Vietnam Defence Forum

[ChineseTiger1986]

we will not start the war.

Then leave our rig alone, since your behavior is close to the brink of the war.

 

[Viet]

Then leave our rig alone, since your behavior is close to the brink of the war.

don´t deploy any rigs into our eez waters.

Because we don't need that missile.

ha ha ha ...do you have anything with performance close to iskander missile?

 

[Carlosa]

The Soviet transferred you Shaddock missiles since the 80s. Russia only agreed to MTCR from 1995 onwards. Meaning, from 1995, they agreed not to export missiles with range over 300km.



People have a right to dismiss your claim if the only evidence you have is "I have reliable source but can't tell you who".

If you come up with that article, then I'll believe you more. For now, it is senseless. If Russia don't care about the MTCR agreement, then why did they join in the first place? why would they then make a public (in russian) announcement to break that agreement? are they on a mission to discredit themselves in front of the international community?

I could not find the article, I don't think I saved it. The article was about the export of the extended range Iskander with 2000 km range.

The statements about Russia supplying the Iskanders to Vietnam without range limitations come from a vietnamese military officer that is part of the team that travels to Russia to evaluate weapon systems. He has been right many times in the past and I consider him reliable. Is that a proof, no its not. Regrettably that's how it is with Vietnam, always everything in secret, no announcements about anything. You can only confirm the big items that can't be hidden like ships and planes, other than that, you can rarely get any information. There is nothing that I can do about that.

To recap and expand on Scuds:

1) Vietnam bought Scuds B from Russia and later self produced the missiles.

2) Around 1997-1999 Vietnam bought 55 missiles from North Korea of an improved variant of the Scud C (Swahong-6) and received full technology transfer. Range is 550 km.
After that Vietnam self produced that Scud C variant and also started to upgrade the B version to C version.

3) Vietnam self produces a variant of Scud D with a range of 800 to 900 km and accuracy with a CEP of 50 meters. Technical assistance from North Korea was received.

4) Vietnam tested an unknown ballistic missile in 2008. The test was shown on Vietnamese TV on channel VTV3. It was announced that the range reaches up to 1500 km, has a new engine with improved thrust and solid fuel. The body was elongated for more fuel capacity. Warhead size was not given. Its probably an advance variant of the Scud D using solid fuel and based on North Korean technology. Vietnam self produces the solid fuel.

5) There are also rumors of a medium range missile, 1500 - 2000 km range, 2 stage, solid fuel under development. It could also be used to place small satellites in orbit. That's all i've heard.

6) Carl Thayer had reported that Vietnam and North Korea had made deals on missile technology assistance in 1996, 1999 and 2009 so this assistance has been ongoing for many years and it seems to continue.

We can only guess what Vietnam has produced as a result of this cooperation and production effort, but I would imagine that such an effort for so many years has to have some results.

If the chinese members of the forum don't want to believe any of this and prefer to dismiss the self produced vietnamese ballistic force, that's their right. What they choose to believe or not does not in any way changes reality.

 

[Carlosa]

ha ha ha ...do you have anything with performance close to iskander missile?

They don't have anything with the performance of the Iskander but you can bet that they will say that they have.

 

[Viet]

I could not find the article, I don't think I saved it. The article was about the export of the extended range Iskander with 2000 km range.

The statements about Russia supplying the Iskanders to Vietnam without range limitations come from a vietnamese military officer that is part of the team that travels to Russia to evaluate weapon systems. He has been right many times in the past and I consider him reliable. Is that a proof, no its not. Regrettably that's how it is with Vietnam, always everything in secret, no announcements about anything. You can only confirm the big items that can't be hidden like ships and planes, other than that, you can rarely get any information. There is nothing that I can do about that.

To recap and expand on Scuds:

1) Vietnam bought Scuds B from Russia and later self produced the missiles.

2) Around 1997-1999 Vietnam bought 55 missiles from North Korea of an improved variant of the Scud C and received full technology transfer. Range is 550 km.
After that Vietnam self produced that Scud C variant and also started to upgrade the B version to C version.

3) Vietnam self produces a variant of Scud D with a range of 800 to 900 km and accuracy with a CEP of 50 meters. Technical assistance from North Korea was received.

4) Vietnam tested an unknown ballistic missile. The test was shown on Vietnamese TV on channel VTV3 a few years ago. It was announced that the range reaches up to 1500 km, has a new engine with improved thrust and solid fuel. The body was elongated for more fuel capacity. Warhead size was not given. Its probably an advance variant of the Scud D using solid fuel and based on North Korean technology. Vietnam self produces the solid fuel.

5) Carl Thayer had reported that Vietnam and North Korea had made deals on missile technology assistance in 1996, 1999 and 2009 so this assistance has been ongoing for many years and it seems to continue.

We can only guess what Vietnam has produced as a result of this cooperation and production effort, but I would imagine that such an effort for so many years has to have some results.

If the chinese members of the forum don't want to believe any of this and prefer to dismiss the self produced vietnamese ballistic force, that's their right. What they choose to believe or not does not in any way changes reality.

bro, it is a nice summarization. Yes, if we master the Scud-B technology (and there are reports we can), then we can develop medium and long range version of it. North Korea missile program is based upon Scud technology. Iran missiles are not much of difference.

BBC News - North Korea's missile programme

 

[Carlosa]

bro, it is a nice summarization. Yes, if we master the Scud-B technonoly (and there are reports we can), then we can develop medium and long range version of it. North Korea missile program is based upon Scud technology. Iran missiles are not much of difference.

View attachment 62528

Yes, to go further in range all is needed is to add another stage (another fuel body and engine) to the missile and to separate and eject the unused stages if required so that in the end you only have the warhead capsule in the terminal phase of approaching the target. That capsule could also have small thrusters for trajectory correction and guidance systems including GPS / GLONASS, etc in order to have good accuracy. There is nothing so difficult about that. Syria had developed Scuds D with a separating warhead section. range of 700 km and CEP of 50 meters.They has assistance from North Korea, same as Vietnam There is no reason why Vietnam can't do it, particularly with North Korean assistance.

The Iranian ballistic missile program is based on North Korean technology and we can see the results. That shows what VN could do. Granted that Iran has a better military industrial base and more money, but it is a point of reference.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

Just keep this in mind: The US:Mexico GDP balance is 14:1. The Chinese:Vietnamese GDP balance is 54:1.

Vietnam produces the same amount of original science research than Kenya despite a much larger GDP and population.

China, meanwhile, has been either the top or the second top (next to only the US) publisher of original scientific research in key indicators of national progress such as materials science, physical chemistry, condensed matter physics, nanoscience, electronic materials, electrical engineering, etc. for the past 5 years. The country that is strongest in these fields will rule the future, since advanced materials are one of the few remaining bottlenecks for rapid advances in all fields ranging from photonics to quantum information to space exploration.

SJR - International Science Ranking

Do you see now why their wild claims are laughable and futile?

In this respect, the US has had a far better strategic vision than China. Back in 1990, we had a GDP that was 22x that of Mexico. We decided to join with them in NAFTA, thus both benefiting from their cheap labor market to create a mini-China to which to outsource our manufacturing, and simultaneously building up a nearby market for our export products. It's worked out fairly well, and as an added bonus, Mexico has gradually become more stable, thus reducing the potential for military involvement (it seems ludicrous now, but remember the US attitude towards Latin America in the 1980s). We need not waste money to fill the Gulf of Mexico with naval assets to secure our oil interests, because the Gulf is peaceful.

It's difficult to understand China's thought process in this. If China wanted, I am sure some agreement could be made over the oil, as long as China is willing to forego the possibility of taking 100% of the oil or oil revenues, and settle for something a bit more equitable. China seems uninterested in such a solution, which I suspect is in order to pander to the population's nationalistic tendencies. China may get all of the oil, but it may lose Vietnam to America in the process, which seems like a terrible trade-off, considering it could have had both.

Note that I didn't mention anything about Mexico's relative lack of scientific achievement.

 

[Viet]

In this respect, the US has had a far better strategic vision than China. Back in 1990, we had a GDP that was 22x that of Mexico. We decided to join with them in NAFTA, thus both benefiting from their cheap labor market to create a mini-China to which to outsource our manufacturing, and simultaneously building up a nearby market for our export products. It's worked out fairly well, and as an added bonus, Mexico has gradually become more stable, thus reducing the potential for military involvement (it seems ludicrous now, but remember the US attitude towards Latin America in the 1980s). We need not waste money to fill the Gulf of Mexico with naval assets to secure our oil interests, because the Gulf is peaceful.

It's difficult to understand China's thought process in this. If China wanted, I am sure some agreement could be made over the oil, as long as China is willing to forego the possibility of taking 100% of the oil or oil revenues, and settle for something a bit more equitable. China seems uninterested in such a solution, which I suspect is in order to pander to the population's nationalistic tendencies. China may get all of the oil, but it may lose Vietnam to America in the process, which seems like a terrible trade-off, considering it could have had both.

Note that I didn't mention anything about Mexico's relative lack of scientific achievement.

I wish, basically everyone wishes in the region, China would copy the ways of what America peacefully contributes to the region. Or Germany does to the region after the defeat in the WW II. to understand China what it does, why it does, one must understand Chinese psyche.

What is Chinese psyche?

actually today the Chinese are stuck between "middle kingdom"´s mindset, extreme nationalism, racism, egoism, arrogance and aggression. In this combination, they are worse than the Japanese in their dark times period.

Do you think they want a peaceful region, a stable neighborhood, a properous Vietnam? Nope. As the foreign minister of Australia Julia Bishop recently put it: China doesn't respect weakness. The only thing Chinese respect is power, or you can put it: violence. Chinese admire US military power. they despise the rest of the world as inferior. the most important thing they want is money and how to accumulate the money. Because they believe money can buy everything including friends or stooge like Cambodia.

Chinese calculus is so: China is big and rich, so it can have all. Vietnam is small and poor. Conclusion: we should give in their demand and surrender our money to them to make them richer. Otherwise they will come with warships and fighter jets.

I bet, if we have a squadron of nuclear submarines with nukes, Chinese will become peaceful and return to negotiating table. So if you want a peaceful region in Southeast Asia, pls provide us with necessary means.

 

[Carlosa]

In this respect, the US has had a far better strategic vision than China. Back in 1990, we had a GDP that was 22x that of Mexico. We decided to join with them in NAFTA, thus both benefiting from their cheap labor market to create a mini-China to which to outsource our manufacturing, and simultaneously building up a nearby market for our export products. It's worked out fairly well, and as an added bonus, Mexico has gradually become more stable, thus reducing the potential for military involvement (it seems ludicrous now, but remember the US attitude towards Latin America in the 1980s). We need not waste money to fill the Gulf of Mexico with naval assets to secure our oil interests, because the Gulf is peaceful.

It's difficult to understand China's thought process in this. If China wanted, I am sure some agreement could be made over the oil, as long as China is willing to forego the possibility of taking 100% of the oil or oil revenues, and settle for something a bit more equitable. China seems uninterested in such a solution, which I suspect is in order to pander to the population's nationalistic tendencies. China may get all of the oil, but it may lose Vietnam to America in the process, which seems like a terrible trade-off, considering it could have had both.

Note that I didn't mention anything about Mexico's relative lack of scientific achievement.

To understand their policies need to understand how chinese naturally do things. If you spend some time in China, you get it right away. Most chinese are aggressive, calculating, greedy and tricky, so their policies reflect that.

There is an smart way to win and even dominate (the US model), but the chinese are used to the old fashion rough way that in the end is not sustainable and will make them lose, but I guess that's the only way for them to learn.

 

[Viet]

Yes, to go further in range all is needed is to add another stage (another fuel body and engine) to the missile and to separate and eject the unused stages if required so that in the end you only have the warhead capsule in the terminal phase of approaching the target. That capsule could also have small thrusters for trajectory correction and guidance systems including GPS / GLONASS, etc in order to have good accuracy. There is nothing so difficult about that. Syria had developed Scuds D with a separating warhead section. range of 700 km and CEP of 50 meters.They has assistance from North Korea, same as Vietnam There is no reason why Vietnam can't do it, particularly with North Korean assistance.

The Iranian ballistic missile program is based on North Korean technology and we can see the results. That shows what VN could do. Granted that Iran has a better military industrial base and more money, but it is a point of reference.

yes, the medium and long range balistic missiles of North Korea Taepodong-1 and 2 are basically Scud-B plus 2-3 stage of fuel body and engine, carrying a warhead of 500 kg. the range of their missiles covers not only Japan, but a large part of China.

who is friend, who is enemy?

Vietnam Scud-B

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

I wish, basically everyone wishes in the region, China would copy the ways of what America peacefully contributes to the region. Or Germany does to the region after the defeat in the WW II. to understand China what it does, why it does, one must understand Chinese psyche.

What is Chinese psyche?

actually today the Chinese are stuck between "middle kingdom"´s mindset, extreme nationalism, racism, egoism, arrogance and aggression. In this combination, they are worse than the Japanese in their dark times period.

Do you think they want a peaceful region, a stable neighborhood, a properous Vietnam? Nope. As the foreign minister of Australia Julia Bishop recently put it: China doesn't respect weakness. The only thing Chinese respect is power, or you can put it: violence. Chinese admire US military power. they despise the rest of the world as inferior. the most important thing they want is money and how to accumulate the money. Because they believe money can buy everything including friends or stooge like Cambodia.

Chinese calculus is so: China is big and rich, so it can have all. Vietnam is small and poor. Conclusion: we should give in their demand and surrender our money to them to make them richer. Otherwise they will come with warships and fighter jets.

I bet, if we have a squadron of nuclear submarines with nukes, Chinese will become peaceful and return to negotiating table. So if you want a peaceful region in Southeast Asia, pls provide us with necessary means.

To understand their policies need to understand how chinese naturally do things. If you spend some time in China, you get it right away. Most chinese are aggressive, calculating, greedy and tricky, so their policies reflect that.

There is an smart way to win and even dominate (the US model), but the chinese are used to the old fashion rough way that in the end is not sustainable and will make them lose, but I guess that's the only way for them to learn.

Let's not be hasty. Everyone has pride, and many cultures have the "we only respect power" component to it, but I think in China's case, it's probably a bit more nuanced. I have hesitated to write this, because it can come across as incendiary if misunderstood, but I mean no disrespect to China or our Chinese friends here. I'm simply trying to apply a conceptual model to rationalize China's behavior and understand what China wants. To wit:

China suffered two large traumas, one in the 19th century, and one in the 20th, that constitute its "Century of Humiliation." A common model for looking at the consequences of traumas in people is the Kübler-Ross model, better known as the five stages of grief. These stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Roughly speaking, the non-reaction in the 19th century might be considered denial, then the upheavals in the early 20th as anger, coming to terms with itself as a new country after WWII as bargaining, the cultural revolution as depression, and then the reforms under Deng Xiaoping as acceptance. I am going to steal Wikipedia's example of the acceptance stage:

Acceptance — "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it, I may as well prepare for it."
In this last stage, individuals begin to come to terms with their mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. This stage varies according to the person's situation. People dying can enter this stage a long time before the people they leave behind, who must pass through their own individual stages of dealing with the grief. This typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable mindset.​

This is China's drive to improve its economic conditions in order to strengthen itself, and fulfill its vow of "never again." This can sometimes manifest itself as overreaction to perceived slights, and a wary defensiveness. I have referred to this in other threads as "aggressive victimhood," but call it whatever you like: China was a victim in the past, and now it's powerful enough to prevent it and do something about it.

Now on to another conceptual model that I think has some utility in understanding the thinking of some Chinese users here. We have seen suggestions that if China breaks the USD as a reserve currency, it can break US hegemony. We have seen suggestions that since China "does more science," it will be more advanced. We have seen suggestions that if China uses the same gunboat diplomacy that the West used over a century ago, it can accrue the same level of prestige as the West.

I think it's instructive to examine the cargo cult. I'm going to excerpt from Wikipedia, but read the article if you have time, it's fascinating.

The most widely known period of cargo cult activity occurred among the Melanesian islanders in the years during and after World War II. A small population of indigenous peoples observed, often right in front of their dwellings, the largest war ever fought by technologically advanced nations. First, the Japanese arrived with a great deal of supplies and later theAllied forces did likewise.

The vast amounts of military equipment and supplies that both sides airdropped (or airlifted to airstrips) to troops on these islands meant drastic changes to the lifestyle of the islanders, many of whom had never seen outsiders before. Manufactured clothing, medicine, canned food, tents, weapons and other goods arrived in vast quantities for the soldiers, who often shared some of it with the islanders who were their guides and hosts.

...

With the end of the war, the military abandoned the airbases and stopped dropping cargo. In response, charismatic individuals developed cults among remote Melanesian populations that promised to bestow on their followers deliveries of food, arms, Jeeps, etc. The cult leaders explained that the cargo would be gifts from their own ancestors, or other sources, as had occurred with the outsider armies. In attempts to get cargo to fall by parachute or land in planes or ships again, islanders imitated the same practices they had seen the soldiers, sailors, and airmen use. Cult behaviors usually involved mimicking the day-to-day activities and dress styles of US soldiers, such as performing parade ground drills with wooden or salvaged rifles. The islanders carved headphones from wood and wore them while sitting in fabricated control towers. They waved the landing signals while standing on the runways. They lit signal fires and torches to light up runways and lighthouses.

In a form of sympathetic magic, many built life-size replicas of aeroplanes out of straw and cut new military-style landing strips out of the jungle, hoping to attract more aeroplanes. The cult members thought that the foreigners had some special connection to the deities and ancestors of the natives, who were the only beings powerful enough to produce such riches.​

To put it simplistically, I think China saw the trappings of wealth and prestige of the West, and decided that in order to attain such wealth and prestige for itself as well, it needed to do what the Westerners did, without fully appreciating the more profound causes of that power. The West had superior technology, so China needed to "do science." The West had used gunboat diplomacy, so China needed to assert itself in the SCS and ECS. The UK and US had the reserve currencies, so China needed to deprive them of that in order to take their place. And so forth. China didn't preoccupy itself with questions of why the Western culture was able to produce these things; it only knew that to have those things was to have power.

I really think it's not much more profound than that. Every rising power wants its place under the sun, whether it's Britain rising up through the Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch empires, or Germany trying to surpass the British Empire, or the US dismantling the British Empire to become leader of the free world.

Now China is attempting to do the same, but in a somewhat more shallow way, along the model of the USSR. Whereas the US combined economic and military strength with an attractive soft power, China relies entirely on its economic strength and military hard power. I don't think this comes down to pure greed, or malevolence, I think China simply doesn't know how to accrue allies, so it creates enemies, instead.

In time, I think China will complete the "acceptance" stage of its grief cycle, and become a normal country that doesn't need to traumatize others in order to feel secure in itself. We saw the first glimpse of that with Tiananmen Square. But it will take a few more decades before China realizes that it's so strong that it's not possible to be encircled again, or to have a repetition of the Century of Humiliation.

What is the solution? Much like China, I think Vietnam should bide its time, and build its resources. Nothing lasts forever, and this stage of tensions will also pass, so Vietnam needs to be ready to exploit the opportunities that come its way when the situation presents itself.

 

[Carlosa]

yes, the medium and long range balistic missiles of North Korea Taepodong-1 and 2 are basically Scud-B plus 2-3 stage of fuel body and engine, carrying a warhead of 500 kg. the range of their missiles covers not only Japan, but a large part of China.

who is friend, who is enemy?

View attachment 63233


Vietnam Scud-B
View attachment 63234

Yes and even the americans already admitted that North Korea already developed ICBM's that can reach USA with a nuclear warhead.

VN already got some of that technology at the very least and can have all of it if it pays enough, the north koreans love to sell it, both the missile technology and the nuclear technology.

I don't know how many ballistic missiles VN has, but I suspect that its not an insignificant number. If there is a ballistic missile exchange between VN and china, it will not be just in one direction.

 

[Carlosa]

Let's not be hasty. Everyone has pride, and many cultures have the "we only respect power" component to it, but I think in China's case, it's probably a bit more nuanced. I have hesitated to write this, because it can come across as incendiary if misunderstood, but I mean no disrespect to China or our Chinese friends here. I'm simply trying to apply a conceptual model to rationalize China's behavior and understand what China wants. To wit:

China suffered two large traumas, one in the 19th century, and one in the 20th, that constitute its "Century of Humiliation." A common model for looking at the consequences of traumas in people is the Kübler-Ross model, better known as the five stages of grief. These stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Roughly speaking, the non-reaction in the 19th century might be considered denial, then the upheavals in the early 20th as anger, coming to terms with itself as a new country after WWII as bargaining, the cultural revolution as depression, and then the reforms under Deng Xiaoping as acceptance. I am going to steal Wikipedia's example of the acceptance stage:

Acceptance — "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it, I may as well prepare for it."
In this last stage, individuals begin to come to terms with their mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. This stage varies according to the person's situation. People dying can enter this stage a long time before the people they leave behind, who must pass through their own individual stages of dealing with the grief. This typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable mindset.​

This is China's drive to improve its economic conditions in order to strengthen itself, and fulfill its vow of "never again." This can sometimes manifest itself as overreaction to perceived slights, and a wary defensiveness. I have referred to this in other threads as "aggressive victimhood," but call it whatever you like: China was a victim in the past, and now it's powerful enough to prevent it and do something about it.

Now on to another conceptual model that I think has some utility in understanding the thinking of some Chinese users here. We have seen suggestions that if China breaks the USD as a reserve currency, it can break US hegemony. We have seen suggestions that since China "does more science," it will be more advanced. We have seen suggestions that if China uses the same gunboat diplomacy that the West used over a century ago, it can accrue the same level of prestige as the West.

I think it's instructive to examine the cargo cult. I'm going to excerpt from Wikipedia, but read the article if you have time, it's fascinating.

The most widely known period of cargo cult activity occurred among the Melanesian islanders in the years during and after World War II. A small population of indigenous peoples observed, often right in front of their dwellings, the largest war ever fought by technologically advanced nations. First, the Japanese arrived with a great deal of supplies and later theAllied forces did likewise.

The vast amounts of military equipment and supplies that both sides airdropped (or airlifted to airstrips) to troops on these islands meant drastic changes to the lifestyle of the islanders, many of whom had never seen outsiders before. Manufactured clothing, medicine, canned food, tents, weapons and other goods arrived in vast quantities for the soldiers, who often shared some of it with the islanders who were their guides and hosts.

...

With the end of the war, the military abandoned the airbases and stopped dropping cargo. In response, charismatic individuals developed cults among remote Melanesian populations that promised to bestow on their followers deliveries of food, arms, Jeeps, etc. The cult leaders explained that the cargo would be gifts from their own ancestors, or other sources, as had occurred with the outsider armies. In attempts to get cargo to fall by parachute or land in planes or ships again, islanders imitated the same practices they had seen the soldiers, sailors, and airmen use. Cult behaviors usually involved mimicking the day-to-day activities and dress styles of US soldiers, such as performing parade ground drills with wooden or salvaged rifles. The islanders carved headphones from wood and wore them while sitting in fabricated control towers. They waved the landing signals while standing on the runways. They lit signal fires and torches to light up runways and lighthouses.

In a form of sympathetic magic, many built life-size replicas of aeroplanes out of straw and cut new military-style landing strips out of the jungle, hoping to attract more aeroplanes. The cult members thought that the foreigners had some special connection to the deities and ancestors of the natives, who were the only beings powerful enough to produce such riches.​

To put it simplistically, I think China saw the trappings of wealth and prestige of the West, and decided that in order to attain such wealth and prestige for itself as well, it needed to do what the Westerners did, without fully appreciating the more profound causes of that power. The West had superior technology, so China needed to "do science." The West had used gunboat diplomacy, so China needed to assert itself in the SCS and ECS. The UK and US had the reserve currencies, so China needed to deprive them of that in order to take their place. And so forth. China didn't preoccupy itself with questions of why the Western culture was able to produce these things; it only knew that to have those things was to have power.

I really think it's not much more profound than that. Every rising power wants its place under the sun, whether it's Britain rising up through the Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch empires, or Germany trying to surpass the British Empire, or the US dismantling the British Empire to become leader of the free world.

Now China is attempting to do the same, but in a somewhat more shallow way, along the model of the USSR. Whereas the US combined economic and military strength with an attractive soft power, China relies entirely on its economic strength and military hard power. I don't think this comes down to pure greed, or malevolence, I think China simply doesn't know how to accrue allies, so it creates enemies, instead.

In time, I think China will complete the "acceptance" stage of its grief cycle, and become a normal country that doesn't need to traumatize others in order to feel secure in itself. We saw the first glimpse of that with Tiananmen Square. But it will take a few more decades before China realizes that it's so strong that it's not possible to be encircled again, or to have a repetition of the Century of Humiliation.

What is the solution? Much like China, I think Vietnam should bide its time, and build its resources. Nothing lasts forever, and this stage of tensions will also pass, so Vietnam needs to be ready to exploit the opportunities that come its way when the situation presents itself.

You made a very good point, thank you. It is correct up to a point, but not fully, believe me, if you spend enough time in china, you will understand chinese people better. Chinese people living in USA, particularly if they grew up there are already very different than mainland chinese.

Western people have a tendency to see others with western eyes and expect from them the same as from western people and when that's not the case, then they try to rationalize a logical explanation as to why is not that way.

The answer is in the cultural differences, Tibetan culture for example, is quite peaceful and religious oriented, they believe in "live and let live". Chinese culture is the opposite of that and it goes back for a very long time. They have a different way of doing things and of thinking, they follow different rules of behavior, they do that in all aspects of their interaction with the outside world, that's why they flood the markets with fake goods, they hack everybody to steal technology, everything is fair game for them, their words and promises don't have much value, they break it at the moment that is no longer needed, they act in a predatory way. The people of the countries around here in southeast asia, they understand chinese and see them for what they are, that's why everybody dislike them (that's a mild way to put it), wether it is Vietnam, thailand, indonesia, malaysia, etc, everybody (generally speaking) feels the same way about them.

Don't worry too much about being politically correct here, can talk rough, you can see how most chinese in the forum don't usually respect anybody anyway. Many of them are living in USA, some are naturalized or born US citizens, but they often speak pretty bad about USA, that's quite typical of them.

Again, thank you for your analysis, its good, I just think that is a partial explanation, at least that's my take.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Now on to another conceptual model that I think has some utility in understanding the thinking of some Chinese users here. We have seen suggestions that if China breaks the USD as a reserve currency, it can break US hegemony. We have seen suggestions that since China "does more science," it will be more advanced. We have seen suggestions that if China uses the same gunboat diplomacy that the West used over a century ago, it can accrue the same level of prestige as the West.

To put it simplistically, I think China saw the trappings of wealth and prestige of the West, and decided that in order to attain such wealth and prestige for itself as well, it needed to do what the Westerners did, without fully appreciating the more profound causes of that power. The West had superior technology, so China needed to "do science." The West had used gunboat diplomacy, so China needed to assert itself in the SCS and ECS. The UK and US had the reserve currencies, so China needed to deprive them of that in order to take their place. And so forth. China didn't preoccupy itself with questions of why the Western culture was able to produce these things; it only knew that to have those things was to have power.

Now China is attempting to do the same, but in a somewhat more shallow way, along the model of the USSR. Whereas the US combined economic and military strength with an attractive soft power, China relies entirely on its economic strength and military hard power. I don't think this comes down to pure greed, or malevolence, I think China simply doesn't know how to accrue allies, so it creates enemies, instead.

This is easy for you to say, with two relatively weak and compliant nations next to you and then two oceans. Do note that the US has fought border wars with both Canada and Mexico during the first 70 years of the US's founding. It is only extremely overwhelming US relative strength that allows it a peaceful neighborhood.

There's no secret to why Chinese do science. China has been the premier technological and scientific power from 500 BC to 1700 AD. There is no need to think about psychology - countries that can do science, will do science. Those that can't, don't. Science is a key indicator of national progress, especially in the materials and physical sciences.

There is also no gunboat diplomacy. Note that no naval forces have been deployed and no guns actually used. Why was the West's gunboat diplomacy called that? Because it literally involved gunboats sailing into harbors of Asian countries and even opening fire along rivers. There has been *nothing close* with Vietnam.

The real problem here is that unlike Mexico, Vietnam does not recognize its overwhelming weakness, because it believes it can leverage the US into helping it. It is the identical situation to if Mexico thought that the Soviet Union or Great Britain would help it get its land back by giving it (as Vietnamese here think the US will give it) IRBMs, a nuclear program, AEGIS destroyers, submarines, tanks, fighters, etc.

As you can see here, Vietnamese are showing their racism. They are saying "Chinese are..." while no Chinese has ever said "Vietnamese are..." Instead, Chinese have only pointed out the objective weakness of Vietnam and its inability to enforce its claims should gunboat diplomacy actually be used. There is no argument about right or wrong, because this thread is not about right or wrong - it is about the objective comparison of Vietnamese military forces to its competitors. By not condemning racism, you are condoning it. Do you see now why Chinese feel apprehensive about Vietnamese? Do you not realize that agreeing with them by saying that Chinese actions are due to preceived slights and historical trauma, rather than legitimate concerns about territorial integrity, is actually a form of racism that says the opinions of Chinese people are worth less than the opinions of Vietnamese and others, simply because of their race?

Yes and even the americans already admitted that North Korea already developed ICBM's that can reach USA with a nuclear warhead.

VN already got some of that technology at the very least and can have all of it if it pays enough, the north koreans love to sell it, both the missile technology and the nuclear technology.

I don't know how many ballistic missiles VN has, but I suspect that its not an insignificant number. If there is a ballistic missile exchange between VN and china, it will not be just in one direction.

Oh my god. You get some Saddam era Iraqi style SCUDs and now think you can launch ballistic missiles like they're fireworks. What do you think is going to happen if Chinese detect a ballistic missile launch heading towards a Chinese city from Vietnam?

 

[bolo]

I wish, basically everyone wishes in the region, China would copy the ways of what America peacefully contributes to the region. Or Germany does to the region after the defeat in the WW II. to understand China what it does, why it does, one must understand Chinese psyche.

What is Chinese psyche?

actually today the Chinese are stuck between "middle kingdom"´s mindset, extreme nationalism, racism, egoism, arrogance and aggression. In this combination, they are worse than the Japanese in their dark times period.

Do you think they want a peaceful region, a stable neighborhood, a properous Vietnam? Nope. As the foreign minister of Australia Julia Bishop recently put it: China doesn't respect weakness. The only thing Chinese respect is power, or you can put it: violence. Chinese admire US military power. they despise the rest of the world as inferior. the most important thing they want is money and how to accumulate the money. Because they believe money can buy everything including friends or stooge like Cambodia.

Chinese calculus is so: China is big and rich, so it can have all. Vietnam is small and poor. Conclusion: we should give in their demand and surrender our money to them to make them richer. Otherwise they will come with warships and fighter jets.

I bet, if we have a squadron of nuclear submarines with nukes, Chinese will become peaceful and return to negotiating table. So if you want a peaceful region in Southeast Asia, pls provide us with necessary means.

Right. A Viet dog pretending to know Chinese mindset.

This is easy for you to say, with two relatively weak and compliant nations next to you and then two oceans. Do note that the US has fought border wars with both Canada and Mexico during the first 70 years of the US's founding. It is only extremely overwhelming US relative strength that allows it a peaceful neighborhood.

There's no secret to why Chinese do science. China has been the premier technological and scientific power from 500 BC to 1700 AD. There is no need to think about psychology - countries that can do science, will do science. Those that can't, don't. Science is a key indicator of national progress, especially in the materials and physical sciences.

There is also no gunboat diplomacy. Note that no naval forces have been deployed and no guns actually used. Why was the West's gunboat diplomacy called that? Because it literally involved gunboats sailing into harbors of Asian countries and even opening fire along rivers. There has been *nothing close* with Vietnam.

The real problem here is that unlike Mexico, Vietnam does not recognize its overwhelming weakness, because it believes it can leverage the US into helping it. It is the identical situation to if Mexico thought that the Soviet Union or Great Britain would help it get its land back by giving it (as Vietnamese here think the US will give it) IRBMs, a nuclear program, AEGIS destroyers, submarines, tanks, fighters, etc.

As you can see here, Vietnamese are showing their racism. They are saying "Chinese are..." while no Chinese has ever said "Vietnamese are..." Instead, Chinese have only pointed out the objective weakness of Vietnam and its inability to enforce its claims should gunboat diplomacy actually be used. There is no argument about right or wrong, because this thread is not about right or wrong - it is about the objective comparison of Vietnamese military forces to its competitors. By not condemning racism, you are condoning it. Do you see now why Chinese feel apprehensive about Vietnamese? Do you not realize that agreeing with them by saying that Chinese actions are due to preceived slights and historical trauma, rather than legitimate concerns about territorial integrity, is actually a form of racism that says the opinions of Chinese people are worth less than the opinions of Vietnamese and others, simply because of their race?



Oh my god. You get some Saddam era Iraqi style SCUDs and now think you can launch ballistic missiles like they're fireworks. What do you think is going to happen if Chinese detect a ballistic missile launch heading towards a Chinese city from Vietnam?

Free trade is not free trade signed by US unless it benefits them. They will and have impose sanctions on their free trade partners. Canada was a victim of that.

CBC Digital Archives - At Loggerheads: The Canada-U.S. Softwood Lumber Dispute - Softwood Dispute: Canada claims victory at WTO

Even WTO agree but it doesn't help. Canadian got a taste of Daddy US.