Thursday, 25 January 2007
 

Chi-Coms Kowtow to Muslim Intolerance

Unclear On The Concept
Jules Crittenden

Take the R out of PRC.  These godless commie idol-worshippers are excising any mention of the unclean “pig” from Year of the Pig celebrations, so as not to offend the Musselmen. Can somebody please explain to them that as communists and/or heathens, they don’t even get dhimmi status in Islamofascia: Go straight to hell, stop briefly at beheading station, please.  ...

Allah and Debbie have more.

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 25, 2007 at 12:13 PM in China, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Monday, 22 January 2007
 

Chinese satellite killer might have been rogue operation

See previous: Chinese Test Anti-Satellite Weapon, China Defends 'Satellite Killer' as Weapon of Peace

Allahpundit writes:

I saw this story at the Times this morning and didn’t give it a second thought. An authoritarian regime with less than complete oversight of its most sensitive weapons? It smelled like undistilled spin cooked up by the U.S. to defuse the tension by absolving the Chinese government of responsibility.

Defense Tech and Global Security think it might be true, though, which presumably means we now find ourselves facing a nuclear power whose ballistic missile experts are firing rockets into space unbeknownst to the nation’s leaders.

What could go wrong?

Eh, I’m still skeptical. Knowing what the consequences are in China for disobedience, would the leaders of the missile program really be willing to take the initiative? Particularly when there appears to be less to the test than first met the eye? Via DT, former NASA scientist James Oberg thinks the Chinese aren’t quite yet a threat to America’s birds in the upper atmosphere. I leave you with a quote: ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 22, 2007 at 08:37 PM in China | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Saturday, 20 January 2007
 

China Defends 'Satellite Killer' as Weapon of Peace 

[See previous: Chinese Test Anti-Satellite Weapon]

China signalled yesterday that its first missile strike against an orbiting satellite was intended to force the US into talks aimed at abolishing weapons in space.

As it faced an international chorus of protest against its test — the first such launch for 20 years — its officials insisted that they wanted space to be free of weapons.

"As the Chinese Government, our principle stand is to promote the peaceful use of space," a Foreign Ministry spokesman said. "We oppose the militarisation of space. In the past, in the present and in the future, we are opposed to any arms race in space. Of this everyone can be confident."

The reassurances failed to placate jittery Asian neighbours and Western powers, which fear that the surprise Chinese muscle-flexing is part of a campaign to raise its global military posture while raising the spectre of a space arms race.

China is the first country since 1985 to destroy a satellite in space and only the third — after America and the former Soviet Union — to master so-called Star Wars technology. The clear message is that if China can shoot down its own orbiter it could also attack satellites operated by other nations. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 20, 2007 at 02:20 AM in China | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Thursday, 18 January 2007
 

Chinese Test Anti-Satellite Weapon

U. S. intelligence agencies believe China performed a successful anti-satellite (asat) weapons test at more than 500 mi. altitude Jan. 11 destroying an aging Chinese weather satellite target with a kinetic kill vehicle launched on board a ballistic missile.

The Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, NASA and other government organizations have a full court press underway to obtain data on the alleged test, Aviation Week & Space Technology will report in its Jan. 22 issue.

If the test is verified it will signify a major new Chinese military capability. ...

Allahpundit has lots of links and reactions here.

For what it's worth:

• The satellite the ChiComs knocked down was at an alitude of “more than 500 miles.”

• GPS satellites orbit at 10,988 nautical miles (I’m too lazy to do the conversion to “real” miles right now. Multiply by 1.150779 if you're not.)

• Geosynchronous orbit altitude is 22,300 miles.

Not saying the ChiCom test isn’t bad news, just that it could be worse.

***

Greg Tinti has more here.

***

CNN: U.S. official: Chinese test missile obliterates satellite

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- China last week successfully used a missile to destroy an orbiting satellite, U.S. government officials told CNN on Thursday, in a test that could undermine relations with the West and pose a threat to satellites important to the U.S. military.

According to a spokesman for the National Security Council, the ground-based, medium-range ballistic missile knocked an old Chinese weather satellite from its orbit about 537 miles above Earth. The missile carried a "kill vehicle" and destroyed the satellite by ramming it.

The test took place on January 11.

Aviation Week and Space Technology first reported the test: "Details emerging from space sources indicate that the Chinese Feng Yun 1C (FY-1C) polar orbit weather satellite launched in 1999 was attacked by an asat (anti-satellite) system launched from or near the Xichang Space Center."

A U.S. official, who would not agree to be identified, said the event was the first successful test of the missile after three failures.

The official said that U.S. "space tracking sensors" confirmed that the satellite is no longer in orbit and that the collision produced "hundreds of pieces of debris," that also are being tracked.

The United States logged a formal diplomatic protest.

"We are aware of it and we are concerned, and we made it known," said White House spokesman Tony Snow.

Several U.S. allies, including Canada and Australia, also have registered protests.

Under a space policy authorized by President Bush in August, the United States asserts a right to "freedom of action in space" and says it will "deter others from either impeding those rights or developing capabilities intended to do so."

The policy includes the right to "deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to U.S. national interests." ...

You might note in passing that apparently no-one at CNN understands it's a big step from shooting down a weather satellite to shooting down a GPS satellite (See my numbers above.)

***

Raising The Stakes In Space
Ed Morrissey

Russia and China have pushed for a ban on weapons in space for the past few years, but the Bush administration has resisted it while the US develops its missile shield program. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US alone retained the ready capability of attacking and destroying satellites in orbit, and no one had actually attempted it in 20 years. That period came to an end yesterday, when the Chinese successfully hit and destroyed one of their older weather satellites, demonstrating clearly that they could do the same to our critical military reconnaissance satellites:

[...]

The action brought immediate protest, and not just from the United States. Japan called for an explanation through its diplomatic missions of the test, and Australia warned against a weapons race in space.

Does China intend on striking our sensitive military satellites? Perhaps not. This seems more like a pressure tactic by Beijing to get the US to change policy on space weapons. Last October, the Bush administration reiterated its stance on the issue, claiming that America needed a free hand in space for research and development, and specifically refused to eschew the kind of test the Chinese conducted yesterday. Now that China has demonstrated its capability to successfully launch the same kind of mission, the Chinese probably hope that the US will reconsider its position.

However, the test itself could prove troublesome for all of the satellites currently orbiting the Earth. The explosion left a lot of debris and apparently accelerated their movement in space. Satellites are remarkably delicate instruments, and having them peppered with shrapnel could knock several of them out of commission. The Chinese used a blunt instrument for its attack, and the fallout could continue for years and force the expensive replacement of other satellites, and some owners might not be able to afford the cost. Will the Chinese offer to bear the cost of replacement over the twenty-five years or more that the debris will stay in orbit? ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 18, 2007 at 03:00 PM in China | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Wednesday, 17 January 2007
 

Stratfor’s 2007 Take
Jules Crittenden

The open-source intelligence analysis firm sees the United States and Iran manuerving aggressively this year toward positions from which they can negotiate a political solution in Iraq. Meanwhile, Russia and China pose problems to the extent that … the U.S.-jihadist war is not the most important thing going on in the world.”  Some of Stratfor’s key predictions:”Bush’s hope is that this (Iraq surge) strategy will cause all parties to the war to reconsider their comfortable assumptions about the United States in Iraq. In 2007, we will see whether the strategy succeeds. The fact is that the United States cannot simply withdraw forces from Iraq, as that would leave Iran the dominant power in the region.”

“The United States is blocking Iranian ambitions as much as Iran is blocking American ambitions. As 2007 unfolds, this will open new possibilities for political arrangements. We would not be surprised to see some moves, however tentative, toward a political settlement in 2007.”

“The United States will spend the coming months taking an aggressive stance against Iranian operations in Iraq …

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 17, 2007 at 09:22 PM in China, Iran, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est, Russia | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tuesday, 05 December 2006
 

That Was Quick

Gates Wins Unanimous Senate Committee Approval as Defense Secretary

WASHINGTON  —  Robert Gates, President Bush's nominee for defense secretary, won unanimous approval Tuesday from the Senate Armed Services Committee, forwarding the nomination to the full Senate for a vote.

"We have just concluded our vote and so far as we know, 21 senators were present, all unanimous," panel chairman Sen. John Warner, R-Va., said. Later, the remaining three senators on the panel added their approval.  ...

... During the open hearing, the nominee said the U.S. is neither winning nor losing the war in Iraq, and "all options are on the table" for a fix. He warned that if the situation doesn't improve soon, it could expand into a "regional conflagration." ...

***

That Was Quick
Ed Morrissey

Robert Gates made a bungee appearance at the Senate Armed Forces Committee today for his confirmation hearings to replace Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon. Some expected the hearings to provide some fireworks and an opportunity for grandstanding -- but in the end, it looks like all sides just wanted to get it done quickly:

Robert M. Gates, President Bush’s nominee to be defense secretary, won unanimous approval today from a Senate panel after testifying that the United States was not winning in Iraq and that American failure there could ignite “a regional conflagration” in the Middle East.

At one point, Mr. Gates said it was “too soon to tell” whether the American invasion in 2003 had been a good idea. He added: “My greatest worry if we mishandle the next year or two and leave Iraq in chaos is that a variety of regional powers will become involved in Iraq, and we will have a regional conflict on our hands.” Mr. Gates is expected to win confirmation from the full Senate as early as Wednesday to succeed Donald H. Rumsfeld. ...

Mr. Gates gave few firm signals today about his own favored options for Iraq, but portrayed himself as a flexible realist, open to all options for adjusting American strategy. But he made clear that he has concerns about a rapid American drawdown, and cautioned that the recommendations to be made public on Wednesday by the Iraq Study Group would be important but not “the last word.”

"It’s my impression that frankly there are no new ideas on Iraq,” Mr. Gates said, noting there are multiple government reviews underway besides the Iraq Study Group. “The question is: is there a way to put pieces of those different proposals together in a way that provides a way forward?”

... It's not to say that Democrats passively monitored the proceedings. Carl Levin, who will chair the committee in the next session of Congress, got Gates to state that the US was not winning in Iraq. That conflicts with what Bush said in October, when he said "Absolutely, we're winning," but Gates added that we're not losing, either. He promised that he would come to the Pentagon as his own man, with no debts to anyone else, but that at the end of the day, the United States only has one President. He will carry out the decisions of the Commander-in-Chief. ...

***

What Gates said and how he said it
Paul Mirengoff

Immediately after President Bush nominated Robert Gates, I predicted that Gates would not enjoy his confirmation hearing. A few hours later, after a learning a bit more about the man, I revised the prediction and said that I wouldn't enjoy the hearing.

I've just finished watching the replay of the morning session on C-SPAN, and found it a mixed bag. That's not too surprising since Gates was doing his best to say what members of sides of the Iraq divide wanted to hear. Unfortunately, he seemed slightly more enthusiastic about saying what the anti-war faction wanted him to.

For example, Sen. Levin elicited a straightforward "no" when he asked Gates if we are winning in Iraq. When Sen. Inhofe asked Gates whether he agreed with Gen. Pace that we are neither winning nor losing, Gates seemed to hesitate for a split second before saying yes "at this time."

Gates' answers seemed carefully framed to avoid terms like "success." It was Sen. Lieberman who finally asked whether Gates' goal would be less to manage a withdrawal and more to achieve success. Gates used that question to tout the need for a bipartisan policy. As Sen. Lieberman probably knows from his unusual political experience this year, achieving success in Iraq (as Lieberman views success) and maintaining bipartisanship are probably incompatible objectives. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on December 5, 2006 at 09:44 PM in Afghanistan, China, Iran, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Lebanon, North Korea, Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Thursday, 30 November 2006
 

And We Can Make It Smaller, Cheaper, And More Efficient
Ed Morrissey

Japan rattled a significant saber yesterday in its parliamentary session. In a debate clearly intended for the Chinese rather than the Japanese audience, Foreign Minister Taro Aso told a security committee that Japan could easily and quickly begin production of nuclear weapons:

Japan has the technological know-how to produce a nuclear weapon but has no immediate plans to do so, the foreign minister said Thursday, several weeks after communist North Korea carried out a nuclear test.

Foreign Minister Taro Aso, who has called for discussion of Japan's non-nuclear policy, also asserted that the pacifist constitution does not forbid possession of the bomb. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on November 30, 2006 at 03:02 PM in China, Japan, North Korea | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Monday, 13 November 2006
 

Chinese sub "secretly" stalked U.S. fleet (Updated, bumped)

China sub secretly stalked U.S. fleet

A Chinese submarine stalked a U.S. aircraft carrier battle group in the Pacific last month and surfaced within firing range of its torpedoes and missiles before being detected, The Washington Times has learned. ...

... According to the defense officials, the Chinese Song-class diesel-powered attack submarine shadowed the Kitty Hawk undetected and surfaced within five miles of the carrier Oct. 26.

The surfaced submarine was spotted by a routine surveillance flight by one of the carrier group's planes. The Kitty Hawk battle group includes an attack submarine and anti-submarine helicopters that are charged with protecting the warships from submarine attack.

According to the officials, the submarine is equipped with Russian-made wake-homing torpedoes and anti-ship cruise missiles.

The Kitty Hawk and several other warships were deployed in ocean waters near Okinawa at the time, as part of a routine fall deployment program.  ...

*** Update and bump. Original timestamp 00:54

If I hadn't been worn out and already starting to come down with something when I posted the above I'd like to think I'd have been smart enough to question whether a Chinese sub really got that close to one of our carriers undetected. No self-respecting Tom Clancy aficionado should have fallen into that trap even momentarily and I'm sorry to admit I did. Don't miss the excerpts and links below the fold. 

A submarine blogger's perspective
Michelle Malkin

Bill Gertz has a worrisome report today about a China sub stalking the USS Kitty Hawk. But one submarine blogger is taking it in stride. Retired submarine officer Bubblehead and his commenters weigh in with an interesting perspective:

[T]he Song-class diesel boat was spotted on the surface about five miles from the Kitty Hawk. So, either the Chinese were trying desperately to let us know that they could get that close to us, or this is another of a series of attempts by the Chinese to send their submarines farther afield where they just can't seem to stay undetected and/or submerged. Since they have nothing to gain by taunting us like that, I vote for the second option.  ...

Any other submariners care to weigh in?

***

Reader Steve e-mails:

I served on a fast attack sub & I concur with the bubblehead who commented. It's no big deal. However, I am willing to bet that one of our nuclear subs who detected the diesel sub, alerted the carrier (and the anti-sub helicopters) and was actually tracking the diesel.

Steve Brock
USS Lapon SSN661

Reader Rob S.: ...

***

Chinese sub plays peekaboo with U.S. carrier
Allahpundit

Three possibilities:

1. A nose-tweak aimed at showing us — and India — that China’s capabilities are further along than we thought.

2. Another fictitious threat concocted by Bush to distract the sheeple from the things that are “really important,” like a modest minimum-wage hike.

3. A whole lot of nuthin’.

Where are our Navy readers? You’ve debunked this sort of alarmism for me before; you can do it again. Don’t let me down.

Update: More worrisome than the sub encounter:

[...]

Update: People are commenting that we used to stalk Soviet subs, and vice versa, all the time. Right, but the point of the article, as I understood it, wasn’t that China’s playing the same game now but rather that they’re playing it well enough to get within firing range of our carrier without being detected. Is that cause for concern? If not, why not?

Update: One of the boss’s readers e-mailed her this. Did Gertz’s sources feed him disinformation?

[T]he Navy will not generally comment on whether they detected the Chinese submarine or not. Any decision to do so would have to take place at the level of the Pentagon or higher. The reasoning is simple: you don’t want the enemy to know your vulnerabilities OR your capabilities. The only way to know whether this diesel sub was being tracked or not is to wait until we are at war with China. Even then you might never know since the poor, noisy thing would probably be at the bottom of the sea before it ever got within a dozen miles of a US aircraft carrier group. ...

Update: Reader Jason comments below:

I’m a nuclear submarine officer with extensive experience in this area.

This is less than a half-story, it’s a 1/10th story. We know almost nothing of the facts, and they won’t be released for at least 25 years.

Unfortunately, any submariner with any knowledge of why this is a non-issue will not be able comment in order to debunk it. Let the media have their headline.

Contributed by Bill Faith on November 13, 2006 at 01:05 PM in China, US Navy | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Wednesday, 25 October 2006
 

China: North Korea Won't Test Again

China announced last night that Kim Jong-Il has no plans to conduct a second nuclear test, attempting to assuage fears in the global community of further provocations by the unpredictable dictator. The foreign ministry also clarified earlier reports of an apology from Kim, saying that Pyongyang had not apologized but wants to return to the six-party talks: ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on October 25, 2006 at 12:08 PM in China, North Korea | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tuesday, 24 October 2006
 

North Korea didn't apologize for test: China

BEIJING (Reuters) - North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has not apologized for a nuclear test but said he had no plans for a second test while reserving Pyongyang's options if the crisis escalates, China said on Tuesday. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on October 24, 2006 at 01:44 PM in China, North Korea | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Saturday, 21 October 2006
 

China wrests N. Korean pledge

China reportedly won a pledge from North Korean leader Kim Jong-il not to conduct another nuclear test and at the same time blocked bank transfers to the isolated state. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on October 21, 2006 at 06:29 AM in China, North Korea | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Wednesday, 18 October 2006
 

The Non-Confrontational Approach To Sanctions

Condoleezza Rice wants to make sure that the application of sanctions do not create an opportunity for unnecessary confrontation, hoping to avoid provoking North Korea into a military response. In what might be a sop to China, Rice has asked nations to inspect North Korean goods on their own territory rather than stopping shipping or attempting to bar material at a border:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will urge the countries of northeast Asia to create a strict system of radiation monitoring and inspections to prevent North Korea from smuggling nuclear materials into or out of the country, a senior State Department official said Tuesday.

But in what appears to be an effort to cajole China to enforce the new United Nations sanctions against North Korea aggressively, the United States will ask the countries to focus their efforts on conducting inspections in their own territories, including ports, and on suspicious ships, trucks and aircraft rather than every piece of cargo. ...

China has reportedly taken the sanctions fairly seriously. They continued to construct a border barrier between themselves and North Korea, and started stopping trucks at the checkpoints for inspections. That's more than most thought China would do, and they made sure that everyone can see the effort they make towards applying the sanctions.

While the application of the sanctions has a great deal of importance, the request for nuclear detection equipment shows that the real issue is an illicit transfer of nuclear material outside of North Korea. ...

[Read on.]

Contributed by Bill Faith on October 18, 2006 at 06:58 AM in China, North Korea | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tuesday, 17 October 2006
 

How Unhappy Are The Chinese?

Apparently, Kim Jong-Il's nuclear surprise last week didn't just upset the various democracies in the Pacific. The Australian reported yesterday that Beijing has begun to consider a move that would have outraged the world fifteen years ago, but which might get tacit support now that North Korea has gone nuclear:

THE Chinese are openly debating "regime change" in Pyongyang after last week's nuclear test by their confrontational neighbour.

Diplomats in Beijing said at the weekend that China and all the major US allies believed North Korea's claim that it had detonated a nuclear device. US director of national intelligence John Negroponte circulated a report that radiation had been detected at a site not far from the Chinese border. ...

The balance of risk between reform and chaos dominated arguments within China's ruling elite. The Chinese have also permitted an astonishing range of vituperative internet comment about an ally with which Beijing maintains a treaty of friendship and co-operation. Academic Wu Jianguo published an article in a Singapore newspaper - available online in China - bluntly saying: "I suggest China should make an end of Kim's Government."

They may decide to throw their weight behind the reformists that Kim fears most. Beijing has information on a budding reform movement, one that would replace the personality cult of the "royal family" with an authoritarian but rational government based on post-Communist states in Eastern Europe, especially Romania. These reformers, considered Sinophiles by the Chinese, would bring stability to the region and allow for the economic growth that would stem the flow of refugees into China

[Read on.]

Contributed by Bill Faith on October 17, 2006 at 01:18 PM in China, North Korea | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Monday, 16 October 2006
 

US Keeping Pressure On China

The US, fresh from its Security Council victory, has now begun to ensure it maintains its success in isolating North Korea. John Bolton told the UN that China had a "heavy responsibility" to police their joint border and inspect all shipments crossing it, while Beijing complained that those expectations are too high:

In an unusual show of regional unity, Japan, South Korea, China and Russia lined up to back the US-drafted measures, which aim to punish Pyongyang for its claimed nuclear bomb test last Monday. ...

China called for calm and emphasised that the UN resolution did not permit military force. Academics said Beijing is reluctant to check all cargo crossing its long land border with North Korea or to take any step that might lead to a collapse of its neighbour and an exodus of refugees. "China will carry out the decision of the security council," said Zhou Yongsheng, professor at China's Foreign Affairs University. "But full inspections along our land border are unrealistic."

John Bolton, the US ambassador to the UN, said yesterday China had a "heavy responsibility" to influence North Korea's behaviour. As the North's major ally and supplier of crucial food and energy, if it were to cut that support, Mr Bolton said, it "would be powerfully persuasive".

North Korea continued issuing petulant rants, after walking out of the UN session that produced the sanctions. Bolton's North Korean counterpart accused the UNSC of being gangsters and again stated that further US pressure would be considered an act of war. No one knows for sure what Pyongyang means by that statement, but one can certainly suppose that the US would have to take out the next Taepodong-2 missile that they put onto a launch pad, regardless of whether they call it a test or not. ...

[Read on.]

Contributed by Bill Faith on October 16, 2006 at 09:50 AM in China, North Korea | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack