 13 gunmen stormed the Badaber air base, about 10 km (6 miles) south of Peshawar in an attack a Pakistani Taliban spokesman said was retaliation for bombing raids on their bases along the Afghan border.

Police picked up dozens of residents living near the base on suspicion of helping the militants organize the attack.

"They came from Afghanistan a few days ago and were staying in nearby villages," another security official said of the attackers.

"More than 50 people have been arrested over suspicions some of them are linked with the terrorists."

For decades Pakistan nurtured Islamist militants as allies against old rival India, and to fight Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

But it has been fighting some militant factions since after it sided with the United States following the Sept. 11, 2001, al Qaeda attacks on U.S. cities.

Pakistan launched an offensive to dislodge Pakistani Taliban from their northwestern stronghold of North Waziristan in 2014 and there has been fighting in various places, including the Tirah Valley, since then.

For years Pakistan and Afghanistan have traded accusations of not doing enough to stamp out insurgents on either side of their long, porous border.

Each country has a separate but allied Taliban insurgency fighting to overthrow the government and install strict Islamist rule and security cooperation is seen as vital to defeat militancy.

Last month, Afghanistan blamed Pakistan for not doing enough to counter militants who carried out a series of attacks in the Afghan capital, Kabul.


(Writing By Katharine Houreld; Editing by Robert Birsel)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/19/us-yemen-security-idUSKCN0RJ03O20150919

Business | Sat Sep 19, 2015 3:13am EDT
Related: World, Aerospace & Defense, Yemen

Saudi-led warplanes pound Yemen's interior ministry in Sanaa
SANAA

Aircraft from a Saudi-led coalition attacked Yemen's interior ministry in the capital, Sanaa, late on Friday and launched several other raids on sites in the heart of the city, residents and other sources there said.

The air raids by the coalition have intensified in recent weeks as a Gulf Arab ground force and fighters loyal to exiled President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi prepare a campaign to recapture Sanaa, seized by Houthi fighters in September 2014.

Residents said about 10 air strikes were launched on the ministry building in the north of the capital, a police camp close to it and a military building.

The health ministry issued an urgent appeal saying it did not have the capacity to treat all those injured as a result of the strikes on several areas of Sanaa, the official Houthi controlled news agency said on Saturday.

Hospitals lack the basic medicines necessary for treating the wounded and lack fuel to operate ambulances and hospital equipment, a health ministry official was quoted as saying.

The raids also targeted the presidential complex and a party building of former president Ali Abdullah Saleh which had already been destroyed in 2011, residents said.

Several air raids also targeted the Fulaihi area of Old Sanaa early on Saturday morning, destroying several houses.

The Omani foreign affairs ministry said the residence of its ambassador in Sanaa was hit by a strike on Friday and denounced the act.

"Oman received with deep regret yesterday's news targeting the ambassador's home in Sanaa, which is a clear violation of international charters and norms that emphasize the inviolability of diplomatic premises," the statement said.

The statement urged the Yemeni parties to put aside their differences with each other to ensure the return of stability and security in Yemen.

In Saada province, about 30 people were killed in various strikes in various strikes on Friday, a news agency controlled by the Houthis said.

The coalition began air strikes against the Houthis and their allies - forces loyal to Saleh - in late March after they pushed from their northern stronghold toward the southern port of Aden.

It is pushing ahead with an offensive in Marib, about 120 km (75 miles) east of Sanaa, trying to drive the Houthis out of the province in preparation for a push against the capital.

Sources within the coalition have said they are waiting for "zero hour" to launch a full attack on Marib which will signal the end of the Houthi rebellion, pan Arab television Al Arabiya said.


(Reporting By Mohammed Ghobari in Sanaa, additional reporting by Fatma al-Arimi in Muscat; Writing By Maha El Dahan; Editing by Robert Birsel and David Evans)
 

vestige

Deceased
Japan enacts bills easing pacifist constitution's limits on military

It's slow... but it IS coming.

el bumpo
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
North Korea to launch rockets - "peaceful" purposes/nuke complex activated/nuke(s) ready?
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...es-nuke-complex-activated-nuke(s)-ready/page3

China warns NK may already have an arsenal of 20 NUKE warheads; could double by next yearhttp://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...NUKE-warheads-could-double-by-next-year/page5

___

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://atimes.com/2015/09/china-seeks-six-party-talks-over-north-korea-nuclear-program/

China seeks six-party talks over North Korea nuclear program

By AT Editor on September 19, 2015 in Top News

Even as Pentagon warned of security threat to the United States because of what it perceived as China’s waning influence on North Korea, Beijing called for all parties involved in talks on North Korea’s nuclear program to adopt a responsible attitude and not take any action to exacerbate tension, Reuters reports.

This week, the North announced a plan to fire a long-range rocket that it says is for a space program. It also said it was working to improve its nuclear arsenal.

North Korea is expected to launch an upgraded long-range ballistic missile, which would violate international sanctions, as it prepares to celebrate the anniversary of the founding of its ruling Workers’ Party of Korea on Oct. 10.

“We call on all sides to adopt a responsible attitude toward the peninsula as well as the region of northeast Asia, and never again take any new action that could lead to tensions in the situation there,” Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told an academic forum on the North Korea talks issue, without directly mentioning any country.

While China has been angered by North Korea’s provocative behavior, it has also been critical of military exercises staged by South Korea and the United States for exacerbating tension.

South Korea has been restrained in its response to the North’s latest tough talk though, a sign it does not want to disrupt a fragile improvement in ties after negotiations ended a tense stand-off last month.

“If there is war or chaos on the peninsula, it benefits no one,” Wang added. “If denuclearization issue is not resolved, there is no way the peninsula will be stable, and it will be difficult for northeast Asia to be at peace.”

In 2005, North Korea reached an agreement with the United States, South Korea, China, Japan and Russia to suspend its nuclear program in return for diplomatic rewards and energy assistance.

Numerous efforts to restart the talks have failed after negotiations collapsed following the last round in 2008. At the time, North Korea declared the deal void, after refusing inspections to verify compliance.

North Korea has called for the resumption of the talks, but the United States and South Korea have said it must first show it is serious about ending its nuclear program.

Pentagon warning

David Shear, US assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific security affairs, and Admiral Harry Harris Jr., commander of US Pacific Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee Thursday that North Korea remained a grave security threat to the United States, VoA said.

“I think that China’s influence on North Korea is waning, or China does not have the influence on North Korea that it had in the past. So that is also an area of concern,” Harris said.

Shear said China’s influence on North Korea had lessened, particularly under Kim Jong Un’s rule.

“The Chinese reiterated to me, as they have in the past, that their influence with North Korea is limited, particularly under the new regime,” he said.

Shear cited, as an example, the recent military standoff between the two Koreas.

“It wasn’t clear to us that the Chinese had a lot of contact with North Koreans or were able to significantly influence them,” he said.

Harris described North Korea as the “greatest threat” that the United States is facing in the Pacific.

“I think that you have a leader in North Korea who has nuclear weapons and is seeking the means to miniaturize them and deliver them inter-continentally,” he said.

Seoul readies for reunions

South Korea is moving ahead with preparations for reunions of families separated by the 1950-53 Korean War despite rival North Korea talking about new rocket launches and nuclear tests.

South Korean officials have hinted they will try to proceed with planned Oct. 20-26 reunions at North Korea’s Diamond Mountain resort even if the North launches a satellite before then.

But analysts believe a dramatic provocation from the North could threaten the reunions as it would inevitably stoke military tensions on the divided peninsula.

“Unlike the issue of economic or food aid, the Seoul government will be able to carry on with the family reunions even in the face of a North Korean provocation without worrying about losing public support,” Koh Yu-hwan, a North Korea expert at Dongguk University in Seoul, said Saturday.

However, since the reunions will be held in North Korea, they could be threatened by escalated military tension along the border, which might follow a rocket launch,” he said.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Uh oh........

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://news.usni.org/2015/09/17/ess...int-toward-further-expansions-in-indian-ocean

Essay: China’s Island Building Campaign Could Hint Toward Further Expansions in Indian Ocean

By: Andrew Erickson and Kevin Bond
September 17, 2015 4:50 PM • Updated: September 17, 2015 7:05 PM


China’s creation of military-relevant facilities on its newly-created islands in the South China Sea is a cause for concern for countries in Southeast Asia, and several of its investments in the Indian Ocean are raising more questions over the possibility of China’s first dedicated naval support facility overseas.

As China expands its reach into the Indian Ocean and wraps up construction in Southeast Asia, the same sort of assets that built-up the seven Spratly features that China occupies into artificial islands may decamp for ports in the Indian Ocean, potentially strengthening China’s logistics chain for its naval activities in what its strategists term the Far Seas.

Dredging up ‘Pearls’

Airstrip construction on the Fiery Cross Reef in the South China Sea is pictured in this April 2, 2015.
Airstrip construction on the Fiery Cross Reef in the South China Sea is pictured in this April 2, 2015.

China’s controversial island-building in the South China Sea — especially in the Spratlys — has been the subject of foreign speculation as well as international litigation since it began on an industrial scale more than 18 months ago.

While some foreign sources prematurely asserted that China was already establishing a “String of Pearls” composed of formal military “bases” across the Indian Ocean, China’s extant reclamation efforts have instead constituted a step toward establishing militarily-relevant facilities in the South China Sea. China’s construction work on the reefs in the Spratlys is by no means new, though; in 1988 the PLA had already started stationing troops in huts on bamboo poles in the island chain.

Rather than novelty, the main reasons that China’s construction has only recently made headlines is because of both the sheer scale and speed at which it was executed and the implications it has for neighboring countries. China is also the first country in the area to turn fully submerged reefs into full-fledged man-made “islands,” and is the only one to build at least one high-capacity 3,000 meter airstrip with a taxiway on a feature it controls. Such a runway has already been completed at Fiery Cross Reef, with another well underway on Subi Reef and yet another possibly emerging at Mischief Reef. The last is suggested by grading and tamping by bulldozers in two strips visible in satellite imagery of Mischief’s northwest portion.

The speed at which China was able to create these islands owes itself completely to China’s dredger development over the past decade, and the movements of several of China’s largest dredgers have been tracked in the area. China’s large self-propelled cutter-suction dredger (CSD) Tianjing was spotted at the Union Banks and Tizard Banks in 2013 and early 2014, then at Hughes Reef between 20 March and 3 April 2014 conducting land reclamation. The trailing suction hopper dredger (TSHD) Tiankai was also seen operating at Mischief Reef between 14 January and 16 February of this year, while the CSD Xinhaitun was identified in the same location from 24-28 February. According to a Sina.com report, China’s dredgers were able to expand two different islands in the Spratlys to the point that they could support normal construction in the span of only three months, a concrete manifestation of China’s large and rapid construction capacity. Both Tianjing and Tiankai are operated by China Communications Construction Company (CCCC) Tianjin, though their website makes no mention of any active projects in the South China Sea region. Pictures in an article on the New York Times website also show dozens of Chinese dredgers working simultaneously at Mischief Reef, demonstrating the sheer numbers China has deployed for feature augmentation.

The Pentagon has stated that although these sand castles are of limited military utility due to their smallness and vulnerability, they could be used to provide logistics support to maritime patrols or an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) in the long term. The idea of using these islands as a way to extend patrols fits China’s larger “maritime rights” enforcement strategy in the South China Sea, whereby it prevents other countries from pursuing fishing, energy exploration, construction, or other activities in the area, regardless of whether other countries accept China’s claims or not, thereby asserting effective control. This strategy already seems to be paying dividends for China. As Ding Zhile, Chairman of the Qionghai Tanmen Fisheries Association in Hainan province, relates, when fishermen previously went to the disputed Huangyan Island (Scarborough Shoal), they would always see fishermen from the Philippines, whereas now all they see are Chinese government vessels. Chinese fishermen now feel much safer fishing in disputed waters, Ding adds, as they know Chinese patrol boats are poised to intercede should they encounter trouble.

Beijing’s assertiveness regarding its position in the South China Sea is thus far unwavering, even in the face of international litigation brought against it by Manila and increasing pressure from Washington. The United States has been conducting freedom of navigation exercises in the area in an attempt to ensure that China’s “islands” do not interfere with innocent passage, though Chinese officials have taken the position that freedom of navigation does not extend to warships and planes in territorial waters. Flights near the islands have repeatedly been subject to warnings from China’s navy that they are entering a military zone and should turn back, lending credibility to the possibility of China setting up an ADIZ in the area—as it did over much of the East China Sea in 2013. However, the recent sailing of several Chinese warships within 12 nautical miles of U.S. soil in the Aleutian Islands off Alaska presents a contradiction between China’s words and its actions, and will make it harder for Beijing to object to U.S. naval ships operating closer to China’s “islands” in the Spratlys.

China’s island construction in the Spratlys is not quite finished, with recent photos of Subi Reef showing another 3,000m runway under construction, China’s third on South China Sea features, along with several ships from China’s large dredging fleet. However, this part of construction should wind down soon, with China shifting to fortification of islands thus built, and then these dredgers will leave to find work elsewhere. The question remains of where they might go once their Spratlys building is finished. While China’s own domestic market is impressive, expected to reach between 5 and 7.5 billion cubic meters by sometime this year, the country’s “Maritime Silk Road” program also has a heavy emphasis on port construction, channel dredging, and land reclamation. China’s large construction capacity and new dredger technology will undoubtedly find itself useful along the Maritime Silk Road, expanding ports in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) and beyond through investment both from the Chinese government and China’s State-owned Enterprises (SOEs). This construction and expansion has raised the concern of other countries active in the region, notably India, leading to fears of the eventual implementation of some form of a “String of Pearls” network—however difficult and uncertain it might be for China to attempt this in practice.

China’s Maritime Silk Road

Chinese president Xi Jinxing onboard PLAN destroyer Haikou. News.cn Photo
Chinese president Xi Jinping onboard PLAN destroyer Haikou. News.cn Photo

China’s Maritime Silk Road project, initially proposed by Xi Jinping in 2013, was initially pitched as a way to develop economic ties between ASEAN countries and China. It has expanded to also include countries in south Asia and possibly even east Africa. This policy envisions the investment in and building of large infrastructure projects along the historic Maritime Silk Road from Fujian province, through the Indian Ocean, and over to the Mediterranean, including several high-profile projects within in the IOR.

Since the proposal of this new strategy, China has invested in the expansion and operation of several ports throughout South and Southeast Asia. Projects extend from Pakistan to Sudan to Singapore. Several prominently feature China’s large SOEs, including CCCC, China Merchants Holdings (International) (CMHI), and China State Construction and Engineering Company (CSCEC). CCCC recently integrated its three dredging subsidiaries, CCCC Tianjin, CCCC Shanghai, and CCCC Guangzhou, into one company—CCCC Dredging—which controls more than half of China’s 1 billion+ m3/year dredging capacity. The majority of CCCC’s overseas business is conducted through its overseas subsidiary, China Harbor Engineering Company (CHEC).

CCCC, through CHEC and other branches, has been involved in several large infrastructure projects in the IOR. In Pakistan’s Karachi, CHEC has signed a contract for a container terminal yard and housing construction at Karachi Deepwater Port, which is the fourth continuing project undertaken by CHEC at Karachi. At the port of Qasim, also in Karachi, CHEC carried out maintenance and channel dredging, as well as dredging for a U-turn extension project from 2010-11. It is currently involved in constructing the Qasim International Container Terminal (QICT), which involves the dredging of the waterway to a depth of 16m and will result in an annual capacity of 1.17 million TEU. Outside of Karachi, CHEC was also involved in the deep-water port of Gwadar, reportedly engaging in talks with Port of Singapore Authority (PSA) about taking over operation of the port in 2012 before the port was handed over to China Overseas Port Holdings in 2013. CHEC was involved in the original construction of the port at Gwadar.

CCCC has also funded the $1.4 billion (US) Colombo Port City project in Sri Lanka, which involved the expansion of the port and the services of several dredgers, including CCCC Guangzhou’s 10,000m3 Junhai-02 TSHD. While this project initially came under scrutiny in 2014 for corruption, environmental issues, high interest rates and exclusive rights over air space above the Colombo Port City land, work has continued, and the port is currently under a 35-year build, operate, and transfer agreement between the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) and China Merchants Holdings (International) (CMHI), which owns an 85 percent stake in the port. On the other side of the island, CHEC, along with Chinese partner Synohydro, also constructed Phase I of Hambantota Port. In 2013, Sri Lanka granted CMHI and CCCC operating rights to four berths at Hambantota Port in exchange for an easing of loan conditions for the port’s development. Loan relief was needed, with Phase I costing over $300 million (US) and Phase II, also involving CHEC, totaling around $800 million. Whereas Chinese companies have effective control of over 100 hectares of land in Colombo, all of the land in Hambantota will be owned by SLPA, including Phase II’s artificial island.

The company’s extensive projects also include the $705 million (US) construction of an underwater tunnel below the Karnaphuli river and port expansion at Chittagong in Bangladesh, the design, construction and maintenance of proposed docks and related structures at Tuas South port in Singapore, a $213 million contract for a crude oil terminal and channel dredging project in Myanmar, as well as the construction of a salt pier in Djibouti. In 2013, CHEC also signed a cooperative agreement on the expansion of the Aden Container Terminal in Yemen before internal instability in the country came to a head.

CCCC is far from the only company operating in the IOR, though, as other Chinese SOEs have further augmented regional investments. CMHI holds 23.5% stake in Port de Djibouti S.A., which includes two-thirds of the port’s Doraleh Container Terminal. Construction of the Damerjog livestock port and the multipurpose Doraleh port, with both projects launching in 2013, are being funded by China Merchants Group. CSCEC won the bid for the engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) project of Phase I of the Doraleh Wharf in August of 2014, which includes the construction of a 1,200m long frontage for five multi-purpose deep water berths, a 175m long service berth, and related supporting facilities, all in Djibouti.

On land, Chinese companies also opened a new oil pipeline from the Chinese-built Kyaukpyu port in Myanmar to Kunming, Yunnan province, in early 2015. Additionally, CCCC subsidiaries are involved in building educational infrastructure in Djibouti and three highways in Sri Lanka, although a proposed a railroad line in Myanmar between Kyaukpyu and Kunming has been cancelled.

Ports or Pearls?

Chinese-Navy

Chinese overseas investment is nothing new, and has steadily increased since China’s reform and opening up period. From January-June 2015, the turnover from Chinese overseas contracted projects reached $67.54 billion (US), with a total contract value of China’s contracted projects overseas totaling $1.4485 trillion. While investment in the IOR is partially encouraged by Xi Jinping’s Maritime Silk Road Strategy and related grants and loans, Chinese investment in this region also accompanies increased Chinese investments in other regions, including ports in Piraeus, Greece and the west coast of Africa.

CCCC Second Harbor Consultants Co., Ltd. even signed the contract for a feasibility study project of the port part of Nicaragua Canal, with a contract value of $4.32 million in 2013. The Economist has argued that far from pursuing geopolitical goals, China is simply exploiting lower prices sparked by a downturn in trade between 2007 and 2008, and subscribing to a “supersized vision of the industry in which an elite group of ports caters to a new generation of mega-vessels,” supporting the argument that Chinese interests in these ports are purely commercial. Increased trade, improved architecture, and better trade relations benefit both China and the countries receiving the investment. However, Chinese port investments have generated rumors of Chinese overseas naval support facilities creation. Rumors aside, they are offering China a larger, more reliable logistics network with potential military applications.

Such an emerging network can better support the protection of its citizens overseas and of Chinese overseas interests. Examples include PLAN anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden, the evacuation of Chinese and foreign citizens from Libya and Yemen, and the escorting of Syrian chemical weapons for destruction. Protection of overseas Chinese citizens is increasingly important for China’s government, with the case of Chinese workers being taken hostage by rebel groups in Sudan in 2012 but one of many challenges to which Beijing must respond. These overseas actions require a logistics network that would allow for China’s navy to operate efficiently and effectively for extended periods of time in international waters. Recently, Chinese ships have relied on commercial ports and facilities to support anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden, mainly using the commercial port facilities in Oman’s Salalah, Yemen’s Aden, Djibouti, and Singapore to replenish, refuel, and overhaul. They have also called on Pakistan’s Karachi, the Seychelles, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh’s Chittagong, and Myanmar’s Sittwe for friendly visits or joint drills. China also has active investment projects in all of these locations, as well as several others; these have the potential to expand the number of ports available to the PLAN for resupply during anti-piracy missions and any future peacetime operations. As the crisis in Yemen shows, a diversity of possible access points is necessary in order to ensure constant, reliable support.

China’s infrastructure investment has also revived Indian fears of encirclement, especially as it pertains to the Seychelles, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. In 2011, China’s Minister of Defense responded to a report that China was invited to establish a base in the Seychelles, stating that, “According to escort needs and the needs of other long-range missions, China will consider seeking supply facilities at appropriate harbors in the Seychelles or other countries.” In Pakistan, China’s Yuan-class submarine hull 335 reportedly docked in Karachi for replenishment in May, and in 2014, two PLAN vessels, a submarine and a submarine support vessel, docked at the Chinese-run Colombo South Container Terminal instead of the SLPA berths mandated to host military vessels, raising anxiety in India about a greater Chinese presence in the Indian Ocean. While visits to foreign ports to refuel and replenish are not out of the norm, the manner in which the ships docked in Sri Lanka, India’s strained relationship with Pakistan and China’s failure to deny the possibility of a supply facility in the Seychelles have all increased concern over a renewed Chinese push for a permanent presence in the IOR.

The Seychelles also is not alone in offering China its first possible overseas support facility. Djibouti’s President Guelleh acknowledged in an interview in May that China has been engaged with Djibouti in negotiations for a naval “base” in the small African nation, which already hosts American, Japanese, and French forces, saying that Beijing’s presence would be “welcomed.” In February 2014, Chinese General Chang Wanquan and Djibouti’s Minister of Defense signed a security and defense strategic partnership agreement, under which Djibouti is offering itself as a home port for China’s navy, in exchange for rent and military cooperation to strengthen the Djiboutian armed forces’ operational capacities. When asked about negotiations concerning a Chinese military base in Djibouti, China’s Foreign Ministry responded by neither denying nor confirming reports, instead saying that regional stability is beneficial for all countries and China is willing to increase its contributions towards this goal.

India’s fear of encirclement by China is, in part, a result of the perception that China is constructing a “String of Pearls,” or military-relevant facilities in ports around the Indian subcontinent. India’s fears may be misplaced, though, as the potential locations for a Chinese presence all present strategic vulnerabilities that would make it difficult to covertly construct a base and then protect it from the aircraft and missiles of India or another major power. Instead, what appears more likely, according to an October 2014 NDU report, is the creation of several “dual-use” facilities, or commercial facilities that would provide limited Chinese Naval deployments in the IOR with logistics support, along with a few logistics bases that would house 100-500 Chinese personnel. However, both a “String of Pearls” model and a “dual-use” model require that China maintain a strong enough political and economic relationship with the host country to ensure Chinese access to commercial facilities, and China’s extensive investments in the region have set the foundation for this kind of strong economic and political relationship.

Conclusion

Song-class submarines of China's People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN).
Song-class submarines of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN).

With the large number of Chinese investments and renewed focus in the Indian Ocean, China’s navy is here to stay. Beijing’s push to develop a “Far-seas”-capable navy that can project increasing influence and reach out as necessary to protect its citizens and economic interests overseas requires a strong logistics chain. This likely means the adoption of a “dual-use” strategy whereby PLAN ships use largely commercial facilities for resupply and replenishment with the host nation’s approval, necessitating strong political and economic relationships. Investments from the Chinese government and SOEs have proven that China has laid the foundations for these relationships in several IOR countries. China’s dredger fleet in the South China Sea has proven China’s construction capacity and the speed at which it can bend shorelines to Beijing’s will.

Now that island construction in the Spratlys appears almost complete for now, many dredgers and related machinery recently engaged there may move to the Indian Ocean, where they can accelerate ongoing port construction projects. Should China seek to establish any official logistics “bases” or other facilities capable of providing naval support, China’s dredging fleet has proven in the South China Sea that it has the horsepower to construct the required infrastructure expeditiously. China has the requisite tools and a firm foundation already set to build the supporting infrastructure for a strong logistics chain in the IOR. The idea of at least one Chinese logistics “base” is appearing more and more to be more a question of when and not if. Keep an eye on Djibouti.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thebulletin.org/hiroshima-and-nagasaki-lessons-learned/turkeys-nuclear-contradictions

09/17/2015 - 12:13

Turkey's nuclear contradictions

Mustafa Kibaroglu

My Round Two essay, which argued that Japan's stockpile of plutonium undercuts the disarmament message of the Hibakusha, seems to have been the inspiration for my colleague Akira Kawasaki to discuss "the double standards inherent in Japan's nuclear policies." Here in Round Three, I'll reciprocate by discussing the nuclear double standards of my own nation, Turkey.

Turkey is a member in good standing of the nonproliferation and disarmament regimes—a signatory to instruments such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and a member of initiatives such as the Zangger Committee and the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Moreover, it has long advocated creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. Turkish officials, in view of the Middle East's increasingly dire security situation, portray establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone as a matter of urgent collective responsibility.

But Turkey is also a member of NATO, and in the context of the alliance's security strategy and its principles of solidarity and burden sharing, Ankara has for decades allowed US nuclear weapons to be deployed in Turkish territory. Officials believe these weapons strengthen Washington's commitment to transatlantic security and contribute to the credibility of extended deterrence.

So on one hand, Turkey is committed to a world free of nuclear weapons. On the other hand, Ankara allows US nuclear weapons within its territory and emphasizes that disarmament will require time and patience—indeed, that total disarmament will not be possible any time soon. This contradictory approach diminishes Turkey's stature in the nonproliferation and disarmament regimes—at least in the eyes of Turkey's Middle Eastern neighbors, whose cooperation is indispensable if a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region is to be established. To eliminate the contradiction and establish consistency with Turkey's long-stated principles, Ankara should—through a deliberate review process and close consultations with Washington—begin the process of returning tactical nuclear weapons to the United States.

Turkish officials might argue that sending US weapons back where they belong would undermine Turkey's security. But even as NATO-Russia relations worsen amid developments in Ukraine, imagining a "hot" confrontation between NATO and Russia—let alone a nuclear exchange—is, in the language of the strategist Herman Kahn, "thinking about the unthinkable." Even if such a scenario played out, tactical nuclear weapons would barely play a role!

Moreover, NATO could provide extended deterrence to Turkey through means other than basing nuclear weapons on Turkish soil. For example, US nuclear-armed submarines could temporarily be deployed in the eastern Mediterranean. They could pay port visits to Turkey. Steps such as these would deliver a powerful message to unfriendly countries. For that matter, no nuclear weapons are deployed in 20 of 28 NATO nations, but all 28 are covered under the alliance's nuclear umbrella.

Paradoxically, should nuclear weapons be withdrawn from Turkey, some Western experts might look suspiciously at Turkey’s plans for nuclear power, wondering if Ankara intended to develop nuclear weapons of its own. But Turkey would have no security-based incentive to follow such a course. And embarking on a nuclear weapons adventure would complicate Turkey's already strained relations with the European Union, damaging Turkish ambitions for eventual EU membership.

Other European nations that host US nuclear weapons have engaged in their own debates about whether to retain them. Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Belgium—all have expressed willingness at least to discuss removing US nuclear weapons from the European continent. Some other countries, concerned about their security position vis-à-vis Russia, have resisted the idea (as has Turkey itself). But against such a backdrop, Turkey would not be out of place if it engaged in serious discussions about removing the weapons from its territory.

The Turkish public, meanwhile, isn't favorably disposed toward NATO and the United States these days. As NATO has transformed itself from a collective defense organization with a "hard power" stance into a collective security organization with a "soft power" stance, its powerful image has been diluted. NATO is increasingly seen as primarily serving US interests and maintaining US hegemony. Anti-American sentiment is pervasive in Turkey today, and removing US nuclear weapons from Turkish soil would likely be a popular step.

Hosting US nuclear weapons does little to enhance Turkish security. But it undermines Turkey's nonproliferation and disarmament credentials and rankles the Turkish public. The time has come for Washington to take its weapons home.
 

vestige

Deceased
From several threads today...

It looks like China is all over the globe.

I wish it was like it was when I was a kid...

all the Chinese made were firecrackers and little parasols for ladies' mixed drinks.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/09/iran-saudi-syria.html

Why Iran, Saudi Arabia keep locking horns on Syria
Author Ellie Geranmayeh
Posted September 18, 2015

The opening created in the aftermath of the July 14 nuclear deal between Iran and the six world powers (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany, or P5+1), which could have triggered a diplomatic uplift over Syria, has so far been wasted. Instead, the regional divide over Syria is deepening and major powers have failed to seriously press Riyadh and Tehran to de-escalate their proxy war in Syria. Meanwhile, the costs for the West and the Middle East continue rising as a result of the festering crises in Syria and Iraq.

There had been hopes that this month’s UN General Assembly in New York could provide the platform to actively pursue diplomacy on Syria. But UN Special Envoy Staffan de Mistura has so far been unable to effectively set into motion plans for "de-conflicting" Syria through the formation of a new contact group.

In the absence of buy-in from both Riyadh and Tehran, the Syrian conflict remains deadlocked. This stalemate is borne out of three fundamental areas of divide in their respective maximalist positions.

First, there is critical divergence over the source of instability in the Middle East, and therefore stark contrast in conceptualizing the “enemy.” For Saudi Arabia, Iran is a “nefarious” regional actor that has overstretched its ambitions in the Arab world, bringing with it great instability. In a recent off-the-record conversation with a senior Gulf Arab official, it was clear that Saudi Arabia’s regional priority was focused on limiting Tehran’s orbit of influence in Syria and consequently weakening its stronghold in Lebanon.

In contrast, Iran views the Islamic State (IS) as the most imminent threat to regional security, and more broadly opposes the US military presence in its neighborhood. A senior Iranian official who spoke with Al-Monitor without attribution said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s state security apparatus, Hezbollah and Russian military assistance provide the most effective means to counter these threats. But for Saudi Arabia, IS and Sunni radicalization are a derivative of the alienation being fueled by the activities of Iranian-commanded Shiite militias in Iraq and Tehran’s backing for Assad.

A second hurdle for diplomacy is that Saudi Arabia and Iran cannot reach consensus on the starting point for ending the conflict in Syria. In principle, both agree on the need for the formation of a transitional government, as outlined by the Geneva 1 conference. However, Riyadh sees no place for Assad in this transition. In contrast, a senior Iranian official who recently spoke to Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity said that recent gains made by IS have made it essential that Assad have a role in the transitional government in order to prevent the dissolution of Syria’s security apparatus and a total state collapse.

Since the nuclear deal, European and US officials have privately acknowledged that a shift toward a middle position may be necessary. British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond suggested last week that a time-limited role could be carved out for both Assad and his political circle as part of the transitional government. On Sept. 18, US Secretary of State John Kerry similarly suggested that the United States is open to the possibility of Assad remaining in power for a short duration under a peace settlement. Such proposals have so far been swiftly rebuffed by Damascus. Both Saudi Arabia and Iran are equally unlikely to openly welcome this approach.

There is also sharp divergence on post-Assad Syria. A senior official from a Gulf Cooperation Council state outlined during a recent private meeting that Saudi Arabia would support a central government in Syria that operates under a power-sharing system between the Sunni majority and minority groups. In a separate conversation, a senior Iranian official who spoke without attribution argued that such a system was unworkable, given that Syria’s largely secular society did not lend itself to proportional power-sharing of the kind seen in Lebanon or Iraq. The official further outlined that Iran places little faith in Sunni Islamist factions offering protection for minorities, who have largely fled such opposition-held areas to seek refuge in government-controlled areas.

A third factor stalling diplomacy is the ratcheting up of military support to opposing warring factions in Syria by external powers. Saudi Arabia’s strategic cooperation with Turkey and Qatar this year has strengthened the anti-Assad “Conquest Army” insurgency in the north and south of Syria, delivering severe blows to regime-held territory. According to a senior Gulf Arab official who spoke without attribution, these operations will continue until Assad is substantially weakened, to force a shift of position from Iran and Russia.

In response, Iran and Russia have noticeably increased their military assistance to Damascus. Israel alleges that Iran is orchestrating Hezbollah’s expansion into the Syrian-controlled sector of the Golan Heights to consolidate its future strategic positioning against Israel. Meanwhile, the Pentagon suspects that the recent build-up of Russia’s military presence in Syria’s northwestern Latakia province paves the way for Russia to boost its forward air operating bases in Syria.

Russia’s move has been open to different interpretation. For some, it has raised alarm bells that Assad’s supporters are willing to escalate the conflict at the expense of a diplomatic track. Others see this as an indication that Russia is bolstering the regime in advance of a political settlement and is open to coordination with the West in combating IS. The announcement by the US administration on Sept. 18 that it is prepared to cooperate with Russia on military efforts in Syria lends support to the latter view.

High-level talks are due to take place on Sept. 21 between Iran and Russia to discuss Iran’s “four-point plan” for Syria. A senior Iranian official who spoke on condition of anonymity told Al-Monitor that while the details of the plan were still a work in progress, the first stage aimed to contain and deplete IS, with the second stage focused on reaching consensus over the type of government in control of Damascus and Assad’s future role.

According to an Iranian analyst involved in Track II diplomacy, Tehran is also exploring options to cut a deal with Turkey to exert pressure on IS and remove backing for other Syrian opposition forces. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has faced considerable domestic backlash over his Syria policy, and this could pressure him to find a middle way out of the conflict. Turkey’s foreign policy priority has also seemingly shifted from toppling Assad to fighting the Kurdistan Workers Party.

As with the Iranian nuclear file, resolving the deadlock over Syria is a global security issue that will require top-heavy and persistent diplomacy. The refugee dilemma facing the West is worsened by the regional polarization between Iran and Saudi Arabia that looks set to prolong the Syrian conflict. Since the nuclear deal was struck, the West has been more hesitant than before in siding too closely with either side. This is perhaps the most prudent stance as neither the current Iranian nor Saudi models for Syria can confidently deliver a sustained cease-fire, protection for minorities or an effective anti-IS campaign.

It is clear that a workable political track in Syria can only ultimately emerge as a compromise between the road maps offered by Saudi Arabia and Iran. Given the West’s military fatigue and precedent of failed intervention in Iraq, the most realistic option is for Western powers to commit to intensified diplomacy that pushes Tehran and Riyadh closer to a settlement, rather than becoming bystanders to escalating tensions in Syria.
 

Be Well

may all be well
From several threads today...

It looks like China is all over the globe.

I wish it was like it was when I was a kid...

all the Chinese made were firecrackers and little parasols for ladies' mixed drinks.

LOL, me too. Or the Chinese cloth shoes and embroidered silk stuff. Exotic things.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.military.com/daily-news/...ilitary-growth.html?comp=1198882887570&rank=1

Study: US Needs More Subs to Combat Chinese Military Growth

Stars and Stripes | Sep 21, 2015 | by Wyatt Olson
Comments 106

Faced with China's growing anti-surface ship capacity, the United States should decrease its emphasis on large aircraft carriers in the Pacific and spend more on submarines, space capabilities and ways to make air bases and aircraft less vulnerable, according to a report released earlier this month by Rand Corp.

In the 430-page report, the Santa Monica, Calif.-based think tank analyzed the relative military capabilities of the U.S. and China in certain scenarios based on open-source documents. The analysis makes comparisons using 10 "scorecards" covering air, maritime, space, cyber and nuclear domains.

Capabilities were examined at seven-year intervals, beginning in 1996 and projecting to 2017, considering two "plausible" scenarios of conflict between the two countries: a Chinese invasion of Taiwan and its forcible occupation of the Spratly Islands. China claims sovereignty over both.

This past year, China expanded a number of the tiny Spratly atolls through dredging and has built several runways -- even as the U.S. has denounced those moves as militarizing the archipelago.

"Over the next five to 15 years, if U.S. and (People's Liberation Army) forces remain on roughly current trajectories, Asia will witness a progressively receding frontier of U.S. dominance," the report said.

Although China is not close to catching up to the U.S. in terms of overall military power, that's not necessary for it to control the region at its doorstep, the report said.

"No one wants war; nobody expects war," said Eric Heginbotham, lead author and political scientist at Rand, when explaining the analysis' purpose. "But I think the balance of power affects calculations on both sides. Balance of power has a major impact on the probability of war."

Military dominance by the U.S., however, does not necessarily equate to deterrence in moments of instability when two nations could potentially consider the incentives for a first strike, he said.

"If you have a highly offensive force or set of weapons that are very forward deployed -- sort of on the periphery of China -- but not resilient to attack, then in a crisis, both sides could have incentives to strike first," Heginbotham said. Attempting to restore U.S. dominance without thinking about the impact on crisis stability could inadvertently undermine the value of that supremacy, he said.

Several broad factors complicate U.S. efforts to maintain military capabilities relative to China.

Since 1996, China's ability to threaten the U.S. Navy surface fleet "at significant ranges from the mainland" has burgeoned, the report said.

China's anti-surface capability has grown with the development of a long-range surveillance system to track surface ships at long distances, deployment of sophisticated anti-ship cruise missiles, acquisition of strike aircraft and ships with long ranges, and the use of larger, quieter submarines armed with cruise missiles.

"The impact of Chinese threats to carriers will likely be greatest during the first stages of conflict," the report said.

The U.S. has means to mitigate those anti-surface capabilities, such as anti-missile systems and air patrols from aircraft carriers; however, some of those measures diminish the U.S. military's ability to project power, the report said.

"Holding carriers farther from the scene of the main battle area would entail longer transit times for combat aircraft, fewer aircraft on station and an increased demand for U.S. Air Force tanker support," the report said.

In the event of a Taiwan conflict in 2017, U.S. carriers would be at significant risk, and in a Spratly Islands conflict, they would also be at risk, but to a lesser degree, the analysis concluded.

The "growing threat to U.S. surface ships" -- as well as the vulnerability of U.S. air bases to Chinese missiles -- "is arguably the most serious challenge facing U.S. forces in any potential China scenario," the report said.

China's ongoing modernization of air and submarine capabilities that pose a more "certain" threat to carrier strike groups, the report said. China's modern diesel sub numbers rose from two in 1996 to 37 this year, and all but four are armed with cruise missiles and torpedoes.

Rand modeling found that "the effectiveness of the Chinese submarine fleet (as measured by the number of attack opportunities it might achieve against carriers) rose by roughly an order of magnitude between 1996 and 2010, and that it will continue to improve through 2017."

"Chinese submarines would present a credible threat to U.S. surface ships in a conflict over Taiwan or the South China Sea," the report said.

Meanwhile, the growing size and sophistication of Chinese ballistic and cruise missile forces puts all U.S. regional air bases at risk, Heginbotham said. And China's force of modern fighters and other attack aircraft could deploy quickly and en masse to a geographically close conflict involving Taiwan, he said.

There are options for the U.S. to improve resiliency, such as finding new basing options farther from China, making the force more survivable, emphasizing area-denial capacity and ensuring counterattack capability, Heginbotham said.

"All of that could contribute to deterrence and defense and not result in greater crisis instability," he said.


Related Topics
Navy, People's Republic of China, Ships and Submarines
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/the-...of-navigation-patrols-in-the-south-china-sea/

The Truth About US Freedom of Navigation Patrols in the South China Sea

US patrols within 12 nautical miles of China’s artificial islands have a complicated legal basis.

By Shannon Tiezzi
September 22, 2015

14 Shares
0 Comments

Last week, the U.S. Senate’s Armed Services Committee held a hearing on Washington’s “Maritime Security Strategy in the Asia-Pacific Region.” The committee heard from Admiral Harry Harris, Jr., commander of U.S. Pacific Command, and David Shear, the assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific security affairs. The discussion included a particular focus on the question of U.S. freedom of navigation (FON) patrols within 12 nautical miles of China’s artificial islands – leading to headlines like this, from Associated Press: “McCain: U.S. should ignore China’s claims in South China Sea.”

That headline seems designed to elicit groans from Asia analysts. In fact, media coverage in general of the Senate hearing – and, more broadly, the question of FON patrols in the South China Sea – conflated the issue of challenging sovereignty and asserting freedom of navigation. That misconception comes because the actual point being made by FON patrols hinges on arcane details of international law.

If United States decides to conduct these patrols, it will not be challenging China’s sovereignty claims over the Spratly Islands writ large. The U.S. has repeatedly state that it takes no position on the sovereignty of the disputed features in the South China Sea. Rather, by conducting patrols within 12 nm of some of China’s artificial islands, Washington would be providing a public assertion of the American interpretation of international law (specifically the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea) regarding freedom of navigation. We’ll need a primer on applicable UNCLOS sections to understand what’s really at stake in the case of China’s artificial islands and U.S. FON patrols.

Within a territorial sea, defined by UNCLOS as 12 nautical miles, ships from all states enjoy the right of innocent passage. But ships must meet certain conditions to conduct “innocent passage.” UNCLOS provides a list of activities “considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State” and thus not included in the right of innocent passage – including (most pertinently for U.S. operations in the South China Sea) “any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the defense or security of the coastal State” (Part II, Section 3, Article 19).

That means states are not guaranteed the right to conduct surveillance within another state’s territorial sea. So the question of whether a certain feature generates a territorial sea is of crucial importance to determining whether the U.S. Navy can send surveillance ships and/or aircraft to conduct surveillance within 12 nautical miles of that feature.

That question is answered by Part II, Section 2, Article 13 of UNCLOS, which reads, in full:

1. A low-tide elevation is a naturally formed area of land which is surrounded by and above water at low tide but submerged at high tide. Where a low-tide elevation is situated wholly or partly at a distance not exceeding the breadth of the territorial sea from the mainland or an island, the low-water line on that elevation may be used as the baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea.

2. Where a low-tide elevation is wholly situated at a distance exceeding the breadth of the territorial sea from the mainland or an island, it has no territorial sea of its own. [emphasis added]

Effectively, any feature that is only above water at low tide is a low-tide elevation (LTE) and is not entitled to a territorial sea, unless it itself is part of another feature’s territorial sea (e.g., a state’s coastline or an island). In fact, LTEs are not subject to sovereignty claims at all, unless they themselves are located within an existing territorial sea. Thus under UNCLOS a state claiming an LTE has no rationale for denying even military ships the right to approach within 12 nautical miles.

UNCLOS also specifies that “artificial islands, installations and structures do not possess the status of islands. They have no territorial sea of their own, and their presence does not affect the delimitation of the territorial sea, the exclusive economic zone or the continental shelf” (Part V, Article 60). Rather than generating a territorial sea, artificial islands are allowed a “safety zone” of no more than 500 meters – a little over a quarter of a nautical mile.

So now we have a well-established body of international law that directly relates to China’s artificial islands: military vessels are only explicitly banned from conducting surveillance within another state’s 12 nm territorial sea; LTEs generate no territorial sea, nor do artificial islands; therefore, there is no legal reason why the U.S. Navy cannot operated with 12 nm of artificial islands that were formerly LTEs.

This last point is often overlooked as China has conducted land reclamation on seven features (Cuarteron, Fiery Cross, Gaven, Hughes, Johnson, Mischief, and Subi Reefs), some of which qualified for a territorial sea even before China’s reclamation efforts. There is no consensus on the states of the features, but the Philippine South China Sea claim against China in the Permanent Court of Arbitration listed three of the seven features (Mischief, Subi, and Gaven Reefs) as LTEs.

U.S. officials originally told the Wall Street Journal that the U.S. considers some the features to have been LTEs and others to have a claim to a territorial sea; the FON patrols would only go within 12 nm of those features that were LTEs before China’s reclamation and construction. In other words, the United States is not challenging China’s sovereignty over the Spratly features; it is challenging the status of those features under international law. A patrol within 12 nm of Mischief, Subi, or Gaven Reef would signal that, despite recent construction, Washington considers these to still be LTEs under UNCLOS with no claim to a territorial sea.

That’s the very narrow sense in which the U.S. would be challenging China’s sovereignty by conducting FON patrols. It does not mean Washington is declaring China’s sovereignty claims in the Spratlys as invalid, merely that the United States does not recognize territorial claims originating from LTEs, even when the feature in question has been artificially enlarged so as to be permanently above the high tide line.

The importance of setting that precedent is obvious: if any state could dredge up sand to artificially create its own 12 nm territorial zone, it could have serious repercussions for freedom of navigation, particularly in the South China Sea. According to the Digital Gazeeter of the Spratly Islands, there are many other LTEs occupied by China’s rival claimants, including Vietnam (Alison Reef, Central Reef, and Cornwallis South Reef) Malaysia (Ardasier Reef and Dallas Reef), and the Philippines (Irving Reef). If the precedent is set that artificially enlarging LTEs grants them a territorial sea, we may see a construction boom in the already-contentious area.

Keep this all in mind the next time an article suggests that the U.S. plans to challenge China’s sovereignty over the Spratlys through FON patrols. It’s not strictly false, but the truth behind the headline is far more complicated.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/india-and-the-syrian-civil-war/

India and the Syrian Civil War

How a potential permanent UNSC member approached the crisis in Syria.

By Kabir Taneja
September 21, 2015

560 Shares
8 Comments

After four years of neglect, Syria is once again getting mainstream attention in India. Pictures of Aylan Kurdi, the refugee crisis in Europe, and the rise of ISIS have given Syria considerable prominence in Indian public discourse in recent weeks,

India’s stance on the Syrian crisis has been subtle yet expected. New Delhi under the previous government of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) maintained its opposition to external military intervention in Syria, and asked for all parties involved to engage in dialogue for a political solution.

“There can be no military solution to this conflict,” said an Indian Ministry of External Affairs statement in 2013.

India and Syria have historically maintained cordial relations, formed during India’s post-independence outreach to the Arab world and beyond as part of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) that then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru championed along with then Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser.

Nehru visited Syria in 1957 and 1960, hoping to consolidate India’s regional interests with the Ba’ath Party after then Syrian President Shukri al-Quwatli had visited Delhi as part of his outreach to the Eastern bloc and NAM states. The local press heralded Nehru’s arrival in Syria with much gusto, writing about more than 10,000 people at the airport chanting “welcome to the hero of world peace” and “long live the leader of Asia,” as described by researcher Dr Rami Ginat in his works.

Later, after much internal turmoil, new Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad visited India in 1978 and 1983. More recently, former Indian Prime Minister travelled to Damascus in 2003, while Bashar Al-Assad reciprocated with a trip to New Delhi in 2008. In between, high-level delegation visits were frequent, with former Indian President Pratibha Patil visiting Syria in 2010.

It is safe to say that the Indian polity has maintained good relations with the Assad family that has presided over the country since 1971 as head of the Syrian Regional Branch of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party. But as the conflict in Syria began to emerge in 2011, during the period now largely known as the Arab Spring, global calls for the ouster of the Syrian regime multiplied. To stay in power, Assad resorted to unprecedented violence against his own people, including the use of chemical weapons.

Reeling under sanctions but surviving thanks to weak and at best ad-hoc policies applied by the Western powers, and with the help of allies such as Russia and Iran, and to some extent China, Assad has managed to retain control in Damascus. Moscow, which has long-standing political and military ties with Syria, sees the country as a critical ally and market in the region. During the buildup to the Geneva II conference to discuss solutions to the crisis in 2013, Russia called for a role to be given to India. India’s then Foreign Minister, Salman Khurshid, attended the negotiations and maintained India’s stance, which was in line with that of Russia and China.

Speaking in Geneva, Khurshid said, “India has important stakes in the Syrian conflict. It shares deep historical and civilisational bonds with the wider West Asia and the Gulf region. We have substantial interests in the fields of trade and investment, diaspora, remittances, energy and security. Any spillover from the Syrian conflict has the potential of impacting negatively on our larger interests.” Together with its consortium partners, China among them, India had to abandon its oil investments in Syria due to security concerns in 2013.

The same year, the Syrian Ambassador to India, Riad Kammel Abbas, referred to India as a friend of Syria, and said Damascus would like to see India take part in the negotiations. In a more recent interview with The Hindu newspaper, Abbas reiterated that India’s stance of not joining the chorus for regime change was appreciated. “Frankly speaking, I have already said this that if everybody has done what India has done; we wouldn’t have any problem in Syria. And [Prime Minister Narendra] Modi has made it very clear that there’s no bad terrorism and good terrorism. There’s only terrorism,” he said.

Consequently, India’s position on the Assad government leans more towards support than strict neutrality. While no means an absolute show of encouragement for Assad to remain in power, by continuing to maintain cordial relations during a civil war in which the president has been accused of using chemical weapons and barrel bombs on civilians perhaps does not augur very well for the standing of the world’s largest democracy. India’s policy on Syria could be seen as practical or realist, but even though it might make sense in the world of realpolitik, its stance could perhaps become hard to justify if its policies come under any sort of questioning in international forums.

For example, in the midst of the Syrian crisis, India has maintained a diplomatic presence in Damascus with its embassy remaining open under a chargé d’affaires. It has even organized yoga classes in the besieged country, courtesy of a Delhi Police officer tasked with protecting the Indian embassy who is reportedly also a yoga hobbyist. Currently, however, India has no plans to appoint a new ambassador to Syria, deeming the situation as being too dangerous.

Meanwhile, in May 2014, a business delegation mounted by the Delhi based commerce chamber ASSOCHAM and led by Cosmos Group visited Damascus to discuss trade opportunities. During this visit the Syrian government also highlighted India’s potential role in the rebuilding process after the civil war ends, a prospect that at present is nowhere in sight.

Recent reports of Russian troops fighting in Syria alongside combatants loyal to the Assad regime could be a test for India’s opposition to any kind of military intervention. If Russian troops are indeed actively taking part in Syria, would New Delhi rebuke Moscow, its oft-cited “all-weather ally”?

India continues to make a strong case for its UNSC candidacy and negotiations for the reforms that would required could begin soon.

As India works towards a UNSC seat with full veto powers, it is perhaps the right time for the country to take a few steps back from its traditional approach to foreign policy, which hides behind the Non-Aligned Movement ideal, an idea that has passed its expiry date. Both economically and politically, taking decisive stands on global affairs should come naturally, and this of course still includes practicing ambiguity where it is needed for the national interest. However, India needs a deep-sea shift in its thinking to coincide with the seriousness with which it is looking to change the UNSC itself.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/why-opacity-is-asias-biggest-military-threat/

Why Opacity Is Asia's Biggest Military Threat

The region’s lack of transparency increases the risk of conflict everywhere.

By Van Jackson
September 19, 2015

Asia has an opacity problem that increases the risk of conflict virtually everywhere. Whatever U.S. military and diplomatic solutions are brought to bear in the region as part of the ongoing policy of rebalancing to Asia, they should be guided by a simple heuristic: reduce, or at least don’t exacerbate, the opacity of a dimly lit environment.

It’s well understood that trust among Asian states is historically absent, while outstanding disputes among them are ever present. At the same time, military modernization is a recurring theme in even the poorest Asian governments, and in many cases military spending is on the rise.

For Asian states, the structure of the regional security environment stunts cooperation, exacerbates political misunderstandings, tempts military accidents, and incidentally creates cover for surreptitious forms of coercion by opportunistic or expansionist states. Central to all of these problems is opacity, whether last month’s mini-crisis between North and South Korea, Japanese fighter jets scrambling to protect Senkaku island airspace, or China’s many gray zone challenges to the status quo in the South China Sea.

In every instance of potential conflict, there exist at least two types of opacity.

One is operational; where forces are located, what they are doing, and what they are trying to signal is often in question, leaving decision-makers having to make judgment calls with imperfect information. Is that a reconnaissance drone, or is it armed? Is China blocking Filipino resupply ships with a Coast Guard vessel or a PLA Navy vessel? Is its fire-control radar about to fire, or simply communicating a warning signal by locking on to a Japanese target?

The other type of opacity is strategic; the intentions underlying the decision-making of others is often unclear. Is North Korea developing nuclear weapons as part of an assured retaliation strategy? Is China a revisionist state willing to use military force to upend the regional status quo?

Both types of ambiguity are connected in the sense that reducing opacity about the operational level can also reduce it about the strategic level. The conceptual solution to a problem of opacity is thus transparency.

This may seem counter-intuitive to advocates of deterrence. In the literature on coercion, opacity is built into what’s supposed to be effective manipulation of an opponent. Thomas Schelling famously wrote of the “threat that leaves something to chance” as a means of preventing an opponent from taking some proscribed action. Strategic ambiguity has long been the de facto U.S. approach to its commitment to Taiwan. And North Korea’s strategy of brinkmanship during crises has depended on exploiting U.S. and South Korean risk aversion to conflict; even though the likelihood of North Korea launching an all-out war has been incredibly low, the lack of 100 percent certainty about the possibility strengthens North Korean deterrence (at least in theory).

But coercion everywhere and at all times isn’t a very compelling basis for U.S. Asia policy; even in the unlikely event it’s successful it would create an environment in which the slightest perception of U.S. weakness or disadvantage could lead to a collapse of regional order. There are times when opacity of one type or another can serve U.S. purposes, but it inevitably entails more risk than U.S. policymakers are usually willing to bear, making it a tenuous foundation for U.S. strategy toward Asia.

By contrast, and as a general rule, transparency measures stand to benefit the United States and regional stability in several ways.

The first is that military adventurism and outright aggression have fewer opportunities to flourish in a more transparent environment. Even North Korea doesn’t want to be seen as an aggressor, and tends to tailor its provocative behavior in ways that allow it to adopt a reactive and defensive frame for interpreting its actions. Second, if we assume that nobody actively seeks conflict—which is itself debatable—then the most likely paths to conflict all involve inaccurate judgments or misunderstandings. In a hypothetical environment of perfect information, the probability of inaccurate judgments by definition approaches zero. Third, even if transparency measures reveal a state to be aggressive, a more common view of what’s happening where and when may facilitate a convergence of threat perceptions among neighbors over time, making it easier for security-seeking states to band together against aggression, even if just diplomatically.

The question facing policymakers is simply how to render Asia more operationally and strategically transparent, and when to make exceptions. In this regard, non-state initiatives leveraging satellite imagery—38 North and the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, for example—nudge the region in the right direction. So does the Department of Defense’s recent Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Strategy, which emphasizes enhanced maritime domain awareness among U.S. allies and partners.

Transparency is no panacea, and opacity isn’t always the same thing as uncertainty, a distinctly vexing problem in international relations. Moreover, how the United States and others go about the task of reducing regional opacity matters; U.S. unilateral transparency measures without reciprocity may simple render the United States more vulnerable without changing the regional environment. But I find some modest cause for optimism as long as transparency remains a guiding principle of U.S. policy.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/will-china-and-russias-partnership-in-central-asia-last/

Will China and Russia’s Partnership in Central Asia Last?

Beijing should approach its partnership with Moscow in Central Asia with a degree of caution.

By Tao Wang and Rachel Yampolsky
September 21, 2015

665 Shares
38 Comments

Leaders in Beijing and Moscow have both been making a concerted effort to extend their connections with Central Asia in recent months. In July, Russia hosted the latest BRICS summit as well as a gathering of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Ufa near the border with Kazakhstan. Earlier, in May, on his fifth visit to Russia since becoming president, President Xi Jinping reached an agreement with President Vladimir Putin to coordinate China’s One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative with the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) in Central Asia. While both countries have clear economic incentives to cooperate in this region in the short term, they will need to overcome a number of hurdles to set their partnership on a path that can be sustained further into the future.

In the past year, Russia and its Central Asian neighbors have faced sobering economic challenges. Russia’s GDP contracted by almost 2 percent in the first quarter of 2015, at least in part as a result of the falling price of oil and Western sanctions, and the ruble lost nearly half of its value against the dollar in August 2015 compared with one year earlier. The impact was felt in Central Asia too, given its close economic interdependence with Russia. Both the oil- and gas-exporting nations of Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan saw declining oil and gas revenues, currency devaluation, and reduced gas exports to Russia, a market that is now oversupplied given weakened European demand. Remittances are another source of income suffering strong disruption – the World Bank has estimated that remittances of some Central Asian countries have fallen by as much as 30 percent since last year. This has a dramatic impact when seen in the context of the share remittances that make up of these countries’ GDP, half in the case of Tajikistan.

Meanwhile, China’s trade with the region reached $50 billion in 2014, a figure that exceeded that of Russia for the first time. According to calculations by the authors based on figures from the Heritage Foundation, total Chinese investment in the region reached $30.5 billion between 2005 and the first half of 2014, including an extensive network of oil and gas pipelines, oil and gas exploration, power plant financing, and even electric grid construction in Tajikistan. The China-Central Asia network of pipelines could supply up to 55 billion cubic meters of natural gas to China every year, or more than half of China’s total gas imports.

Central Asia is critical in China’s OBOR initiative, because it holds the immediate entrance of China’s Silk Road Economic Belt, and is itself a significant destination of Chinese investment. But China’s huge investment, especially those in oil and gas in Central Asia, is far from risk free. Russia’s longstanding influence in this region offers the potential to build a mutually beneficial partnership among China, Russia, and the countries of Central Asia. Having Russia in the partnership is especially valuable in securing existing regimes in these former Soviet Union countries, safeguarding China’s long-term investment, a lesson learnt from setbacks in places like Myanmar and Libya. Making it a lasting framework that aligns the political and economic interests of all three parties, however, may prove to be a difficult process.

First, Beijing and Moscow may not share the same vision for Central Asia or for their partnership. At the core of Putin’s ideology the partnership with China is a brand of anti-Western rhetoric, which was particularly acute during the Sino-Russian gas deal and negotiations over the Power of Siberia (POS) natural gas pipeline route to deliver gas from Chayanda oil and gas field to Khabarovsk with a connection to North China. Along with China and Central Asia, Russia is eager to promote the EEU as an alternative to the West, even more so now with the prospect of channeling Chinese capital. But that may not be in line with China’s official position on OBOR and the role of Central Asia. Despite the tensions between the United States and China, China is far from comfortable being in direct confrontation with the United States and the West, and prefers to stay behind Russia’s waving hammer. More importantly, Russian sees Central Asia its own backyard, to be defended against Western expansion in favor of keeping the existing order. China, by contrast, sees Central Asia as a strategic corridor of its OBOR initiative linking the Europe, sharing prosperity and conveying inclusiveness in a changing international order.

Another challenge stems from the geopolitical circumstances under which this partnership was formed. The Ukraine crisis and Russia’s economic difficulty gave China an upper hand in the POS gas route negotiations and in its bid to access Russia’s upstream energy resources. The partnership is formed at a time of Russian economic weakness, and could become a source of resentment. China’s economic support comes into play when Russia’s economy is in peril, but it may not be fully appreciated by the Russian oil industry and politicians once the hard days pass. CNPC, China’s state-owned oil and gas firm, certainly still remembers how, about a decade ago, its two attempts to purchase Russian oil assets and the long expected Angarsk-Daqing oil pipeline agreement went south due to the opposition of Russian politicians and the Russian government’s swing game between China and Japan.

The potential competition for natural gas market share in China between Russia and Central Asia is another potential risk to sustaining this partnership over the long term. Given declining European demand for natural gas since the Ukraine crisis, Russia is inclined to deliver gas from the proposed west Altai route instead of the high profile east POS route, so its surplus production in existing West Siberian fields could be sold, but this would be in direct competition with existing Central Asia-China gas imports. The POS route, awaiting new field development in East Siberia, is what China prefers but is more difficult in terms of construction and operation. However, once completed it could supply exclusively to the northeast Chinese market and even the Far East market of Japan and South Korea without competition from Central Asia. China is already facing a short-term oversupply of natural gas due to slowing growth in demand. Even though many are still confident about China’s long-term demand for natural gas, direct competition between Central Asia and Russia on the western route may not be in the best interests of the partnership.

Finally, there are risks in further engaging Central Asia. This region has enormous security challenges, among them narcotics trafficking, religious radicalism, weak governance, and the threat of terrorism. There are also growing concerns over the successors to the aging leaders of the region’s authoritative regimes. Russia has been the key security partner for these post-Soviet states, but China risks becoming more directly involved politically with a continued deepening of economic relationships. In the context of a continued economic contraction, Russia may have to focus more on securing its own interests and domestic security without regard to those of China. After the Ukraine crisis, how much room Russia still has in the international community to wield its power in Central Asia when needed is questionable. China would do well to approach the partnership with a bit more caution and less fantasy.

Wang Tao is a resident scholar at the Carnegie*–Tsinghua Center for Global Policy, where Rachel Yampolsky was a research assistant during the summer of 2015.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.worldcrunch.com/opinion-...se-choice-of-stability-or-democracy/c7s19634/

Mexico, The False Choice Of Stability Or Democracy

The Mexican government's recent actions suggest the ruling party yearns for the days when it governed unchallenged through cronyism. But order comes at a price.

Luis Rubio (2015-09-21)

OpEd-

MEXICO CITY — Amid the uncertainties of modern Mexico, many must miss the days when one party ran the country: for 70 years, everything — and everyone — seemed to know its proper place.

That was 20th-century Mexico, governed by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which held all the reins both public and hidden, until its grip was loosened in the 2000 presidential elections.

The rules were clear before, values consensual and the risks, known to all. Those who were in the system knew there were ups and downs, but they soldiered on, loyal to their superiors and hopeful of receiving their political rewards one day. And that created an order respected practically by all. Dissent led nowhere.

The old PRI system didn't rest on the laws or lawfulness, but rather had its own foundations in a web of unwritten rules. These were, simply put, loyalty to the president and respect for outward forms. And these, curiously, were factors in the stability that characterized Mexico for decades.

While this was not what the forgers of modern Mexico envisioned in the early 20th century (President Plutarco Elías Calles called for a "country of institutions" in 1928, speaking at the formation of the National Revolutionary Party, the PRI's precursor), the new regime did impose order and stability after a decade of revolutionary turmoil. The modern-day voter may find these woefullly inadequate, but for a time Mexico enjoyed stability, in stark contrast with most other countries in the region.

José López Portillo, president between 1976 and 1982, once said he was the last of the revolutionary presidents. The man blamed for the economic crisis of 1982 broke all the system's rules and with that ushered the country into the age of economic failure. Until the 1980s, all the presidents that followed the 1910 revolution had either been soldiers or lawyers. Attachment to established patterns, repeatable and predictable as they were, created an implicit bottom line on which society could rely.

So while individual politicians rose and fell, society knew there was a minimum level, an order, from which they never deviated. Some presidents might veer to the Left and others to the Right, but none abandoned the established canons of their time. Attachment to established forms furthermore generated business confidence, and the presidents knew that was a crucial ingredient of stability. Everyone played at the game.

Ushering in instability

The time of crises began in 1976, and ended (one hopes) in 1995. In those 20 years, the country lost the historic stability that was a source of economic confidence and viability. This was partly due to transitions happening abroad, but the greatest "change" impacting Mexico was the system's refusal to advance. Doggedly attached to the past, it would not adapt to transformations happening inside Mexico (sometimes blatantly, when it crushed the 1968 student protests) and in the global economy.

In the 1980s, the technocrats came to the rescue, and they had new criteria and new ways that clashed with the old system. The economy was liberalized, state-affiliated bodies were privatized and new economic management forms were adopted. These were more attached to international norms than to history, though unfortunately, things were still not clear or simple. A certain margin was left to allow for personal favors, which made it impossible for the country to become fully modern.

Yet it was a time when the economy, and the blessed "forms," were changing, and that meant in effect the economy's partial liberalization. While there have been some good years of growth, instability has been our economic leitmotif since the late 1980s.

Mexico has so far failed to fully abandon the past, and is therefore failing to build a different future. And nowhere is this infirmity so starkly illustrated as in the present PRI government of Enrique Peña Nieto, whose maxim seems to be, forget the future and let's go back to the good old days of political primitivism.

Order is necessary for a nation's progress. Without it, everything is illusory because the propensity toward disorder and instability is permanent. Clearly the country doesn't need a top-down system of "order and progress" dictated by the state, but instead institutional mechanisms within its precarious democracy to assure that minimum level of stability and trust the old system enjoyed.

The world today is quite unlike the mid-20th century, but one thing is constant: People need to trust their government. Even Mao and the Lenin understood that. But as the Mexican peso slides in value these days, our government seems not to.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Oh yeah, this is going to chill out Putin......NOT

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150922/eu--ukraine-nato-0e41db78d2.html

Ukraine leader expresses wish to join NATO

Sep 22, 6:43 AM (ET)
By EFREM LUKATSKY

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) — Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on Tuesday told the country's security council that staying out of the NATO alliance was a "criminal" policy that his government is ready to reverse.

More than 8,000 people have died in Ukraine's fight against separatist rebels in the east since April 2014. Russia backed the rebels, fearing that the pro-Western course of the new Kiev government would make it a NATO ally.

"The decision on the non-alliance policy which was announced by the previous government is criminal in terms of security and strategic interests of our state," Poroshenko said, citing an opinion poll showing 60 percent of Ukrainians supporting potential NATO membership.

Poroshenko, who chaired the security council with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg in attendance, said any decision to join the alliance will be subject to a popular vote.

Before the February 2014 uprising which toppled pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych, the majority of Ukrainians opposed joining NATO, but many now see the alliance as their best defense from a foreign military threat.

NATO officials say Ukraine needs to enact political, economic, social and military reforms to be considered for membership.

Stoltenberg told the meeting on Tuesday that "Ukraine can rely on NATO" and that "NATO provides Ukraine with political and practical support." He lauded the Kiev government for sticking to the Minsk cease-fire agreements and called on Moscow and the rebels to respect the deal.

Stoltenberg's visit comes less than two weeks before a summit in Paris where leaders of Ukraine, Russia, Germany and France will be discussing a political solution to the conflict.

NATO has expressed firm support for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia, but alliance member states, including the U.S., have declined its request for offensive weapons.

---

John-Thor Dahlburg in Brussels and Nataliya Vasilyeva in Moscow contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150922/ml--yemen-stalled_advance-5cc250676d.html

Yemeni pro-government forces stall in push toward capital

Sep 22, 3:01 AM (ET)
By AHMED AL-HAJ

(AP) In this Monday, Sept. 14, 2015 file photo, Yemeni soldiers loyal to exiled...
Full Image

SANAA, Yemen (AP) — In Yemen's Marib province, a key battleground in the fighting against Shiite rebels, frustration is growing in the ranks of troops backing the country's president-in-exile after more than a week without gains on the ground.

The pro-government forces' advance on the capital, Sanaa, has stalled as Iran-backed Houthi rebels put up heavy resistance and despite an airstrikes' campaign by a Saudi-led coalition that has relentlessly pounded rebel positions.

The difficulty highlights the stark challenges facing the diverse set of fighters that make up the pro-government forces as they set their goal on Sanaa, about 165 kilometers (103 miles) to the west of Marib.

Ground commanders from the Yemeni army complain of poor logistical coordination, along with slow communication and decision-making between the Marib front-lines and the military leadership in Riyadh. Troops have grown nervous, commanders say, after two incidents when Saudi-led airstrikes hit and killed allied fighters.

(AP) In this Monday, Sept. 14, 2015 file photo, Yemeni fighters allied with the...
Full Image

In Yemen's war, the coalition against the Houthis is a shaky combination of local and tribal militias, southern separatists, Sunni Islamic militants and army units loyal to President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi.

The ground forces are backed by a coalition of Gulf countries — led by Saudi Arabia and supported by the United States — that has been targeting the rebels with airstrikes since March. The Houthis, in turn, are supported by military units loyal to the former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, and alliance that enabled them to take over Sanaa a year ago, overrun much of the country and drive Hadi into self-imposed exile in Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi-led coalition has been training thousands of pro-government troops and working with some Yemeni tribesmen. It has also brought in additional weapons, armor and trained personnel to the fight.

Initially, the pro-government troops' fast push north from the port city of Aden, where they routed the rebels earlier this summer, signaled success.

But Marib appears tougher to take.

(AP) In this Thursday, Sept. 17, 2015 file photo, a shopkeeper and other Yemeni...
Full Image

The strategic province, home to Yemen's oil fields, shares a border with Saudi Arabia and many local tribes have had decades-long alliances with the kingdom. Thousands of Emirati and other coalition troops are on the ground, to help the pro-government forces. The provincial capital, Marib city, is controlled by pro-Hadi forces and the province's deputy governor, Abdul Rab Ali, estimates that 80 percent of the sprawling, mostly desert province is under their control, with the rebels contesting the rest.

"The real thing blocking the advance is our fear of raids from coalition planes — shelling or launching mistaken strikes against our forces," said Brig. Gen. Mubarak al-Abab, a field commander for the Yemeni army.

"This has happened in error twice or more and killed a number of our forces ... and the reason is that information or coordinates arrived to the coalition late," he told The Associated Press.

On Saturday, a coalition airstrike killed 13 anti-Houthi fighters by mistake and damaged military equipment in Marib, other military officials said. Another friendly-fire airstrike last week also killed multiple fighters, though the officials could not provide an exact figure.

Fighters also face difficult terrain, with rugged mountains obstructing a westward push on Sanaa. Also, the Houthis and their allies have worked for months to make the terrain even less hospitable to the enemy, building fortifications, digging ditches, and planting land mines, security officials and independent tribesmen said.

(AP) In this Monday, Sept. 14, 2015 file photo, Yemeni Gen. Abd al-Rab Qassim...
Full Image

Emirati Brig. Gen. Ali Saif al-Kaabi, who is with UAE troops in Marib, cited land mines as a major threat to the advancing forces and compared the province's mountainous terrain to that of Afghanistan. An Emirati soldier was killed in a land mine blast last week, the country's 54th fatality this month.

Yemeni Lt. Gen. Sherif Hussein said the various anti-Houthi forces are only loosely coordinated. There is unified decision-making, he said, but the groups on the ground fight independently.

As a result, the battlefield is disorganized, said Col. Ahmed Salem, another pro-Hadi officer. "If the situation continues this way on the front lines, then it won't be possible to achieve victory on the ground," he said.

Yemeni troops loyal to Hadi and allied tribal fighters were seen visiting a command post at the primarily Emirati coalition base near the town of Saffer in Marib during a visit by the AP last week.

The tribesmen chatted while seated in a circle on the ground with military commanders from the United Arab Emirates, surrounded by Oshkosh armored vehicles and other Emirati hardware. The pro-Hadi troops, stationed at a nearby base, maintain checkpoints and the occasional tank position closer to the frontline further west. Tribal fighters, some in pickup trucks retrofitted with heavy machine guns, roam the streets of the provincial capital and barrel over sand dunes in the surrounding countryside.½a0}½a0}

The stalled advance has prompted Hadi to call the Marib governor and a local military commander, according to Yemeni presidential officials, who like the security officials interviewed by the AP spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to reporters about battlefield strategies.

Later, Yemeni state television reported that Hadi called Saudi Defense Minister Mohammad bin Salman to discuss the military situation in Marib. According to the Yemeni military officials, Hadi and Salman discussed the obstacles facing their forces in Marib, and ways get around them.

For now, the fog of war in Marib is obscuring the road to Sanaa.

---

Associated Press writer Adam Schreck contributed reporting from Saffer and Marib, Yemen.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150922/as-china-american-detained-76d361d6bf.html

China detains American woman over national security

Sep 22, 7:06 AM (ET)

BEIJING (AP) — Chinese authorities are investigating an American businesswoman on suspicion that she threatened China's national security, the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday, confirming earlier media reports that Phan Phan-Gillis of Houston was detained earlier this year while traveling in the country.

Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said the woman was healthy and was able to meet with American officials. He said Beijing is handling the case according to China's laws.

Citing privacy concerns, the U.S. Embassy on Tuesday declined to comment on the woman's detention.

Phan-Gillis is a Vietnamese-American of Chinese descent. The Houston Chronicle reported Monday that she was in a trade delegation to China when she was stopped on her way to Macau.

Her husband, Jeff Gillis, told the Chronicle that he was publicizing her six-month detention as Chinese President Xi Jinping visits the United States this week in hopes of pressuring Beijing and Washington to secure her release.

The woman also goes by the name Sandy Phan-Gillis, and is known as Pan Wanfen in Chinese.

The Chronicle said she was on a routine trip with Houston officials and businesspeople to China to promote trade with the Texas city.

She offers consulting services for U.S. and Chinese businesses, the newspaper said.
 

Hurricanehic

Veteran Member
Housecarl did you see the news about Boeing building a new plant in China! Have we absolutely lost our minds!!!! This is the only piece missing from their arsenal.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150922/as-nepal-constitution-566f18be10.html

Nepal eases curfews though constitution protests persist

Sep 22, 5:51 AM (ET)

(AP) A Nepali woman shouts slogans during a protest against the Nepalese government and...
Full Image

KATHMANDU, Nepal (AP) — Protests against Nepal's new constitution were abating, Nepal said Tuesday, just hours after police opened fire on a crowd and injured three in the east of the Himalayan nation.

Curfews imposed amid weeks of violent demonstrations that left more than 40 dead are now being relaxed in parts of the country, the Home Ministry said Tuesday. "The situation is improving," ministry spokesman Laxmi Prasad Dhakal said, describing the continuing protests as "small."

The violence has alarmed neighboring India, with New Delhi calling its ambassador to report on the situation Monday.

"We are deeply concerned over the incidents of violence resulting in death and injury in regions of Nepal bordering India," the Indian foreign ministry said in a statement. "The issues facing Nepal are political in nature and cannot be resolved through force."

(AP) Nepalese people burn portraits of Nepal{2019}s Prime Minister Sushil Koirala, left, and...
Full Image

On Monday, police opened fire on a crowd of stone-hurling protesters in the eastern city of Biratnagar, and one officer was injured, police said.

A spokesman for the Nepal Oil Corporation, Dipak Baral, said Indian oil tankers are refusing to enter Nepal "because of security concerns." Trucks carrying cargo from India were also stopping short of the border.

While many in Nepal cheered Sunday's adoption of a permanent constitution after a 10-year effort, some ethnic groups say their concerns that the seven newly defined states would have borders cutting through their ethnic homelands were ignored. Some groups have also argued for bigger territory and more seats for ethnic minorities in parliament and government, and other protesters want the country to remain Hindu, rather than secular, as was decided.

"We will continue our protests until the major parties fulfil our demands," said Abhisek Pratap Sah, who leads a group that wants provinces carved out for its members in the southern plains of Nepal.

The government sees the new constitution as a much-needed success for the nation of 28 million, still recovering from a devastating April 25 earthquake that killed thousands.

Amnesty International urged Nepal to rein in security forces, noting in a statement Monday night that investigations by human rights groups "found that in many of the protest-related deaths, the force used by security forces was excessive, disproportionate or unnecessary, contrary to international legal standards."
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Housecarl did you see the news about Boeing building a new plant in China! Have we absolutely lost our minds!!!! This is the only piece missing from their arsenal.

They've (Boeing) been off shoring component manufacture for a while.

The real chutzpah on the part of the PRC is Xi stopping in Seattle first in his US visit to meet with the tech company leadership to lobby them to keep the Obama Admin from sanctioning mainland companies that are using hacked and stolen tech that's competing with those very same companies!
 

Hurricanehic

Veteran Member
Yes a friend builds GE jet engines and says every few months they send over a engine made on the mainland. Used to be junk but now getting much better. Kind of that old made in japan we grew up with thing. Now some of the best.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150921/af-nigeria-explosions-4706af6800.html

Nigerian official: 54 die in blasts in Borno state capital

Sep 21, 12:13 PM (ET)
By HARUNA UMAR and JOSSY OLA

(AP) Victims receive treatment at a hospital, after an explosion in Maiduguri, Nigeria...
Full Image

ABUJA, Nigeria (AP) — Suspected Islamic extremists killed at least 54 people when they detonated explosive devices in crowded places Sunday night in Maiduguri the capital of the northeastern state of Borno, members of civilian defense group said Monday.

Forty-three people died in an attack on a mosque and 11 were killed in an attack on a market center, said the civilian defense force members, who insisted anonymity for fear of reprisals from the Nigerian military which has been deployed to guard civilians in the town.

There were four explosions in the attacks one in a Mosque after evening prayers, another at a market place and two homemade explosives were thrown into a business center where people charge their phones and play video games, said a member of the civilian militia.

The blasts occurred within 20 minutes, he said.

(AP) People gathered around abandoned shoes, at the site of last night's explosion in...
Full Image

A dusk till dawn curfew in Maiduguri limits the flow of information as journalists fear of getting attacked by the militants or the army at night.

The number wounded from the blasts was still not available, said Lt.Col. Tukuru Gusau, the army spokesman for the 7th Division based in Maiduguri.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack, but the initial suspicion has fallen on the Islamic extremist group Boko Haram, which has resorted to hit-and-run tactics after the Nigerian military recaptured territory once held by the militants.

Military spokesman Col. Sani Kukasheka Usman said the attacks signify the increasing desperation of Boko Haram. At least 20,000 people have been killed in Boko Haram's six-year-old uprising which has displaced 2.1 million people across three countries.

---

Ola reported from Maiduguri.

---

This story has been corrected to show that the explosions happened Sunday, not Monday.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150922/af--burkina_faso-coup-4e0de89045.html

Burkina Faso coup leader says awaiting regional decision

Sep 22, 8:05 AM (ET)
By BRAHIMA OUEDRAOGO

(AP) A soldier stands guard after he and others dispersed anti coup protestors outside...
Full Image

OUAGADOUGOU, Burkina Faso (AP) — Burkina Faso's coup leader said Tuesday that negotiations are still ongoing even though a deadline given by the military for the junta to disarm has expired.

Gen. Gilbert Diendere, the coup leader who was head of an elite presidential guard until last year, said he awaits the results of talks by West African regional mediators in Abuja, Nigeria. He said that is likely where a solution lies.

Diendere said there is no use for confrontations at this time, and he is confident in negotiations.

"We will find a solution between brothers in arms to avoid confrontations," he said.

(AP) In this photo taken on Saturday, Sept. 19, 2015, Gen. Gilbert Diendere, who was...
Full Image

Burkina Faso's media reported that the junta had been given a 10 a.m. (1000 GMT) deadline to disarm. The National Armed Forces said it wanted the mutinous soldiers to lay down their arms and return to barracks without bloodshed.

Soldiers from around Burkina Faso poured into the capital, Ouagadougou, overnight in a show of force as the military has vowed to disarm the mutinous presidential guard behind last week's coup on Tuesday, with force if needed.

"I call on the population of Burkina Faso to remain calm and to have confidence in the National Armed Forces who have reaffirmed their unfailing commitment to preserve the unity of the nation," Gen. Pingrenoma Zagre said in a statement.

A civic organization told residents to remain in their homes.

Meanwhile, the junta met a key international demand by releasing the country's interim prime minister, Lt. Col. Yacouba Isaac Zida, who had been detained last week along with the interim president before the transitional government was dissolved.

Diendere on Monday night apologized to the nation through a written communique and said he would hand over power to a civilian transitional government.

West African regional mediators have proposed an agreement that calls for Diendere to step down, and for interim President Michael Kafando to be reinstalled until elections can be held. Kafando, who already had been released by the junta, is staying at the residence of the French ambassador in Ouagadougou.

The vote would take place no later than the end of November, and allies of ex-President Blaise Compaore would be allowed to take part.

An electoral code passed earlier this year had banned members of Compaore's party from taking part in the election. He was forced from power last October after 27 years in power in a popular uprising after he tried to prolong his rule by amending the constitution.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...30-b-52hs-of-nuclear-weapons-capabili-417022/

USAF stripping 30 B-52Hs of nuclear weapons capability
¤—¤˜
22 September, 2015
| BY: James Drew
| Washington DC

As US Air Force Global Strike Command anticipates the introduction of the nuclear-capable Long-Range Strike Bomber in the mid-2020s, the command is de-arming its air-launched cruise missile-carrying Boeing B-52 bombers to comply with New START treaty limits with Russia.

The command announced last week that 30 B-52Hs, all veterans of the Cold War, would be modified as conventional heavy bombers, in line with verifiable treaty standards.

According to a 17 September statement, the first aircraft to shed its nuclear capabilities was tail number 61-1021 of Air Force Reserve Command¡¯s 307th Bomb Wing at Barksdale AFB, Louisiana.

The conversions should be complete by early 2017, the air force says, and interestingly the service also intends to revive a dozen non-operational B-52H aircraft in storage at the boneyard in Arizona.

¡°The conversion process preserves the full conventional capabilities of the B-52,¡± the service says.

The air force is whittling down its nuclear-capable bomber force to about 60 B-52s and Northrop Grumman B-2s, as per the force mix announced in 2014. The Boeing B-1B is already non-nuclear.

Despite having fewer nuclear-capable bombers, Global Strike Command is currently going through a re-branding exercise following a series of high-profile nuclear stuff-ups including revelations last year that dozens of missileers were cheating on routine nuclear proficiency tests.

At an Air Force Association Conference last week, Global Strike commander Robin Rand declared ¡°SAC is back¡± in reference to Strategic Air Command.

Senior air force leaders have been trying to reinstate the professionalism and prestige of the nuclear deterrent force exemplified by SAC under legendary Cold War commander Gen Curtis LeMay, who ran the organisation from 1948 to 1957. In fact, Rand recently moved LeMay's old desk into his headquarters office.

On 1 October, the command will take control of the B-1B despite its conventional role, giving it responsibility for training and equipping the entire US long-range bomber force.

There are currently 159 bombers aligned under Global Strike including 76 B-52s, 63 B-1Bs and 20 B-2s and the average age of the B-52 fleet is 53 years.

In another New START compliance measure, the service is also reducing its number of active Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missiles from 450 to 400, with those 50 missiles being removed from their silos and placed in standby mode.

Despite heightened tensions with Russia, which is currently outpacing the West in terms of nuclear modernisation, both sides see the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) that comes into full force 5 February 2018 as being mutually beneficial ¨C particularly at a time of strained relations.

Under the treaty, each side is limited to 1,550 nuclear warheads and a total of 700 deployed launchers, namely land-based ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers.

Along with the introduction of LRS-B, the air force is also planning to field the Long-Range Stadoff (LRSO) cruise missile and GPS-guided B61-12 thermonuclear bomb.

___

From a practical standpoint, a "conventionally armed" fully updated B-52, or for that matter B-1B, is of much more "utility" than a nuclear capable one in terms of just the security requirements of the aircraft vs. mission assignments. Also in a "big war" scenario either loaded up with the SBD "glide bomb" or conventionally armed cruise missiles can arguably be more effective than a similar tonnage of nuclear weapons in a lot of circumstances.

The other is a GPS guided B-61 delivered by an F-22, F-15E or even the F-35 "brick" is more likely to be employed at this stage of the game than by a B-2 or B-52.
 

almost ready

Inactive
ISIS Attempts Sneak Attack on Russians in Syria

...and the bad news is that the Russians have discovered that ISIS had satellite imagery of their base

from whom?

Serious escalation, whether real or simply a false assertion which cannot be disproved. We may never know which.


Report: Russian Marines Battle ISIS In Syria, IS Possesses “Satellite Imagery” Of Base

By Brandon Turbeville

As the conflict in Syria continues to escalate, it has been reported by Russian media that Russian Marines stationed at an airbase in Latakia have now engaged ISIS fighters in direct combat.

According to Russian news website, Segodnia, ISIS militants attempted to ambush the Russian soldiers stationed at the base but were fought off by the Russian marines, with a number of ISIS fighters being killed and some captured.

Russian military activity has been increasing at the airbase near Latakia over recent days with the arrival of new and advanced Russian fighter jets, according to reports.

Combat between Russian forces and ISIS militants marks a drastic increase in the level of conflict in Syria, adding an even greater international aspect to it as well. With Russia now openly providing the Assad government with missiles, missile defense systems, advisers, helicopters, satellite imagery, and fighter jets (particularly those being flown by Russian pilots), the Russians now stand directly in opposition to the United States pilots, jet fighters, and special forces operatives on the ground in Syria supporting the death squads (even if the official U.S. line is publicly opposed to ISIS and supportive of “moderate” cannibals).

Thus, we now have the growing potential for direct military confrontation between the two major world powers, both of them armed with nuclear weapons.

The United States has supported terrorists in Syria since the very beginning of the conflict while the Russians have provided tangential but growing support for the secular government of Bashar al-Assad.

The fact that Russians are now engaged in combat in Syria now greatly increases the likelihood that the two opposing superpowers may “accidentally” or even intentionally find themselves in direct conflict with one another in Syria.

Yet, while the Russian marines fighting off ISIS attacks is news enough, perhaps the most important revelation is that, according to Segodnia, the ISIS fighters apparently had detailed plans of the base as well as clear satellite imagery of the military installations located there.

The question then becomes, how did ISIS, a terrorist organization which has yet to launch its own satellites into orbit, acquire such sensitive and important material?

If the Segodnia report is to be believed, and with the United States, NATO, Israel, and the GCC, having supported the death squads in Syria, it seems we may have some idea of where they were able to procure satellite images.


September 21, 2015

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/09...a-is-possesses-satellite-imagery-of-base.html
 

vestige

Deceased
From#26:

Despite heightened tensions with Russia, which is currently outpacing the West in terms of nuclear modernisation, both sides see the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) that comes into full force 5 February 2018 as being mutually beneficial ¨C particularly at a time of strained relations.


This statement was made by a blooming idiot.
 

tiger13

Veteran Member
or more likely, by the Obama administration and his Muslim brotherhood associate traitors. it would not surprise me in the least if the defense department themselves is feeding them the information, the bastards.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:popcorn1:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/21/us-china-defence-idUSKCN0RL2B420150921

World | Mon Sep 21, 2015 5:03pm EDT
Related: World, China

China military hints at strong opposition to large-scale troop cuts

BEIJING | By Ben Blanchard


Bitterness is growing within China's armed forces to President Xi Jinping's decision to cut troop numbers by 300,000 and considerable effort will be needed to overcome opposition to the order, according to a source and commentaries in the military's newspaper.

Xi made the unexpected announcement on Sept. 3 at a military parade in Beijing marking 70 years since the end of World War Two in Asia. The move would reduce by 13 percent one of the world's biggest militaries, currently 2.3-million strong.

One government official, who meets regularly with senior officers, said some inside the People's Liberation Army (PLA) felt the announcement had been rushed and taken by Xi with little consultation outside the Central Military Commission. Xi heads the commission, which has overall command of the military.

"It's been too sudden," the source told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"People are very worried. A lot of good officers will lose their jobs and livelihoods. It's going to be tough for soldiers."

China's Defence Ministry, in a statement sent to Reuters, said the "broad mass" of officers and soldiers "resolutely endorsed the important decision of the (Communist) Party center and Central Military Commission and obey orders".

It has said the cuts, the fourth since the 1980s, would be mostly completed by the end of 2017.

Experts say the move is likely part of long-mooted rationalization plans, which have included changing the PLA command structure so it less resembles a Soviet-era model and spending more money on the navy and air force as Beijing asserts its territorial claims in the disputed South and East China Seas.

Soon after Xi's announcement, the official Xinhua news agency published a long article quoted soldiers as supporting the decision.

Each branch of the armed forces believed the cuts would raise quality standards, Xinhua said.

Commentaries in the PLA Daily newspaper have since warned that the reductions would be hard to carry out. Chinese state media often run commentaries that reflect the official line of the institution publishing the newspaper.


"UNPRECEDENTED" CHALLENGE

The cuts come at a time of heightened economic uncertainty in China as growth slows, its stock markets tumble and the leadership grapples with painful but needed economic reforms.

China has previously faced protests from demobilized soldiers, who have complained about a lack of support finding new jobs or help with financial problems.

A protest by thousands of former soldiers over pensions was reported in June, although the Defence Ministry denied any knowledge of the incident.

The PLA is already reeling from Xi's crackdown on deep-seated corruption in China, which has seen dozens of officers investigated, including two former vice chairmen of the Central Military Commission.

Barely a week after the Beijing parade, the PLA newspaper said the troop cuts and other military reforms Xi wished to undertake would require "an assault on fortified positions" to change mindsets and root out vested interests, and that the difficulties expected would be "unprecedented".

If these reforms failed, measures still to come would be "nothing more than an empty sheet of paper", it said.

It did not give details on the planned reforms.

But state media has said they will likely involve better integration of all PLA branches. As part of this move, China's seven military regions, which have separate command structures that tend to focus on ground-based operations, are expected to be reduced.

There had been no previous suggestion big troop cuts were planned.


TROOP ENTERTAINERS TO GO

Another commentary in the PLA Daily published a week later detailed the kind of opposition Xi faced.

"Some units suffer from inertia and think everything's already great. Some are scared of hardships, blame everyone and everything but themselves ... They shirk work and find ways of avoiding difficulty," the commentary said.

A second government source, who is close to the PLA, said military song and dance assemblies, which traditionally entertain troops, would be the first to go.

"The defense budget will not be cut. It will continue to gradually increase," the source added.

China's military budget for this year rose 10.1 percent to 886.9 billion yuan ($139.39 billion), the second largest in the world after the United States.

Some retired Chinese generals have supported the troop cuts.

"A bloated military can only cause ineffectual expenditure and forfeited battles," retired Major-General Luo Yuan, a prominent Chinese military figure, wrote in the Global Times newspaper three days after Xi's announcement.

Xu Guangyu, a retired major general and now a senior army arms control advisor said: "Our country's military needs to take the path of modernization ... These force reductions are an effort to stay on this path and increase quality not numbers."

($1 = 6.36 Chinese yuan)


(Additional reporting by Michael Martina and Benjamin Kang Lim; Editing by Dean Yates)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150922/as-china-american-detained-76d361d6bf.html

China detains American woman over national security

Sep 22, 7:06 AM (ET)

BEIJING (AP) — Chinese authorities are investigating an American businesswoman on suspicion that she threatened China's national security, the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday, confirming earlier media reports that Phan Phan-Gillis of Houston was detained earlier this year while traveling in the country.

Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said the woman was healthy and was able to meet with American officials. He said Beijing is handling the case according to China's laws.

Citing privacy concerns, the U.S. Embassy on Tuesday declined to comment on the woman's detention.

Phan-Gillis is a Vietnamese-American of Chinese descent. The Houston Chronicle reported Monday that she was in a trade delegation to China when she was stopped on her way to Macau.

Her husband, Jeff Gillis, told the Chronicle that he was publicizing her six-month detention as Chinese President Xi Jinping visits the United States this week in hopes of pressuring Beijing and Washington to secure her release.

The woman also goes by the name Sandy Phan-Gillis, and is known as Pan Wanfen in Chinese.

The Chronicle said she was on a routine trip with Houston officials and businesspeople to China to promote trade with the Texas city.

She offers consulting services for U.S. and Chinese businesses, the newspaper said.

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/22/us-china-usa-security-idUSKCN0RM0QC20150922

US | Tue Sep 22, 2015 3:04pm EDT
Related: U.S., World, United Nations

White House seeks answers from China on U.S. woman detained in spy probe

BEIJING/AUSTIN, Texas | By Megha Rajagopalan and Jon Herskovitz


The White House has contacted China's Foreign Ministry over the detention of an American businesswoman accused of spying, a spokesman said on Tuesday, in a case that blew up just as President Xi Jinping began a visit to the United States.

Sandy Phan-Gillis of Houston, Texas, has been held by Chinese authorities for about six months under suspicion of spying and stealing state secrets, according to a statement from her family released this week.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters it was "disconcerting" that many of the U.S. government's questions "have gone unanswered" by Chinese officials about the status of Phan-Gillis.

"This is something that the United States State Department has been working on for quite some time," Earnest said. "At this point, I certainly couldn’t rule out that it would come up in the conversation between the two leaders."

The Chinese president arrived in the Seattle area on Tuesday to kick off a week-long U.S. visit that will include meetings with business leaders, a black-tie state dinner at the White House hosted by President Barack Obama and an address at the United Nations.

In Beijing ahead of Xi's U.S. arrival, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said Phan-Gillis was suspected of "endangering China's national security" and is being investigated by "relevant Chinese authorities."

But her husband, Jeff Gillis, told Reuters from their home in Houston that "Sandy is not a spy or a thief.

"I have absolutely no clue whatsoever why she was taken into custody," he said.

Phan-Gillis ran a consulting business that helped pair U.S. and Chinese firms and had been to China numerous times without incident, her husband said, adding he had asked the State Department for months to press for her release, but to no avail.


Related Coverage
› U.S. seeking answers from China about Phan-Gillis case: White House

"My intent here was not to embarrass China or President Xi Jinping. It was really to encourage them to release Sandy in the lead-up to the state visit," he said.

"I concluded from my research that if I remain quiet and do nothing, that my wife is just going to end up being quietly crushed by a Chinese criminal justice system that has absolutely no justice in it, or no real rule of law," he added.


A MATTER OF STATE SECURITY

China's state secrets law is notoriously broad, covering everything from industry data to the exact birth dates of state leaders. Information can also be labeled a state secret retroactively.

The U.S. State Department said it was aware of her detention and is monitoring her case.

China has permitted her at least six consular visits and she is in good health and cooperating with the investigation, Hong told a news briefing.

In a statement, State Department spokeswoman Katy Bondy said Phan-Gillis was arrested on March 20 and confirmed the U.S. consulate visits. It referred questions about her arrest and any charges to local authorities. Chinese authorities did not say if she has been officially charged in the case.

China's Ministry of State Security could not be reached for comment.

Phan-Gillis, who has Chinese ancestry and is a naturalized U.S. citizen, visited China on a trade delegation from Houston. She was detained while attempting to cross from the southern city of Zhuhai to Macau on March 19, according to the family statement.

Gillis said he spoke to his wife in the early days after being taken into custody, with the last conversation on March 23. At that time, she gave no indication she had been apprehended by Chinese authorities, he said.

Phan-Gillis is being held in the southwestern city of Nanning, the family said. She had been under house arrest until she was transferred to a detention center on Saturday, it added.

It was unclear whether any formal charges have been brought. A lawyer working on her case could not be immediately reached.

"Sandy is in very poor health," the family statement said, adding she has been hospitalized repeatedly while detained.



(Reporting By Megha Rajagopalan in Beijing and Jon Herskovitz in Austin, Texas; Additional reporting by Roberta Rampton, Doina Chiacu and David Brunnstrom in Washington; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore, Meredith Mazzilli and Alan Crosby)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Well here's a DOT.....That they're not telling who or for deployment where is real interesting. Considering the number of hot spots in Africa guessing is a waste of time without more information.

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/22/us-usa-india-idUSKCN0RM2KH20150922

World | Tue Sep 22, 2015 4:39pm EDT
Related: World, Africa

U.S., India agree to jointly train peacekeepers in Africa

WASHINGTON

The United States and India on Tuesday agreed to train troops in six African countries before they are deployed to U.N. peacekeeping missions, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said.

He spoke after meetings at the State Department with his Indian counterpart, Shushma Swaraj, on economic and security issues.

"We agreed on a joint initiative to train troops in six African countries before they deploy to U.N. peacekeeping missions," Kerry told reporters without specifying which African countries would be involved.

"This responds to a growing need for effective, professional, international peacekeeping in regions of conflict," he said at the end of a two-day U.S.-India Strategic and Commercial Dialogue.

He said progress was also made on energy security and climate change. India is the world's third-largest carbon emitter despite its low per-capital emissions, giving it a crucial role in U.N. climate talks in Paris in December.

The Paris summit will seek agreement on halting damaging greenhouse gas emissions.

"Both of our governments are firmly committed to reaching a truly meaningful, truly comprehensive, and truly ambitious climate agreement in Paris later this year," Kerry said. "That is absolutely critical."

He said the United States was launching a Fulbright climate fellowship program to help with the exchange of research information.

Swaraj said India recognized that climate change is "one of the most pressing challenges of our times."


(Reporting by Lesley Wroughton and Arshad Mohammed; Editing by David Gregorio)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Middle-East/Iran-Deal-May-Redefine-The-Middle-East.html

Iran Deal May Redefine The Middle East

By Robert Berke
Posted on Sun, 20 September 2015 00:00

One month after the Iran nuclear deal was concluded, the Middle East is still reeling from profound shock. Long and well established alliances have led to bewildering changes, not only in the Mideast, but across the world.

The stark difference is nowhere more strikingly revealed than in the media reports on the recent Iran nuclear deal. In a recent article on the front page of the Tehran Times, the author compared President Lincoln’s battle with a recalcitrant Congress for the passage of the 13th Amendment with Obama’s struggle with the Congressional leadership and hardliners for passage of the Iran nuke deal.

According to the Tehran Times article, the deal liberated Iran from the ‘enslavement’ of international sanctions that caused Iran’s isolation from the world, with the U.S. President, formerly referred to as Satan, now taking on the role of a new Moses.

Obama’s publicly stated view of the deal, similar to Iran's, is that it is not just about weapons, but also about ending the thirty odd years of isolation and restoring Iran to its traditional place of power, leadership, and influence in the region.

The huge impact of that statement in the Middle East had the newly anointed King of Saudi Arabia hastening to make his first official visit to the U.S., in an effort to gain assurances from Obama that his alliance with the U.S. will not be abandoned in favor of Iran, its longtime adversary.

There is widespread speculation about the visit of the new Saudi King to the U.S. to meet with President Obama, at a time when tensions between the two countries have seldom been higher. The Saudis’ bitter disappointment over the U.S./EU nuclear deal with Iran, their prime geopolitical rival, is no secret.

Serving to heighten Saudi fears of ‘alliance drift,’ was the U.S. refusal to take more than an arm’s length role in the ongoing wars in Syria and Yemen, against Iran’s allies.

Acting against the advice of the U.S. military, the Saudis’ response was to take a direct role in the conflicts in Yemen and Syria, along with support of so call ‘moderate’ jihadist elements fighting against the Syrian government, Iran’s ally.

From the U.S. perspective, the Saudis are adding fuel to a conflict that threatens to engulf the whole region, where the U.S. Administration had been desperately working with Russia, Iran, and regional allies to find a diplomatic solution.

This has led to a new emerging relationship between the Saudis and Russia, where negotiations between Russia and OPEC emerged over the possibility of coordination of oil production levels. OPEC hinted that it was open to coordinated production cuts with non-OPEC members in its latest bulletin report, saying that “if there is a willingness to face the oil industry’s challenges together” then the future would “be a lot better.” Russian officials held meetings with their counterparts from OPEC, fueling speculation of some sort of accommodation.

Despite positive language from the negotiators, the talks so far have not amounted to much. Rosneft’s Igor Sechin seemed to rule out such a scenario on September 7 in comments to the press, in which he said that Rosneft can’t operate the way OPEC can. It would be difficult for Russia to cut back on its production, even if that meant some chance of higher prices. Russia’s economy is hurting, and it needs to sell every barrel that it can.

Although there won’t be a deal on oil output, Saudi Arabia and Russia made more progress on discussions regarding the purchase of Russian nuclear power plants and military equipment, a likely wake-up call to the U.S. and UK, the Saudis’ longtime military suppliers. Still to be determined is whether this is a new alliance or merely a show of Saudi independence.

The nuke deal also led directly to a sudden military alliance between Israel and Saudi Arabia, once thought of as inconceivable. Along with that, the Saudis also promised, for the first time, exports of oil to Israel.

Related: The Shale Delusion: Why The Party’s Over For U.S. Tight Oil

But the real bombshell, reported in the Israeli press, was the Saudis offer to Israel to allow flyovers of Saudi territory in case an attack on Iran became necessary, supposedly in exchange for some form of peace agreement with the Palestinians.

If that were not enough, there was a new diplomatic overture from Iran to the Saudis to end their long enmity and join in a coalition of like-minded countries opposed to radical Islam.

Following that with another surprise, was the Iranian President’s New Year’s greeting to the Jewish people on their High Holiday celebration of Rosh Hashanah.

At any other time, the recent ‘handshake’ between the Saudis and Israelis to coordinate military strategies against Iran and radical jihadists would have been welcomed with open arms in the U.S. and EU. But now things have changed in ways few could have imagined. Now it seems like both countries are preparing policies that are independent of the western alliance, with Netanyahu scheduled to meet with Putin this month in Russia.

The recent frayed relationship between the U.S. and Israel is often reported as a result of embittered personal relations between Obama and Netanyahu, while others believe that Obama no longer views Israel as a major strategic asset, but a burden for the U.S. and a liability in the Middle East.

That seems unlikely with Obama agreeing to large supplies of U.S. advanced weapon systems for both the Saudis and Israelis, while raising direct aid to Israel by $1.5 billion, totaling $4.5 billion for the next five years.

Opponents of the Iran deal in the U.S. suffered a bitter defeat as the Congress failed to muster enough votes to block the deal from going through, a stinging blow to hawkish forces in the U.S. capitol.

The Iran deal has become viciously politicized as election season is now very much underway. During the September 16 president debate, eight of the eleven Republican candidates promised that their first act of business as President would be to revoke the Iran agreement.

Related: Oil Industry Influence Waning Amid Oil Price Slump


$80 Oil By Christmas – Do NOT Be Fooled By The Mainstream Media

The current market turmoil has created a once in a generation opportunity for savvy energy investors.
Whilst the mainstream media prints scare stories of oil prices falling through the floor smart investors are setting up their next winning oil plays.

Click here for more info on successful oil investing


Prior to their Washington visit, the ever diplomatic Saudis, keenly aware of Obama gaining the votes needed to win the deal in Congress, have recently softened their public opposition, even going so far as say that they understood its logic and accepted the deal.

It’s a rare event when the powerful and enormously rich Saudis appear as supplicants in DC, where their influence is widely respected, and their favor and money widely sought. But the Saudis may have valid cause for fears of losing leverage with the U.S., its primary defender for some seventy years.

The EIA reports that in the last five years, the U.S. ‘shale oil revolution’ has enabled the U.S. to more than halve its oil imports, making it far less dependent on imports from OPEC, and significantly changing the terms of the relationship.

There is a lively ongoing argument in the world press about the possibility of the nuke deal leading to an entente between the U.S. and Iran, or even the possibility of an actual alliance.

Hardcore opponents of the deal claim that Iran is already in a quasi-alliance with the U.S. in the fight against ISIS in Iraq. And, although both countries hotly deny any intent to form an alliance, there are many in the region who believe that perhaps ‘the ladies doth protest too much’.

The U.S. and its Gulf allies are also well aware that Russia has been trumpeting a proposal to the international community for a power sharing agreement with the Syrian Government, with a call for immediate new elections in which Assad steps aside and accepts a titular role, with development of a new coalition government against radical Islam, aimed at ending the Syrian conflict.

Related: Saudi Arabia Opening Up For Business As Oil Strategy Takes Its Toll

Obama seemed to be giving the Russian proposal some room to run when he recently stated, “I do agree that we’re not going to solve the problems in Syria unless there’s buy-in from the Russians, Iranians, Turks and our Gulf partners.” For the Saudis, whose confidence has been shaken about its U.S. alliance, this statement could hardly be viewed as re-assuring.

It’s no coincidence that on the eve of the King’s visit, the news appeared in the Israeli press that Russian forces have been deployed in Syria to launch attacks against rebels fighting the Assad government. The point of the Israeli reports is that, unbeknownst to U.S. allies, the Russian deployment in Syria is taking place in close consultation and coordination with the United States.

No doubt, the planned news blitzkrieg was meant to discredit Obama as an unreliable ally to his royal visitors. Although there’s never been a secret about the presence of Russian military advisors in Syria, Kerry warned his Russian counterpart, Lavrov, about not sending Russian combat troops to Syria, even though the U.S. is fully aware of Russia’s military assistance to the Assad government.

Few Russian experts believe that Russia has any intention of directly confronting the western alliance that is fighting against the Syrian Government while the Kremlin is seeking to free itself from international sanctions. Nor is Russia in any shape, economically or militarily, to carry on a war on behalf of Syria that is more than 1,000 miles from its borders.

But within days, the story was carried by the Daily Beast, Washington Post, and NY Times, with hardliners attacking Obama for secretly conspiring with Russia. From there the story went viral across the western media, where it now appears as unquestioned fact instead of rumor.

In the same vein, a similar story seems to have taken on permanent residence on the Israeli web site, debka.com (often referred to as the voice of the Israeli Mossad) which states that the U.S. has handed off responsibility to Russia and Iran for ending the Syrian war.

Playing into the immense upheaval is the refuge crisis in Europe, leading 'Old Europe' to rethink its position on the Syrian war.

German Chancellor Merkel seems to be abandoning NATO's anti-Assad position and welcoming the help of Russia in Syria, with France and Italy agreeing.

As reported by Nick Cunningham, on these pages, the recently announced agreement with European oil companies to extend Gazprom's Nordstream gas pipeline into Germany was a clear sign that the EU is willing to do business with Russia again; this despite the Ukraine crisis, which in the face of Middle Eastern conflicts, seems to be fading into the background.

As few would have predicted only a few months ago, the next shoe to drop could be the first meeting in years between Obama and Putin, at this month's UN meeting in New York, to discuss the prospect of working together to end the Syrian war.

The west’s deal with Iran is causing a monumental upheaval in Middle East relations, threatening some seventy years of reliable and steady alliances. At the same time, the unending Syrian refugee crisis is forcing Europe to consider new alliances.

Where all this will go next is anyone's guess.

By Robert Berke for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:
Is This The End Of The U.S Shale Gas Revolution?
Oil Prices Could Surge As This Country Fails To Meet Production Targets
Does OPEC Have An Ace Up Its Sleeve?
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/09/sanaa-battle-looms.html

The battle for Sanaa looms

Saudi Arabia and its coalition partners are preparing for a major offensive to take Yemen's capital from the Zaydi Houthi rebels this fall. If the battle becomes a house-to-house urban clash, it will have disastrous humanitarian consequences.

Author Bruce Riedel
Posted September 21, 2015

The Saudis are massing forces at two locations for the assault on Sanaa. To the east of the capital, coalition forces are preparing to attack in Marib province. According to press reports, 4,000 troops from the United Arab Emirates, another 1,000 from Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, and an unknown number of Yemeni loyalists are assembled for this offensive. Furthermore, south coalition forces in Taiz are preparing another move on Sanaa. Saudi and Emirati troops and Yemeni loyalists are reinforcing this axis as well.

The United Nations’ efforts to arrange a cease-fire this month were stymied by Yemen President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi’s refusal to attend peace talks in Oman unless the Houthis and their ally, former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, withdraw their forces from Sanaa and other cities first and accept UN Security Council Resolution 2216. Hadi remains in Riyadh, although some of his Cabinet members have moved to Aden where the situation remains unstable. A Saudi bombing attack damaged the residence of the Omani ambassador in Sanaa this weekend, sparking a sharp protest from Muscat.

The Saudi military successes in Aden and other fronts so far have been in Sunni inhabited parts of Yemen. Now they are moving into predominantly Zaydi Shiite areas. Sanaa itself is a city of 2 million people. Both the terrain and the local conditions will become more difficult for the coalition forces as the war moves toward Sanaa.

The Yemeni civilian population is already suffering from the effects of months of bombing by the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) and its allies, the blockade of key ports like Al-Hudaydah, and shortages of food, clean water and medical supplies. Some Yemenis have even fled across the Bab al-Mandab Strait to comparative safety in Somalia and Djibouti.

Inside the Kingdom, the young Minister of Defense Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the king’s favorite son, remains the face of the war and its most prominent advocate. He engineered the removal of a key supporter of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, Minister of State Saad bin Khalid Al-Jabri, from the Cabinet earlier this month, fueling speculation that Mohammed bin Salman's ambition is to succeed his father. Victory in Yemen is probably critical to those ambitions.

Washington and London, the main arms suppliers to the Kingdom, have significant capacity to influence Saudi policy. The United States has sold the kingdom more than $90 billion in weapons since 2010, according to congressional reports. Since the beginning of the Saudi war in Yemen, the United States has provided crucial logistic and intelligence support, including the establishment of a joint US-Saudi planning cell. The administration has publicly urged Riyadh to open the blockade of Yemen's Red Sea ports and allow humanitarian aid to get into the country, but there is no sign Washington has used its arms leverage. President Barack Obama promised King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud additional security assistance in their meeting this month. Like the United States, the British government has continued to provide a steady stream of spare parts, munitions and other equipment to the RSAF.

For their part, the Houthis have accused Washington of collusion in the war. Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi has said, "The Americans determine targeting of every child, residential compound, house, home, shop, market or mosque targeted [in the war] … Therefore, the Saudi regime is a soldier and servant of the Americans.” Some kind of retaliation against American targets is probably only a matter of time.

The battle of Sanaa could lead to scenes as terrible as those we've seen in Damascus and Aleppo these past few years. It is time for all the parties to accept a cease-fire, open Yemen's ports and airports to humanitarian cargo and begin a political dialogue. Obama needs to use the leverage he has to avert catastrophe.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/09/china-us-visit-213169

In The Arena

China, World Leader in Graft

The country is stealing from its people. America can stop it.

By Charles Davidson and Jeffrey Gedmin
| September 21, 2015

China is ruled by thieves. Its cancerous system of kleptocracy must be confronted when Xi Jinping makes his first state visit to the United States this week. Kleptocracies — authoritarian systems designed to defend and extend the wealth and power of a ruling class — now plague the planet. America needs to recognize the threat to global world order and get serious about a response.

According to Freedom House, after a three-decade increase in the number of “free” countries, over the past 15 years authoritarians have mounted a comeback. Most of these new regimes are kleptocracies. They’re oil-rich states like Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. They’re adversarial regimes like today’s Russia and Iran. They’re partially free countries like Ukraine and Georgia. Because of China’s size and ability to project power, however, it stands out as a particularly alarming case. Senior Chinese communist officials are by now infamous for self-dealing, helping themselves and their relatives to exceptional levels of enrichment.

By the time he left office in March 2013, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and his family — through extensive use of front companies, offshore accounts and myriad other opaque financial holdings — were thought to be worth nearly $3 billion. A New York Times investigation published in October 2012 found that in many cases ownership stakes of the Chinese leader’s family members were disguised “by an intricate web of holdings as many as five steps removed from the operating companies.” According to records obtained by the Times, Wen’s 90-year-old mother held one investment worth $120 million. Holdings of family members included at the time — shares in banks, buildings, resorts, and television and telecommunications companies. All in all, not a bad take, the Times observed, considering Wen’s reputation for simple ways and the common touch.

China’s kleptocrats are often assisted by offshore havens known for their secrecy. In 2014, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists published a report based on leaked documents — a cache of 2.5 million files — from two offshore firms. The documents contained some 22,000 clients with offshore accounts and addresses in Hong Kong or the People’s Republic of China. Those clients included family members of several current and former members of China’s Politburo Standing Committee, the Communist Party’s most senior leadership. One British Virgin Islands company, for example, is owned by President Xi’s brother-in-law Deng Jiagui, a wealthy real estate developer and investor in rare-earth metals.

In China, “princelings” is the term popularly used to describe the relatives of top party officials who enrich themselves by using their political connections and then hide their ill-gotten gains from public scrutiny. They’re reviled by ordinary Chinese, who are always on the hunt for signs of corruption. It was Chinese Web users who discovered the lavish lifestyle of a 56-year-old political commissar from the southern province of Guangdong, who managed to acquire 22 homes worth millions while earning less than $20,000 a year. Authorities felt compelled to act.

More often, such abuses go unpunished.

This should concern America because kleptocratic systems preclude the development of democracy. They distort the economy and, for tens of millions of ordinary people, cause untold social and environmental damage (last spring China’s authorities censured for graft and malpractice 63 agencies that carry out environmental risk assessments). Kleptocratic systems empower and protect dictators hostile to American interests and values. They also make for failed states. In his book “Double Paradox: Rapid Growth and Rising Corruption in China” expert Andrew Wedeman contends that corruption in the current Chinese system exceeds “normal” development corruption and may ultimately lead to catastrophic, destabilizing effects.

What should we do to combat the kleptocracies that make the world a less stable, more dangerous place? It’s a steep hill, but here are three concrete steps to point us in the right direction.

First, we need far more robust efforts aimed at the assets of kleptocrats. To this end, the U.S. Senate should approve the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. The act will authorize the president to sanction individuals involved in corruption and human rights abuses. Individuals placed on a sanctions list will be prohibited from obtaining U.S. visas and subject to a freeze on their U.S. assets and bank accounts. Once Global Magnitsky is approved in the United States, we must press for the adoption of similar legislation by key democratic allies. British banks and London real estate cry out for scrutiny. Former Daily Telegraph Editor Charles Moore calls London’s vast property market nothing more than ”a form of legalized international money laundering.” Investigators believe that vast sums of illicit Chinese money — by some estimates more than $1 trillion dollars — are hiding in real estate in the United States, Canada and Europe.

Second, let’s do away with shell corporations. These dummy companies are crucial enablers of international fraud and embezzlement, “getaway cars for global financial crime and corruption,” as one observer puts it. The state of Delaware is a serious part of the problem. It remains one of the friendliest places on earth if you want to establish an untraceable shell company. In 2011, the most recent time U.S. investors lost large sums due to a series of collapses of Chinese stocks, more than 400 Chinese companies, many with government ties, had been using shell companies to gain easy entry into American capital markets. There’s an urgent need for greater transparency — and debate of our own role in aiding and abetting kleptocrats. According to documents studied in last year’s ICIJ report, PricewaterhouseCoopers, UBS and numerous other firms serve as middlemen for Chinese clients establishing trusts, companies and bank accounts in offshore centers. Credit Suisse, for example, helped Wen Jiabao’s son create his British Virgin Islands company while his father was prime minister.

Third, the FBI and the Justice Department have their roles to play. Last year, DOJ’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative froze the family assets of the late Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha — a sum totaling nearly a half-billion dollars. The FBI announced earlier this year the establishment of a kleptocracy squad set up to investigate corrupt government practices around the world. Such government efforts are not nearly sufficient, though, and will at times be constrained by political expediency. That’s why the human rights and democracy promotion community needs to allocate far greater resources to support investigative journalism. It’s why U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Radio Free Asia must be given the requisite support for recruitment, training and supervision to ramp up their efforts in investigative journalism. As a former CEO of RFE/RL, one of us was able to witness firsthand how deep and diligent reporting touches the Achilles’ heel of kleptocratic systems. RFE/RL reporter Khadija Ismayilova sits today in a Baku jail because her investigative work had begun to uncover riveting details of how the systematic thievery of Azerbaijan’s ruling clan works.

This kind of government-financed and philanthropy-supported reporting is critical because of China’s aggression toward commercial media. To take just one prominent example, following a June 2012 story on the familial wealth of then-incoming communist party boss Xi Jinping, sales of Bloomberg terminals in China ground to a near halt after pressure from party officials. Bloomberg’s website was blocked on Chinese servers. Bloomberg found it suddenly difficult to obtain visas for its journalists. The reporter on the story, Michael Forsythe, left Bloomberg under a cloud of controversy. According to at least four Bloomberg sources, Forsythe’s editor blocked the story for fear that China would eventually throw Bloomberg out of the country, an assertion Bloomberg has denied. Bloomberg has dodged questions about self-censorship, suggesting instead it may have been merely guilty of straying from its core mission of reporting financial news. Due to confidentiality agreements, there’s much we don’t know about the particulars of the case, including about the details of Forsythe’s and another colleague’s subsequent departure. We do know, however, that China has a kleptocracy problem and it doesn’t cotton to outsiders looking into to it. For those who dare poke around, there’s a price to pay.

Today, convictions for graft in China are up. “Rein in your spouses, children, relatives, friends and staff,” Xi Jinping told party officials before becoming president. Who knows, perhaps the Chinese leader is sincere. A 2009 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing disclosed by WikiLeaks asserted — relying on an account by a close Xi associate — that the top man himself is no kleptocrat, but rather a patriot “repulsed” by official corruption. But Xi can implore, cajole and crack down on individual cases all he wants and have little effect. It’s the Chinese system and culture of kleptocracy — an elaborate labyrinth of communist controls and familial and crony capitalist relationships — that lies at the heart of the problem.

Swept up two years ago in President Xi’s anti-corruption campaign, China’s ex-security chief Zhou Yongkang was sentenced this summer to life in prison for bribery and abuse of power. Yet Zhou had created his expansive network by working the system and its hierarchy. It was by virtue of his position in the party that he was able to develop so many levers of control and recruit so many allies and subordinates ready to engage in corruption in order to enrich themselves and their powerful patron.

No wonder ordinary Chinese are cynical, feeling increasingly disenfranchised. Repressive and inefficient Communism has morphed into crony capitalism of the most hideous sort. “The Party is running out of time not because corruption is a drag on the economy — it can outrun that effect — but because the public is losing confidence,” wrote Evan Osnos in The New Yorker three years ago.

Indeed, Chinese kleptocracy is fast becoming a threat to the country’s stability. It’s in the interest of Beijing’s leadership to embrace the only things that will bring this increasingly unwieldy, potentially fatal problem to heel. This includes developing reliably independent courts and allowing a truly free, competitive press.

We cannot keep waiting, though, for the wisdom and the amity of autocrats. Only a serious, comprehensive, well-coordinated assault led by the United States and other rule-of-law states will allow us to conquer the scourge of kleptocracy.


Charles Davidson is publisher of the American Interest and founder/executive director of the Kleptocracy Initiative at the Hudson Institute.

Jeffrey Gedmin, senior fellow at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and a former president/CEO of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, is a member of the board of the Kleptocracy Initiative.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm.........:hmm: :dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/chinas-military-parade-civil-military-relations-and-army-unity/

China’s Military Parade, Civil-Military Relations and Army Unity

The presence of generals in the formations was designed to send a message.

By Ka Po Ng
September 22, 2015

465 Shares
17 Comments

Many scholars have offered analysis of the Chinese military parade, held early this month to commemorate the 70 anniversary of the end of World War Two. Much of it has studied the capability of the equipment or deciphered the political and military messages. According to the Chinese official media, however, one of the “bright spots” of the parade was the inclusion of generals in the formations, a first. Why such an unprecedented arrangement? Its significance is just as great as the display of advanced weaponry. To look for answers, we have to study the ongoing politics of anti-corruption and changing civil-military relations, as well as the internal problems facing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

Since the Chinese government released its first list of generals under investigation for graft and corruption in January this year, more and more leaders above the group army level have been implicated. This reporting is consistent with Xi Jinping’s policy of combating corruption in order to rectify the Communist Party’s alienation from the people and reinvigorate its ruling capacity. While the prosecution of high-profile personalities who are collectively nicknamed “tigers” serves to show Xi’s determination to put words into deeds, the expanding list simply testifies to the poor quality and integrity of those in power.

For the PLA, the consequences have been disastrous. The military is seen by common Chinese people as a hotbed of all kinds of corruption and poor discipline. Although the army was divested of all businesses in the 1990s, economic crimes and disciplinary problems have not gone away. Both the two vice-chairmen of the Central Military Commission, Guo Boxiong and Xu Caihou, were prosecuted. Both had been appointed by Xi’s predecessors. The hunting down of these “tigers” and other generals has been a blow to the reputation of the PLA, which has in recent years tried hard to build an image as a professional custodian of national interests. Perhaps the parade could begin to repair the damage.

Inside the army, the rank and file have more reason to question the competence and impartiality of their superiors and leaders. Given its origin as a mass army, the PLA has paid special attention to officer-solider relations and to the so-called grassroots level. The Maoist era emphasis on egalitarianism and comradeship gave way to a focus on a hierarchic organization and formal chain of command when Deng Xiaoping led China into a period of modernization. This has cost the army the internal bonding it once enjoyed. No wonder Xi Jinping revived the practice of sending generals and senior officers to the grassroots level for short-term job exchanges. Again, this is consistent with China’s general political directions under Xi Jinping, especially his mass line policy.

As tensions rise, the PLA feels an urgency to call for greater organizational unity and coherence which, it believes, produces combat proficiency. The high command thus wants to dispel the image that senior leaders enjoy privileges and are out of touch with the lower echelons. Therefore, the generals participating in the parade were subject to the same stringent drills and living conditions as the soldiers. An anecdote had it that a 56-year old major-general was among the soldiers ordered by a staff sergeant to tie sandbags to their arms to practice proper salute manner. Each day, they had to practice saluting more than 400 times. The message of these media reports is clear. The generals are not above their soldiers.

It could be said that a crisis of faith has emerged in the Chinese military. Soldiers are increasingly skeptical of the military competence of their leaders, who, in their eyes, only give orders and design training programs from air-conditioned offices, while shouting empty slogans. In an attempt to close the schism and to earn the trust of the rank and file, the PLA is placing greater emphasis on leadership. It has adopted a two-pronged policy, demanding that all commanders update their military skills and keep in shape.

More and more drills and evaluation exercises have been organized specifically for so-called leading organs, regardless of their rank. The army mouthpiece, Liberation Army Daily, also carries reports that senior officers are examined by their grassroots level counterparts. All of this is aimed to show the soldiers that those who lead them are capable and qualified.

Of course, physical appearance is often the first attribute to be noticed. To eliminate the image of big-bellied leaders, the PLA’s four general departments jointly announced earlier this year a document on military physical training reform for 2015-2020. Officers slated for promotion must meet certain physical fitness criteria. In fact, the PLA has already set up a physical training base, laid down physical fitness standards, and organized physical fitness training programs.

In the parade, for example, the J-10 and inflight refueling echelons were led by two major-generals, to show that even generals could fly and were capable of meeting the stringent formation requirements. Those on the ground were ready to march together with their soldiers, facing the same hardships.

In short, the appearance of the generals from all arms and services in the parade was not a simple act of honoring individuals. It had a political message no less important than the parade itself. The repairing of reputational damage, the showcasing of organizational unity, and the demonstration of military and physical fitness of senior leaders obviously targeted the public and, more importantly, the soldiers and junior officers at the grassroots level. The PLA understands that winning wars requires more than advanced equipment and smart strategies – a capable, reliable, and effective leadership is also needed.

Ka Po Ng is a professor at the University of Niigata Prefecture, Japan, teaching security studies and Chinese politics. He is the author of Interpreting China’s Military Power: Doctrine Makes Readiness as well as articles on China’s defense policy and Asia-Pacific regional security.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Elijah J. Magnier retweeted
Ashkan ‏@Zarathoustra96 12h12 hours ago

#BREAKING: "Mistral" battleships have been acquired by #Egypt.



Top news story
Egypt مصر ‏@RT3Egypt 11h11 hours ago

France says Egypt to buy Mistral warships after Russia deal scrapped - Yahoo7 News http://ift.tt/1FtSlSz #مصر #Egypt


posted for fair use
https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/2...-mistral-warships-after-russia-deal-scrapped/


France sells warships to Egypt, after Russia deal scrapped


AFP
September 24, 2015, 4:12 am

France says Egypt to buy warships after Russia deal scrapped France says Egypt to buy warships after Russia deal scrapped

Paris (AFP) - French President Francois Hollande said Wednesday Egypt had agreed to buy two Mistral warships which France built for Russia before scrapping the sale over the Ukraine crisis.

The deal is the second big military contract this year between France and Egypt, which Hollande said he increasingly views as a strategic partner.

"It was my preferred buyer because we already have military cooperation with Egypt," Hollande said of the deal he struck with President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

"Egypt plays an important role in the Middle East and wants to move towards a democratic transition, which is not easy, and we should support their efforts."

French government sources said Egypt would pay 950 million euros ($1 billion) for the warships, with "significant" financing from Saudi Arabia.

The two warships, which can each carry 16 helicopters, four landing craft and 13 tanks, were ordered by Russia in 2011 in a 1.2-billion-euro deal.

France found itself in an awkward situation as the delivery date neared in 2014, with ties between Russia and the West plunging to Cold War lows over Moscow's annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Paris faced the wrath of its allies around the world if it were to deliver the technology to Russia, and decided to cancel the delivery.

It was an expensive decision for France, which has had to foot the bill of over one billion euros for the upkeep of the ships and the cost of training 400 Russian sailors to crew them.

After months of intense negotiations, France and Russia agreed on the reimbursement of the deal in August.

Paris returned 949.7 million euros which had already been paid and also committed not to sell the two warships to a country that could "contravene Russia's interests", such as Poland or the Baltic states, a diplomatic source told AFP.

Several other countries were said to be interested in the warships, including Canada, India and Singapore.

The defence ministry source who revealed the cost of the ships said they were due to be delivered to Egypt in March.

Video France and Russia resolve Mistral warship dispute

- Ships after jets -

The deal comes after Egypt became the first foreign buyers of France's Rafale fighter jet, agreeing to purchase 24 in February, in what Paris hailed as an "historic" accord.

The 5.2-billion-euro ($5.9 billion) sale of the planes and a frigate was a rare triumph for France which had failed to export its flagship multi-role combat jet.

However rights group Amnesty International slammed the decision to sell the planes to a nation it has accused of "alarming" human rights abuses.

Analysts said that deal required overlooking some serious abuses by a regime which Paris sees as a bulwark against several threats in the region.

With Libya to the west wracked by instability, and the threat from Islamic State-linked jihadists on its eastern flank, Egypt has become a strategic partner to France despite a rights record sullied by Sisi's brutal crackdown on opponents.

Sisi was elected president in May 2014 with almost 97 percent of the vote a year after toppling the country's first freely elected leader, Islamist Mohamed Morsi.

A subsequent crackdown on Morsi's supporters left at least 1,400 dead and thousands more in jail.

Hollande said during a visit to Egypt in August that the ever-closer ties between Paris and Cairo stemmed from the "fight against terrorism".

"Unfortunately it is the Egyptian people who pay the price," Didier Billion of the Paris-based Institute of Strategic and International Relations said at the time of the Rafale sale.

"We can shut our eyes over the rights situation in Egypt but we can't shut our eyes over Russia, because Russia is at the centre of an international power struggle," said Billion.

Sisi was also the subject of scathing global criticism over the detention and trial of Al-Jazeera journalists, two of whom he pardoned on Tuesday on the eve of a major Muslim holiday.




posted for fair use
[Bhttp://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Sep-24/316453-france-and-egypt-agree-16b-mistral-warship-deal.ashx


Sep. 24, 2015 | 12:13 AM
France and Egypt agree $1.6B Mistral warship deal

PARIS: France has agreed to sell two Mistral helicopter carriers to Egypt for $1.06 billion after their sale to Russia was canceled in August, French officials said Wednesday. Cairo has sought to boost its military power in the face of a two-year insurgency based across the Suez Canal in the Sinai Peninsula and fears the conflict in neighboring Libya could spill over. Egypt’s allies are also keen to burnish its image in a region beset by turmoil.

“We unwound the contract we had with Russia, on good terms, respectful of Russia and not suffering any penalty for France,” Hollande told reporters on his arrival at an EU summit in Brussels.

“Yesterday, I agreed the price and conditions of this sale with [Egyptian] President [Abdel-Fattah al-] Sisi and so France will ensure the delivery of these ships without losing anything, while helping protect Egypt.”

A French Defense Ministry source said the contract was worth about 950 million euros, but unlike the deal with Moscow would not include any technology transfer.

As of yet there had been no talks on the potential armament for the carrier, which can hold up to 16 helicopters and 1,000 troops.

“The ships should be handed over in early March after the training of about 400 Egyptians and some final tests,” the source said.

A diplomatic source said Cairo wanted to base one ship in the Mediterranean and another in the Red Sea, making it available for future operations in Yemen, where Egypt is part of a Saudi-led coalition fighting Houthi rebels.

The French government agreed to reimburse 950 million euros to Moscow last month after the Mistral sale to Russia was canceled as a result of the Ukraine crisis.

The deal with Egypt comes as France has nurtured new links with Gulf Arab states, which appreciate its tough stance on their rival Iran and similar positions on the region’s conflicts. France has also benefited from what some Gulf countries perceive as disengagement from a traditional ally, the United States.

One source close to the matter told Reuters in August any deal with Egypt would likely be part-financed by Gulf Arab states.

Egypt and Saudi Arabia agreed at the end of July to work together to create a joint Arab military force.

The Mistral is known as the “Swiss army knife” of the French navy for its versatility. The sale will take the number of French naval vessels sold to Egypt to seven in just two years.

Egypt last year bought four small Gowind warships, built by Mistral manufacturer DCNS, which is 64 percent owned by France and 35 percent by defense group Thales.

It also acquired a French frigate as part of a 5.2 billion euro contract for 24 Rafale warplanes earlier this year, France’s first overseas export of the fighter jet.

Rights group Amnesty International slammed the decision to sell the planes to a nation it has accused of “alarming” human rights abuses.

Analysts said that deal required overlooking some serious abuses by a regime, which Paris sees as a bulwark against several threats in the region.

Hollande said during a visit to Egypt in August that the ever-closer ties between Paris and Cairo stemmed from the “fight against terrorism.” “Unfortunately it is the Egyptian people who pay the price,” Didier Billion of the Paris-based Institute of Strategic and International Relations said at the time of the Rafale sale.

“We can shut our eyes over the rights situation in Egypt but we can’t shut our eyes over Russia, because Russia is at the center of an international power struggle,” Billion said.

Peter Roberts, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute and a former Royal Navy officer, said Egypt’s military is shifting its focus, previously focused on the Sinai, to a more regional outlook.

“It does provide an interesting window into the decision-making of Egypt’s leaders at this moment,” Roberts said.

Analysts said the purchase showed Egypt’s attempt to take a more muscular role in the region, notably with the disintegration of Yemen and Libya.

A version of this article appeared in the print edition of The Daily Star on September 24, 2015, on page 9.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Chinese president in United States
Started by mzkittyý, Today 01:03 PM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?476011-Chinese-president-in-United-States
___

Hummm.......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...559e4b00310edf8c1de?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

Why China's Economic Problems May Be Worse Than We Think

China's authoritarian leaders must enact deep reforms, not just stimulus. It is not clear if they are willing to do that.

Daniel Marans
Reporter, The Huffington Post
Posted: 09/23/2015 12:00 AM EDT

Chinese president Xi Jinping is leaving behind a struggling economy as he visits the United States this week. That is worrying leaders of other countries that do business with China, including the United States, and is sure to be a topic of discussion when Xi meets with President Barack Obama on Thursday.

China’s trading partners have good cause for concern: Whether China will emerge from its current challenges stronger, hobble along or enter a free fall is largely up to China’s authoritarian leaders. They must enact deep economic reforms that will increase competition, transparency and rational allocation of resources if China is not only to revive its growth, but also to do so sustainably. And it is not at all clear that Xi or the country’s other decision-makers are willing to make those changes.

The Chinese economy is not in recession, but its growth has slowed considerably in the past two years, and shown especially troubling signs in recent months. China’s economy is on track to grow 7 percent in 2015, according to official Chinese government estimates. Most Western analysts believe that the real rate will be slightly lower. (Some observers argue that it will be much lower, dropping to 4.5 percent or less.)

An expansion rate of 7 percent is much higher than the growth typically enjoyed by developed nations. The U.S. economy, for example, has been growing at around 2 percent since 2010. But China has depended on consistent, near double-digit growth to lift 500 million people out of poverty since 1978 -- and it still has at least 100 million people living in poverty.

embed.png

http://cdn.tradingeconomics.com/cha...tle=false&url2=/united-states/gdp&h=300&w=600

And since China is the world’s second-largest economy, after the United States, even modest declines can have a significant negative impact on economies across the world. China’s slowdown has had the gravest consequences for countries like Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Canada and Australia that relied heavily on China’s demand for their commodities.

The U.S. has not been immune to these trends. Concerns about China’s downward trajectory and its impact on emerging markets like Brazil prompted a sell-off on the U.S. stock market in August. The Federal Reserve cited concerns about China fallout in its decision not to raise interest rates last Thursday.

The immediate cause of China’s deceleration is the normal business cycle. China’s economy is not growing as rapidly because foreign demand for its exports has slowed down. The country’s manufacturing sector hit a three-year low in August.

To some degree, a slowdown of this kind is inevitable as China hits a point of diminishing return that many maturing economies face. “China has become a very large economy,” said Nicholas Hope, a China specialist and director of the Stanford Center for International Development. “It is hard to keep growing at 10 percent.”

A common analysis of the deeper causes of China’s economic troubles is that it's in the midst of a painful transition from an investment and industrial export-driven economy to a service and domestic consumption-driven economy. If it could make up for its industrial losses with a commensurate increase in the high-value service sector and domestic demand for its goods and services, it would be on a solid path for the future.

While that is indeed the transition China must make, it is really only one manifestation of China’s need to become a less state-controlled, more competitive economy. Services generally make up a larger share of GDP than manufacturing in advanced economies, because as wages and living standards rise in these countries, industrial production becomes less competitive. Wealthier, more educated citizens become better poised to provide professional services.

In a relatively liberal economy, capital would force such a transition naturally, rewarding competitive businesses with investment and withdrawing from others.

But the Chinese government’s intervention has distorted market forces to the long-term detriment of its economy. Since 2008 in particular, China’s central and provincial governments have inflated China’s manufacturing and construction sectors far above their market value, investing or backing investments in factories, roads and housing that rarely reflected real market demand for goods and services -- or in the case of infrastructure, a genuine public need.

Rather than market forces, these investments are often motivated by patronage or political considerations. Normally a bank would only lend to a viable business, Hope said, but “China gets around that constraint by having powerful local officials request a bank loan for a local enterprise.”

As a result, China’s economy is weighed down by a vast oversupply of manufacturing, construction and real estate infrastructure.

“They have already built too many bridges to nowhere and they have an overhang of real estate debt,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist of Mesirow Financial.

When the economy began cooling in 2014, the government fostered a stock market bubble to offset corporate losses, encouraging China's new middle class to invest their savings in stocks. But that bubble too has since burst, erasing trillions of dollars in wealth.

Inefficient state-owned enterprises also dominate industries like telecommunications and petrochemicals that would otherwise be more competitive, creating a drag on economic growth.

The Chinese government appeared to recognize the need to liberalize its economy when the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China met for its third annual plenum in November 2013.

But few of the recommendations that emerged from the plenum have been implemented. The government and private banks alike continue to finance projects that do not fill a clear need. Not many state-owned enterprises have been privatized or streamlined. And to make matters worse, there is a dearth of reliable information about those companies’ and banks’ finances.

“Banks are slowly developing a backbone,” Hope said. “As the economy slowed down though, I was disappointed they were continuing to fund projects that were not worth it.”

Hope believes there is disagreement within Communist party leadership as to whether to liberalize the economy more, or preserve state-owned enterprises and a government-driven financial system.

He is nonetheless confident that the Chinese government has enough tools at its disposal to reinvigorate the economy in the short term by boosting demand. The Chinese government has already cut interest rates several times in a short period, even as it depletes its sizable foreign currency reserves to prevent the value of the yuan from dropping too much. China has also spent $236 billion purchasing stocks over the summer to keep prices high.

If the situation gets worse, Hope notes, the government can engage in fiscal stimulus through public spending projects to boost domestic demand for China’s goods.

But if China only stimulates demand the way it has in the past -- by funding bogus infrastructure and housing projects -- without liberalizing its economy, it risks laying the groundwork for yet another bubble. A series of fiscal stimulus measures designed to offset a decline in foreign demand after the 2008 financial crisis contributed to the bubbles afflicting China today.

“You have the problem of the urgent being the enemy of the important,” Hope said. “I’d rather see them forgo some growth and focus on important reforms.”


More on Xi Jinping's visit to the U.S.
•6 Issues Obama Will Grapple With As Xi Jinping Visits America
•What You Need To Know About China's Strongman President
•Xi Jinping's Visit To Seattle Will Shut Down Entire City Blocks

_____

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/chinas-silk-road-initiative-is-at-risk-of-failure/

China's 'Silk Road' Initiative Is at Risk of Failure

China’s “Silk Road PR” is in full swing, but the reality on the ground is different than the rhetoric.

By Moritz Rudolf
September 24, 2015

21 Shares
4 Comments

The Silk Road Initiative is the major project for Chinese President Xi Jinping. On every state visit and within every diplomatic forum, he has promoted his idea of “One Belt, One Road” (OBOR). Beijing wants to create China-centered infrastructure networks in order to expand its own economic and political influence in Eurasia.

But the time when the country was able to make economically unprofitable investments on the basis of political motives is long gone. Beijing had intended to invest more than $900 billion in infrastructure expansion in Eurasia. However, the money is now needed to stabilize its stagnating economy and nervous financial markets. China‘s currency reserves decreased drastically in August.

Due to financing difficulties a number of infrastructure projects have come to a standstill. For example, the gas pipeline known as “Power of Siberia,” the subject of an agreement signed by Russia and China in May last year, is in danger of flopping. In addition to this, the release of funds for the construction of the Altai gas pipeline to connect western Siberia and China has been delayed indefinitely.

At a more basic level, the OBOR represents an economic step backwards: instead of placing more emphasis on domestic demand, Beijing is speculating on new export markets in unstable regions such as Pakistan. The overcapacity of Chinese state-owned enterprises are not addressed but simply exported abroad. In this way the leadership is hampering its own ability to overcome the structural crisis of the Chinese growth model.

For the time being, OBOR remains a speculative bubble. Part of the initiative is to create around 20 cross-border Special Economic Zones. Khorgos, on the border with Kazakhstan, serves as a cautionary example: two years after the go-ahead China has built a city consisting of a number of multi-story shopping centers in the desert. In one of those buildings, for example, there are roughly one hundred shops, each one of them selling exactly the same product: fur coats. By way of contrast, on the Kazak side stands only a yurt and a couple of plastic camels. Inside the yurt, where one can buy German sweets and Russian beer; there is no sign of any customers.

At the same time, there is a lack of partners for the OBOR initiative: China is virtually on its own. The Chinese leadership has until now only been able to reach a handful of vague cooperation agreements, such as those with Russia and Hungary. But none of those states (and maybe not even China itself) know what OBOR really means. Xi Jinping wants to promote the idea of a “community of common destiny”. He has, however, not been able to convey what this term signifies and he has failed to convince other states why the OBOR should be attractive for other countries.

While Xi promises win-win situations, the biggest winner would be China. This is because Beijing is at once the project’s architect, financier, and builder. The suspicion towards OBOR is also fueled by China’s increasingly aggressive foreign policy. By following a more assertive approach in the South China Sea territorial disputes or more recently, by displaying modern military hardware during the World War II commemoration military parade in Beijing, the Chinese leadership risks losing the very thing it most needs from neighboring countries to make OBOR become a reality: trust.

In addition to this is the problem of unfortunate timing, a problem which could result in the collapse of Xi’s grand plan. In the light of the crisis in Ukraine, the prospects for a joint Chinese-Russian-European project have never looked worse. Moreover, ISIS threatens to spread to the very Central Asian regions that are key to the success of OBOR.

thediplomat_2015-09-23_17-13-07.jpg

http://thediplomat.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/thediplomat_2015-09-23_17-13-07.jpg

Despite these obstacles, the Chinese “Silk Road PR” is in full swing. Berlin and Brussels should exercise restraint and should not allow themselves to be dazzled by this PR offensive. Individual projects should only be considered if they are in the direct interest of Europe and are economically viable.

Moritz Rudolf is a Research Associate at the Mercator Institute for China Studies
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:popcorn1:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/21/us-china-defence-idUSKCN0RL2B420150921

World | Mon Sep 21, 2015 5:03pm EDT
Related: World, China

China military hints at strong opposition to large-scale troop cuts

BEIJING | By Ben Blanchard


Bitterness is growing within China's armed forces to President Xi Jinping's decision to cut troop numbers by 300,000 and considerable effort will be needed to overcome opposition to the order, according to a source and commentaries in the military's newspaper.

Xi made the unexpected announcement on Sept. 3 at a military parade in Beijing marking 70 years since the end of World War Two in Asia. The move would reduce by 13 percent one of the world's biggest militaries, currently 2.3-million strong.

One government official, who meets regularly with senior officers, said some inside the People's Liberation Army (PLA) felt the announcement had been rushed and taken by Xi with little consultation outside the Central Military Commission. Xi heads the commission, which has overall command of the military.

"It's been too sudden," the source told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"People are very worried. A lot of good officers will lose their jobs and livelihoods. It's going to be tough for soldiers."

China's Defence Ministry, in a statement sent to Reuters, said the "broad mass" of officers and soldiers "resolutely endorsed the important decision of the (Communist) Party center and Central Military Commission and obey orders".

It has said the cuts, the fourth since the 1980s, would be mostly completed by the end of 2017.

Experts say the move is likely part of long-mooted rationalization plans, which have included changing the PLA command structure so it less resembles a Soviet-era model and spending more money on the navy and air force as Beijing asserts its territorial claims in the disputed South and East China Seas.

Soon after Xi's announcement, the official Xinhua news agency published a long article quoted soldiers as supporting the decision.

Each branch of the armed forces believed the cuts would raise quality standards, Xinhua said.

Commentaries in the PLA Daily newspaper have since warned that the reductions would be hard to carry out. Chinese state media often run commentaries that reflect the official line of the institution publishing the newspaper.


"UNPRECEDENTED" CHALLENGE

The cuts come at a time of heightened economic uncertainty in China as growth slows, its stock markets tumble and the leadership grapples with painful but needed economic reforms.

China has previously faced protests from demobilized soldiers, who have complained about a lack of support finding new jobs or help with financial problems.

A protest by thousands of former soldiers over pensions was reported in June, although the Defence Ministry denied any knowledge of the incident.

The PLA is already reeling from Xi's crackdown on deep-seated corruption in China, which has seen dozens of officers investigated, including two former vice chairmen of the Central Military Commission.

Barely a week after the Beijing parade, the PLA newspaper said the troop cuts and other military reforms Xi wished to undertake would require "an assault on fortified positions" to change mindsets and root out vested interests, and that the difficulties expected would be "unprecedented".

If these reforms failed, measures still to come would be "nothing more than an empty sheet of paper", it said.

It did not give details on the planned reforms.

But state media has said they will likely involve better integration of all PLA branches. As part of this move, China's seven military regions, which have separate command structures that tend to focus on ground-based operations, are expected to be reduced.

There had been no previous suggestion big troop cuts were planned.


TROOP ENTERTAINERS TO GO

Another commentary in the PLA Daily published a week later detailed the kind of opposition Xi faced.

"Some units suffer from inertia and think everything's already great. Some are scared of hardships, blame everyone and everything but themselves ... They shirk work and find ways of avoiding difficulty," the commentary said.

A second government source, who is close to the PLA, said military song and dance assemblies, which traditionally entertain troops, would be the first to go.

"The defense budget will not be cut. It will continue to gradually increase," the source added.

China's military budget for this year rose 10.1 percent to 886.9 billion yuan ($139.39 billion), the second largest in the world after the United States.

Some retired Chinese generals have supported the troop cuts.

"A bloated military can only cause ineffectual expenditure and forfeited battles," retired Major-General Luo Yuan, a prominent Chinese military figure, wrote in the Global Times newspaper three days after Xi's announcement.

Xu Guangyu, a retired major general and now a senior army arms control advisor said: "Our country's military needs to take the path of modernization ... These force reductions are an effort to stay on this path and increase quality not numbers."

($1 = 6.36 Chinese yuan)


(Additional reporting by Michael Martina and Benjamin Kang Lim; Editing by Dean Yates)

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/reme...00000-troop-cut-not-everyones-happy-about-it/

Remember China's Announced 300,000 Troop Cut? Not Everyone's Happy About It

Xi Jinping’s announcement of a major troop cut in the PLA caught even China’s military by surprise.

By Ankit Panda
September 23, 2015

321 Shares
7 Comments

Chinese President Xi Jinping, in his opening remarks at China’s September 3 parade to celebrate Japan’s defeat in World War II, made a surprise announcement: the Chinese People’s Liberation Army would reduce its troop count by 300,000. Since the 1980s, the PLA has restructured and been cut four times, in 1985, 1997, 2003, and finally, in 2015, with Xi’s announcement.

Xi, in his speech, pitched the troop cut as a gesture of good will and a manifestation of China’s desire for peace. Analysts and observers of China’s military affairs, however, note that the cut allows Beijing to balance its military spending away from infantry and personnel costs toward modernization and its navy — its 2015 defense white paper, for example, says that the PLA needs to abandon “the traditional mentality that land outweighs sea.”

The troop cuts took many by surprise, including many within the PLA, over which Xi, as chairman of the Central Military Commission, exercises absolute authority. Reuter‘s Ben Blanchard reports that the troop cut decision has lead to some bitterness within the officer ranks of the PLA. Even though the PLA will remain the largest military in the world in terms of personnel, with 2 million active troops still standing after the troop cuts, 300,000 is not a negligible portion of the PLA. In economic terms, Xi announced a surprise cut in 300,000 jobs, pulling the rug out from underneath many in the PLA who hadn’t been consulted.

Blanchard’s Reuters report cites a government official close to senior officers in the PLA who notes that the decision was “too sudden.” As a result, there is a perception that Xi’s decision-making regarding the future of the military occurred entirely within the confines of the CMC (not that this is a radical departure from established practice). ”People are very worried. A lot of good officers will lose their jobs and livelihoods. It’s going to be tough for soldiers,” the source adds. Meanwhile, China’s Defense Ministry told Reuters that the concerns were exaggerated and that officers and soldiers “resolutely endorsed the important decision of the Party center and Central Military Commission and obey orders.”

I’ve previously written about Xi’s occasionally strained relationship with the People’s Liberation Army. The PLA, it should be noted, is not a professional military that exists to serve the state; it was founded as and continues to remain the military arm of the Chinese Communist Party. Last fall, after returning from his trip to India, which was marred by a sudden PLA border incursion along the disputed India-China border, Xi convened senior PLA officers and demanded their absolute loyalty and stressed the importance of adhering to the chain of command. With these troop cuts, it’s likely that these underlying tensions could become exacerbated.
 
Top