Coming six months after Beijing’s biggest-ever offshore naval drills, the joint war games are another reminder that military posturing is central to the world’s two most powerful authoritarian states. While neither likely desires or expects war with the US or its allies, Beijing and Moscow want to give every impression they are increasingly ready — and are relying on that message to dominate their neighborhoods and intimidate less powerful nearby nations.
The countries also have an unambiguous message for the Pentagon — that if war should come in eastern Europe or the South China Sea, the US would risk serious losses if it tried to intervene.
These landmark military exercises are part of a much wider picture of investment, development and weapons trials — even if the outcome has sometimes been mixed. According to reports, Russian forces are still attempting to recover a nuclear-powered cruise missile that failed on a test flight somewhere in the Arctic last year. Meanwhile, China is reported to have suffered its own significant increase in military aircraft crashes over the last two years, particularly in the South China Sea.
Illustration: Mountain People
It is a stark sign of how much risk these countries are willing to take on in their quest for military power — arguably significantly more than the US or any of its European and Asian allies.
Russia’s September “Vostok” drills are to involve up to 300,000 troops, just as Moscow deploys its largest naval formation in several years to the Mediterranean.
As well as a naked warning to the US not to intervene with any further Russian action in Syria, they also likely act as domestic political messaging. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s poll numbers have been waning as of late, and military posturing could help his popularity. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has also increasingly embraced militaristic nationalism as he entrenches his power — but if war should actually come, the countries see themselves in rather different confrontations.
Russia sees future wars most likely taking place on land, a repeat of scaled-up versions of 2008 and post-2014 conflicts with neighbors Georgia and Ukraine, in which victory depends on deploying overwhelming military force within a few miles of Russian territory while keeping the US and other powerful Western states from intervening.
China sees its most likely wars taking place offshore, either over disputed territories in the South China Sea or Taiwan, but as with any territorial ambitions that Moscow might have in Europe, a victory by China would again depend on keeping US and other allied forces back and out of theater as much as possible for the duration of the war.
Much of the new technology that Moscow and Beijing are developing is designed with this goal in mind, particularly China’s missiles and submarines built explicitly for sinking US aircraft carriers.
However, new military purchases and deployments are also part of a much wider diplomatic and propaganda strategy. Russia has lobbied furiously against Georgia and Ukraine joining NATO, while those who watch Moscow’s social media and television feeds closely have said that it has also been attempting to undermine support for the Baltic states, NATO’s most Eastern members.
China has launched a savage diplomatic campaign this year to further isolate Taiwan, encouraging airlines and foreign governments to view it once again as part of China. In these attempts, neither country would have much success, but many believe that they plan to intensify their efforts in the months and years to come.
The US’ response, unsurprisingly, has been to do very much the same. In Europe, that has meant a dramatically stepped-up involvement in NATO exercises, particularly in countries that are most vulnerable to Russia, such as the Baltic states, Norway and Poland. US and allied warships and aircraft have continued to aggressively control disputed areas of the South China Sea, even as Beijing has dramatically increased its military presence in the area.
Clearly, that is something that infuriates Moscow and Beijing.
China has tried to exclude the US from regional military exercises that it wants to organize with other ASEAN members, while Russian media have repeatedly complained that NATO forces in Eastern Europe are themselves provocative and a threat to nearby Russian troops and territory. All this feeds into a rising tide of global distrust.
This year, the US disinvited China from taking part in its Rim of the Pacific naval drills, in part due to espionage fears, but also in protest against China’s growing South China Sea bellicosity.
For all their increasingly allied interest against the US, there are no signs that Russia and China particularly trust each other. Moscow has long feared Beijing might try to grab territory in its sparsely populated center, while Beijing has had its own worries about how Russia might use its military against it.
Indeed, some observers suspect one of the principal reasons that Moscow invited Beijing to take part in next month’s exercises is to keep Beijing from worrying that they might be a precursor to actual military action.
Where the truth lies is inevitably difficult to know, but the more energy and focus the world’s great powers put into extravagant war games, the greater the likelihood that they might find themselves in a real and perhaps uncontrollable conflict.
Peter Apps is Reuters global affairs columnist and founder and executive director of the think tank Project for Study of the 21st Century. The opinions expressed are his own.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
RSS