The possibility of a direct military conflict between the UK and China has generated discussion and concern in recent years, especially as tensions over territorial disputes and trade issues increase.
This article will compare the capabilities of the British and Chinese militaries while also considering the use of nuclear deterrence, soft power, and hard military force.
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
Even if the Chinese military has a numerical advantage, a hypothetical conflict’s result would ultimately depend on a number of variables, such as global alliances, technology, and strategic judgement.
Strong military force and ‘hard power’
The British military is one of the most modern and well-trained forces in the world and has a long history of maritime strength. However, when comparing Chinese and British military capabilities, China has a numerical advantage and it is important to remember that.
In terms of military and economic power, China is generally considered more powerful than Britain. China has the world’s largest standing army and the second-largest defence budget, while Britain has a smaller but highly advanced military force.
While China has a larger military and a bigger defence budget, Britain has several advantages and capabilities that allow it to counter the Chinese military in certain situations. Here are some key advantages:
- Technical sophistication: The British military is outfitted with cutting-edge equipment, including communications networks, surveillance systems, and weapons. Even when facing a numerically superior foe like China, the British armed forces can be more effective and efficient thanks to their technological advantage.
- Tools for obtaining intelligence: Britain has a strong intelligence infrastructure that is essential for learning about possible enemies. Important organisations include the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), which specialises in human intelligence, and the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), which specialises in cybersecurity and signals intelligence. The ability of British intelligence agencies to intercept and analyse a wide variety of conversations and data allows them to gain important insights into the actions and goals of potential enemies like China.
- British satellite systems are available to enable intelligence gathering, reconnaissance, and surveillance. These systems include satellites run by the United Kingdom as well as those of its partners, most notably the United States, thanks to agreements for the exchange of intelligence. Satellite-based intelligence can help with targeting during military operations, follow the movement of assets, and provide early warning of military activities.
- Advanced cyber capabilities are available in Britain, which can be utilised both defensively and offensively. Critical infrastructure can be safeguarded by the nation’s cyber forces, which can also intercept enemy communications and shut down their systems while gathering information on their intents and capabilities. These capabilities can be extremely important in fending off possible digital attacks from China.
- Professionalism and training: The British military is renowned for its strict training requirements, professionalism, and sense of discipline. These characteristics help to create a combat force that is highly capable and skilled and that can successfully take on a variety of military challenges, including those posed by China.
The important elements that would affect the outcome of a potential conflict include the calibre and technology of military hardware, the training and experience of personnel, and strategic decision-making.
Foreign policy and ‘soft power’
In the modern world, soft power is crucial for influencing other countries’ tastes and behaviours through appeal and persuasion. As a result of its lengthy history, illustrious cultural institutions, robust higher education system, and extensive usage of the English language, the United Kingdom has a significant soft power footprint in the world.
British diplomacy and global participation are well-respected, and the UK is frequently regarded as a leader in fora like the UN and other international organisations.
Even in the case of a potential clash with China in international waters, these elements may help to prevent conflicts and encourage amicable settlements of differences.
US and Britain providing Australia with nuclear submarines to counter China through AUKUS
The creation of the AUKUS alliance is a recent change in the global geopolitical scene that affects the British military’s capacity to confront China in international waters. Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States are partners in a trilateral security arrangement known as AUKUS.
The deal to give Australia nuclear-powered submarines to improve its naval capabilities and stave off possible threats, especially from China, is one of the partnership’s key tenets.
The British and American governments’ use of their technological know-how, resources, and strategic alliances to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific area is an example of their soft power.
Australia’s naval capabilities will be greatly improved by the delivery of nuclear-powered submarines, allowing it to project power more successfully and retain a greater presence in the region. As a result, a stronger security network is built, which can serve as a deterrence to any possible Chinese assault in the region.
The AUKUS collaboration emphasises the value of global coalitions in resolving future crises. The United Kingdom is able to pool resources and expertise with the United States and Australia, building a collective security architecture that is better suited to compete with China in international waterways.
This collaborative strategy highlights the importance of diplomacy and collaboration in tackling international security issues and underlines the necessity of soft power in influencing global relations.
The Nuclear Option
Nuclear weapons are part of the United Kingdom’s arsenal of defensive tools. Four Vanguard-class submarines that can each carry up to 16 Trident II D5 ballistic missiles outfitted with multiple nuclear warheads make up the Trident nuclear deterrent used by the United Kingdom.
Because a nuclear battle would be disastrous for all parties concerned, the existence of nuclear weapons serves as a deterrence to potential enemies, including China. This deterrent effect promotes diplomatic resolutions to international conflicts and helps to avoid direct military clashes.
Conflict is unlikely
While the British military is strong and well-equipped, it may not match China’s naval forces in terms of sheer numbers. However, the UK’s soft power, strong international relationships, and nuclear deterrent play a significant role in influencing global affairs and preventing direct military confrontations.
In the event of a potential conflict in international waters for example, various factors, including international alliances, technology, and strategic decision-making, would determine the outcome.
Yet, it is crucial to stress that diplomacy and talks are the best ways to settle disputes between states, and both the UK and China would probably choose these strategies over using armed action.
In what context is the question posed? Are we talking about a conflict in the North Atlantic, at a geographically neutral location or in the Taiwan Strait? In what plausible scenario are we in conflict with China without the US (and probably Australia and Japan) being similarly inclined?
The chances of a UK-China solo war are almost non existent now that we have given up Hong Kong. The only plausible situation would be perhaps an invasion of Brunei however I can’t imagine that happening without the international community and especially US, Australia and Singapore being involved. However if the UK did go to war solo with China then the UK would win in about a year. It would win the way it always fights wars against continental opponents with big army’s, blockade. With Diego Garcia the UK can blockade the India Ocean-Malacca straits. Bases in the Caribbean (Cayman/BVI)… Read more »
What planet are you on?
Blockade?
The only saving grace is that we would not be on our own.
It’s called Earth, you should come and visit, it’s nice.
I am here, perhaps you missed the point.
Yes I missed your point, it appears you just insulted me but did not actually make a point about what I said.
Or did I miss something?
Insult yes. I was making the point that the concept of the RN, I who hugely respect, blockading China, is foolish. Perhaps they will dust of HMS Victory. However China is not France. Suggest we let it rest.
Yes but the premise of the question is could the UK take on china solo not should the UK take on China solo. Clearly no nuclear weapon states should ever get in to direct conflict.
I’m having difficulty with this whole concept.If any western country has an issue with China clearly trade will be a factor. As we have found out with Ukraine most western countries will rally round if there is a genuine issue however stopping trading with China would be far easier than sinking shipping.The lifeblood of modern China is trade with the world. Whilst they would not starve it would be a problem to lose just 10% of their trade. The danger in my view is that the remaining autocratic countries could band together and lash out at the rest of the… Read more »
That’s impossible! I do not know where you’ve been for the past 30 years. With good luck, we could probably do what you suggest for a couple of weeks but then attrition would see us looking for a peace treaty to save our skins. We have six destroyers and eleven frigates compared to a cold war strength of more than 50. The Army and RAF are in a far worse state. Granted, todays equipment is superior to those of 30 years ago. But such a small fleet cannot hope to be in several locations at once to contain a much… Read more »
I am guessing strategy and Geo politics is not an area your familiar with George but you don’t need a fleet to blockade a straight. You can use aircraft, small boats, mines, helicopters and an entire bunch of other things when you have a land base at each choke point. We are the only country in the world with a land base at each choke point based on 100% sovereign territory. This is the exact strategy used to defeat Germany twice and France once. You can have the largest navy in the world but if that navy can’t hunt Astute… Read more »
By all means keep guessing Jim. If I’m not mistaken the quite numerous ChiCom PLA Missile Forces have hundreds of DF-26 capable of reaching Guam and Diego Garcia from mainland China. They are stationed on it’s “newly acquired” island fortresses too. Which should be close enough to enable final stage maneuvering to avoid interception. That assumes they do not deploy them elsewhere or on cargo ships. Saturating our defences. The PLA have other missile assets too, capable of adding to the carnage. Submarine, surface ship and air launched. They also have a system of ocean hydrophones listening for enemy submarine… Read more »
DF26 is out of range of Diego Garcia from mainland China without shooting over India from Tibet. Not a good idea shooting ballistic missiles over a nuclear armed country. Indeed it’s probably an act of war. Possibly from Some South China Sea bases but it would have to cross Indonesian airspace and Malaysian. If it’s on an island it’s highly vulnerable to a counter strike from British Block V tomahawk. If the Chinese are getting to magically put DF26 on cargo ships like it’s a Tom Clancy novel can I put ATACMS and Storm shadow on a cargo ship too… Read more »
As for oil imports from Russia these are still a very small part of Chinas imports and there are very hard limits to what can be moved over pipelines especially through Siberia or across the Himalayan mountains. The bulk of Chinas crude imports go through malacca with significant amounts coming trans pacific from Venezuela and Brazil all of which we could stop with a blockade.
You have correctly identified the issue is geo-political and China suffers from limitations that cannot be solved militarily. The resolve shown by the Allies is the crucial part of AUKUS, not so much the hardware that won’t be seen until Xi is a distant memory; the Chinese want to be rich even more than victorious. In any case, China, like everyone else on this planet cannot put enough muscle behind moving continents. I asked JohninMK to identify the pipeline or lines bringing Russian oil to China but so far have not received a reply.
Mate, one of the tidbits coming out of Xi Jinping’s meeting with Putin in Russia last week, was to have at least two new pipelines transferring gas and oil from Russia to China.
They might take a while to build even for the Chinese!
The problem with oil pipelines in cold places is that you need to keep them warm otherwise the oil viscosity rises / gels.
You also need a lot of pumping to get over mountains.
Gas needs pumping too: it isn’t as simple as pressurise the Russian end and out pops gas the Chinese end!
Thanks Davey. Just picked this up. The terrain to be crossed will be a challenge and I doubt either Xi or Putin will see this finished.
Just seen this comment. No idea, you could Google it.
Russia already sends gas to China via its Power of Siberia pipeline, which began pumping supplies in 2019, and by shipping liquefied natural gas (LNG). It exported 16.5 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas to China in 2021.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Priyanka-Desouza/publication/319332873/figure/fig10/AS:532729697247254@1504024065830/Russia-China-Oil-Pipelines.png
Thank you. Your comrade in arms JohninMK was less forthcoming. This is why China is actively commissioning a huge coal fired energy programme at this time. Russia has not the existing infrastructure to back up its promises of largesse – a country that is impressing 50-60 year old tanks to fight a lost war is not, I suggest but am open to contrary imaginative argument, a reliable mark for future trade relations. China and India are happy to buy cut price crude that costs Russia almost as much to produce as the selling price. Presumably China is going to lend… Read more »
My comrade in arms! Baz, what the hell are you insinuating?GO WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT! The CCP will milk the situation for everything it is worth because that is what they do. Laws, sanctions and trading standards be damned. Russia has a vast wealth of untapped natural resources. What Putin needs most is trade with industrial allies, willing to sell their surge capacity of weapons to the cause. What Communist China conveniently craves more than anything else. Is a vast uninterrupted supply of raw materials to feed it’s huge industrial capacity. Including what has become the world’s largest heavy industrial… Read more »
Oil could come by rail from the Gulf, thru Iran, thru central Asia to China
No it could not, or certainly not in meaningful quantities to run a country the size of China.
China is a land power, the US, UK are sea powers. It makes sense therefore for China to get its oil by land
Your information is out of date, China has the largest surface fleet in the world at over 350 vessels and the largest ship building industry in the world. Its ship building rate is staggering, China calls it “more dumplings in the soup” and is predicated to have over 450 vessels within a few more years.
From?
In your dreams.
tornadoes havent flown for long time
Jim the issue is we would not generally be supported in blocking any of the straits…no one nation apart from may be the US is going to get away with blocking civilian shipping from crossing passing through straits….the expecting of the world is that you keep your own wars limited and contained. Any nation that started blocking straits would become an international pariah very quickly. In reality as with most conflicts it would be a limited engagement with limited Aims and objectives…neither nation would declare war and the winner would be the nation that could put the greater resources into… Read more »
Limited aims and objectives is certainly the mission statement of HM Armed forces today. We are hollowed out in the absolute extreme right across the board and only capable of limited actions on a unilateral basis. That’s fine, as long as we acknowledge our limitations and keep out of things we simply have no way of reacting to militarily. We are a pivotal part of NATO, (our real strength) and capable of defensive actions of our islands and dominions, police / very limited military and (critically here) short term actions against rouge states world wide. That’s all folks, that’s it,… Read more »
Yes but one would have to surmise that what ever hypothetical event could possibly get the UK into a solo country like China on the other side of the planet would give the UK atleast sympathy in the international environment if not direct support.
WW2 and WW1 blockades were opposed by the US but the UK had enough moral sympathy to get away with it as it was seen as being in the right side.
To be honest it’s all hypothetical ..the fundamental geological fault line between china and the West is Taiwan…when that fault explodes and goes off the level of contagion will plunge the world into a global general war anyway.
Their anti-submarine capability may not be particularly good. How much experience with such a field of warfare do they have?
Zero, they have never conducted ASW in their history. Not on a single occasion.
They will learn from their ally Russia
Limited information sharing from the Russians to the Chinese and the Russians have very limited ASW experience as well.
The Kursk disaster doesn’t count as ASW
If you want to look at numbers look at the number of PLAN tankers and their size.
I agree completely Jim. The article’s premise is far fetched. China has passed its peak. It needs to sell finished goods and requires raw materials sourced outside its frontiers. It has no real history of colonisation or conquest. In modern times the striking part of China’s involvement in projects in co-operation with clients is its racism: In Africa it uses its own people and isolates from the client state’s population. Therefore, the military side is simply window dressing (and for internal reasons I suggest). I watched a well argued video intelligence assessment of China’s reach last year in which the… Read more »
Yes, agreed. I have seen certainly Peter Zeihan reiterate the same analysis on the two destroyers. Diego Garcia means the UK is probably the only European power who could launch such a blockade although France may be able to as well. Too many on here are either Russian bots or have very limited understanding of Geo politics and strategy and how you actually win a global war. As mad Vlad and the rapists are learning it’s certainly not as simple as counting bayonets and as Japan learned in 1945 and Germany in 1918 you can easily lose a war without… Read more »
We don’t have a navy anywhere near taking on China alone even if it was deployed exclusively there. The PLAN navy is approaching USN levels & we are tiny in comparison with essential capabilities still gapped. Any conflict would be contributing a few ships towards a far larger US/Aus/Jap effort.
read the suggested blockade tactics, no one is suggesting a WW2 type fantasy fleet war when both sides line up and shoot at each other
Yes too many have a notion of some form of invasion being how wars are fought but that’s almost impossible against a country the size of China. Distant blockade is immensely effective and very hard to over come unless you have true blue water naval capability and world wide basing. Only two countries really fit in to that category and it’s certainly not China.
By 2050 if China continues its naval build up and is allow to get away with effectively colonising countries with debt diplomacy then it may be a different story.
It’s approaching US levels but largely in inshore attack craft. Deploying to the IO far away from any bases it would be in much smaller numbers and it lacks a qualitative edge in SSN’s or any menagiful ASW capability.
It has only a basic carrier capability at the moment with STOBAR J15’s and in small numbers.
The SSN’s screening RN fleet would take a heavy toll and what’s left would have to over come air superiority that the RN would enjoy.
I don’t think I’ve heard anything quite so ridiculous as the idea of the UK beating China by sea blockade with our 6 destroyer navy. Thanks for the laugh though. I needed it.
A couple of things, China has and is getting more gas/oil pipelines to Russia. It has also been in talks with putting a pipeline through Afghanistan to Iran. The Malacca problem is well known, strategically China is trying to overcome it with the Belts and Roads Initiative. They have their first overseas naval base in Djibouti. Which puts their navy strategically at the mouth of the Red Sea and able “monitor” traffic going to/from the Suez Canal. The Malacca Straights are a bottleneck. Which is the main reason why they are setting up a naval base in Myanmar, much to… Read more »
Blockades mean huge naval resources. Sadly you are out of touch! We may well have an Indian Ocean base but what would we put there, and in any event it is run by the US? We don’t have the Navy to supprot such a concept, and since we are rather dependant on Chinese goods it is debatable if we could sustain any action let alone contain China.
Honestly, I doubt we have enough assets and ammunition to successfully “blockade” China on our own.
China is very weary of the UK. People forget about Great Britain’s real power and thats our ability to sabotage key infrastructure like pipelines supply routes and even key military facilities.We are very good at let’s call it Commando raid operations and we have some of the World’s best intelligence and operatives. We have very good Security Services personal and the Worlds best Special Forces .We will have our (Silent service personnel in place )Because we are a small Island Nation Great Britain has always had to think out of the box and we have always punched above our weight… Read more »
It’s worth remembering that in the mid 19th century, when China was at its weakest and Britain had overtaken it as the world’s largest economy, the most Britain and others could achieve was a few treaty ports. Later, a divided China still managed to resist Japanese forces. Today, China, like Britain in the 1840/50s, is the world’s biggest manufacturer with a ppp GDP bigger than USA. On its own territory, China cannot be defeated except with nuclear weapons. But how would it fare in a war of aggression? Tibet was ( re-)occupied without serious resistance.but in border clashes with India… Read more »
The UK, with a pitiful small field army of 25,000, less than 60 airworthy 4th Gen Typhoon fighters and 15 frigates/destroyers (during the cold war in 1990 we had 50) could not fight a major war against anyone.
Our armed forces are no longer considered the backbone of NATO and we should avoid at all costs thinking that we are still a major military power, lest our politicians get us involved in something out of our depth.
David your figure’s are completely wrong, are you mis informed or intentionally spreading mis information?
Either way I don’t think you should be posting on this site.
The figures are not wrong, we need to accept the reality of decades of defence cuts.
What’s a “field army” are you fighting Napoleon? If you talking about deployable forces the UK can and has sent a division sized force anywhere in the world. China has never sent anything beyond a battalion outside its own boarders.
So what are you on about?
Looking back over much of what you post on this site it is absolutely clear that you really do not know what you are talking about, in fact most of it is complete crap. And, I have always found that once an idiot like you starts in with the personal insults and name-calling, it is a sure sign that you have lost the argument. Find another forum to spout your bollox, because you do not impress me with your trolling. Up yours!
What’s a “field army” then and why do we only have 25,000 in it then? Where did you come up with that?
Jim, take a breath….. In an extreme situation, the Army could muster a 25,000 strong force, for a limited period, but it would all but break it to do so now if that ran on for more than three months tops. 25,000 represents the sharp tip of the spear, the youngsters with the actual weaponry (rifles to artillery to tanks) that will have to go nose to nose with angry foreign minded sorts…. The rest of the spear is absolutely vital, its there to ensure the pointy bit hits the target….. In reality, we are only likely to deploy at… Read more »
Jim you should listen to the learned & experienced posters on this site.
We deployed a division I think in the Iraq war but no longer have that capability after decades of severe cuts.
You say, “China has never sent anything beyond a battalion outside its own boarders.” But they invaded Tibet, sent armies into Korea, attacked India, nvaded Vietnam & currently have deployed forces to illegally occupy SCS islands they’ve illegally created by smothering the reefs thay have tenuous claim to.
The issue is that China could deploy a lot if it chose to do so. The fact it hasn’t means either they are not inclined to take military action or that they are biding their time!
Ye that is bonkers the army is bigger!
although not by much😐
The USA has always been the backbone of NATO. Within Europe it’s recognised that in terms of conventional forces France and the U.K. are the most powerful military forces – though I suspect Poland with be there too within a decade.
You dismissal of our forces is highly inaccurate and totally lacking context.
Worth remembering that in population, GDP and military numbers, UK is more like Taiwan than China!
Every army has shrunk since the Cold War. The US had 12 armoured/mech divisions and now have 6. Belgium and the Netherlands each had a Corps. In the grand scheme of things our army wasn’t that big in NATO in 1989. It was much smaller than France and Germany, smaller than Italy and a bit bigger than Spain. 1 Br Corps was very valued and the best in NORTHAG but we were never the backbone of NATO. If you look at the quality of those 50 escorts compared to ours today they are incomparable. T45 are best in world T42… Read more »
In 1939 we sent 4 division’s to France while the French had 100+
Nothing changed in proportion, if anything the British army is quite large by historical comparisons to its peers.
Anybody who is any doubt about the appalling reduction in British military power since the end of the cold war could watch this YouTube video from the well respected military historian Mark Felton
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7JxykuyxBo
Mark Felton is hardly well respected and he offers many caveats to what he is saying in the video. As Putin and his band of rapists found out the second they entered Ukraine you don’t rate army’s through manpower. If you did then India and North Korean are super powers. Defence spending and military force structure does not take place in a vacuum. The forces that that “great British army of 1991”was sized against were massive and capable compared to anything Russia can field today. Also that amazing Navy he talks about with all those submarines and frigates could barley… Read more »
100% 👍🏻
Is it the 1st of April😎
We do not have the military strength to stand against Russia. CCP occupied mainland China would be a ridiculously one sided affair. GB has nobody to blame but ourselves.
The short video by Mark Felton on YouTube explains things nicely. Britain’s Shrinking Military – From Cold War Colossus to Cash-Strapped Shadow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7JxykuyxBo
Excellent no holds barred video, pointing out the inability of the UK Military to do anything alone any more.
Maybe Mark Felton could do a video, showing the rise of Defence Contractors, and the deeply damaging, expensive effects, that it’s had on all Arms of the UK Armed Forces.
In 1815 at the zenith of our military and industrial power we needed the Prussian’s at Waterloo to win. The USA is the greatest military and economic power of the past 100 years, how many wars has it ever fought on its own and won.
So what’s actually changed.
On a point of order, Britain did not need the Prussians. Britain’s Military ‘peak’ came in 1813, at which point the Army alone stood at approx. 250,000 men. Austria, Prussia, Sweden and Russia, had been fighting France and Napoleon since before Napoleons disastrous invasion of Russia, in 1812. Those same countries formed their sixth coalition against France, which culminated in the coalition’s invasion of France, which saw Napoleon abdicate in April 1814. Britain was involved in its own Peninsular Campaign against the French, in Portugal and Spain, after Britain went to the aid of its Ally Portugal. After Napoleons escape… Read more »
Yes lots of coalitions there, my point being that we have never gone toe to toe solo with a major continental army even when we were a superpower.
So nothing really changed from then to now.
China v United Kingdom, 1v1 toe to toe… No, the UK would not even get started, before it was over. As shown in the current European conflict, size, resilience, equipment stockpiles DO matter. Nice that the UK is opening up ‘Commando camps’, nice that the UK has formed a new regiment, the Ranger Regiment however… Special Forces ‘operative’ numbers are down in general. The Rogers Ranger Regiment is being formed by taking recruits from current Infantry Regiments, while the regiments that these recruits come from, are not being replaced. Number! Numbers of boots on the ground, numbers of equipment, numbers… Read more »
I’m curious with all your clear military knowledge, how do you think China would attack the UK to win this hypothetical war? How do you think it would get all its Army Airforce and navy to the North Atlantic to take us out?
I was responding, to a hypothetical question! I hope this helps with your curiosity.
You said we would fall in a matter of weeks due to Chinas greater numbers. I’m just curious how you think China could deploy those numbers against us. I can see a number of avenues for the UK to conventionally attack China from cruise missiles off the coast to a distant blockade but I can’t see how China can do much to the UK with all its numbers.
Do you think they can cross the Eurasia landmass perhaps and show up at Calais?
Thanks ever so much for those comments however, and once again, I was in fact, responding to an entirely Hypothetical question.
However, and just to amuse myself, China could probably rain down all manner of shit on the UK, with all manner of terrestrial, intercontinental, and orbital weapons. Just a a theory of course…
Yes although I seem to remember us spending a whole lot of money in the 90’s on our own load of intercontinental and sub orbital weapons as well.
I think it was called Trident or something to that effect.
😂 😅 😂
There is more than can be put in a short comment like this, but just a few to start. A British carrier group sent to help Taiwan, needs its F-35B armed with a stand off missile. Probably JSM, as Japan is thinking of putting JSM under the wings of its F-35B. I wonder if the anti ship block 5 Tomahawk can fit in the capsule for torpedo tube launch? If so, it would give RN Astutes stand off capability in the same Taiwan scenario. Is Britain going to stop the CCP colonisation of Britain? Will the UK stop selling its… Read more »
Very muddled article. In essence the answer is no. If China decided to pick on the UK over a hypothetical incident similar to the Falklands they would wipe the floor with us. Yes IF the yanks got involved it would change things, but historically Americans have been very cool in their support of the UK, it’s more been the UK supporting the US and not really being appreciated much for it. I do wish people would wake up to the seriousness of both the economic and military threat China poses to the UK and our general way of life. IMHO… Read more »
How would they get to the UK to “wipe the floor” with us or attack any UK sovereign territory?
“Incident similar to the Falklands”. They have more ships and more economic clout than us.
Yes but ships need bases and last time I checked China did not have any bases in the Euro Atlantic area. We could only retake the Falklands because we had Ascension and even then it was the longest invasion in the history of warfare.
Where is Chinas base in range of the UK?
UK sovereign territory… hmm let me see Pitcairn Islands (Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands in the Pacific Ocean), British Indian Ocean Territory (including Diego Garcia)… All those are British Crown Colonies.
Do you own an atlas by any chance?
UK and France are like the 2 emblematic nation to take down for China…
If we have forgotten the opium wars, they didnt, we are the cause of the century of shame of China.
One of those old conflicts where France and the UK were happily trampling other countries together…
This is just one chapter in our history, but a big grudge for them…
(tbf I don’t even know why France supported the UK during the second war).
Such a massive grudge but they let’s us keep Hong Kong until 1997.
Most people in China have no idea the opium war ever happened.
The problems with China are less the Chinese than the CCP.
Simple, trade control.
China is actually quite weak u only have to control a relatively small part of an ocean near China and starve it of oil and food it lacks the abilty to operate far from its mainland and doesn’t have a true blue water navy yes it’s military is huge but it’s more like a police force it’s getting better but chinas weakness is that it has to import a lot of what it needs
The West is funding the massive Chicom military buildup. How about reversing the trend to have most Western goods manufactured over there? Makes too much sense I know. lol. Trump tried telling people years ago what a threat China is and will become but everyone ignored him. When old sleepy Joe took over he ended most of the China sanctions. He even told Tiktok he was ok with the Chicoms running the app and ended Trump’s ultimatum to either sell Tiktok or America will ban it. Now Joe and many others are seeing that once again Trump was right.
Believe you have made valid points. 👍
I think Jim is both right and wrong. Not a chance China could touch the UK, they do not have the capability. The Chinese navy I’m built and designed to operate in the south China Sea, its not an expeditionary force at all. Its numbers lie in its missile boats, corvettes and frigates which don’t have the legs ro threaten Britain’s green and pleasant lands. If we sent everything available to Diego garcia which would probably be 1 QE carrier, 3 type 45, 6 type 23, 3 astute and a vanguard to sit on the bottom and listen, it would… Read more »
For whatever reason, believe Mr. Allison has created a hypothetical strawman scenario, which while theoretically possible, is extremely unlikely to occur as stated. However, it is significantly more probable that the UK could be drawn into a conflict in the SCS (probable Taiwan invasion) as a blue force coalition member, presumably including at least the US and Australia, and possibly Japan and S.Korea as well. Realistically, the UK could contribute one robustly constituted CSG and two Astute class SSNs (potentially more RN SSN AUKUS boats from the 2040’s), and limited RAF assets, conceivably based at any of a number of… Read more »
…upper…🙄
Yes, I would agree and say the Chinese Navy’s main focus is controlling the South China Sea. But perhaps more significantly is to enable China to blockade Taiwan. Remember Xi said that the two Chinas problem will be solved in his lifetime! But it faces a big dilemma. How far could it push the blockade without letting Japan get involved? As Japan are in a better and quicker position to affect the blockade than the US. Trade wise Japan heavily relies on Taiwanese chip manufacturers. It will take time for the US to get a number of carrier task groups… Read more »
There is no chance that China could take on the UK militarily if that meant in some way invading the UK directly and on its own. Notwithstanding a pre-emptive nuclear strike, it would have to align itself with Russia and perhaps India to provide itself with land-based and naval-based assets to assert itself through Europe and to control the Indian Ocean. With regard to Europe, that would bring it against NATO as it would in the Indian Ocean primarily the US/UK/France. China militarily has echoes of Japan in WW2. It can assert itself in the South China Sea and beyond… Read more »
I’d really appreciate being able to up- or down-vote people’s comments. Like on boredpanda. So we can approve or disapprove and see how others see them as well.
Lets be honest the Army isnt going to engage in a tank slugfest with the PLA.
The RAF isn’t going to be dogfighting in SCS
Fight to your strengths.
Astute subs being the UKs biggest strength would put a massive dent in PLAN assets and could if someone in No10 had the bottle to allow it, go after surface trade as well. The PLAN subs would also not last very long.
Admiral Sir Arthur Wilson, the First Sea Lord of the Royal Navy, stated in 1901 that submarines were “underhanded, unfair, and damned un-English” Well if thats what it takes…
Could we defeat China on our own? No way. Could we cause China disproportionate casualties? Heck yes…until attrition wore our armed forces down and China’s superior numbers came into play.
However….we won’t be fighting alone…. you’d hope. We have friends and allies. The flash points of Taiwan, SCS and China making territorial claims against other sovereign states are a concern and could easily lead to a US and allies Vs China and allied war. Think Russia, North Korea, China, Argentina, Venezuela, South Africa possibly and maybe even India Vs Western Alliance. That would be a nightmare scenario.
I could not imagine India siding with China given the simmering Himalayan tensions. Now Sri Lanka? Defo, they are in extreme hock to China and for all this talk of bottlenecks, having a Chinese owned port in Hambantota means China could blockade us. South Africa is challenging – I wonder which way her Navy would sway as opposed to her pollies, who would go Chinese. South African based Chinese forces would again blockade us and before we denounce Chinese ASW capability, as we learned in WW2, they will learn as well. Trade would decide any conflict and that conflict would… Read more »
We may have to & over many issues do so already. Be in no doubt the CCP is seeking continually to undermine & subvert us. What may be most in doubt is our own leaders showing the intelligence & integrety to resist China. Issuing soundbites while undermining our own forces fools nobody, especially China.
Fortunately regional allies & others are in-step to counter & contain the spread of CCP dictatorship. We can contibute quite constructively there.
China trains its hackers & signals intelligence officers in a special university in Zhengzhou.
Excellent documentary on the PRC assault(Grey warfare but brutal & savage, using extreme language) on Taiwan last Thursday evening on BBC2. Shows the true face & threat of the CCP. I also see elsewhere(Wiki) that the PLA has a considerable base at Djibouti with a short runway, berthing for up to a couple of carriers, Underground bunkers & one or two thousand personel resident. Just 6 or 7 miles away from the US/Fr/Jap base besides Djibouti airport. They’ve even engaged US aircraft with lasers injuring a couple of US aircrew. With 100+ operational frigates & destroyers, some of cruiser size,… Read more »
In the early hours Saturday two savagely offensive posts from brand new accounts, clearly bots, on here on this page. Flagged & removed thankfully. We must be in no doubt of the CCPs true hatred of the west & anyone who opposes them. We’re not in a cold war, but quite a warm one. We need to make blatently clear we will not quietly allow Putin or Xi to subvert the whole international order, starting with a firm commitment to stop any attempt to invade Taiwan. Since the HK crackdown most Taiwanese who were tempted by the CCPs overtures have… Read more »
The UK alone couldn’t stand up to an invasion from China, and it is highly debateable if we could do much in the Pacific if conflict were confined there. While we may have more advanced military technology against massed hordes it is unlikely to prevail and in any event countering massed hordes requires the expenditure of enormous quantities of munitions. It is highly unlikely that we could sustain the resupply needs of basic armaments let alone hi-tech ones. As part of a multi-national force we would be in a better position but resupply remains a serious issue. Our forces are… Read more »
The world goes from fighting over Oil to fighting over chips (Integrated circuits).
China could do massive economic damage to the west if they chose to destroy or capture the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company.
I think the possible threat of China invading, Taiwan is starting to make a lot of other countries outside of Asia nervous.
& yet we still sell our chip shops to China
Its a bit late but this map may be useful, not sure how to include it rather than the link.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrKaQmYWYAAudMg?format=jpg&name=small
The issue is that China could deploy a lot if it chose to do so. The fact it hasn’t means either they are not inclined to take military action or that they are biding their time! Their only real weakness is their dependence on foreign trade in their manufactured goods. The issue for any oponents is can they recreate alternative sources of goods if China’s factories were cut off, and could they sustain manufacture of ammunition and replacement hardware in the required quantities. Since China’s domestic market is so huge they would have a similar capacity advantage to that of… Read more »
Talking about the UK’s technological advantage over China is a bit complacent. This article, unfortunately, is full of points that are rather wishful thinking than reality.
This is a somewhat ridiculous article. The UK has no capacity to fight any sustained war against anyone and much of its equipment is not modern but dates from up to half a century ago, particularly in regard to its army. Its industrial base and capacity has declined so much that it can no longer even build a main battle tank. In terms of soft-power that has also been in decline for a very long time and has been significantly weakened since Brexit. Case in point, the UK, was unable to influence the Solomon Islands from reaching agreement with China… Read more »
Don’t forget the carrier group will contain our NATO ‘allies’ ships as well …oh hang on err no it wouldn’t ….obviously the simple answer to the rather pointless quesiton is No …No we wouldn’t – well not militarily anyway.
Anyone who thinks othereswise is deluded.
Sad but true. We should work harder to change this trend.
Why are we (Britain) still playing poodle to a collapsing american hegemony and why is china which is 5’000 miles away Britain’s problem or responsibility??
Are you in Zhengzhou?
High tech does not guarantee victory. Fundamentally numbers matter, if you are outnumbered 3:1, you are likely to lose. Russia has a similar defence budget to ours, yet is at least 3x bigger. Why is Russia getting much more for its money than us.
Sad how many posters here are discussing army sizes for a naval conflict.. 🤦
It is not true to say it would be unlikely for the UK to face China. With the UK’s stated Asia/Pacific tilt and AUKUS we could easily be drawn into conflict in the area. As an partner with tge US/Australia and increasingly Japan we would have to support them. A very realistic development would be China invading Taiwan. The US would join in and draw the UK in too. Not that unrealistic. The UK is not a superpower but in consort with our partners we can make a significant contribution. Our Astute SSNs and the new AUKUS SSNs will be… Read more »
When you have liberals like Tim Cook and the Bidens praising communist China there is little hope left to stop the massive Chicom expansion.
British Armed forces with the massive defence cuts during the last 30 years are now unable to fight with a possibility of victory with Russia, sad reality.
Britain is no longer a military super Power but a médium one.
There is one realistic flaspoint between China and the UK and it’s not even mentioned: Falklands. Argentina is negotiating the purchase of modern fighters from China. The sticking point on the JF-17 Block 3 sale is price. If China gives Argentina a discount to allow Argentina to quickly field figher jets then the Falklands becomes vulnerable. There are too few fighters and little air defense stationed on the Falklands. From a balance of power perspective I have no doubt China is thinking of doing this because of the Australia sub deal and greater military ties with Japan. It’s really silly… Read more »
HMS queen Elizabeth Il, f35B lightning II, HM queen Elizabeth Il , iloveyou, Long live the King charles lll no, G7
F16 fighting falcon, Washington DC, Long live the King charles lll no, f22 raptor, queen Elizabeth Il,
F16 fighting falcon, Ukraine, Long live the King charles lll no,