China, War, and Logistics in the Indian Ocean

March 3, 2015

by Christopher Yung

Professor James Holmes and I are in the middle of the usual public back and forth that takes place between academics who disagree strongly. In a January piece here at War on the Rocks, Holmes took issue with an article I wrote that was published in the Diplomat, which itself was a rejoinder to his article criticizing our National Defense University (NDU) report, “Not An Idea We Have to Shun: Chinese Overseas Basing Requirements in the Twenty First Century” (NDU Press, October 2014). Holmes first takes me to task for not responding to the substance of his argument that a fictitious Spanish NDU would have concluded in 1897 that the United States would not build bases and engage in conflict with the Spanish Empire. His larger conclusion is “Never Say Never!” Next, he accuses the NDU report of “cherry picking” its definition of the “String of Pearls” concept, essentially creating a “straw man” and then shooting it down. He prefers the definition laid out in the original Booz Allen Hamilton Report to the Office of Net Assessment in 2004, which hypothesizes that China will form commercial and strategic partnerships in the Indian Ocean to ensure continued access to facilities there to protect China’s overseas shipping and access to energy and raw materials.

click here to read the rest of the article at War On The Rocks

Conflict and Cooperation in Sino-US Relations: Change and Continuity, Causes and Cures (Routledge Contemporary China Series)

February 22, 2015

Table of Contents
1. Taking the Temperature of China-US Conflict and Cooperation: An Introduction, Jean-Marc F. Blanchard and Simon Shen
2. A Primer on China-US Relations, 1949-2012: A Friend in Need is a Friend Indeed, Jean-Marc F. Blanchard
3. China, the US, and the Transition of Power: A Dual Leadership Structure in the Asia-Pacific, Quansheng Zhao
4. China and America: Showdown in the Asia-Pacific?, Suisheng Zhao
5. Friend or Foe: Washington, Beijing, and the Dispute over US Security Ties to Taiwan, Dennis V. Hickey and Kelan (Lilly) Lu
6. China’s North Korea Dilemma and Sino-U.S. Cooperation, Jingdong Yuan
7. Tough Love: US-China Economic Relations between Competition and Interdependence, Wei Liang
8. US-China Relations in Asia-Pacific Energy Regime Complexes: Cooperative, Complementary and Competitive, Gaye Christoffersen
9. Dialogues and Their Implications in Sino-American Relations, Robert G. Sutter
10. Continuity and Change in Sino-US Military-to-Military Relations, Christopher D. Yung
11. From the EP-3 Incident to the USS Kitty Hawk-Song Class Submarine Encounter: The Evolution of Sino-US Crisis Management Communication Mechanisms, Simon Shen and Ryan Kaminski 12 Conclusion, Stanley Rosen

China’s Tailored Coercion and Its Rivals’ Actions and Responses: What the Numbers Tell Us

January 26, 2015

The fifth paper in the Maritime Strategy Series, by Dr. Christopher Yung and Patrick McNulty, is a groundbreaking data-driven look at how the six claimants of features in the South China Sea have advanced and defended their claims from 1995 to 2014. During several years of research conducted at the National Defense University, the authors constructed a custom-built database of open-source reporting on actions taken in the South China Sea by each claimant, classified them into a detailed typology of different tactics, and drew conclusions from the resulting data. Broadly speaking, the research concludes that China has been the most active player, leading the field in use of all tactics save legal measures, and especially so in military and paramilitary actions. But activities by other claimants including the Philippines and Taiwan are also of note, providing a richer picture of the disputes. These data provide one of the only public sources for numerical comparison of various claimants’ actions, and Yung and McNulty’s analysis thus provides a crucial basis for further study of this fraught maritime zone.

Dr. Christopher Yung is a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University. At the time of writing, Patrick McNulty was a research analyst at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University.

Download the report (PDF) from CNAS

Burying China’s ‘String of Pearls’

January 22, 2015

The “String of Pearls” model has long outlived its usefulness as a strategic concept.

In a November 8 column, U.S. Naval War College Professor James R. Holmes (aka the Naval Diplomat) criticized a new National Defense University (NDU) report on Chinese overseas basing that I and a team of analysts published in October 2014. Holmes mischaracterizes the report’s findings as concluding “there’s little reason to expect China to seek bases in the Indian Ocean” and criticizes it for “linear thinking” and “straight-line analysis.” In fact, the report argues that China’s expanding global interests will generate increased demands for out-of-area naval operations and predicts that China is likely to establish at least one “dual-use” civilian/military base to provide logistics support for increased People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) operations. The report also concludes that the so-called “string of pearls” model of covert access to commercial ports built with Chinese investment is unable to support a robust, combat-oriented Chinese naval presence in the India Ocean. The report argues that it would not make strategic sense for the Chinese to pursue such a course.

The NDU report is titled “Not An Idea We Have to Shun: Chinese Overseas Basing Requirements for the Twenty First Century” and was written by Ross Rustici and me with research assistance from Scott Devary and Jenny Lin. We examined China’s growing foreign economic and security interests abroad; posited which interests needed to be protected and would generate PLA missions; surveyed press reports and statements by government officials about overseas bases; looked at writings by Chinese civilian and military analysts; and conducted interviews with logistics experts. We concluded that China’s current method of protecting its interests abroad by relying solely on commercial port access was unsatisfactory from a Chinese perspective, which suggests change is likely. A number of Chinese commentators agree with this conclusion.

read the rest of this article and the 100+ comments at The Diplomat

China’s Out of Area Naval Operations: Case Studies, Trajectories, Obstacles, and Potential Solutions

December 13, 2010

Accession Number : ADA535138

Title : China’s Out of Area Naval Operations: Case Studies, Trajectories, Obstacles, and Potential Solutions

Corporate Author : NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIV WASHINGTON DC INST FOR NATIONAL STRATEGIC STUDIES

Personal Author(s) : Yung, Christopher D. ; Rustici, Ross ; Kardon, Isaac ; Wiseman, Joshua

Full Text PDF

Paperback Available From Amazon

Report Date : DEC 2010

Pagination or Media Count : 77

Abstract : This study seeks to understand the future direction of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) with regard to out of area deployments and power projection. The assessment is based on the history of past PLAN out of area deployments and an analysis of out of area operations of other military forces. Both short- and long-term lenses are employed to understand the scope and direction of China’s defense planning and strategic decisions.

Descriptors : *DEFENSE PLANNING, *MILITARY FORCES(FOREIGN), *NAVAL OPERATIONS, *CHINA, POWER, CASE STUDIES, MILITARY STRATEGY, DEPLOYMENT, HISTORY

Subject Categories : MILITARY FORCES AND ORGANIZATIONS

Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE