Pentagon Report: China Military Build-up in Preparation for War Over Taiwan





One of the saddest things that I’ve had to report on my web site is China’s rush towards total war with the United States. I’ve been describing this for years, but it was always in the distance. A new report by the Pentagon makes it clear that this war is no longer distant, and an attack within the next 12-18 months is a reasonable expectation.

On Wednesday, the Pentagon issued its annual report on China’s military, Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2011 (PDF).

This report was supposed to be issued five months ago, but it was apparently delayed until mid-August, with Congress out of town, at a time when it was less likely to alarm people. The report contains euphemistic phrases like, “China’s military is modernizing, but the Chinese government needs to be more forthcoming on why it needs these new capabilities.” But if you actually read the details of China’s preparations for war, you get a very stark reality.

The Taiwan Scenario

The report details China’s border disputes in central Asia, especially with India, as well as China’s aggressive claims to practically everything in the South China Sea and East China Sea, including many islands that are considered sovereign territory of other countries.

But the really big focus is Taiwan. There’s never been any doubt that China has been focused for years on invading and taking control of Taiwan. They said that themselves many times, as I’ve reported in dozens of reports on this web site. Furthermore, the Chinese consider a preemptive invasion of Taiwan to be a “defensive” military action.

But the difference is that China now has the military capacity to do that, despite defense by the U.S., according to the report:

“Although the PLA [People’s Liberation Army] is contending with a growing array of missions, Taiwan remains its main strategic direction. China continued modernizing its military in 2010, with a focus on Taiwan contingencies, even as cross-Strait relations improved. The PLA seeks the capability to deter Taiwan independence and influence Taiwan to settle the dispute on Beijing’s terms. In pursuit of this objective, Beijing is developing capabilities intended to deter, delay, or deny possible U.S. support for the island in the event of conflict. The balance of cross-Strait military forces and capabilities continues to shift in the mainland’s favor.”

The reports describes deployment of thousands of missiles specifically directed as U.S. naval capabilities in defending Taiwan, including numerous ballistic and cruise missile programs that can attack Taiwan and attack and disable any aircraft carriers or other U.S. naval vessels in the region.

China has deployed dozens of surface and submarine naval attack vessels, supported early-warning aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and other surveillance and reconnaissance equipment, capable of launching nuclear missiles from the sea.

China has also deployed space and cyber warfare capabilities. China has developed the capability to attack and kill America’s communication satellites. Each week there are news stories about Chinese “hackers” stealing enormous amounts of military technology and defense-related secret information.

(There have been recent news stories that General Electric Corp. is planning to partner with Chinese firms and provide them with a great deal of American aerospace technology that will also have military use. This deal by GE is going to be a disaster.)

In addition, China is developing a number of capabilities that can directly attack the U.S.:

“China is modernizing its nuclear forces by adding more survivable delivery systems. In recent years, the road mobile, solid propellant CSS-10 Mod 1 and CSS-10 Mod 2 (DF-31 and DF-31A) intercontinental-range ballistic missiles (ICBMs) have entered service. The CSS- 10 Mod 2, with a range in excess of 11,200 km, can reach most locations within the continental United States.”

This is the fulfillment of several threats made by China in years past. In 2005, top-level Chinese army officer General Zhu Chenghu threatened America with nuclear war if America interfered with Taiwan:

“If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond. We … will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian [a city in central China]. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds … of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese.”

In 2005, Zhu’s remarks were an empty threat. Today, they’re a real threat.

And, as I reported in 2006, Sha Zukang, the Chinese ambassador to the U.N., furiously and harshly threatened the U.S. over Taiwan. I transcribed the words that he literally screamed in an interview with a BBC reporter:

“The moment that Taiwan declares independence, supported by whomever, China will have no choice but to [use] whatever means available to my government. Nobody should have any illusions on that. …

It’s not a matter of how big Taiwan is, but for China, one INCH of the territory is more valuable than the LIVES of our people.”

[With regard to the U.S.’s constant criticism of China’s rapid militarization:] It’s better for the U.S. to shut up, keep quiet. That’s much, much better. China’s population is 6 times or 5 times the United States. Why blame China? No. forget it. It’s high time to shut up. It’s a nation’s sovereign right to do what is good for them. But don’t tell us what’s good for China. Thank you very much.”

Secrecy and deception

China’s military culture is completely opposite to America’s in the sense that America tries to be as open as possible, while China tries to be as secretive and deceptive as possible until it attacks. This is described in the report:

“PRC [People’s Republic of China] military writings point to a working definition of strategic deception as “[luring] the other side into developing misperceptions, and [establishing for oneself] a strategically advantageous position by producing various kinds of false phenomena in an organized and planned manner with the smallest cost in manpower and materials.” In addition to information operations and conventional camouflage, concealment, and denial, the PLA draws from China’s historical experience and the traditional role that stratagem and deception have played in Chinese statecraft.

There is an inherent tension in Chinese strategic culture today, pitting a deep-seated tendency to conceal military capabilities and force development against a partial acceptance that excessive secrecy inflames regional and global anxiety about China’s rising power. For over a decade PRC leaders have identified the so called .China threat theory. as a serious hazard to the country’s international standing and reputation, threatening the development of a persistent alignment of regional and global powers in opposition to China. In addition, extreme secrecy is increasingly difficult to reconcile with China’s role in the integrated global economy, which depends upon transparency and the free flow of information for success.

There is perhaps another source of tension between the emerging reality of Chinese military power and China’s tradition of secrecy, and that is the fact that many of China’s new military capabilities are difficult or impossible to hide. Examples of such capabilities include advanced aircraft, long range missiles, and modern naval assets. Furthermore, missiles, space-based, and counterspace systems must be tested and exercised before being operationally deployed with confidence. The PLA’s growing inventory of these new assets and the ranges at which they operate effectively prevents their concealment.”

Will America abandon Taiwan?

I want to address this problem head on, because dozens of people have suggested this to me over the years — that America can simply abandon Taiwan, let the Chinese have it, rather than risk a major world war.

I want to make it as clear as I can that there is no possibility that America would abandon Taiwan, for several reasons:

Once China attacked, American response would be rapid and automatic, with no time for debate.

China would not target Taiwan alone. China would simultaneously attack America’s “weak points,” its communications satellites and its cyber capabilities, leaving no choice but to respond.

The U.S. has a defense treaties with Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia and New Zealand (ANZUS treaty), Israel, Europe, Iceland, and others. All of these countries have cut back on their own military in the last 60 years because they’ve counted on U.S. protection. If the U.S. abandoned Taiwan, then every one of these countries would go into total panic, and war would result anyway.

This last point is one of the great ironies of a type that we often see in generational theory — something adopted early in a generational cycle in order to prevent war later becomes one of the causes of war decades later, during the generational Crisis era. In this case, when these treaties were signed after WW II, when America became policeman of the world, their purpose was to prevent another world war by making it too expensive for anyone to attack a country aligned with the United States. Now that America can no longer provide that level of defense, these treaties guarantee that a war cannot be prevented.

The way the world works

The Pentagon report was mostly ignored by the mainstream media this past week, but there was a little coverage, and one thing that I heard politicians say a couple of times was to the effect: “There’s no danger of war with China, because it will be decades before they have the capability to defeat the United States.” In fact, the Chinese themselves are saying the same thing (consistent, I would add, with their strategy of secrecy and deception).

The world doesn’t work that way. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor when anyone could have told them that they would lose the war. General Beauregard and the Confederates attacked Fort Sumter when anyone could have told them that the South would lose. Logic and rationality are for non-crisis wars. Generational crisis wars are launched on raw emotion, with little logic.

Here’s how historian Wolfgang Schivelbusch describes the beginning of war in his 2001 book, The Culture of Defeat: On National Trauma, Mourning, and Recovery:

“The passions excited in the national psyche by the onset of war show how deeply invested the masses now were in its potential outcome. Propaganda had reinforced their conviction that “everything was at stake,” and the threat of death and defeat functioned like a tightly coiled spring, further heightening the tension. The almost festive jubilation that accompanied the declarations of war in Charleston in 1861, Paris in 1870, and the capitals of the major European powers in 1914 were anticipatory celebrations of victory-since nations are as incapable of imagining their own defeat as individuals are of conceiving their own death. The new desire to humiliate the enemy, noted by Burckhardt, was merely a reaction to the unprecedented posturing in which nations now engaged when declaring war.

The deployment of armies on the battlefield is the classic manifestation of collective self-confidence. If both sides are not convinced of their military superiority, there will be no confrontation; rather, those who lack confidence will simply flee the field. Accordingly, the battle is decided the moment the confidence of one side fails. The will to fight (“morale”) evaporates, the military formation collapses, and the army seeks salvation in flight or, if it is lucky, in organized retreat. The Greek term for this point in space (on the battlefield) and time (the course of the battle) was trope. The victors demarcated the spot with the weapons of the vanquished and later with monuments, yielding the term tropaion, from which we get our word trophy.” (p. 6-7)

The euphoria lasts until something goes wrong. Panic occurs when a military disaster occurs. In his 1832 book, On War, General Carl von Clausewitz describes what happens:

“The effect of defeat outside the army — on the people and on the government — is a sudden collapse of the wildest expectations, and total destruction of self-confidence. The destruction of these feelings creates a vacuum, and that vacuum gets filled by a fear that grows corrosively, leading to total paralysis. It’s a blow to the whole nervous system of the losing side, as if caused by an electric charge. This effect may appear to a greater or lesser degree, but it’s never completely missing. Then, instead of rushing to repair the misfortune with a spirit of determination, everyone fears that his efforts will be futile; or he does nothing, leaving everything to Fate.”

This is what happens when reality sets in — whether by the Bataan Death March or the Battle of Bull Run.

Growing worldwide xenophobia and nationalism

As I’ve written many times, the world has seen a dramatic rise in xenophobia and nationalism in country after country, as the last generation of World War II survivors have been disappearing. In America, this xenophobia has been directed mostly at Muslims and Tea Partiers. But in China, this xenophobia has been directed at Americans.

I’ve been following this issue closely for years, and there is absolutely no question in my mind that the Chinese WILL launch a preemptive attack to acquire Taiwan at some point. This is a highly nationalistic issue for the Chinese, and they will not be deterred. It could happen at any time, but based on the Pentagon report, the next 12-18 months seems pretty likely.

Some people suggest that the Taiwanese people will eventually decide that they WANT to be part of China again. But once again, that ignores the strength of nationalism, this time on the Taiwanese side. Taiwan’s indigenous Hokkein people want no part of Beijing, and Han Chinese on Taiwan moved sharply towards separatism after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, and after the passing, in the 1990s, of the elderly leaders of the Kuomintang Party who were survivors of Mao’s Communist Revolution. See my 2004 article Taiwan’s Wild Election Battle)

The survivors of World War II understood how dangerous xenophobia and nationalism are, after they’d seen it in Germany’s Naziism, Italy’s Fascism, and elsewhere.

The Chinese learned the same lesson from their own civil war, and from Japanese nationalism and xenophobia. And Hu Jintao, China’s president, is a survivor of Mao’s Communist Revolution, and may well be only person left in China’s government desirous of peace, as I discussed in 2006 in “Eerie similarity: Chinese President Hu Jintao and Donald Rumsfeld.” In that article, I quoted the following analyst description of Hu:

“Yet in this sense, Hu reflects present-day China: As leader, he has not yet found a clear pathway, sources say. His country is at a major juncture of greater expectation, but with no clear direction or footing, socially or politically. Hu is not a zealous ideologue, a visionary economist, nor is he ready to force a war over Taiwan. He is cautious, lawyerly, a survivor, say numerous scholars, diplomats, and party sources. To the Chinese, he is as much a mystery as he is to the foreign community in Beijing. Whether he has yet consolidated power in China’s secretive leadership enclave is still speculated about.”

But Hu’s time is almost gone. In 2012 there will be a planned generational change in China’s leadership, and Hu will be replaced by younger people who ARE zealous ideologues and who ARE ready to force a war over Taiwan.

China’s war with America over Taiwan will not be a rational decision. It will be pursued by a nihilistic younger Chinese generation in the same way that America’s Generation-X pursued the destruction of the global financial system. It will be both immensely destructive and immensely self-destructive.

It’s worth repeating what General Zhu said:

If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond. We … will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian [a city in central China]. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds … of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese.”

There’s nothing rational about this, but it’s the way the world is going.

One of the saddest things that I’ve had to report on my web site is China’s rush towards total war with the United States. I’ve been describing this for years, but it was always in the distance. A new report by the Pentagon makes it clear that this war is no longer distant, and an attack within the next 12-18 months is a reasonable expectation.

On Wednesday, the Pentagon issued its annual report on China’s military, Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2011 (PDF).

This report was supposed to be issued five months ago, but it was apparently delayed until mid-August, with Congress out of town, at a time when it was less likely to alarm people. The report contains euphemistic phrases like, “China’s military is modernizing, but the Chinese government needs to be more forthcoming on why it needs these new capabilities.” But if you actually read the details of China’s preparations for war, you get a very stark reality.

The Taiwan Scenario

The report details China’s border disputes in central Asia, especially with India, as well as China’s aggressive claims to practically everything in the South China Sea and East China Sea, including many islands that are considered sovereign territory of other countries.

But the really big focus is Taiwan. There’s never been any doubt that China has been focused for years on invading and taking control of Taiwan. They said that themselves many times, as I’ve reported in dozens of reports on this web site. Furthermore, the Chinese consider a preemptive invasion of Taiwan to be a “defensive” military action.

But the difference is that China now has the military capacity to do that, despite defense by the U.S., according to the report:
Pentagon Report: China Military Build-up in Preparation for War Over Taiwan at Pat Dollard

********************************************************************

It’s not clear how the author arrives at the 12-18 month attack scenario. I do think that China has probably reached the point where it would attack the US given a good excuse. This is based on China’s military developments over the last 20 years, China’s internal stresses due to economic volatilty and the decline of the US.

What’s a good excuse for war – a Chinese nuclear attack on the US?

Look for a cross-civilizational conflict. For example, a conflict in the South China Sea will not lead to an attack on the US unless the US is directly involved. An incident amongst only Asian countries will probably not blow up.

A direct conflict between the US and a China (or Russia) ally would qualify. A cross-civilizational conflict involving only allies might work too – Israel vs Syria. A US or Israeli attack on Iran would qualify. Again note that conflicts across two different civilizations have a higher probability of blowing up.

What is the chance of the US or Israel attacking Iran, or an Israel-Syria conflict in the next year?

*****************************************************************

Jeremiah 16:4

Good News Translation (GNT)

4 They will die of terrible diseases, and no one will mourn for them or bury them. Their bodies will lie like piles of manure on the ground. They will be killed in war or die of starvation, and their bodies will be food for the birds and the wild animals.

Revelation 6:8

Good News Translation (GNT)

8 (A)I looked, and there was a pale-colored horse. Its rider was named Death, and Hell followed close behind. They were given authority over one fourth of the earth, to kill by means of war, famine, disease, and wild animals.

中評社北京12月17日電

俄羅斯《獨立報》12月15日文章,

題:莫斯科優化南部軍事部署——俄羅斯正在應對特拉維夫和華盛頓可能對德黑蘭的打擊

  圍繞叙利亞和伊朗而形成的地緣政治形勢促使俄羅斯加快完善在外高加索、裡海、地中海及黑海地區的軍事部署。軍事部門的消息人士透露,克裡姆林宮已得到以色列在美國支持下在為打擊伊朗核設施而做準備的消息。打擊將是突然的,很可能就在最近某天。可以想象,德黑蘭會立馬進行回擊,可能因此發生大規模戰爭,其後果難以預料。 

在軍事領域,為使可能針對德黑蘭的軍事行動的損失減至最小,俄羅斯一年多前就開始著手準備。現在這項工作已接近完成。據國防部消息人士透露,2011年10至11月,亞美尼亞第102軍事基地的準備工作就已全部到位。軍人家屬現已撤回俄羅斯,駐扎在亞美尼亞首都埃里溫附近的部隊也被削減,這些人被調至靠近土耳其邊界的久姆里地區。美軍可能正是從土耳其境內對伊朗設施實施打擊。102基地為此應完成的任務暫時還不得而知。但有一點是清楚的,即從今年12月日起,駐扎在南奧塞梯和阿布哈茲的所有俄羅斯軍事基地都已完全進入戰鬥準備狀態。 

優化海軍部署

黑海艦隊的一些軍艦已在距離格魯吉亞邊界不遠的地方停泊,格魯吉亞在這場衝突中可能會站在反伊朗的一邊。

在俄羅斯北高加索聯邦區內達吉斯坦的伊茲別爾巴什,也就是緊挨著阿塞拜疆邊界的地方,一個海岸導彈獨立營已進入備戰狀態。該營所裝備的海岸反艦導彈射程為130公里。為組建一支統一的艦艇部隊,裡海區艦隊的所有導彈艇都已從俄羅斯的阿斯特拉罕調往馬哈奇卡拉和卡斯皮斯克。與此同時,“伏爾加頓斯克”號小型火炮艦和“達吉斯坦” 號導彈艦不久將加入裡海區艦隊旗艦 “韃靼斯坦”號導彈護衛艦的行列。該艦隊的旗艦全部裝備有射程可達200公里的導彈系統。

北方艦隊以“庫茲涅佐夫海軍元帥” 號航母為首的一支航母艦隊日前被派往地中海,該航母打算造訪叙利亞塔爾圖斯潛。北方艦隊的核潛艇是否伴隨水面艦只一同前行,國防部消息人士對此未置可否。官方層面不會宣布一旦對伊朗開戰,各軍種將如何行動。

中評社北京12月14日電/“俄美關係就像騎自行車,速度越慢,倒下的可能性就越大。”美國《洛杉磯時報》12月9日在談論由俄羅斯國家杜馬選舉引發的美俄關係不睦時,做了這樣的比喻。美國總統奧巴馬2009年上台後,向俄羅斯伸出過“重啟”關係的橄欖枝,但這些年影響俄美關係的因素實在太多,陷入僵局的北約歐洲導彈防禦系統、伊朗核問題、巴以關係、制裁利比亞、叙利亞等。難怪俄羅斯的地緣政治學者強調,“俄是目前唯一能對美國構成震懾的國家”。蘇聯解體20年後,俄羅斯的確一直都沒有忘記心中的“大國夢”,也始終無法消除與美國之間的相互敵意。環球時報文章稱,中國俄羅斯問題專家楊成說:“俄羅斯更多的時候是不惜用越來越激烈的方式體現自身的存在,這反過來又刺激了西方內心對俄的隱性恐懼。”正是美俄雙方在利益和戰略上有難以調和的矛盾,讓雙方騎的這輛自行車沿著慣性外交的思維,繼續滑行在敵意難消的老路上。

俄美敵意帶來彼此競爭

俄羅斯國家杜馬選舉引發的不僅是俄羅斯國內“挺普派”與“倒普派”的對峙,還有新一輪的俄美相互攻擊。意識形態因素再次制約俄美接近的限度,當美國認為俄在走向專制時,美俄之間又開始了新矛盾和新衝突。俄羅斯地緣政治研究院第一副院長康.希夫科夫在接受《環球時報》記者採訪時表示,目前的俄美關係可以用“不睦”一詞來形容。希夫科夫說:“俄國家杜馬選舉還沒正式公布結果之前,美國國務卿就橫加指責,在國際法中,這簡直就是粗暴的做法。在這種情況下,你想俄美關係能好嗎?”他認為,從2007年普京在慕尼黑發表講話開始,俄美兩國關係實際上開始變壞,而未來俄美關係將向更壞方向發展,這完全是由雙方不同的利益造成的。

相對俄學者的不滿,旁觀者或許看得更清楚。曾在1995年到2000年任英國駐俄大使的安德魯.伍德告訴記者:“希拉里國務卿開口一說,俄杜馬選舉既不公平也不公正,奧巴馬總統就該意識到,他上台以來一直苦心經營的美俄‘重啟’關係又得重新修補了。”卡內基國際和平基金會俄羅斯和歐亞項目副主任馬修.羅楊斯基在美國媒體上預測,隨著美俄明年都進入大選年,雙邊關係將每況愈下,雙方的善意幾乎已釋放殆盡,但大選結束後,兩國關係或將有所緩和。

俄美關係修修補補無疑嚴重影響著俄民眾對美國的認知。“誰是俄羅斯的敵人和朋友?”這是俄羅斯各大民調機構經常提出的問題。俄列瓦達中心5年前公布的民調結果顯示,33%的俄羅斯人視美國為最大的威脅。俄社會輿論基金會今年最新公布的民調顯示,仍有26%的俄羅斯人認為美國是俄最主要敵人。在回答“哪個國家對俄羅斯最不友好”時,高達24%的被調查者選擇了美國。他們表示,美國是俄羅斯永遠的敵人,美國想保持世界強國地位,因此一直在削弱俄羅斯,在美國政府中有越來越多的俄羅斯敵人。

有意思的是,美國皮尤公司12月5日公布的調查報告稱,蘇聯解體20周年後,俄羅斯人對美國持正面看法的比例高達56%,持否定看法的人只有34%。但在盟友和威脅方面,俄羅斯人認為最親密的盟國分別為白俄羅斯、中國和德國,而對俄威脅最大的分別是美國、格魯吉亞、烏克蘭。

京報:美俄之間敵意到底有多深
http://www.chinareviewnews.com   2011-12-14 00:07:42
從以往來看,美對俄批評、打壓最多的時候,也是俄民眾反美情緒最盛的時候。無論是科索沃危機,還是以美國為首的北約轟炸南聯盟,俄民眾都對美表現出敵意,認為美隨時對俄羅斯構成威脅,一直在阻止俄羅斯的重新崛起。俄羅斯《生意人報》曾援引北約-俄羅斯理事會美國協調員艾拉的話說,“2003年以後,俄羅斯政府一直把西方視為俄羅斯的死敵,並培養一種對抗西方的情緒”。隨著敵意而來的還有競爭。美國學者詹姆斯.福洛斯在1991年9月9日,也就是蘇聯解體前不久,在《美國新聞與世界報道》以“敵人:一個愛與恨的故事”為題寫道:“對美國這樣具有多樣性的國家來說,只有外部的各種挑戰才能使其團結起來。蘇聯是有用的敵人。美國相信,不僅要和蘇聯在軍事力量上競賽,還要和其成就競賽,這是一種顯示優越性的競賽,沒有蘇聯的空間計劃,美國人就不可能那麼快登上月球。”“冷戰”給美國國力發展很多刺激,但卻使蘇聯逐漸衰落。談到蘇聯解體後的俄美關係,俄政治觀察家弗拉基米爾.西蒙諾夫在《獨立報》上分析說,俄羅斯曾一度轉向西方,從而有了短暫的“蜜月期”,但後來俄羅斯人發現自己被“忽悠”了,開始明白西方國家是不可信的。

俄既有大國情結,又有“堡壘心態”

英國《衛報》12月1日以“普京為俄羅斯帝國發起反擊做準備”為題評論說,作為有可能任期到2024年的俄羅斯總統,普京有一個壓倒一切的目標——創建一個繼沙皇和蘇聯之後的俄羅斯第三帝國。文章說,儘管在杜馬選舉中備受指責,但無論支持者還是反對者都認為,上世紀90年代葉利欽領導的俄羅斯經歷了10年的風雨飄搖,是普京使俄羅斯重新站穩腳跟。普京恢復俄羅斯大國地位的策略正逐漸浮出水面,重要內容就是與其傳統敵人美國抗衡。前蘇聯領導人赫魯曉夫的曾外孫女、美國新學院大學國際關係學教授尼娜.赫魯曉娃說過:“近年來,俄羅斯社會的反美情緒越來越嚴重,令人吃驚。華盛頓曾希望俄羅斯成為一個順從的合作夥伴,但後者卻變成了咄咄逼人的對手,這主要是由於俄民眾仍抱有濃厚的大國情結。”

華東師範大學俄羅斯研究中心副主任楊成認為,在俄美關係2009年“重啟”之前,雙方確實存在難以根除的深深敵意。因為受到美國的打壓,俄羅斯總感覺“自己做了那麼多,但卻沒收到應有的回報”,因此經常陷入“親西方—反西方”的循環。如果從俄羅斯自身找原因的話,也離不開俄羅斯的“堡壘心態”——當社會內部出問題時,俄會習慣性地強調外部強權力量帶來的挑戰。楊成認為,俄羅斯將自己定位為世界的“核心”大國,但西方認為,俄羅斯無論是在西方文明中,還是現在的國際事務中,都只能扮演“邊緣”角色。這種“核心—邊緣綜合體”效應給俄羅斯帶來了巨大的心理落差。

在這樣的背景下,為了獲取西方對俄切身利益的關注,俄羅斯更多的時候是不惜用越來越激烈的方式體現自身的存在,這反過來又刺激了西方內心對俄的隱性恐懼。楊成說,從沙俄至蘇聯然後到後冷戰時期的俄羅斯外交的邏輯都基於此。直至今天,在俄羅斯作出了這樣巨大的努力、付出了這樣巨大的代價後,歐美國家的政治精英,包括民眾,依然基本上將俄視為異類,從而使西方對俄政策更加抗拒。

同樣,俄羅斯人也對歐美充滿警惕。加拿大學者埃里克.沃爾伯格近日在澳大利亞“世界新聞”網撰文說,普京打造的俄羅斯外交路線已非常明確,俄羅斯不會以“屈從的後現代國家”加入西方陣營。埃里克說,儘管大多數俄羅斯政治經濟精英把財產存到國外,把子女也送到外國,但美國逼迫俄羅斯喪失政治地圖上的大國地位的企圖從未成功,因為即便最親西方的俄羅斯人也不願看到這一點。

地緣環境不會讓俄美徹底翻臉英國前駐俄羅斯大使伍德說,俄羅斯在向民眾解釋美俄關係時的表達方式存在很大問題,很多俄羅斯當權高層者的慣性外交思維,成了重塑俄美關係的最大障礙。但讓俄羅斯放心一點的是,畢竟冷戰時期兩大集團對峙的時代已經過去,英法德等其他西方國家不會還像過去那樣,與美國抱團來對付俄羅斯。美國最大的心病就是擔心俄羅斯會借助能源外交,和更多的西歐國家走到一起,因此分化俄與歐洲國家關係是美國最重要的外交政策之一。他認為,美國與其說是忌憚俄羅斯成為“大國”,不如說是擔心俄羅斯有朝一日會拉攏歐洲國家,“這種情緒一直籠罩在華盛頓,為兩國間長期營造了對立情緒”。

美國戰略預測公司資深分析專家勞倫.古德里奇近日在接受英國媒體採訪時表示,俄羅斯的最終目標是通過對歐洲戰略能源供給權的控制重新獲得對歐洲的影響力,這將不可避免地促使俄美再次陷入對抗狀態,使奧巴馬所謂“重啟”對俄關係無果而終,因為俄羅斯在歐亞大陸的勢力存在,是對美國保持全球影響力的最直接威脅。

俄美敵意難消,俄羅斯該如何與美國對抗?這是俄媒喜歡談論的一個話題。俄羅斯“新大陸”網站11月27日一篇題為“美國的噩夢:中國和俄羅斯團結”的文章說,60多年來,只有蘇俄與中國的戰略團結讓美國人恐懼,因此,二戰後美國歷屆總統都盡量避免與莫斯科和北京同時發生正面衝突。俄地緣政治研究院第一副院長希夫科夫對記者說,俄領導人早就意識到了這一點,因此要和中國、印度等亞洲國家加強夥伴關係。

俄是目前唯一能對美國構成震懾的國家。”這是希夫科夫的觀點。也有學者認為,俄已不是美國的“最大敵人”。對於俄美關係的複雜性,楊成認為,還不能說,奧巴馬上台後“重啟”美俄關係的做法似乎就此成了空頭支票。這一關係調整的最基本邏輯在於全球權力轉移的新格局。隨著中國等新興國家的發展,美國會繼續拉攏俄羅斯,借助俄謀求新的力量平衡。而俄也希望能充當不可避免地日趨衝突的中美之間的“平衡器”,從而謀求利益最大化。

專譯:伊朗如獲核武 美國將失中東主導地位
http://www.chinareviewnews.com   2011-12-14 00:56:32中評社香港12月14日電(記者 陳曉編譯報道)長久以來美國政府都以積極參與世界性事務為己任,借著插手地域性糾紛,加強和鞏固自身領導者的地位。而在中東問題上,美國一直都以主導者的姿態出現,希望掌控和主導區內的一切大小事務。但以色列總理內塔尼亞胡的高級顧問、前駐美國大使扎拉曼.沙佛(Zalman Shoval)認為,如果美國無法阻止伊朗發展核武器,中東國家將對美國失去信心,繼而美國在中東地區將會失去“主導者”的地位。   美國華盛頓時報報道,扎拉曼.沙佛在接受採訪時表示,除以色列外,中東其他國家的領袖們都在密切關注美國政府對伊朗的政策,如果美國無法阻止伊朗發展核武器,美國可能會失去其在中東的“主導者”地位。 

  扎拉曼.沙佛警告,如果伊朗有能力自行製造核武器,中東地區的國家將失去對美國的信心,認為美國不能依靠,從而親近伊朗,加強與伊朗的合作。屆時在中東地區,除了以色列外,其他的中東國家都將不再支持美國,轉投親伊朗的陣營。 

  以色列和美國政府曾研究對伊朗的核設施進行軍事打擊的可能性,以此減慢伊朗發展核武的進度。但扎拉曼.沙佛擔心,類似的軍事打擊可能會淪為空談。美國國防部長帕內塔曾表示,軍事襲擊或能推遲伊朗的核計劃一至兩年,但其具體成效還需要研究。 
 而近日,伊朗政府聲稱近乎完整地捕獲了美國最先進的無人偵察機,那麼伊朗政府極有可能破解美軍最先進的軍事機密與技術,這對美國極為不利。另外,如果伊朗能自行製造核武,也將反映其掌握高端科研技術的能力大大提高,這對美國也將會是一個威脅。 

  扎拉曼.沙佛希望美國發動的制裁伊朗行動能達到預期的效果,但他強調,就算有強力的制裁,美國還需要有更具體的政策配合,才可以達成目標。 

  另外,沙佛指出,美國不應對所謂的“阿拉伯之春”抱太大的希望,不可只依靠選出新政府來改變中東局勢。他說,在埃及的議會選舉中,穆斯林兄弟會和薩拉菲斯特努爾黨已得到了大約三分之二的選票,我們很難保證一個新的伊斯蘭政府將繼續保持與以色列的和平關係。

中評社北京12月14日電/國際在線消息:隨著伊朗在與英國的外交糾紛中放低姿態,上月發生的伊朗導彈爆炸事件重新成了西方輿論品讀的話題。有人認為,內賈德政府“變軟”的重要原因之一就是那次爆炸癱瘓了伊朗的導彈工業,使其失去了與西方叫板的“牙齒”。《紐約時報》12月4日報道稱,美國科學和國際安全研究所提供的伊朗11月12日導彈爆炸前後當地的衛星照片對比顯示,這座位於沙漠中的伊朗固體燃料導彈試驗中心在爆炸中實際上已被完全摧毀。美國等西方國家和以色列的軍方官員及導彈技術專家們也據此認為,伊朗遠程彈道導彈發展計劃已遭到重創。   擁有中東最大導彈庫   伊朗導彈計劃基本起步於上世紀70年代末伊朗伊斯蘭革命後。兩伊戰爭爆發後,在戰爭初期吃盡伊拉克火箭彈和彈道導彈苦頭的伊朗,開始與伊拉克展開導彈軍備競賽。近30年來,包括彈道導彈在內的各種導彈一直是伊朗軍工發展的重中之重。 

  據西方媒體報道,目前伊朗擁有中東地區最強大的導彈庫,現役彈道導彈總數約1500多枚,已具備中遠程打擊能力。其中採用液態燃料的“流星-3”導彈最具代表性。據稱該型彈研發工作始於1993年,2003年正式裝備伊斯蘭革命衛隊。有資料顯示,“流星-3”長16米,最大發射重量16噸,最大推力13噸,有效載荷1200公斤,可攜帶重量為760至1158公斤的戰鬥部,射程超過2000公里。 

  不過,伊朗並沒有就此止步。據報道,近10多年來伊朗開始重點發展中遠程彈道導彈,並先後發展出“沙哈伯”系列導彈。其中,“沙哈伯”-4/5/6型更是採用了固體燃料發動機。值得一提的是,有西方媒體報道說,沙哈伯-5射程可達3500至3750公里,而且可以攜帶750至1000公斤的彈頭,而沙哈伯-6射程預計可達5470至6200公里之間,攜帶彈頭重量可達500至1000公斤。 

可能正在技術攻堅   從上面的數據可以看出,西方報道關於伊朗導彈的射程、彈頭重量等參數,大都是揣測,後者的真實性能並不為外界所知。   有軍事專家指出,西方媒體的報道明顯帶有誇大的成份,實際上,伊朗多年來一直受到西方國家制裁,很難進口先進的導彈技術,雖然有媒體指稱伊朗導彈發展得到了朝鮮的幫助,但眾所周知,朝鮮的導彈技術本身就很落後,不可能給伊朗提供很大的支持。至於伊朗國內媒體的渲染報道,可能也只是出於向西方叫板的宣傳目的。當然,從此次爆炸破壞程度的衛星照片看,伊朗正在研發測試的這款導彈可能具有較大威力,不能排除是一枚採用固體燃料的中遠程彈道導彈的可能性。 

  倫敦國際戰略研究所近日發表的一份報告稱,固體燃料發動機已經成為伊朗導彈開發項目的“轉折點”,這項技術對伊朗來說具有深遠的戰略意義,因為它將幫助伊朗接近打造遠程導彈的目標。 

  也正是基於這個原因,一些西方國家和不少防務專家認為,此次導彈爆炸對伊朗來說,是一次重大打擊:一方面試驗基地被完全摧毀;另一方面包括伊朗導彈項目領導人、有“伊朗導彈之父”之稱的穆加達姆將軍在內的一系列導彈專家在爆炸中喪生,讓伊朗在短期內很難恢復其導彈研發能力。 

  不過,也有分析認為,伊朗一向視導彈為其抗衡美以的主要殺手鐧,一次爆炸是否能夠奪去伊朗整個導彈發展體系的根本,現在還難以早下結論。 

美以發起“超限戰”?   雖然伊朗導彈爆炸事件已過去近4周時間,但圍繞導彈爆炸原因的種種說法依然鋪天蓋地。《紐約時報》報道說,到目前為還不清楚爆炸的原因,不過有美國專家推測說,爆炸可能是由伊朗缺乏製造和使用固體燃料導彈的經驗造成的。有伊朗官員則認為,爆炸可能緣於蓄意破壞。   就在《紐約時報》報道說到目前為止還沒有任何證據支撐“蓄意破壞”說之際,美國《洛杉磯時報》12月4日援引華盛頓近東政策研究所“伊朗安全計劃”負責人帕特里克.克勞森的話報道稱,此次爆炸是美國、以色列等國反對伊朗核計劃行動的一部分,是一場“超限戰”,目的是讓伊朗核武器計劃偏離軌道。中央情報局前特工阿特.凱勒也對該報說:“這應該是中情局反核擴散部門的手法,目的是延緩伊朗大規模殺傷性武器研製計劃。”該報同時引用一些西方分析師的結論舉例說,早在去年,美國和以色列就通過網絡向伊朗互聯網終端和核電站員工個人電腦秘密植入“震網”蠕蟲病毒,並一度導致布什爾核電站濃縮鈾離心機失靈。 

  有軍事專家指出,通過植入電腦病毒來破壞伊朗的核設施及導彈項目的可能性並非沒有,“超限戰”作戰樣式的最大優勢在於,不僅能做到殺人不見血,而且可實現“零傷亡”。

揭秘:伊朗導彈實力還剩多少?
http://www.chinareviewnews.com   2011-12-14 10:11:30


俄軍調整高加索軍事部署 防西方對伊朗動武
http://www.chinareviewnews.com   2011-12-17 08:20:53
Advertisements

About usachinanukewar

For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.