Should Russia be Worried? China Makes Alliance With Pakistan, Afghanistan & Tajikistan

China is to set up an anti-terrorism alliance with Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan, state media said on Thursday, as it seeks to boost coordination with neighbors to tackle what it says is a growing domestic militant threat.

Fang Fenghui, a member of the powerful Central Military Commission which controls China's armed forces, hosted a meeting with his counterparts on Wednesday in Urumqi, capital of the western Xinjiang region, where officials say they are battling Islamist militants.

The four countries recognized the serious threat of terrorism and extremism to regional stability, the official Xinhua news agency said, and they agreed to set up a "four-country mechanism" for intelligence sharing and training.

"All parties reaffirmed they will cooperate to respond to these forces, and safeguard all member countries' peace and stability," Xinhua said.

link.

Putin Names US, NATO as National Security Threats

A new appraisal names the United States as one of the threats to Russia's national security for the first time, a sign of how relations with the west have deteriorated in recent years.

The document, "About the Strategy of National Security of Russian Federation", was signed by President Vladimir Putin on New Year's Eve. It replaces a 2009 version, endorsed by then- President Dmitry Medvedev, the current prime minister, which mentioned neither the United States not NATO.

It says Russia has managed to heighten its role in solving global problems and international conflicts. That heightened role has caused a reaction by the West, it says.

"The strengthening of Russia happens against the background of new threats to the national security, which has complex and interrelated nature," the document says.

[...]

The document says that the United States and the EU have supported an "anti-constitutional coup d'etat in Ukraine", which led to a deep divide in Ukrainian society and a military conflict.

It also names the expansion of NATO as a threat to Russia's national security and said that the United States has expanded its network of military-biological laboratories in neighboring to Russia countries.

The document, which serves as a basis for planning strategy related to national security by different state bodies, does not mention Syria. On Sept. 30, Russia began air strikes against anti-government rebels opposed to the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a Russian ally.

link.

The Pentagon states there's no reason to declare the US an enemy.

The Forces Reacting to China's South China Sea Ambitions

Few can deny that China has had a particularly challenging year. In an effort to augment its sovereignty claims over what it considers as its national “blue soil,” China has inadvertently encouraged a growing number of nations to coalesce against it. One could argue that China has overplayed its hand, unleashing a dangerous strategic dynamic that threatens the whole region.

Throughout the early years of this decade, China rapidly and inexorably altered the maritime status quo in East Asia, wresting control of Philippine-claimed Scarborough Shoal and deploying a giant oil rig into Vietnamese-claimed waters in the South China Sea.

In possession of cutting-edge technology, and confidently overseeing decades of relentless military modernization as well as paramilitary mobilization, China has transformed a whole host of contested low-tide elevations (LTEs), atolls, shoals and rocks into full-fledged islands. Within 20 months, it has reclaimed 17 times more land than the other claimants combined over the past four decades.

link.

Saudi Arabia Forms 34 Nation Coalition to Fight Terrorism.

Saudi Arabia on Tuesday announced the formation of a 34-state Islamic military coalition to combat terrorism, according to a joint statement published on state news agency SPA.

"The countries here mentioned have decided on the formation of a military alliance led by Saudi Arabia to fight terrorism, with a joint operations center based in Riyadh to coordinate and support military operations," the statement said.

A long list of Arab countries such as Egypt, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, together with Islamic countries Turkey, Malaysia, Pakistan and Gulf Arab and African states were mentioned.

The announcement cited "a duty to protect the Islamic nation from the evils of all terrorist groups and organizations whatever their sect and name which wreak death and corruption on earth and aim to terrorize the innocent."

link.

Could this become a military alliance?

NATO to Offer Montenegro Membership

The Balkan state of Montenegro will on Wednesday be formally invited to join the NATO military alliance, diplomatic sources said, a move which could further strain already difficult ties with Moscow.

The offer is expected to come after a meeting of foreign ministers from the 28-nation alliance in Brussels on Tuesday and Wednesday.

"The proposed text has been approved at (NATO) ambassador level," one source said Monday, asking not to be named. "After that, it would take at most a year and a half for Montenegro to become a member state," the source added.

link.

Ukraine Seeking NATO Membership Again

Ukraine aims to get NATO membership "as quickly as conditions permit", according to Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. "And I would do that tomorrow if it was at all possible."

Speaking to reporters at a joint press conference after his meeting with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on 15 December, Yatsenyuk said his country's security strategy is crystal clear.

link.

Despite "new type great power relationship", China's Strategic Vision for Asia Clashes With US' View & Role

While the back and forth between the Chinese and U.S. and Japanese speakers at the Shangri-La Dialogue has gained considerable attention, less scrutiny has been paid to the comments by General Wang Guanzhong advocating a “new Asian security concept.” His comments echoed those of Xi Jinping, who outlined a vision of an Asian security order managed by Asian countries at the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures (CICA) held on 20-21 May in Shanghai.

In many ways, advocacy of a revised security order to better accord with Chinese preferences is not new. PRC officials first introduced the principles of the new security concept in 1997. Around 2005, Chinese leaders introduced a series of major concepts, including “Harmonious World,” and its derivative, “Harmonious Asia,” to provide a clearer vision of how China hoped to shape the global and regional order to accommodate the country’s rise. The Asian new security concept introduced by Xi at the CICA summit, like the ideas promoted by preceding leaders, proposes the development of political and security relationships, institutions and structures to complement China’s growing economic clout and to replace the U.S.-led system of alliances as the basis of the region’s security architecture.

The sources of China’s growing dissatisfaction with the U.S. alliance system are deep and structural. They have little to do with the personal preferences of PRC leaders. Nor do they stem from reactions to statements by individual leaders or U.S. policies, such as the Rebalance, although these may aggravate Chinese frustrations. Criticism of U.S. “hegemonism” and “Cold War mentality” has a long history, but for years these have been aimed at specific policies, such as arms sales to Taiwan. The latest round of criticism, by contrast, is more generally aimed at structural obstacles to China’s pursuit of economic growth and security. In the eyes of PRC leaders, the U.S.-led system of security alliances and partnerships in Asia is one of the most important of these obstacles.

To be clear, Chinese leaders have not designated the United States an enemy. On the contrary, the urgency behind China’s advocacy of the “new type great power relationship”—a policy ideal of close cooperation between relative peer powers to co-manage contentious issues—demonstrates the extent to which China, as a rising power, has hoped to avoid the onset of a classic security dilemma with United States, the status quo power. China continues to require regional stability to maintain its focus on national development. However, a powerful and regionally integrated China is increasingly finding its security and development needs at odds with the current security order.

link.

More on Finland, Sweden Joining NATO

SWEDEN and Finland stopped being neutral years ago. They both participate in NATO exercises, commit troops to its rapid-reaction force, took part in peacekeeping operations in Bosnia and Kosovo, joined the fight in Afghanistan and, in the case of Sweden, even got involved in the 2011 air war in Libya.

The two Nordic countries are thus more willing participants in the transatlantic alliance than several full members (Germany refused to have anything to do with Libya). Yet they do not enjoy the biggest benefits of NATO: a seat at the decision-making table and the protection afforded by Article 5, the clause that defines an attack on one as an attack on all. This did not matter much when Russia was a “partner” and neutrality, or rather non-alignment, was a badge of national identity. But Vladimir Putin’s aggression towards Ukraine is forcing a reassessment.

This is especially true in Finland, once part of the Russian empire. Alexander Stubb, who is about to take over as prime minister, made clear his wish to push for NATO membership with the aim of “maximising Finland’s national security”. He was elected this week as leader of the conservative Kokoomus party, succeeding Jyrki Katainen, who is moving to the European Commission. Nothing will happen immediately, as the current five-party coalition excludes moves towards NATO. But Mr Stubb said the country needed a “comprehensive debate” after next April’s general election and, if he wins, he seems determined to lead it.

link.

Upgrades are Already Being Planned for F-35 Lightning II

The F-35 is barely out of the stable and hasn’t been ridden hard yet, but the Pentagon is already beginning work on the next generation of improvements to the Joint Strike Fighter, with a close eye on the Chinese J-20 and J-31 stealth aircraft — and other capabilities.

Frank Kendall, the Defense Department’s head of acquisition, told reporters that the foreign program partners and the United States have begun discussions about planning upgrades to the aircraft and its weapons systems. The partner nations – Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway,Turkey, the United Kingdom – met this week to discuss the program and Kendall was briefing us on the meetings.

Kendall has been pushing work on this — and on the early work for a sixth generation fighter (whatever that will be) — for more than year, when he pushed DARPA to set up its air dominance initiative. When it was announced it sounded more like a study group — big brains trying to come up with glimmers of what the next threat would be and how to counter it. DARPA put eight program managers from a wide variety of areas to work with Air Force and Navy experts.

But Kendall’s comments yesterday — though they were fairly thin on details — seemed to indicate that the appearance of the two Chinese aircraft in less than two years, combined with other technologies the Chinese, Russians and other possible competitors are hard at work on, has prompted the program to step up its efforts to ensure the F-35 has the right mix of weapons, software, Electronic Warfare capabilities and processors.

link.

US vs China in Asian Security Summit

The United States and China squared off at an Asian security forum on Saturday, with the U.S. defense secretary accusing Beijing of destabilizing the region and a top Chinese general retorting that his comments were "threat and intimidation".

Using unusually strong language, U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel took aim at Beijing's handling of territorial disputes with its Asian neighbors.

"In recent months, China has undertaken destabilizing, unilateral actions asserting its claims in the South China Sea," Hagel said.

He warned Beijing that the United States was committed to its geopolitical rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region and "will not look the other way when fundamental principles of the international order are being challenged".

His speech at Singapore's Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia biggest security forum, provoked an angry reaction from the deputy chief of staff of the Chinese Army, Lieutenant-General Wang Guanzhong.

"I felt that Secretary Hagel's speech is full of hegemonism, threat and intimidation," he told reporters just after the speech.

Wang said the speech was aimed at causing trouble in the Asia-Pacific.

link.

Ukraine: Hints of Patterns

Battles continue in the East.  It appears the LGM are starting to get the worst of it.  Of those captured or killed and IDed in the East, only 20% are local levees.  There are some pretty gruesome pictures from morgues being posted.

 The Ukrainian government had a deadline for the LGM to lay down their weapons for an amnesty.  That deadline has now passed.  The Ukrainians have stated they will begin the offensive full force everywhere.  They stated they held off to give time for those who realized they made a mistake to give up their arms and to minimize the violence during the presidential election.  The election is over and a large part of the LGM haven't given up.  Time to kill.

 The LGM are digging in in Donetsk.  Barricades are going up all over.  The police merely watch.

After the report of the LGM in Lugansk turning on those in Donetsk, news has come out of the LGM executing a number of their own in Donetsk.  The reason?  Rape, murder and robbery.  If they were really concerned about this, they would have stamped down hard immediately.  The LGM have come to realize the populace does not support them and they are screwed by that.

The OSCE has lost another team of observers in the Donbass.  head to desk moment here.

The most intriguing bits from Kiev? Poroshenko has come out and asked for a Lend-Lease Program with the United States: he wants direct military equipment.  he believes sanctions are close to useless in stopping Russia's intervention in Ukraine (does he read Noel's blog?)  He has also stated he wants allies and security guarantees other than the Budapest Memorandum.  If NATO membership for Ukraine is Russia's "red line," they had better be ready to confront the fact Russia has pushed Ukraine closer to NATO than any time prior. 

(my warped and funny idea is *CHINA* becomes the guarantor of Ukrainian sovereignty and drops a division of troops in the Donbas.  Watch Putin *&* Europe freak...however, the US would freak just as much...and Ukraine is not terribly friendly to the idea of the китаєць running around with guns in their country)

 

China Outlines Vision for Asia

While tensions in the South China Sea have gone from bad to worse, with riots in Vietnam targeting Chinese businesses and a range of ASEAN states exploring ways to counter Chinese actions, Xi’s Wednesday speech at the Shanghai Conference on Interaction and Conference Building in Asia (CICA) seemed to take place in a different world. Rather than focusing on conflict, he spoke about China’s role in building a “peaceful, stable and cooperative new Asia.” Xi’s speech called for the construction of a new regional security architecture based on the organization, which China will chair for the next two years.

While recognizing the existence of U.S. interests in Asia, and its right to a role in the region, Xi made it clear that the United States’ current role is far too large. He called upon Asian states to settle their problems “among locals,” dismissed alliances as threatening to regional security and sought to put CICA, an organization which includes Russia and Iran but not the United States, at the center of regional security issues­.

link.

Japan and America Growing Closer

FOR the prime minister, Shinzo Abe, it was a milestone. On May 15th a panel published its long-awaited report recommending that the country’s “self-defence forces” (SDF) be allowed to act more like a normal army. At present, in Article Nine of its constitution, Japan renounces war as a sovereign right. For Mr Abe, rewriting the clause is a cherished aim. For most Japanese, that remains several steps too far. So Mr Abe, backed by the panel, has a narrower goal: reinterpreting the constitution in ways that, for the first time, allow for “collective self-defence”—that is, would let Japan aid its allies, notably America, should they come under attack.

The recommendations stop far short of allowing combat missions overseas. Assuming the recommendations become law, only collective defence related chiefly to the protection of Japan will be permitted, meaning in practice in its near-abroad. But in a country aware of its past imperial rampages through Asia and proud of its post-war pacifist credentials, even this change faces opposition. Public support for Mr Abe’s changes has been ebbing. In particular, his coalition partner, New Komeito, has grave doubts. The party is backed by Soka Gakkai, the country’s biggest (and staunchly pacifist) Buddhist organisation.

New Komeito’s support is critical and, for the fact that it is not a given, Mr Abe has partly himself to blame. His visit in December to Tokyo’s Yasukuni shrine, which honours war criminals as well as the war dead, appalled the party. Its leader, Natsuo Yamaguchi, deplores Japan’s bad relations with China and South Korea. Both countries are wary of Japan being seen to boost its armed forces. Still, New Komeito may yet come around. It seems to have been heartened by President Barack Obama’s endorsement, when he visited Tokyo last month, of the desire to reinterpret the constitution. It was just the boost that Mr Abe needed.

Mr Obama’s endorsement makes sense. The panel’s recommendations ought to help Japan act as a more effective partner should the United States find itself, for instance, in combat with North Korea or defending Taiwan. Indeed, the debate about collective self-defence is taking place in parallel with an overhaul of defence guidelines between America and Japan, the first in 17 years.

For the first time, Japan could provide logistical support, including the supply of ammunition, fuel, transport and medical services, to front-line American forces in the event of a crisis on the Korean peninsula. Japan could also provide America with more help in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. And the self-defence forces would have clear permission to shoot down North Korean missiles heading for American bases or territory.

Separately, in UN-approved peacekeeping operations, Japanese soldiers could bear arms for the first time.

link.

Japan Wants Closer Ties, Alliance (?) With India

Japan wants closer defence ties with the new Indian government that will take power after 16 May, the chief of the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) said at the recent Western Pacific Naval Symposium (WPNS) held in Qingdao, northeastern China.

"The Indian Navy [IN] is keen and willing [for closer co-operation] but Indian politics is very complicated," Admiral Katsutoshi Kawano told reporters on 22 April.

He hinted that China's concern at stronger naval ties between India and Japan had prevented the outgoing Congress Party-led federal coalition from forging a stronger military relationship with Tokyo. He added that he hoped the incoming administration would shed this diffidence.

link.

Japan Works to Reassure its Main Ally, The United States

After a difficult few months, Mr Abe seems to recognise the need to reassure Japan’s main ally about his government’s intentions. His visit last year to the Yasukuni shrine in Tokyo, where high-ranking war criminals are honoured, drew protests from the country’s neighbours, especially China. The United States declared itself “disappointed” with Mr Abe.

link.

Finland, Sweden Considering Joining NATO Because of Crimea?

When Russian warplanes staged a mock bombing run on Sweden last year, air defences were caught napping. It was the middle of the night and no Swedish planes were scrambled.

Instead, Danish jets belonging to NATO's Baltic mission based in Lithuania, took to the air to shadow the Russians.

The discussion that incident triggered over Sweden's ability to defend itself has grown with Russia's seizure of Crimea from Ukraine. As in neighbour and fellow EU member Finland, Swedes wonder whether to seek shelter in the U.S.-led NATO alliance, abandoning Stockholm's two centuries of formal neutrality.

Sweden has talked of a "doctrinal shift" in defence policy. In Helsinki, where "Finlandisation" became a Cold War byword for self-imposed neutrality driven by fear of a powerful neighbour, the government has talked of an "open debate" on joining NATO.

Talk of NATO underscores anxieties that feed calls for more defence cooperation and spending. But membership seems distant, with voters in both countries sceptical of the benefits, and wary of the costs of taking on new international commitments.

Both nations have a history of dealing with Moscow in their own particular ways. Sweden's loss of Finland to Russia in the time of Napoleon prompted it to give up on war and armed pacts.

Finland, which won independence during Russia's revolution of 1917 but nearly lost it fighting the Soviet Union in World War Two, kept close to the West economically and politically during the Cold War but avoided confrontation with Moscow.

Like Sweden, it joined the European Union only in 1995.

For all the scepticism about NATO, however, worries have been growing in Scandinavia since Russia's action in Crimea.

link.

Saudi Arabia's Doing Something Interesting

Saudi Arabia has been hitting the news a lot lately. No, not for the the nominal reasons: oil, women's rights, their court system, etc. Rather they have been cropping up a lot in military and international relations ways. Ones which can only be intentional leaks meant to be warnings, both to its current allies and to its main enemies, Iran and Israel. This has all taken place since the preliminary nuclear deal with Iran. The Saudis have been on record has both wanting to have the US attack the Iranians to stop their nuclear weapons development and not believing in the nuclear deal being anything other than a smoke screen to buy Iran more time. (for the record, I'm skeptical, too. While the Iranians are not North Korea by any stretch, its obviously possible to run a smoke screen, milk the world and still develop a weapon) So what is it that the Saudis have been doing? Why are they doing these things? And what it could it mean?

I am not an expert on foreign policy or the Middle East or even Saudi Arabia.  Take everything you read with a grain of salt.

What is it the Saudis have been doing?  First off, the Saudis hinted multiple times they may acquire nuclear weapons from Pakistan or have Pakistan station Pakistani nuclear weapons on Saudi soil.  Furthermore, the Saudis have been in negotiations with the Pakistanis to both purchase military equipment from them and base Pakistani troops in Saudi Arabia.  It has also just lent/gave $1.5 billion dollars to the Pakistanis.  Finally, it was revealed the Saudis have acquired DF-21 ballistic missiles from the Chinese...ironically, with help from the US.  

The last one is the least frightening of the above, even though.  The Saudis already had DF-3A missiles in silos for some time. The Saudis even decided during the first Gulf War the allied air campaign was sufficient as retaliation and launching their own missiles in retaliation would be counter productive, since a large number of civilian casualties were expected with their impact.  The acquisition of the DF-21s took place with the help of the CIA, supposedly, to verify they were not nuclear capable.  I am sure that there was no incentive on the part of the CIA so they could get a first hand look, nuh uh. 

The DF-21s, while sounding scary, are not really more so than the DF-3As the Saudis already had.  Albeit more accurate than before.  Basing Pakistani troops, on the other hand, and nuclear weapons, on the gripping hand, are even more so.  The latest there extremely so.

Why would they do this?  Nukes?  Pakistani troops?  Lending, perhaps even granting, that much money to the Pakistanis?  Why would they consider any of the above?  In no small part it is because the US now produces more oil and gas than the Saudis do.  Domestically.  That dog don't bark anymore.  In other words, the Saudi threats to nail the US with oil price spikes through OPEC are becoming meaningless, if not are already.  That threat is gone, so new ones needed to be added. The new threat is to try to scare the United States into backing away from the nuclear deals with Iran.  A threat with a path to escalation.  Back off or else.

The first is the Saudis will stop buying American weapons (pakistani tanks and aircraft).  Moderate, mild but painful since the Saudis have money to spend and we want to keep our defense contractors afloat.  Do as we say, or the defense contract gets it.  And we really mean it.  We'll go to the Pakistanis if the rest of you mooks don't like it.

The second threat, that of Pakistani troops and basing, is more worrisome.  It would probably presage a move to boot the last bits of the US military there.  It would give an additional benefit that should Iran ever attempt to nuke the Saudis, the Pakistani troops would likely get it too and therefore would act as a tripwire.  This would mean aligning closely with the Pakistanis though and while the Saudis have the money to keep the Pakistanis generally happy, it entails a risk that the paycheck to the Pakistanis may not be enough and the troops might have more than nontrivial abilities to place whomever in power.  Don't listen?  We just broke up with you and here's our new boyfriend!  nyah!

The final threat, acquiring nuclear weapons, would be the ultimate middle finger.  They almost assuredly have the money.  They might have even already bought the weapons and have them on hot standby for delivery (although not detonation).  The consequences of this move would be enormous though.  it would make the Israelis extremely unhappy if the Saudis took delivery.  The US would be almost as much so.  The only way I can see this happening is if the Iranians tested a bomb and the Saudis felt they could not completely trust the Pakistanis.  naaaah.  ;)

 The Saudis could walk away from the first of the above even after committing to buying Pakistani equipment.  It would give them some leverage in a threatening, scary way, but would not be a line which could not be uncrossed.  I'd think this is likely to happen if the West continues to negotiate with the Iranians.  I also expect the West will not stop negotiating.  This will mean the Saudis will go through with the buy.

What happens after that depends on what happens next...with the West and Iranians.  And, ironically, with Crimea.  If the West is seen as a toothless partner, then alternates are needed.  The Pakistanis, a nuclear armed one, may be the partner.  If a deal is signed with the Iranians by the West, the Saudis will have some small contingent of Pakistani troops placed somewhere conspicuous and near a target which the Iranians might nuke.  This acts as a tripwire.  I'd also expect we'd see some favourable deals with equipment, oil and whatnot as well for the Pakistanis: you're the muscle, we're the money.  If the Iranians detonate a nuke, then all bets are off. 

Watching the situation in Ukraine and doing likewise here with the Saudis, I have to wonder if we are seeing the end of the order set up after the fall of the Soviet Union.  The US is no long seen as reliable, irregardless of whatever power it may wield.  China is seen as too far away and perhaps as it is on the rise but not yet embedded in most places in the world, best to be kept out from the start.  Russia...remains Russia.  There has been talk of a multipolar world for ten years now, ever since the 'hyperpower' nonsense was first brought up.

Perhaps an unexpected pole is being born...Saudi money and Pakistani muscle.  Could we see others joining?  Willingly or not?  Bahrain?  Kuwait?  UAE?  Qatar?  Others?  Proxy wars with Iran happening in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan?

There's a word which springs to mind which I will not utter here(*), but the irony of wanting to utter it is delicious.

Feel free to mock me here.

*.  It brings out the Eye of Mord^H^H^H^HCraziness.

Saudi Arabia, Pakistan in Military Hardware, Base Talks

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are discussing a potential military hardware sale agreement that would involve the export to Riyadh of an unspecified number of Al-Khalid main battle tanks (MBTs) and the Sino-Pakistani JF-17 Thunder fighter aircraft, senior Pakistani officials and Western diplomats in Islamabad have told IHS Jane's .

The deal may form part of a wider defence co-operation agreement that could also involve the future deployment of Pakistan Army troops to Saudi Arabia, according to officials.

link.