The UK has joined the U.S. in issuing a stern warning to China regarding its increasingly aggressive actions in the South China Sea, particularly targeting Philippine vessels.
In a joint statement following the U.S.-UK Strategic Dialogue, the two nations condemned China’s actions, reaffirming their commitment to upholding international law.
“We stand united against any attempts to destabilise the region,” British Foreign Secretary David Lammy said. Both countries emphasised “the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.”
During the talks held in London, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Lammy reiterated the shared U.S.-UK commitment to “upholding the law of the sea” as outlined by the UN Convention.
They voiced serious concerns about China’s “destabilising actions in the South China Sea” and reaffirmed their collective goal to maintain a free and open Indo-Pacific. Both leaders condemned “unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion,” sending a strong message to China about the consequences of its aggressive behaviour.
Beyond addressing China, the dialogue covered other global security issues. Both nations reaffirmed their “unwavering support for Ukraine’s sovereignty,” discussing further military and financial aid while condemning recent Russian airstrikes.
The U.S. and UK also expressed concerns about Iran’s military support for Russia, pledging to impose “new and significant measures” in response. In the Indo-Pacific, the two countries committed to deepening their cooperation with partners such as Australia, exemplified by the AUKUS agreement, to bolster security and defence capabilities across the region.
The joint statement also touched on wider global security concerns, particularly in Europe. Both the U.S. and UK reaffirmed their “enduring support for Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity,” pledging further military and financial assistance.
The dialogue addressed ways to “mobilise resources for Ukraine and restrict Russian revenues,” condemning Russia’s recent airstrikes on civilians. They also highlighted concerns about Iran’s military support to Russia, confirming “coordinated action” against both nations and denouncing the transfer of ballistic missiles from Iran to Russia.
Additionally, the U.S. and UK spoke of the importance of “strengthening democratic resilience globally,” particularly through anti-corruption measures. The two nations reaffirmed their shared goal of combating “foreign information manipulation and interference,” particularly by Russia, and pledged to support Ukraine in its efforts to counter Kremlin disinformation.
Both nations also highlighted their ongoing efforts to drive economic growth through clean energy initiatives and committed to cooperating on climate leadership ahead of COP29.
It’s amazing how much UK US political relations have deteriorated that the most that comes out of a UK US summit, the first since 2010 with two left of centre leaders is a joint deceleration on freedom of navigation. Hardly an exciting or controversial topic.
Not a mention on trade or anything new or useful.
What has the U.K. got for a trade deal that the US would want?
The US wants access to current U.K. markets it’s not allowed in due to standards etc.
Seems a bit one sided with the U.K. not gaining much.
Yes but where there’s a will there’s a way on trade, the problem is both the Trump and now Biden administration have been populist governments built on protectionism. CPTPP was set up by the Obama administration but the US left. What has the US got to offer Britain? Not a lot other than dragging us into a potential pacific conflict. Seriously why should Britain be that bothered? The closest countries we are treaty bound to protect Malaysia, Brunei and Singapore are largely anti US and pro China so clearly the situation in the SCS does not bother them that much.… Read more »
UK isn’t treaty bound to defend any of those countries. Five eyes is a cooperation and intelligence sharing agreement.
Five powers not five eyes, different treaties. We do have treaty obligations to Malaysia and implied obligations to Brunei.
Yep wrong set of fives. But we do not have any obligation to defend Malaysia. We agreed to provide defence assistance on independence because of threats from Indonesia. Fighting lasted until 1966, when Indonesia accepted the formation of Malaysia.
The 1971 FPDA is consultative not the equivalent of NATO article 5.
Article 5 is also consultative though, countries are not legally obliged to fight under article 5. International treaties always work like this.
Because the impact of failing to deter a war there would probably collapse the global economy, and because we are heavily reliant on semiconductor products that are largely produced by Taiwan.
Yeah but we make up 0.5% of the global population. I’m all for pacific countries defending Taiwan and deterring China but just like they all ask whats in it for me should the UK not do the same? Japan, South Korea and the USA can all step up for this one. They are easily powerful enough to take on China. If they need help the likes of India can get off their ass and do something for a change instead of constantly supporting evil regimes while claiming moral superiority. Why is it always us having to get stuck in, can’t… Read more »
I sympathise with much of what you say but despite the dilution over time of the ties that bound us together I would not want to live in a country that wouldn’t send its forces to protect the people of Australia and New Zealand amongst one or two others in the region.
I couldn’t care less if they become republics but there are debts with those nations that are incalculable and cannot be simply cast aside.
Australia and NZ are a very long way way from China, NZ is very reluctant to confront China, Australia may be rapidly back tracking under its new government as well.
Perhaps we don’t need to get involved.
Living here in Aus for nearly 40 years i think I can safely say that Aussies don’t back track. They’re on the whole a fair, pragmatic and straightforward bunch. Call a spade a spade. They’ll handle China relations in the best of their national interest and they’ll be united and defend their freedoms and Western democratic values if ever threatened. Plus there’s some serious upgrading of their military going on.
The UK needs to make sure it can back all its foreign policy talk up with sufficient ships, subs, planes, missiles and all in the right places.
I don’t doubt the fortitude of the Australian people, I have doubt’s on the Australian Labour Party though. It’s sending very mixed signals. Should I be wasting billions in British tax payers money to build a navy to help defend Australia is Australia doesn’t want to get into the fight? I think the UK should support Australia in what ever it decides to do, I don’t think we should be like the USA however and lead Australia into a confrontational path against China it doesn’t want. If Australia was really that concerned by China it would not be making a… Read more »
I certainly don’t want us to get involved and if and it’s a big if we could increase SSN numbers over the next 20 years then I would suggest a couple RN boats based in the region along with Aussie and US boats is a sufficient deterrent. That with a softer presence of OPVs or light frigates and occasional deployments of larger units should with regional allies be enough. I don’t believe in withdrawing East of Suez but likewise it is not for us to bear a heavy burden whilst others watch on. Personally I think the above is within… Read more »
Agree, it’s worth noting though that most if our “trade” in the region is us importing vast amounts of consumer goods from Asia. Almost nothing physical goes the other way.
Should we spend billions on a navy to defend Chinese ships bringing South Korean TV’s and American smart phones to Britain.
Unfortunately as we are off shoring even more manufacturing to achieve net zero I suppose we might have to if we want to use the phone or watch TV. More seriously I think for the UK a navy and airforce as large as we can afford is fundamentally important for an island trading nation to defend itself and its interests. For that reason I think we need to be careful of any ideas that we should be Eurocentric focused and that somehow means a larger army at the expense of the RN and RAF. If we expect Asian countries to… Read more »
The more friends the merrier I reckon. In fairness to uk we sidestepped Vietnam so we don’t always get involved in usa wars . The thing with China, it really is aiming for world domination economically militarily and politically . So it’s vital there is a collective pushback from democratic nations . Australia and New Zealand will be toast if usa moves away from Pacific
Why will Aussies and NZ be toast ? Not like China have ever threatened them. Both countries have strong economic ties with China, and the Aussies only fell out with China when their Washington bosses started putting pressure on them to join the anti-china bandwagon. The collective west is merely making an enemy of China at the behest of the US who wants to keep it’s dominant position even if it comes at the expense of all their allies.
All true, hard to see if China really does have world domination on its mind though. It certainly wants to dominate its region but the EU an and the USA want the exact same thing. It’s impossible for China to dominate the world as the USA and Europe both exist. It might try and dominate Africa and Asia much as we did in the 19th century but then there is no money in that which is why we gave it up and having a strong out multi ethnic empire makes your incredibly vulnerable to attack as we found out in… Read more »
I’ll tell you exactly why the Yanks and the ENGLISH government always get stuck in. Two words; Anglo Saxons. The most warlike race in the entire world.
Attila the Hun might argue that point!
When did England get a Government? AD1277 maybe 🤔
Pretty good summary Jim!
yes, the way the usa used ww2 to essentially cripple the uk, including an insistence on loan repayments (up until 2000’s) does make one want to play by the same rule book wrt China. As you say.
I know its hard nosed, but I agree entirely with your principal behind this. I think our primary issue is essentially weak government who do not hold a long term geostrategic goal
I like that. We do have a responsibility to Australia and new Zealand who both fully supported us in two world wars. A UK fleet forward based to Malaysia etc is a No No in my opinion just a repeat of Force Z.
With Suez problematic maybe we should consider basing some units in Western Canada. Is South Africa still a viable route. Can the Carriers transit Panama? Do they have to go round the Horn?
What has the US got to offer Britain? Lots of cheap not organic food.
The idea that the USA can offer the uk cheap food is quite funny to me have you ever looked at what the USA pays for things in its supermarkets I remember people losing there minds about chlorine washed chicken maybe coming to the uk when there paying more than we do in the uk for chicken so I can’t see the USA shipping a chicken to the uk to lose money
I believe the USA can produce food cheaper than the UK however the cost of distribution in the USA is high and they have a limited super market competition in comparison to the UK on account of few players in the market and lower urban density.
Australia has much the same issue.
Super markets is probably the UK greatest global advantage.
No one else can beat M&S simply food on the planet 😀
I don’t know, the USA has plenty of supermarkets and have u seen the wages lately in the USA ? They dwarf ours in the U.K. there paying there police like 100k plus a year and your right shipping cost would be huge to get it to the U.K. that any saving on production would be lost shipping it across the sea
US wages are high cost are also high, much of it is to do with exchange rates. Sterling is still in the toilet.
If you like hormones in your meat 😀
I personally love USDA beef.
I am upset however about their constant need to pick on scotch whisky at the slightest hint of a trade problem.
Lots of war materials, food and oil if things go wrong apart from the Atlantic. I agree though they screwed us unfairly in WW1 and 2. They unconscionably held back in France in WW1.
Without British Empire holding out as a partner, eventually the USA was probably toast ( A Bomb excepted) but they never accepted that and still hardly ever do.
The BE brought the Merlin, Ultra, The RN, Bases and lots more to the party.
Plus they were defeated in trying to make a trade deal where if the UK did anything that harmed US buisnesses interests they could sue us!!!
Top UK exports in 2023. And just what does the UK have that the US needs?
Not a lot, hard to say the USA needs anything really. That’s kind of my point. The USA has little to offer and needs even less. Not really much of a basis for international relations. This is why the US is and always will be isolationist at heart. The 1945 to 2016 movement was more of a historical blip. Every other G7 and major G20 economy has entered into a trade agreement with us post Brexit or requested to do so. The US has gone out of its way to not offer any kind of trade agreement, We lack common… Read more »
I agree…the UK is just a US lackey with no material benefit to show for it.
The USA is always 2 or 3 Governments. You have the President and Congress and the individual states. Congress tends to be much more protectionist and often refuses to sign Treaties.
Well they are not left of center. In one of them the opposing candidate already had 2 murder attempts. And in UK that might not happened yet because the other side is really not the other side.
Britain warns China? If you do not behave we’ll send a gunboat. Ah, actually we can’t do that. Damn!
In the 1930s we appeased while rearming. Now we posture while disarming, which feels even worse. Speak loudly and carry a small twig.
In the 1930’s we had many security obligations, now we have very few.
Not a lot of countries in the pacific running to our aid so why should we bother.
Because we are hugely dependant on both imports & exports there as well as having the responsability of being a permanent member of the UN security council. The whole western democratic sphere is at risk from tyrranical CCP bent on world domination.
I’m not sure being a permanent UN Security Council member comes with any responsibility, one of them is currently invading another member while another is threatening to do so. One of them continuously props up a government in the Middle East that has been illegally occupying land since 1967 and shields them from all consequences and the other one is France. The western democratic sphere is fine as Russia is all but finished and China is no where near the west, China is as far away from the west as it’s possible to be. Lots of strong powerful counties in… Read more »
Agreed ccp quest for world domination is blatantly obvious . Economically militarily and politically. The whole world will be 1984 and animal farm all rolled into one. With happy cat memes to keep us amused via Tiktok 🙂
What’s the difference, they’re already keeping us amused on Tiktok, Instagram and Facebook while our precious democratic countries sponsor atrocities across the globe. At least the chinese isn’t bombing any country or supplying arms to genocidal regimes. I’d start worrying about them when chinese vessels start patrolling the western Pacific and sponsoring coups across different continents at will. Until then you will need present a more convincing argument to illustrate how a country who has not fired a single bullet against any other country since 1979 is somehow a threat to us all..
Agreed, a very dangerous precedent for both the UK and the US. The ChiComs are perfectly capable of arithmetic calculations and subsequently formijgy the appropriate conclusions.
…forming…🙄
The reality is the Chicoms are only adding up the following 1) can they bring about the near mutual destruction of the PLAN and USN in the china seas..if yes go to two ( and the probability is yes). 2) can they draw a war with the US into years..if they can gut the USN in the china seas if yes go to three ( again it’s a nation of billions with huge resources it can fight for years). 3) can they win politically. This essentially means can they suffer more without political collapse than the US population in a… Read more »
I do see the logic in a lot of what you say but I honestly can’t see a US/China war lasting more than a few weeks before someone’s starts seriously considering nukes. I simple can’t see any situation for long drawn out hostilities. It will be intense, concentrated violence and destruction on a level the world probably has not seen since WW2. When people talk about China’s ability to outbuild the US they seem to be applying the Ukr/Rus war to the way the US fights and that is simple not the case. US doctrine still relies heavily on the… Read more »
to be honest, most of the serous assessments I’ve read have the US and china going at it very long term..simply put they will not go nuclear because they will not have a driving need to, as it will not be existential for either nation..as for deep battle the same thing that stops to the nuclear war will stop the deep battle and that is the 12,000 miles that is the pacific. Basically you will end up with two giants who are to far from each other to achieve a killer blow, so they will simply bleed each other..neither of… Read more »
It’s not a that much of a deep battle for the US when launching longer range cruise missiles from penetrating bombers or ballistic missiles from mobile launchers from Japan, the Philippines and other outpost that are difficult to defend against. The recent deployment of the Typhon systems was to clearly demonstrate the fact that mainland China is within easy reach of US weapons. You can bet your last dollar that the dark shadow system will be deployed to the region as soon as it is declared operational. Things like the aim-174 is not just for show. All these new weapons… Read more »
What you failed to factor in your assessment is china’s military capabilities which frankly, we know little to nothing of the depth and sophistication of their gears. We in the west make a big song and dance about our military tech but forget that all our electronics and assembly lines comes from china. Even the US military admits that China are already ahead in missile tech. They reign supreme in civilian drone tech as well, do you really think that drone dominance does not extend to their military as well ? Any military base that the US can attack from… Read more »
When you say “we” do you mean civilians or do you mean for example, US intelligence? Because if you’re referring to US intelligence then you are terrible wrong. There is wide consensus that US intelligence has penetrated the highest levels of the CCP and the Chinese military. What you have failed to note is the rampant corruption in China that has allowed this. Have you ever heard of Qin Gang? or Wei Fenghe? or maybe even Li Shangfu? Have you? “Even the US military admits that China are already ahead in missile tech.” Please provide a source for this. “They… Read more »
I tried posting a link from bloomberg about china’s lead in hypersonic missile tech, but that’s still awaiting approval apparently. But then you can Google the information yourself if your bias will let you. China already has 2 stealth drone models publicly operational with the PLAAF, CH-7 and GJ-11, and have a hypersonic drone WZ-8. China not fighting any wars also has its advantages too(as we’ve seen in Ukraine), in the sense that it can present unexpected surprises in the battlefield, unlike the US who fights a war every fourth night( and lose most by the way). Every potential opponent… Read more »
Are you sure the drones you listed are really the examples of Chinese superiority in drones? Surely you are joking.
Are you going to address the rampant corruption in the Chinese military or how US intelligence have compromised them? Are you going to address the purge of senior military officials due to widespread corruption? Speaking about the Rus/Ukr war, will the Chinese weapons that make you so proud perform similar to the Russian ones in Ukraine?
You said that the chinese are unable to copy stealth drones and I gave examples of operational stealth drones already in the PLAAF fleet. The chinese high level military chi3fs you mentioned were charged for corruption, stripped of their military honour and jailed. That says nothing about US infiltration, except you have prove of this that you can share with us, there is absolutely no credibility to your assertion. The corruption and purge of some high ranking officers in the PLA is a testament to their zero tolerance for corruption irrespective of how high up you are, and I think… Read more »
I guess sarcasm was lost on you. Have you seen the pictures of the drones that you posted. Do you think those are stealthy?
You think it’s a good thing that some of the highest people in the Chinese military are being removed due to corruption. Doesn’t that make you wonder how many more of them are compromised? Or how many more of them secretly wish to live in the west are willing to work with western intelligence for a number of financial or moral reasons?
Now you are moving the goal post. Before you were sure the US intelligence have infiltrated the chinese military, I asked for prove and now it’s a hunch. Just because you think it doesn’t make it true mate. I really do think it is a good thing that corrupt top ranking officers are made an example of. And no, it doesn’t make me wonder how many more are left because if the generals can go down for corruption, then other corrupt personnel haven’t got a chance of getting away with it. That is a true working system in my opinion.… Read more »
I never said anything about a hunch. I’m saying what people with more more info are saying. Are you really asking me for proof that US intelligence has infiltrated the PLA? Are you for being serious?
With regards to the stealth drones I admit I had a different Chinese drone in mind than the copies you referred to. By the way those are still in development and not yet operational.
Okay can we say that the chinese intelligence have infiltrated the pentagon then ? That is actually more plausible to me just looking at the amount of Intel leaks the US have had in the past few years. As you said yourself the chinese copy US drones, I wonder how they got the blueprints. By your own assertion China knows more about the US military than the US knows about china’s PLA. Except we are never going to know the full extent of the exposure until a war breaks out.. But judging from the amount of US Intel and tech… Read more »
“Okay can we say that the chinese intelligence have infiltrated the pentagon then ?”
That is certainly possible. Let’s just agree to disagree but I would say judging by the historic levels of corruption in the Chinese system I know which military I think s more compromised.
It’s easy to deduce which military is more exposed, we can both check if any useful information about the PLA is in the public domain, what operations they’ve conducted, how many aircraft, drones, submarines or missile types. Western intelligence only has a ballpark of the number of surface vessels and that’s cos it can be spotted from satellite and we constantly hear how many ships the chinese navy have and the projected number in a few years. If the US knew the number or type of other equipments, it’d be in the public domain just like the number of ships.… Read more »
“It’s easy to deduce which military is more exposed, we can both check if any useful information about the PLA is in the public domain” This is untrue. In most of the close aircraft intercepts that happen over the South China Sea the US at times have issued the name of the Chinese pilot that was in the plane. Believe me the US often knows the names of the pilots in each unit. Even where they live. All this is relatively easy to find on the internet by the way. If amateurs can find it then I assure you that… Read more »
Not saying the US can’t find somethings about chinese military personnel, I only argue that US military secrets are probably more exposed than chinese ones. They are less prone to hacking cos they have an independent Internet from the rest of the world. We have the US showing what they can do in every corner of the world which is why we all know that the US military is feeble without ariel dominance, and with an opponent like China, anything you put in the air will not get close to chinese airspace without being intercepted. China had s slow balloon… Read more »
The thing is china simply does not see war in the same way as the west, they have a complete different paradigm..the modern western way of fighting has never actually been tested on a very large peer enemy with significant strategic reserves, land mass and a cohesive population that wants to fight…historically every time you have that mix a war drags on for ever and ever…even if you only have one of those a say “population with a will” the war drags on for ever…simply take Afghanistan..the west essentially won every battle, utterly dominating militarily and in the end lost… Read more »
“in effect china sees war as having 4 phases” Honestly I don’t see anything new or revolutionary here. This is standard warfare practiced by Russia and former ussr countries. I’m actually quite surprised that you placed so much faith in a country that has not shown any ability to engage in high intensity combat in recent history. Most of the personnel in the pla weren’t even alive the last time they were in a conflict and the tactics used that time is considered primitive by today’s standard. Have you seen the analysis on their recent large scale exercises and the… Read more »
I think your completely missing the key point here..I am not saying they would in the end win or loss..I think anyone who makes an assumption on who would win when two great powerblocks go to war is an idiot. But the risk is if china calculates that it could win and starts the war, because at that point it would be irrelevant if china won or lost..because it’s a zero sum game, the war kicks off and the west loses even if it wins..the loss of life, the destruction and economic damage would be catastrophic..the aim should focused on… Read more »
No I didn’t see that as the main point of your post. You implied numerous times that China was now or soon had this great military that would overrun the US. Now nothing is impossible as they have the human resources and the economy but my point is there is no indication that they have the military know how as yet. The point you keep ignoring is in terms of knowledge and experience and tonnage the USN still dwarfs the PLAN and it will remain that way for many years to come. Another element to consider is the looming demographic… Read more »
Never did I say overrun the US, that’s a ridiculous proposition..because neither the U.S. or china could overrun the other..that’s the point. It then comes to which nation has the greatest will to win the particular fight..for china Taiwan is a totemic issue of national unity..Taiwan to china is a part of its nation held by another power..what is it to the average U.S. voter who will suffer economic hardship and see reports of many thousands of US servicemen dead. Let’s be really clear the last war the US and Uk were involved in they lost, soundly and completely, their… Read more »
“neither the U.S. or china could overrun the other” Why are you so sure about this? Maybe overrun is too strong a term here but I really don’t understand why you think that they would fight to a stand still. “Taiwan to china is a part of its nation held by another power..what is it to the average U.S. voter who will suffer economic hardship and see reports of many thousands of US servicemen dead.” Taiwan in itself not so much but walking away from Taiwan would signal an embarrassing retreat from the pacific and the world stage for the… Read more »
They won’t be building any warships if they take on the USA & allies so their shipyards are all destroyed.
And how will the US do that ? When china flattens every major base in the western pacific..?
Actually we are fitted for but not with a twig.
We need to get to the ROOT of the problem and then BRANCH out with all our services but our politicains are all such SAPS…😉
FFBNEW small twig.
We do have a gun boat there presently but we are also just about to send an aircraft carrier four missile boats and a nuclear powered monster to the SCS.
Not many can do that.
There is no way that the UK could sustain a carrier group east of Suez. It doesn’t have the escorts, it doesn’t have the aircraft, it doesn’t even have the sailors to do that. For the past twenty years, Britain has cut its defence capabilities. It is amazing how, as capabilities have been cut, Britain’s rhetoric has become ever more shrill.
I don’t think that’s true. Britain could sustain a carrier group east of Suez, but it would require a tremendous shift in resources away from the Atlantic and Europe leaving us very vulnerable
Yes, we easily could, albeit not while maintaining standing NATO commitments. However, given the A2/AD environment China has created and the limited range of carrier aircraft and their ordnance, I’m not sure how useful it would be in an all-out war.
in reality there will be a couple of theatres of any china US war, one of those will be the western Indian occean theatre as china attempts to cut the Euro pacific shipping lanes as well as keep its own lanes to the gulf and Africa open. As the pacific is a very long way from Europe and the U.S. is a long way from the western Indian occean, the most sensible approach would be for any UK carrier battle group to take the western Indian Ocean focusing on combating any Chinese surface action groups, subs or even a carrier… Read more »
We have two, we can sustain one anywhere we want but what would be the point in sustaining one east of Suez?
Are we desperate to get involved in more Middle East wars? Perhaps we see an opportunity to get ourselves glassed to protect the oil extraction rights of dictatorships in south east Asia.
See Jonathan’s reply above
Why would you need to sustain a carrier group east of Suez? We have several massive air bases scattered through the region and almost no interest past the Arabian gulf.
Why would you think a country in the North Atlantic would either want or need to have a super carrier (1 of 13 such vessels that even exist on planet earth) in an ocean on the other side of the planet.
Yep. Next year for a tour and then out again for another three or four years, if not forever. Xi must be quaking.🙃
If only there where four other countries with our capability then we could all just rotate. Neither China, India or Japan keep a carrier in the Atlantic, why would we think to keep one in the pacific or Indian Ocean. The USA can only do this because it has a two ocean coast’s. We could do this and had to when we controlled most of the countries boardering the Indian Ocean. Now we just have Diego Garcia, where is the interest for the UK in defending the region? Most of the countries in this region are either blatantly supporting Russia… Read more »
You may be right Jim, assuming we pull back to being a Euro orientated country AGAIN…. I don’t know whrer we are with policy any more European, Indian Ocean, Asia Pacific. Having spent thirty years making a complete “pigs ear” of defence I’m not sure if we even have the right kit.
I think we essentially pulled back to being a Euro orientated country in 1904 with the signing of the Entente Cordiale. Europe is where most of the good stuff is anyway and not much useful is happening outside the North Atlantic area. We are rapidly getting ourselves off of middle eastern oil, once we do should we really care that much about anywhere outside of the Euro Atlantic Area. Having global supply chains in Asia is doing us no favours. None of these countries seem to like us much, many of them wanted independence from us and f**k all to… Read more »
There’s truth in what you say. I’m in two minds myself about what we can sensibly do. With the Med. taken care of and the U.S. moving even more to the Asia/Pacific the North Atlantic is our patch really, along with the JEG countries. AUKUS and now our links with Japan need to be protected but to what extent?? We’ll have to wait until next year I suppose for the new political types to make up thier mind.
All it will take to sink the carrier group is 3 waves of 48 cruise and ballistic missiles fired in 5mins intervals. The chinese already ran that simulation 4 years ago. Big boats and aircraft carriers are 20th century tech meant to intimidate low tech militaries.
Yes, it’s been like that since the 1960’s which is why we got rid of aircraft carriers in the 70’s. Trouble is 99% of the time intimidating lower tech militaries is exactly what you want to do with your military and not having carriers leads to national embarrassment (see Falkland Islands 1982 for more details)
Believe it or not the USA and the uk combined could cripple chinas economy overnight if it wanted to not everything has to be a military answer
I do believe it. I’ve been on about it for years. It’s as if we decided in the 1930′ to buy everything from Nazi Germany so they could afford to re-arm.
Exactly and sooner or later the USA is going to get sick of China and it’s going to pull the plug on China and we will follow suit and the military won’t have to fire a shot
Well, it’s taken us thirty years NOT to do it Tim, but I hope you’re right and it’s not too late.
To be fair chinas military isn’t a match for the USA but it’s getting more of a threat and could give it a headache but it couldn’t defeat the USA China is also rotten to the core with corruption
…. and America isn’t?
No not compared to China no it isn’t don’t mistake corporates padding our military contracts as the same as Chinese troops selling rocket fuel or generals selling officer positions or troops selling off anything they can lay there hands on it’s just laughable to even try and claim the u.s military is as corrupt as China
It is laughable to think the US military is less corrupt than the chinese. At least in China you go to jail or face the death sentence when found guilty even if you are the chief of army staff. I am yet to see any high ranking military personnel convicted of corruption in the US. Except you want to tell that almost $900 billion yearly is spent judiciously without any high level corruption.
Behave will u
I didn’t say anything about the U.S. miltary being corrupt. I’ve actually met a good number of them. It’s the likes of the two parties, the unions, the crime bosses, the property fiddles and I could go on. That is where the problem is. A great chunk of the U.S. is living in poverty
Ok then we were talking about the military but ok then, so u think the Chinese government and country is less corrupt than the usa, again that is absolutely insane, China is the most corrupt country me and my wife have ever had the misfortune to have had dealings with they literally fake food on an industrial level
I did’nt say that either Tim. Let’s leave it be .
Well… I doubt that, considering the US has not really won any war its been in since 1945. With all the shiny military gear, they left Vietnam and Afghanistan humiliated, and that’s against sandal wearing militias at best. What chances does the US have against China with their industrial capacity ? The collective west cannot even supply enough ammunition to Ukraine. Just 1 Chinese automated factory can literally manufacture over 200 engines for cruise missiles in 1 day, the collective west might manage that number in 1 month. The Ukraine war has taught us that big military hardwares like tanks… Read more »
You clearly don’t understand that missiles need to know where ships are to hit them and China hasn’t got a chance in hell of getting anywhere near a u.s carrier group in the event of a war and why would the USA want to get to the Chinese mainland ? The USA would destroy chinas economy first then strike from the air it wouldn’t need to land troops lol and I’m guessing u don’t read much if u think the USA hasn’t beat anyone since ww2
You are clearly not following recent events. Why do you think the chinese have these fancy satellites system Beidou which is proven to be more advanced than the GPS. They’ve literally been able to track US warships across the globe using artificial intelligence powered satellite since 2021. They can even track US naval assets on US mainland, how much more in the SCS where they have a concentration of radar systems and censors. And yes, the US lost most wars its been in since WW2. If you don’t think so, please do enlighten us on what wars the US have… Read more »
The amount of wishful thinking going on in the comments here is baffling. It almost feels like everyone on here is living in the 80s and early 90s. You talk about crippling the chinese economy without factoring in the blowback effect on US and especially the European economy. Any all out war with China will have the European economy on its knees way before the chinese simply because the produce everything and do business with most of the world. They will take massive pains losing the western economies(whom themselves will be unable to take the pain)but that still leaves the… Read more »
They really don’t have a clue of the hole we are in unfortunately. They are incapable of looking at deconstructionist post marxist culture that permeates all western countries.
Where making things are punished, but being a paper mover political bureaucrat/journalist is not.
So u actually think China could defeat the USA in a war are u really saying that just so I know ?
In a shooting war in the SCS or Taiwan strait, China has the home advantage. Most of their military assets are around the region and can be used and rearmed at a moment notice. How long do you think it’d take the US to rearm a Carrier strike group in an all out war ?
How long would it take to rearm it’s got 10 carriers it could have a group on station permanently and do u think the USA would just operate off the coast of China and let them have the advantage lol China would want to take Taiwan the USA could lay off the coast and shoot down anything China has the minute China tried to land forces it would be destroyed not that it would get to that stage as the USA could have chinas economy destroyed in 6 months if it wanted too you clearly don’t understand how powerful the… Read more »
And you clearly underestimate the opponent you have in China. The US have been trying to destroy China’s economy since 2014 yet China keeps making new strides in sectors the US are struggling to compete in. The US can have 20 carriers and it won’t make any difference in an all out war with China. They already ran that simulation several times and know its not a war they can win. China can track US war ships even in US mainland with artificial intelligence powered satellites and can sink a carrier strike group with several waves of ballistic missiles. Now… Read more »
Firstly the USA hasn’t been trying to destroy China since 2014 lol and I’ve already told u on day one of a hot war between China and the USA China wouldn’t have any satellites to track anyone and u seem to have really bought into the Chinese propaganda of what there military is capable of they only had a combined HQ for all its forces in the past 5 years and don’t have a blue water navy yet u think they can go head to head with the USN ha ha ha don’t make me laugh
For a military that could not defeat the taliban or Vietnam farmer militias, you seem to be the one buying into the Hollywood propaganda. So somehow you believe the US have all these capabilities that is yet to be tested by any sophisticated military. Carpet bombing a country with barely any airforce is different from being in a conflict with a peer competitor. We saw how good the so called cutting edge stealth F-117 nighthawk was when it got shot down in Kosovo using old soviet missile system, and also how the much vaunted sentinel drone was hacked and hijacked… Read more »
As for Blue Water navy, that is US’s priority. Just cos you want to patrol the world and get into other people’s business does not mean the chinese have to want the same. Their navy is built to protect their territorial interests not to be like the US. A blue water navy isn’t needed if your priority is the Asia Pacific. The chinese aren’t planning to go fight the US in the western hemisphere, it is the US who is planning on fighting in the Taiwan strait and SCS. So I don’t understand your emphasis on a blue water navy…
We’ve got a tiny River OPV with a pea shooter in the region. They’ve got the largest fleet in the world, still rapidly growing. Thankfully most other main nations in the region have also been expanding their fleets accordingly rather than cutting to oblivion like we have.
Thirty years of stupidity Frank, and I can’t see this lot improving anything.
‘Look at this photograph of a battleship Mr Xi! We have more photographs like that!’
China is like the Brits – only interested in making money. Stop taking about war and get on with trade. Rising power India worries Pekin – I’m old and that’s easy to spell! – more than the U.S. I imagine.
👍😉
I bet Xi is utterly pooing himself.
He’s a complete dictator, so he will employ someone else to do it for him!
The duplicated articles on UKDJ are getting a bit annoying now.
I don’t know what is causing them, but filling the news section with the same repeated article with slight variations is causing important news to disappear in so short a time that I am missing some articles completely.
George et al, pls fix, it’s putting me off checking the website.
Yes UKDJ quality has been going down,
And no article about 2 manufacturers that retired from medium helicopter competition tells me something is going on and do not look pretty for UKDJ.
Wow another strongly worded letter. Wonder if the defence budget can up its stationary purchases to keep up with this.
Yes I bet the PLAN are reconsidering the wisdom of commission 6-10 major warships a year..just incase the U.S. and UK get very upset and well jell.
Jonathan. Mate. You know the US is still the only true global superpower with unmatched capabilities across all domains. The Chinese know this. Ship building numbers are only one part of the puzzle. They don’t have any real combat experience. None. Like the Russians, they are very good at shouting big numbers, and equally good at hiding their many shortcomings. They are not free thinkers. Copy cat technology. No mass production 5th gen capability of any description. Nothing close to the quality of western capability and training. I’d still take an early F16 over anything they call 5th gen. 4th… Read more »
This this the interesting thing, from the analysis I’ve been reading china knows this as well..and they expect to loss a lot..what china thinks is it can drag the west into a long drawn out war in which it will out suffer the west…essentially if it can gut the USN in the western pacific..hammer the wests Economic model by essentially shutting down world trade for a couple of year of war..it thinks the wests populations, who are rich pampered, split, not cohesive and unwilling to suffer will essentially force its “weak” governments into a peace treaty. Where as china’s population… Read more »
But do normal Chinese citizens and a much larger middle class that want and have a similar standard of living as us have any appetite for such a conflict. I doubt it. They want McDonald’s and Disneyland and holidays to London like we do. China will have seen and felt the impact to the global economy from the war in Ukraine. Surely that has set off alarm bells in Beijing, that economically, any conflict with Taiwan, the Americans or any of its very well-equipped neighbours, would be devastating for them.
Worth a look at china’s demographic problem.
The problem is Robert, china is not the west and they are not a western population, they are a highly controlled population that has lived with generations under a communist regime that is practically a state religion..the population of china is far closer to say the population of the third Reich..they generally believe in the teaching of Mao..( the majority do and those that don’t know to shut up or be re-educated). what they fundamentally believe and all believe is ..Taiwan is china and the west is bullying their nation over part of their own sovereign soil not only that… Read more »
The difference is though, Taiwan has a democratically elected government and is free to rule as it pleases. It has not been overtaken by a western nation, although I do recognise it does have close ties to the US both financially and military. I don’t agree that young Chinese are signing up for these beliefs, and will eventually push back against it’s communist rulers. They look how they are making a royal mess of Hong Kong. A ruling party based more on fear and control will not inspire it’s population to fight to the death for a small island off… Read more »
The journal of contemporary china, did a blind study this last year and it found the 55% support the armed reunification of China while only 30% supported only peaceful reunification ( the reunification agenda was 100% supported). You have to remember that although the CCP have doubled down on reunification even without the CCP china would still attempt to reclaim Taiwan, This is really based on what is essentially a Chinese religion 大一统 or great reunification, to the Chinese wanting to reclaim bits of china is not really a political position it’s completely indoctrinated into their national self belief, governments… Read more »
Issuing stern warnings to China doesn’t carry much weight coming from people who are so spineless that they won’t even let Ukraine use Storm Shadow to defend itself properly for fear of upsetting a country (Russia) with much less military potential than China has.
The UK is simply an errand boy for the US. When the pentagon says jump, the MOD asks how high ?
Not quite that simple Ian,because of the risk of dragging NATO into the war the decision on using Storm Shadow is not really ours alone. Believe it or not permission to use these weapons has to come from SACEUR! The problem with that is he is always American and ultimately guess who he is answerable too?
Looks like Italy will be joining the next CSG.
Unfortunately the only thing that will convince china is if it is 100% convinced it would loss a long war completely. If it thinks it can draw the west into a mutually destructive war in which the peace terms give it Taiwan it will go for it. The west has in reality only three options open to it. 1) complete deterrent across all domains of conflict.that includes: political warfare ( willingness of the population to suffer and ability to attack opponents politically ) dominance of world supply chains, industrial output, dominance of raw materials, manpower and military capacity…the war is… Read more »
But going to war with USA etc will cut off the demand for cheap Chinese products from the USA & Europe, damaging PRC’s industries & economy. Even if China gained Taiwan, it would lose far more as a consequence.
The thing is china is the CCP and for the CCP the single most import thing is reunification..for them it’s the single most important thing…it’s essentially a state religion..they even venerate the idea of suffering to achieve unification…they will suffer almost anything for it as long as they think they will achieve it. To understand this you really have to read the writings of Mao, consider and then really read up in Xi and realise that he’s not a standard dictator but a man who has been completely brainwashed into the CCP religion of reunification created by Mao..this man was… Read more »
I think trying to take Taiwan could actually precipitate the downfall of the CCP. Xi is already 71 so may not last a lot longer & this focus on reunification ignores the other half of the equation/quote, ” long united, must divide”.
I just hope & pray when change comes to China it is peaceful & not at the cost of millions of lives.
“Ship me somewheres east of Suez, where the best is like the worst,
Where there ain’t no Ten Commandments an’ a man can raise a thirst;
For the temple-bells are callin’, an’ it’s there that I would be.”
After letting Russia get away with such grevious “aggressive behaviour” for so long we need to take the brakes off UKR plus give air support. Then our warnings to China might carry some weight. We’ve been doing it all wrong, just pleading without any consequences. WW3 will be over & done & we’ll still be trying to cut further with the “peace dividend”!
I hope this new Labour government is considering the role of the special relationship in Britains foreign policy. It doesn’t necessarily need changing but it does need re-evaluating every so often, like all things.
It would be foolish to let the special relationship become some sort of universal truth, something we take part in just because that’s the way things are, rather than a calculated position for our foreign policy.
The special relationship exists inside government and miliatry circles automatically, politicans on both side of the Atlantic avoid it at all cost. In Britain the special relationship is politically toxic since Trump came to power and it’s especially toxic for labour since the Blair years. Look how subdued Starmers meetings are with Biden compared to the fan fair with Germany last week. In the US politicans don’t even have a foreign policy anymore. No US candidate wants to be seen with any foreign leader as both the Republican and Democratic base are anti foreign. America closed the door on trade… Read more »
I’m sure that’ll tell em. Us with our 24 soldiers, 4 tanks and an old Spitfire. Terrifying.
I think we have to rise above this ‘what do we get out of the USA-UK relationship?’ and look at the bigger picture. Yes, the US is protectionist, hovering on isolationist, self-interested and not too interested in the UK, except when we are buying expensive kit from them, supporting them in expeditionary wars, letting US companies take over British ones and turning a blind eye to Israel”s colonisation of the West Bank.. We behaved similarly with our Empire and Dominions when we were top dog, it goes with the territory. The bigger picture is that the democratic order and international… Read more »
Bravo Cripes, Jim and Jonathon. Can we have a like button please ? Can those excellent posts be amalgamated into a foreign affairs style article by their authors please. How is it that the clear eyed, common sense, utilitarian foreign policy direction we are reading here is not commonly expressed in the mainstream ? Does it appear too left wing perhaps, in the sense it opposes laissez faire globalist trade and that idealogical inertia cannot overule the invisible hand of the market. Whose bastard hands are they, I have a clipboard let’s use it to take names …