What's new

North East Asian Union? Exploring the potential of an NEA integration

FAST FORWARD: If NEA is united, how would its combined navy look like? PLAN (+ROCN) + JMSDF + ROKN + DPRKN

That would make it having the largest Navy in the world. With the following capital warships:

SFWgoh6.jpg


maxresdefault.jpg



7753.jpeg


She shall field 3 Liaoning Class CVN, 2 Izumo class light carriers (+2 hyuga class, + 2 osumi class), + 1 Dokdo class. Right now, she can field 10 Carriers (3 full carriers and 7 light carriers).
 
.
FAST FORWARD: If NEA is united, how would its combined navy look like? PLAN (+ROCN) + JMSDF + ROKN + DPRKN

That would make it having the largest Navy in the world. With the following capital warships:

SFWgoh6.jpg


maxresdefault.jpg



7753.jpeg


She shall field 3 Liaoning Class CVN, 2 Izumo class light carriers (+2 hyuga class, + 2 osumi class), + 1 Dokdo class. Right now, she can field 10 Carriers (3 full carriers and 7 light carriers).

I don't think I will live long enough to witness this great days...but I will let my children and grand children to see that happen.
 
.
I don't think I will live long enough to witness this great days...but I will let my children and grand children to see that happen.

America would have been contained, and the Pacific will be ours...

From the mountains of Xinjiang to the California coastline, shall our empire have domination.

If only i can live 2-4 generations, to see this realized.
 
. . . .
America would have been contained, and the Pacific will be ours...

From the mountains of Xinjiang to the California coastline, shall our empire have domination.

If only i can live 2-4 generations, to see this realized.
Wow, suddently, u realize how bad USA is....but why you want JP to get away from US now ?? U can feel some thing so bad will happen to JP soon ??
 
.
America would have been contained, and the Pacific will be ours...

From the mountains of Xinjiang to the California coastline, shall our empire have domination.

If only i can live 2-4 generations, to see this realized.
North East Asian Union:
China: Checked
Japan: Checked
South Korea: Checked
Taiwan: Checked
Hong Kong: Checked
North Korea: Unchecked
Now we have one problem which is how can we convince North Korea to join us...
 
.
ha ha ha, not just the americans, but the europeans and our southeast asian friends. by then australia and new zealand would have become satraps. :)
But I don't think the Americans will just sit still and express their good wishes while this happening or even beginning to happen. Perhaps this article I just read may shed light on what the US is going to do if she sees it coming.

Beijing Vs DC: The Battle for Southeast Asia | New Eastern Outlook
Beijing Vs DC: The Battle for Southeast Asia
04.02.2016 Author: Tony Cartalucci

The Strait Times published an opinion piece by the London-based Rob Edens. Wishfully titled, “South-east Asia fast becoming unfriendly territory for China,” it attempts to portray Southeast Asia as increasingly pivoting West toward Washington, coincidentally just as Washington was “pivoting” East toward Asia.

Edens’ attempts to outline Beijing and Washington’s respective strategies in the region by stating:

On the one hand, China’s “One Belt One Road” initiative, for instance, is focused on physical infrastructure; improving road, rail and air networks overland between neighbouring states as a means to oil the cogs of commerce and bring new customers into China’s fold. On the other hand, the US-led Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) maintains a discourse of freer trade in the Pacific region, opening up new markets overseas by relaxing tariffs and increasing various standards relating to the process of manufacture.
Lost on Edens appears to be the fact that physical infrastructure built beyond China’s borders becomes a long-term asset for those who cooperate in its construction, while Western “free trade” is in all reality, submission to foreign economic hegemony. Many aspects of “free trade” agreements are in fact, stripped verbatim from treaties that defined Colonial Europe and its subjugation of Southeast Asia.

Free Trade” is Code for Economic Hegemony

Edens seems to believe that “free trade” is a viable incentive to lure Southeast Asia away from China. However, upon historical examination, it is more a means to coerce it away.

Thailand in the 1800’s, then the Kingdom of Siam, was surrounded on all sides by colonized nations. Gunboats would eventually turn up off the coast of Siam’s capital and the Kingdom made to concede to the British 1855 Bowring Treaty. Upon examining these terms imposed via “gunboat policy,” how many of them echo verbatim the terms found among modern “free trade” economic liberalization?

  1. Siam granted extraterritoriality to British subjects.

  2. British could trade freely in all seaports and reside permanently in Bangkok.

  3. British could buy and rent property in Bangkok.

  4. British subjects could travel freely in the interior with passes provided by the consul.

  5. Import and export duties were capped at 3%, except the duty-free opium and bullion.

  6. British merchants were to be allowed to buy and sell directly with individual Siamese.
Compared to modern day examples of “free trade,” and in Iraq’s case, free trade imposed once again by the barrel of a gun, it is nearly impossible to distinguish any difference.

The Economist would enthusiastically enumerate the conditions of “economic liberalization” imposed upon Iraq in the wake of the 2003 US invasion in a piece titled “Let’s all go to the yard sale: If it all works out, Iraq will be a capitalist’s dream.” They are as follows:

  1. 100% ownership of Iraqi assets.

  2. Full repatriation of profits.

  3. Equal legal standing with local firms.

  4. Foreign banks allowed to operate or buy into local banks.

  5. Income and corporate taxes capped at 15%.

  6. Universal tariffs slashed to 5%.
Iraq is a perfect modern day example of a nation overrun by brute force and made to concede to an entire restructuring of its economy, giving foreign powers not only access to their natural resources, markets, and population, but uncontested domination over them as well. It was absolute subjugation, both militarily and economically. It was modern day conquest. And it is something Washington seeks to repeat elsewhere, including Southeast Asia.

It’s America’s “Island Dispute” with China, Not Southeast Asia’s

Edens would continue claiming:

However, regional attitudes are changing, largely as a result of the bullish stance China has taken in recent years over territorial disputes. The nations of South-east Asia are increasingly reluctant to accept any threats to their sovereignty in the form of Beijing’s repeated incursions into their exclusive economic zones.
However, it should be noted that the US itself in its own policy papers has noted that these “disputes” are being intentionally provoked by Washington itself, often with ambassadors and envoys repeatedly finding themselves attempting to pressure nations across Southeast Asia to “join” the dispute. The goal of using Southeast Asia as a collective Western-dominated bloc to encircle and contain China with has been stated US policy since the release of the Pentagon Papers in 1971.

A relatively recent example of this can be seen when US Ambassador to Thailand Glyn Davies berated the Thai government for not “adding its voice” to calls for China to “peacefully resolve conflicts over its appropriation of islands in the South China Sea.” Similar messages and accompanying political and economic threats, have been delivered to other capitals across Southeast Asia.

Edens doesn’t seem to understand that what he is watching is a dispute created by Washington, and a confrontational reaction from across Southeast Asia extorted out of each respective nation by Washington.

Edens mentions the Philippines and their legal dispute with China brought before the Hague. He fails to mention that the legal team representing the Philippines is in fact headed by Washington-based law firm Foley Hoag and that their representative is in fact an American.

The New York Times would reveal this in their report, “In Victory for Philippines, Hague Court to Hear Dispute Over South China Sea,” as well as reveal one of the “incentives” likely being used to encourage the Philippines to continue participating in what is mainly Washington’s confrontation with Beijing:

The Philippines — represented by an American lawyer, Paul Reichler, of the Washington law firm Foley Hoag — contends that it has the right to exploit oil and gas in waters in a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone extending from territory that it claims in the South China Sea.
Dangling the spoils of victory over the government in Manila – in this case, oil – along with less public threats over what will happen if Manila does not cooperate, is likely what has caused the Philippines to squander diplomatic currency with Beijing, money in unnecessary military expenditures, and both time and energy that could be better spent invested in its own future in Asia Pacific, rather than Washington’s.

Nations Not Cooperating Will Suffer Washington’s Wrath

Edens then turns his attention toward Thailand, claiming:

In the grip of a military junta since last year, the former Land of Smiles is slowly being turned into some southern version of a North Korea.
One might forgive the London-based writer for thinking so, apparently having never set foot in Thailand before or after the coup, and apparently only reading what he sees in the British papers.

In reality, up to and including the day before the coup, US-backed dictator Thaksin Shinawatra was mass murdering his opponents in the streets with a paramilitary political front known as the “red shirts,” all while building a hereditary dictatorship that saw not only himself as prime minister, but also his brother-in-law and sister as well.

More relevant is the fact that during Shinawatra’s decade plus grip on power, he capitulated to every demand made by Washington, including sending troops to Iraq, hosting the CIA’s abhorrent rendition program, and attempting to illegally pass a US-Thai free trade agreement without parliamentary approval.

Since Shinawatra’s ouster from power in 2006, and more recently his sister’s ouster from power in 2014, he and his political dynasty have received unswerving support from the West, seeking to undermine Thailand’s existing political institutions, and reinstall the Shinawatras back into power.

These facts are never mentioned by Edens, nor is it explained how Thailand is being turned into “North Korea” by the military simply for intervening and putting a stop to obvious abuses of both power and human rights, or subsequently arresting members of this political group – a group that has employed terrorism and pursued open, armed insurrection.

Edens is making it clear, intentionally or not, that nations failing to heed the demands of Washington will be isolated and undermined, rhetorically, politically, economically, and even militarily, just as it is doing to China.

China Seeks Collaborators, Washington Seeks Colonies

Edens claims that Thailand has become a “prime breeding ground for Chinese foreign policy.” In some respects that is true. Thailand seeks a regional partner, not a foreign master. China has not placed any preconditions on Thailand regarding its internal politics in exchange for regional political and military cooperation or joint economic expansion.

In reality, it is likely Southeast Asia collectively prefers this arrangement with Beijing, over the preconditions and client regime status mandated by Washington. What Edens and others in the West attempt to hold up as “evidence” of growing tension in Southeast Asia is more likely the result of backdoor meetings and insinuated threats prodding weaker capitals in the region continuously toward wider confrontation with China. However, none of this is sustainable.

Even as Edens and others hold up evidence that their strategy of tension is working, those on the ground in Southeast Asia can see the waning influence of the West, increasing awareness of the poorly hidden coercion used by the West to cling to the influence it has remaining, and the slow and steady influence of China.

China is a regional neighbor, unlike Washington who attempts to impose its agenda from the other side of the planet. China benefits from a stronger Asia, while Washington sees any rising power or region as a threat that must be controlled, and failing that, divided and destroyed.

It would be wrong to say the rest of Asia is not watching China’s rise with caution. It would also be wrong to say that China does not possess the potential to some day equal or exceed the unwarranted power and influence Washington has wielded in the region. But it would be equally wrong to say that Asia prefers very real Western subjugation to a potential Chinese variety. It seeks a multipolar region where all nations rise together and a balance of power and a respect for national sovereignty is maintained. That is a balance collaboration with the West simply will not yield.

So despite Edens optimistically claiming the “ball” is “squarely in Washington’s court,” the truth is after centuries of the West using and abusing Asia, Asia now is using the West, to raise itself up before pushing it out.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine
 
.
Well that is the goal of integration and unification, it is a merger of various states into one larger state. I suppose in the eventual aspect -- Japan and Korea unifying with Greater China will mean a seat of power will be centralized in Beijing. Coming from the patriotic Japanese perspective, even during the most desperate times or daring (some ultra patriots would use this description) times in Japan's modern history, it embarked on its own unilateral agenda of unifying East Asia through militaristic means; in fact this happened twice in history through leadership of Hideyoshi during the Imjin Wars (who planned to conquer Korea, then ultimately, unify Japan with China); and then later in the 1st, and 2nd Sino-Japanese Wars.

In the Korean perspective, historically speaking, Korea had always been a peripheral vassal state of China's since even the days of the Koguryo Empire to the last breaths of the Jeoseon Dynasty. Korea , as a civilizaiton, had relied on China for existential longevity either to resist the Jurchens, the Manchu, to resist the Czarist Russia , then later, to some degree against the Japanese. China has had a unique and rich relations with Korea and Japan in that it had played as an arbiter of peace and the conduit wherein regional cooperation was attained. China functioned as mentor and civilizational role model for Japan and Korea, and at the same time, had played as the iconic guarantor of harmony in the region to stem the tide of early 'expansionist' notions of the Japanese.

What is the common unifying theme here? The theme here is that in one way or another Korea wants to, historically and presently, always wanted to be under the protection of China; Japan historically always wanted to be united with China and Korea. China historically always wanted to guarantee preservation of harmony in her boundaries -- from alien (non-East Asian) entities that have historically plotted and weaseled themselves into China's spheres of interests and thus affected the status quo. So if we are to apply Aikido philosophy to this equation, let us use the concept of enabling each player to ease one another's "Ki" to realize union. Ultimately all three entities somehow vie to depend on each other. Integration is only the zenith and final process of the East Asian cultural integration paradigm. Either way, it will be realized.



That is the fatalism that defines Western ideology, Madoka. This is iconic of the zero sum mentality of Western peerage that i have come accustomed to (amongst my colleagues in the west, or the students i have had the privilege of teaching). Union does not mean the annihilation of identities but the fusion of identities under one banner. Take for example the European Union or on another multifaceted apperture -- the Russian Federation, which is a union of various Republics that ultimately constitute ONE RUSSIAN FEDERATION --- or 'Rosisykaya Federiyatsya'. Am i right @senheiser @vostok @T-55 ? :)

What is the government of this unified Asian state? Is it democratic or is it similar to the CCP or is it something different? If different, please elaborate.

FAST FORWARD: If NEA is united, how would its combined navy look like? PLAN (+ROCN) + JMSDF + ROKN + DPRKN

That would make it having the largest Navy in the world. With the following capital warships:

SFWgoh6.jpg


maxresdefault.jpg



7753.jpeg


She shall field 3 Liaoning Class CVN, 2 Izumo class light carriers (+2 hyuga class, + 2 osumi class), + 1 Dokdo class. Right now, she can field 10 Carriers (3 full carriers and 7 light carriers).

If we are including light carriers the US actually has 19.
 
.
A united East Asian fleet will still be much smaller than the current U.S fleet.

Perhaps several decades in the future such a match up wont be a one sided fight but for now, a ragtag mix and match fleet spearhead by an old ex Soviet Aircraft carrier (in training) is not a match.

Hug the coast under the cover of land based SAMS and Df21s for now.
 
.
America would have been contained, and the Pacific will be ours...

From the mountains of Xinjiang to the California coastline, shall our empire have domination.

If only i can live 2-4 generations, to see this realized.

Well, I suppose I take comfort in the fact that you represent no one but yourself with this view. You clearly do not have the best interests of Japan or the Japanese people at heart if you are advocating annexation of Hawaii and other US territories in the Pacific. Why you think in 2-4 generations the US will no longer be a nuclear power if nothing else is beyond me.

If you aren't advocating the annexation of Siberia why would you do so with Hawaii?

You should really rethink your poorly thought out (this should be self-evident) stance, its not worthy of coming from someone labeled an analyst/think tank.
 
Last edited:
.
Well, I suppose I take comfort in the fact that you represent no one but yourself with this view. You clearly do not have the best interests of Japan or the Japanese people at heart if you are advocating annexation of Hawaii and other US territories in the Pacific. Why you think in 2-4 generations the US will no longer be a nuclear power if nothing else is beyond me.

If you aren't advocating the annexation of Siberia why would you do so with Hawaii?

You should really rethink your poorly thought out (this should be self-evident) stance, its not worthy of coming from someone labeled an analyst/think tank.

I don't think he meant to annex Hawaii...LOL. But if this Asian Union is formed, Americans will have to re-adjust it foreign policy regarding Asia, they will not be anymore to play Japanese card against China, black mail Japan or play dirty trick to Japan such as plaza accord which really hurt Japan, The combined 2nd and 3th world economic power China and Japan respectively will be able to withstand any US economic challenge. As for military front, like I said before If Japan dare to give middle finger to US then Americans will lose their military supremacy in Asia, Japan is the key player regarding US's future in Asia.
 
.
From the mountains of Xinjiang to the California coastline, shall our empire have domination.

Why would the land-based portion of the empire suddenly end at Xinjiang?

The Mongols managed to do all this on horseback in the 13th century.

hZGSpU6.jpg


Do you honestly believe that a fully mechanized PLA can't do better with 21st century technology?

Ef20hgJ.jpg

PKPvQ2c.jpg

40TwgP0.jpg


The J-20 will maintain absolute air superiority over Asia.

5pbKZYP.jpg


The nuclear/conventional DF-26 covers the entire Asian continent. Nothing is out of our reach.

L7vjojJ.jpg


As far as I can tell, Asia already belongs to China. It's only a matter of when China begins to expand.:)
 
.
Wow, suddently, u realize how bad USA is....but why you want JP to get away from US now ?? U can feel some thing so bad will happen to JP soon ??

lol, never lower your eyes to your enemy. In the end, it was never China that was an existential threat to Japan. Since the Meiji Revolution, friend, it had always been the West, particularly the United States, that had always posed the greatest threat to Japanese independence. Ever had they deigned to have a strangle hold of Japan, and thus the right arm of East Asia.

Anyways, there is a change that will happen, a major paradigm shift in regards to Japan's policy with the United States. With the constitutional changes that will happen this coming year, we shall see the renewal of national spirit, and as you can already see, aided in part to the gradual reduction of American troops from Japanese soil. As their presence decreased , in tandem shall there be major policy shifts.

You will see, if you observe Japan's polity, we are already at the opposite helm with the US in regards to major US foreign policy:
  1. Japan has reverberated its position in support of IRAN, even despite US GOP demonization of Tehran , Japan's recent commitment of a multibillion dollar framework of investments in IRAN is testament to a major policy change for Japan. Washington has already lost influence in cajoling Tokyo in this regard (thanks in part to Japan's forward deployment in the region)
  2. Japan UNDERSTANDS and SUPPORTS the role of Russia in the solvency of the Syrian Crisis, to the opposition of Washington's foreign policy. Japan has time and time again at the foreign affairs level (through Kishida Fumio) reiterated Japan's commitment with working with Russia in North Asia as well as in Syria and the Middle East
  3. Japan has remained rather silent in the ECS, in Senkakus / Diayutai , despite American coaxing to deploy against China, in an effort to instigate erosion of Tokyo's relations with Beijing. Japan has remained silent and instead , have further relieved American forces in Okinawa by formulating new air squadrons, a silent yet symbolic gesture as the Okinawa base removal dialogue is going on. :)
  4. Japan has not deployed any naval and military units in SCS in an attempt to help encourage a bilateral mechanism where China can solve issues with pertinent neighbors. Despite numerous Washington invitations for the JMSDF to join USN warships to patrol in the SCS, Tokyo had remained reticent and risen above such petty advances.

It is evident, really, to see how Tokyo now realizes Washington's unproductive stances and actions as it pertains to Greater East Asian Region. And it is good to see that despite these irritant actions, Japan , Korea and China are collaborating more with each other through recent revitalization programs to enrich inter-academia, inter-tourism, inter-governmentalism, and overall intercommiserability.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom