Deciphering China’s Rage At South Korea

[Maybelater]

http://www.hoover.org/research/deciphering-chinas-rage-south-korea

Deciphering China’s Rage At South Korea


China is mad—really mad—at South Korea. Well-known Chinese defense and military figures are advocating direct military strikes against South Korea; state-controlled media are fanning anti-Seoul hysteria; mobs across the country are smashing South Korean-made goods and merchandise; K-pop concerts and other South Korean cultural events long on the schedule are being cancelled without explanation; South Korea-bound Chinese tourists are forced to cancel their flights and cruise tickets; many South Korean stores and companies in China are harassed and restricted by local authorities, and some are forced to close their shops.

Ostensibly the reason for China’s anger is the deployment in South Korea of the U.S. Army’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile interception system to destroy incoming North Korean ballistic missiles. China interprets this action as a threat to deterrence.

Beijing’s rage over THAAD is unfounded because the system’s strategic threat to China’s missile deterrence is grossly exaggerated to say the least. Such reaction from China blatantly denies the real ballistic missile threats from North Korea against the South and the interests of the United States in the region.

China acts as if THAAD is new and its capabilities will completely nullify China’s fast- developing missile programs. In fact, THAAD, which may also soon be deployed in nearby Japan, is but one of the several missile-defense systems South Korea and its allies the United States and Japan could use to achieve the same purpose. Besides the U.S. Army’s THAAD system, the U.S. Navy has a nearly identical system installed on its large fleet of Arleigh Burke-class Aegis guided missile destroyers, which could be deployed even closer to China and more flexibly than the U.S. Army’s THAAD. U.S. military authorities have utilized all of their persuasive options and consultative channels to try to explain to Beijing that THAAD is strictly for use against North Korean missiles and poses no technical or strategic threats to Beijing’s missile deterrence. But Beijing stubbornly refuses to listen to reason and continues the THAAD red herring.

To understand China’s temper tantrum, one must go beyond THAAD and delve into China’s deeper psyche that speaks volumes about China’s strategic views and peculiar gamesmanship. First, China’s indignation is a result of incurable intoxication with a strategic fantasy of its own making, namely that the United States is deliberately stirring up tensions on the Korean Peninsula so that Washington can destroy the North Korean regime and complete a strategic encirclement of China. According to such a theory, Kim Jong-un’s belligerent behavior, like that of his father’s and grandfather’s, is not the source of the tensions but only the response to the root of the tensions in the Korean Peninsula, namely the constant provocations and military buildup and drills by the U.S. and its ally South Korea. As Pyongyang’s only ally, China can be annoyed by Kim’s rash and bratty aggressiveness in pushing ahead with its nuclear and missile programs, but ultimately China is unwilling to join the rest of the world to stop Kim’s dangerous gambits, continuing to support the regime through open and furtive economic assistance and trade.

Second, China’s rage reflects its Han chauvinism toward its neighbors in the periphery. It seems odd that China is thoroughly mad at South Korea but not directly chastising the United States that is actually installing and operating the THAAD system. That is because China considers South Korea a small country [xiaoguo] that should not have the chutzpah to defy a big country [daguo] such as China. This xiaoguo vs. daguo complex is becoming a hallmark of Chinese diplomacy in recent decades as China grows economically and militarily stronger.

For about four years since 2012, China’s leadership believed they had successfully split the U.S.-led defense alliance in Northeast Asia, pitting South Korea against Japan, thus isolating the U.S. Convinced of China’s willingness to rein in the Kim regime, former president Park Geun-hye of South Korea unwisely sided with China against Japan in the Beijing-Tokyo spat over a variety of issues, threatening the unity of the U.S.-led alliance. But China’s outrageous snub of President Park in January 2016 by refusing to respond to Seoul’s call for joint action against Kim’s renewed nuclear and missile tests catapulted South Korea back to the camp of the U.S. and Japan, which was viewed by Beijing as perfidious and disrespectful of the magnificent and magnanimous daguo that is China. President Park’s approval of the THAAD deployment is thus just a matter of China’s revenge and punitive rant against the little xiaoguo on the Korean Peninsula.

Unless China abandons its decades-old misguided siege mentality and its centuries-old daguo chauvinism, regional security in Northeast Asia will not fundamentally improve, with or without THAAD deployment.

[civic_stylez]

It would be nice if China would throw some rage at NORTH korea. Baffles me that China still stands behind a country that offers little in the way of benefit for them. At least Jinping and Trump are talking..

[Sentry]

Why did they name their missile defence system after a frat bro? :dunno:

[suntan]

In Korean, it means "Big Cock".

[Maybelater]

Originally posted by civic_stylez
It would be nice if China would throw some rage at NORTH korea. Baffles me that China still stands behind a country that offers little in the way of benefit for them. At least Jinping and Trump are talking..

The only real benefit is keeping US troops away from the Chinese border. However, if NK collapsed there would be little to legitimate the presence of the USA in SK without the existence of NK. Over the longtime, China would benefit as American troops would slowly be withdrawn from Korea if NK didn't exist. The US even withdrew all its troops from Korea in 1948 before the Chinese backed invasion of the South occurred.

The PRC has a very self-concerning strategy, and it explains its behaviors towards countries such as Vietnam, through its building of artificial islands around it. China doesn't care if it'll turn Vietnam against it, because it believes Vietnam is just another small country, just like South Korea, and it can betray the historical, and cultural connections.

Honestly, the behaviour of China regionally demonstrates why the west needs to behave with extreme caution when considering increasing its economic ties with Mainland China.



I bet many of you would agree as Canadians if the United States started floating its military in Canadian waters without authorization, started building islands around it, and provided its enemies with nuclear secrets, that American stopped being a friend, but rather a foe.

Mainland China behaviour, i.e. what happens when you're not allowed to think free

de1u6bNRZfQ

Ykq8xQAKHCg

Xo0XNu4fLGI

Chinese Cruise Passengers Refuse to Go Ashore in Jeju. (http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/03/13/2017031301286.html)

The epitome of blind, senseless nationalism.

[Maybelater]

Originally posted by Sentry
Why did they name their missile defence system after a frat bro? :dunno:

LAWL

Terminal* High Altitude Area Defense - A UoC FRAT

[Stuart]

Originally posted by Maybelater


LAWL

Thermal High Altitude Area Defense - A UoC FRAT

Terminal not thermal. Also, BMS rules!

[ZenOps]

South Korea sold out to the US sort of like or exactly like the same way that Cuba sold out to Russia during the missle crisis.

Now, I have no idea how much the US is paying South Korea to maintain its presence there - but I can imagine it is substantial if Trump wants some sort of decisive decision on what to do in that area.

Normally its in the US best interest to keep wars perpetual, or else the ten aircraft carriers, all those F-35s, B2 bombers, and tens of thousands of nukes are just expensive showpieces.

[ZenOps]

Some recent information the current state of South Korean leadership: There is none, she is in the process of being impeached.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/10/the-guardian-view-on-the-south-korean-impeachment-right-thing-to-do

Some have complained that some governments gave too many concessions to the Chinese, others complained that some governments gave too many concessions to the US.

Personally I think South Korea is spineless, so it might as well make some money off whoever pays them the most to put military bases on their land because they for sure can't hold it under their own power. And if the leadership of South Korea is retarded enough to pay either China or the US for "protection" then its already too late to save them - they have already lost.

[eblend]

Bet the Japanese are happy about this....as it's not them this time.

In China they always show shows and movies, and textbooks all about the Second World war and Japanese occupation and such....no wonder they grow into these crazy nationalists. New flavour of the day is South Korea. Think they need a chill pill.

[ZenOps]

I really don't understand how South Korea can dislike North Korea and like the USA.

Looking at both US and North Korea from a Canadian perspective, they are nearly the same. I guess you tend to hate the devil you know more than the devil you don't.

Maybe the South Koreans are hypnotized, pure mesmerized by the Blonde California wave combover haircut - its the only explaination.

I mean seriously, Texans hate Californians too - they also fought them in the American Revolution. But maybe its time to declare all out peace, and let Kim Jong point its nukes further offshore.

[zhao]

Originally posted by ZenOps
I really don't understand how South Korea can dislike North Korea and like the USA.

Looking at both US and North Korea from a Canadian perspective, they are nearly the same. I guess you tend to hate the devil you know more than the devil you don't.

Maybe the South Koreans are hypnotized, pure mesmerized by the Blonde California wave combover haircut - its the only explaination.

I mean seriously, Texans hate Californians too - they also fought them in the American Revolution. But maybe its time to declare all out peace, and let Kim Jong point its nukes further offshore.

wtf are you talking about?

Looking at north korean and the US, from any perspective, is the opposite of the same.

[ZenOps]

Under Trump the US is returning to what North Korea idealizes, Protectionist policy and nuke building. Two cornerstones of economic and military policy.

There was only a short hiatus from this policy under Clinton and Obama, but if you look at the greater history of the US (when it peaked out at 40,000 nuclear weapons based on all sorts of platforms from missle silos hidden in farms, submarines to ICBMs) North Korea is actually *tamer* than US nuke policy and building.

Nixon was absolutely brutal on economic policy, which arguably put the path of the US dollar on the route it is now - where rockstars demand $53 million to live, but $1 Billion to actually create anything of quality.

http://fortune.com/2016/02/15/kanye-west-asks-mark-zuckerberg-for-1-billion/

If you look carefully, all that Kim Jong Il did was mimic the growth period of the US, including the space race rocketry expenditures. They did build the North South Korean wall much earlier however, which Trump is now trying to mimic.

If you can't read that between the lines, you have been brought up reading far too many US history textbooks.

The timeline for Trump is Frederic Trump being like Kim Jong Il, where all of his wealth went to the male son heir - of which Donald lost $915 million in about 18 years without sacrificing lifestyle at all (Donald boasts about sleeping with supermodels when the rest of the nation was dying in the Vietnam war which he avoided) Slight time dilation on that, but otherwise, the *exact* same type of ruling class.

[ZenOps]

A little bit of history: General Wesley Clark was predicting seven countries would come under the US flag if the middle east campaign was successful.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166

They still have the plan I'm sure. I don't think its doable anymore as Khadafi isn't around anymore, so demonizing a specific leader as a singular point of hate (like Assad or Kim Jong) becomes much more difficult. Without that leader, you must convince the populace that is behind you, that the millions of people in the country you are invading are worth killing, which is insanely tougher to do.

BTW: I don't really see how you wouldn't take an armed aircraft carrier off your shores as anything but an act of aggression. Seriously, going around pointing guns at people is bad, and almost always taken the wrong way (if there is even a way to take it as "acceptable")

What if China parked its one aircraft carrier equipped with nuclear armaments, 12 miles from New York and started some military drills?

Seriously: Look in the mirror USA.

[ZenOps]

Reality check:

Its not entirely a bad time for North Korea to attack the US.

South Korean leadership is in tatters, the impeachment will keep South Korean leadership occupied for a while.

US will have its little fingers full with Syria, you cant just bomb and run. Even if you did, consequences would still linger.

North Korea has nukes, and US strategies on how to deploy them. The US has about 2,000 different methods of "deploying" nukes. The main two ways that people know of are ICBM missile silos and submarine launches, but there are literally thousands of ways to effectively deploy a nuke (mole nuke underground is probably what South Korea fears most, suitcase or coffee crate nuke is probably what US fears most)

Personally I think its foolish of the US to not increase its fees for renouncing US citizenship. If it comes down to actual real war, when the females aged 18 to 35 are drafted for mandatory overseas combat there will be a lot of people looking to get an Antarctic citizenship. Maintaining the illusion that US citizenship is something of value will dissolve in hours.

I mean really, Eduardo Saverin probably had to pay an exit tax of half a Billion dollars to effectively renounce his US citizenship.

[ZenOps]

CBC was allowed in for birthday celebrations and new skyscraper housing projects.

qEzpF0BdVNk

[ZenOps]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/15/asia/north-korea-missile-test/

Crisis averted. North Korea fails ICBM launch.

Just goes to prove that rocket science is by far more difficult than building a nuke.

[zieg]

Gonna post this again-relevant image:
http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/285/441/0a5.jpg

[ZenOps]

Rumors have it that the US is sending another two aircraft carriers to the area.

Someone should explain to Trump that the Day of the Sun is over, and the US is more that likely safe for another 364 days.

[Epididymitis]

I think every one here knows that the koreans play enough star craft to know how to blow the united states to smithereenies.

[tonytiger55]

I think north Korea's response is a bit overrated.

The second time the US went into Iraq, I recall watching the news and there was much talk about Saddam was going to do. Not much materialised. The US pretty much walked into Iraq.

On paper it looks scary. When shit hits the fan, I think North Korean solders will be in too much in shock and aww to mount a effective response.

But then again.. Koreans are good at Starcraft... so who knows.. :dunno:

[ZenOps]

US has a good short game, North Korea has a good long game strategy.

-1F7vaNP9w0

USA first strike, where they just nuke everyone does actually go in the US favour. Of course long term if it does end up being effective - others will see this strategy and will do the same against other nations including the US.

The US tends to use quotes like "Shock and Awe" because they very well know that if the war isn't won in the first three months - they have lost.

Its kind of like suckerpunching first, unfortunately the US has no such advantage over North Korea as they are expecting suckerpunches from all angles.

[tonytiger55]

Your right. North Korea are expecting a sucker punches.

The way I see it the problem is that they don't know when they are going to get hit. I liken it to being a blacked out room with a angry Mike Tyson who is wearing night vision goggles. Your expecting a punch to the face. The problem is you don't know when your going to be snacked and its going to be a hard punch.

I don't think the US will nuke. They have intensive satellite imagery. They would have played out war games multiple times and have better supply logistics.

A very heavy hit with tomhawks, fighter jets and bombers to knock out potential front line threats and artillery strikes. The second would be dear leaders home, potential bunkers, electrical grid and communication networks. Possibility other strategic areas. But hit first, with lots of bombs, quick and hard.

From that how does North Korea respond? Is the army communication, supplies and training able to deal with that?

Your right, the US will have to knock them out within three months. Does not play well at home politically.

[ZenOps]

There is also the scenario that North Korea would use a nuke within its own borders should anyone attempt a land invasion.

It does make sense if say 10,000 US troops and a few hundred standard armored vehicles get all clustered up in nuke blast radius (very easy to do) I can imagine they have bouncing betties all along the border now, that do not need to have any launch vehicle at all.

A defensive nuke, actually used as "defense" has never been tried before - but it does make sense that if you don't care much about a few random outlier farmers at your borders - you can stop an invading land army in 1/4 second.

HZXn5Ct0PJg

I mean, its not like the US hasn't nuked its own country several hundred times over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedan_(nuclear_test)

Sedan was *supposed* to be underground, but it broke through the surface and is estimated to currently be the cause of 7% of the self inflicted nuclear fallout in the US.

[Stuart]

Originally posted by ZenOps
Sedan was *supposed* to be underground, but it broke through the surface and is estimated to currently be the cause of 7% of the self inflicted nuclear fallout in the US. [/B]

Sedan was always intended to be a cratering event. There was no attempt to contain it underground as that would have defeated the entire purpose of the program.

[ZenOps]

So then by that rationale, the 10 or so events were designed to maximize nuclear fallout across the greater landmass of the US.

Whatever side you want to have on that event, I tend to prefer "accident" or at very least "miscalculation".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout#/media/File:US_fallout_exposure.png

Y'know if North Korea did that - it would be called the greatest human rights violation ever. Forget about gassing your own populace, the US probably cancered everyone. I could very easily debate that the US open ground nuclear tests did far more damage long term to millions of Americans, than Assad ever allegedly did with gas to the local population there.

Technically, Canada could probably sue the US for its extreme negligence during the Nevada Tests. Noone at the time realized what 100 atmospheric and 12 or so ground level nukes would do to cancer rates and general health implications of greater north America over the decades.

BTW: By that rationale it makes Kennedy the single most heinous president of the US, if you include the possibility that he faked the moon landings.

[ZenOps]

There is also the question of:

If and when North Korea tests an atmospheric nuke in the middle of its own nation, would it be considered an act of war to those outside the nation?

Because North Korea is a small place, and it would be hard to not see it from South Korea. And if you can see the visible light blast, you are also absorbing the gamma rays.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

1,000 kilometer view distance for the fireball, shock wave on a bigger nuke can also shatter windows at that distance. But unlike the US, most of the fallout would not drop over land, it would most likely drop into the ocean and not be a humanitarian disaster, like the aforementioned US nukes were a humanitarian disaster.

Trivia: Although the Tsar Bomb was dropped from a bomber, it in fact - nearly made it back up to the height of the bomber because of the blast pressure against the ground forcing it back up.

[ZenOps]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/north-korea-threat-sink-us-nuclear-submarine-uss-michigan-south-korea-donald-trump-kim-jong-un-a7709946.html

It could be possible, diesel submarines have a huge disadvantage in that you can only go a couple of days submerged. But is that really a disadvantage in the 15 minutes or so you need to launch a naval assault?

Nuclear subs are arguably much more fragile and finiky, an indirect hit may show the entire US nuclear submarine fleet to be glass cannons. I mean, they can't even keep a nuclear reactor from melting down on land by accident (Fukushima)

Noones ever gone up against a nuclear sub in real war.

[ZenOps]

THAAD now operational in South Korea.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-us-america-anti-missile-thaad-defense-system-south-north-korea-spying-donald-trump-military-a7713251.html

Very capable system for shooting things into high altitude upper atmosphere. Can be used with conventional explosives to shoot down nuclear ICBMs but can also be used to launch nuclear weaponry into high altitudes.

The last time the US detonated a nuke at high altitude was "Starfish Prime" and is widely regarded as potentially crippling a nation the size of China or the US by knocking out the entire power grid.

"The Starfish Prime electromagnetic pulse also made those effects known to the public by causing electrical damage in Hawaii, about 1,445 kilometres (898_mi) away from the detonation point, knocking out about 300 streetlights, setting off numerous burglar alarms and damaging a telephone company microwave link."

The US arsenal now contains singular nukes that would be about 20x stronger than that, and could potentially sporadically wipe out the power grids of nations on the other side of the planet (3,000 miles+) due to reflections.

There are some scientists who believe it is still possible that a large enough high altitude nuke could ignite the upper atmosphere and make the entire planet inhospitable. Technically, the US did test "Starfish Prime" knowing that there was a *small* possibility that it might end up killing Billions of people, and most plant life on the entire planet.

Kim Jong is arguably completely sane compared to the United States back in the 1950's.

World enders on THAADS.

[ZenOps]

Quick history:

"American planes dropped 635,000 tons of bombs on Korea -- _that is, essentially on North Korea --including 32,557 tons of napalm, compared to 503,000 tons of bombs dropped in the entire Pacific theatre of World War II"

The US helped to kill 4 to 5 million people in North Korea (mostly civilians, as there is no real military on earth larger than 1 million soldiers) mostly through US conventional bombs and napalm.

Most of the food shortages in North Korea can be attributed to the mines and unexploded ordinance left in the fields from US bombing runs. I don't see how you can even connect the dots any other way.

US pilots would complain that "There was nothing left to bomb" when they were done, the war was NEVER declared over - North Korea is only in a "ceasefire".

Its actually crazy impressive that North Korea is doing as well as it is all things considered. I respect Kim Jong for that.

[ZenOps]

North Korea and Iran co-ordinating against US?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/05/pentagon-eyes-iran-north-korea-military-connection.html

Not impossible, a coalition is always stronger than individuals - The US only has ten aircraft carriers afterall.