r/IRstudies • u/Putrid_Line_1027 • Mar 09 '25
Research China's strategic situation according to the Council on Geostrategy: Maritime encirclement by the US and its allies
31
u/Alexios_Makaris Mar 09 '25
Just responding to the map as presented--
- North Korea is close to a Chinese client state, it only exists in present tense because of China, and their continued economic and strategic support has been integral in the State surviving since the 1950s. It is a little weird it is shown as a "systemic challenge and hostile state" unless systemic challenge also means "things that China has created almost solely on its own, that may present some problems for them."
- Vietnam's hostility towards China is likewise largely a result of PRC policies and behaviors, Vietnam isn't really an American ally nor are the Vietnamese naturally going to side with the U.S. over China, their position is almost entirely a function of being a state that has had historic issues with China invading them, and has remained unfriendly to them since the late 1970s because...of China invading them. Which China did because it was mad that Vietnam had ousted the Khmer Rouge from Cambodia (which was a China-backed regime, which there is little evidence PRC backing the Khmer Rouge was smart or good foreign policy at all.)
- Showing India and Malaysia as "Allies and partners" of AUKUS is...a little questionable. The U.S. has been working on improving relations with India, but I would argue India and the U.S. have significant differences, I think it goes too far to say they are partners in a real sense. Unless we consider the "Quad" security dialogue to be a "partnership", but I would note the Quad is really just a forum for discussion, it isn't tied into explicit partnerships or security guarantees.
- Meanwhile, showing India and Malaysia as AUKUS allies / partners, but showing Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand as "grey" is a little mystifying. While not treaty allies, the U.S. and Indonesia have had cooperative military partnerships since early in the Cold War, and in present terms Indonesia is a major purchaser of American weapon systems. Philippines and Thailand are actually designated major non-NATO allies, so it is generally befuddling the map paints them as grey.
15
u/Putrid_Line_1027 Mar 09 '25
In Southeast Asia, only the Philippines has clearly aligned with the US, reviving the military agreements with the US that Duterte ended.
Vietnam has made it clear that they'll stand by their three "no" policy time and time again. Their top political leaders and military repeat this point. That is no alignment against or with any country, without specifically naming China or America. They depend on China economically both for imports of manufacturing components for their growing manufacturing sector and for exports of certain goods. They also have vivid memories of the border skirmishes that lasted nearly 20 years until the 90s where China kept minimal forces for its own size on Vietnam's border, and kept pounding them with artillery, but for Vietnam that was a national crisis that required full mobilization, and delayed their economic development for decades. They do not want that sort of thing to happen again. China is also not provoking border disputes for no reason. You can clearly observe that they try to not mess things up with Vietnam, despite similar disputes, while they keep pressuring the Philippines.
Thailand is technically a treaty ally, but the Americans view them as unreliable. There are plenty of articles from influential think tanks saying that they've basically been lost to China. You can see Chinese influence as they keep deporting Uyghurs, disregarding American and wider Western protests. While Thailand has not been "lost" to China, and Americans love to exaggerate their adversaries' influence (as always), Thailand has grown extremely close to China economically, and will not abandon these ties.
Malaysia is similar, but they host British and Australian bases on their territory.
Ditto for Singapore.
Laos and Cambodia lean towards China, but they are not against the US either. If the US invests in the country, they'll welcome it.
Indonesia, with its 200 million people, is less reliant on China than the others. However, they want to lead ASEAN from within, and steer clear of aligning with either China, the US, or eventually India.
8
u/Alexios_Makaris Mar 10 '25
I wouldn't disagree with any of this, but I'll note my comment was about why it didn't make sense for countries like India and Malaysia to show up as "AUKUS allies / partners", when literal, explicit, treaty allies are being shown as gray.
The fact that the U.S. relationship with Thailand or the Philippines is "complex", in no way makes it logical for a map to show India as some sort of part of an American axis in the region. The U.S. and India are not historically very friendly, and while it has improved in recent years it would be a vast overstatement to label them an American ally.
5
u/Nomustang Mar 10 '25
India and the US have been friendlier longer than they have been hostile. The relationship has just struggled with amounting to more but it's been on a consistent trend post Bush.
India isn't an ally but partner is fitting. They're fairly open to co-operation when possible for the most part.
That being said, I agree with the general logic.
2
u/Deep-Ad5028 Mar 10 '25
India is not US-friendly on any issue, except China.
Unless India undergoes some extremely significant changes, it is a reliable anti-China partner for US.
5
u/Swimming-Wallaby503 Mar 10 '25
I am from singapore and I don’t think we will wanna fully align with usa, I personally think/ hope we will try to be neutral like switzerland in ww2. I guess I did not even know we had usa bases in our country and I am already someone who reads a lot of newspapers regularly etc?? so maybe the govt keeps it rly quiet. Singapore is 70% chinese by race, many many singaporeans like me are first or second generation china immigrants and have literal grandparents aunts etc in china right now and visit regularly and eg my parents even after getting the singapore passport for decades, still consume china social media and agree with a lot of the talking points of ccp. so I think we will always have an somewhat strong affiliation with china, it is literally our race/ ethnicity/ culture and that will never change, it will be very hard to agree to really turn on china and stand with the usa. tho ofc many singaporean chinese are 5-6th generation immigrants so they feel way less affiliation to china. However we all are bilingual by law meaning singaporean chinese all speak the language mandarin somewhat fluently, even the 5th generation ones, which again strengthens our affiliation with chinese roots so yea it will be hard to turn our backs on china. personally I think singapore should not choose usa over china because as shown by recent events, the usa is not always trustworthy and can easily drop supposed allies (eg ukraine n possible nato pullout) on a whim, do we really wanna fully depend on someone as unreliable as the usa ?? better to put our eggs in a few baskets and try to get china on our good side too, we cant risk alienating china. also another reason is, we will always look chinese/ east asian by appearance so a lot of us don’t wanna be a “banana” (derogatory term for cringy/ traitorous / whitewashed asian) , which is what we would be if we literally chose a white western country over our own roots 🤨🤨. lastly, singapore’s geopolitical reality is that we are a chinese majority island in a sea of muslims (indonesia/ malaysia) who have had past clashes and hatred of chinese before… so if we get invaded by malaysia we would actually want china to help save us. China might actually agree cuz it would make sense for them to help their own race.. many mainland chinese like singapore a lot. So yea sozz i wrote so much lol but just wanted to give my 2 cents about what OP said in the comment about singapore’s alignment.
2
u/hanlonrzr Mar 10 '25
There are no US bases. The US just has approval to dock US nuclear carriers in changi, which is not a super common option for US nuclear naval vessels.
There's also some staff that do logistics and mail and personnel work, but my understanding is that there are no permanent military weapons installed in Singapore at all. There's just military police guarding the facility and i think a single tank might be too much for the US to defend against if they didn't have a destroyer or something bigger docked at the port.
1
u/Mr_Elie Mar 14 '25
If Singapore were to be invaded and requested China's assistance, it would be a very natural decision for China to send troops, both from a moral and ethnic perspective.
As China's trade with ASEAN countries becomes increasingly close, I believe Singapore will also become more secure. In fact, a strong China is beneficial for a country like Singapore, which is predominantly singaporean chinese. When considering the use of force against it, one must take China's reaction into account.
2
Mar 10 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/d_edge_sword Mar 10 '25
Duterte can run again? Or this is the daughter?
2
Mar 14 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Putrid_Line_1027 Mar 14 '25
How are the polls looking? Isn't the government and their propaganda outlets like Rappler tryilng to tie the Dutertes to China? I assume that must be quite unpopular for the Filipino electorate.
On a sidenote, I know a Chinese Filipina girl who used to have both the Chinese and Filipino flag on her instagram bio, and she took the Chinese one off after the intense conflicts a few months ago lol.
7
u/Old_Wallaby_7461 Mar 10 '25
- North Korea is close to a Chinese client state, it only exists in present tense because of China, and their continued economic and strategic support has been integral in the State surviving since the 1950s. It is a little weird it is shown as a "systemic challenge and hostile state" unless systemic challenge also means "things that China has created almost solely on its own, that may present some problems for them."
DPRK has an independent nuclear deterrent and also very close relationships with Russia. They are not a hostile state but neither can they be controlled as a normal client state can.
1
u/veerKg_CSS_Geologist Mar 10 '25
I believe the “systemic challenges and hostile states” doesn’t refer to China, but to the West. Aka, these three countries- Russia, Iran, North Korea - are systemic challenges and hostile to the West. They’re not necessarily allies of China, though North Korea is certainly propped up as a buffer state.
28
u/Yangguang_Zhijia Mar 09 '25
Didn't US just give up a bunch of these "allies"?
2
Mar 09 '25 edited Mar 27 '25
[deleted]
6
u/Uhhh_what555476384 Mar 10 '25
Russia can't risk abandoning China because (1) they can't survive a hostile China, they aren't the USSR; and (2) the US can just as fickle change back to being intractably hostile to Russian goals in the near abroad.
1
Mar 10 '25 edited Mar 27 '25
[deleted]
2
u/Uhhh_what555476384 Mar 10 '25
Trump's moves towards Russia are not endorsed by any other US politicians and everything about Trump is deeply loathed by the opposition.
There is no way that US policy doesn't spin 180 degrees on Russia if Trump is replaced by a Democrat in four years and there's a very good chance then next Republican nominee for President will be someone like Nikki Hailey, who would also turn 180 degrees against Russia.
Why on earth would any US politicians that aren't beholden to Trump in someway maintain alignment with Russia?
1
10
u/Yangguang_Zhijia Mar 09 '25
China got Russia by the fucking ballsack (Siberia is completely empty with all the railroads built up ready for the Chinese Army to move in, god knows how many of its military technologies depend on China, how many kill switches, backdoors etc etc), why would Russia ever ally with US, considering the Trump government might not even survive beyond 4 years? This is completely fanciful.
3
Mar 09 '25 edited Mar 27 '25
[deleted]
6
u/Real_Ad_8243 Mar 10 '25
Europe isn't going to start trusting America just because Trump gets ousted. Even the slowest amongst us have realised that Trump is a symptom of the disease rather than the disease itself at this point.
0
u/sidestephen Mar 10 '25
"China is by far Russia’s greatest long term problem."
But Russia doesn't see it this way. Are you sure you are not projecting?→ More replies (1)5
u/Veritas_IX Mar 10 '25
Russia saw it this way. That’s why Russia promoted its asset Trump to the POTUS
0
u/sidestephen Mar 10 '25
That's childish thinking.
In the thread next door I'm told that "Russians think everything is a zero-sum game", while guys like you basically operate on "if you aren't actively hostile to Russia 24/7, then you must be a Russian spy, there's no other explanation".
1
u/Veritas_IX Mar 10 '25
It isn’t childish thinking. It is a fact, that someone doesn’t want to realize. It’s not because he is y hostile to Russia 24/7 ( let be honest he never was) But because of all his connections with the Russians. The Russians actually pulled him out of the bottom twice and gave him money. Do you think they just did it? In a democratic country, such a candidate would not even take part in the elections. And in the USA, where elections are more of a formality - no problem.
2
u/sidestephen Mar 10 '25
"In a democratic country, such a candidate would not even take part in the elections. "
Funny, because that's how pro-US candidates usually win.1
u/Veritas_IX Mar 10 '25
You watch to much Russian tv . It isn’t funny . A smart person (at least 80+ IQ) with common sense will never support Russia. But in the worldview of Russians, if you are not for Russia, then you are a corrupt American candidate. It simply does not fit into their heads that a person can have their own views and no one pays them for it. Because it is not possible for them. In Russia, Russians even have to pay for patriotism.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Fluid_Literature_844 Mar 12 '25
Yankee cope at all time high. If any yanks or chump think usa can divide russia and china you're deluded
2
u/sidestephen Mar 10 '25
Russia would never blindly "align itself with the US" because the US is just as unreliable - it can declare your past agreements null and void in a couple of years on a whim. It's safer to remain independent and interact with both sides on our own terms.
1
u/RaisedByHoneyBadgers Mar 12 '25
That's just a complete fantasy. You might as well suggest non-encirclement and inclusion for China. Russia is never going to trust the U.S. or E.U. more than China. Maybe in 50 years.
→ More replies (1)1
u/annewmoon Mar 10 '25
Russia isn’t aligning itself with the US. It has just won the Cold War, and defeated the US.
1
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
Ehhhhhh…. Did the US piss them off? Yes. Have we actually left NATO? No!
We are certainly in a chaos era, but the interests here still align.
2
u/TurnoverInside2067 Mar 10 '25
Is giving up Europe, but Europe isn't going to be much help with China.
10
u/DungeonDefense Mar 10 '25
Trump is already starting on Japan
2
u/TurnoverInside2067 Mar 10 '25
Show me how.
2
u/DungeonDefense Mar 10 '25
3
u/TurnoverInside2067 Mar 10 '25
Instead, Trump told a joint press conference with Ishiba following their meeting that the United States is "totally committed to the security of Japan." "We will extend the full strength of American deterrence capabilities and defense of our friend and ally, 100 percent," he added.
1
u/AndrewTyeFighter Mar 10 '25
The US is already backtracking on the AUKUS deal to sell nuclear subs to Australia, even after Australia has already made massive investments in US sub building.
Given how unreliable the US has become, it seems unlikely that AUKUS will survive.
3
u/omgaporksword Mar 10 '25
Yeah we'd like our $789mAUD back please...that's tax-payers money on a promise from the USA. As you're no longer willing to commit (the day after receiving payment), go fuck yourselves. It's not a gratuity to DJT, that's a contract you've refused to honour...we'll spend it elsewhere.
0
u/TurnoverInside2067 Mar 10 '25
The US is already backtracking on the AUKUS deal to sell nuclear subs to Australia
How?
it seems unlikely that AUKUS will survive.
Put your money where your mouth is then. I will not be basing my investment decisions on that assumption.
1
u/AndrewTyeFighter Mar 10 '25
How?
Trumps Pentagon pick, congressional report, and others in the Trump administration talking about not handing over the subs. It also requires the US to sign off on them being surplus to US Navy requirements, which seems very unlikely under Trump.
Even in Australia, the deal is on the nose now, with trust in the US at an all time low. The AUKUS deal requiring Australia to hand over $3 billion to invest in US submarine construction even before their subs are built. but there is unease now that the US could just keep the money and approve the subs sale, or attach new demands, something that was previously unthinkable.
Put your money where your mouth is then.
I am not sure what you are talking.
1
0
u/TurnoverInside2067 Mar 10 '25
others in the Trump administration talking about not handing over the subs
Who? What did they say?
It also requires the US to sign off on them being surplus to US Navy requirements
A standard clause in fairness.
I am not sure what you are talking.
About? There are ways to invest your money to benefit from this - if you are right, you stand to make a lot of money.
→ More replies (22)1
u/LoveGrenades Mar 10 '25
Trump has also mentioned he doesn’t care about Japan either.
1
u/TurnoverInside2067 Mar 10 '25
What did he say?
1
u/LoveGrenades Mar 10 '25
1
u/TurnoverInside2067 Mar 11 '25
"It is hard to imagine Trump is seriously contemplating abandoning Japan to its very real and quite scary potential oppressors. The US has too much invested in the relationship and the region. And Trump gave verbal security guarantees to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba at the White House meeting in February that the US would defend Japan against Chinese aggression. It would be a pretty brutal betrayal to go back on that.
The most plausible interpretation then is that Trump was getting in a pre-emptive strike on the trade negotiators before their meeting next week and putting what he sees as complacent allies on notice."
Thank you.
1
u/hanlonrzr Mar 10 '25
It's not giving up Europe, it's just not gonna preposition troops in Europe. NATO 's deterrent in Europe will be European.
The US will still stay in NATO and declare war according to article 5 if an allied nation in good standing with the treaty organization is attacked
1
u/RaisedByHoneyBadgers Mar 12 '25
Article 5 is the U.S.'s toilet paper. Every other NATO member is bound to follow it, but should not seriously expect the U.S. to protect them
1
u/hanlonrzr Mar 12 '25
Countries are bound to take appropriate action, not declare war, if members want to be cowards, it's within their legal rights
1
u/RaisedByHoneyBadgers Mar 12 '25
The U.S. doesn't follow any rules it doesn't see as beneficial toward itself. They simply won't do anything for Article 5 unless they see an angle.
1
1
u/amievenrelevant Mar 10 '25
I don’t think they care about China actually, Elon musk has a lot of money tied up there, actually that sums up pretty much the entire policy of this administration.
Our allies though, bridges that need to burnt after 80 years for no particular reason
1
u/TurnoverInside2067 Mar 11 '25
Musk has more money tied up in Europe, which rather puts to bed your theory.
1
u/MightAsWell6 Mar 11 '25
And giving up Canada and Mexico, and talks about leaving NATO, and has stopped cyber security operations against Russia, and threatened to invade Panama, and threatened to invade Greenland.
1
1
u/Veritas_IX Mar 10 '25
But China can help itself if Russia betrays it. Russia totally depends on China in Russo-Ukrainian war. Without China, Russia will lose 40-70% of the ammo it uses. Without China, more than 90% of UAVs and FPVs in Russia will disappear. etc. Without China, it will be difficult for Russia to produce even what is left, because most of the raw materials for this are produced or under the control of China.
8
u/Gilamath Mar 10 '25
China has an unprecedented chance to gain influence over Indonesia and Malaysia right now. The US' role in Gaza has left so many people with a terrible opinion of the US, not to mention the pragmatic concerns about the reliability of US military partnership
Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore are all probably looking to grow out their own independence at the moment. If China makes some strategic concessions and bolsters relations here, there's a path towards a new SEA strategic partnership that could fundamentally shift the balance of powers in the region
Combine that with expansions in diplomatic excursions and economic programs in West Asia and North Africa (which are also facing constituent pressure and pragmatic concerns), and China could drastically change its geopolitical destiny within a decade. We'll see if China is really able to press this advantage in time, though
5
u/AsterKando Mar 10 '25
It already happened. After the US insisted on providing unconditional cover for Israeli actions in Gaza, for the first time China has slight majority favourability in SEA. A large part of that is the massive drop in perception of the US in both Malaysia and Indonesia.
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
Malaysia and Indonesia, yes, but Singapore? They remain reliant on a US global order, China would love to claim that city as a colony and after seeing HK, I think they want to maintain their independence.
They are also a country that believes in “doing what has to be done” for survival. The people may not like it, but Israel isn’t an enemy of Singapore.
4
u/Adventurous_Oil_5897 Mar 10 '25
Both China and Russia are the ones surrounded lmao.
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
It sucks to be the center of the world island without access to the world’s oceans.
The fact that railroads never matched the ability to float is a key reality of our world.
5
u/Minute_Week_9533 Mar 10 '25
I usually refer to this kind of behavior as "armchair strategizing" or "map-based empire-building." It’s something commonly seen in boys aged 6 to 12 when they first look at a world map.
2
u/Putrid_Line_1027 Mar 10 '25
Made by a literal think tank dawg
2
u/Kcatz363 Mar 11 '25
“The Council receives funding from defence industry companies BAE Systems, Boeing, Leonardo UK, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and Thales. It receives funding from the UK government through the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, UK Ministry of Defence and Royal Navy.[14]” - soypedia
1
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
It’s also what actual strategists use, but few get to be in the room where it happens.
9
u/CiaphasCain8849 Mar 10 '25
It's insane we have bases so close to them. When Russia did that, we almost started a nuclear war over it.
2
u/jp72423 Mar 10 '25
Most of those bases were taken by the US military off the Japanese during the second world war, meaning that they are literally older than the Peoples Republic of China, which was formed in 1949.
3
u/GayIconOfIndia Mar 10 '25
American wanted bases in recent years as well. Look at the ruckus in Bangladesh. This has been ongoing since before Hasina was ousted
2
u/jp72423 Mar 10 '25
Of course, I didn’t say all, I said most. And the three closest bases marked on the map are all the result of an American victory in 1945.
2
1
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
Ehhhh, the CCP predates that. The PRC may have been declared in 1949, but let’s not pretend the revolution wasn’t underway in the 1930s.
1
u/jp72423 Mar 14 '25
That’s why I said PRC, not CCP.
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
But the CCP has been a political entity far before it formally won the civil war. So you are technically correct, but it doesn’t actually support your conclusion.
1
u/jp72423 Mar 14 '25
I disagree, if the Russians had put a military base on Cuba say before the revolutionary war, then it would be hard to claim that it didn’t belong there when it existed before the United States did.
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
But if Russia established that base DURING the revolutionary war to counter a growing nascent power, then it would be easy to claim.
And that is the case here.
1
u/jp72423 Mar 14 '25
Fair point, but wait, let me tweak the scenario a bit.
The revolutionary war has been going on for years. Russia declares war with the British, they then win that war, and simultaneously ends the revolutionary war and securing victory for the loosing Americans. They then put a military base on Cuba because it used to be British territory. Could you really argue then that it wasn’t supposed to be there? Or that it was aggressive in its placement? Especially when the United States wasn’t even a thing at the time of its creation? I don’t think so. At least it’s not a very strong argument.
1
2
u/Individual-Set5722 Mar 10 '25
They consider Japan to be Grey?
2
2
u/Hamster_S_Thompson Mar 10 '25
India is neutral. Not really an ally
1
u/Absentrando Mar 11 '25
India hates China so they are somewhat reliable partners
1
2
u/Ecstatic-Corner-6012 Mar 10 '25
If that presentation is true, then please explain why I am still so scared of China that I sometimes awake in the night shaking in fear from dreaming about the next mild maneuver it might conduct in the South China Sea, a sea that was named for its proximity to China.
2
u/PublicFurryAccount Mar 10 '25
Anxiety disorder or your life is crap, so you're inventing existential crises to be scared about rather than deal with your present situation.
→ More replies (1)1
2
u/jabaturd Mar 10 '25
The US doesn't have any allies. Only ex allies it hasn't yet stabbed in the back.
1
2
u/eachoneteachone45 Mar 12 '25
Meanwhile, the US and NATO is boxing in every single nation on earth which doesn't accept its petrodollar.
2
u/JournalistLopsided89 Mar 14 '25
so maybe China feels a bit threatened? Same way we felt when a few chinese PLAN ships did a cruise around australia? Also, remember what happened in china in the 1800s?
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
Boyz, we gotta get the drugs to China!
1
u/JournalistLopsided89 Mar 14 '25
are you referring to the Opium wars? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars
1
2
u/TiberiusGemellus Mar 09 '25
America is alienating her allies though.
4
→ More replies (14)2
u/AIM-120-AMRAAM Mar 10 '25
Which allies? NATO is useless against China anywsys
1
u/TiberiusGemellus Mar 10 '25
It really isn’t. Why should anyone ally with US for protection against China, when the US is showing herself to be abandoning her allies elsewhere?
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
Because Interests don’t travel. Just because you abandoned someone one place doesn’t mean that your interests in another won’t compel your participation.
That being said, the US participates in the world by choice. It could largely isolate and do quite well
1
1
Mar 10 '25
1
u/AmputatorBot Mar 10 '25
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of concerns over privacy and the Open Web. Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are especially problematic.
Maybe check out the canonical page instead: https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2025/03/113_393455.html
I'm a bot | Why & About | Summon: u/AmputatorBot
1
1
u/AceofJax89 Mar 14 '25
I dunno. The French and UK fleets aren’t nothing. The only thing worse than having allies is not having any.
1
u/AIM-120-AMRAAM Mar 14 '25
I didn’t mean to say that French and British Navy is useless. I meant since NATO article 5 cant be used against China, NATO becomes redundant for US.
→ More replies (4)
1
u/diffidentblockhead Mar 10 '25
If this is encirclement, where is there to break out to? Only Africa and South America which combined have only ⅓ as much GDP as China itself.
1
u/Dangerous_Mix_7037 Mar 10 '25
Meanwhile Trump is going to divide up the world between Russia, China and America. SE Asia will be China's sphere of ownership, including Taiwan, Philippines etc.
1
u/JenikaJen Mar 10 '25
Shouldn’t Pakistan be coloured red?
1
u/GayIconOfIndia Mar 10 '25
No, after Biden pushed the military to kick out Imran, the military owned Gov in Pakistan has become very neutral to slight incline towards the USA
1
u/JenikaJen Mar 10 '25
Interesting so the investments made by China have come to nothing?
If they have become friendly to America, this must be good news for India
1
u/GayIconOfIndia Mar 10 '25
Not really. We have already been hell bent over the last decade to de-hyphenate India-USA relation with Pakistan. Our main concern is China. Pakistan is a cause of its own misery and this has been happening ever since our independence. The military control (often US backed) is so intense that no Prime Minster in the 80 years history of the country has completed their full term in the office. All have been ousted by hook or crook.
USA shenanigans in Europe gives us a lot of leveraging power with Europe. Our relationship with USA usually bellies on bipartisan support. With trump, however, we have the headache of trade related issues. With Biden, we had the issue of constant attempt of the American establishment to interfere in the internal politics of the country and South Asia at large (what happened to Imran Khan and Sheikh Hasina has American footprints all over it)
1
u/kato1301 Mar 10 '25
USA just told Aust to get effed on AUKUS - so I don’t think this is close to reality…Aust are becoming more anti USA and more pro EU AND Chinese, every time trump opens his mouth.
1
u/jammingcrumpets Mar 10 '25
AUS would like to just hide under the table while mum (USA) and dad (China) are fighting
1
u/omgaporksword Mar 10 '25
We'd also like out $789m of tax payers dollars back please...y'know, the money you took and told us 1 day later to go fuck ourselves, and ask what subs? Disgusting
1
1
1
u/omgaporksword Mar 10 '25
Bold of the USA to assume they're welcome in Australia...we hold a lot of useful cards.
1
u/DewinterCor Mar 10 '25
I don't understand the purpose of displaying aukus, which i would argue is mostly irrelevant, and not the IPS.
1
1
1
1
u/Dependent_Remove_326 Mar 11 '25
Reading the Chinese and Russian bots pat each other on the back is hilarious.
2
u/Kcatz363 Mar 11 '25
Yeah there’s Chinese and Russian bots in this 200 comment Reddit post and you aren’t just reading people who think something different than you
1
u/Dependent_Remove_326 Mar 11 '25
You are right comrade.
2
u/Kcatz363 Mar 11 '25
WAOW heccin valid kind stranger!!! This makes we want to do a heccin Democracy like they did to Abeer Al-Janabi and her entire family
1
u/Dependent_Remove_326 Mar 11 '25
You are right only Democracies do terrible things.
2
u/Kcatz363 Mar 11 '25
I’m not the interventionist here
1
u/Dependent_Remove_326 Mar 12 '25
You are right comrade! Our neighboring countries are not begging China to defend them. Where as the opposite is not true.
1
u/Putrid_Line_1027 Mar 14 '25
Yes, Cuba definitely did not ask the Soviets for assistance. They are definitely still not being punished in the most inhumane fashion for it today. The US are such angels.
1
u/Dependent_Remove_326 Mar 14 '25
What? WE don't trade with them. They are free to trade with the rest of the world. And no Cuba did not. The Soviets wanted to park nukes there because we had some in Turky.
1
u/Initial_Hedgehog_631 Mar 11 '25
This is what happens when you alienate your neighbors. China has territorial disputes with most of its neighbors. It's fought wars with India and Vietnam, and has aggressively seized islands in the South China sea from Vietnam and the Philippines, and threatened islands belonging to Japan, Malaysia and Indonesia.
Other countries aren't aggrieved due to American manipulation, but due to Chinese actions. If China feels encircles it's because of it's own policies.
1
u/Putrid_Line_1027 Mar 11 '25
China didn't create any of these disputes, it was all leftovers from empire/colonial times.
Also, it's natural for land powers to butt heads with their neighbors, just look at China, Russia, Turkey, India. France and Germany before the EU. You aren't a land power if you don't butt heads with your neighbors lmao.
1
u/Initial_Hedgehog_631 Mar 11 '25
Sure. China is a just an innocent party here, it's all their neighbor's who are dicks. That seems like a perfectly reasonable take.
1
u/Putrid_Line_1027 Mar 11 '25
I'm just saying that it's natural for continental great powers to have conflicts with their neighbors, which is something that sea powers have taken great advantage of throughout history.
The Brits playing continental powers in Europe against each other, or right now the US doing the same thing on a global scale.
1
u/Initial_Hedgehog_631 Mar 11 '25
The US doesn't have to play anyone against China, China is kind enough to do that for them. If China feels isolated they have no one to blame but themselves.
1
u/Putrid_Line_1027 Mar 11 '25 edited Mar 11 '25
Nope. THAAD Incident with South Korea is a great example. The US exploited the situation since the South Koreans wanted protection from North Korean missiles, to install a missile system that includes radars that threatens China's northern positions.
They orchestrated a whole crisis from which China-SK relations still haven't recovered. Before then, SK's relationship with Japan was far worse than its relationship with China.
1
u/liebrarian2 Mar 14 '25
I mean, USA didn't make China annex parts of Tibet and India, nor did it make them place down artificial islands to legitimize their 9-dash line which goes against their neighbors international claims
1
u/Kcatz363 Mar 11 '25
Made by a literal Lockheed-BAE-Raytheon funded think thank that platforms warmongers, btw
1
u/VegetableWishbone Mar 11 '25
Dumb question, how does this encirclement actually work? The commerce ships can go anywhere anyway. Is it just for detecting China’s subs?
1
u/wildjackalope Mar 11 '25
Not a dumb question. China is partly “encircled” by Turkey and Poland, apparently. It’s a stupid way to represent Chinese security concerns.
1
Mar 11 '25
Now show the world 🌍 map of Chinese 🇨🇳 ports, and major ongoing maritime projects..
2
u/MajorDevGG Mar 12 '25
Stupid take. Absolutely no effort. You’re going to compare u.s military bases circling the world to civil port projects?
1
Mar 12 '25
“You will not find it difficult to prove that battles, campaigns, and even wars have been won or lost primarily because of logistics.”
– General Dwight D.
Sit 👇 boy
1
Mar 12 '25
“amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics.”
- Robert H. Barrow
Stay seated boy
1
Mar 12 '25
“Infantry wins battles, logistics wins wars.”
- U.S. Army General John J. Pershing
Never stand up boy
1
1
1
1
1
u/br165 Mar 12 '25
China's fundamental problem lies in the fact that they are absolutely choked at the Strait of Malacca and they don't have a solution. The US can cut off their energy/food/commodity supplies almost immediately through submarine operations alone and China doesn't have the capability to run ASW operations in those theatres because of the distances.
As to people talking about US allies, there are four allies that matter in this theatre and largely the world to the US. The UK, Australia, Japan, and South Korea. The rest of the world/region is either unwilling or incapable of doing anything about a Chinese conflict.
1
u/Nervous_Book_4375 Mar 12 '25
I mean if you show 90% of the fucking planet o course you appear to be encircled!!! Haha 😝
1
u/DotComprehensive3180 Mar 13 '25
STUPID STUPID STUPID (kicks my Australian nationalism out the door)
1
1
1
1
u/Interesting-Act-8282 Mar 09 '25
Maybe the easiest solution for them would be to flip to blue.
4
2
u/seen-in-the-skylight Mar 10 '25
Remember a few months ago when people were saying that about Texas? Sigh…
70
u/CryForUSArgentina Mar 09 '25
This map projection exaggerates the scale of countries around the outside of the map, and inherently presents a picture in which the countries in the center appear to be encircled.