China Conflict: Not IF, When

So much is happening in China’s military development programs and foreign affairs that analysts in Washington are no longer making “what if” arguments but have moved the discourse toward debating about “when.” Concern in the democratic West extends across a wide swath of threats from Chinese surveillance balloons over sovereign US territory to military weapons deals supporting Russian aggression in Ukraine that could lead to regional war across Europe. China today possesses a military shipbuilding industry that outpaces America’s. From submarines to satellites China is designing a military, in concert with Xi Jinping’s aggressive foreign policy, that is recalcitrant to nations urging Beijing to behave as a responsible partner in the international rules-based system.

This week Chinese researchers revealed that Beijing plans to deploy almost 13,000 satellites in low-orbits, under the project code “GW.” The system, when in place, will be capable of spying on rival networks such as Starlink and carry out anti-Starlink missions. Professor Xu Can, of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Space Engineering University in Beijing, cited the development in a paper published in February in the Chinese journal Command Control and Simulation. The plan calls for it to launch satellites in the near future before Elon Musk launches his planned network of 12,000 satellites in 2027. Starlink satellites can receive data from DOD to coordinate positions and they are equipped with monitors to watch the space environment, according to the Chinese paper. The researchers suggest that this requires China to build a more powerful system to identify, track and, using new weapons, be capable of destroying Starlink. It notes that China’s system will include lasers and high-power microwaves.

From the stars to the bottom of the seas, Xi Jinping is overseeing a military development program that is destabilizing the world and threatening the democratic peace. This week HI Sutton, in Naval News, reported that China’s XLUUV (extra-large underwater drone) design, which is similar the US Navy’s Boing Orca, will have advanced weapons on board beyond what the Orca can provide today. Sutton points out that while the US Navy is in the lead in experimentation and orders, China’s XLUUV represents a “significant leap” in technology and will be armed with four torpedo tubes. It not only represents a capability lacking in the Orca, China has at least four additional designs already being tested in the water. Images release by Chinese shipbuilding organization CSSC 705 Institute indicate the underwater drone is built for export, too. It is the first to include specialized sonar with the torpedo tubes. When operational it will need to be autonomous and, as such, represents an increased risk of blue water accidents.

In a recent meeting in Moscow, China’s Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, is quoted China-Russia relations remain “mature, resilient and stable” after being test by “international storms.” Although the two communist states are allied in some areas, there also is a quiet but competitive environment between the two in Central Asia. China is beginning to expand its “private security companies” (PSC’s) in the region in support of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). They are, however, de facto armies. Analysts point to Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan as the two countries most likely to receive the security forces, according to Sergey Suhankin of the Jamestown Foundation. Today, he says, the PSCs’ should be viewed as being more of a “continuation of business by other means” rather than military-political tools or instruments of geopolitical competition. China faces negative sentiment in region due to its anti-Muslim policies. The PSC’s offer a two-prong advantage for Beijing. They will be on the ground to restrain Sinophobia and quell and anti-China demonstrations or activities. Second, and perhaps more significant, is that these officially “non-official” forces will be acquiring real world experience that could be used in other theaters of operation. China’s soft power approach could quickly transform into a hard power conflict. Suhankin points out in a February 22 article that “The strategic importance of the region is highlighted not only by the attention given to it by Chinese government agencies but also by the existence of more than 30 large research institutions—including those under the umbrella of China’s largest and most reputable universities—specifically tasked with researching and monitoring developments in Central Asia.” The pattern is clear. No matter where one turns, China is on the move and becoming increasingly aggressive in its policies. Chinese war planners are trained to examine the battlefield as Sun Tzu described long ago. He wrote that an army must climb high to see farther down the road. China’s allocation of resources to programs that are offensive in nature points to a road filled with conflict if the West does acknowledge what is occurring today.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Photo: China Defence Ministry

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.