PLA strategist reflects military’s mainstream

The Peoples oppression army seems to have increased allowance for opium smoking to its top generals.

Senior Col. Dai Xu : Welcome to the conspiracy theorists club

One of China’s most influential military strategists has made headlines by saying that a new, lethal strain of bird flu is a “U.S. bio-psychological weapon” conspiracy designed to harm China.
Senior Col. Dai Xu, an air force officer in the People’s Liberation Army, has written several best-sellers, mostly on U.S. military strategy toward China, and enjoys a national following. He is a prominent voice inside China on military strategy and national security.

Though many in the West view him as an aberration, Col. Dai is a core member of China’s strategic community and his views are backed by a huge following in Chinese military circles.
In accusing the U.S. of “bio-psychological” warfare in the outbreak of the H7N9 bird flu virus in the Shanghai area, Col. Dai offered no evidence to support his scurrilous claims.

But he is not on the fringe of China’s mainstream strategic culture: He is a professor at the Chinese National Defense University, the ultimate symbol of China’s military establishment. He also directs China’s Research Institute of Maritime Security and Cooperation, based in Beijing.
His extremist views about the U.S. are encouraged by China’s tightly controlled mainstream media. The official Communist Party Central Committee’s mouthpiece, the People’s Daily, hosts a special online column for him, as does Global Times, a subsidiary focusing on military and security issues that is packaged for readers in a more popular format.

In addition, Col. Dai frequently appears on national television to rail against what he regards as a multitude of American conspiracies against China.
Col. Dai and his views have an enormous popular following.
In 2010, more than 300,000 Internet users in China voted Col. Dai one of China’s nine most popular online opinion-makers. In the same year, the xenophobic anti-American Global Times newspaper ranked him as one of “China’s 10 most Outspoken Virtuous Men.”


In December 2011, tens of millions Internet users on China’s second-most popular Internet portal, Tencent, endorsed the 2010 online voting result and confirmed Col. Dai as one of China’s nine most influential “public intellectuals.”
Col. Dai himself has a Twitter-like Weibo account that has more than 250,000 followers, giving him the aura of being part of mainstream China’s public space on security and defense issues.
His influence also reflects the potency of his message. Analysts say that what makes Col. Dai so influential is his deep, unshakable loathing of the U.S. and his sensational claims of various American conspiracies, grand or petty, against the virtuous and rising China.
To millions of Chinese, Col. Dai is synonymous with the exposure of America’s anti-China conspiracies, and he holds a unique place as China’s most paranoid conspiracist.
Examples of alleged U.S. conspiracies he supp
osedly has discovered were revealed in a 2 -hour speech in 2009 called “2030: China Faces the Fate of Dismemberment: The U.S. Strategy for a Global Empire and China’s Crisis.”
The closed-door speech later appeared on the Internet after it was given to military officers during a meeting at the Nanjing-based PLA Institute of International Relations Studies, a key training ground for elite officers. The conspiracies he outlined include that the United States:
Seeks to reduce the world’s population by 20 percent, with the Pentagon plotting to encourage countries on China’s periphery to develop nuclear weapons to create a holocaust on China, India and other populous Asian states.

Aims to destroy China’s investment in Pakistan in its battle against the Taliban.
Secretly controls 21 of China’s 28 industries.
Manufactured the 2008 financial crisis to steal China’s and other countries’ money.

Is encouraging North Korea to develop nuclear weapons to damage China’s role in the region.
Is engaged in short- and long-term plans to foment ethnic riots against China in Tibet and western Xinjiang province.
Wants to trick Russia into launching a nuclear war against China that would destroy both countries and assure a U.S. triumph.
Wants to split up China into smaller states and create alliances with some of them.
Popular as they are, these conspiratorial theories are not accepted by everyone in China. In fact, many Internet users ridicule Col. Dai’s fantastical claims. And quite a few Chinese security analysts have privately and quietly expressed disgust and shame toward the senior colonel’s scandalous claims to foreign counterparts at international conferences.
Yet not a single serious scholar or strategist inside China’s defense establishment has been able or permitted to challenge Col. Dai’s conspiracy mania face-to-face on national TV or in mainstream media outside of the Internet.
The reason is that Col. Dai represents views that are encouraged by China’s mainstream strategic culture, which is widely viewed as conspiratorial, anti-U.S. and paranoid a culture that does not allow open debate or the free exchange of views that contradict the official party line.
For these reasons, Col. Dai Xu is not on the fringe of China’s mainstream. He is the mainstream.

The art of war, Chinese style

The recent 50th anniversary of China’s invasion of India attracted much discussion, especially within India. Yet the debate shied away from drawing the broader, long-term lessons for Asian security.
The lessons are also relevant for China’s other neighbors because the 1962 war helped uncover the key elements of Beijing’s war-fighting doctrine — a doctrine it brought into play in 1969 (provoking bloody border clashes with Soviet forces), 1974 (occupying the Paracel Islands), 1979 (invading Vietnam), 1988 (seizing Johnson Reef), and 1995 (grabbing Mischief Reef). In each of those aggressions, the major 1962 elements were replicated.

As a 2010 Pentagon report citing the 1962 war, among others, put it, “The history of modern Chinese warfare provides numerous case studies in which China’s leaders have claimed military pre-emption as a strategically defensive act.” In fact, a 2010 essay in the Qiu Shi Journal — the ideological and theoretical organ of the Chinese Communist Party’s central committee — underscored the centrality of “offense as defense” in Chinese policy by declaring that “Throughout the history of new China, peace in China has never been gained by giving in, only through war. Safeguarding national interests is never achieved by mere negotiations, but by war.”

Unlike India, which still naively believes that it gained independence through nonviolence, not because a war-debilitated Britain could no longer hold on to its colonies, “new China” was born in blood after a long civil war. And it was built on blood, with Mao Zedong and other revolutionaries ever ready to employ force internally and externally. No sooner had the new China been established than it doubled its territorial size by forcibly absorbing Xinjiang and Tibet. Domestically, countless millions perished in witch-hunts, fratricidal killings and human-made disasters.
In fact, Mao attacked India after his “Great Leap Forward” created the worst famine in recorded world history, with the resulting damage to his credibility serving as a strong incentive for him to reassert his leadership through a war. The military victory over India indeed helped him to consolidate his grip on power, besides raising his international stature.

Yet, like a rape victim being scolded for inviting the attack, India was repeatedly rapped by some analysts during the anniversary debate for having brought on the Chinese aggression through “provocative” gestures and moves.

When the Chinese military marched hundreds of miles south to occupy the then-independent Tibet, bringing Han soldiers in large numbers to the Himalayan frontiers for the first time and setting the stage for China’s furtive encroachment on Indian territory, this supposedly did not constitute sufficient grounds for India to try to guard its undefended Himalayan borders. So when India belatedly deployed some units of its army, the action became, in Beijing’s words, a “forward policy” — a term lapped up by biddable analysts and still being bandied about.

India does not commemorate war anniversaries the way the United States does — with annual ceremonies honoring its fallen heroes. For example, at the exact time the Japanese began bombing Pearl Harbor 71 years earlier, commemorations were held last weekend at Pearl Harbor and memorials elsewhere, drawing thousands of Americans. India, in fact, has not built a single memorial to honor those who were martyred in 1962 or any of its other wars. China, by contrast, has a 1962 war memorial in Tibet and its Beijing military museum depicts India as the “aggressor.”
In this light, the 50th anniversary of what American scholar Roderick MacFarquhar has dubbed “Mao’s India War,” which killed 3,270 Indian troops and 725 Chinese, ought to have served as a time for reflection on its larger lessons. By baring key features of Beijing’s warfighting doctrine, the 42-day war indeed holds lasting lessons for India and other countries locked in territorial disputes with China.

Here are six of the 1962 principles China replicated in its subsequent aggressions: (1) take the adversary by surprise to maximize political and psychological shock; (2) strike only when the international and regional timing is opportune; (3) hit as fast and as hard as possible by unleashing “human wave” assaults; (4) be willing to take military gambles; (5) mask offense as defense; and (6) wage war with the political objective to “teach a lesson” — an aim publicly acknowledged by Beijing in the 1962 and 1979 attacks.

The Chinese strategy to choose an opportune moment to strike became evident before 1962 when China invaded Tibet in October 1950 while the world was preoccupied with the Korean war. China’s rapid success in seizing eastern Tibet emboldened it to intervene in Korea.
The classic case of opportunistic timing, however, was 1962: The attack coincided with the Cuban missile crisis, which threatened to trigger nuclear Armageddon and helped cut off India from potential sources of international support. But no sooner had the U.S. signaled an end to the faceoff with the Soviet Union by terminating Cuba’s quarantine than China declared a unilateral cease-fire. Such was the shrewd timing that throughout the Chinese attack, the international spotlight remained on the U.S.-Soviet showdown, not on China’s bloody invasion of India.

Similarly, China seized the Paracel Islands from South Vietnam in 1974 after the U.S. military withdrawal from there had created a strategic vacuum. It occupied the disputed Johnson Reef in the Spratlys in 1988 when Moscow’s support for Vietnam had petered out after the Soviets stopped using Cam Ranh Bay as a major forward deployment base. And in 1995, China seized Mischief Reef when the Philippines stood isolated after having forced the U.S. to close its major military bases at Subic Bay and elsewhere on the archipelago.

The 1979 attack on Vietnam occurred after Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping convinced U.S. President Jimmy Carter during his Washington visit that a “limited military action” against Vietnam was essential to contain Soviet and Vietnamese influence in Southeast Asia and to force Hanoi to withdraw its forces from Cambodia. After 29 days, China ended its Vietnam invasion and withdrew, claiming Hanoi had been sufficiently chastised.

It is apparent that new China hews to ancient theorist Sun Tzu’s advice: “All warfare is based on deception. … Attack where the enemy is unprepared; sally out when it does not expect you. These are the strategist’s keys to victory.”

Communist Party of China and Peoples Oppression Army supply FN-6 MANPAD of the Free Syria Army

One one side Communist Party of China and Peoples Oppression Army support Bashar Al-Assad, on another side Communist Party of China and Peoples Oppression Army supply Free Syrian Army with MANPADS ;)  Strange power China

China likes to play both sides for profit. Chinese external agency Ministry of State Security has become a bidder in the global arms black market.

Chinese PLA determines to improve its work style

China's peaceful rise bluff is going to reveal itself shortly

To echo China’s new central leadership's call to improve work style, the Central Military Commission (CMC) of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the General Staff Headquarters (GSH) of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) issued regulations and notices successively, which shows the CMC’s determination to set an example in improving the PLA’s work style.

　　The regulations and notices were reduced by the public to prohibition on alcoholic drinks, control on vehicles and anti-corruption, etc. In the wake of which, the share price of Maotai fell accordingly. It seems that the public opinions have reached a common judgement that the CMC’s determination was real and serious this time. The regulations and notices show that improper practices indeed existed inside the PLA and the PLA was not a pure land free from corruption. Usually, the PLA was seldom supervised by China’s public opinion and always presented a positive image in the public, and all its problems were solved internally.

　　The CMC and the GSH of the PLA publicly required that the PLA’s work style should be improved and the PLA’s unhealthy tendencies should be exposed to the people of the whole country, which is another important progress of China’s political transparency and is widely greeted with sincere applause from the public.

　　Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the PLA has not only fought dauntlessly for China and its people, but also shared weal and woe with China’s reform and opening-up. As an organic component of the Chinese society, the PLA has shared China’s progress and honor. And in turn, the PLA has been inevitably influenced by numerous complicated factors of the society.

　　The PLA is competent on the whole, as evidenced by having shouldered its due responsibilities for the country and its people. So far, the PLA has never been defeated, for which it is very dignified strategically.

　　In the past 20-odd years, China has been in a state of relative peace, both the equipment and the comprehensive combat effectiveness of the PLA have been promoted rapidly. And with increasing deterrent force, the PLA has been supporting China’s international status as a great power and also China’s peaceful rise, in the form of remaining quietly dignified. How the PLA plays its role in China’s daily social life has been constantly adjusted since China’s reform and opening-up. The most typical example is that the PLA could conduct business, but afterwards got out of the business completely.

　　It is very difficult to build up the military in peacetime. The PLA should not only maintain fish-and-water relations with the people, but also keep special distance from the people and do what is incompatible with our daily life. Even in the future, the PLA will probably have its own style, including not being so highly reactive with public opinion as other industries.

　　However, the PLA should not be completely out of the social supervision. As to how to supervise the military, China needs to establish an innovative system which can not only protect the military’s independence as a special force but also ensure that the military will not become a “blind zone” of country’s supervision. In terms of code of ethics, the PLA should live up to the people’s expectations and stand high in the Chinese society.

　　Strict management is the only road for the development of the Chinese PLA. The requirements for the PLA will inevitably keep rising with increasing openness of the whole society of China. The combat effectiveness of the PLA also depends on the social understanding and support.

　　The PLA has over two million servicemen, and its overall image will be heavily influenced as long as an individual soldier has malpractice or a scandal is exposed to the society. With its comprehensive national strength ranking second worldwide, China has stood in the teeth of the storm, and its future strategic security environment will be probably complicated and confusing. The Chinese PLA has been playing an increasingly important role in safeguarding the interests of China and its people, and it is one of China’s most urgent issues to strengthen and better the military through strict management.

PLAN submarines hold confrontation drill for future wars with Chinese neighbours

December 13, 2012

The submarines of a submarine flotilla of the North China Sea Fleet under the Navy of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) are conducting formation navigation training in the sea on December 13, 2012.

China's Party Congress Propaganda Undermined by Social Media

Kung Fu Expert in China Beats Up Chinese Communist Party Mob of 50 Trying to Evict Him

Kung-fu Panda 

When 38-year-old Shen Jianzhong was faced with a mob of thugs trying to evict him, he asked himself what his hero, Bruce Lee, would do. The answer, according to a video that has attracted more than two million hits on the Chinese internet, is turn to kung fu.



For 20 years, Mr Shen had been practising kung fu, teaching himself Bruce Lee's system in his courtyard home in Bazhou, Hebei province.
Working in a local gym as a fitness coach, he is also the holder of a world record, at least according to an association in Hong Kong, for the most press-ups in a minute using a roller. "I am now training to break the record for most press-ups on a balance beam," he said.
At the end of October, Mr Shen was able to put his kung fu into action. For six months, a property developer had been trying to get his hands on Mr Shen's house.

"They called it a remodelling project, to turn our village into a town," he said.
"They wanted to tear down the whole street, and promised we would get a new house of the same size in two years, as well as rent to cover the interim.

True Chinese Hero

But I heard of people in a neighbouring village getting a much better deal, so we refused to sign."
At first, the property company stuck up posters warning of dire consequences for any families who held out. Then, Mr Shen said, when 70 of the 100 households had left, the threats escalated.
"This mob of thugs would block the street most days. They would pick on the women, threatening to kill their kids. Then people started tossing bricks through windows and letting off fireworks at night. Some people got beaten on the street."

On October 29, as Mr Shen went to work and his wife popped out for a packet of instant noodles, a mob of "30 to 50 men" materialised at their front door.
"My wife tried to close the door, but they pushed it back and she tripped over. That is how the fight started," said Mr Shen.
With a flurry of kicks and punches, he and his 18-year-old son, a fellow kung fu devotee, set about the attackers, rendering seven of them near unconscious in the hallway.
"It was self defence. I really cannot remember what kung fu skills I used.
It was quite messy. Only seven people were injured because the rest were scared and stayed outside. Some of them ran away," he said.

When the police arrived, however, they were little help, insisting that since the thugs were unarmed, it was Mr Shen and his family who were in the wrong. They urged the family to sign the contract.
Instead, the Shens posted their homemade video online, where it has gone viral as a rare David versus Goliath moment in the bleak fight against China's avaricious property barons.

They then fled, on the evening of November 21, to Beijing. Upon arriving in the capital, however, Mr Shen's son was arrested by the police, who said they would charge him with assault.
"I do not regret the fight, but I am worried about my son," said Mr Shen.
"I think they are trying to fit up him up with some crime. I am concerned that my actions will end up hurting him," he said, acknowledging that officials may try to emotionally blackmail him into signing over his lease.