You have4 free articles left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.
You have 4 free articles left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
defence connect logo

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

The Guns of August: UK Professor predicts the US-China flash point of the 2020s

The Guns of August: UK Professor predicts the US-China flash point of the 2020s

In the lead up to the First World War, game theory dictated that all parties would act rationally – they didn’t. In an echo of history, Patrick Porter, a professor of international security at the University of Birmingham, has penned an interesting prediction for the 2020s and a clash between the US and China.

In the lead up to the First World War, game theory dictated that all parties would act rationally – they didn’t. In an echo of history, Patrick Porter, a professor of international security at the University of Birmingham, has penned an interesting prediction for the 2020s and a clash between the US and China.

At the height of the Cold War, historian Barbara Tuchman penned an insightful prelude to the outbreak of the First World War – The Guns of August catalogued the relationships between the Entente and Central Powers, which would eventually lead to the Great War and the role of alliances and game theory in one of history's greatest miscalculations. 

Game theory states that all state-based actors within the international relations context will behave in a rational manner, serving the best interests of their respective nations – meaning war should be unlikely, if not inconceivable, particularly between trading partners – something we know isn't true. 

While much of the debate in recent months has focused on the growing similarities of the world's currently changing geo-strategic, economic and political paradigm and the years immediately preceding the First and Second World War – despite the rising competition between the US and China having similar echoes, it is vastly different. 

The key factor making any potential conflagration between the US and China is not the tried and true method of roping in allies or the concept of potentially devastating 'total war' between two superpowers, it is nuclear weapons. 

2029 – the year of flash point Taiwan 

Serving as an echo of this premise, the combination of alliance networks, interdependent economies and the horrors of total war, professor of international security Patrick Porter at the University of Birmingham recently penned an insightful, yet equally concerning article titled 'Looking back: WWIII remembered' .

Porter's 'role play' articulates the high-level conversations – and the attempts by both sides to 'rationally' predict the next-steps by both sides of the Pacific following an increasingly assertive China's attempts to forcibly annex the "breakaway province" of Taiwan through the implementation of a comprehensive blockade to starve the island's population into capitulation. 

"It began with a struggle in Asia as China pursued its 'dream' of greatness. Its economy kept growing. It built up its military forces. It threw around its weight — coercing neighbours, crushing protesters and minorities, bribing politicians, stealing intellectual property, seizing contested reefs and atolls," Porter states. 

"It declared its overlordship of the 'three seas' — South, East and Yellow. Unsure where it was headed, countries hedged between the old superpower and the new."

In contrast, Porter focuses on the relative decline, war-wary and increasingly divided US and, more broadly, its web of Indo-Pacific allies including Japan, South Korea and Australia, each of whom have interests in maintaining the post-Second World War economic, political and strategic order led by what many globally and increasingly domestically consider a declining US: 

"America, the weary titan, grew scared of China’s rise and the defection of allies. It buckled under the costs of debt, guns and butter, and increased domestic strife. It tried to turn the tide," Porter articulates, setting the scene. 

"It started decoupling its economy. It progressively enlarged its naval, air and cyber forces, increasing American garrisons across Asia, launching ever-larger 'freedom of navigation' operations. It declared a 'league of democracies' against the world’s dictatorships. In the contest for opinion, Washington claimed 'moral leadership' with a 'no first use' nuclear policy."

Porter's core premise for Australia to take particular note of is the growing limitation of the US and its power to intervene on behalf of allies, despite best intentions, after all, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. 

Australia's strategic independence 

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the growing consensus is becoming not a matter of if, but when will Australia decide to reclaim the initiative regarding it's own strategic independence – balancing the alliances and friendships that have served us well since the Second World War, while expanding our sovereign capacity.  

For the first time since the introduction of the Defence of Australia doctrine, growing consensus is developing among Australias strategic community in response to the growing power of China, that Australia needs to rethink its approach to politics, diplomacy and defence on the matter.  

This has been perfectly encapsulated by ASPI senior analyst Dr Malcolm Davis, who told Defence Connect:

"We need to burden share to a much greater degree than before, and accept that we can no longer base our defence planning on the assumption that in a major military crisis or a period leading up to a future war, the US will automatically be there for us.

"In fact, if we want to avoid that major military crisis, we have to do more than adopt a purely defensive/denial posture, and be postured well forward to counterbalance a rising China or to be able to assist the US and other key allies, notably Japan, to respond to challenges. We can’t be free-riders."

Further supporting the growing need for strategic independence is Air Marshal (Ret'd) Leo Davies and Air Marshal (Ret’d) Geoff Brown both joining the public debate recently, with Davies telling journalist Catherine McGregor:

"Our existing naval and air ­assets may not be able to defend the country’s sea lines of communication — the primary maritime routes used by military and trade vessels — or fight a hostile foreign power."

Additionally, Dr Andrew Davies of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has called for Australia's policy makers to recognise the limitations of the US in an increasingly contested, multi-polar world, echoing the sentiments of Kevin Rudd. 

Dr Davies articulated this in a recent piece for ASPI, saying, "The assumption of continued US primacy that permeated DWP 2016 looked heroic at the time. It seems almost foolishly misplaced now."

Calls for a more 'mature approach' to the Australia-China relationship

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd has drawn both praise in condemnation in recent weeks calling for the nation to take on what he calls a "mature approach" to the China-Australia relationship with a focus on tipping the bilateral relationship and Australia's capacity to influence the direction in Australia's favour. 

"Australia needs a more mature approach to managing the complexity of the relationship than having politicians out-competing one another on who can sound the most hairy-chested on China," Rudd explained.

Rudd's focus on this 'mature conversation' includes growing Australia's population to serve as both an increase in the economic potential of the nation and as a strategic deterrent to potential future aggression by an increasingly assertive and often recalcitrant Chinese regime with its own economic, political and strategic ambitions for the Indo-Pacific. 

This is best summarised by what Rudd describes as "a big and sustainable Australia of the type I advocated while I was in office".

"Only a country with a population of 50 million later this century would begin to have the capacity to fund the military, security and intelligence assets necessary to defend our territorial integrity and political sovereignty long term. This is not politically correct. But it’s yet another uncomfortable truth," he added. 

While the population point is an important component of Rudd's thesis, his focus on a mature debate also calls for the nation to shake it's economic dependence on China, looking more broadly to other potential partners in the region, Europe and Africa as a means of limiting the potential for foreign influence.  

"We have become too China-dependent. We need to diversify further to Japan, India, Indonesia, Europe and Africa – the next continent with a rising middle class with more than a billion consumers. We must equally diversify our economy itself," Rudd explained. 

Rudd encapsulates and distills the premise of each of the aforementioned experts, saying, "Australia must also look to mid-century when we may increasingly have to stand to our own two feet, with or without the support of a major external ally.

Your thoughts

Australia's position and responsibilities in the Indo-Pacific region will depend on the nation's ability to sustain itself economically, strategically and politically.

Despite the nation's virtually unrivalled wealth of natural resources, agricultural and industrial potential, there is a lack of a cohesive national security strategy integrating the development of individual, yet complementary public policy strategies to support a more robust Australian role in the region.

Enhancing Australia’s capacity to act as an independent power, incorporating great power-style strategic economic, diplomatic and military capability, serves as a powerful symbol of Australia’s sovereignty and evolving responsibilities in supporting and enhancing the security and prosperity of Indo-Pacific Asia.

Shifting the public discussion away from the default Australian position of "it is all a little too difficult, so let’s not bother" will provide unprecedented economic, diplomatic, political and strategic opportunities for the nation. 

Rear Admiral Kevin Scarce also issued a challenge for Australia's political and strategic policy leaders, saying:

"If we observe that the level of debate among our leaders is characterised by mud-slinging, obfuscation and the deliberate misrepresentation of the views of others, why would the community behave differently ... Our failure to do so will leave a very damaging legacy for future generations," he said.

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia's future role and position in the Indo-Pacific and what you would like to see from Australia's political leaders in terms of shaking up the nation's approach to our regional partners.

We would also like to hear your thoughts on the avenues Australia should pursue to support long-term development in support of national security in the comments section below, or get in touch with Stephen.Kuper@momentummedia.com.au or at editor@defenceconnect.com.au.

You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!

Comments (15)

Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
  • At last Australia is finally waking up, and not a moment too soon!!! The CCP is not our friend, indeed not anyone's friend!!!

    Realising this we need to seriously consider the %of GDP spent on the ADF, and capabilities of the ADF, at least copying the CCP's effective A2AD strategy, ditching the 12 Attach Class and acquiring 12 of the Virginia Class, ......


    0
  • Australia's Pearl Harbour
    Anonymous wrote:
    interesting little look into the past.. look at what Japan targeted and tried to invade or invaded.. then look at CCP and where they are trying to take over.. they are following similar path as Japan did but instead of military invasion china is trying to use corruption and buy the countries or atleast control them... also CCP about to build their 5th base on Antarctica, 3 bases on our land, 1 on Argentina land, 1 new base about to be built on NZ land with maybe additional 6th on french land.. with Macron showing support to CCP china it also makes the 4 island chains France owns in the Pacific questionable too..

    There is a book called "The Ghost Fleet" dealing with a sneak attack on Hawaii by the CCP/PLA in the future and I have thought about that but the more I look into & investigate China & its intent, I'm coming to the conclusion the target will be Australia. If you study the Indo-Pacific maps features & countries, you realise that China has to take out only one country and it wraps up the entire Indo-Pacific and obtains all of the real estate it could ever need. For all other countries they just continue the bullying & coercion...game over. USA & Europe for another day.

    Former liberal party leader John Hewson revealed the following gem "I was recently informed by a friend who maintains a residence in Vanuatu that the Chinese have built over 100 large warehouses there, all still sitting empty. To what purpose?

    www.smh.com.au/national/blowing-in-the-w...20190619-p51z6v.html

    Multiplying that across all countries & regions surrounding Oz you start to build the wherewithal to do sneak attacks, close-in using manpads and other lightweight munitions via very large drone swarns from all the packed boxes in the warehouses.

    Position the sneak attack assets close by RAAF Glenfield HQ, Willitown, Amberley, Pine Gap, Townsville, Darwin HMAS Kuttabul, etc and do it on Xmas day, preferably a Sunday and you've got the basis for a giant shock attack which other geniuses amongst us could work out what would be the follow on waves of attack, certainly subs, sea & land based missiles from strategic merchant shipping re-engineered & armed.

    That's my scenario for the next decade, let's hope it doesn't become a reality.

    Phil Eagle

    0
    • i will look into it mate, it some thing we both have in common following the CCP expansion... it only really clicked when i posted recently how CCP has positioned themselves on all our shipping lanes, well if you follow CCP they are trying to buy or influence same path Japan followed with military invasions.. all for the same end goat choke Aus out from the rest of the world then eventually take control of our country.. military naval siege with 60 CCP submarines on the outside then CCP naval ships between them subs an aus targeting Aus.. subs keep our allies out and the ships ware down our resources and defences... and it all can be mobile fleets... CCP will wait till they have 10 to 15 or more bases surrounding Aus and 60 to 100 submarines with 400 to 600 ships.. give CCP 5 years they will be there along with nearly 100 LPD's and LHD's... once any country takes civilians as hostages it's will be a long costly war... if CCP gets to that stage we will lose close to 1/4 or 1/3 of our population easy well most will be put in re education and slave camps too...
      wjb
      0
    • the big question is will Macron let CCP china onto New Caledonia or their other islands.. France is more unpredictable than most think and they call trump unpredictable.. Macrons the 1 we have to watch both in the Pacific and Antarctica with their support to CCP china..
      0
    • well i found our gov is proposing to sell off cape York to CCP china.. a old resort called Pajinka Resort on about 700 acres of mostly undeveloped land... lets map it Darwin to Cape York then to Bougainville and through to Solomons.... what the hell is our retarded Gov playing at, saying china's a threat yet they open the door to them to come into Australia and buy what is ours and they get the profits not us..
      0
  • If a country can be evaluated by the level to which they respect other's sovereign laws and way of life then the alarm bells should be ringing out loud and clear when it comes to the intentions of our friendly neighbour, China. I would also say don't listen to what they say, look at what they are doing in plain sight and then consider the Chinese war philosophy, "The Art of War". Through this insight you could be forgiven for imagining that more sinister motives are indeed at play. Why are the Chinese building up military forces to a level that will surpass the US in a few short years? Are others coming after them, apart from Russia being a concern some 40-50 years ago, I haven't seen this. In fact, China and Russia are now military allies, is that a problem? Together, are they more powerful than the US? Furthermore, the words politician and trust do not sit easily together in my mind and the words China, Rudd and politics simply sends chills down my spine. Growing our population has always been in Australia's plan but remember China has thousands of cities with populations of around 25 million, will our famous Mandarin speaking Kevin Rudd's next suggestion involve relocating one of these cities to Australia, where will the 25 million people he is talking about come from? Think carefully about that, it’s our future, our right and our freedom... for now at least!
    0
  • Is it time to resurrect a new SEATO? If led by Japan, Australia, South Korea, Indonesia, NZ etc. it might be more effective than a US led structure for the region?
    0
    • why do we have to pick between USA and a SEATO alliance.. we are all allies and a merged Aus USA and SEATO alliance including all ASEAN coutries and NATO and EU allies...
      0
  • Media Blackout re China

    A strange thing is happening in Australia, I can't get any reputable media organisation or journalist to report the fact that 2 of President Xi Jinping's sibling live in Oz as permanent citizens.

    twitter.com/PhilipMEagle/status/1203579490237997056

    This is highly indicative of the malaise across Oz when it comes to China & its intentions. Most commentators seem to see China~(CCP/PLA) in trade & economic terms without any consideration for the possibility that they have been comprehensively stalking us & have plans, that we choose to ignore or fail to rationalise.

    Why has Xi Jinping in his life, travelled to every state of Australia.

    Why has Xi's siblings vacated China for permanent residence in Oz, are they escaping communist suppression or are they the takeover committee advance guard.

    Why does one of the Silk Roads have a direct path from Beijing to Auckland NZ.

    If you were a strategist, would you plan to fight your way through the Indonesian archipelago or stroll down the Silk Road east of PNG, down through the South-West Pacific Islands and into OZ & NZ, how easy would that be in another decade or so?

    The game will be over inside the next decade, so either start arming and bulking up or schedule your Chinese Induction at a convenient time.

    Phil Eagle
    0
    • interesting little look into the past.. look at what Japan targeted and tried to invade or invaded.. then look at CCP and where they are trying to take over.. they are following similar path as Japan did but instead of military invasion china is trying to use corruption and buy the countries or atleast control them... also CCP about to build their 5th base on Antarctica, 3 bases on our land, 1 on Argentina land, 1 new base about to be built on NZ land with maybe additional 6th on french land.. with Macron showing support to CCP china it also makes the 4 island chains France owns in the Pacific questionable too..
      0
  • here is 2 words CCP china should start getting used too... "NO" and "STOP"
    0
  • The more hostility Australia projects towards China, the more China will need spies in Australia to figure out what the hell is going on. The Australia public would also appreciate it if China keeps us up to date as well, as the Morrison government isn't doing this. We seem to be governed by a secret cabal.
    0
    • what.....!!!! you got that backwards, CCP culture is based on lies scams and manipulation to get what you want or in front in life... they want control of our exports and profits and the want to exploit our country and people... how many chinese have you spoken too..!!! they honestly think we are 3rd world criminals and stole this land so it's ok for them to steal it from us... CCP has been sending spies to Aus for over 30 years not because they think we are a threat it so they can collect intel manipulate control and exploit businesses trade and education... CCP needs to stop interfering with Australia and stop trying to force their CCP crap onto our country especially the chinese Australians.. CCP LAWS DO NOT APPLY IN AUSTRALIA AND BEST THEY LEARN THAT AND THEIR PLACE...
      0
    • Paul maybe we should close down Pine Gap too, CCP China see's that as hostility and it angers them we have it... Maybe we should leave the Indo-Pacific region CCP China see's our presence there as hostility too, along with using the shipping lanes... Our alliance with USA is seen as hostility towards CCP China maybe we should end that too.. what do you think Paul..!!!!!
      0
  • First and foremost, Australia has to deal with its economic dependency on China. Whilst ever we depend so heavily on any one country for our economic wellbeing, we will never be free to move forward with complete independence of thought or action. And China knows this. This is the national equivalent of a small business that is dependent on just one customer for all its revenue. Will that small business ever do or say anything that might jeopardise its relationship with that customer?
    First, let 'start 'weaning' ourselves off China, and then we can start to talk seriously about what to do about China's influence in the Indo-Pacific.
    0