What IS "Ukraine Model"?

Thanks to Brian Fruman, who pointed me towards initially piece by well known clown and amateur military porn masturbator David Axe who in his piece in Forbes informed us about this:

The U.S. Navy Submarine Force Could Sink The Chinese Fleet And Save Taiwan, But At The Cost Of A Quarter Of Its Boats

But these were not his ideas--I doubt he understands the difference between the Operational Sweep in ASW and Swiffer for the floors, although both are related. No, he described to the best of his very limited abilities by far more interesting paper from real military professionals from CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies) which is called The First Battle of the Next War: Wargaming a Chinese Invasion of Taiwan. You can download the paper (PDF) and read summary here:

CSIS developed a wargame for a Chinese amphibious invasion of Taiwan and ran it 24 times. In most scenarios, the United States/Taiwan/Japan defeated a conventional amphibious invasion by China and maintained an autonomous Taiwan. However, this defense came at high cost. The United States and its allies lost dozens of ships, hundreds of aircraft, and tens of thousands of servicemembers. Taiwan saw its economy devastated. Further, the high losses damaged the U.S. global position for many years. China also lost heavily, and failure to occupy Taiwan might destabilize Chinese Communist Party rule. Victory is therefore not enough. The United States needs to strengthen deterrence immediately.

Putting aside all those traditional tropes about China and BS about "international relations", whose real study doesn't functionally exist in the US anymore--died out together with always substandard US "diplomacy"--there are reasons to view paper with interest and it is absolutely normal to game possible wars and everybody does it. So, in this respect this paper is interesting. 

I am not going to review all of it, but apart from interesting admissions such as these:

1. Shift to smaller, more survivable ships and develop rescue mechanisms to deal with crippled ships and multiple sinkings. Surface ships are extremely vulnerable, with the United States typically losing two carriers and 10 to 20 large surface combatants in game iterations.

2. Prioritize submarines and other undersea platforms. Submarines were able to enter the Chinese defensive zone and wreak havoc with the Chinese fleet, but numbers were inadequate.

or this:

3. Continue development and fielding of hypersonic weapons but recognize that they are niche weapons. Their high cost limits inventories, so they lack the volume needed to counter the immense numbers of Chinese air and naval platforms.

among many others, the paper continues to emphasize this: 

 There is no “Ukraine model” for Taiwan.

One may ask what is this "Ukraine Model"? If the authors and CSIS gamers (this time it is a respectful term) mean that the US will have to physically become a full blown party to the "defense of Taiwan", well, they have a point. But other than that, what is perceived as a "Ukraine Model" didn't complete forming itself. Far from it, albeit I do personally view a direct US participation in SMO as unlikely. But, but, that is the other issue altogether--even authors of paper admit some extremely serious military-industrial limitations of the United States, especially in terms of stand-off weapons, and mind you--the US has zero supersonic anti-shipping missiles, forget about hypersonic ones. And not only that, when discussing possible involvement of the United States in Taiwan's war, one has to seriously consider a strategic ambiguity in Europe, as IN WESTERN Europe, due to SMO and it, seemingly, growing scale. 

Yes, the United States has a very good, top notch submarine force--I write about it for years--but what will be the effect of the US losing completely in 404, and then in Europe? And that is not just in Kremlin's plans, it is being done as I type this. What are those "black swans", what are those random variables thrown into the mix, considering a historic strategic miscalculation the US committed when getting involved in perversion of 404 and NATO? There are many interesting points to discuss in this paper and, unlike David Axe's sophomoric writing, this paper certainly deserves to be discussed. So, the link is there, download and enjoy, if you will. I already briefly browsed it, many interesting admissions. And yes, "Ukraine Model" needs to be discussed too. 

In the end, look at the dynamics of rebuilding of Russia's Pacific Fleet, especially subs and surface carriers of 3M22 Zircons, and expansion of both strike combat aviation and delivery of Novella-equipped IL-38N ASW and patrol aircraft. Russia is anticipating some events and if Russia backs China up in this conflict, which is very likely, boy, we may see some spectacle for the ages. But, I am also on record, that PLAN nuclear submarine force is no contest to the state-of-the-art US Navy's subs and well trained crews and the issue of ASW against such a force is of a strategic importance to China, as is of Air Defense. China has very little time to get ready.  I am sure Xi and Putin discuss this often.   

If You Ever Needed Any Proof...

A whorehouse filled with former spooks, Amnesty International, suddenly, after four months noticed:

Amnesty International has accused Ukraine of war crimes during its ongoing military conflict with invading Russian forces. The humanitarian organization said in a release on Wednesday that the Ukrainian military's tactics "violate international humanitarian law and endanger civilians" by operating weapons out of bases established in residential areas while civilians are present.

Oh, please.  You can read the whole report here. The hypocrisy of this is so obvious that one really has to question main reasons behind this "discovery" by enablers of West's war crimes. The main reasons, however, are very easy to spot. The stream of documents confirming almost compete demolition of regular VSU continues to gain strength, and it is also coming from... Ukraine itself.

We may only extrapolate the losses of VSU but even brief acquaintance with the reports tells us that we are looking at around 300,000 KIAs and MIAs. It is a catastrophe for Ukraine, while the bulk of fighting on Russian side is done by LDNR militias. Another proof of that is absolutely ridiculous behavior of Mr. Ze.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky said on Thursday he would like to speak “directly” with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, as he urged Beijing to use its economic and political leverage to stop the conflict in his country. In an exclusive interview with the South China Morning Post, Zelensky noted that he had not spoken to the Chinese leader since the start of Russia’s military offensive in Ukraine. “I would like to talk directly. I had one conversation with [President] Xi Jinping that was a year ago,” he said. “Since the beginning of the large-scale aggression on February 24, we have asked officially for a conversation, but we (haven’t had) any conversation with China even though I believe that would be helpful.” According to Zelensky, Xi is one of a handful of world leaders who have been to Ukraine “at least once,” adding that the Chinese president warmly recalled his ties with Kiev during a call between the two leaders last year. Zelensky stressed that he wants to see China redefine its stance on Russia, but understands why Beijing is seeking a “balanced” approach.

In related news, I want to directly talk to God and I demand it immediately, while reading famous fairy tale of Fisherman and Gold Fish. Speaking of which, I mean China. 

Upon my video on situation with Taiwan, as was expected, I was bombarded by accusations of "demeaning" China, of "underestimating" her and other sins of this nature. I want to respond to all "critics"--I don't DO pleasantries, I am into business of sober assessment of geopolitical (a euphemism for military-industrial capability) balance. All of those "accusers" miss completely my every praise of China's achievements, but immediately go bananas when I point out things which do define this very geopolitical balance. 

1. Many continue to forget that China still remains a very "good boy" for the US when it comes to sanctions against Russia. Yes, China buys Russia's energy, but so does USA, who exempted it, together with other strategic resources, from sanctions. Should I ignore this fact for the sake of Russian-Chinese friendship? Ask yourself a question why Russia grows her indigenous microelectronics industry with lighting speed? Well, because China is in no hurry to provide Russia with it. I can sit here and write this list for 24 hours. 

2. Many still do not understand that militarily and technologically China lags behind both US and Russia. It is a hard cold fact which many prefer to ignore. Yet, the list of crucial military and dual-use technologies where China lags, not to speak of operational and strategic experience, is vast. It takes a lot of effort to explain to people what it takes to build and operate effectively such huge military organizations as advanced submarine force, carrier task groups or air force, among many others. Sorry to break it for you, China lags here, and this is not just my opinion, it is opinion of Russian military professionals who were directly involved militarily with Chinese. China still has a long way to go here. 

And that is why it explains this today, as was predicted:

ПНОМПЕНЬ, 5 авг - РИА Новости. Китайские власти готовы укреплять стратегическое сотрудничество с Россией на фоне все более усиливающейся напряженности в Тайваньском проливе, заявил в пятницу министр иностранных дел КНР Ван И на встрече с российским коллегой Сергеем Лавровым."Россия неизменно придерживается принципа "одного Китая", выступая против любых посягательств на суверенитет нашей страны", - подчеркнул он на встрече с Лавровым в Пномпене."В свою очередь Пекин готов усилить стратегическое взаимодействие с РФ, чтобы сообща мы могли еще более эффективно отстаивать международную систему, в которой ключевую роль играет ООН, а также порядок, опирающийся на нормы общепринятого международного права", - добавил Ван И.

Translation: PHNOMPEN, August 5 - RIA Novosti. Chinese authorities are ready to strengthen strategic cooperation with Russia amid growing tensions in the Taiwan Strait, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said on Friday at a meeting with Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov. "Russia invariably adheres to the One China principle, opposing any encroachment on the sovereignty of our country," he stressed at a meeting with Lavrov in Phnom Penh. "In turn, Beijing is ready to strengthen strategic cooperation with the Russian Federation so that together we can more effectively defend the international system in which the UN plays a key role, as well as the order based on the norms of generally accepted international law," Wang Yi added.

 

It took obvious humiliation, largely self-inflicted by Chinese, of this bimbo Pelosi visit to Taiwan for China to start recognizing that maybe there should be more than just buying of energy and some mil.tech from Russia and verbal support in a strategic partnership. Time for CPC to start cleaning its decision-making circles from people from Chinese Komsomol, a precise contingent, which keeps its vast fortunes, families and real estate in the United States and Canada and continues to exercise this illusion that China can substitute the United States as global hegemon and become... the US 2.0. Hopefully this humiliation gives Comrade Xi a necessary tool for removing these people who believed that fantasy. The reaction from China in regards to Russia is really instant, but still, let's wait and see how it will translate into practical actions. Russia fully supports China and will continue her support but it is about time China also undertook very substantive steps, not just declarations, towards real alliance and adjustment of China's economic aspirations to the realities of the Eurasian integration, whose strategic security rests with Russia. Ah yes, Chinese recognition of Crimea as part of Russia would have been nice, but...you know.

OK, Let's Cut The Crap...

 ... from the start--China got humiliated. There is no other way about it. Let me turn on here the famous Russian Вы не понимаете, Это Другое (You don't understand, This is Different) mode, usually used by Russia's pro-western liberda when trying to whitewash West's crimes and idiocy. Here it is:

As Ramzan Kadyrov correctly responded to this PR affair in his TG:

Ну и зачем было столько нагонять жутей, пугать людей, шум поднимать, когда можно было так спокойно дать прилететь бедной старушке в Тайвань?
😂😂😂😂
Можно же было тихо и молча всё завершить, так нет, бедную бабусю несколько часов пугали истребителями, ПВО, эсминцами и громкими заявлениями.

Translation:  Why did they engage in fear-mongering, scaring people, creating the noise, when one could have allowed poor grandma to calmly fly to Taiwan. Everything could have been arranged calmly, silently, but no, poor grandma was being frightened with fighters, Air Defense, destroyers and loud statements.  

I understand clearly the disappointment of many anti-globalists and China's sympathizers when observing this. I agree with Ramzan, though, as in a good fight--if you show your weapon, you better use it when time comes, otherwise keep it to yourself. But why this "This is Different" meme? Let me explain. As famous re-imagining of Nixon's Vietnam War "Peace with Honor" phrase goes: those who settle for peace with honor, get neither peace nor honor. The US can tell a lot about this issue, since we saw it on full display in Afghanistan last year. It took Russia several beatings of the US lap-dogs into bloody pulp starting in 2008 with Georgia, then in Syria and now in Ukraine, until Washington returned to its natural state of being a bellicose bully but scared shitless of engaging directly with Russia. 

This all, despite the fact that the United States IS involved directly, as an example, in command-controlling and providing ISR to their Kiev SOBs. As the representative of Ukies' military intelligence (GUR) Vadim Skibitsky boasted to Telegraph (in Russian), including admitting the fact that the US is directly involved even in choosing targets for HIMARS. Primarily against civilians. But the US knows that it will be annihilated when it tries to "probe" a direct war with Russia even in fully conventional framework. It will be the US which will be forced towards nuclear threshold the moment it will begin to sustain losses it never encountered in its history. But this is not the case with China!

The obvious "this is different" issue behind Pelosi's PR escapades is the fact about which I write for years ad nauseam, such as here, among many other posts: the United States doesn't know how and cannot fight a serious enemy on the ground, but there is absolutely no doubt about the United States being a naval power, which DOES think and, in fact, HAS the means to impose some solution on China as long as the naval forces are involved directly. It is the only field in which the United States has an upper hand over China. I already presented on a number of occasions the comparison between he US Navy's and PLAN's submarine forces. Taiwan is an island, and unlike Georgia, let alone Syria and most of Ukraine, which Russia never declared as its territories, Taiwan for China is a huge, existential issue. Taiwan officially is considered by international community as part of mainland China, which has its semi-official status "temporarily". But because it is the island, and because the United States Navy can bring a massive firepower near it, the US has the escalation dominance here. And China knows it and she blinked. 

Moreover, main China's mistake was this, however justified, bellicose rhetoric preceding walking mummy's visit to Taiwan and now the precedent had been created and IT IS already being spun by media. Of course, there is a school of thought which promotes the view that China prevented a nuclear war. I don't know, what I know for sure is this:

China begins military drills near Taiwan – reports

Should have been ongoing well before Pelosi's plane took off from the US and the scale of those drills, including at least the deployment of the Chinese Air Force, should have been massive, presenting a real threat in the area for any unauthorized flight. But now we may have on our hands, actually, a bigger problem--with China being forced to respond in such a way that she is not perceived as a "paper tiger" and that may (I underscore it--may, it is not preordained) lead to an attempt on Taiwan and that may involve the US Navy, especially its submarine force, which theoretically CAN score some significant military points, which are desperately needed for demoralized and economically strained United States in general and Biden Administration in particular. This is the price of the moment of weakness and indecisiveness and there is no way to spin it in any positive direction. But that only reinforces my long-standing position that in Russia-China relations, it is Russia who leads, exhibiting both great resolve, mastery of a major military conflicts and the ability to withstand any kind of pressure. And that is what we know at this moment with full clarity. Let's keep watching... 

Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi.

Or, ouch, that's gotta hurt. What is permissible for Jupiter may not be permissible for a bull(c). It is also known as a pecking order or, as Russian naval truism goes, the only thing scarier than the nuclear war is a lose cannon sea-bass. Sea-bass, of course, being the term for a novice, first year, enlisted sailor who still doesn't understand how combat ship works and what is his place in it and disrespects the authority of seniors. Lithuania, evidently, thought that it can play in the same league as China. 

FRANKFURT/VILNIUS, Dec 9 (Reuters) - China has told multinationals to sever ties with Lithuania or face being shut out of the Chinese market, a senior government official and an industry body told Reuters, dragging companies into a dispute between the Baltic state and Beijing. China downgraded its diplomatic ties with Lithuania last month, after the opening of a representative office by Taiwan in Vilnius. Lithuania's ruling coalition had agreed in November last year to support what it described as "those fighting for freedom" in Taiwan, putting its relations with China at risk.

They, obviously, bought completely into this propaganda BS about "democratic" West and being paupers and beggars with no serious real self-sustaining economy, the only thing they can sell is their loyalty to big master and that means spewing Russophobic BS and trying to please the owners by irritating China. Obviously, now that China started to introduce some measures, as is expected:

Lithuania has also appealed to the European Commission for support. In a letter sent earlier this week to top officials at the Commission and seen by Reuters, Lithuanian foreign minister Gabrielius Landsbergis asked for support in rebuffing China. "A strong reaction is necessary at the EU level in order to send a signal to China that politically motivated economic pressure is unacceptable and will not be tolerated," the letter said.

LOL, I like politically motivated pressure thing. Russians got their pop-corn and are sitting in anticipation of a good show. To understand why Russians call three Baltic States Vymirates (Вымираты--analogy to Emirates), which is a combination of the words to die out and emirates, one can take a look at that:

As you can see yourself, this mighty country with declining population, and which lives in large part on handouts from EU thinks that it can play in the same league as China. Obviously, it can't but, hey, eventually woke EU politics and economism will get to them too (actually, already) and considering the speed of Lithuania's depopulation, who knows, this territory may become of interest for Poland and Russia at some point of time in the future. You see, there will be no Soviet communists caring about preservation of Lithuanians. Russians don't care. Neither do Chinese, and they may not exhibit sympathy to those who cross therm. Especially when dealing with a pipsqueak of a nation. Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi.

Few Points Of Interest.

China's English language Global Times is viewed as a tabloid under the "roof" of CCP, but being a "communist" tabloid does not mean that even this tabloid is free from good thoughts and valuable opinions. Such as this from former US Marine Corps officer and now civilian employee of Pentagon Franz Gayl who penned and interesting piece in Global Times about possible war between China and the United States around Taiwan. Gayl opens with a broadside. 

It would seem to some that a US war with China over the island of Taiwan appears imminent. Considering the congestion of hostile forces in, above, and below the Taiwan Straits and South China Sea, conflict could explode by accident or design. Once blood is drawn, the US will have few options. If the US elects to fight China over the island of Taiwan, then it will lose.   

And I happen to agree militarily with Gayl in terms of a possible hostilities around Taiwan, especially when Gayl goes into the neck of the woods and addresses what is commonly known as "fundamentals".

Many Americans assume China's citizenry longs for a liberal democracy like that on the island of Taiwan, and that war will trigger popular revolt. But the Taiwan question is not an ideological dispute. Rather it is a raw and painful open wound in China's civilizational identity. Today, US othering of Chinese only fuels a fierce nationalism in its 1.4 billion citizens. China has a traditional self-narrative wherein the preservation of face and enforcement of sovereignty are inseparable. All the while the balance of power has shifted fundamentally. The US would be wise to regard China as a peer superpower, if only due to her casualty-tolerance - China's decisive advantage in any fight with the US. China also shares a binding mutual defense treaty with North Korea, and the depths of its friendship and security bonds with Russia should never be underestimated. 

This is an excellent point. Nationalism is not the thing the United States, which still operates with a primitive two-dimensional picture of the world (unsurprisingly, considering a "level" of US "elites") and turned the term "communism" into the euphemism for everything the United States doesn't like, encountered since Vietnam where the war was lost not just to Vietnamese "communists" but to Vietnamese nationalism, especially when one considers the historic age of Vietnamese, whose antiquity goes back as far as 2000+ years BC. American "elites" have no concept of profound and long history and we all know how the War in Vietnam ended. But Gayl makes the most important observation here:  

The US has never paid an existential price for violating another nation's sovereignty, leading to our smug sense of military invincibility. However, with Taiwan being a core Chinese priority, that would be a fatal miscalculation. Still, the US counts on regional allies to share the pain. Yet some will have blood debts to pay if they engage in China's civil war. For example, India was bloodied badly in the 1960s for testing China's territorial resolve. Japan's humiliating 50-year occupation of Taiwan and the Rape of Nanjing also remain fresh, unforgettable wounds for China. The US allies will definitely think twice before militarily intervening in China's unresolved civil war and internal affairs.    

Yes,  I am on record for years that the expeditionary warfare--the only warfare the United States knows--is not a continental warfare which shapes nation-states and national awareness. Vietnamese lost in the war with the United States millions of people--numbers incomprehensible for the average American, while China is even more casualties tolerant and, unlike Vietnam of 1960s, which was dependent on Soviet support, has own armed forces which are capable to both defend China proper and project power into Taiwan. Recall what I wrote four years ago:

Expeditionary warfare simply does not provide a proper angle on the issues of actual defense. The nation whose 20th Century losses due to wars from WW I, to the Russian Civil War, to WW II number roughly in the 40-45 million range, would certainly try to not repeat such ordeals. This is the reality from which most of the US elites are completely detached. In layman’s lingo, the United States lacks the geographic, historic, cultural, economic and technological pressures to develop and have a coherent defensive military doctrine and weapons which would help to implement it. Russia lives under these pressures constantly and, in fact, Russians as an ethnos were formed and defined by warfare.

Now let us recall that China's loses in the WW II were second only to the Soviet Union. And visuals, sometimes, are very important in terms of demonstrating what REAL loses in real wars are and that in case of war around Taiwan the United States may expect not only a completely different dynamics of losses than it ever encountered, but also has its bases in the region under the threat of annihilation by Chinese medium and long-range missiles. 

This video should be shown to every member of US Congress and every US government employee with the explanation that the United States is a newcomer to the world of real war in which fates of nations are at stake and that modern weapon systems make not only any US force vulnerable to what it never experienced in its history--its strategic and operational depth being attacked by the opposition--but the US proper being under very real threat of attack. And it is a very good sign that American military professionals understand that and speak out about this increasingly loud. I touch here purely military and humanitarian aspect of this issue. I have no idea how the China-Taiwan issue could be settled in a peaceful way, I am sure it can be, but I am no professional Sinologist to offer any prescriptions. 

In related news, yesterday Kiev "celebrated" the anniversary of the SS Division Galicina--a kind of people US and EU support. You know, "democratic" Ukraine et al.

So, you may enjoy "Western values" which were streamed on Ukrainian TV. But we all know that there are no Nazis in Ukraine, yes, yes, ask Vicki Nuland, she'll tell you.