Security tops the Environment for China

[MKSheppard]

NYT Article

Okay, several revelant bits that stood out for me:

China has just emerged as the world’s largest manufacturer of wind turbines and solar panels, and plans to be the world’s biggest builder of nuclear power plants in the coming decade.

An oil exporter as recently as the early 1990s, China passed the United States last year as the biggest customer for Saudi oil and gas exports. Within as few as five years, it will be importing a higher percentage of its oil than the United States.

That is of great concern to the Chinese government, where officials worry about the security of energy supplies from abroad. And it is why China’s military and its main security and intelligence agency are playing an increasingly visible role in energy policy making.

While oil demand has risen inexorably in China, domestic production has barely increased. Chinese companies have struggled to acquire oil fields elsewhere. Shut out of the most attractive operations, which are already controlled by exporting countries or Western multinationals, Chinese companies have ventured into some of the world’s most volatile countries, notably Sudan and now to some extent Iraq and Iran.

One of the last issues still unresolved in the energy legislation involves the extent to which China should continue investing in such oil fields or rely on buying oil in world markets. Mr. Li says he personally believes that China’s energy security does not improve when state-controlled oil companies buy oil fields in potentially unstable countries.

“A lot of companies say, ‘I develop oil for China,’ ” but are really out to make a profit for themselves, he said,

Somali pirates have begun preying on tankers and freighters bound for China from the Mideast. That poses a challenge for China’s navy, which is mostly designed for coastal defense.

So I wouldn't be surprised if China's BIG move on the international scale is to simply invade Somalia in the next couple of years to uh, "peacekeep" and impose "order" on the place after a couple of Chinese flagged tankers/freighters get taken over; and also to be a very strong backer of the Iraqi government -- they can always outbid everyone else for the rights on the oilfields in Iraq.

[Zixinus]

So I wouldn't be surprised if China's BIG move on the international scale is to simply invade Somalia in the next couple of years to uh, "peacekeep" and impose "order" on the place after a couple of Chinese flagged tankers/freighters get taken over; and also to be a very strong backer of the Iraqi government -- they can always outbid everyone else for the rights on the oilfields in Iraq.

Isn't Somalia a shithole? My first thought is that such a move might actually be a good thing, because it would establish a government that wasn't there before, rather than giving it to muslim extremists. It would also effectively stop piracy. Of course, I don't know much about how modern China treats occupied territories or the exact state of current Somalia.

Though, it would be a logical next step really for the superpower that is China. After all, it has massive industrial power and it needs oil for that.

[Sarevok]

Is there any great amount of oil or natural gas resources in Somalia worth offsetting the cost of Chinese involvement ?

[Guardsman Bass]

So I wouldn't be surprised if China's BIG move on the international scale is to simply invade Somalia in the next couple of years to uh, "peacekeep" and impose "order" on the place after a couple of Chinese flagged tankers/freighters get taken over;

Why invade? If they don't really have any issues about working with governments as long as they let them basically do their thing in peace, it would probably make better sense (and be cheaper) just to try and make deals with the Al-Shaahab group if/when they finally overthrow the Transitional Federal Government.

Of course, that probably wouldn't stop them from doing naval missions to prevent piracy, if it's still a major problem for them after that.

[Temujin]

Besides, the Chinese don't have the force projection capabilities to even entertain the notion of successfully landing troops on Taiwan. They certainly aren't going to waste the time and money to do it in a place like Somalia when they can just prop up a local strongman who's willing to work with them.

I think the mistake a lot of people make about China's aspirations as a world power is that they assume that they're going to follow the US or Soviet model. China historically has been a strong regional power whose cultural influence was strong enough to extend beyond its borders. I see a variation on this their plans; militarily be the unassailable 800 pound gorilla of Asia, and than use a variety of other softer power (i.e., political, cultural, economic, etc.) ala Sun Tzu to accomplish what they want on a global scale. Ironically this is the method the US should be utilizing more than they actually do.

[Ziggy Stardust]

There is no reason to think the Chinese are invading anything. They have absolutely no reason to, and it completely contradicts every single foreign policy goal their government has stood for in the past decade.

[mr friendly guy]

I see several lines about Chinese invading this, or if they were in charge blah blah. I mean AV once bagged Iran by saying if America wasn't top dog would they enjoy having China running the show, que Chinese coming down on them harder than the US ever did. But why? What is this based on? The fact is China's policy of not interfering in other's affairs (which it hasn't always kept) has generally manifested itself as letting the governments it deals with do what they want as long as China gets what it wants. That is it doesn't try and impose conditions like democracy, accountability etc like Western aid. It seems to be a much cheaper way of doing things then sending troops in (even if it had the power projection capability to do so), and I don't see why this would change if their military modernises enough to have decent power projection capabilities.

[MKSheppard]

Is there any great amount of oil or natural gas resources in Somalia worth offsetting the cost of Chinese involvement ?

Was there any great amount of resources in the Barbary states in the 1800s? No. In fact, it was actually more expensive for the US -- in terms of paying for the costs of deploying a squadron of warships to the Mediterranean -- than it was to keep paying off the Barbary pirates.

The same principles come into play here -- China is increasingly becoming a Sea based power -- the sinews of Chinese Economic growth, both internally through exports to foreign markets; and externally through raw materials imported to China travel the world's oceans.

And if that free travel of imports/exports gets upset a bit by the Somalis in the next five years, I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese use their new amphibious forces (they have a new 20,000~ ton LPD now and LCAC clones in the works) to perform a punitive expedition against the Somalis, where they land, kill anyone who attacks them; sink all the scows in the ports of Somalia, then go home.

There's also th efact that China wants to make their mark on world political events.

Destroying the Somali pirates would be a nice step towards that.

[Medic]

I see several lines about Chinese invading this, or if they were in charge blah blah. I mean AV once bagged Iran by saying if America wasn't top dog would they enjoy having China running the show, que Chinese coming down on them harder than the US ever did. But why? What is this based on? The fact is China's policy of not interfering in other's affairs (which it hasn't always kept) has generally manifested itself as letting the governments it deals with do what they want as long as China gets what it wants. That is it doesn't try and impose conditions like democracy, accountability etc like Western aid. It seems to be a much cheaper way of doing things then sending troops in (even if it had the power projection capability to do so), and I don't see why this would change if their military modernises enough to have decent power projection capabilities.

I like how you kindly ignore China's extremely bellicose actions from the birth of the regime to the 1970's.

When they became a nuclear power, their military engagements with a spate of neighbors came to an end, probably because it changed the strategic calculus for any action they might have taken. They had Russia to worry about and now, the United States. For that matter, India's a regional nuclear power that can't afford to get too entangled with again.

A general American economic and military withdrawal would remove significant blocks to courses of action they may want to take, especially militarily. It isn't the greatest leap of faith to hope they'd be better custodians of global or even merely regional hegemony than the United States but I wouldn't exactly bet the bank on it, either.

[Thanas]

Is there any great amount of oil or natural gas resources in Somalia worth offsetting the cost of Chinese involvement ?

Was there any great amount of resources in the Barbary states in the 1800s? No. In fact, it was actually more expensive for the US -- in terms of paying for the costs of deploying a squadron of warships to the Mediterranean -- than it was to keep paying off the Barbary pirates.

And yet it took french colonization to stop the pirates.

[mr friendly guy]

I like how you kindly ignore China's extremely bellicose actions from the birth of the regime to the 1970's.

Ah, so this Chinese scare is based on actions 30 + years ago, most of it before they opened up to the West. Gotcha. Hey, are guys also afraid they British might rebuild their empire and try to retake the colonies?

While past actions aren't completely disregarded, more recent actions to me certainly hold more weight in predicting future behaviour than ones further in the past.

When they became a nuclear power, their military engagements with a spate of neighbors came to an end, probably because it changed the strategic calculus for any action they might have taken. They had Russia to worry about and now, the United States. For that matter, India's a regional nuclear power that can't afford to get too entangled with again.

Yeah, war is bad for their business. It disrupts trade and diverts resources from other projects they have planned. What else is new?

Your argument seems to be they won't do such and such because of Costly factor x, y, z instead of because they are just nicer people. My question is, how does this affect my position anyway, since I pretty much said it was cheaper for them to negotiate than to send troops in.

A general American economic and military withdrawal would remove significant blocks to courses of action they may want to take, especially militarily.

America invaded Iraq without the significiant block of another super power obstructing it. Yet the cost in lives and money is already quite high. What makes you think the Chinese are willing to pay the same price even if America said, hey go invade this shithole, we don't care? Especially when currently they seem to be able to negotiate satisfactory deals for themselves even with governments the West won't touch with a 10 foot pole. Its not like the Chinese get upset when countries demand to negotiate with them "without preconditions."

It isn't the greatest leap of faith to hope they'd be better custodians of global or even merely regional hegemony than the United States but I wouldn't exactly bet the bank on it, either.

Effecting regime change (like how the previous US administration likes to) isn't necessarily bad overall, look at Germany and Japan as examples. However recent attempts to do so have quite adversed outcomes like the destroyed infrastructure in Iraq worsening the life of the average Iraqi and strengthening AQ's hand. China seems content to negotiate with regimes without attempting to change them, with some of the infrastructure the Chinese build for these regimes filtering down to benefit the average guy on the street.

Simply maintaining the status quo of bad governments (which I see is what the Chinese will continue to do) doesn't necessarily make one a good global custodian, however it certainly seems better for most of the average citizens on the street than invasions Iraq style especially in terms of lives lost from the actual conflict and damaged infrastructure.

[mr friendly guy]

And if that free travel of imports/exports gets upset a bit by the Somalis in the next five years, I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese use their new amphibious forces (they have a new 20,000~ ton LPD now and LCAC clones in the works) to perform a punitive expedition against the Somalis, where they land, kill anyone who attacks them; sink all the scows in the ports of Somalia, then go home.

There's also th efact that China wants to make their mark on world political events.

Destroying the Somali pirates would be a nice step towards that.

Ah, so you see them using punitive expeditions instead of regime change with peace keepers and all that baggage. I guess this is more believable than them forking out the costs of occupying a shithole.