U.S. Military Says Japan Must Inform Public of China Threat

• Japan needs rethink on use of offensive weapons
• U.S. Coast Guard to boost Pacific presence to match China

By Isabel Reynolds and Andreo Calonzo

Japan should rethink its rejection of offensive weapons, a senior U.S. military officer said in Tokyo, while the U.S. Coast Guard chief warned of China’s “antagonistic” behavior in disputed waters.
There needs to be a discussion between the government of Japan and the public about the threats that are out there, said the U.S. military officer, who spoke Monday to reporters on condition of anonymity. 

The officer cited China as a particular risk.
The pacifism built into Japan’s U.S.-drafted, post-World War II constitution means attempts to bolster defenses frequently face opposition from local residents, even as China and North Korea build up their arsenals of ballistic missiles. 

Japan, which hosts about 50,000 U.S. military personnel, also places tighter constraints on training than other countries, the officer said.
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has increased the defense budget and sought to loosen the constraints of the war-renouncing constitution since taking office in 2012. 

But repairing ties with China, Japan’s biggest trade partner, has also been a priority for his administration.

China’s Reach
The U.S. officer said China has spent heavily to bolster its ballistic missile force, which has rapidly expanded over the years. 

China continues to say publicly it backs peace, stability and security, but its actions don’t match its words as it builds a weapons inventory that threatens Japan as well as others in the region, the officer added.
Japan’s avoidance of offensive weaponry under its constitution is no longer acceptable and should be another topic of discussion with the public, the officer said.
Restrictions on training, such as access to ranges or permission to fly at low altitude or at night, are affecting the ability of both U.S. forces and Japan’s own Self-Defense Forces to prepare for contingencies, the U.S. officer said, adding that Japan should debate the issue soon.
Chinese dictator Xi Jinping rolled out some of the country’s most advanced weaponry in an Oct. 1 parade marking the 70th anniversary of the People’s Republic — a grand demonstration of the country’s growing challenge to U.S. military might.
The Asian nation had a plan to increase its access across the globe, U.S. Coast Guard commandant Admiral Karl Schultz said in a teleconference Monday, as he warned of Beijing’s “coercive and antagonistic” actions in disputed waters.
“China talks about peaceful conduct, and then we see man-made island where there weren’t islands before,” Schultz said when asked to assess Beijing’s actions in the South China Sea.
The U.S. Coast Guard will continue to increase presence and add more vessels in the Pacific amid China’s “expansive intent,” he added.

Rival South China Sea visions in spotlight as Washington, Beijing front Shangri-La Dialogue

By Brad Lendon

Hong Kong -- With China-US relations already strained amid an escalating trade war, attention is about to turn to a familiar arena -- the South China Sea.
After years of stand-offs and brinkmanship in the hotly contested region, acting US Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan is expected to unveil the Pentagon's new Indo-Pacific strategy at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on Saturday.
Intriguingly, just one day later Chinese Defense Minister Gen. Wei Fenghe is scheduled to speak about Beijing's role in the Indo-Pacific -- the highest-ranking Chinese official to appear at Asia's premier defense conference in eight years.
Their presence is significant. 

Beijing claims almost the entire 1.3 million square mile South China Sea as its sovereign territory and aggressively asserts its stake, with Xi Jinping saying it will never give up "any inch of territory."
US military officials, meanwhile, have vowed to continue enforcing a free and open Indo-Pacific.

The Chinese Type 52D guided missile destroyer Guiyang participates in a naval parade on April 23, 2019.

William Choong, senior fellow at the Shangri-La Dialogue, said in a tweet Tuesday that the presence of both Wei and Shanahan would set up "a clash of two visions — the US/Japan-led 'free and open' Indo-Pacific and China's 'Asia for Asians.'"
Analyst Carl Schuster, a former director of operations at the US Pacific Command's Joint Intelligence Center, told CNN: "Chinese leaders now recognize the value of multilateral defense venues and want to deny the US a monopoly of great power influence."
US intentions for the region have already been telegraphed strongly.
The Pentagon has stepped up freedom-of-navigation operations to as often as weekly. 

And the commander of the US Pacific Air Forces said this month that Air Force jets were flying in and around the South China Sea almost daily.
Washington has also sent warships through the Taiwan Strait separating China from what it calls its renegade province several times this year.
One of Washington's Taiwan Strait operations included a US Coast Guard cutter, which later sailed into the South China Sea — sending the fifth arm of its military and its main maritime law enforcement agency into the Pacific fray.
More robust US armament packages also seem to be part of the plan. 

For bilateral exercises with the Philippines in April, the US loaded the amphibious assault ship USS Wasp with 10 F-35B stealth fighters — four more than it normally carries — and sailed it into the South China Sea.

The amphibious assault ship USS Wasp transits the waters of the South China Sea with a large load of F-35 fighters.

Of course, it's not just the US that's active around the region. 

Its allies and partners are also involved.
France sent a ship through the Taiwan Strait this year, and is showing off its Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier on the sidelines of the conference. 

In May alone, Japanese, Indian, Philippine and US ships took part in a multilateral South China Sea exercise — while conference host Singapore held live-fire drills with India. 

A four-ship Australian naval force also visited countries around the region in a three-month trip that ended this week.
Meanwhile, US officials have bigger plans for the coming year.
In a conference call with reporters this month, US chief of naval operations Adm. John Richardson reiterated plans for the forward deployment of two littoral combat ships — fast, maneuverable warships designed for shallow-water operations — to Singapore this year. 

The ships would be the US Navy assets stationed closest to the South China Sea.
And in March, the commander of US Army forces in the Pacific, Gen. Robert Brown, announced plans to train 10,000 US troops for combat in "a South China Sea scenario." 

The Philippines and Thailand were mentioned as possible destinations for the troops.
The US pressure on Beijing extends back to Washington, where a bipartisan group of senators last week introduced legislation that would impose sanctions on Chinese companies and individuals who help the PLA's South China Sea build-up.
"China has been bully in both the South and East China Seas, encroaching on and intimidating its neighbors. Such aggressive behavior cannot go on unchecked," Sen. Ben Cardin, a Maryland Democrat, said in a statement.
For its part, China hasn't backed down at all: launching new warships, touting new weapons, keeping its forces active in the South China Sea — around Taiwan and beyond — and blasting Washington.
Beijing says it is the US that endangers peace in the region.

What are China's naval goals? The West can't wait to find out

On May 12, it launched two Type-52D destroyers in a single day — the 19th and 20th of what are expected to be 30 ships in that class.
A US Defense Department report released in early May said China had Asia's largest navy, with more than 300 ships and submarines.
Military analyst Euan Graham, who was aboard an Australian warship during a recent South China Sea operation, said it and other Australian and US ships operating in the region were all closely monitored by the Chinese navy.
"The ubiquity of PLAN (PLA Navy) vessels shadowing other warships in the (South China Sea) suggests that China's surface force has grown big enough to be able to 'close-mark' at will," Graham wrote on The Strategist blog.
Meanwhile, the PLA Navy has held training exercises with Russia off China's east coast and with Thailand to the south.
To the north, Chinese air force jets in April conducted what Taiwan said was their most "provocative" mission in years in the Taiwan Strait, crossing the median line between the island and the mainland.
"It was an intentional, reckless and provocative action. We've informed regional partners and condemn China for such behavior," Taiwan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.
But it's clear Taiwan can't expect much quarter from China.
A May report on the PLA's English-language website touted a new amphibious assault vehicle as "the world's most advanced." 

With its help, combined with other weapons in China's arsenal, "the People's Liberation Army is well positioned to deal with Taiwan secessionists and potential island disputes."
The Shangri-La Dialogue touts itself as a venue "where ministers debate the region's most pressing security challenges, engage in important bilateral talks and come up with fresh solutions together."
But against that backdrop of bluster and build-up, it's hard to expect any compromises to emerge from what Wei and Shanahan have to say.

FONOPs

U.S. warship sails near the Scarborough Shoal
By Idrees Ali

The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Preble (DDG 88) transits in the the Indian Ocean, March 29, 2018.

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. military said one of its warships sailed near the disputed Scarborough Shoal claimed by China in the South China Sea on Sunday.
The busy waterway is one of a growing number of flashpoints in the U.S.-China relationship, which include a trade war, U.S. sanctions and Taiwan.
China struck a more aggressive tone in its trade war with the United States on Friday.
The tough talk capped a week that saw China unveil new retaliatory tariffs in response to a U.S. decision to raise its levies on $200 billion of Chinese imports to 25% from 10%.
The U.S. destroyer Preble carried out the operation, a U.S. military spokesman told Reuters.
“Preble sailed within 12 nautical miles of Scarborough Reef in order to challenge excessive maritime claims and preserve access to the waterways as governed by international law,” said Commander Clay Doss, a spokesman for the Seventh Fleet.
It was the second such U.S. military operation in the South China Sea in the last month.
On Wednesday, the chief of the U.S. Navy said its freedom of navigation movements in the disputed South China Sea drew more attention than they deserved.
The U.S. military has a long-standing position that its operations are carried out throughout the world, including areas claimed by allies, and they are separate from political considerations.
The operation was the latest attempt to counter what Washington sees as Beijing’s efforts to limit freedom of navigation in the strategic waters, where Chinese, Japanese and some Southeast Asian navies operate.
China claims almost all of the strategic South China Sea and frequently lambastes the United States and its allies over naval operations near Chinese-occupied islands.
Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam have competing claims in the region.
China and the United States have repeatedly traded barbs in the past over what Washington says is Beijing’s militarization of the South China Sea by building military installations on artificial islands and reefs.

Chinese Peril

70th anniversary: Pompeo urges NATO allies to adapt to China threat
www.aljazeera.com
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks during a reception celebrating NATO''s 70 anniversary at the Andrew W Mellon Auditorium in Washington.

United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged NATO allies on Thursday to work together to confront a wide variety of emerging threats from Russia and China.
Pompeo made the call at the start of a NATO meeting of foreign ministers in Washington that marked the 70th anniversary of the transatlantic military alliance.
"We must adapt our alliance to confront emerging threats ... whether that's Russian aggression, uncontrolled migration, cyberattacks, threats to energy security, Chinese strategic competition, including technology and 5G ... [or] many other issues," Pompeo said.
In a 2018 strategy document, the United States military put countering China and Russia at the heart of a new national defence strategy.
The meeting's first session focused on ways to deter Russia, including in the Black Sea, where it seized three Ukrainian naval vessels last year.
NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg called on Moscow to release the ships and their crews.
He said Russia's breach of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty was part of a "pattern of destabilising behaviour".
Washington has said it will withdraw from the treaty this summer unless Moscow ends its alleged violations of the pact, which rid Europe of land-based nuclear missiles.
"We will not mirror what Russia is doing," said Stoltenberg. 

"We will be measured and coordinated, and we have no intention of deploying ground-launched nuclear missiles in Europe."

Cyber warfare
In his remarks, Pompeo said NATO should also confront increased cyber warfare, including threats from China.
Washington has warned it will not partner with countries that adopt China's Huawei Technologies systems, but has been at odds on the issue with the European Union (EU), which has shunned US calls to ban the company across the bloc. 

The bulk of NATO members are EU countries.
Huawei is under scrutiny from Western intelligence agencies for its ties to China's government and the possibility that its equipment could be used for espionage.
The US has also been at odds with European countries over the failure of many of them to meet NATO defence-spending guidelines of two percent of gross domestic product (GDP).
Stoltenberg told reporters that NATO allies should commit to increased defence spending to improve burden-sharing in NATO.
"All NATO allies made a pledge to invest more in defense to improve burden-sharing in our alliance, and I expect all allies, including Germany, of course, to make good on the pledge we made together," the NATO secretary general said.

Defence spending
US President Donald Trump has called on NATO countries to pay even more than two percent of their GDP for defence.
He told NATO leaders last year to increase defence spending to four percent of GDP. 

He said the US pays 4.3 percent of its GDP to NATO.
Trump has singled out Germany for not doing enough. 

Stoltenberg said Germany was now making progress, but all allies needed to do more.
"We didn't make this pledge to please the United States. We made it because we live in a more unpredictable and uncertain world," Stoltenberg said.
On Thursday, Pompeo said every NATO member had an obligation to explain to its citizens the need to increase their defence budgets and rejected what he called "tired arguments" about public opposition to such spending.
The NATO chief said disagreement between NATO members Turkey and the US over Ankara's plan to buy S-400 missile defence systems from Russia was not part of the formal agenda of the Washington meeting, but would be discussed in the margins.
The US has halted delivery of equipment related to its advanced F-35 fighter jets to Turkey over its S-400 plans.
The US has said Turkey's purchase of the Russian air defence system would compromise the security of F-35 aircraft, which are built by Lockheed Martin Corp and employ stealth technology.
Pompeo on Thursday said he was confident the US will be able to "find a path forward" with Turkey over its S-400 plans.
Meanwhile, Canada's Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland took the opportunity of the NATO meeting to register Ottawa's displeasure with being labeled a potential national security threat by the US in relation to steel production.
She called the designation, which has led to the imposition of tariffs on Canadian steel, "absurd" and pointed to her presence at the NATO meeting as proof that Canada is not a threat to the US.
Pompeo said NATO allies also discussed the need for Russian troops to leave Venezuela.

China Threat

Taiwan asks US for new fighter jets to defend against China

AFP

Taiwan air force pilots stand next to French-made Mirage fighter jets during an annual exercise at the Hsinchu base in January. 

TAIPEI -- Taiwan has made a formal request to the United States for new fighter jets to defend itself against increasing Chinese threats, Deputy Defence Minister Shen Yi-ming told reporters on Thursday (Mar 7).
"We made the request to purchase (fighter jets) because China has been increasing its military strength and we are starting to have an imbalance of power in our air defence capabilities," Shen added.
The request, if granted, could ramp up tensions between China and the United States.
Beijing sees Taiwan as part of its territory awaiting unification, even though the two sides have been ruled separately since the end of a civil war in 1949.
China has significantly stepped up diplomatic and military pressure on Taiwan since the Beijing-sceptic President Tsai Ing-wen took office in 2016, including staging a series of military exercises near the island.
Chinese bombers and surveillance aircraft have also begun flying much more regular sorties around the island.
Washington switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979, but has remained Taiwan's most powerful unofficial ally and biggest arms supplier.
Last year, the US irked China over its plans to sell a batch of military parts to Taiwan in a US$330 million contract including standard spare parts for aircraft.
Beijing has been incensed by warming ties between Washington and Taipei, including the approval by the US State Department of a preliminary licence to sell submarine technology to the island.
But fearing a possible backlash from Beijing, the US has repeatedly denied Taiwan's requests since 2002 for new fighter jets including newer F-16s and F-35s.
In that time China has massively ramped up spending on its armed forces, including highly advanced fifth-generation jet fighters.
That has left Taiwan with an ageing airforce that analysts say is in desperate need of an upgrade.
The island currently has 326 fighter jets, all in service since the 1990s, including US-made F-16s, French Mirage 2000s and Taiwan's own indigenous fighters (IDF).
Defence officials would not confirm how many fighter jets they have asked for in the purchase request, or what model.
Local media Apple Daily reported Taiwan was seeking 66 F-16V at a cost of US$13 billion including missiles, logistics and training.
"It does not matter if it is F-15, F-18, F-16 or F-35, as long as it fits our combat needs," Tang Hung-an, a major-general with Taiwan's Air Force Command Headquarters said.
Tang added that the letter of request to the US did not specify which type of aircraft Taiwan wants.

China Threat

The message to China behind Singapore's US F-35 jet plan
By Brad Lendon

Hong Kong -- They are at the cutting-edge of America's elite stealth jet technology, capable of seamlessly connecting pilots for co-ordinated missions.
And now Singapore wants to become the fourth country to enmesh US F-35 warplanes above and around the South China Sea -- a move likely to be greeted with trepidation in Beijing.
In a speech before Parliament last week, Singaporean Defense Minister Ng Eng Hen announced a plan to buy up to 12 F-35 warplanes from the US.
If the deal goes through, Singapore will become the fourth American ally in the Pacific to own them.
The purchase would require US congressional approval, but Ng said that both the Trump administration and the Pentagon favored the deal.

A US Marine Corps F-35B flies above the East China Sea, Oct. 23, 2018.

"Next Gen Singapore Armed Forces will be more lethal in all domains," read a graphic shown to legislators during the defense minister's presentation.
It showed dozens of pieces of military hardware Singapore plans to have in its arsenal by 2030 as it ramps up its defense capabilities.
The US stealth fighters are the crown jewel on the list.
The Pentagon touts the F-35, with the world's most advanced avionics, engines and weaponry, as the "the most affordable, lethal, supportable and survivable aircraft ever to be used."

Regional stability
Singapore sits on the western approaches to the South China Sea.
Analysts say the country's decision to acquire F-35 technology is indicative of growing concerns within Asia regarding China's regional ambitions.
"Singapore probably does not trust China's assurances that its South China Sea claims are benign, without military intentions and will not result in China taking control of air and sea commerce," said Carl Schuster, a former director of operations at the US Pacific Command's Joint Intelligence Center.
China has claimed almost the entire 1.3-million-square-mile South China Sea as its sovereign territory.
It has aggressively asserted its stake in recent years in the face of conflicting claims from several Southeast Asian nations, building up and fortifying islands in the Spratly and Paracel chains.
The US has steadfastly contested those claims, sending warships on freedom of navigation operations near the islands and regularly flying reconnaissance -- and sometimes bomber -- flights over the South China Sea.
When it acquires the F-35s, Singapore will join US allies Australia, Japan and South Korea in operating the jets in the Pacific.
The US also has F-35s based in Japan, and they can operate off US Navy ships moving through the region.
Even the United Kingdom said earlier this year it would send an aircraft carrier with F-35s into the region in 2020.
US officials have previously dismissed the idea they are pursuing a cold war or containment policy in regards to China in the Pacific, but Singapore's decision to join the list of F-35 capable countries risks strengthening that divide between the US and China.
"Beijing should see in this development evidence that there remains strong demand in the Asia-Pacific region for a US presence," said Timothy Heath, senior defense analyst at the RAND Corp.
"The network of air forces that employ the F-35 expands the possibility that these militaries could work together in a coalition if necessary. This development can provide a robust deterrence message to China regarding its behavior in the South and East China seas," Heath said.

Coordination among allies
The F-35's advanced electronic warfare suite can allow seamless integration among allied users and that could be cause for concern in Beijing.

A new F-35B fighter jet is prepped for take off from the deck of the United Kingdom's aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2018. The jet's electronics enable close coordination between allied air forces.

Peter Layton, defense analyst at the Griffith Asia Institute in Australia, says the F-35's stealth and electronic warfare capabilities make it a "force multiplier."
F-35s are able to sneak past air defenses and send detailed targeting information to trailing planes carrying long-range missiles or to land-based anti-ship missile systems, he added.
"The acquisition may spur China to think about how it can improve its air defense network in the South China Sea and on ships to detect and target stealth aircraft such as Singapore's F-35," said Layton.
Previous F-35 purchases from US allies have prompted bravado from Chinese media.
A January report in the state-sponsored Global Times brushed away any threat from "the US F-35 friends circle" in the Asia-Pacific, with Chinese analysts saying the F-35 was no match for China's fifth-generation stealth jet, the J-20.
Yet even though the F-35 procurement sends strong signals to China, analysts agree that Singapore is sending them carefully.
Defense Minister Ng did not mention China when revealing purchase plans last week.
His presentation to Parliament said only that the jets "will significantly contribute to the (air force's) ability to safeguard Singapore's sovereignty and security."
He also said the country was being deliberate in how it acquired them, buying four with its first order and then adding up to eight others if the first batch fit requirements.

Singapore Air Force F-15SGs fighter aircraft flay as part of the National Day Parade in 2018. The jets would work in concert with the county's F-35s in the future.

'Low-key player'
The F-35s would eventually work in concert with Singapore's US-built F-15s when they replace the country's F-16s, which will be obsolete in a decade, the defense minister said.

Two Singaporean F-16s fly in formation with an F-15 in 2017. The country's defense minister says the F-16s will be obsolete by 2030.

While Singapore has been a close and longtime US ally -- it even hosts a US Navy facility -- it tends to be a low-key player in military matters.
"Despite good relations with the United States, Singapore generally remains reluctant to take a leadership role in challenging Chinese power due to its small size and depth of economic ties with China," Heath said.
Schuster added: "Singapore does not want to anger China... Singapore tends to act quietly and with nuance and subtlety."
However, the subtle approach should not be mistaken for military weakness.
Australia's Lowy Institute ranked Singapore's military power 10th among 25 Asian nations last year -- just behind Australia and ahead of larger countries like Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia.
Singapore boasts quality military hardware and strong defense relationships in the region.
"Singapore sees its role as a facilitator of regional security and stability, not as a member of any alliance directed at any particular nation," said Schuster.

Chinese Peril

Facing a bellicose Beijing, Taiwan's president issues a warning to the world
By Matt Rivers, Steven Jiang and Ben Westcott

Taipei, Taiwan -- Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen has sent out a warning to Asia in the face of mounting aggression from Beijing.
In an exclusive interview with CNN, Tsai said the military threat posed by China was growing "every day" in line with a more assertive foreign policy under its dictator Xi Jinping.
"If it's Taiwan today, people should ask who's next? Any country in the region -- if it no longer wants to submit to the will of China, they would face similar military threats," said Tsai.
Taiwan and China are separated by fewer than 130 kilometers (81 miles) at their closest point.
For seven decades, the two have maintained an uneasy truce following their split at the end of a destructive civil war in 1949.
Annexation is a long-term aim for China's ruling Communist Party, which considers democratic Taiwan -- an island of 23 million people -- to be a renegade country.
But it was the election of Tsai and her pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 2016 which sent relations between the two governments spiraling.
Beijing has placed mounting diplomatic and economic pressure on Taiwan, conducting live-fire drills in nearby seas and flew H-6K bombers and surveillance aircraft around the island.
"With China becoming increasingly strong and ambitious, we are faced with growing threats," Tsai said.
"Our challenge is whether our independent existence, security, prosperity and democracy can be maintained. This is the biggest issue for Taiwan."
Taiwan's unofficial ally the United States has for decades acted as the island's security guarantee against the threat of Chinese military action. 

But when asked directly, Tsai wouldn't be drawn on whether she believed US President Donald Trump would come to her aid.
Instead the Taiwan leader said she is focused on strengthening Taiwan's own defense capabilities in the face of an "imbalanced war," as China's military modernizes.
"We have to be prepared at all times," she said.
CNN has reached out to the China's Taiwan Affairs Office for comment.

Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen in conversation with CNN's Matt Rivers on February 18.

Growing threats
As the first woman to be elected Taiwan's leader, Tsai was carried into office on a swell of anti-Beijing sentiment following attempts by the Kuomintang party to move closer to China.
But her popularity has fallen steadily in the face of domestic opposition to her policies and a struggling Taiwan economy battling to keep up with the mainland.
In November Tsai's DPP suffered a bruising defeat in local elections, losing by as much as 10% across the island. 

Tsai said the 2018 result was due to what she called a "challenging" domestic reform agenda.
"The people don't feel the result of the reform so much when you've just started," she said.

Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen will run for re-election in 2020

The setback has not deterred Tsai who revealed to CNN she would stand for re-election in 2020. 

"It's natural that any sitting president wants to do more for the country."
Xi Jinping is unlikely to welcome a second term for Tsai. 

Since she came to power, the Chinese government has increasingly tried to exert pressure on Taiwan, known officially as the Republic of China, to unify with the People's Republic of China, as the mainland is officially known.
In January, Xi Jinping called for the "peaceful reunification" of China and Taiwan in a speech, warning that Taiwan independence was a "dead end."
"We make no promise to renounce the use of force," the Chinese leader said.
Tsai said Xi's January speech had caused concern within Taiwan. 

She said the island refused to become another Hong Kong or Macau -- both semi-autonomous cities under Beijing's rule.
"(The speech) has alarmed us that Taiwan's independent existence may be changed," she said.
But Tsai said the threats and intimidation out of Beijing are counter-productive to Xi's goals, and serve only to push the island further away from the Communist Party and strengthen support for democracy.
"China may feel such (pressure) would create a sense of failure for people in Taiwan and deal a blow on our morale. But every such move has only further upset and alienated Taiwanese people," she said.
"China's behavior has only backfired in Taiwan."

Xi Jinping (L) and US President Donald Trump review Chinese honour guards in Beijing on November 9, 2017.

Warmer ties with President Trump
In January Taiwan held military drills intended to ready its troops in the event of an invasion from the mainland. 

Photos showed dramatic images of helicopters and artillery launchers conducting live-fire exercises.
Tsai said she was strengthening Taiwan's military capabilities in the face of China's rapid modernization. 

She said Taiwan was "on alert 24/7" for the first sign of a Chinese strike.
"What we are expecting is, after withstanding the first wave of Chinese attacks ourselves, the rest of the world would stand up to exert strong pressure on China," she said.

Taiwan holds military drills to halt invasion amid rising China tensions

While Tsai did not say it specifically, it's likely any pressure exerted on China will come from Washington. 

For years, the United States has provided a tacit guarantee of protection from Beijing.
Under Trump, the relationship between Washington and Taipei has grown closer with expanded weapons sales and greater support from US politicians.
In 2018 Trump signed into law the Taiwan Travel Act, encouraging "visits between officials of the United States and Taiwan at all levels." 

Months later, the US approved the sale of submarine parts to Taiwan.
In June, the US opened a new, $255 million de facto embassy on the island, known as the American Institute in Taiwan.
Many leaders around the world have criticized President Trump for focusing on domestic US interests at the expense of the international community but Tsai said she didn't see it that way.
"Any president has to take multiple factors into consideration when making decisions, especially domestic decisions. That's why President Trump has been emphasizing 'America First'," she said.

Trump broke decades of protocol and took a brief congratulatory call from Tsai upon his election in 2016, but the two have yet to meet in person.
There is an outside chance that could change this year. 

A group of US lawmakers, led by well-known China hardliner Marco Rubio, have asked US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to invite Tsai to address a joint meeting of the US Congress.
But Tsai declined to say whether she would accept an invitation to speak, a move that should it go ahead would be sure to infuriate China.
"It's not a simple question of invitation and acceptance," said Tsai. 

"Whether or not to go deliver a speech in Washington would depend on whether such a move benefits Taiwan, our relations with the US and regional stability."
The US has been careful, at least publicly, to adhere to a so-called "one China" policy, acknowledging Beijing's assertion that Taiwan is part of China, as well as the People's Republic's status as the sole legitimate government of China. 

It is this policy that sees the US base its embassy in Beijing, but not in Taipei.
But Washington has also maintained deliberate ambiguity on the status of Taiwan, only encouraging both sides to engage in dialogue to settle their long-running disputes.

Tsai meets with her constituents on a street in the capital Taipei on February 18.

Caught in the middle
Trump's foreign policy hasn't all been good news for Taiwan. 

As the US President tries to drive down the trade deficit, Taiwan has become caught in the middle of a US-China trade war.
"There's a lot of trade and economic flow between Taiwan and the US as well as investment and trade with China," said Tsai. 

"We have to make sure that we can lessen the impact of any kind of uncertainty on Taiwan's economy."
Tsai said with no clear end to the trade dispute in sight, she was taking actions to protect Taiwan, including government spending to stimulate domestic consumption and investment.
"So that the growth of our economy can be driven by domestic demand instead of an over reliance on exports," said Tsai.
But while the trade war may cause difficulties for Taiwan's exports, it could present an opportunity for the island's tech sector.
The US is currently ramping up its opposition to Chinese technology, in particular the telecoms giant Huawei, over concerns of potential security threats.
Both US Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have warned countries that using Chinese 5G mobile phone technology will make it more difficult to work with the US.
Tsai said that unlike Chinese products, other countries had no such security concerns about Taiwan's technology. 

"Taiwan is a very secure location for the manufacture of such products," she said.
"We manufacture and design a lot of high-tech products such as semiconductors and we rank in the front in terms of worldwide production."

Taiwan faces down China
Throughout her interview, Tsai painted the picture of Taiwan as an underdog facing down the growing might of Beijing, the first line of defense for the liberal, democratic world order.
"If a vibrant democracy that champions universal values and follows international rules were destroyed by China, it would be a huge setback for global democracy," she said.
Set against that backdrop, military tensions between Taiwan, China and the US have continued to rise.

China and Taiwan clash in Lunar New Year military propaganda videos

On January 2019, Washington sent two guided missile destroyers, the USS McCampbell and USNS Walter S. Diehl, through the Taiwan Strait in a message of defiance to Beijing.
In February, China's People's Liberation Army issued a propaganda video juxtaposing images of Chinese jets and bombers with famous landmarks across Taiwan.
In reply, the Taiwan military posted dramatic footage of soldiers, tanks and explosions, followed by a simple message -- "On standby 24/7."
Tsai said China wants to become a "global hegemony" and if Xi's attention turns to expansion outside of the country's borders, Taiwan would be "first to be hit."
"I believe this is not just an issue of Taiwan under attack, but a reflection of China's willingness to use force for its expansionist policy," she said.
"It's not just Taiwan's interests at stake, it's the whole region's or even the whole world's."

Egyptian billionaire: President Trump is right about China

• Egyptian billionaire Naguib Sawiris said President Trump is right in saying that China has taken advantage of other countries.
• He said other countries are justified in their concerns that Chinese telecommunications equipment maker Huawei could be a security risk.

By Everett Rosenfeld

Egyptian billionaire: The world's political situation has 'never been worse

Egyptian billionaire Naguib Sawiris didn't mince words in his evaluation of the ongoing trade war between the U.S. and China and the security concerns about Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei.
Beijing has long taken advantage of other countries and U.S. President Donald Trump is right to seek changes out of Asia's largest economy, he told CNBC's Hadley Gamble on Tuesday.
"President Trump is right about that: This has been a long time where we closed eyes on China raping us. So, by the time you come and tell them, 'You need to change,' I mean, they just used to be so comfortable and do whatever they want," he said.

Overall, he said, "the political situation in the whole world has never been worse."

"People expect wars ... whether it's a trade war or its a real war," Sawiris said, noting a list of geopolitical hot spots including "the Middle East in disarray" and China pressuring Taiwan. 

"It's just not like a very stable world today."

Concerns about Huawei are justified
Sawiris, who has vast telecommunications holdings, also weighed in on the drama around Chinese equipment maker Huawei.
Since 2012, Huawei, the world's largest maker of networking equipment, has been barred from selling those products in the U.S. on the explanation of security concerns by the U.S. government.

Naguib Sawiris, chairman and chief executive officer of Orascom Telecom Media and Technology Holding.

"I think there is genuine concern, and I think it's justified," the Egyptian billionaire told CNBC on Tuesday. 

"It's actually taking the West very long to — I mean, you know, telecom was my domain — to get worried. I think they should be worried."
Now, several other countries have taken Washington's lead and moved toward banning Huawei products from being used in their own development of 5G tech — the next generation of ultra-high speed internet.
Sawiris warned that such concerns, although justified, may eventually lead to technological silos between countries.
"I don't know how we'll remedy that because that will apply then to everyone: If I'm Chinese, I might not any take equipment from Motorola, for example," Sawiris said.

Chinese Aggressions

The UK’s shift in attitude to the threat of China
By James Forsyth

Defence secretary Gavin Williamson



Gavin Williamson’s speech today is another demonstration of how the UK government’s attitude to China has changed.
In the Cameron Osborne era, the UK was determined to be China’s best friend in the West.
All the emphasis was on creating a ‘golden era’ in Anglo-Chinese relations.
But now, the government strikes a more realistic tone on China.
In his speech today, Williamson brackets China with Russia as a threat.
The headlines today have been about Williamson’s decision to send the UK’s new aircraft carrier, carrying both US and UK jets, to the Pacific in a message to Beijing.
But just as telling is the emphasis that Williamson places on various alliances.
He talks about the Five Eyes—the intelligence sharing agreement between the US, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand—which is at the forefront of efforts to deal with Chinese intellectual property theft. 
Williamson also stresses the UK’s growing closeness to Japan, South Korea and India—three countries that are vital to any attempt to balance and contain Chinese power in Asia.
The government’s shift in thinking on China is sensible.
Ultimately, the UK will not benefit from a world in which China’s power grows unchecked.

Europe’s Future Is as China’s Enemy

The continent can save NATO—but only if it takes Washington’s side in its growing struggle with Beijing.
BY STEPHEN M. WALT

Xi Jinping speaks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel at the G-20 summit in Hangzhou, China, on Sept. 4, 2016. 

If NATO were a listed stock, would now be a good time to short it? 

According to the New York Times, U.S. President Donald Trump has told his aides repeatedly that he would like to withdraw the United States from the alliance. 

The U.S. foreign-policy establishment promptly got the vapors at this news, with former Undersecretary of Defense Michèle Flournoy declaring that such a step “would destroy 70-plus years of painstaking work across multiple administrations, Republican and Democratic, to create perhaps the most powerful and advantageous alliance in history.” 

Even though NATO’s original rationale evaporated when the Soviet Union imploded, it continues to be the most sacred of cows inside America’s policy elite.
But Trump isn’t the real problem, even though his vulgar, vain, erratic, and needlessly offensive behavior has made a difficult situation worse and to no apparent benefit. 

Rather, the real problem began as soon as the Soviet Union collapsed because it removed the principle rationale for a deep U.S. commitment to European security.
Remember, an alliance such as NATO isn’t a country club whose members just like to hang out together, eat nice meals at annual summits, and talk about world affairs. 

At its core, NATO is a formal commitment to send one’s citizens to fight and possibly die to defend other members of the alliance. 

Such a pledge should be offered and maintained only when doing so is vital to one’s own security.
So forget all the pious rhetoric about “shared values,” a “rules-based order,” and a “trans-Atlantic community”—because that is mostly just window dressing. 

The real reason the United States got deeply involved in European security in the past is because it thought it was in the country’s interest to prevent any single state from dominating Europe and controlling its abundant industrial might. 

The United States entered World War I and II in good part to prevent Germany from achieving that goal because U.S. leaders feared that such a state might be more powerful than America and might try to interfere in the Western Hemisphere in ways they would find inconvenient or dangerous.
The same logic explains why the United States helped form NATO in 1949 and kept several hundred thousand U.S. troops in Europe for much of the Cold War. 

The aim was to prevent the Soviet Union from conquering Europe, absorbing its economic and military potential, and using this enhanced capacity against the United States. 

Doing most of the heavy lifting to protect Europe was not an act of philanthropy on America’s part because containing Soviet expansion was very much in its self-interest.
The core strategic challenge facing NATO today is structural: There is no potential hegemon in Europe today, and none is likely to emerge anytime soon. 

In other words, there is no country that has the combination of population, economic might, and military power that would allow it to take over and govern the continent and mobilize all that potential power. 

Germany’s population is too small (and is declining and aging), and its armed forces are much too weak. 

Russia is not the wreck it was in the 1990s, but it is still a pale shadow of the former Soviet Union, and its long-term economic prospects are not bright.
Moreover, Russia’s population is currently about 140 million (and is projected to decline as well), while NATO’s European members have a combined population in excess of 500 million. 

NATO Europe has a combined GDP exceeding $15 trillion; Russia’s is less than $2 trillion. 

To put it differently, Russia’s economy is smaller than Italy’s. 

And don’t forget that NATO’s European members spend three to four times more than Russia does on defense every year. 

They don’t spend it very effectively, of course, but the idea that Europe lacks the wherewithal to defend itself against Russia simply does not stand up to close scrutiny. 

Need I also mention that France and the United Kingdom also have nuclear weapons?
Given all that, it is far from obvious why the United States cannot gradually turn the defense of Europe back over to the Europeans. 

Faced with such awkward realities, NATO’s die-hard defenders point out that America’s NATO allies have demonstrated their value by fighting with the United States in places like Afghanistan. 

There is no question that they have sacrificed money and lives in this joint effort, and Americans should be grateful for their contributions. 

But allied support was never essential: The United States did most of the heavy lifting and could have fought the entire war on its own had it wished. (It is worth remembering that the George W. Bush administration declined European offers to help during the initial toppling of the Taliban because it understood that working with its NATO partners would have impeded the U.S. operation.)
By contrast, none of America’s NATO allies can presently undertake any serious military action without significant support from Uncle Sam. 

For this reason, NATO today is more protectorate than partnership, which is why Trump keeps asking whether being in the alliance is still in America’s interest. 

And he’s hardly the first U.S. leader to issue forceful complaints about Europe’s unwillingness to take greater responsibility for its own defense. 

In 2011, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates predicted that NATO would face a “dim if not dismal future” if its European members didn’t do more, warning that “there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress — and in the American body politic writ large — to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling … to be serious and capable partners in their own defense.” 

Barack Obama voiced similar concerns in June 2014, even as he sought to rebalance U.S. forces to Asia.
No wonder Europeans are genuinely worried that the United States might leave. 

U.S. leaders have flirted with this idea in the past (as in the Mansfield Amendment of 1971), but threats to withdraw were never very credible so long as the Cold War continued. 

They are today, however, and the Europeans know it.
Meanwhile, China’s rise continues to draw U.S. attention away from Europe and toward Asia, and there is no reason to think that this trend will stop. 

China is likely to be a more formidable rival than the Soviet Union ever was, so one suspects that America’s willingness to commit substantial resources to Europe’s defense will continue to decline.
There is one final rationale for a continued U.S. commitment to Europe, however, although both Americans and Europeans are often reluctant to acknowledge it openly. 

As Josef Joffe noted in Foreign Policy some years ago, the U.S. presence in NATO has long served as Europe’s “pacifier.” 

As long as the United States was fully engaged in Europe and central to NATO, rivalries inside the alliance were muted, and there was little danger that they might turn into full-fledged security competition. 

If the United States were to withdraw, however, European foreign policies might gradually renationalize, opening the door to renewed suspicion, arms races, and possibly even war at some point in a more distant future.
Such views run counter to claims that a half-century of peace and the creation of the European Union have transcended old-style national rivalries, created a new European identity, and rendered war in Europe unthinkable. 

But given political trends in Europe today—and in particular, the re-emergence of powerful nationalist sentiments in several countries—such optimism seems much less reassuring. 

From a European perspective, therefore, keeping the United States in would provide a residual guarantee against the re-emergence of major-power competition among EU member states and a bit more reassurance against a resurgent Russia, at least in the short to medium term.
Put all these factors together, and one can see the vague outline of a new trans-Atlantic bargain. Looking ahead, the United States is going to focus primarily on China. 

Washington will want Europe to take charge of its own defense so that the United States can devote more resources to Asia, but it will also want to make sure that Europe’s economic dealings with China do not help Beijing compete more effectively with the United States. 

In particular, the United States will want Europe to deny China access to sophisticated technologies with military applications and equipment (such as the diesel-electric engines that currently propel some Chinese submarines) that could be used by the Chinese armed forces. 

For their part, NATO’s European members will want the United States to remain part of the alliance (and in an ideal world, to stop doing dumb things such as abandoning the Iran nuclear deal or the Paris climate accord).
Presto—there’s your new trans-Atlantic bargain. 

The United States agrees to remain a formal member of NATO, though its overall military contribution will gradually decline and a European commander will eventually assume the role of supreme allied commander in Europe. 

In exchange, NATO’s European members agree to restrict Chinese access to advanced technology and to refrain from selling them goods that might have direct military applications. 

In short, it means recreating something akin to the old CoCom system that limited technology transfers to the Soviet Union.
I’m by no means convinced this idea would work and not even sure it would be desirable. 

The Cold War CoCom system was a source of considerable trans-Atlantic friction, and the new bargain would require convincing NATO’s European members to forgo some lucrative economic opportunities. 

For these and other reasons, I’ve previously maintained that NATO’s European members would be reluctant to help the United States balance against China and that this issue would eventually become a further source of rancor between the United States and its European partners. 

After all, China is a long way from Europe, and Sino-American competition will mostly play out in Asia, where Europe has little reason to get involved.
But I’m not so sure about that anymore. 

European concerns about Chinese ambitions have grown in recent years, as have their fears about a total U.S. withdrawal. 

And if the United States is really serious about limiting China’s power, having Europe on board—at least in the economic realm—would obviously be desirable. 

So this arrangement might provide NATO with a strategic rationale it has lacked since 1992 and keep the trans-Atlantic partnership going for a bit longer. 

Heck, it might even be enough to convince Trump to stop bad-mouthing NATO every chance he gets. But I wouldn’t bet the farm on that either.

Chinese Peril

China’s advances seen to pose increasing threat to American military dominance

By Missy Ryan and Paul Sonne

The Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning takes part in military drill in the western Pacific on April 18, 2018. 

China’s drive to acquire cutting-edge weaponry and establish itself as a global military power poses an increasing threat to American defense superiority, a new intelligence report said Tuesday.
The Defense Intelligence Agency’s first public report on Chinese military capability reflects mounting concern within the U.S. government that the United States is not moving quickly enough to respond to Beijing’s rapid military rise or its efforts to dominate American allies in the Pacific.
“During the past decade alone, from counter-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden, to an expanded military presence in the East and South China Seas, China has demonstrated a willingness to use the [People’s Liberation Army] as an instrument of national power in the execution of what they call their historic mission in the new century,” Dan Taylor, a senior DIA analyst, told reporters at the Pentagon.
The assessment by the Pentagon’s intelligence agency comes as the U.S. military begins reshaping itself to counter powers such as China and Russia after nearly two decades of focusing on counterinsurgency and anti-terrorism operations. 

Though then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis released a new national defense strategy in January 2018 outlining the goals, the Pentagon is still working on implementing them, with officials promising that proof of the transformation will be visible in the department’s 2020 budget request, which is due out next month.
Acting defense secretary Patrick Shanahan has made the effort to outpace China a central aim of his tenure since joining the Pentagon as the deputy defense secretary in 2017. 

A former Boeing executive, Shanahan oversaw the 2020 budget request, which he has called a “masterpiece” designed to show how the U.S. military is reorienting itself toward China and Russia.
The DIA report places a new emphasis on the impact of China’s emerging status as a global military player, following Beijing’s establishment of permanent external facilities in the Horn of Africa and the South China Sea.
According to the report, China’s Communist Party leaders remain largely focused on preserving internal stability. 

But they also are increasingly concerned with dominance across East Asia, driven in large part by Beijing’s goal of reunification with Taiwan.
China has sought to demonstrate regional primacy by challenging other nations’ claims to disputed islands in the South China and East China seas, and building its first-ever locally designed and produced aircraft carrier. 

It has also developed new long-range bomber capabilities and constructed military outposts in disputed areas, allowing it to project military power in new ways.
Outside of Asia, China established its first foreign military base, in Djibouti, and used naval assets to evacuate civilians from Yemen.
Beijing has powered its advances with massive increases in its military budget, which grew at an average annual rate of 10 percent from 2000 to 2016, the DIA said. 

While the rate of China’s spending growth has slowed, it remains robust at up to 7 percent a year.
The report also said that China has acquired technology “by any means available” in its long-running effort to modernize its armed forces, an effort the DIA said has put the Chinese military “on the verge of fielding some of the most modern weapon systems in the world.”
Defense officials say that two areas where China may be pulling ahead of the United States are hypersonic glide vehicles and intermediate- and long-range missiles.
China is developing additional capabilities that can be used to attack and jam satellites after testing an antisatellite missile system in 2014, according to the DIA, which said Beijing also was researching and possibly developing antisatellite lasers.
In cyberspace, the Chinese may be combining cyberreconnaissance, cyberattack and cyberdefense into one organization known as the Strategic Support Force, which could centralize command and control and reduce bureaucracy in cyberwarfare, according to the report. 

Beijing has identified controlling the “information domain” as a prerequisite to achieving victory in modern war, the report says.
China is also overhauling its defense industrial base to help deliver cutting-edge technologies to Chinese forces and at times sell them to others. 

Among the disciplines the DIA says China has targeted for development are hypersonic missiles, nanotechnology, high-performance computing, quantum communications, space systems, artificial intelligence, autonomous systems and robotics.

China should think twice before sinking US aircraft carriers

By Jerry Hendrix

Sinking US aircraft carriers will resolve tension in South China Sea, says Chinese admiral

China is betraying a level of strategic anxiety not yet seen as the impact of trade tariffs looms and its return to its historical power role in the Asia seems to have stalled.
On Dec. 20, Chinese Rear Adm. Lou Yuan, while speaking at a military trade conference, announced that what the United States feared most was casualties and that the easiest way to defeat China’s main rival was to sink two American supercarriers, killing over 10,000 sailors in the process. 

When that has happened, Admiral Lou announced, then “we’ll see how frightened America is.”
Lou’s statements were followed just a few days later by Chinese dictator Xi Jinping who threateningly said China “reserves the option of taking all necessary measures” to ensure “peaceful reunification” with Taiwan, a democracy that has governed itself apart from China since 1949. 

Xi added that Beijing was willing to “fight the bloody battle against our enemies,” and menacingly predicted: “Reunification is the historical trend and the right path, Taiwan independence is ... a dead end.”
This is a stark escalation of language. 

Taken with other examples of bellicose rhetoric that have increasingly issued from Beijing officials, it is clear that Xi Jinping and his supporters have been badly rattled by the recent events.
China’s leaders assumed after the 2008 global financial crisis that the Communist, centrally controlled economic state’s time had come. 

It would regain its historic role in the region. 

It could cast off the cloak of a peaceful rise to assume a hegemonic role in the Asia-Pacific region.
But Xi and his followers have watched their diplomatic, economic and military initiatives come up short, engendering increased resistance from other Indo-Pacific nations rather than the realignment China had expected. 

Now the Trump administration’s trade tariffs threaten to destabilize the Chinese economy, resulting in a cascade failure of Xi Jinping’s broader strategy and threatening to undermine the legitimacy of the Communist Party, hence the stronger and more strident attacks.
China’s desperate attempts to regain the momentum, however, betray an ignorance of the American culture.
China perceived the lack of strategic focus of the George W. Bush administration and the passive “lead from behind” foreign policy of the Obama administration as American decay and decline. 

 In reality, the foundational aspects of the American economy remain surprisingly strong and the American fighting spirit is not dead -- merely sleeping. 

Those who would believe that the sinking of two aircraft carriers would trigger an impulse toward retreat would do well to make themselves aware of the United States’ history and the impact events such as the sinking of the Lusitania, the attack on Pearl Harbor and the collapse of the World Trade Center had on the national psyche. 

What some have labeled the Jacksonian impulse could be described as a tendency toward great power rage. 

To be sure, it burns itself out. 

After all, the U.S. is considering leaving Afghanistan, 17 years later.
But make no mistake: Any attack upon a single U.S. aircraft carrier by long-range aircraft, cruise missiles or ballistic missiles would surely generate a response against the bases from which those weapons were launched, the sensors associated with them and the command-and-control nodes that directed them, and then the United States would turn its attention on the Chinese naval and merchant fleet.
Before China knew what was happening, it would be cut off from the overseas sources of energy and raw materials that fuel its import/export economy. 

Within weeks it would be without fuel and its factories would be shuttered. 

The American economy, established in a nation that has most resources domestically available, would be able to ride out the storm, even if China attempted to climb the escalation ladder and attack targets in North America.
For China, it is better to get its more bellicose voices under control and approach the bargaining table with the United States over trade issues in good faith and with an openness to real compromise on the economic issues that divide our two nations, rather than resorting to nationalist saber rattling.
Xi Jinping should try harder to understand his real strategic position while remembering that he who rides the tiger finds it difficult to dismount. 

There will be no return to global hegemony or Middle Kingdom status. 

China brought its candle out from under the basket too soon, and its broader, aggressive ambitions have been revealed.
As for the United States, it should follow the lead of President Trump and his new acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan, who between them have identified that we are in an era of great power competition that will require more effort and that the focus of that competition is China, and China and China.

If forced to take sides, most countries would pick the US over China

By Huileng Tan

As the changing nature of the U.S.-China relationship reshapes global political and economic landscapes, many countries are wondering if they'll eventually be forced to take sides.
If it comes to that, many will choose to align themselves with America, according to Fraser Howie, an independent analyst who has written books about China and its financial system.
"They're going to go with the States," he told CNBC on Wednesday.
Although much of Asia has become wealthier on the back of China's economic rise since the start of the communist country's reforms 40 years ago, the East Asian giant has not managed to grow its soft power much, Howie told CNBC's "Street Signs."
"In 30 years of growth, much of Asia (has become) rich on the back of China, (but) they've failed to make friends. I think this is a weakness of Chinese soft power — they've failed to make friends and people are more nervous of China rather than friendly towards it," he said.
China's rise from an impoverished country to the world's second-largest economy in the span of 40 years has emboldened the Asian country to expand its footprint economically, politically and technologically. 

Many see that development as a threat to the U.S. that could bring about a seismic change in the world order Washington helped shape.
"China's goal, simply put, is to replace the U.S. as the world's largest global superpower," FBI Director Christopher Wray said at a press conference in December where the U.S. Justice Department announced hacking charges against two Chinese nationals.
U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is currently locked in a bitter dispute with Beijing that has the two sides arguing over not just the tariffs and non-tariff barriers affecting the balance of trade, but also how they fundamentally treat each other's companies.

President Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.

That means businesses, as well, may have to decide on which side they choose to align themselves, the co-founder of billion-dollar tech company Tradeshift told CNBC last month.
Countries neighboring China — many of which are small — may not want to antagonize Beijing, Howie said, but many people feel they have been "hard done" by China.
"They don't feel that China has played fair in many areas. They feel China is a bully — and certainly it is — and they are using it as an opportunity to try and push back," Howie said.
Even so, many nations around the world that find themselves in a delicate balancing act between U.S. and Chinese interests may be forced to pick a side.
Meanwhile, many allies and partners of the U.S. — and even departing Secretary of Defense James Mattis — have expressed frustration that the Trump administration has not treated international commitments as well as they'd have liked.
"It makes it very difficult for many of the countries, especially in (Southeast Asia), because so many countries in Asia have largely dismissed politics as it was; there's been an economic direction of travel that everyone has been comfortable with for 20, 30 years — and that's now fundamentally changing," said Howie.
One country that has openly expressed concern is Singapore.
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told CNBC in October last year that his country's relationship with the world's top two economies also "depends on how the U.S. relationship with China develops."
"If there are tensions between America and China, we will be asked to pick a side. It may not be directly, but you will get the message that: 'We would like you to be with us, and are you with us? If not, does that mean you're against us?' And that's to put it gently," Lee said.
Countries would ideally not have to take sides, but that may not pan out, said Howie: "There should be room for cooperation and there certainly needs to be a change of practices, but the world is going to look very different in a decade."

American Recklessness

Amazed at lack of concern over grave threats from China: FBI official
By MIKE LEVINE and LEE FERRAN

In the past six months alone, U.S. news outlets and other publications have unleashed several hundred articles spotlighting the robust cyber-espionage threat the U.S. says is emanating from China. 

Congress has also held open hearings on the matter, and Trump administration officials have traveled the country to publicly warn Americans of the growing danger.
But the message has yet to be sufficiently received, the FBI's top counterintelligence official told senators on Wednesday, during another congressional hearing on the issue.
FBI Assistant Director Bill Priestap said he is still amazed at the lack of understanding of the gravity of the threat among those being targeted the most by China.
"This is the most severe counterintelligence threat facing our nation today," Priestap said during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. 

"What hangs in the balance is not just the future of the U.S., but the future of the world."
The committee's chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said public focus on "all things Russia" for the past two years has "distracted attention from arguably a greater, more existential threat: China's efforts to overtake the United States as the world's preeminent superpower in all phases of society."
Priestap and two other senior U.S. officials painted a dire picture of China's aim to overcome U.S. innovations through both legal and illegal means – leveraging everything from corporate takeovers, to cyber-espionage, to "leaning on" Chinese nationals in U.S. tech firms and at educational institutions.

Bill Priestap, assistant director of the FBI's counterintelligence division, testifies before a Senate Judiciary Committee.

Priestap noted that he recently visited three states to meet with business leaders there about the cyberthreat facing their companies.
"On the one hand, I was amazed at some of those business leaders' understanding of the way the threat is working today. On the other hand, with different business leaders, I was amazed at the lack of understanding of the gravity, capabilities [and] methodologies of China," he said.
Testifying beside Priestap, the head of the Justice Department's National Security Division, Assistant Attorney General John Demers, pointed to four ongoing court cases against Chinese nationals involved in plots to steal trade or military secrets from the United States.
Meanwhile, underscoring his own concerns, Priestap cited surveys showing that – when people around the world are asked to name the nation states presenting the biggest national security risks to the home countries – China is always "toward the bottom." 

And he said, "There's still work to be done by the U.S. government in messaging to the American people the gravity of the threat we're facing."
"Again, there are pockets of great understanding of the threat we're facing, and effective responses," he added. 

"But in my opinion, we've got to knit that together better. We need more people in government, more people in business, more people in academia pulling in the same direction to combat this threat effectively."
The key, he said, is "raising awareness of the threat," including ensuring that business and academic institutions know how they're being targeted, and informing the public about security risks to their data and efforts by foreign governments to influence Americans online.
Wednesday's hearing came a day after a U.S. official told ABC News that the Justice Department is preparing additional indictments against Chinese cyber-spies, as first reported by The Wall Street Journal.
Past ABC News reports have detailed purported Chinese thefts of technology related to everything from advanced fighter aircraft to corn seeds.

The Empire Strikes Back

Japan to get first aircraft carrier since second world war amid China concerns

By Justin McCurry in Tokyo

Japan is to upgrade two of its existing Izumo-class helicopter carriers.

Japan is to acquire at least one aircraft carrier for the first time since the second world war, as it attempts to counter Chinese maritime expansion in the Pacific ocean.
The government will upgrade its two existing Izumo-class helicopter carriers so they can transport and launch fighter jets, according to media reports. 

The plans are expected to be included in new defence guidelines due to be released next month.
This week the Nikkei business paper reported that Japan was poised to buy 100 F-35 stealth jets from the US at a cost of more than US$8.8bn, a year after President Donald Trump urged Tokyo to buy more US-made military equipment.
The reported order is in addition to 42 F-35 jets it has already bought from the US.

Japan’s prime minister, Shinzo Abe, told President Trump in September that high-spec military equipment would be “important to strengthen Japan’s defences”.
By refitting its two 248-metre-long Izumo-class vessels, which can each carry up to 14 helicopters, Japan would in effect be acquiring its first aircraft carriers since the end of the war.
Previous Japanese governments have ruled out acquiring aircraft carriers, adhering to the postwar consensus that the vessels’ capabilities could be interpreted as offensive, in a possible violation of the country’s “pacifist” constitution.
In its latest defence white paper, Japan noted that China had acquired and built aircraft carriers to enable it to expand into Pacific waters near Japan’s outlying south-western islands.
Increased Chinese naval activity in waters far from its shores has added to bilateral tensions over Japan's Senkaku islands.
“It’s desirable that the Izumo can be used for multiple purposes,” the defence minister, Takeshi Iwaya, told reporters this week.
The carriers will be deployed to defend Japan’s remote south-western islands, according to the Mainichi Shimbun.
The defence white paper, published in August, also voiced concern about Chinese military spending and naval activity in the South China Sea.

Panama the new flashpoint in China's growing presence in Latin America

A spat over the site of China’s embassy has underlined the strategic value of the canal – through which two-thirds of ships to or from the US pass
By Mat Youkee in Panama City

Jutting four kilometres into the Pacific, the Amador causeway islands separate the concrete and glass skyline of Panama City from the entrance to the Panama Canal. 

Jutting four kilometres into the Pacific, the Amador causeway islands separate the concrete and glass skyline of Panama City from the soaring iron arch of the Bridge of the Americas – under which 40 cargo ships pass each day en route to or from the Panama Canal.
Linked to the mainland by a slender causeway, these strategic outcrops are home to a handful of derelict buildings once used to house US military personnel.
But they have become a new flashpoint in the global rivalry between Beijing and Washington, as the US struggles to develop a coherent strategy to deal with China’s rising influence in Latin America.

China’s plans to build a new embassy on the islands were derailed after US officials pressured the government of Panama’s president, Juan Carlos Varela, to withdraw its offer of a four-hectare plot, according to senior Panamanian and diplomatic sources.
“Of course there was pushback from the US: they weren’t going to allow a huge Chinese flag next to the entrance to the canal,” a diplomatic source told the Guardian. 

“But local pressure was also important. Handing over that land to the Chinese would have been a hugely unpopular move by the Varela government.”
Panama’s government has insisted that the decision was based on security and environmental concerns.
But a previous plan to build a new Chinese embassy in the traditional diplomatic district of Panama City was also blocked by objections from Washington, and Beijing has now established a temporary mission in an office block.
The incident may prove to be a pyrrhic victory for Washington, however. 

This weekend, Chinese dictator Xi Jinping arrives in Panama for a visit aimed at cementing ties with the Central American nation.
It will be the first such visit by a senior Chinese figure since Panama cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan to open formal relations with Beijing in June 2017.
Since then, the two countries have signed 28 diplomatic and investment agreements, a $500m renminbi-denominated “Panda” bond is expected before the end of the year and Chinese contractors have won major contracts for a port, convention centre and a new bridge over the canal.
The growth of Chinese investment and influence in the country has been the source of growing unease in Washington.

President Juan Carlos Varela, left, and the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, talk at the presidential palace in Panama City. 

In July, the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, ended a visit to Panama with the warning that “when China comes calling, it’s not always to the good of your citizens”. 

He added that state-run Chinese firms operated with political, rather than market-driven motives.
Xi’s visit comes amid an escalating trade war between China and the US, which has highlighted Panama’s strategic importance as a pinch-point of world commerce.
Two-thirds of ships to or from the US pass through the Panama Canal – which was an unincorporated territory of the US between 1903 and 1979 and was home to dozens of American military installations.
“Recent rhetoric from Washington suggests the US has not accepted that the canal has shifted from being a military asset to a commercial one,” said Eddie Tapiero, a competitive intelligence specialist for the Panama Canal Authority and author of a new book on China-Panama relations. 

Negotiations for a free trade agreement between China and Panama are at an advanced stage; Panamanian officials say the country can benefit from its growing role as a regional logistics hub, build its exports to China and protect local farmers.
“We will become the gateway for Chinese goods into Latin America,” the trade minister, Augusto Arosemena, told the Guardian. 

“I think Panama will be an example of how smaller countries can negotiate with China.”
Meanwhile, the US has been caught flatfooted: diplomats were unaware of Varela’s decision to establish ties with Beijing until hours before its announcement and the state department has yet to name a replacement for John Feeley, who stood down as ambassador in March.

In recent years, Beijing has shown growing interest in strategic infrastructure projects in the region: Chinese companies are involved in a project to build a rival interoceanic canal through Nicaragua and investigated the option of a “dry canal” railroad linking Colombia’s Atlantic and Pacific coasts.
Some Panamanians are also wary of Bejing’s intentions, said Euclides Tapia, a professor of international relations at the University of Panama. 

“The Chinese are here for the long term – and they’ve come for the canal,” he said.