Translate

Friday 24 August 2012

Back to the 80s, a new Cold War for the 21st Century?

Hey China, welcome to the 1980s in missile tech:

News first emerged of the planned ‘super missile’ from defence industry bible Jane’s Defence Weekly last week, according to South China Morning Post.
It apparently claimed that a Dongfeng-41 (DF-41) intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), had been fired in testing last month by the PLA’s Second Artillery Corps.
This third-generation missile, US military sources told Jane’s, contain multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) – effectively multiple warheads – meaning they would be almost impossible for current US defences to take down.
This sounds a whole lot like a Minuteman III or some such from the height of the Cold War, and by itself is nothing to get exercised about, despite flying in the face of current Arms Control agreements. What this sort of rumour/announcement really signifies (if you somehow missed the rest of the signs) is that China has plans to expand.
The Americans have of late finally noticed this, and will hopefully allow the Arabs etc. to kill each other in the Middle East and concentrate on something which actually threatens their position in the world (almost as much as the current system of government). Mitt Romney, presently the de facto Republican Presidential nominee, has just pushed out a plan for North American energy independence which is a step in the right direction, but he has to a) be elected and b) actually follow through on the plan for it to make a difference.
I really don't know what China intends with this; that sort of a missile is a threat to both the US and Russia, overkill against India (or less likely, Pakistan), but doesn't materially change the deterrent of either of the major powers. Likely it's for internal political consumption and it's possible they're not even seriously pursuing it, at least not as an ABM-busting strategic weapon.
In any event, the world is re-aligning, and China is doing itself no favours in the international community by backing places like Iran and Syria. The truth of the matter in the South China Sea is that without the US Navy none of the smaller regional actors have a chance against China, and everyone knows it. In order therefore to defend its' broader national interest (e.g. global trade) the USA needs to get its' house in order by boosting it's economy in real terms.
A rational energy and regulatory program will help that a lot, another four years of Obama binding the country up in red (green?) tape and having an indefinable foreign policy will not help at all. Romney et al might be an improvement, but the system is now so ponderous and corrupt that I have my doubts that anything short of armed rebellion will make much of a difference. Note that none of this is an endorsement of such an uprising (Canada can't absorb that many refugees if nothing else), but I will for what it's worth say that I see Romney as the best of a bad lot.
The next five years or so are critical to the trajectory of the USA and of China, and whatever happens it'll affect the whole world. The big question seems to be: new Cold War, or a Hot one?

No comments: