If US and China Go to War, Don’t Underestimate the Pain America Will Face

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 1 August 2016
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Alex Harper. Edited by Shelby Stillwell.
On July 29, the RAND Corporation, a U.S. think tank, published its latest report, which predicts four possible scenarios in which a Sino-American war could happen. The report takes the years from 2015 to 2025 as its research focus. It argues that in the wake of the increase in China’s military power, once the U.S. and China go to war, U.S. Armed Forces have no way of ensuring the conflict would expand in the direction they have predicted, and they will also not necessarily be able to obtain a decisive victory. We are getting closer and closer to 2025, and the U.S. obtaining victory in the future appears even more difficult. But this does not necessarily mean that China could win the war.

The report argues that no matter what kind of war the U.S. and China fight, China’s losses will all be larger. Furthermore, these damages include not only military losses, but political and economic ones as well. The U.S. GDP, for example, will decrease anywhere from 5 to 10 percent, but China’s is likely to fall anywhere from 25 to 35 percent. The U.S. will only have to deal with increased bipartisan disputes, but China will potentially face social unrest and ethnic divisions. In addition, the report argues that if the war had broken out in 2015, the U.S. would have only suffered losses to its naval and air strength, its aircraft carriers and its military bases in the Asia-Pacific, but the continental United States would not have been threatened at all.

The RAND Corporation has a close relationship with U.S. political and military circles; it is the most influential defense research think tank. The company’s research report on China’s political and military affairs is widely valued in the U.S. and throughout the West. One of its reports from more than 10 years ago proposed that once war erupts between China and the U.S., the U.S. would be able to carry out air attacks against the Chinese mainland, using the U.S. bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade as an example, raving that China “wouldn’t need to take even one pair of American boots,” but it “would take U.S. air attacks.”*

The U.S. and China both obviously have departments and organizations researching contingency plans for the chance that war breaks out between the two nations, but doing an internal study is a very different thing than publishing it. Publishing this kind of report poisons the social atmosphere of the U.S. and China, without a doubt; it also becomes a fight of public opinion and bears similarity to psychological warfare, and the overall negative effects are completely unavoidable.

The RAND Corporation and other organizations frequently publishing this kind of report put U.S. “strategic disregard” on display. They think if they irritate China a little bit, it’s no big deal; even if the Chinese don’t like it, they still have to take it. The source of the Americans' self-confidence is the way they constantly treat Chinese: "We know you (China) have improved very quickly, but you still have a long way to go when compared to us."

China’s military strength and economic clout are still inferior to the U.S., a fact that Chinese citizens clearly understand themselves. Most Chinese people also recognize that once war breaks out between the U.S. and China, China’s losses will possibly be slightly larger than America’s. However, when the Chinese consider the circumstances of a war between the two nations, the disparities are not limited only to these points.

China does not want to go to war, especially not with the U.S. If the U.S. and China do go to war, the only situation under which it could happen would be the U.S. breaking down China’s front doorway and provoking China to a level it cannot accept. The Chinese people would then be forced to fight. When it comes to moving toward war, the Chinese are very cautious. However, once we start to fight, Chinese people fight with a determination far greater than that of the U.S. Our ability to sustain the losses associated with war also far exceeds America’s.

The RAND Corporation claims that because of economic recession China will experience social unrest, so much so that the nation could break up. But we feel that, on account of the damages from war, the U.S. is more far more likely to be thrown into a state of upheaval first. This is because going to war with China in China’s coastal waters is not based on the core interests of the United States. Instead, it’s just that the U.S. wishes to maintain its pipe dream of forever being the world hegemonic power. Suffering the losses of war will force America to wake up to reality.

The statement that the continental U.S. will not be threatened in the event of a war with China has certain conditions. One premise is that the U.S. must not drop a single bomb in Chinese territory. If U.S. Armed Forces, just as the RAND Corporation suggests, carry out air raids against China just like they did more than 10 years ago, U.S. territory will definitely be included in the range of China’s military strike capacity. Americans know that China has this kind of capability, and the people in Washington and throughout U.S. society need to understand clearly: The Chinese do not lack this kind of resolution or determination.

In a situation where the U.S. and China undergo military conflict, those powers which provide bases and direct military support for the U.S. will become the targets of Chinese retaliation. They perhaps fear that it will be too hard to sustain the long list of damages that comes with war. In the western Pacific Ocean, there exist only disputes over reefs, and the possibility of these reefs directly triggering a war are awfully small. The biggest risk faced by Japan, the Philippines and the other nations involved is that they might possibly be forced by the U.S. into a war because of their military alliances.

This report by the RAND Corporation should remind us how important it is that Chinese military power become even stronger. China must continually strengthen its construction of a deterrent force that can threaten American territory. This includes the capacity to carry out a nuclear strike anywhere within U.S. borders, as well as the ability to cover the whole of America with non-nuclear strikes. The more powerful our capacity of this kind, the more respect our peaceful attitude will be given. Furthermore, the U.S. will be more likely to restrain its warlike impulses.

The U.S. and China cannot go to war lightly; it would be best if they never did. But, I’m afraid that it is not as simple as making a request. It’s only if the American people believe deeply that a war with China implies losses the U.S. would be unable to bear that peace will hold firm and not be broken.

*Editor’s note: This quote, although accurately translated, could not be verified.


 美国智库兰德公司7月29日公布最新报告,预测了中美有可能发生战争的四种假想场景。报告以2015年至2025年为研究期限,认为随着中国军力的提高,一旦美中开战,美军并不能确保战争按自己预料的方向发展,也不一定能够取得决定性的胜利。时间越接近2025年,美军获胜将更困难,但这不意味着中国会赢得战争。

  报告认为无论中美打什么样的战争,中国的损失都会更大,而且这种损失不仅是军事上的,还包括经济和政治上的。比如美国GDP会下降5%至10%,而中国将下降25%至35%。美国只会增加两党纷争,中国却可能出现社会动荡和民族分裂。此外报告认为如果战争2015年爆发,美国的损失包括海空军力量、航母以及在亚太的军事基地,但威胁不到美国本土。

  兰德公司是与美国政界军界关系密切、以防务研究最具影响的智库,它对中国的政治、军事研究报告在美国以及西方广受重视。它十多年前出的一个报告曾建议一旦中美爆发战争,美国可对中国本土实施空中打击,并以科索沃战争中中国驻南联盟使馆被炸为例,妄言中国虽“不能接受美国的一双军靴”,但“能接受美国的空袭”。

  中美显然都有部门和机构在研究中美一旦发生军事冲突的应对预案,但内部研究和把报告公布出来,区别很大。公布这类报告必然会对中美两国社会互视的氛围造成一定毒化,还会成为舆论战及心理战的一部分,总体上的负面影响不可避免。

  兰德公司等机构不时公布这样的报告还显示了美方战略上的“不在乎”,他们觉得刺激中国一下“没什么了不起”,中国不喜欢也要受着。他们这种“自信”的来源就是美国人经常对中国人表达的那个意思:我们知道你们进步很快,但同时知道跟我们比,你们还差得很远。

  中国的军力、经济实力都还弱于美国,中国人自己非常清楚。对中美一旦发生战争,中国的损失很可能比美国的损失大这一点,应该也是多数中国人的认识。但是中国人看待中美一旦爆发战争的情况,远不止这些。

  中国不想战争,尤其是不想同美国发生战争,如果中美开战,唯一的情况就是美国逼到了家门口,且有中国无法接受的挑衅,中国人被迫一战。中国人走向战争会很谨慎,然而一旦打起来,我们打到底的决心大概会远远高于美国,我们承受战争损失的能力也会高于美国。

  兰德公司宣称中国会因经济衰退而动荡,甚至国家分裂。而我们认为,因为战争损失美国更可能先乱起来,因为美国在中国近海同中国打仗依据的不是其真正的核心利益,而是它想要永远称霸世界的梦游。战争损失会让美国社会清醒过来。

  美国本土不会因中美开战受到威胁,是有条件的。它必须以中国国土不落下一枚炸弹为前提。如果美军像兰德公司十几年前出的主意那样对中国国土实施空袭,美国国土必进入中国的军事打击范围。美国人知道,中国有这样的能力,华盛顿和全美社会也需清楚,中国人同样不缺这样的决心和意志。

  在中美发生军事冲突的情况下,向美国提供基地和直接军事支持的力量都可能成为中国的报复目标,它们恐怕很难不进入蒙受战争损失的清单。西太平洋只存在岛礁争议,由它们直接引发战争的可能性很小。日本、菲律宾等卷入战争的最大风险在于它们可能因军事同盟关系被美国强行绑上战车。

  兰德公司的报告提醒我们,中国军事力量进一步强大有多重要。中国必须不断加强对美国本土具有威慑力的军事能力建设,这既包括能打到美国全境的核武器能力建设,也包括同样能覆盖美国全境的非核打击能力建设。这种能力越强大,我们的和平姿态就越会受到尊重,美国的那些好战力量也就更会克制自己的冲动。

  中美是轻易不能打仗的,最好永不开战。但这恐怕不是可以求来的,只有美国人深信对华开战意味着它无法承受的损失时,和平才会牢不可破。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Canada: Minnesota School Shooting Is Just More Proof That America Is Crazed

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Topics

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Related Articles

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?

France: Global South: Trump Is Playing into China’s Hands

Zimbabwe: What the West Doesn’t Understand about China’s Growing Military Might

Sri Lanka: Trump Is Very Hard on India and Brazil, but For Very Different Reasons

1 COMMENT

  1. As a citizen of the United States and a democratic socialist I am appalled that this military tension between my country and this great world power China is not publicly debated by Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump as an ominous development.
    As a working class American I ask : what wrong has China done to me ? As a democratic socialist I do not think that U.S. imperialism is on a higher moral plane than the understandable ” nationalism ” of other proud countries.
    It is also clear to me that the Hillary Democrats have evolved in just a few short weeks into a neo-con, War Party , the kind ridiculed by anti-imperialist author Mark Twain more than a century ago. What natural right did the U.S back then have to Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico ?
    How can you, Hillary Clinton, have the open support of the Pentagon, the CIA, the FBI – the ruling plutocracy as a whole – and be anything but poison for working class America ?
    [ http://radicalrons.blogspot.com]