The Necessary War

Sen. Lindsey Graham: "Accept the pain that comes with trade between US and China"
By Andrew O'Reilly 

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said on Sunday that Democrats should not criticize President Trump for taking on China over trade as they have complained for years about Beijing’s policies but done nothing.
“Every Democrat and every Republican of note has said China cheats,” Graham said on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.” 

“The Democrats for years have been claiming that China should be stood up to, now President Trump is and we’ve just got to accept the pain that comes with standing up to China.”
Graham added: “To my Democratic colleagues: he’s doing the things you’ve been calling for all these years.”
Graham’s comments come as President Trump faced a tense reception from his counterparts on the world stage as they gathered in a French beach resort for the Group of Seven summit.
President Trump suggested during a breakfast meeting with United Kingdom Prime Minister Boris Johnson that he harbored qualms about the spiraling conflict. 

"Yeah. For sure," he told reporters when asked if he had any second thoughts about ramping up tariffs on China after Beijing imposed new tariffs to retaliate against earlier tariff moves by the U.S.

Then hours later, however, White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham issued a statement saying the news media had "greatly misinterpreted" President Trump's response. 

Grisham said the president only responded "in the affirmative -- because he regrets not raising the tariffs higher."
President Trump had been trying to use the summit to rally the other leaders to do more to stimulate their economies, as fears rise of a potential slowdown in the U.S. before he stands for reelection in November 2020.

The meetings come days after President Trump responded to China's announcement Friday that it would slap new tariffs on $75 billion in American goods with more tariffs of his own. 

President Trump also issued an extraordinary threat to declare a national emergency in an attempt to force U.S. businesses to cut ties with China.
Graham on Sunday did admit that the trade war would hurt some of his constituents – saying “consumer prices on commodities are going to go up” – but called it a necessary evil to take on Beijing.
“Until [the Chinese] feel the pain they’re not going to stop,” he said. 

“They never will until they feel a heavier price.”

The Necessary War

SAYING CHINA IS BLOCKING TRILLIONS IN OIL AND GAS, U.S. WILL SEND NAVY FOR ASIA DRILLS
BY TOM O'CONNOR 

The United States has accused China of preventing Southeast Asian countries from accessing trillions of dollars worth of untapped oil and gas reserves in the South China Sea as the Pentagon planned to hold its first exercise with regional powers near the strategic region.
In a press statement, State Department spokesperson Morgan Ortagus said Thursday that the "United States is deeply concerned that China is continuing its interference with Vietnam's longstanding oil and gas activities in Vietnam's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) claim" following recent incursions there by Chinese survey ship Haiyang Dizhi 8 and an armed escort. 

Beijing has laid vast claims to the South China Sea and does not recognize boundaries established there by a number of Southeast Asian nations who are supported by the U.S. 

The most recent incident occurred last week near Vanguard Bank, a Vietnam-administered outpost in the Spratly Islands, and Ortagus attributed the move to China "pressuring Vietnam over its work with a Russian energy firm and other international partners."
"China's actions undermine regional peace and security, impose economic costs on Southeast Asian states by blocking their access to an estimated $2.5 trillion in unexploited hydrocarbon resources, and demonstrate China's disregard for the rights of countries to undertake economic activities in their EEZs, under the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention, which China ratified in 1996," Ortagus said.
Chinese survey vessel Haiyang Dizhi 8 conducts research on behalf of the Guangzhou Marine Geological Survey in this photo shared July 25, 2018. The ship once again entered what Vietnam's exclusive economic zone near Vanguard Bank of South China Sea's Spratly Islands on August 13 of this year.
Washington has signed, but not ratified the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention, though it justified sending warships through Beijing-claimed waters in the South China Sea by citing "freedom of navigation" operations outlined in the deal. 

China has responded by scrambling military ships and aircraft to intercept the U.S. vessels in the resource-rich region.
While China may have backed Vietnam's communist revolutionaries in their victory over U.S. and allied local forces decades ago, Beijing and Hanoi quickly became rivals and engaged in deadly border clashes, including near the Spratly Island, lasting up until the 1990s. 

In 1995, Vietnam and the U.S. normalized their relations, putting pressure on China as the region's geopolitical dynamics shifted.
As the U.S. began to increasingly assert its own presence in the South China Sea, it has sought to push back on China there, exploiting territorial tensions between Beijing and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a 10-nation grouping of which Vietnam was a part. 

Washington sided with Hanoi in 2014 when China moved its Hai Yang Shi You 981 oil rig near the disputed Paracel Islands and sank a Vietnamese fishing vessel amid a standoff there.
Last year, the U.S. sent a historic message to China by sending Nimitz-class supercarrier USS Carl Vinson to dock in Vietnam in March. 

In May, the U.S. disinvited China from the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise involving Vietnam and several other ASEAN states over Beijing's increased militarization of the Spratly Islands.
The U.S. also began planning joint drills with ASEAN, but it was China that secured an exercise alongside the regional collective months later in October. 

That same month, then-Defense Secretary James Mattis confirmed that a U.S.-ASEAN exercise was still in the works and on both The Bangkok Post and Nikkei Asian Review reported Thursday that the maneuvers were set to begin early next month in Thailand.

A map created July 30, 2012 details the multinational, overlapping territorial disputes involving Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam in the South China Sea. Many of these countries, especially China, have expanded their presence on contested land masses known as the Spratly Islands and an incident on August 13 of this year took place on the westernmost stretch of reefs.

Tensions in the South China Sea add to an array of issues already putting a major strain on ties between the world's top two economies. 

President Donald Trump and Chinese Xi Jinping are embroiled in a multibillion-dollar trade war of tit-for-tat tariffs with Vietnam finding itself right in the middle of the feuding powerhouses.
Beijing has also repeatedly accused Washington of interfering in its internal affairs, both in the ongoing protests that U.S. officials and politicians have expressed support for in the semi-autonomous city of Hong Kong and in a recent $8 billion arms sale involving F-16V fighters jets to Taiwan, an independent island nation also claimed by Beijing.

The Necessary War

A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be a bloody, logistical nightmare

By Ben Westcott
Taiwan -- Roaring out of the sky, an F-16V fighter jet lands smoothly to rearm and refuel on an unremarkable freeway in rural Taiwan, surrounded by rice paddies.
In different circumstances, this could be alarming sight. 

Taiwan's fighter pilots are trained to land on freeways between sorties in case all of the island's airports have been occupied or destroyed by an invasion.
Luckily, this was a training exercise.
There's only really one enemy that Taiwan's armed forces are preparing to resist -- China's People's Liberation Army (PLA). 

And as China's reputation as an economic and military superpower has grown in recent years, so too has that threat of invasion, according to security experts.
Taiwan has been self-governed since separating from China at the end of a brutal civil war in 1949, but Beijing has never given up hope of reuniting with what it considers a renegade province.
At a regional security conference in June, Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe said: "If anyone dares to split Taiwan from China, the Chinese military has no choice but to fight at all costs for national unity." 

In some shops in mainland China, you can buy postcards and T-shirts emblazoned with patriotic emblems promoting the retaking of Taiwan.
But for seven decades, China has resisted attacking Taiwan partly for political reasons, including the prospect of a US intervention and the potential heavy human toll. 

But the practical realities of a full-blown invasion are also daunting for the PLA, according to experts.
Ferrying hundreds of thousands of troops across the narrow Taiwan Strait to a handful of reliable landing beaches, in the face of fierce resistance, is a harrowing prospect. 

Troops would then have a long slog over Taiwan's western mudflats and mountains to reach the capital, Taipei.
Not only that, but China would face an opponent who has been preparing for war for almost 70 years.
At mass anti-invasion drills in May, Taiwan military spokesman Maj. Gen. Chen Chung-Chi said the island knew it had to always be "combat-ready."
"Of course, we don't want war, but only by gaining our own strength can we defend ourselves," he said. 

"If China wants to take any action against us, it has to consider paying a painful price."

A Chinese Cultural Revolution poster showing a Chinese soldier and the island of Taiwan. "We must liberate Taiwan," the caption says.

Difficult and bloody
It could be easy to assume that any invasion of Taiwan by Beijing would be brief and devastating for Taipei: a David and Goliath fight between a tiny island and the mainland's military might, population and wealth.
With nearly 1.4 billion people, the People's Republic of China has the largest population in the world. Taiwan has fewer than 24 million people -- a similar number to Australia. 

China has the fifth largest territory in the world, while Taiwan is the size of Denmark or the US state of Maryland. 

And Beijing runs an economy that is second only to the United States, while Taiwan's doesn't rank in the world's top 20.
But perhaps most pertinently, China has been building and modernizing its military at an unprecedented rate, while Taiwan relies on moderate US arms sales.
In sheer size, the PLA simply dwarfs Taiwan's military.
China has an estimated 1 million troops, almost 6,000 tanks, 1,500 fighter jets and 33 navy destroyers, according to the latest US Defense Department report. 

Taiwan's ground force troops barely number 150,000 and are backed by 800 tanks and about 350 fighter aircraft, the report found, while its navy fields only four destroyer-class ships.
Under Chinese dictator Xi Jinping, the PLA has rapidly modernized, buoyed by rises in military spending and crackdowns on corruption in the army's leadership.
"China's leaders hope that possessing these military capabilities will deter pro-independence moves by Taiwan or, should deterrence fail, will permit a range of tailored military options against Taiwan and potential third-party military intervention," according to a 2019 US Defense Intelligence Agency report on China's military.
Yet while China hawks in the media might beat the drum of invasion, an internal China military study, seen by CNN, revealed that the PLA considers an invasion of Taiwan to be extremely difficult.
"Taiwan has a professional military, with a strong core of American-trained experts," said Ian Easton, author of "The Chinese Invasion Threat" and research fellow at the Project 2049 Institute, as well as "highly defensible" terrain.
In his book he described an invasion by China as "the most difficult and bloody mission facing the Chinese military."

US-made CM-11 tanks are fired in front of two 8-inch self-propelled artillery guns during military drills in southern Taiwan on May 30.

The plan to take Taiwan
China's Taiwan invasion plan, known internally as the "Joint Island Attack Campaign," would begin with a mass, coordinated bombing of Taiwan's vital infrastructure -- ports and airfields -- to cripple the island's military ahead of an amphibious invasion, according to both Easton and Sidharth Kaushal, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies.
At the same time, the Chinese air force would fly over the Taiwan Strait and try to dominate the island's air space. 

Once the PLA was satisfied it had suitably disabled Taiwan's air and naval forces, Kaushal said soldiers would begin to invade on the west coast of the island.
The island's rocky, mountainous east coast is considered too inhospitable and far from mainland China.
The amphibious invasion needed to put troops on Taiwan, however, could be the biggest hurdle facing the PLA.
In its 2019 report to Congress, the US Department of Defense said China -- which has one of the largest navies in Asia -- had at its command 37 amphibious transport docks and 22 smaller landing ships, as well as any civilian vessels Beijing could enlist.
That might be enough to occupy smaller islands, such as those in the South China Sea, but an amphibious assault on Taiwan would likely require a bigger arsenal -- and there is "no indication China is significantly expanding its landing ship force," the report said.

That makes it vital for Beijing to neutralize Taiwan's navy and air force in the early stages of an attack, Kaushal said.
"The Taiwanese air force would have to sink around 40% of the amphibious landing forces of the PLA in order to render this sort of mission infeasible," he said.
Essentially, that's only about 10 to 15 ships, he added.
If they did make it across the strait, the PLA would still need to find a decent landing spot for its ships.
China's military would be looking for a landing site both close to the mainland, and a strategic city, such as Taipei, with nearby port and airport facilities.
That leaves just 14 potential beaches, Easton said -- and it's not only the PLA that knows it. Taiwanese engineers have spent decades digging tunnels and bunkers in potential landing zones along the coast.
Furthermore, the backbone of Taiwan's defense is a fleet of vessels capable of launching anti-ship cruise missiles, on top of an array of ground-based missiles, and substantial mines and artillery on the coastline.
"Taiwan's entire national defense strategy, including its war plans, are specifically targeted at defeating a PLA invasion," Easton said.
Chinese troops could be dropped in from the air, but a lack of paratroopers in the PLA makes it unlikely.
If the PLA held a position on Taiwan, and could reinforce with troops from the mainland to face off about 150,000 Taiwan troops, as well as more than 2.5 million reservists, it would have to push through the island's western mud flats and mountains, with only narrow roads to assist them, towards Taipei.
Finally, the mobilization of amphibious landing vessels, ballistic missile launchers, fighters and bombers, as well as hundreds of thousands of troops, would give Taiwan plenty of advance warning of any attack, Kaushal said.
"It's extremely unlikely that the invasion could come as a bolt from the blue," Kaushal added.

Four US-made Apache attack helicopters launch missiles during the 35th "Han Kuang" military drill in southern Taiwan on May 30.

The bad guy in the neighborhood
There is, of course, one final deterrent to any PLA invasion of Taiwan.
It isn't clear whether or not such an attack by China would spark an intervention by the United States on Taipei's behalf.
Washington has been a longtime ally of the island, selling weapons to the Taiwan government and providing military protection from Beijing.

Facing an aggressive Beijing, Taiwan's president issues a warning to the world

Easton said that, at present, the US would likely intervene in Taiwan's favor, both to protect investment by US companies on the island and reassure American allies in the region, who are also facing down a resurgent PLA in the East and South China seas.
Collin Koh Swee Lean, research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies' Maritime Security Program in Singapore, said there would also be "immense political consequences" from taking over Taiwan, in the event of a successful China invasion.
"It will likely mean that China will be seen as the bad guy in the neighborhood, who uses force," he said. 

"It will alienate regional partners and the good will which China has been trying to build over the years will evaporate. And it will set China on a collision course with the US."
But Taipei isn't taking anything for granted.
On the sidelines of the massive Han Guang drills, Taiwan's Maj. Gen. Chen pointed out the hundreds of spectators who had come out to watch and support the island's military.
"These exercises let people know the national army of the Republic of China is ready," he said.
Taiwan is taking no chances.

The Necessary War

South China Sea: Chinese fighter jets deployed to contested island
By Brad Lendon

ImageSat International (ISI).

Hong Kong -- A satellite image obtained by CNN shows China has deployed at least four J-10 fighter jets to the contested Woody Island in the South China Sea, the first known deployment of fighter jets there since 2017.
The image was taken Wednesday and represents the first time J-10s have been seen on Woody or any Chinese-controlled islands in the South China Sea, according to ImageSat International, which supplied the image to CNN.
The deployment comes as tensions remain high in the South China Sea and Chinese dictator Xi Jinping prepares to meet Donald Trump at the G-20 summit in Japan next week.


Analysts who looked at the satellite photo for CNN said both the placement of the planes out in the open and accompanying equipment is significant and indicates the fighter jets were on the contested island for up to 10 days.
"They want you to notice them. Otherwise they would be parked in the hangars," said Peter Layton, a former Royal Australian Air Force officer and fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute. 

"What message do they want you to take from them?"
Carl Schuster, a former director of operations at the US Pacific Command's Joint Intelligence Center, said the deployment is designed to "demonstrate it is their territory and they can put military aircraft there whenever they want."
"It also makes a statement that they can extend their air power reach over the South China Sea as required or desired," Schuster said.
The J-10 jets have a combat range of about 500 miles (740 kilometers), putting much of the South China Sea and vital shipping lands within reach, Schuster said.
The four planes are not carrying external fuel tanks, the analysts said. 

That suggests they were to be refueled on the island, so the plan may be to keep them there awhile.

Chinese J-10 fighters fly at Airshow China in Zhuhai in 2010.

"It could be an early training deployment as part of getting the J-10 squadron operationally ready for an ADIZ (air defense identification zone) declaration," Layton said. 

"This activity may be the new normal."
China said in 2016 it reserved the right to impose an ADIZ over the South China Sea, which would require aircraft flying over the waters to first notify Beijing. 

It set up an ADIZ over the East China Sea in 2013, prompting an outcry from Japan and the United States, but the zone has not been fully enforced.
Woody Island (đảo Phú Lâm) is the largest of the Paracel chain, also known as the Hoàng Sa.
The Paracels (Hoàng Sa) sit in the north-central portion of the 1.3 million-square-mile South China Sea. 

They are also claimed by Vietnam and Taiwan, but have been occupied by China since 1974, when Chinese troops ousted a South Vietnamese garrison.
The past several years have seen Beijing substantially upgrade its facilities on the islands, deploying surface-to-air missiles, building 20 hangars at the airfield, upgrading two harbors and performing substantial land reclamation, according to the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative.
Woody Island has served as a blueprint for Beijing's more prominent island-building efforts in the Spratly chain to the south, AMTI said in a 2017 report.
The appearance of the J-10s on Woody Island comes just over a year after China sent its H-6K long-range bombers to the island for test flights for the first time.
The PLA claimed that mission was a part of China's aim to achieve a broader regional reach, quicker mobilization, and greater strike capabilities.
A military expert, Wang Mingliang, was quoted in a Chinese statement as saying the training would hone the Chinese air force's war-preparation skills and its ability to respond to various security threats in the region.
In 2017, a report in China's state-run Global Times, said fighter jets -- J-11s -- were deployed to Woody Island for the first time, with the new hangars able to protect the warplanes from the island's high heat and humidity.
That report said such hangars would be useful on other Chinese islands to greatly enhance Beijing's control over the South China Sea.

The Necessary War

Retired US general says war with China very likely in 15 years
By VANESSA GERA

Retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges speaks to reporters on the sideline of the Warsaw Security Forum in Warsaw, Poland, Wednesday Oct. 24, 2018. Mr. Hodges, who was U.S. Army commander in Europe from 2014-17, told the forum that it's very likely that the United States will be at war with China in 15-years. 

WARSAW, Poland — The former commander of the U.S. Army in Europe warned Wednesday that it’s very likely the United States will be at war with China in 15 years.
Retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges said that European allies will have to do more to ensure their own defenses in face of a resurgent Russia because American will need to focus more attention on defending its interests in the Pacific.
“The United States needs a very strong European pillar. I think in 15 years, but it is a very strong likelihood, that we will be at war with China,” Hodges told a packed room at the Warsaw Security Forum, a two-day gathering of leaders and military and political experts from central Europe.
“The United States does not have the capacity to do everything it has to do in Europe and in the Pacific to deal with the Chinese threat,” Hodges said.
Hodges was U.S. Army commander in Europe from 2014 until last year. 

He now is a strategic expert with the Center for European Policy Analysis, a Washington-based research institute.
Despite shifting geopolitical priorities, Hodges said the U.S. commitment to NATO remains “unshakable.” 

He said he is certain the Trump administration views Europe’s security as a key U.S. interest even though President Donald Trump has sometimes questioned the Western military alliance’s usefulness.
“So you’re going to see us continue to invest here in Europe, continue to train, to practice rotational forces, as well as permanently assign forces for the eventuality that in 10 or 15 years we’re going to be having to fight in the Pacific,” Hodges said.
Hodges told The Associated Press that a recent near-miss between a U.S. Navy destroyer and a Chinese warship in the disputed South China Sea was only one of the signs pointing to an “an increasingly tense relationship and increasing competition in all the different domains.”
Others, he said, are China’s “constant stealing of technology” and how China is gaining control of infrastructure by funding projects in Africa and Europe. 

He said that in Europe, China owns more than 10 percent of the ports.

War With China
	2016 Population	Killed		Survivors
CHINA	1 373 541 278	1 057 119 689	77%	316 421 589
UNITED STATES	323 995 528	19 089 783	6%	304 905 745
EUROPEAN UNION	513 949 445	371 356 958	72%	142 592 487
RUSSIA	142 355 415	30 924 816	22%	111 430 599
INDIA	1 266 883 598	1 158 499 174	91%	108 384 424
PAKISTAN	201 995 540	175 747 473	87%	26 248 067
JAPAN	126 702 133	114 241 889	90%	12 460 244
VIETNAM	95 261 021	84 340 688	89%	10 920 333
PHILIPPINES	102 624 209	92 732 902	90%	9 891 307
KOREA, NORTH	25 115 311	21 141 050	84%	3 974 261
KOREA, SOUTH	50 924 172	47 636 302	94%	3 287 870
TAIWAN	23 464 787	22 278 490	95%	1 186 297
	4 246 812 437	3 195 109 214	75%	1 051 703 223

The Necessary War

China prepares for battles against US, Japanese missiles

• The Chinese conducted anti-missile drills in the East China Sea over the weekend.
• The drills were designed to counter missile threats from US, Japan, and their allies
• The exercise showed how a conflict with the Chinese might play out.

By Ryan Pickrell

Members of the Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force’s Amphibious Rapid Deployment Brigade perform a demonstration with an amphibious vehicle, in Sasebo, Nagasaki Prefecture, on April 7, 2018. 

Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy ships drilled in the East China Sea over the weekend, practicing honing its skills and countering missile threats from rivals like Japan, the US, and other potential combatants.
More than 10 naval vessels from three different command theaters participated in an air-defense and anti-missile live-fire exercise on Saturday, according to Chinese media reports.
"Intercepting anti-ship missiles is an urgent task as the surrounding threats grow," Chinese military expert Song Zhongping told Global Times, specifically referring to the threats posed by the US, Japan, and allies that engage in military activities near China.
"Anti-missile capability is indispensable to building a fully functional strategic PLA Navy. Such exercises are aimed at ensuring the PLA is prepared for battles," Song explained.
During the drills, the Meizhou, a Type 056 corvette with the South Sea Fleet armed with both anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles, gunned down an incoming anti-ship missile, according to Asia Times. 

The Tongren, another ship of the same class with East Sea Fleet, reportedly missed a missile on purpose to demonstrate the ability to follow with a successful second shot.
The drill comes on the heels of two other naval drills in the Yellow Sea and South China Sea.
China's naval exercises appear to be, at least in part, a response to part of the most recent iteration of the Rim of the Pacific maritime drills. 

On July 12, aircraft, submarines, and land-based missile systems manned by US, Australian, and Japanese military personnel opened fire on the former USS Racine, a decommissioned ship used for target practice during the sinking exercise.
For the "first time in history," Japanese missiles under US fire control were used to target a ship and sink it into the sea.
China is actively trying to bolster the combat capability of its naval force, the largest in the world today. 

China is producing new aircraft carriers, as well as heavy cruisers to defend them. 

China's growing power is becoming more evident as it attempts to flex its muscles in disputed seas, such as the East and South China Sea.
The sinking exercise during RIMPAC "demonstrated the lethality and adaptability of our joint forces," US Indo-Pacific Command chief Adm. Phil Davidson said of the drill in a statement published on Facebook.
"As naval forces drive our enemies into the littorals, army forces can strike them," he said, adding, "Conversely, when the army drives our enemies out to sea naval firepower can do the same."
In response to Chinese drills in the East China Sea, where China coveted Japan's Senkaku Islands, Japan will deploy an elite marine unit for drills before the end of the year. 

The Amphibious Rapid Deployment Brigade, which has not been in service since World War II, was reactivated in March to counter potential Chinese threats to Japanese territory, according to Taiwan News.

Sina Delenda Est: The Necessary War

Admiral Harry Harris warns US must prepare for war with China
By Ben Doherty

Harry Harris says China’s military might could soon rival US power across almost every domain, and warned of possibility of war.

The navy admiral nominated to be the next US ambassador to Australia has told Congress America must prepare for the possibility of war with China, and said it would rely on Australia to help uphold the international rules-based system in the Asia-Pacific.
In an excoriating assessment of China’s increasingly muscular posture in the region, Harry Harris said Beijing’s “intent is crystal clear” to dominate the South China Sea and that its military might could soon rival American power “across almost every domain”.
Harris, soon to retire as the head of US Pacific Command in Hawaii, told the House armed services committee, the US and its allies should be wary of Beijing’s military expansionism in the region, and condemned China’s foreign influence operations, predatory economic behaviour and coercion of regional neighbours.
“China’s intent is crystal clear. We ignore it at our peril,” he said. 

“I’m concerned China will now work to undermine the international rules-based order.”

Admiral Harry Harris is named US ambassador to Australia

Harris also warned of a “cult of personality” developing around Chinese dictator Xi Jinping.
Harris praised Australia as one of America’s staunchest allies in the Asia-Pacific region, noting existing military cooperation at air force bases in the Northern Territory, joint naval exercises and the regular rotation of 1,500 marines through Darwin.
“Australia is one of the keys to a rules-based international order,” Harris said. 

“I look to my Australian counterparts for their assistance, I admire their leadership in the battlefield and in the corridors of power in the world.
“They are a key ally of the United States and they have been with us in every major conflict since world war one.”
Harris, the Yokosuka-born son of an American naval officer and a Japanese mother, has been nominated by President Donald Trump as the next ambassador to Australia. 

His appointment must be confirmed by the Senate.
Australia has been without a US ambassador since John Berry departed in September 2016.
Harris said he was alarmed by China’s construction of military bases on seven disputed islands in the South China Sea that neighbouring countries lay territorial claims to.
In 2016, the permanent court of arbitration in The Hague, sided with the Philippines in the dispute it brought, saying there was no legal basis for China’s claim of historic sovereignty over waters within the so-called nine-dash line in the sea.
Regardless, Chinese military build-up continues in the sea.
“China’s impressive military build-up could soon challenge the United States across almost every domain,” Harris said.
In a separate answer, he said of the risk of conflict with China: “as far as the idea of deterrence and winning wars, I’m a military guy. And I think it’s important you must plan and resource to win a war at the same time you work to prevent it.”
“At the end of the day the ability to wage war is important or you become a paper tiger. I’m hopeful that it won’t come to a conflict with China, but we must all be prepared for that if it should come to that.”
Should Harris be confirmed as the next ambassador to Australia, his position would present a challenge for Canberra, as it seeks to navigate an increasingly delicate diplomatic and economic relationship with Beijing.
Ties were severely strained last year after a backlash against China’s influence on and infiltration of Australia’s political system, highlighted by the resignation of Labor senator Sam Dastyari over accepting cash from Chinese businessmen for private debts and his position, at odds with his party, on the South China Sea. 

The Australian government has proposed new espionage laws and tightening of rules around foreign donations to political parties.
China is Australia’s largest trading partner, but the US is its primary defence and security ally, and Australia has been a vocal defender of the US alliance network over issues such as the nuclear weapons ban treaty, which the US opposes.
The Australian prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, who has previously met Harris in Hawaii, has publicly welcomed his nomination. 

“Great to see Admiral Harry Harris nominated by [Donald Trump] as US ambassador to Australia. Look forward to seeing you in Canberra, Harry,” Turnbull said on Twitter on February 10.
Turnbull will meet with Trump in Washington next week. 

It is not known when Harris’s confirmation hearing will take place.

The Necessary War

U.S. WAR WITH CHINA AND RUSSIA MORE LIKELY AS WORLD POWER SHIFTS FROM WEST TO EAST
BY TOM O'CONNOR

A top NATO official has warned of a shift in global military strength from the Western military alliance to China and Russia, a move he said could make a global conflict more likely.
In an address to the Atlantic Council, a NATO-affiliated think tank, NATO Supreme Allied Commander Transformation General Denis Mercier reportedly said Thursday that the "risk for a major interstate conflict has increased" as non-Western powers, especially Russia and China, rocked the U.S.-led balance of power with their own push for greater military and economic clout. 

Both countries have undergone significant campaigns to revamp and modernize their forces, unsettling the transatlantic coalition.
"China is leveraging its economic power to increase defense spending as a foundation of the growing global power strategy," Mercier said, according to The Hill.
"The neighboring India is following the same path and could reach a comparable status in the medium term. At the same time, Russia is resurfacing with the will to become a major power again, challenging the established order in the former Soviet space," he added.
Mercier's remarks came in direct response to NATO's latest Strategic Foresight Analysis report, which was published last month with the stated goal of analyzing current international policy trends to shape the multinational coalition's strategy through 2035. 

The report claimed that "one of the biggest changes in the world is the increased risk of major conflict" since the release of similar reports in 2013 and 2015.
NATO blamed this on the "actions of a resurgent Russia in Eastern Europe and a more assertive China in the South China Sea using both hard and soft power to achieve political ends." 

Economically, things were changing too, with the report finding that "the global economic power shift away from the established, advanced economies in North America, Western Europe and Japan is likely to continue to 2035 and beyond."
"As power is shifting away from the West toward Asia, the West’s ability to influence the agenda on a global scale is expected to be reduced," the report read.
In September, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Marine General Joseph Dunford, told the Senate Armed Services Committee at his reappointment hearing that, while he considered North Korea the foremost threat to the U.S. "in terms of the sense of urgency," Russia led "in terms of overall military capability" and he expected China would become "the greatest threat to our nation by about 2025."
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping shake hands during a meeting on the sidelines of the APEC summit in Danang, Vietnam November 10, 2017. In addition to empowering their own nations, Putin and Xi have sought greater ties with one another in order to present a united challenge to U.S. and Western interests.

China's increasingly important role on the international stage was put in the spotlight last month during the quinquennial Communist Party Congress, which made Xi Jinping's consolidation of power and influence apparent for the world to see. 

Xi has rapidly reformed his country's military, which boasted the largest standing army on Earth, to create a 21st-century fighting force capable of protecting Beijing's initiative to establish trading routes across Asia, Africa, Europe and the Middle East, as well as countering the U.S. presence in the Pacific.
Meanwhile, Russia's military rise has been viewed as particularly challenging to Western interests, as the country has already begun to replace the U.S. as the leading power broker in the Middle East and has expanded its influence in Europe. 

Following Vladimir Putin's 2014 annexation of the Crimean Peninsula, NATO assumed a more militant stance toward its rival, and the two have embarked on a major arms race across the region.
Xi and Putin have also sought to establish greater ties with one another in order to provide an alternative to the Western status quo. 

China and Russia have conducted joint drills across the world, from East Asia to the Baltics, and the Chinese Defense Ministry announced Friday that China and Russia would team up for an anti-missile exercise as both countries express opposition to the U.S.'s installation of the Terminal High Altitute Area Defense (THAAD) system in South Korea, according to Reuters.

The Necessary War

A border dispute high in the Himalayas puts the decades long cold peace between India and China under severe strain.

By Richard Javad Heydarian

"It is true that we have a border dispute with China. But in the last 40 years, not a single bullet has been fired because of it", exclaimed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his visit to Russia in June.

He hailed the 21st century as "the century of Asia", with India and China poised to "influence the situation of the world in the coming decades."
The situation on the ground, however, suggests otherwise.
The decades-long "cold peace" between India and China is actually under severe strain. 

For the last two months, hundreds of Indian and Chinese soldiers have been squaring off over a "tri-juncture", which tenuously separates India, Bhutan and China thousands of kilometres above sea level.
There have reportedly been clashes between the two sides, with Chinese and Indian soldiers throwing stones at each other, but so far stopping just short of firing their guns. 

But tensions are rising every day, with diplomatic patience wearing thin. 

The two Asian giants, collectively home to a third of humanity, are once again on the verge of direct military conflict with frightening implications for the region and beyond.

Troubled Borders
The so-called Line of Actual Control (LAC), which separates India from China, is a potentially explosive oxymoron. 

It is neither a clear line nor is anyone fully in control.
The murky territorial boundaries are the legacy of 19th-century colonialism, when the British Raj and Qing Dynasty sought to negotiate their overlapping imperial boundaries under fluid geopolitical circumstances.
With their economies and military capabilities expanding, both modern India and post-Qing China have been pushing the envelope to maximise and mark their territory in the area.
At the heart of the new round of tensions is the Doklam plateau, which lies at a junction between China, the northeastern Indian state of Sikkim and Bhutan, is currently disputed between Beijing and Thimphu. 

India supports Bhutan's claim. 

India and China already fought a war over the border in 1962, and disputes remain unresolved in several areas.
In mid-June, Indian soldiers crossed into the plateau to prevent Chinese border guards from bringing in road-building equipment into the contested area.
New Delhi claimed that its latest action was in defence of its ally, the tiny kingdom of Bhutan, which has no direct diplomatic relations with China and is a de facto protectorate on India. 

But the South Asian powerhouse was likely more worried by the prospect of China extending its strategic reach (via construction of new road systems across Bhutan-claimed territories) close to so-called "chicken's neck", a strategic corridor that connects India's heartland to its eight northeastern states.
New Delhi is worried about losing strategic high ground to its rival-neighbour, which has a military budget that is four times larger and is bent on buying friends and allies throughout the region with major infrastructure investment deals.
The situation reflects the perils of Beijing's rising assertiveness, which is rattling both its continental neighbours such as India as well as maritime neighbours in the East and South China Sea, namely Japan, Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia.
Throughout the decades, continental-size China, with 14 land neighbours and six sea neighbours, has been embroiled in 23 border disputes. 

Many have been resolved, particularly with Russia and central Asian republics, but those with the likes of India, Vietnam and Japan have festered in recent years.

All Fall Down
Following India's decision to send its soldiers to the Doklam plateau, an incensed China has warned of direct military confrontation and a repeat of India's humiliating defeat during the 1962 border conflict.
Amid deteriorating diplomatic relations, Indian and Chinese leaders have been refusing to meet each other on the sidelines of major summits in recent months. 

Meanwhile, hawks on both sides have been sabre-rattling and engaging in bitter and acrimonious exchanges in recent weeks.
All this marks a dramatic turnabout in the direction of bilateral ties.
Since coming to power in 2014, Mr Modi has tirelessly sought to upgrade bilateral relations with Beijing. 

After all, he was a former minister of Gujarat, a booming Indian state that has benefited from large-scale Chinese investments.
Few months into office, he cordially welcomed Xi Jinping to the luxurious Hyderabad House, where the two leaders indulged in personal diplomacy with bonhomie amid much media fanfare.
The following year, Modi visited China, where he signed multibillion-dollar business deals, visited key cultural sites of China and, along the way, took an intimate selfie with Li Keqiang, which flooded the social media landscape with thousands of shares.

It's selfie time! Thanks Premier Li. pic.twitter.com/DSCTszSnq3

— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) May 15, 2015

He also shared on Chinese social media platform Weibo portraits of his gifts to Xi, including a Buddhist relic and a millennium-old statue of Buddha excavated from his home state of Gujarat.
Quick to underscore the shared Buddhist legacy of both neighbours, the Indian leader visited the ancient city of Xi'an, the cradle of ancient Silk Road, where he received a gift from a Buddhist monk.
Modi's cultural diplomacy efforts and personal investment in bilateral relations, however, have been torpedoed by age-old territorial disputes. 

The standoff in the Himalayas underpins the fragile nature of bilateral relations between the world's two most populous nations.
It also reveals growing territorial nationalism and strongman brinkmanship on both sides, as Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Narendra Modi tap into ethnocentric sentiments for domestic political purposes. 

At this point, both men, who have promised to make their countries "great again", are in no position to back down.

The Necessary War

This is how it could go down when China and India went to war

By Blake Stilwell

For more than a month, Indian and Chinese troops have been locked in a standoff on a remote but strategically important Himalayan plateau near where Tibet, India, and Bhutan meet.

A war between the world’s largest democracy and the world’s largest communist state may not seem likely to the casual observer. 

But not only is it possible, it’s happened before. Only things were very different back then.

China was facing an economic collapse in the early 1960s in the years following the Great Leap Forward. 

The country was struggling to feed its people, let alone support an all-out war.
India, on the other hand, was on an economic upturn. 

Militarily, however, India was unprepared and could only field 14,000 troops, compared to China’s exhaustive manpower.
In 1962, Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong invaded India for granting asylum to the Dalai Lama and not supporting the Chinese occupation of Tibet (Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was an outspoken critic of the occupation). 

The Chinese won the harsh mountain war, fought without navies or air forces, at 14,000 feet.
Mao later told Sri Lankan and Swedish delegations the war was essentially to teach India a lesson.

Potential causes of a new Sino-Indian war

The 1962 war only lasted a month, resulting in slight border changes and a now-ongoing dispute on just where the border is — namely in two areas called Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh, which could re-spark a conflict today. 

But any border disputes could turn the mountainous region hot.
The most recent standoff in August 2017 was about an obscure plateau in the Himalayan Doklam Plateau region, which borders India, China, and Bhutan. 

India supports Bhutan’s claim to the area, while both major powers have scores of troops in the region.
The spark for that standoff is an unfinished road from China.
China also supports India’s arch rival Pakistan, turning any conflict into a potential two-front war. But India doesn’t take it all laying down. 

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi confronted China’s assertiveness from his first day in office — when he invited the exiled Tibetan government to his swearing-in ceremony.

A map of Doklam, a disputed area between China, India, and Bhutan.

The two countries clashed along their border several times, including one incident over Tibet in 1967 and another near miss 1987 over Arunachal. 

There were also smaller incidents in 2013 and 2014 in Ladakh, where India has since loaded the area with infantry, tanks, and reserves to be prepared for any potential aggression from China.
But the very likely spark that could drive the two Asian giants to war could come from a clash over resources. 

In this case it wouldn’t be over oil, it would be over water. 

Both countries have an eye on the fresh water and hydroelectric power from the Brahmaputra River.
Water is not the only resource in question, though. 

Earlier in 2016, China prevented India’s membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which controls the trade of nuclear material and tech.

Technology and numbers

A pilot in the cockpit of a Jian-10 fighter jet at Yangcun Air Force base on the outskirts of Tianjin municipality, April 13, 2010, during a media trip to the 24th Air Force Division of the People's Liberation Army.

China and India are now economic powerhouses, 2nd and 7th (respectively) in world GDP rankings. Militarily, India is number four on the GlobalFirepower rankings and boasts the largest standing volunteer army at 1.13 million troops with 21 million in reserve. 

Ranked number three on the same scale, China’s armed forces have 2.3 million active troops with another 2.3 million in reserve.
China’s technology is superior to India’s, but not by much. 

The Chinese air forces also vastly outnumber India’s somewhat antiquated air force. 

The Chinese also have a homegrown version of the F-35, which can outmatch India’s 50-year-old MiG-21s. 

The Chinese J-20 is currently the best for Chinese air superiority, if it’s operational in time for such a conflict.
India is working with Russia on developing a 5th-generation Sukhoi fighter with capabilities similar to the American F-22. 

But the Indian air force has been outnumbered and outclassed on many occasions and still came up with a win. 

Training and experience count for a lot. More on that in a minute.
The Indian Navy's Scorpene submarine INS Kalvari escorted by tugboats as it arrives at Mazagon Docks Ltd, a naval-vessel ship-building yard, in Mumbai, India, October 29, 2015.

India’s Navy matches China’s with two aircraft carrier groups but China still edges India in technological capability — barely. 

China also dwarfs India’s tank and submarine corps, with five times as many of each. China also has twice as many warships and military aircraft.
India’s advantage is that, despite China’s superiority in merchant marine, its sea lanes come very close to Indian waters. 

This would force the Chinese to divert ships used for a blockade to protect their shipping. 

This is why both countries invest in developing submarines and anti-sub technology.
No matter what, the air and sea war would be a slugfest. 

Even so, the primary conflict would likely be between two land armies. 

Or three if Pakistan decides to take advantage of the situation.

Joota on the ground
Chinese paramilitary policemen take an oath ahead of the 96th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in Kunming, Yunnan province, China.

The problem with the major border disputes is that the border in question is high in the Himalayas, making quick thrusts and land grabs unlikely. 

A large disparity in ground troops between the opposing forces will decide who advances. 

China may have the manpower to make taking the disputed provinces possible.
A significant difference in India’s favor is that its troops are battle-hardened and have a long tradition of fighting to defend India’s borders. 

The Indian Army has been fighting Pakistan, terrorism, and a host of insurgencies for decades. 

Its last war ended in 1999, and it has employed significant paramilitary and special operations forces ever since.
The Chinese haven’t seen real fighting since the 1979 war with Vietnam. 

That war lasted just shy of four weeks, with each side claiming victory. 

The Chinese wanted to punish Vietnam for being in the Soviet sphere while proving to the world the USSR could not protect its allies. 

It didn’t work. 

The Vietnamese repelled the Chinese People’s Liberation Army using only border militias.
India's Rapid Action Force (RAF) personnel pose for pictures inside their base camp in New Delhi, November 6, 2014.

The truth is, the Chinese PLA, for all its growth and advances in technology, has not truly been tested since the Korean War. 

China’s biggest equalizer is its ballistic missile force, capable of hitting well inside India.
China’s biggest advantage is its economy. 

If it suffers no sanctions as a result of an invasion, it could sustain a protracted war much longer than India. 

In this instance, India’s best hope is to strangle Chinese shipping using its sizable submarine force. India sits with its boot on the neck of the Chinese economy.
If it came to a nuclear exchange, India would not fare well. 

China has a stockpile of ballistic missiles and with major Indian cities so close to the Chinese border, it doesn’t even need longer-ranged weapons to annihilate major urban centers. 

Conversely, India has few of these and primary targets in China are much further away. 

Luckily, both countries have a “no first use” policy, making a nuclear exchange unlikely.

How it plays out
An officer from the Indian Central Reserve Police Force during preparations for Republic Day parade, near the Presidential Palace in New Delhi, India, January 12, 2016. India marks Republic Day on January 26.

India invading China is highly unlikely. 

The Indian Army would not have the ground force necessary to drive through the Himalayas and sustain such a push.
This war would be fought with light infantry, mountain troops, and light armor. 

China has the advantage in numbers, but India has experienced veteran soldiers. 

Even aircraft would have trouble fighting in these mountains, but the Indian Army has developed specialized attack helicopters just for this purpose: the HAL Druv and HAL Light Attack helicopters.
China has very few airfields in the area, which would limit its ability to provide air cover, whereas India’s Air Force maintains considerable assets in the area.
India also has multiple layers of anti-air and anti-missile defense and is developing more. 

China would have to get the bulk of its ground forces across the Himalayas as fast as possible, or the war would grind to a halt.
Any halt to the Chinese advance would be a de facto win for India. 

China would have to completely capture the disputed territories and move into India to be able to claim victory. 

China’s only real chance to progress into the subcontinent is to perform an Inchon landing-style maneuver from the sea, but that would require going through India’s submarine force unopposed.
Soldiers from a special unit of the People's Armed Police in Xinjiang at a training session in Kashgar, Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, China.

Frankly, any conflict between the two would be explosive and bloody, requiring a lot of manpower and ending with a massive loss of life. 

The geography and population density between the two countries makes both of them unconquerable.

The Necessary War

China and India's Border Standoff Heats Up in Kashmir
By Aijaz Hussain

The Pangong lake high up in Ladahak region of India on June 17, 2016. 

SRINAGAR, India — Indian and Chinese soldiers yelled and hurled stones at one another high in the Himalayas in Indian-controlled Kashmir, Indian officials said Wednesday, potentially escalating tensions between two nations already engaged in a lengthy border standoff elsewhere.
The Chinese soldiers hurled stones while attempting to enter Ladakh region near Pangong Lake on Tuesday but were confronted by Indian soldiers, said a top police officer. 

The officer said Indian soldiers retaliated but neither side used guns.
China did not comment directly on the reported incident, but called on India to comply with earlier agreements and help maintain peace and stability along the border.
An Indian intelligence officer said the confrontation occurred after Indian soldiers intercepted a Chinese patrol that veered into Indian-held territory after apparently it lost its way due to bad weather.
The officer said that soon the soldiers began shouting at each other and later threw stones. 

He said some soldiers from both sides received minor injuries.
After nearly 30 minutes of facing off, the two sides retreated to their positions, he said.
An Indian military officer said the skirmish was brief but violent and for the first time stones were used.
All the officers spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Soldiers from the two countries are already locked in a bitter but non-violent standoff in Doklam, an area disputed between China and India's ally Bhutan, where New Delhi sent its soldiers in June to stop China from constructing a strategic road.
China demands that Indian troops withdraw unilaterally from the Doklam standoff before any talks can be held, while New Delhi says each side should stand down. 

China and India fought a border war in 1962 and much of their frontier remains unsettled despite several rounds of official-level talks.
In Beijing, foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said Chinese troops sought to avoid confrontations and said India should "make tangible efforts to maintain the peace and stability of the border areas between the two countries."
The website of New Delhi-based English weekly India Today quoted a report by the Indian military intelligence, which said the use of stones was unprecedented and appeared intended to heighten tension without using lethal weapons. 

The report said the worst that has happened earlier was an isolated slap or pushing between soldiers from the two sides.
India's worries over Chinese repeated border crossings into Kashmir's Ladakh region have seen a massive Indian army buildup in the cold desert in recent years.
The disputed Himalayan territory of Kashmir is divided between nuclear-armed India, Pakistan and China. 

The part held by China is contiguous to Tibet.

The Necessasry War

Nepal: A battleground for regional supremacy between India, China
AFP

A Nepali child plays in an abandoned railway carriage of the Nepal Railway Corporation Ltd in Janakpur, some 300km south of Kathmandu on June 13.

Three years after its last train hit the buffers, landlocked Nepal is building a new railway network to boost its ailing economy -- helped by the rivalry between its powerful neighbours, China and India.
The railway to India was a lifeline for the small southern frontier town of Janakpur, used to import everything from sweets to clothes and cosmetics and fuelling a vibrant border economy.
But it fell into disrepair after years of neglect and since 2014 the train has sat stationary, its rusting carcass now a playground for local children, while Janakpur’s markets are empty.
“When the train was running, we would have a lot of business. I was easily providing (for) my family,” said Shyam Sah, whose small family-run cosmetics shop has suffered an 80 percent drop in profits since the railway closed.
Now it is being rebuilt with Indian backing, one of three new rail lines -- one funded by China in the north and a third by Nepal itself -- that the country hopes will help boost international trade.
Nepal remains largely isolated from the global economy, dependent on aid and remittances.
Growth slowed dramatically after a 2015 earthquake but is expected to normalise at 5 percent from 2018 -- one of the slowest rates in South Asia -- according to the World Bank.
In recent years it has courted its two large neighbours for investment in an attempt to plug itself into a rail network that links the far eastern reaches of Asia with Europe.
But geography is not on its side.
The Himalayas form a natural border between Nepal and China, leaving it largely dependent on India -- with which it shares a 1,400 kilometre (900 mile) open border -- for the majority of its imports and exports.

Game-changer
In recent years Kathmandu has tilted towards Beijing as part of a nationalist drive to decrease the country’s reliance on New Delhi.
China has responded, ramping up its diplomatic ties with Nepal -- mostly through large-scale infrastructure investments.
In 2017, Beijing pledged $8.3 billion to build roads and hydropower plants in Nepal, dwarfing India’s commitments of $317 million.
Feasibility studies are also underway for a Beijing-backed railway connecting Kathmandu to Lhasa in Tibet, cutting straight through the Himalayas at an estimated cost of $8 billion.
Ankit Panda, senior editor at The Diplomat magazine, said that could be a game-changer for the small country.
“The rail line with China holds potential depending on the demand side of the equation, on how China allows Nepal to leverage that link for commercial growth opportunities,” he said.
But it has strained relations between India and China, who are currently locked in a tense standoff on a remote Himalayan plateau in Bhutan sparked by a new road being built by China.
“China knows that its chequebook diplomacy with the smaller Asian states is a sore point with India, which simply cannot afford to put up the kind of capital outlays that the Chinese promise,” said Panda.
The project is part of its “One Belt, One Road” initiative, a massive global infrastructure programme to connect Chinese companies to new markets around the world that critics see as a geopolitical powerplay.
Regional rival India has snubbed the plan and skipped a summit in Beijing in May.
New Delhi is funding the reconstruction of the Janakpur line, rebuilding the tracks to carry broad-gauge trains that will allow it to connect to the rest of the subcontinent’s expansive rail network.

Battleground
Meanwhile Nepal is building a 945-kilometre line that will cut across the southern plains from east to west.
Nearly a third of the track has been built, but construction has stalled for lack of funds and it is not clear when it work will be finished.
Some experts warn that Nepal has become a de-facto battleground in a geopolitical struggle for regional supremacy between India and China -- a position that Kathmandu must navigate carefully.
“None of them (smaller Asian nations) want to become a de facto satellite state,” said Michael Auslin, Asia expert and fellow with the Hoover Institution.
“But by having both India and China essentially compete over it, from one perspective it makes it a battleground, from another perspective it means that Nepal is playing the two off against each other,” he added.
Meanwhile, the people of Janakpur are eagerly awaiting the rail revival that will connect them to India once again.
“When the train stopped, everything finished. Business has gone down for all of the city,” said bookshop owner Rajendra Kusuwah.
“After the new rail comes, it will open doors for development.”