U.S. media said more worried about China than the U.S. aircraft carriers and missile submarines
view pictures from the spread of the Internet, Kuznetsov aircraft carrier will soon test the sea water.
According to the United States, “Eurasia Review” Web site on May 23 Journal article said the United States is the development of sea-air combat theory, in response to China’s “anti-intervention” strategy. If both misunderstood each other’s intentions, will give the region at risk.
the two countries should confirm their mutual intention of the current military, they become constantly hard, may lead to miscarriage of justice; Therefore, the two countries should further explain the plans and intentions.
China’s growing military capability has deepened U.S. concerns, some of these capabilities in a “counter-intervention” in nature, may make the situation in the United States in East Asia, the action becomes complex. For example, in the Taiwan Strait or the Korean peninsula conflict. In response to “anti-access” strategy, the Pentagon proposed a new deal with “anti-intervention” strategy of offensive theory. China-US high-level dialogue for the first time the recent Chinese military presence, their presence helps to enhance mutual understanding of each other’s military intentions.
Subsequently, the article on “anti-intervention” strategy and made a theoretical analysis of the sea air, and that the two countries should strengthen dialogue, enhance understanding of both military intentions to reduce false positives.
China’s anti-intervention capability
China is gaining a powerful new military capabilities, especially stealth fighters, submarines and anti-ship ballistic missile systems of new . Among them, anti-ship ballistic missiles could hit U.S. carrier battle groups. Although, Beijing claims that these capabilities for self-defense, can the Washington think they can stop U.S. involvement in East Asian regional affairs.
perhaps, the United States is not worried about China’s aircraft carrier in service, because it can not be compared to the U.S. aircraft carrier. In contrast, China’s submarines, land-based attack aircraft and missiles, the U.S. even more worried. Chinese defense white paper in 2010 failed to mention these, not to mention explain to explain to them. On the contrary, the defense white paper highlights to help China’s military expansion and global security, soft power.
The article said that “sea air theory” was aware of the United States from China’s “anti-access” threat, made the most significant response. The theory first appeared in the United States in 2010 “Quadrennial Defense Review Report”; the report declared that “the Air Force and Navy should jointly develop a new theory of joint sea-air, in a series of military operations to defeat the enemy; including with advanced ‘anti- intervention ‘and regional denial capabilities of the enemy “
” Quadrennial Defense Review Report, “continued:” The theory describes how the Air Force and Navy operations in all areas (air, sea, land, space, network) integration capabilities, freedom of action to deal with the U.S. facing a growing challenge. “theories about the content of the sea air has not said that China is one of the enemy, U.S. officials said in their statement, the theory is not aimed at China, but species is not quite convincing. Of course, China believes that the theory is for them; China’s critics to respond accordingly. However, their response may result in over-interpretation of the theory. China should understand the public’s military strategy and military theory, the importance of democracy; especially in the United States, defense spending through congressional hearings and public comments made a lot of review. Unfortunately, the “China threat theory” in the U.S. critics and became popular among the population.
a military doctrine (such as the sea air) and public awareness of the domestic audience and international audience is equally important, the domestic audience, including people need to understand the military, national defense budget approved by the politicians, and most importantly the need for such a theory to start training and deployment of tactical military personnel themselves.
foreign audiences, including: the need for the U.S. commitment to friends and allies, and the need to position the U.S. national defense information on the seriousness of the potential enemy. Because the Pentagon is facing major financial cuts, the theory of sea air may be mainly the domestic audience.
Cold War legacy
sea-air theory with the late Cold War the United States elements of a successful strategy, that strategy led to the disintegration of the former Soviet Union; including defense for Western Europe U.S. Navy land and sea combat strategy theory. This includes a war when the two superpowers, to take the offensive deployment of the former Soviet Navy trapped in their domestic waters. These strategies will help make the former Soviet Union believe that the war against the West can not be won. However, the theory of sea air in China who can produce similar results.
now, a contentious issue is that the sea air as the theory of such a strategy in the current strategic environment is appropriate. If appropriate, people need to better explain them. There is no Cold War between China and the U.S., they are not similar between the United States and the former Soviet Union’s strategic competitor. Bottom line is that Washington should avoid the development of China and caused the other tit for tat response strategy. U.S. military officials should strengthen dialogue to avoid such results.
Sino-US competition, or even the possibility of conflict is the region’s most worrying scenario. In the past year, Beijing’s response to the U.S. Navy exercises in the Yellow Sea, as well as Beijing and Washington, differences exist in the South China Sea view confirmed the possibility of increased competition.
worry Southeast Asian countries, especially China and the U.S. in the region may lead to tension, though it is not; U.S. military strategy seems to exist on the offensive side of the irrational. To cover high-level dialogue talks between military officials, such as the recent talks in Washington to help promote greater understanding of the parties’ intentions. (Sri Lanka years)