Jay

Why would the cargo ships bound to Japan travel to South China sea? I doubt that China can mount an attack on the mouth of South China sea which feeds Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam etc.

And China has a limited option for a second strike, if we dont count the imaginary 1000's of miles of tunnels under the mountains.

They have 1 SSBN, which seldom leaves the port and it will be identified miles ahead.

__________________
A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

Swift Sword

If I understand the situation correctly, they like to transit various straits on the Western end such as the Straits of Malacca and transit the SCS as it takes several days off of the trip.

Many of those straits are fairly chocked and any number of parties could conceivably mine them overtly or clandestinely for a variety or reasons. Given the current security climate, there is a long list of potential suspects.


True. However given the history of Chinese strategic weapons, the threat might evolve quite quickly.

It has been pointed out here that a US v. PRC conflict does not neccessarily have to go nuclear for a few different reasons.

Too, if we consider the much ballyhooed but sound Chinese treatise "Unrestricted Warfare" (which most people who talk about it do not seem to read, incidentally) it is entirely possible whatever the Chinese consider an offset or a second strike might not be readily recognizabe as such.

This book is free online, BTW, which makes it a really good educational opportunity: http://www.terrorism.com/documents/T...restricted.pdf

It is an interesting read but funny translation: it refers to the AEGIS cruiser as the "Zeus Shield cruiser"

I have complete faith that the Chinese cannot venture far with thier fledgling submarine service in the face of the USN.

However, what about their SSKs?

A Kilo boat operating close to shore in home waters seems to be a threat of some order and our own SSNs would lose some of their advantages under such circumstances. I would like to hear those of you with much more expertise comment on this and the latest Kilo variants in general.

__________________
Pharoh was pimp but now he is dead. What are you going to do today?

sparten

I believe that Ageis was Athena's shield.

__________________
"Any relations in a social order will endure if there is infused into them some of that spirit of human sympathy, which qualifies life for immortality." ~ George William Russell

Swift Sword

But how long does it have to go on in general to be regionally disruptive?

Ok, I understand.

I do not share your optimism. With Japan 90% dependent on various petroleum imports (AFAIK) to meet its needs, how long does any war have to be to have an adverse impact? Sure the Chinese cannot hold out forever for the reasons you pointed but there are others who might suffer more immediately from the blowback.

That may be the case but it still pins down resources that might be used for something more productive somewhere else but I am not in a postion to speculate which makes it a strategic asset for the PRC just the same.

I have a modest grasp of the Tanker War, "Earnest Will", "Praying Mantis" and some of the associated operations. The USN did indeed sink the Iranian Navy.

However, the PLAN strikes me a more robust, better trained and more varied threat. The USN would have a field day shooting them up but they do not have to get far or do too much damage to make a ruckus.

My concern in the South China Sea is analagous to when 19 ships struck mines in the Red Sea. None were sunk, but traffic was reduced and the Egyptian economy subsequently suffered damage and there was a maritime insurance premium spike that could have had serious repercussions on the global level.

What I am concerned about is something similar but on a grand scale. It would not have to be an overt act of violence, just blowback from mining and AShM activity that could conceivably occur in a USN v. PLAN shootout.

Now another scenario might find the Chinese deliberately targetting commerce in an effort to weaken any regional coalition the US might build as part of its effort to defend Taiwan. Third parties might covertly strike at commerce in the region to advance their own agendas under the cover of a US v. Chinese confrantation. Under thse scenarios, damage would be global and systemic, I suspect.

I should issue a caveat: I am a shareholder in three tanker companies and a container outfit so this may color my thinking to some extent but I honestly think that there are security implications for the US and its allies in the region that merit some discussion.

Officer of Engineers

To put it bluntly and therefore, the rest of your arguements invalid. The PLA has at most 30 days to do what they need to do on Taiwan. Even assuming that they can manage to land a corps, they have at most 72 hours of combat in them. Assuming that they can be resupplied twice at the expense of their entire transport fleet and their fishing and civilian fleet, that's nine days of combat.

As stated before, this is they ONLY get one try at this which means that they HAVE to put EVERYTHING into the campaign. What ships are NOT supporting the invasion are out there trying to prevent the USN from intervening.

They don't have the ships to do an invasion, prevent the USN (hell, they don't even got enough ships to do those two things), and harrassing shipping.

__________________
Chimo

Swift Sword

Actually, a thirty day time frame might only make my argument stronger.

Cut that in half and there still may be cause for concern.

A cursory glance at the C.I.A. World Factbook and security information from the E.I.A., a partial disruption of shipping might leave Taiwan itself cumulatively two million barrels of oil short after a fortnight. Our good friends the Koreans and the Japanese would be pinched pretty good to boot.

I have not even factored in the all important container trade.

There is an awesome amount of material and money transitting those waters and I am disinclined to think that it would not be disrupted by military activity.

Too, any maritime disruptions caused by mines will linger long, long after a nine day offensive regardless of who wins or loses. IIRC, after Gulf War '91, it took the USN a year and a half to clear ten minefields from the Persian Gulf which is geographically a much smaller theatre.

Theoretical and hypothetical concerns aside, there is more than ample historical evidence which you might find hard to explain away that mining is effective against both military and commercial shipping (the latter more so than the former, one would think).

I understand and that is a very good reason to suspect they will try all sorts of stuff.

Which is really a good reason to beleive they might turn to mines and other offsets.

It is known that the Chinese are developing new types of mines (and their mine warfare experience goes back to the 14'th Century so I am sure they are cognizant of the capabilities).

It does not take much of a boat to lay mines and they are much easier to effectively plant before the commencement of hostilities so it is entirely possible that clandestine, pre-emptive mining to throw off the opponents balance and timing as well as opportunities to maneuver could take place.

Officer of Engineers

Takes time to lay mines. Time that they don't have. When are they going to start laying mines? Right at the start of the conflict? They don't have the ships. Before the conflict? Warning to the USN to get ready and therefore, cut down their actual available combat time even further.

Can you sight me a case where sea traffic actually stopped because of a minefield? Simple fact is that naval minefield is a hindrance, not a show stopper. It's way too easy to go around. The actual problem is locating the field, not the field itself.

Wraith601

It was the shield of Zeus.

Aegis

__________________
"We always have been, we are, and I hope that we always shall be, detested in France."
-Sir Arthur Wellesley

Jay

Nope it does not work that way. Like the US, lot many countries hold stockpiles of oil. China, India hold them as well.

Read this excerpt,
Developed countries in the world, including Japan, are members of the International Energy Agency (IEA) as a framework in which oil consuming nations work together to secure energy supplies. IEA member states keep their own oil stockpiles. As of January 1 this year, these stockpiles amount to approximately 395.9 million tons, or 2,656 million barrels of oil, which are equivalent to 114 days' oil imports of the 26 IEA members. Drawing a lesson from the 1973 first oil crisis, Japan also maintains oil stockpiles. Our oil stockpiles meet 169 days' domestic consumption. Japan's oil stock consists of the state oil stockpile, which amounts to 320 million barrels, or 51 million kiloliters of crude, the private-sector stockpile, which oil-related private business enterprises maintain in accordance with the Petroleum Stockpiling Law and which amount to 129 million barrels, or 21 million kiloliters of crude, and the stockpile of petroleum products amounting to 130 million barrels, or 20 million kiloliters. Viewed in terms of domestic consumption, the state stockpile covers 92 days' supplies and the private-sector stockpile meets 77 days' consumption.
In a nutshell, even if our oil imports from all countries, including those in the Middle East, should be totally cut off, we have "a stock of oil" sufficient to meet petroleum requirements for the nation's production activity and people's living for almost half a year. We will draw on our oil stockpiles if we face uncertainty about the availability of oil supplies. In that case, because the concerted action of oil consuming nations will have a greater impact on the world oil market, IEA member states will basically work together to cope with the crisis. Based on accurate assessment of the trends in oil producing countries as well as the trends in the world oil market, we will properly use the nation's oil stockpiles we have built up in order to spare you inconvenience.

http://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/english...n/oilinfo.html

Jay

Partially true. Ships courses are altered based on available intel all the time.
Yes, it may take time, but they will factor it in when they plot a course.

Other than China I dont see any body else mining. Even china does not have resource to mine the Indian Ocean. Indian Navy has a naval base thats right on the mouth of Malacca Straits. Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia and Australia wouldnt want to disrupt the high seas traffic. Incase of war, there will be active patrol on the seas. Any unusual Chinese movement will be carefully monitored/being monitored as we speak.

What history? During Sino-Russian conflict the Chinese were saber rattling missile loaded with conventional warheads, ask the Colonel.

Unless China initiates it. Any attack on Taiwan will be replied back by Ameria and I dont think China is quiet ready to handle that.

Un-restricted warfare and political games might not work/win wars all the time. Actually the US is not bad at these either.

IIRC, PLAN has less number of upgraded Kilo's than IN. Kilo's are not utterly in-destrutable, you know. Combined fleets of USN, RN, ROTN, and other ABCA navies would sink PLAN far before, incase the war starts.

Swift Sword

Best time to to lay them is generally considered to be ahead of the pistol.

PRC capability, AFAIK, might support some creative, clandestine aerial dispersion of mines; perhaps from commercial flight plans. Nobody has yet convinced me that they are just dumb, brown people.

Slowing, not stopping is the gist of mine warfare. Just study "The Tanker War". After all, "the best fordes are choked with caltrops."


There are those who feel that the USN underrates minewarfare. What is your opinion?

Mi amigo, you just wrote some man's epitaph

Swift Sword

My neo-classical education aside, I call them like I see them: check out page 124.

Swift Sword

I have good reson to be suspicous of stated stockpiles and reserves; they change with a breath.

Jay

Hmm, mostly not. Everytime the stockpile is released it will be slowly built up again. So in anycase even if the stock pile is used, you cannot be totally empty, in this hypothetical case it will still work out for 30 days. IMO it will not take 30 days incase China attacks Taiwan. It will be much sooner, atleast the air and naval war would be over long by then.

TopHatter

Hanoi/ Haiphong Harbor 1972?

__________________
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.
~John Quincy Adams