article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
When China awakes, Napoleon is said to have warned, the world will tremble. For more than a century and a half after his time, that prospect seemed remote.
By khaleejtimes.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
Vietnam and the United States will stage a fresh demonstration this week of their military ties at a time of escalating tensions with China over territorial claims in the South China Sea.
By news.yahoo.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
Beijing, July 29 : Chinese experts believe that it is not the ripe time for China and the United States to resume their military talks.
By newkerala.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg gestures during a news conference in Bishkek July 18, 2010. REUTERS/Vladimir Pirogov WASHINGTON, July 28 (Reuters) – The lack of sustained military ties between the United States and China is a key challenge for the two countries at a time of tensions in Asia, the U.S. No. 2 diplomat said on Tuesday.
By bernama.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
As the U.S. and South Korea play war games near Chinese waters, Beijing makes bellicose sounds. Soon it may threaten with more than noise
By time.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
As the U.S. and South Korea play war games near Chinese waters, Beijing makes bellicose sounds. Soon, it may threaten with more than noise
By time.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
China said Thursday that U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is welcome to visit at an appropriate time, just weeks after it rejected a proposed trip by him.
By news.yahoo.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
A Chinese general said on Thursday that U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was welcome to visit China at an “appropriate” time, possibly signaling a desire to soften military tensions between the two powers.
By news.yahoo.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
Taiwan and China will sign a landmark trade pact Tuesday, a deal that could yoke the two sides closer than at any time since their split more than 60 years ago.
By news.yahoo.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
Chinese tanks and other military equipment are on show for the first time at the Eurosatory defense trade fair outside Paris, as state-owned Chinese companies seek to tap new markets.
By biz.yahoo.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
Much time is spent trying to figure out the consequences of China’s rapid movement towards becoming a great economic and world power. Much less time has gone to explaining how this change happened and how it will be sustained, if it is sustained.
By huffingtonpost.com

article[s] found via yahoo.com”s news search
Japan reports that, for the third time in the past 18 months, Chinese warships have been spotted south of the Japanese Island of Okinawa. This time, it was two Chinese submarines, running on the surface.
By strategypage.com

Click here for original article
Beijing (XNA) May 10, 2010 –
China’s space authorities added seven new members to its astronaut crew on Friday, with two women included for the first time. As usual, the names of the second batch of astronauts were not disclosed. However, space authorities did reveal in a press release that they are all aged 30 to 35, married and have college diplomas.

The five men are fighter pilots, while the two women fly transport aircraft for the Chinese air force. On average, they have 1,270 hours of flight time each. All of the astronauts are strong physically and psychologically, the release said.

“China is expected to test its docking technology in the next few years and the seven new astronauts are selected for these new tasks,” said Chen Shanguang, director of the Astronaut Center of China.

China is expected to launch an unmanned space module – Tiangong 1 – in the first half of 2011, according to Xinhua News Agency.

The Shenzhou 8 spacecraft will be launched in the second half of 2011 to carry out the nation’s first space docking, followed by the Shenzhou 9 and Shenzhou 10, which will be launched in 2012 to dock with Tiangong 1.

The seven new additions are expected to replace some of the first batch of 14 astronauts, maintaining the “moderate scale” of China’s crew, said Chen.

The two women will likely be trained to become pilots of the spacecraft, he said, without specifying the time.

Sui Guosheng, the air force officer in charge of recruitment, told Guangzhou-based Nanfang Weekly last July that those chosen to join the astronaut program will undergo between two and three years of training, and the first female astronaut could complete her journey into space by 2012.

China started to select its astronauts in 1998. Yang Liwei was the first and made history when he voyaged beyond the planet’s atmosphere for 21 hours aboard the Shenzhou 5 in 2003.

After Yang, five other astronauts made it to space on missions in 2005 and 2008. Among them, Zhai Zhigang made China’s first outer space walk aboard the Shenzhou 7 in September 2008.

Source: Xinhua News Agency

By spacedaily.com

Click here for original article
Last week, I officially quit from my job. I am currently in the middle of an one-week hiatus before starting my new job. As such, I’ve had some time to watch Ted Koppel’s piece on China (People’s republic of capitalism) and part of Paul Merton’s trip to China. I think Ted Koppel’s 4 part mini-series on China was simply brilliant. For anyone who is trying to learn about future US-China relationship, that series would be a good place to start off. As I watch the series, I really begun to think about several major questions. How did China change so quickly? Were the policies of economic liberation really as great as people think they are? Why are Chinese businesses so competitive now and can they be this competitive in the future? Why is the politburo so paranoid about social stability and order? Can democracy and more importantly human rights be delivered in the country without stopping the economic progress? And most importantly, what would happen if the current economic growth in China stop? Ted Koppel brought up the point that it should not be too surprising if there will be another huge revolution/revolt that uproots the system when that happens. Considering the current rein on power that the communist party has on the China, that really seems to be a far-fetched idea. I watched some documentary from Mao’s time (China – Mao Bloody Revolution Revealed) and also on Deng in the past 24 hours and have a slightly different prospective.

There have often been a lot of criticisms in the Western media regarding human rights in China. A lot of that is well deserved. As shown in Koppel’s documentary (and also could be confirmed by anyone that lived in China for more than a month), the amount of corruption and the driven for greed is astounding; and has caused so much injustice in the country (many in the form of human right violations like forcible eviction). Koppel’s interview with billionaire Vincent Lo really revealed some interesting points. Mr. Lo basically made several major points
- while he is not happy about China’s human rights record, but they have to start somewhere.
- the autocratic gov’t has gone from socialism to become the world’s most business friendly government with a constitution of economic development.
- this current autocratic system has delivered 300 million people out of poverty in 30 years and democracy could not have done that
- assurance of stable gov’t + policies allow investors like himself get involved in the Chinese economy and deliver more wealth to the country
So, does that mean we should accept or tolerate such human right abuses and lack of democracy in the country.

For this, I watched a documentary on Mao by Phillip Short of BBC and reflected also on past documentaries I watched + what I know from growing up in China. There have been several documentaries made about Mao in the past 15 years as foreigners became allowed to interview people close to Mao at that time. None of which are flattering to Mao. Simply put, there have been 4 major man-caused disasters since the founding of CCP in the 1920s. The first two were the Japanese invasion in 1937-1945 and the civil war in 1946-1949. The next two were both caused by Mao himself in the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. I knew that things were really bad during the years of great leap forward, but didn’t really know how bad they were until seeing that 20+ million people died of starvation from 1958-1962. It was especially disconcerting to read that cannibalism was quite common during that period (mostly of dead people, but also of living in some cases). Even through all of this mass starvation, the gov’t continued the insane policies of exporting grains to other countries to pay off Soviet debts and to look self sufficient in front of outside nations. I guess my family was not as affected by those years because we lived in the cities. However, the urban dwellers had their turn in front of the gun when Cultural Revolution came. All through China, urban youths were sent to the countryside to help the motherland. The intellectuals and the slightly wealthy urban dwellers and supporters of sacked leaders were all publicly humiliated and beaten. There were many stories of deans of universities and principals of schools getting beaten to death or committing suicide after being tortured. Worst of all, some of the most precious art, literature and historical places were destroyed by the brainwashed youth also known as the Red Guards. Personally speaking, my mother’s parents were both severely persecuted because of their educational background. The Mao era had none of the war and foreign occupation that plagued the country for the 100 years before that. However, it was replaced by a psychotic leader that managed to brainwash much of the population and destroyed all possible political opponents through radical ideological movements (Cultural Revolution and other major purges). Other than Zhou Enlai and Zhu De, all of the other major revolutionaries like Peng Dehuai, Liu Shaoqi, Deng Xiaoping and many other generals were purged, humiliated and tortured. The administration was infected by leftist radicals like the Gang of Four, Mao himself and Lin Biao to a lesser degree. The succession of Deng Xiaoping over Hua GuoFeng in late 1970s was the first time in the recent Chinese history where a succession happened over a unified China without blood spilling or purges. And thankfully, they have finally put in a system that would allow for peaceful transition of power and that would prevent future emergence of charismatic leader (like Mao himself). If this series of events sound crazy, one has to realize that this was nothing new in the Chinese history. Unfortunately, Chinese history is marred by continuous cycles of internal war, mass starvation, political purges by emperors and village rebellions that led to new deification of rebellion leader as an emperor God.

In Koppel’s documentary, he interviewed a bunch of villager who insisted that life is better now than it has ever been. Their explanation was that “the army no longer forces people to join. And we are no longer forced to move off our land.” And the oldest women in the village said that right now is the best time to live because they have enough food to eat and enough clothes to wear. Some may think these are extraordinary statements or that the Chinese population has set their standards way too low. However, one only has to look at the past to see how much things have moved. When my parents were in their early 20s, they were working at textile factories and villages in the midst of the Cultural Revolution. All form of higher education were stopped (even most lower level of education were stopped), so their dreams of going to university were sitting in vain. When my grandparents were in their early 20s, China was involved in the two major wars of this century. A lot of their friends were killed by Japanese brutality and then by the civil war. When my great grandparents were in their early 20s, China had just became a republic and was in the midst of constant infighting between local warlords. It should not be hard to see why the Chinese gov’t fears change and instability so much. Deng Xiaoping what happened to China in the 60s and 70s when the country went into policies without pragmatism and caution. His philosophy of control, pragmatism and caution has been passed onto all of the current leaders. Outside of the TianAnMen Square crackdown, one can hardly argue against this period of peace, political stability and economical growth in China. A lot of people on the top are fearful that if their current hold on power is taken away, the country will go back into chaos like prior to 1978.

It is very easy to credit Deng Xiaoping and recent administrations for China’s success in the past 30 years, but are they really that responsible? Looking back at the period right after Mao’s death, the Chinese population was ready to open itself up to the rest of the world and embrace capitalism. I think that opening up the country to Western investment and technology was the smartest thing that the gov’t did once the relations were normalized with the Western countries. From his past experiences at the top, Deng Xiaoping saw the need for pragmatic engagement with the West over extreme ideological warfare. According to this well written article by Hoover Institution, the Chinese people were hungry by then for political reform. They were even acting out illegally in many cases to make money for their families. During the late 70s and early 80s, the younger generation were kids when the great leap forward happened and teenagers when the cultural revolution happened. I think they became disillusioned of class struggle and socialism after being starved and later sent to the farms. The older generation still had enough memory of the period of society prior to 1949. I think both generations had suffered enough by then and really wanted to work hard to make lives better for their kids. Even today, the older generation in China are the younger generation of the late 70s, so they still remembered the chaos, starvation, poverty and hard times. They don’t really mind to work super hard to ensure better future for their kids. And I think Ted Koppel’s documentary was a perfect illustration of what every poor Chinese family are willing to do for their kids. He made a perfect point later in an extra interview that “Chinese people probably deserve to go to the hall of fame for enduring hardship and suffering”. When you look at Ted Koppel’s interview with the owner of Lifan, you can see the prototypical hardened Chinese entrepreneur that is willing to do whatever it takes to make it in the capitalistic world. You also hear about this with many of the other successful business men in China. They have succeeded because of their hardened experience during the great leap forward and the cultural revolution. They know that the only way forward is to beat out your competition in any possible way. So, I think that China is thriving in the world economy now, because the people that are driving the economic growth are the same people who were hardened through the Mao-caused disasters. It is beating out competitions around the world like Japan did in the 50s/60s because it has a very driven group of people willing to endure hardship. I think that the recent regime’s main role through all of this time is to continue a stable environment to allow Chinese people to better their own lives. Deng and the following leaders were smart enough to not stop a good thing when it has already started. The only thing that prevented this from happening for the 100 years prior to that were continued chaos, utter lunacy in power and the numerous wars. And maybe Deng’s policy of maintaining stability and not stopping good things is the best anyone can ever hope a government to do. The question as we move forward is whether or not China can continue to strive in the world market when the future generation that came in after the start of the single child policy become the drivers of the economy. Can the Chinese population still work hard and endure suffering when most of the people grew up being spoiled and pampered by their parents.

So in the past 30 years, we have gone from a society of total chaos and starvation to a society of vibrant growth with large degree of personal freedom. It is hard to imagine that China will ever go back to the Mao days. In fact, I read a recent article where Chinese tourists started to complain about lack of freedom after a day of visit in North Korea. Today’s North Korea is probably where China was at the time of Cultural Revolution. In fact, the evolution of North Korea from a state that was wealthier and more industrialized than South Korea in the 60s to the pariah state that it is today is a very good parallel to what happened to China in the 60s and 70s. Knowing all of this, the question is what holds in the future for China in terms of democracy and human rights. I think it was very interesting that Ted Koppel mentioned in several places that what he saw or many of the interviews that he was happening could not have happened 15 years ago or even 5 years ago. This shows a gradual change in the personal freedom that we are seeing in the ordinary citizens. For example, I don’t think the administration would be able to survive the internal backlash from a crackdown like the one in TianAnMen Square. Actually ever since the death of Deng Xiaoping, no civilian leader will ever have the same power to control the military. That is a good thing, because the politburo members have to retire after 2 terms of power. And we are certainly seeing a lot of checks and balances within the PSC to prevent a God-like leader ever appearing again. As the power at the top have slowly faded from Mao to Deng to Jiang to Hu and to Xi Jinping in the future, the question is whether or not we can have a peaceful transition to some form of electoral based system. I think that a transition to elecoral based system will happen in the next 20 years, but I hope it does not come as a result of a violent national uprising by the disenfranchised over the wealth gap between the haves and the have-nots. Even though today’s system is causing a lot of corruption, injustice and wealth gap, it has vastly improved the lives of most Chinese people. I think that a complete repudiation of this system would cause chaos and economic disaster in the short term.

Even so, I do hope for some kind of repudiation in the future. I think that the mistakes that Mao made in the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution will never be properly revealed to the Chinese public unless this system is shaken. Deng continued the legacy of Mao and the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party by maintaining that Mao’s contribution to history was 70% good and 30% bad. I cannot see CCP go any further in repudiating Mao because 1) that would take away their legitimacy in power; 2) the population just doesn’t care anymore. And I think my second point is probably the sadest of all. Even from my parent’s generation, they have grown up with the view that Mao was this great leader that unified China but made some mistakes along the way. Leaders like Liu Shaoqi and Peng Dehuai have been rehabilitated, but they have never received the credit they deserved for bringing China out of the Great Leap Forward and trying to run the country. Most of the blames for the Cultural Revolution should rest upon Mao rather than the Gang of Four or Lin Biao. Even though he unified the country and kicked out the foreigners, he also set the nation back to stone ages with his insane economic policies and political movements. In the future, 95% of the new generation of Chinese would grow up never know about how bad things were between the early 1950s and 1978. And I think that is a mistake, because they need to learn about the past to not repeat it again in the future. So, I hope that as people demand for better rule of law and more freedom in the future, the government will incrementally become more open about its past. More transparency from the gov’t on these matters is certainly better than having its own citizens watching documentaries of Mao on youtube (some of which are quite biased). There is a major bubble forming in the Chinese economy. Once that bubble bursts, the gov’t needs to be prepared for millions of unemployed college students hanging around the country. It would need to also continuously change to prevent another million people from protesting in front of TianAnMen Square. Because the next time it happens, I doubt the army would be listening to the civilian commands.

In conclusion, I think that even though China is going through a really healthy period of peace and growth, there are some looming signs of danger up ahead. Having looked back through its recent history, I understand the politburo’s obsession with stability and caution, but also think that they need to continue to change to maintain this stability. Nobody really knows what would happen if the Chinese economy bubble bursts. I hope that the country does not go back to chaos, because that would set the country back many years. I would recommend all of the links that I have mentioned in this blog entry. They are great places to start in understanding Modern China.

By Feng

Click here for original article
For long time readers of this blog; the fact that most of China’s helicopters are powered by European / Canada engines should come as no surprise. China To Fit Attack Helo With European EngineBy wendell minnick and pierre tranPublished: 7 February 2010http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4489192&c=FEA&s=CVSSINGAPORE and PARIS – China is outfitting a new attack helicopter with a European engine
By Coatepeque

originally published at china-defense-mashup.com

Jan.11 (China Military News reporting by Johnathan Weng) – Beijing local time PM 9:00 Januray 11 on 2010, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs announces that China has successfully finished a ground-Based midcourse missile interception test in the territory of China.

The ministry says that the test has reached the technological purpose and this behavior is purely defensive and not directed at any third country or bloc of countries.

According to some Chinese resources, the designation number of Chinese ground-based interception missile is HQ-19, which has been finished the trial test in 2003. Chinese Government has made the ballistic missile defense technology as the part of “863 National Advanced Defense Project”. The initiation of HQ-19 project is believed to start in 1995. HQ-19’s warhead is a 35-kg Kinetic Kill Vehicle (KKV). In 1999, HQ-19’s KKV successfully passed its first “hovering test” and it let China become the second country except U.S., which realizes the milestone in Kinetic killing vehicle development.

The HQ-19’s warhead is a light KKV with Three-axial Stabilization. The interceptor has 4 orbital maneuver propulsion thrusters and 6 attitude control thrusters, controlled by DACS (Digital Attitude Control System).

Besides, some Chinese people believe that the HQ-19 is a variant of KT series rocket.

××××××××××××××

Chinese Missile Defense Test Witness:

Time: a few minutes to PM 8:00

Location: Jiuquan, Gansu Province (GPS Position: 39.646411,98.347893)

Witness Description: From the elevation of about 45 degrees in the north-west sky, I found a positive white circular Clumps about the size of dozens of moons. My first judge was the moon created a very personalized style halo. My colleagues and I immediately look for the moon, while preparing the camera and prepared to dial a news hotline.

But soon we discovered there is no moon on that position, while the white Clumps is rapidly expanding. In the tens of seconds of time, it quickly expanded to a half of the sky, and gradually fades. I suddenly think if it will be some nuclear explosions. Subsequently, the flashes appeared in the center of white Clumps. The flashes were not very strong, when it felt as if a mass of white fog.

My colleagues and I have guessed that it maybe a alien trip from another planet. But the flash and fog-like clumps have quickly dimmed. We do not have warned others, nor photograph the whole progress by the camera. We even didn’t have time to report to news media. This odd scene just lasted 2-3 minutes.

I analyzed that the whole process looks more like an explosion. But it is rather strange is that why there have no even the slightest sound before and after. Because here is a military zone, so I have heard the voices of a variety of artillery shells exploded. And it is is really puzzling that the strong shock wave in the sky did not bring any sounds. 

××××××××××××××

One picture of this missile defense test, photoed by one Chinese people’s cellphone

Time: UTC+8 PM 7:45, Jan.11, 2010     Location: some place near the Urumqi City, the captial city of Xinjiang

You may also be interested in

• August 23, 2008 — China launches 2nd Olympic weather satellite (0)

By admin

China Air and Naval Power

via The state of China/Russia military cooperation.

Today, I read this article by a Russian paper regarding the military cooperation between China and Russia. I think it really does a great job of explaining why there haven’t been a major deal recently and why it probably would not happen anytime soon. The important point is that this article didn’t dwell on the so called pirating efforts of China against Russian hardware, so it was able to explore some of the major reasons why nothing is going on. It clearly identifies IL-76 and S-400 as the 2 major items that China would most likely want from Russia at the current time and why they are not coming through.

With respect to the last paragraph, I think the idea of pirating will be a problem for a while, because the two sides really can’t agree on what constitute pirating. The copyright laws in the two countries are actually not the same. So even though they signed an agreement, I’m not sure it will work out as the Russians want.

The crisis in the Russian defence industry is hindering the
development of military-technical cooperation with the Middle Kingdom.

Military cooperation between Russia and China in the weapons business
sphere, it appears, is experiencing a severe crisis. This is shown by
the results of the visit to Russia by the Chinese government
delegation headed by Colonel General Guo Boxiong, deputy chairman of
the PRC’s Central Military Commission, that concluded last Friday [27
November].

General Guo Boxiong (on the left) rubbed shoulders with Dmitriy
Medvedev but apparently left Moscow empty handed.

The military leader from China came to discuss prospects for military-
technical cooperation (VTS) between the two countries. President
Vladimir Medvedev received Gou Boxiong. He noted that “a firm
partnership is developing between the two countries, and it is based
upon a coincidence of our basic interests.” The day before, in the
presence of Defence Minister Anatoliy Serdyukov and Federal Service
for Military-Technical Cooperation (FSVTS) Director Mikhail Dmitriyev,
Russia’s leader met for a long time behind closed doors in Barvikha
with the Chinese guests. On 24 November the delegation from China was
at the Kapustin Yar proving ground in Astrakhan Oblast where new
developments in prospective armament models were demonstrated for it.
And the next day [25 November] the 14th session of the Russian-Chinese
Joint Commission on Military-Technical Cooperation (SMK) was held in
Moscow under the chairmanship of Anatoliy Serdyukov. According to
Irina Kovalchuk, the defence minister’s press secretary, at the
session “the sides expressed satisfaction with the state of bilateral
military-technical cooperation.”

Nevertheless, it is striking that neither the Russian nor the Chinese
sides expected the present meeting to end in the signing of any sort
of documents about weapons purchases. Foreshadowing the SMK session,
Mikhail Dmitriyev stated that all areas of bilateral collaboration
“will be examined” at it: aircraft building, engines, ships, PVO [air
defence] systems, and armoured equipment. Although “the adoption of
any breakthrough decisions or the signing of any contracts is not
expected.” Why it is “not expected” is completely understandable.
Beijing already has bought everything that is possible in Moscow, and
it will produce the greater share of weapons by itself. And all of the
new types of weapons that the PRC needs are only at the development
stage in Russia, or else there are problems in producing them.

For example, the last “breakthrough contract” between Moscow and
Beijing was concluded as far back as 2005 in Sochi. At issue were
deliveries to the PRC by 2010 of 34 Il-76 military-transport airplanes
and four Il-78 refueling airplanes, at a total cost of more than one
billion dollars. But, as is well known, the Chkalov Tashkent Aircraft
Production Association (TAPOiCH, Uzbekistan), where the airplanes
mentioned are produced, defaulted and the contract was broken. As
sources in the FSVTS reported to Nezavisimaya Gazeta, the question of
buying heavy military transport airplanes also was raised during the
present round of Russian- Chinese contracts, but Moscow was not able
to make the Chinese comrades happy in any way.

We would note that during the time of Guo Boxiong’s visit to the
Russian Federation President Medvedev visited Ulyanovsk. The media
paid attention to the dressing down that the president gave to the
military in that city in connection with the explosions at the Navy’s
No 31 Arsenal. Meanwhile, having arrived in Ulyanovsk Dmitriy Medvedev
immediately left the airport and headed first of all to the Aviatstar
SP [joint venture] aircraft-building plant, to which the production of
the Il-76 will be transferred from Tashkent. Together with others of
the aviation enterprise’s innovations, they also showed him the plans
for a new aircraft (Il-476) based on the Il-76 airplane, where the
newest aviation navigation and control systems are used and where in
addition to everything the configuration of the wing is changed.

On the same day in Ulyanovsk, in addition to a session of the State
Council for Nanoinnovation [Gossovet po nanonovatsiyam: According to
the Kremlin website, Medvedev participated in a session of the State
Committee for Questions of Innovative Development of Russia's
Transportation System in Ulyanovsk on 24 November], a session of the
board of directors of the Amalgamated Aircraft Manufacturing
Corporation (OAK) was held under the chairmanship of Deputy Premier
Sergey Ivanov to determine plans for Russian aviation. Notable among
these is a plan for “the programme for producing the Il-476 to be set
in motion at the Ulyanovsk aircraft plant: the airplane is expected to
be rolled out in 2010 and will be tested in 2011.” Thus it was
demonstrated to the PRC that Russia is developing modern aviation
technology, but the Chinese still will not see the new military
transport airplane very soon. Judging from present Russian experience,
testing the airplane will take a long time.

Besides this, the Russian Air Force is in great need of these
airplanes. The same thing could be said about other new Russian
defence industry developments. Let us say that on 24 November at the
Russian Air Force’s Kapustin Yar proving ground the Chinese admired
the S-400 surface-to-air missile (ZRS) system. But it was hinted to
them that they are unlikely to that soon either. In the first place,
the Russian armed forces will have to be equipped with it, and in the
second place – and perhaps this is the most essential point – the
shortcomings that the S-400 has must be eliminated. Air Force
Commander in Chief Colonel General Aleksandr Zelin unambiguously
hinted at this on 26 November. According to him, the tactical-
technical characteristics that are set for this surface-to-air missile
system “still have not been completely obtained”. Therefore, the
general says, together with the PVO Almaz-Antey concern it is still
necessary to carry out a great deal of work in order for “the
necessary results to be achieved”.

The Chinese were shown other new types of weapons, but Russia does not
want to sell them “simply for the sake of selling them”. From all
accounts, Moscow wants to establish gentlemen’s agreements with
Beijing in the area of military-technical cooperation in order to
avoid pirate copying of our technology. In this connection one can
recall the scandal fanned by the media about the fact that Moscow is
thinking about refusing to sell Beijing a major part of the SU-33
fighter out of fears that the Chinese will illegally copy this
airplane as they had done earlier with the Su-27. Vyacheslav Dzirkaln,
deputy director of Russia’s Federal Service for Military- Technical
Cooperation, thinks that the problem is a real one: “Last year we
signed an agreement on the protection of intellectual property, and I
hope that it will help us solve problems in disputes connected with
the illegal copying of our weapons.”

China’s Capacity for Cyberwarfare with the U.S. (Time Magazine): “Obama may want to bring up allegations that China is using proxies toinfiltrate U.S. computer networks. But Beijing won’t even acknowledge that aproblem exists”

US and China, locked in equal embrace | John Gittings: “

Obama’s trip comes at a time when the US needs China as much as China needs it – and neither nation can afford to let go

When President Obama arrives in Shanghai tomorrow he will be carrying the baggage of a relationship between communist China and capitalist America that dates back more than 60 years.

‘There is no such thing as America not intervening in China,’ Mao Zedong told a US diplomat in 1945 – and offered to fly to Washington to talk about the future with President Roosevelt. Mao’s proposal, made a year before the Chinese civil war in which the US backed Chiang Kai-shek’s rule, never reached Roosevelt. What might have happened if they had met is a fascinating counter-factual question of history.

After the communist victory in 1949, two decades of hostility ended with Nixon’s visit to Beijing in 1972 when China became a useful ally for Washington against the Soviet Union. Since then the relationship has fluctuated but has always been seen on the Chinese side as essential – less consistently so by the US.

What is different today, and what takes the Obama administration into new territory, is that it is at last a relationship of equals: the US now needs China as much as China needs the US.

The contrast with the last presidential state visit to China, by Bill Clinton in 1998, is striking. That event was more show than substance, carefully choreographed to give the president a much-needed boost after the Monica Lewinsky affair. Clinton urged the virtues of democracy upon President Jiang Zemin and offered to act as a go-between for him and the Dalai Lama. It looked good at the time but the Tibetan offer came predictably to nothing and six months later Jiang launched a crackdown on the Chinese democracy movement.

Within another six months, the US air force bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, provoking a wave of genuine anger across China. George Bush, in his presidential campaign, would label China as a potential strategic threat, not as a partner.

It was the shock of 9/11 that gave China a grim golden chance to make itself more useful to the US (and target its own Muslim dissidents in Xinjiang province) by signing up to the war on terror. Yet in spite of Chinese entry into the World Trade Organisation, Beijing knew that the relationship remained less than equal: in the wry expression of a senior Chinese diplomat ‘we think it is better to remain number two’.

Today’s relationship occupies a completely different world in which there is talk of a Sino-US G2, and even suggestions that China might become No 1. The past rhetoric of both sides – ‘empty cannons’ as Chairman Mao once called them – seems dated. China is not going to make too much fuss about continued US arms sales to Taiwan (when was that island last in the headlines?). Human rights in China – never a huge concern to Washington (only a month after the Beijing massacre in 1989, a secret US envoy was sent to Beijing to maintain relations) – will be mentioned for form’s sake by Obama. But the priorities identified by Obama earlier this week are the only ones that really matter: ‘climate change, economic recovery, nuclear non-proliferation’.

The US says it seeks a ‘comprehensive partnership’ with China in what Jon Huntsman, new US ambassador to Beijing, calls ‘the most important bilateral relationship in the world’. This is music to the ears of Chinese foreign policy advisers in Beijing who have often worried about the underlying ‘inequality’ in US-China relations.

The presidents whom they advised, Jiang and now Hu Jintao, can privately tell internal critics that their long-term strategic policy of putting the relationship with the US first has paid off.

More openly, the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, has warned the US military establishment that China should be regarded as a partner, not an adversary.

Does China perhaps have the upper hand in this relationship, as it measures another 8% growth in GDP against the limping US economy? Hardly so, if we consider the real implication of the familiar statistic that China now holds $800bn in US Treasury bonds.

Obama may ask Beijing to revalue the Renminbi; Hu may ask Washington to ‘focus on its own financial deficit’, but the Chinese surplus rides on the American debt as if on the back of the Old Man of the Sea: neither can let go of the other.

And China’s extensive growth over almost two decades is not only unhealthily dependent on foreign markets, but has been bought at the expense of a deteriorating environment and a worsening rich-poor divide.

US presidential visits to China have always had a showbiz element – ever since Richard Nixon stood on the Great Wall and declared that it was truly a great wall. We may expect a wave of Obama-fever in the Chinese media: every tabloid paper – and there are a lot of them now – will want to have Michelle on the front page. Yet the widely read Huanqiu Bao (Global Times) says that the Obama visit ‘won’t shake the world’ and that most Chinese people have ‘neither strong concerns nor high expectations’. In a more equal Sino-US partnership, fewer heads may actually turn for the presidential motorcade.

China Vs. India: Will Rivalry Lead to War? (Time Magazine): “In the Himalayas, India and China are needling each other. Welcome to what may be the century’s most important contest”