« 

China Building New Air Bases in South China Sea - New

In the past, I’ve posted items about the growing militarization of the South China Sea by China, and the growing risk of a military confrontation there. These pressures are steadily increasing. The first link reports that China is rapidly building man-made islands in the South China Sea, and that these islands will be large enough to accommodate the construction of military airfields at which China can base its military aircraft. If it is allowed to finish building these invasive military airfields in the Spratly Island region of the South China Sea, China will gain an enormous advantage over the USA and its allies in the Pacific Rim region. China will be able to send its warplanes from its own mainland air bases on missions to the South China Sea and then land, refuel and rearm them at these man-made island bases. The first two links detail the growing and understandable concerns about these soon-to-be Chinese airbases in the South China Sea.
The second link also reports that China is building ships which will be able to transport and deploy tanks and other weaponry to locations outside China’s borders. The link focuses on China’s ability to use such ships to transport tanks and ground-based weaponry to the South China Sea, but I have a question about that. What good would it do to deploy tanks to island military airfields in the South China Sea? It would make much more sense for China to deploy copious air defense systems to those islands to defend the military airfields that are almost sure to be built there. China could use such ships to deploy tanks, artillery, etc. to land military forces elsewhere where a Chinese invasion will occur at a future time. Knowing the prophecy of Ezekiel 38-39 predicts a Russian-Chinese invasion of the USA through Alaska (as well as other Russian-Chinese-Iranian invasions around the world in other theaters of combat in a coming World War III), I think China may have areas far more far-flung in mind as eventual destinations for deploying ground weaponry via surface transport ships.
One thing I think is clear. China is preparing to fight a war in the South China Sea. They have built the weaponry for such a war, and now they are building the necessary support bases for their warplanes to operate in such a combat operation. China doubtlessly plans on pre-placing at these island air bases, armaments, fuel, food and everything it needs to sustain a war fought by its military when that time comes.
As I have stated in previous posts, I think China wants a limited, regional, conventional war in the South China Sea. Its belligerent and outlandish claims in the region support that viewpoint. It especially, in my view, wants to compel the USA to sending aircraft carrier battle groups to support its allies in the region when such a war breaks out. China seems to be in a hurry to get ready for such a war. It makes sense, from their strategic and tactical point of view, to provoke the war while America is led by a president who has little or no military skills.  China can create a pretext for such a war in order to force the USA to deploy its carrier(s) to the region so China can “field-test” its new weaponry to see if they can sink a US aircraft carrier. China can put the US president in a position where he has no choice but to deploy US carriers to the region to support US allies. If a US president refuses to send the carriers to support American allies, the USA will lose face all over the world and the US president will have a debilitating “wimp” label on him/her from then on. If a US president deploys carriers and China can sink one of them, the president will encounter a firestorm of domestic rage from Congress and the US public for neglecting US national security. It is my opinion that President Obama has appointed generals and admirals who are more tasked to imposing Obama’s politically-correct agendas than winning wars. If China defeats US naval forces in a war that China provokes, Obama could face impeachment for neglecting national security and causing the deaths of perhaps thousands of US servicemen and women because of his neglecting US national security needs. The US war-planners need to ask themselves a serious question: If China lures US carriers into a war in the South China Sea, how many hundreds of sub- and super-sonic cruise missiles, scores of torpedoes and dozens of ballistic missiles can US carrier defenses defeat before they are overwhelmed? They need to ask this question now before any such war occurs, because if it does, the above scenario is what will happen. If I were the head of the Chinese military in such a future war, I’d unleash all of these threats at the US carriers…simultaneously. The third linkoffers details on one of China’s new cruise missiles which can be used now to attack targets from Alaska to the Philippines.
If China can sink a US aircraft carrier in a South China Sea war, the consequences would be immense. The US post-World War II dominance will be over. The domestic anger over such an occurrence can scarcely be overestimated. Rage will be focused on the president and Congress by the American people, and Congress (Democrats as well as Republicans) will be desperate to blame the president for the disaster rather than admit their own complicity in the debacle. There would be crushing effects devastating to US interests on global financial, monetary and commodity markets.
It makes sense for China to provoke such a war sooner rather than later after the US Navy has had time to deploy more-capable defensive systems on its surface warships (rail-guns, laser cannons, etc.). The US Navy has a plan in the works to add far more offensive and defensive weaponry to its existing warships rather than building ultra-expensive new ones (fourth link). In my view, this is an excellent strategy. For too long, US warships have been built to defend aircraft carriers instead of being able to take the war to the enemy with offensive weaponry that has a long over-the-horizon reach. It would be far cheaper to arm current US warships with long-range cruise missiles, longer-range cannons for shore bombardments, etc. than to build new warships that won’t be ready for many years. As the fourth link notes, new modern weapons systems could be “bolted” on to any US Navy surface warships. This strategy actually envisions a preparation for equipping warships to carry out offensive operations if a carrier is lost. The strategy envisions that in any major war, the US can expect to lose some “LCS.” This is an abbreviation for “large capital ships” (i.e. aircraft carriers).
As a deterrent, the USA should have a president who would warn China via diplomatic means prior to any war that China will pay a terrible price if it provokes a war with the USA on any level. Two possible such deterrent responses would be informing China that in the event of a war it fights vs. US forces, the US would (A) declare all US T-bonds and T-bills owned by the Chinese government, banks, private entities, corporations, individuals, shell companies in other nations, etc. “null and void” if China commits any “act of war” against the USA and (B) retaliate by attacking and destroying China’s Three Gorges Dam with conventional ballistic missiles. I think destroying this strategic and immense dam could do far more damage to China’s economy and nation than attacking any single military base, as its destruction would unleash a massive tsunami all the way from the destroyed dam to the Pacific Ocean. China should be made to know that in any war against the USA, its Three Gorges Dam is “toast.” If and when such a war occurs in the future, I hope the USA has a president who has the backbone to implement such tough actions. If deterrence is strong, it can prevent a war from starting. If China thinks it can gain ascendancy in a war, it is more likely to start such a war. I deeply hope such a war doesn’t happen, but only the most naive of current observers would be unable to see that China is now preparing to fight just such a war.
My thanks to a reader who tipped me off to this development.
  1. http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-china-us-islands-20150128-story.html?track=lat-pick#page=1
  2. http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1101&MainCatID=11&id=20150108000057
  3. http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1101&MainCatID=11&id=20150125000034
  4. http://breakingdefense.com/2015/01/if-it-floats-it-fights-navy-seeks-distributed-lethality/?utm_source=Breaking+Defense&utm_campaign=e2b743b5aa-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_4368933672-e2b743b5aa-408194097