Tag: war

Posted on

US vs China on Taiwan: Shadow Boxing

 

Link to the earlier blog on the subject (China vs Taiwan)

 

Recently US Defence Department Spokesperson John Kirby made a statement on recent military exercises conducted by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army near the island of Taiwan. John Kirby told reporters that the US commitment to Taiwan is “rock solid” and that “the US is united with Taiwan against the current danger posed by the People’s Republic of China.”

 

Also the official Twitter accounts of the US State Department posted photos and tweets of Under Secretary of State José Fernandez and Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink respectively meeting with Taipei Economic and Cultural “Representative” Bi-khim Hsiao, claiming that the US commitment to Taiwan remains rock-solid, and the US will further strengthen ties with Taiwan. Media reports said that the US has invited Hsu Yen-pu, Taiwan’s “Army Commander,” to visit the US.

 

Strong Chinese Reaction

Zhao Lijian, spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry reacted strongly to these developments. Gist of his rebuttal is as follows:-

 

  • Taiwan Island is China’s territory and the US is in no position to point fingers over the Taiwan question.

 

  • US has been making negative moves to sell arms to Taiwan and strengthen official and military ties with the island, including a $750 million arms sale plan, the landing of US military aircraft on the island and frequent sailing of US warships across the Taiwan Straits. These provocative actions damage China-US relations and undermine regional peace and stability.

 

  • The remarks by the US senior official seriously violate the one-China principle, sending an extremely wrong and irresponsible signal to the outside world.

 

  • “Taiwan independence” is a dead end, and the Chinese mainland will take all necessary measures to resolutely crush any attempt at “Taiwan independence.”

 

  • China’s resolve and will to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity are firm and US should correct its mistakes and stop supporting secessionists in the island.

 

  • The embassy warned the US not to fantasise about seeking China’s support and cooperation while wantonly challenging China’s red line on the Taiwan question.

 

Analytical Thoughts

 

  • So far China and US are both shadow boxing over Taiwan issue.

 

  • It seems both are testing the waters and each other’s resolve.

 

  • It is like sumo wrestlers or boxers going round and round gauging each other, before engaging.

 

  • Besides verbal duels, once in a while the two sides resort to strategic coercion and muscle flexing.

 

  • The frequency of these acts is increasing.

 

  • Final engagement and result would depend upon – who wins the power race and world number one position.

 

  • Fate of Taiwan will determine the final result of the power race.

 

  • India has a breathing space, so long as China is preoccupied with Taiwan.

 

  • Our border dispute is still not resolved, with China claiming more and more.

 

  • If it is able to unify Taiwan, it will get encouraged to try it elsewhere.

 

Doubtful Thoughts

 

China is determined to unify Taiwan with the mainland.

 

  • Will China do it with its grey zone operations?

 

  • Will China use force to achieve her objective?

 

  • Will US fight for Taiwan?

 

  • When is this shadow boxing likely to escalate into actual engagement with throwing of punches?

 

  • Will the world get divided into two factions once again?

 

  • Will India be able to maintain policy of equidistance or get drawn towards one of the factions?

 

Random Thought

 

Western powers have been ruling the roost for a while.

Coming century is of the Asia.

 

Question

What will be India’s role, position and choices in this scenario?

 

Suggestions and value additions are most welcome

 

Link to the earlier blog on the subject (China vs Taiwan)

 

For regular updates, please register here

Subscribe

Posted on

Q & A Series: No War No Peace Situation & Grey Zone Conflict

Recently I wrote an article on “Airpower and Grey Zone Operations”. During the research, one question kept nagging my brain, so I asked all my colleagues and veterans, carrying out research and analysis on defence and security related subjects, individually or in association with different think tanks. Got some clarity on the issue with quite a few perspectives.

 

Question: What is the difference between Grey Zone (GZ) Conflicts / operations and No War No Peace (NWNP) situation?

 

Answer:

NWNP is an existing state (generally at the borders) – GZ is a zone in the continuum of war between peace and declared war.

 

NWNP is generally referred to military domain (actions or matters) – GZ is multi domain in DIME paradigm.

 

NWNP uses military tools as threats and weapons – GZ anything or everything can be used as a threat or weapon from multiple domains (political, economic, information, psychological, diplomatic, cyber and space etc).

 

NWNP includes firing by regular forces, small team actions across border and actions by non-state actors in concert with regulars etc – GZ activities are much broader and ambiguous.

 

NWNP is referred in the context of Indo-Pak border situations – GZ term appeared in the lexicon of defence and security analysts in global context.

 

NWNP was a low level term largely utilised on LOC – GZ is a wider concept that looks at the wide space between peace and war – a zone that is blurred.

 

NWNP situations may or may not have deniability – GZ operations generally have a high degree of deniability.

 

NWNP generally involves kinetic weapons and could lead to escalation – GZ generally employs hybrid warfare techniques (with kinetic weapons being one of the options but rarely used).

 

NWNP is a situation existing between two nations with their militaries face to face – GZ is a conflict between two nations not necessarily in eyeball situation.

 

NWNP is related to posturing, deterrence, coercion and use of force – GZ is achieving the objectives without military confrontation.

 

NWNP: the escalatory ladder can be traversed (up or down) at a rapid pace – GZ the transition is gradual and slower.

 

NWNP: the actions may be localised, limited in area and influence – GZ actions generally affect a large area or number of people.

 

Titbit

We are in NWNP situation with Pakistan

Chinese have mastered the art of Grey Zone operations

 

Comments and value additions are most welcome.

 

For regular updates please register here –

https://55nda.com/blogs/anil-khosla/subscribe/

Posted on

Grey Zone Operations or Conflicts

 

Definition. 

Grey Zone conflicts also referred as shadow wars have been defined in many ways.

 

They are not formal or traditional conflicts or full scale wars between nations or states. 

 

 Grey zone operations or conflicts fall somewhere in between the peace-conflict continuum.

 

Two major characteristics of Grey Zone conflicts are that the threshold is maintained below the level of full scale war, and second that, the means of operations are not restricted to military actions. Variety of instruments of power, often asymmetric and ambiguous in character are used to achieve the objectives.

 

Means.

Grey zone conflicts focus on the weaknesses and the vulnerabilities of countries being addressed.

 

The vulnerabilities could include weak economic conditions, internal disparities, ethnic alignments and religious polarisation etc.

 

Based on these vulnerabilities, local population, disillusioned elements or even the diaspora could be exploited.

 

The grey zone activities could be in the domain of politics, economy, social movements, diplomacy, cyber, space, information, psychological and / or communications.

 

Characteristics.

Grey Zone operations are generally sub-conventional in nature employing irregular means.

 

They could be overt or covert, carried out by proxy players or non-state actors.

 

They generally have a high degree of ambiguity and deniability.

 

Invariably they are conducted in multiple domains, maybe using both kinetic and non-kinetic modes simultaneously.

 

They generally include the nuances of other classifications of hostile actions like no war no peace, hybrid operation, asymmetric and sub conventional warfare etc.

 

Comparison and Differentiation.

Grey zone conflicts, no war no peace operations and hybrid warfare are terms used by security analysts and academics to describe prevailing hostile conditions between two countries.

 

No war no peace (NWNP) operations also fall in the same zone as grey zone conflict, but NWNP operations are generally referred to military actions whereas, grey zone activities could be in any of the numerous domains mentioned above.

 

Grey zone conflicts and hybrid warfare are other two terms which could be confusing. Grey zone is an operational environment encompassing the space between peace and war, whereas, hybrid warfare refers to the threats that are exploited in multiple domains. These threats could be employed either in full-fledged open war or in Grey-Zone conflict situations.

 

Grey-Zone conflict and hybrid means are not independent of each other, they are intricately linked to each other.

 

Value additions and comments are most welcome

 

coming up: Various aspects of grey zone operations

 

For regular updates please register here –

https://55nda.com/blogs/anil-khosla/subscribe/