Will there be a war between China and America. War news: if tomorrow is a war between the US, China and Russia

The armed forces of the United States and China are among the most powerful and combat-ready on the planet. It is extremely difficult to predict the outcome of an open confrontation between the two superpowers; everything will depend on how they use their advantages.

Passions run high

Since Donald Trump came to power, relations between the United States and China have deteriorated sharply. Many American politicians talk about the reality of a trade war between the two countries. But some experts also speak of the possibility of a "hot" war, one of the main reasons for which could be Beijing's claims to the South China Sea - a zone of economic and military-political interests of Washington.

The situation is fueled by the deployment of US THAAD anti-missile systems in South Korea, aimed at containing a possible North Korean threat. However, the Chinese authorities categorically object to strengthening the positions of the Pentagon in the immediate vicinity of their borders, believing that China is the true goal of the American military presence.

The problem with Taiwan, which China considers to be its territory, cannot be discounted either. In the event that Beijing attempts to resolve this issue by force, the United States, as a strategic partner of the island republic, may well get involved in a military conflict.

The numbers speak

In 2016, the PRC allocated a record amount of $215 billion for defense, ranking second in the world ranking for this indicator. However, the United States, with a $611 billion military budget, remains out of reach.

You can often hear that Beijing does not record all military spending in official reports. But even if you take into account the billions hidden by the Chinese in other budget items, America is still ahead of the rest in defense spending.

However, if we take into account the official statistics of the increase in funds allocated by the Chinese government to defense (a fourfold increase over the past 10 years), then in the foreseeable future, the advantage of the United States will be leveled.

At present, the United States Army has 1,400,000 troops, with another 1,100,000 in reserve. The Chinese armed forces are 2 million 335 thousand people, the reserve is 2 million 300 thousand. When comparing the number of ground forces of the two countries, the difference becomes even more obvious: 460 thousand Americans versus 1.6 million Chinese.

The figures reflecting the amount of equipment and weapons of the armies of these two states are also very eloquent.

Aircraft of all types: USA - 13,444; China - 2,942

Helicopters: 6 084 - 802

Tanks: 8 848 – 9 150

Armored vehicles: 41 062 - 4 788

Towed artillery: 1,299 – 6,246

Self-propelled guns: 1934 - 1710

Multiple launch rocket systems: 1 331 - 1770

Aircraft carriers: 19 - 1

Frigates: 6 - 48

Destroyers: 62 - 32

Subs: 75 - 68

Nuclear warheads: 7,315 - 250

Military satellites: 121 - 24

The statistics clearly demonstrate that if China has an undeniable superiority in manpower, then in technology and weapons, by most indicators, a tangible advantage is on the side of the United States.

At sea, on land and in the air

In quantitative terms, the Chinese Navy was far ahead of its opponent: 714 Chinese warships against 415 American ones, however, according to military analysts, the United States has a clear advantage in firepower. The pride of the US Navy is 10 full-size aircraft carriers and 9 landing helicopter carriers, which will leave no chance for the Chinese fleet in an open sea battle. But if the battle takes place in enemy waters, then the technical advantages of American ships may not be enough, in particular, to neutralize the missiles of the People's Liberation Army of China (PLA).

The United States has an impressive arsenal of 14 ballistic missile submarines, of which 280 are nuclear-capable, each capable of wiping out an entire city. China can only counter with 5 nuclear attack submarines so far, but the biggest problem is that Chinese submarines are easily tracked by American radar equipment. At the moment, from the point of view of experts, the US submarine fleet still has superiority both in the fight against ground targets and in an underwater duel.

The first M1 Abrams tanks entered service with the US Army back in 1980, but since then they have been repeatedly upgraded, turning into essentially new vehicles. In particular, the modern Abrams is equipped with a 120-mm main gun and remotely controlled weapon stations. His armor is made up of uranium and kevlar, and he also possesses combined chobham armor.

The best tank currently in service with the PLA is the Type 99. On board is a 125 mm smoothbore gun with an automatic ammunition feed system, which is also capable of launching missiles. The Type-99 is equipped with reactive armor and is considered almost as invulnerable as an American tank.

If we take into account the direct collision of American and Chinese tank units, then there is parity, but the experience and more qualified crews are on the side of the US Army.

The most advanced aircraft in service with the US Air Force is the fifth-generation F-35 light fighter, which, however, has many vulnerabilities, including an intermittent high-tech helmet designed to transmit all kinds of information to the pilot's screen.

The Chinese can boast of a J-31 fighter similar in performance to the American model, which debuted at an air show in 2014 and earned good reviews from foreign pilots. However, analysts are still relentless: they say that the ratio of losses in battles between the J-31 and the American counterpart F-35 will be 1-3 not in favor of the Chinese fighter.

However, there is one factor that can negate the superiority of the US Army - this is a high sensitivity to losses. Considering that the replenishment of manpower in the Chinese army is an order of magnitude higher than in the American one, the United States will almost certainly lose the land war.

The temptation to strike first

The authors of the latest study by the reputable American analytical and research organization RAND Corporation argue that a military conflict between the United States and China may break out suddenly. Any reason is likely: the Taiwan or North Korean issue, a provocation on the Indian-Tibetan border, or the situation in the South China Sea.

Thus, recently the Arbitration Court in The Hague ruled unlawful China's territorial claims to 80% of the water area of ​​the disputed region in the South China Sea. Beijing responded by saying that it would not comply with the decision of the Hague Court. Showing the seriousness of the authorities' intentions, the Chinese bomber defiantly flew over the Scarborough Reef, which China had actually taken from the Philippines.

By now, the Pentagon and the PLA have pulled their most advanced weapons to the place of possible hostilities. In view of the power of weapons, there is a strong temptation for adversaries to strike first, analysts at the RAND Corporation say.

However, if a clash does occur, it is unlikely to reveal anyone's advantage. There are enough sober minds on both sides not to get involved in a protracted conflict. “Washington and Beijing need to carefully consider the possibility of a long, uncontrollable and very difficult conflict in which there will be no winner,” the study notes.

Attacking and holding back

A well-known specialist in the field of international relations and military history, Robert Farley, writes in one of his articles that after the collapse of the USSR, the United States developed a doctrine that, instead of a strategy of confronting one global adversary, determined the pattern of actions that the Pentagon should have followed in the event of a sharp aggravation of relations with two regional adversaries.

This concept, according to Farley, involves active military action against one adversary and keeping the other from the war. When the first is finished, the time will come for the operation against the second.

“In the event of a war, the analyst continues, the ground forces and part of the US air force will be concentrated in Europe against Russia, providing assistance to European allies, while the other part of the air force and the most powerful fleet formations will be involved in the Pacific Ocean in combat operations against China.”

Nuclear weapons are unlikely to be used in such a conflict, since, taking into account the accumulated arsenals, any use of them will mean the guaranteed destruction of both opponents. At the same time, Farley notes that a military alliance between China and Russia against the US is unlikely, since each of the countries follows its own goals "according to its own schedule." China, he said, can count on Russia's friendly neutrality and arms supplies, but nothing more.

Strength in union

The Chinese leadership has repeatedly stated that the PLA serves exclusively defensive purposes and does not intend to use military force far from its native shores. That is why Beijing avoids establishing military bases outside the country, with the exception of Djibouti.

The Pentagon, on the contrary, is present in more than 100 countries of the world and has several dozen military alliances. American financier George Soros once stated that
if there is a military conflict between China and Japan, which is a military ally of the United States, then most likely it will result in the Third World War, since the United States will certainly get involved in it.

According to experts, it is highly likely that the United States in such a war will be supported by its faithful satellites - South Korea and Australia. Soros, in turn, declares the possible support of China by Russia.

Sinologist Konstantin Sokolov, vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, shares Soros's fears and speaks of a possible full-scale conflict between China and the United States with the participation of allies.

“We see a new stage of global confrontation. This was very well manifested on May 9, when Chinese and Indian troops marched through Red Square. This was a demonstration that the BRICS association is beginning to transform from a purely economic union into a military-political one. The union is moving into a new quality, and this union is anti-Western,” says Sokolov.

However, the Russian expert states that "a classic armed confrontation between the United States and China is impossible," so the conflict "will develop according to a different technology." He sees an example of such wars in Libya, Egypt, Syria and Ukraine. Formally, there was no foreign invasion of these countries.

All these wars, according to Sokolov, were unleashed in accordance with the unified national security strategy of the United States adopted in 2006 - the so-called "Bush Doctrine". This doctrine says that the most effective way to harm the enemy state is a civil war.

Speaking in Singapore at a regional security summit, Pentagon chief James Mattis once again condemned Beijing's activities in the South China Sea (SCS). According to AFP, the US Secretary of Defense added that he did not rule out a confrontation with China. Mattis reproached Beijing for militarizing the situation, as well as for neglecting international law and the interests of other countries.

• James Mattis
• Reuters

"The scale and impact of China's activities in the South China Sea to build artificial islands is different from similar actions by other states," Mattis said.

Note that earlier with an alarming forecast of the situation in the South China Sea, senior adviser to Donald Trump Stephen Bannon made. In an interview with The Guardian, he predicted that the confrontation over the South China Sea would enter a hot phase within the next ten years.

Despite the fact that today a war between the United States and China seems unlikely, there are indeed prerequisites for such a scenario, and very serious ones.

Military presence

China and the United States regularly deploy their warships to the disputed area, but so far the parties have limited themselves to psychological pressure on each other. However, any misfire can turn the conflict into a phase of armed confrontation. To prevent accidental clashes, Beijing and Washington were forced to conduct joint exercises in 2015, during which a special code of conduct for the military of both countries in the South China Sea was developed.

• Spratly archipelago in the southwestern part of the South China Sea
• Reuters

Recall that the Paracel Islands and the Spratly archipelago, as well as their water area, are the subject of a territorial dispute between China, Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan and the Philippines. Washington does not put forward its own territorial claims, but provides active support to its allies in the region. This provokes protest from Beijing, since the Chinese authorities consider it unacceptable for outside forces to interfere in a regional dispute. In 2014, the People's Republic of China officially announced its rights to the Spratly Islands, as well as its intention to start developing oil fields on the shelf of the archipelago. At the same time, China sent its warships to the disputed area.

In April 2015, Beijing began building artificial islands on the reefs of the archipelago, and in May, the PRC published its new military strategy. According to the document, the Chinese Navy is responsible for protecting the interests of the state on the high seas. Previously, the Chinese navy was supposed to protect only the near borders of the country.

• Artificial island in the South China Sea
• Reuters

Ignoring the indignation of Washington and its neighbors in the region, China continues the construction of artificial islands in the South China Sea at an accelerated pace. In May 2017, Beijing deployed missile launchers on the disputed Yongshudao Reef to prevent Vietnamese submarines from approaching the archipelago.

Washington's response was immediate: a few days later, the US Navy destroyer Dewey approached the Spratly Islands without notifying the Chinese side of its appearance.

• US Navy destroyer Dewey
• US Navy

Chinese Defense Minister Ren Guoqiang said that the Chinese Navy's URO frigates (frigates carrying guided missiles) demanded that Dewey leave the Spratly sea area. On May 26, another incident occurred between the military powers: two PRC J-10 fighter-bombers dangerously approached a US P-3 Orion patrol aircraft over the South China Sea. According to the ABC television channel, Washington assessed these actions of Chinese pilots as "unsafe and unprofessional."

key artery

Such close attention of the two powers to the South China Sea is explained by a number of factors. First, the sea is crossed by shipping routes that export energy resources from the countries of the Middle East to the United States, as well as to the states of the Asia-Pacific region. Through this corridor, in particular, China imports up to 40% of crude oil consumed in China. The US share in the transit flow through the South China Sea accounts for about $1.2 trillion.

In addition, rich hydrocarbon deposits were discovered on the shelf of the Paracel Islands and the Spratly Archipelago. To date, the amount of proven oil reserves in the South China Sea is approximately 11 billion barrels.

In 2016, the International Court of Justice in The Hague banned China from developing deposits in a number of areas of the South China Sea, but Beijing ignores this decision.

The Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands also have serious military and strategic importance - the military presence here allows you to control most of the South China Sea from the air.

The birth of a maritime power

The Chinese are not only gaining a foothold in the archipelago, but also building up the potential of their naval forces. The course towards turning China into the strongest maritime power was taken by the authorities of the Celestial Empire in 2012. This, by the way, should reassure those Russians who fear some kind of “stab in the back” from the PRC. China's former military doctrine emphasized ground forces, an approach inherited from the feud between the USSR and the People's Republic of China, but this has changed in recent decades.

• Chinese army nuclear submarine
• globallookpress.com
• Li Gang

Now the Chinese military department is building additional submarines, despite the fact that China already has a large submarine fleet of 75 submarines. For comparison: the US Navy is armed with 70 ships. The Chinese fleet is noticeably inferior to the United States fleet in terms of the number of aircraft carriers: the PRC has two such ships in service, and the United States has ten. However, now China's shipyards are building three more floating airfields. These preparations cannot be called redundant - the interests of China and the United States have diverged too much lately.

• New Chinese aircraft carrier
• U.S. Department of Defense

Even Donald Trump's plans to reduce US dependence on hydrocarbon imports by developing the American shelf will not help reduce the level of tension in relations with Beijing.

“The United States has always been an energy-deficient country, and at the same time it holds the first place in the world in hydrocarbon imports. Even the reopening of all American fields will not solve the problem - the United States will still be forced to import oil and gas, and shale oil will not help, ”political scientist Leonid Krutakov said in an interview with RT.

Therefore, the White House's interest in the sea route through the South China Sea will not weaken over time.

Experts believe that another factor of uncertainty is the policy of the US regional allies, whose interests are formally defended by Washington in the South China Sea. For example, the President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, has managed to change his attitude towards the problem of the disputed islands several times in recent months. At first, the politician threatened to send troops to the area and promised to personally raise the Philippine flag on one of them. Then, rather unexpectedly, the president revised his plans, declaring that he had met Beijing halfway in order to strengthen good neighborly relations. But in May, Duterte again made a sharp maneuver and began the redeployment of the Philippine military to the disputed island of Thitu. Manila still cannot decide with whom it is more profitable to cooperate - with Beijing or with Washington. It should be noted that a few years ago such a choice was out of the question.

“China’s influence is growing so fast that the United States is increasingly turning on itself economically,” Alexander Lomanov, chief researcher at the Institute of the Far East of the Russian Academy of Sciences, explained in an interview with RT. - Washington will find it increasingly difficult to find allies among countries with a low level of economic development: they are all interested in attracting Chinese investment. Probably, only Japan will soon be a reliable ally of the United States, and maybe also South Korea.

Pforesight of a great war

Experts believe that it is impossible to exclude the transition of the Chinese-American confrontation into a hot phase, and Stephen Bannon's words about the coming big war are not an exaggeration.

“The fact that the world today is on the verge of a third world war was said not only by Steve Bannon, but also by Jacob Rothschild. Too serious contradictions have accumulated in the world economy - even deeper than the contradictions that existed on the eve of World War II. The main deterrent today is nuclear weapons,” Krutakov said.

According to the expert, the confrontation between China and the United States will only grow, and both sides are preparing for a possible war. One of the steps in this direction by the United States can be considered the deployment of THAAD anti-missile systems in South Korea under the pretext of the North Korean threat. Beijing has no doubt that these missile defense systems are not directed against the DPRK, but are designed to stop the possibility of a Chinese retaliatory strike during Doomsday.

• Anti-missile complex THAAD
• Reuters

In addition to the fact that both countries have nuclear weapons, a deterrent factor in this situation is the strong trade and economic ties between China and the United States. China is the leading trading partner of the United States, and the rupture of ties will lead to a shortage of goods in the United States and an overproduction of goods in China, and the consequences of the crisis of the world's two largest economies will negatively affect the global economy. However, no matter how afraid Chinese and American politicians are of provoking an economic collapse in their countries, military-political factors may overcome these fears.

“Mutual dependence generates not only attraction, but also additional threats. As long as China did not show political ambitions, there was no confrontation. But now Beijing is making it clear that it has plans not only for economic but also political dominance. It is difficult for two different political strategies to exist in the same economic field. The issue of national interests and security is always higher than issues of profit,” Krutakov said.

According to Lomanov, historical experience shows that the existence of economic ties between countries has never been a guarantee of peace.

“Otherwise, there would be neither the First nor the Second World Wars,” the expert concluded.

This is not an idle question, the US is on the verge of declaring such a war.
Except that Trump's strategic adviser Steve Bannon has already announced it.

He did say in an interview:
- We are in a state of economic war with China. They are not shy about talking about what they are doing. One of us will be the hegemon in 25 or 30 years. And if we get stuck along the way, it will be them.

That is, the war on the part of the United States turns out to be, as it were, defensive!

- For me, the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on it. If we continue to lose it, then in five, I think, at the strength of 10 years, a turning point will come from which we will never be able to recover.
https://www.gazeta.ru/politics/2017/08/17_a_10835288.shtml

Steve Bannon proposes that section 301 of the Commerce Act of 1974 apply.
It gives the President of the United States the exclusive right to take all possible measures to combat the actions of a foreign state that may harm American commerce.
Yes, it should again be sanctions.
Specifically, against the violation of the intellectual rights of American companies operating in China.
And the eternal theme is against the understatement of steel and aluminum prices by the Chinese.

Some experts write that there is no trade war, that this is just a continuation of the competition between the US and China.
She was, is and will be.
https://ria.ru/economy/20170817/1500518443.html

This point of view seems to me to be a significant simplification of the problem.
Competition really was and is now.
But if the White House decides to turn trade and economic competition into a trade and economic war, then it will be a war.
And Bannon has either already declared this war, or is trying to get Trump to start it.

For us, for Russia, what is interesting here?
1) How will the US trade war with China, if it starts, affect our relations with both the US and China?
2) Can China win, should one bet on it?
3) And is there a difference in where the trade and economic capital of the world is located, in New York or in Shanghai?

Russia, with its small economy, will not be able to significantly influence the course of the war.
Therefore, as an ally, we are unlikely to represent any special value for both the United States and China.
However, China may try to use the transport, gas and military-political opportunities of Russia, but the United States is practically not interested in them.
It turns out that we are organic allies of the Chinese.

It is unlikely that China will be able to win in the next 20-30 years.
GDP per capita is too low, the economy is export-oriented and dependent on trade conditions, and political problems have not been resolved: the power-political system remains archaic and needs to be reorganized on generally accepted principles.

But in the longer term, Chinese dominance is inevitable.
As soon as China moves to a domestic market economy, it will immediately gain advantages over any developed economy.
Where, who else has a billion of their own consumers?
They just need to be made rich and solvent!
After that, no country in the world, except India, will be able to compete with China's trade and economic system.

However, all this is feasible on one condition: in the process of power-political reorganization, China will not break up into several states.
But without knowledge of the real laws of social development, the process of power-political reorganization occurs spontaneously and catastrophically, as in the USSR and Yugoslavia.

Finally, there remains the question of the capital of the world.
Does it matter where it is located, in China or the USA, if it is not in Russia anyway?
Perhaps US global dominance is less dangerous for Russia than superpower China at hand?

China has mirrored the US trade restrictions. From April 2, the Celestial Empire introduces trade duties on 128 items and 7 goods imported from America (15% for 120 goods and 25% for 8).

According to a statement from the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, the tightening of trade barriers for products from the United States is being introduced to protect its interests and compensate for damage from duties imposed by Washington on steel and aluminum.

“I respect Xi Jinping, but the economy is more expensive”

When Donald Trump was only a candidate for the American presidency, in his election campaign he promised strong support to national manufacturers. Having led the United States, Trump kept his promise. To begin with, he did not want to continue what he started. Barack Obama case called "Transatlantic Alliance with Europe". And recently, the President imposed increased duties on imports of steel and aluminum, which greatly offended China, Russia and the European Union.

Increased duties on imported aluminum and steel in the United States have been in effect since March 23. These are 10% and 25% respectively. Donald Trump explained the decision to tighten trade barriers by dumping foreign metallurgists, which is why American manufacturers are experiencing problems.

At the same time, the American leader promised that he could ease duties for those states that recognize his slogan "America first." And he really reduced them until May 1 for Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea and the European Union. Russia and China are not on the list of “forgiven” ones. On the contrary, Washington seems to be unleashing a trade war with Beijing even more strongly.

In mid-March, Trump signed a memorandum on trade restrictions on China. According to The Hill, the US president believes that tariffs imposed on China will cost the Chinese economy $60 billion. “This is the first measure of many,” Trump said.

According to him, he respects Xi Jinping, including for cooperation on North Korea, but the US and China have a trade deficit of 375-504 billion dollars. "This is the largest trade deficit for any country in the world," the American leader stressed. In total, the US trade deficit last year was $800 billion.

“By pursuing this policy towards American manufacturers, Donald Trump embarked on the path of a trade war against most countries in the world that exported their products to the United States. The world is in a difficult situation. The introduction of duties on steel and aluminum resulted in losses for steel companies that supply these products to the United States. Also, the imposed duties on products from China exacerbated the situation,” says Gaidar Hasanov, an expert at the International Financial Center.

There will be no winners

The main victims in the trade war declared by Trump will be Russia and China, according to the Kommersant newspaper. "Washington suspended the introduction of duties on steel and aluminum against almost all major partners, except for Moscow and Beijing, the front of the fight against which, on the contrary, has expanded dramatically," the note says.

Russian producers will lose $3 billion due to new US duties, as calculated by the Ministry of Industry and Trade. “As for the losses of our enterprises, our companies, according to preliminary calculations, this is at least $2 billion for steel and $1 billion for aluminum,” Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade Viktor Yevtukhov said on Rossiya 24.

Moscow and Beijing joined forces in the fight against "American injustice": the countries criticized Washington's actions and filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO). They were supported by Brazil, the European Union, Turkey, South Korea, and Japan.

The Chinese have already imposed duties on American products. Russia, too, will not remain in debt, according to Gasanov. “Russia will also take measures to limit the import of American goods. And an increase in trade between Russia and China will benefit both countries. After all, China is a promising strategic partner for Russia,” he emphasizes.

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin even announced investment restrictions against China. According to him, this is Trump's order. Mnuchin, by the way, admitted that he was not afraid of a trade war with China. “We intend to continue with the tariffs, we are working on it,” he said on Fox News.

In turn, the official representative of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, Gao Feng, noted that Washington itself could fall into a hole dug for others. “We would recommend that the US refrain from any actions that could harm trade and economic relations between the two countries, otherwise the US itself will fall into a hole dug for others.<…>China is currently actively developing partnerships around the world, making efforts to create a new model of international relations, where cooperation takes into account the interests of all countries and is mutually beneficial,” RIA Novosti quoted Feng as saying.