What forces are currently deployed on the Russian-Chinese border?

[Zhang Fei]

Anyone? These are some stats from a while back:

In 1990, the Soviets had about a quarter of its ground and air forces and a third of its navy dedicated to the border, or 56 divisions containing 700,000 troops when fully mobilized. The Chinese had 1 million soldiers deployed along the 7500-kilometer border.

A secondary question is this - when does anyone think China will become able to recover for itself the territories of Mongolia and what is now the Russian Far East?

[gunnut]

Before I answer your question, I have one of my own. How did Mongolia seperate from China and when?

To answer your 2nd question. I think it is unlikely in the foreseeable future for China to recover these territories through military means. However, China will have the 2nd largest economy in the world within 20 years. That's a major bargaining chip. China could re-acquire the territories through economic means. Although that will still be unlikely since Russia needs that land for strategic reasons and the Mongolians want to be on their own due to cultural reasons. Neither of which is likely to be exchanged for money.

[astralis]

gunnut,

you are right, china will not need to re-take those places by military means. there is no need to- mongolia is empty desert, which china has plenty of already, and the russian far east?- i believe there's more chinese there now than russians.

in fact, newsweek just did a recent report about it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11903907/site/newsweek/

[Officer of Engineers]

56 Divisions? I don't know where that came from but I only counted 45 back in the Cold War days.

★ FAR EAST MILITARY DISTRICT | Russian Arms, Military Technology, Analysis of Russia's Military Forces

Lanzhou Military Region
Beijing MR
Shenyang MR

[Garry]

Actually looking at the map I can see that Mongolia as an indepedent and anti-chinese state is good for Russian defense. It breaks down Russian-Chinese border into two parts and China will not be able to attack from both and independent Mongolia in between will be a problem in transfering troops from one direction to another.... So this was big achievement for USSR to make Mongolians independent in 1940-es

[Zhang Fei]

56 Divisions? I don't know where that came from but I only counted 45 back in the Cold War days.

This is from the Global Security website. I don't know where they get their numbers from - my assumption is a combination of Jane's and ex-NATO military. The basic point, though, is that these were entire armies, not just a few thousand Border Patrol personnel.

[Officer of Engineers]

No sh!t, Sherlock. The Soviets were ready to nuke their way clear for their tank armies all the way to Lop Nor.

[Zhang Fei]

Before I answer your question, I have one of my own. How did Mongolia seperate from China and when?

I assume Garry answered your question above. China claims to be the successor to the Manchu empire - i.e. everything that was part of or a tributary state to the Manchus is held to be Chinese territory. Many of these are submarine rather than official claims - they surface as the Chinese state becomes strong enough to contest the "unequal" treaties under which they were signed away.

To answer your 2nd question. I think it is unlikely in the foreseeable future for China to recover these territories through military means. However, China will have the 2nd largest economy in the world within 20 years. That's a major bargaining chip. China could re-acquire the territories through economic means. Although that will still be unlikely since Russia needs that land for strategic reasons and the Mongolians want to be on their own due to cultural reasons. Neither of which is likely to be exchanged for money.

gunnut,

you are right, china will not need to re-take those places by military means. there is no need to- mongolia is empty desert, which china has plenty of already, and the russian far east?- i believe there's more chinese there now than russians.

China has expanded its territory at the expense of its neighbors for thousands of years. Pretty much all of Central Asia was part of the Tang Empire - until the Arabs came calling in AD 751. As China becomes stronger, the historical pattern may re-emerge. Traditionally, China has played by its rules, not rules imposed by outsiders - via Western constructs like the Treaty of Westphalia, whereby the modern nation state was created. The Chinese empire has certainly been around longer than any individual Western state.

Note that most non-Western countries do not have the same attitude towards immigration and foreign investment as the West. Those who were let in can be expelled. What was sold can be taken back, with or without compensation. If Russia were to expel its Chinese immigrants or expropriate Chinese investors of their Russian assets, the question would be - (1) when would China have any military options against Russia, if ever, (2) what form would these options take, and (3) how would China go about recovering these territories?

[Officer of Engineers]

(1) when would China have any military options against Russia, if ever, (2) what form would these options take,

And here I assumed you are a PLA watcher. Generals Cao and Bao already listed the future doctrinal aspects of the PLA. Territorial conquests, not even Taiwan, is amongst the options. Instead, punitive expeditionary forces is the expectation for future military adventures.

This has been formalized in the doctrine known as the War Zone Campaign. The military aspects can be summarized in 4 phases.

1) A recee by force
2) Defining and isolationg the war zone (ie, the anticipated battle area)
3) A battle of annhilation of enemy forces within that war zone.
4) A retreat from the War Zone to deny any enemy re-enforcements a chance at vengence.

and (3) how would China go about recovering these territories?

It would have to be a political and diplomatic process, not a military one. But then again, the PLA starts and ends thinking political. The military aspects are completely secondary in their way of thinking.

[Zhang Fei]

And here I assumed you are a PLA watcher.

I'm more of a Far East watcher. China is where a lot of interesting things are happening, so I'm paying a lot more attention to it.

Generals Cao and Bao already listed the future doctrinal aspects of the PLA. Territorial conquests, not even Taiwan, is amongst the options. Instead, punitive expeditionary forces is the expectation for future military adventures.

This may simply be a matter of fitting declared objectives to the capabilities at hand. As the capabilities increase, the objectives probably will, if China's pre-Communist history is any guide*. The large-scale border clashes China fought with India, Vietnam and the Soviet Union were carried out during a period of relative Chinese weakness (compared to its overweening might throughout much of its history) when anything more could have escalated to a point when the benefits might not have been worth the cost - as occurred during the China's entry into the Korean War.

It would have to be a political and diplomatic process, not a military one. But then again, the PLA starts and ends thinking political. The military aspects are completely secondary in their way of thinking.

Again, as a tool of statecraft, China's military is a work in progress. As China becomes more powerful in relation to its neighbors (and the rest of the world), militarily and economically, it should be able to work its will without much recourse to external views. The question is when China will reach this stage.

* What I find interesting is that the government is funding and airing large scale historical epics involving far-flung military campaigns that depict wise (and ruthless) emperors. This is not your father's Communist party, during which the pre-communist era was reviled as feudal and an example of why the Communist Party became necessary. Communism is turning out to be merely another iteration of the state ideologies that have characterized every new dynasty in China's history. The only real difference is that Chinese Communism has adopted the Roman method of succession, whereby the strongest faction appoints the top dog.

[Officer of Engineers]

So you're a PRC watcher, not a PLA watcher.

The doctrinal aspects of the PLA is a snail's pace in development. We have only seen 3 iterations since the dawn of the PLA's some 50+ years history. By contrast, the Canadian Forces went through 6 in the last 15 years.

General Cao has publically stated that the PLA's Brigadization and WZC development would take 20 years to accomplish. He has alot of dead wood to get rid of, alot of mistakes to be fixed ... and alot of mistakes to be made as he pushes ahead with the reformation.

In simple terms, the vast powerful military you're envisioning is not being envisioned by the PRC's highest ranking soldier.

[HistoricalDavid]

Again, as a tool of statecraft, China's military is a work in progress. As China becomes more powerful in relation to its neighbors (and the rest of the world), militarily and economically, it should be able to work its will without much recourse to external views. The question is when China will reach this stage.

China will never reach that - even if the United States flickers out of superpowerdom, it'll still have India and its demographic aging problems with which to contend.

[Garry]

Hi Zhang Fei, I actually was interested about this issue as well some time ago. First it looked to me that Russian millitary positions are weak if not supported with nuclear capabilities. I discussed this with colonell and with other's. Read something in other forums. And come to conclusion that China can not challenge Russia in a conventional war even on its borders.

Chinese millitary industries are too weak to go for long and protracted war. China is not sustainable in mass production of many things which they export - even AKs and bullets! (I know it sounds shoking but being largest exporter of this stuff China can not cover its own need in case of war). And it really lacks capacities for mass production of more advanced weapons like artillery shells, artillery guns, tanks, aircraft. Chinese army officers estimate that re-equiping army with new AK type using domestic capacities would require more than 5 years...... I got this quotes from manager of Tula plant - one of the largest AK producer and designer.

OK. Capacities can be build up...... relativelly fast for rifles and bullets, much slower for tanks, artillery guns, shells and at least in a decade for aircraft. It is doable but requires some INVESTMENT..... and then expenses to sustain this sh...t idle.

Another big problem why China is not really ready for long conventional war - China relies on foreign designs in most of the crucial weapons it has. China relies on Russian and Israelly desings for many of its crutial weapons. China still faces great lacks of designers and it has no its own design schools. It would take decades to build it up if significant investment are made regularly. CHINA CAN NOT ATTACK RUSSIAN AIR FORCE USING FLANKERS. Russians will never give software codes for the same reason why US does not do it..... Russian AF can ground Flankers withough battle..... but giving a signal which would disable so many inside the aircraft.

So no reason to think of this topic in next couple of decades. China simply can not challenge Russia millitarily

[gunnut]

Chinese millitary industries are too weak to go for long and protracted war. China is not sustainable in mass production of many things which they export - even AKs and bullets! (I know it sounds shoking but being largest exporter of this stuff China can not cover its own need in case of war). And it really lacks capacities for mass production of more advanced weapons like artillery shells, artillery guns, tanks, aircraft. Chinese army officers estimate that re-equiping army with new AK type using domestic capacities would require more than 5 years...... I got this quotes from manager of Tula plant - one of the largest AK producer and designer.

OK. Capacities can be build up...... relativelly fast for rifles and bullets, much slower for tanks, artillery guns, shells and at least in a decade for aircraft. It is doable but requires some INVESTMENT..... and then expenses to sustain this sh...t idle.

This is precisely what I have been saying about China's military capabilities and future development.

People power is cheap in China so there's very little incentive to automate production. Automation at consumer level can translate into automation in military production. Without innovation in automation, China lags behind in the ability to produce larger, newer, more sophisticated weapon systems to compete.

[astralis]

China will never reach that - even if the United States flickers out of superpowerdom, it'll still have India and its demographic aging problems with which to contend.

historicaldavid,

i don't think the US will flicker out of superpowerdom, but it will flicker out of hyperpowerdom. as for india, nothing says that china-india necessarily will have an antagonistic relationship;

china will have a demographic aging problem, yes, but because it doesn't have a welfare economy anywhere close to the size of the US's, this will be a smaller problem than you think. having over a billion people, too, helps when it comes to a population problem- the number of young people in china (provided they are well-educated and brought up, which increasing numbers ARE) will ALWAYS exceed the total population of the US.