Remarks by Ambassador Valentin Radomirski, meeting-discussion “China-modern challenges and Perspectives”, organized by the Bulgarian-Chinese Partnership Association, SIMO and Student council at UNWE, 5 November 2019.

“There has become a cliché assertion that the world of the next generation will be multipolar. But regardless of the outcome, the outcome in all cases means a loss of America’s current situation. And the whole American economic well-being is based on it. Depriving this foundation of the American rise threatens not only with the outbreak of civil unrest, but represents a real risk of territorial collapse of statehood.
At the beginning of the year, a lot of comments triggered the words of the deputy chief of the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences – Rear Admiral Li Yuan, who said that for the victory over the United States it is only necessary to be submerged in two of its aircraft carriers. Most of the comments on this claim were based on two fairly simple and primitive arguments. The first wars began not because of deep processes and regularities, but because of inconsistent leadership. The second, China’s claim for a military victory is ludicrous, since China has not won a single war in the last two hundred years.

And if behind the second argument there are still some reasons, then the first one does not correspond to reality. The American-Chinese conflict was created not by personal leadership flaws, but by a number of global strategic errors, perpetrated not only by the American but also by the entire Western managing elite in the 70 years of the TWENTIETH century.
I will allow myself a little historical course, for those younger than me, who have not lived or studied the specified period.
During the Cold War, in the global confrontation with the Soviet Union, the American elite was looking at China (and Asia in general) as the major region of importance (the second was the Middle East and then Africa), the mastery of which predetermined victory or Defeat in the geopolitical game. And after finally the results of the Vietnam War (1964-1975) proved the impossibility of gaining control of the priority region by military means, Washington passed to the strategy, known by its name from the attributed to Philip the Macedonian phrase – Ie. Triggered the notorious “gold-laden donkey”.
The policy taken then, from today’s point of view of what we already know, is unequivocally interpreted as a strategic error. At that time, China was only evaluated as a large but poor and hopeless traditional colony, only by an annoying coincidence, temporarily acquired independence. According to the so- “Japanese scheme” it had to be integrated into the Western (mostly American) economic, and then in the political, management system to consolidate definitively the whole population of western superiority over the USSR.

The Americans believed that expanding trade links would inevitably lead to a massive influx of their capital because of the revenues from investment. As a result, the Chinese leadership will be forced to start taking into account the foreign views of the country’s political governance. Western money will gradually erode the ideological basis of communist ideology and will undermine the social foundation of the state structure of the PRC. Then it should become the likeness of Japan, which allegedly kept the attributes of independence, but was actually transformed into an economic colony and a military placardus in Asia.
It should, but it didn’t work. America had to remember and stop the economic cooperation with China immediately after the events of Tiananmen Square in 1989. But the disintegration of the European socialism and the profits from trade with China proved to be too tasty and the American political elite failed to curb the appetites of their multinational corporations. It is from this moment that the global process begins, already very little dependent on specific personalities.
Both countries were trapped in tukidides (if someone had not met him as a concept this is what the academical by Harvard Graham Allison called The clash between an established force and a growing one). If the potential hegemon starts gaining momentum quickly, the current hegemon begins to fear him and seeks the opportunity to destroy the source of fear, the only variant of which is only war.

The Americans believed that expanding trade links would inevitably lead to a massive influx of their capital because of the revenues from investment. As a result, the Chinese leadership will be forced to start taking into account the foreign views of the country’s political governance. Western money will gradually erode the ideological basis of communist ideology and will undermine the social foundation of the state structure of the PRC. Then it should become the likeness of Japan, which allegedly kept the attributes of independence, but was actually transformed into an economic colony and a military placardus in Asia.
It should, but it didn’t work. America had to remember and stop the economic cooperation with China immediately after the events of Tiananmen Square in 1989. But the disintegration of the European socialism and the profits from trade with China proved to be too tasty and the American political elite failed to curb the appetites of their multinational corporations. It is from this moment that the global process begins, already very little dependent on specific personalities.
Both countries were trapped in tukidides (if someone had not met him as a concept this is what the academical by Harvard Graham Allison called The clash between an established force and a growing one). If the potential hegemon starts gaining momentum quickly, the current hegemon begins to fear him and seeks the opportunity to destroy the source of fear, the only variant of which is only war.

The problem was that neither China nor America at that time in the late 20th century did not understand this problem. Or more precisely, they made a very different sense of conclusions. Washington was only excited about the fate of the capital, thinking that China had nowhere to move geopolitical. You didn’t understand it then, but it became clear to him a few years later.
For its part, the managing elite of the “sub-celestial” Just then began to realize the boundary of the transition, when the amount of foreign capital leads to the loss of monopoly on the management of the society and the State. But at the time, you realized it was very limited. Without detailed calculation of further strategic consequences. It was concluded that it was necessary to develop the economic power of the country to a level comparable to the power of western competitors. Otherwise, sooner or later they will just crush China.
Realizing the impossibility of a decisive public change of the global course, Beijing took on the path of silent economic expansion. At first, purely internally, forming what today is usually defined as the specific Chinese model. The management of the country gladly accepted investments and created comfortable special economic zones for them, while isolating them politically from the state principles of the country.
Somewhere around 2006, In China were oriented in the processes and scale of prevailing trends in a globalising world, while in Washington most analysts continued to work with the clichés of the neo-liberalism for globalisation.

The next dozen years, the Chinese leadership devoted the trend of shaping their views into a clear and detailed strategy that in 2015. Led to the “Made in China 2025” programme, which envisaged the national economy to reach at least the last place in the top 10 of the world’s industrial countries by that date. Just from that moment the war between the Challenger and the current hegemon became almost inevitable. The question was only about the time of his beginning.
The Chinese calculations were the following. China cannot depart from the chosen path because of the unacceptability of the inevitable political and economic consequences. This means that by 2025, the necessary to carry out the modernisation of the key industries and then until 2035, To rise to the middle of the top-tan list, so that the century of the proclamation of the PRC in 2049. It confidently takes the first place in the world. With all the changes in its international status.
It was foreseen somewhere around 2027-2029. The scale of the process inevitably reaches a level that causes unavoidable contradictions with the United States. At the initial stage, they would have a purely economic nature and could be neutralized by the global project “One Belt-One Road”, which had to be fully realised by 2025 – 2027.

In addition to the overall growth of trade in key markets, the idea envisaged a major shift in transport balance. If, prior to the changes in the strategy, 98% of Chinese foreign trade was at sea and focused on routes entirely controlled by the Western naval Forces (mainly American), the new approach resulted in 10% of logistics being redirected to Land lines, and up to 40% must pass through the North Sea Road, i.e. close to Russia. Given the increased capacity of the Chinese armed forces in its coastal zone, only a maximum of 30 – 35% of the total turnover would have to remain under American control.
The Chinese believed that the American leadership should have knew all of this, but given the specifics of the American worldview, a long time will be trying to solve the problem “through money”. In particular, with sanctions and political influence on countries that represented key segments of Chinese projects. In fact, this would already be a war, but remaining within the scope of the use of commercial and economic instruments.

Washington’s understanding of the inability to achieve victory in this way, had according to Beijing to occur around 2035-2037 years. Right at this time the objectives for achieving all the plans for qualitative modernization of the Chinese armed forces and the implementation of a full readiness for modern warfare were targeted. Since that time, the threat of direct warfare has turned into a key factor in the fundamental geopolitical visions of Chinese politics.
War never arises alone. It always requires a goal achievable with military means. For America in the case of China, it had to be the replacement not only of specific personalities in the Chinese leadership, but a change of the entire managing elite to another, “with a more correct attitude to the West”. Theoretically, Washington could accomplish this in only two ways: through occupation after Victory and through Civil war, as a consequence of major external defeats. The Chinese leadership has developed a strategy to stop both scenarios.
It was reported, of course, that China had not fought seriously. Although his war with the Japanese did not seem like a childish joke, but it was fought 70 years ago. But on the other hand, the fact that the US military reputation was also largely exaggerated by the propaganda has been taken into account. And most importantly, America is extremely sensitive to losses. So the main task of the Chinese army was formed as a maximum increase in the aggressor’s losses in the event of his invasion. And that was already an achievable goal.

Moreover, the scale of such a war requires the Pentagon to have at least a millionth contingent, which will still have to be focused somewhere before being thrown to mainland China. It is impossible technically to force such mass troops without the front bases removed. The U.S. Army was theoretically able to do so, relying solely on the pre-rebasing of a similar amount of troops in Japan, South Korea and the Philippines. Because of this, the management of the PRC has made a lot of efforts to develop and improve the small and medium-range missiles and the Air Force as a tool for eliminating the enemy’s occipital zone. China has clearly stated its readiness to launch a preventive attack on neighbouring countries if their potential aggressor uses their territory to prepare aggression against China.
The factor for the use of nuclear weapons must also be Add. Without a strategic nuclear strike, any discussion of the success of an invasion of mainland China makes no sense, and this scenario will automatically follow a retaliating attack with decidedly unacceptable consequences for the United States.

The second type of threat was based on the stimulation of a civil war inside China because of a sharp decline in the living standards achieved over the last two decades, and this stimulation could be triggered by the interruption of Chinese foreign trade Communications. China’s economy is 30 to 70% (for business sectors) dependent on export markets and from resources outside China. However, most of the logistic lines are located in the coastal waters of China, which means that they can be concealed by a Chinese fleet of sufficient power, which closely interacts with the AA’s coastal complexes and the main forces of aviation.
Given that the American base infrastructure in Asia is within reach of the forces of Chinese rocket troops, in the event of a conflict, the US will be forced to retreat “away in the ocean” to the borders of Australia, the Marshall Islands and Hawaii. Even the Indian Ocean shipping would have to be disguised by the Chinese navy, relying on a broad system given with bases such as those already set up in Pakistan and Mogadishu, and this could successfully block the American forces on the island of Diego Garcia.
Thus, the management of CDD expected the fundamental exacerbation of the American-Chinese relations, in the period around 2037-2040, when it would already have the capabilities of its CS to such an extent that the military victory over China would no longer look Easily achievable. In this case, the possibility of developing some kind of peaceful mechanism for “surrender to the throne” in exchange for certain future preferences for the American elite should become an apparently preferred option for total mutual destruction.

In all probability, in the estimates the possibility of a direct military conflict was allowed, but according to the Chinese government, it would not go beyond the strictly territorial and time-based conflict frameworks. The result of these clashes should finally show the increased power of the Challenger and the critically limited ability of the United States to withhold their positions. And again, the narrow reciprocal economic ties of both sides were a solid argument in favour of Chinese settlements.
The Chinese have really calculated their strategic plan well. And the degree of stability of its implementation for more than 12 years is respectable. In it, however, a serious mistake began to manifest itself. The authors of the plan failed to accurately assess the extent of the power of American economic domination over the planet.
The growth rates of China’s financial and economic growth during the period considered were more than twice as high as those set (of course assuming that the version published for the public included the true parameters for development, and Have not been specifically lowered so that the hegemonic is currently not suspected of threatening danger).
So much for history. The situation – now.
Instead of a “mere” breakthrough in the top ten of the planet’s leading economies by 2025, China became the third largest country with GDP in 2009, the second in 2012, and reached 61.8% of US GDP in 2014, which means overtaking strategic Plans for at least 25 years. Instead of 2027 – 2029, the acute trade problems with America began in 2017. and reached a decisive level last year and its peak at the G-20 summit in Osaka this year.

The plans had to be corrected literally on the move. For example, the line to bring the Chinese navy to the top of power, with the deployment of six percussion groups aircraft carriers simultaneously, was displaced from 2042-2045 to 2035 year. Today, Chinese shipyards produce warships literally as Banichki, 130 thousand gross tonnage per year! In May T. Mr. The NAVY of China overtaken the United States by the number of the PMPs and became the largest in this benchmark fleet in the world.
A similar decisive acceleration of the competitor the United States could no longer ignore. And Washington also switched to the arms race and extensive analysis of possible strategies to win. In the last year there was a moment when literally a matchstick was enough to start shooting, but here the strategic calculations of China, combined with the political restraint of the guides of the two countries, proved to be true.
Including the fact that China’s position is strategically more advantageous. To win a possible war, the Beijing does not need to physically conquer America, suffice it to just keep the boundaries now occupied practically along its own coast. And Washington must destroy modern China to win. Or change his elite to a very pro-Western, which seems to be unattainable by the means available to US.

The events, however, began to acquire a noticeable momentum, which is difficult to control and the ruling elites of the two countries have become, in a sense, disguised to take fire measures to avoid direct armed conflict.
The problem is that the processes are evolving now exclusively on their inner logic. China can no longer stop its development. Including because it achieved the ability to fight the current hegemon. In turn, America suddenly realized the absence of a suitable alternative and the lack of deadlines for its strategic development. Everything should be done literally “on the move” in a rapidly shortening time window for tactical possibilities.
Finally, the most important thing is that the White House can no longer continue “the game of muscle”, creating military hysteria, even though only in the SMI. First, the muscles proved to be insufficient for serious pressure even on Iran, which is not comparable to China at all. Second, the current American nation is much different in determination to America than the 40-60 years of the last century. That is, with excessive media overload, the US managing elite may suddenly get a result much different than expected.
But also the silence of the demonstrations of his “masculinity” for Washington would mean almost openly recognizing a strategic defeat. With all the resulting negative consequences of financial, commercial and geopolitical nature. To increase the risk of disintegration of the country.

Because of all the above, Trump is right that the main threat to the United States is China, Zzinpin – because in this skirmish you have to have a strong til, which may only Russia can provide, and Putin is right in the “Clash of Suns” to look for a shady place and not to daydream And for the moment. “

2022-04-02T19:40:25+00:00