Military Talk

Spied this in the morning's newsfeed:

Chinese marines' desert operations point to long-range ambitions
Reuters - Michael Martina and Greg Torode - 14 January 2016

BEIJING (Reuters) - Days after China passed a new law that for the first time permits its military to venture overseas on counter-terror operations, its marines began exercises in the western deserts of Xinjiang, more than 2,000 kilometers from the nearest ocean.

The continuing drills are an indication, analysts say, that the marines, who have traditionally trained for amphibious assault missions, are being honed into an elite force capable of deploying on land far from mainland China.

China's limited means to respond to threats abroad were highlighted by two incidents in November: when Islamic State executed a Chinese hostage, and the killing of three executives by Islamist militants who attacked a hotel in Mali. [cont.]

Wikipedia says the PLA Marines have two 6,000-man brigades that include units of armor, air defense, engineers, and artillery. No mention of aviation. A separate article on the deployment to Xinjiang notes that the marines will be exercising with a PLA infantry division. This looks to me like they're trying to assemble a unit that can be used a bit like our Special Operations Command, which combines Special Forces, Rangers, and a helicopter regiment. Obviously China has no reason to organize its units like ours, so a direct comparison may be misguided, but the article does claim they're inspired by our units and organization.

"[China's marines] never really had a major strategic role, as force projection wasn't something the PLA was willing, or able, to think about even ten years ago," said Gary Li, an independent security analyst in Beijing.

With amphibious divisions in the PLA Army also capable of extending China's reach into the South China Sea and Taiwan, Li said the marines are a good fit for a budding Chinese expeditionary force.

"The main advantage of playing around with the marines is that they have a higher concentration of specialists, act well as light infantry, have good esprit de corps, and are nimble enough to be deployed over long distances if needed," he said.

Chinese officials announced in November they were in talks with Djibouti to build permanent "support facilities" to further boost Chinese naval operations, in what would be China's first such off-shore military base.

The African port, sitting on the edge of the Red and Arabian seas, is home to several foreign military bases, including U.S., French and Japanese naval facilities.

According to Wikipedia, China's marines use Type 95 and Type 03 assault rifles, which both uses a steel-cased 5.8×42mm round with a muzzle velocity of ~930 m/s. The 95 is a "bullpup" rifle (there's an export version, the Type 97, that's chambered for the NATO 5.56x45), while the Type 03 is a descendant of the Kalashnikov, with the classic curved magazine in front of the trigger. The Type 95 also becomes the marines' squad support weapon, with a heavier barrel, a drum magazine and a bipod, and the 5.8×42mm "heavy round" that has a steel core and a higher muzzle velocity. They also use some wire-guided AT missiles, and probably whatever shoulder-fired SAMs the PLA uses these days. The heavier weapons and vehicles all look a little old and unimpressive (their armor regiment supposedly uses the Type 59 MBT, which is a variant of the Soviet T-55), but I suppose if you're looking at pirates and terrorists, and armies such as Vietnam's and Indonesia's you don't need next-gen tech as much as well-trained infantry.
 
Chinese marines' desert operations point to long-range ambitions
Reuters - Michael Martina and Greg Torode - 14 January 2016

BEIJING (Reuters) - Days after China passed a new law that for the first time permits its military to venture overseas on counter-terror operations, its marines began exercises in the western deserts of Xinjiang, more than 2,000 kilometers from the nearest ocean.

The continuing drills are an indication, analysts say, that the marines, who have traditionally trained for amphibious assault missions, are being honed into an elite force capable of deploying on land far from mainland China.

China's limited means to respond to threats abroad were highlighted by two incidents in November: when Islamic State executed a Chinese hostage, and the killing of three executives by Islamist militants who attacked a hotel in Mali.

Did these analysts ever think maybe China realizes all of its forces must be properly prepared for homeland defense? Large sections of China are desert territory so it would only make sense to train all of your ground forces, including your marines, for desert warfare. Also, a lot of desert nations are right in China's backyard, so it would make sense to have all your forces prepared to fight in those environments as well. And if the GWOT is any indication, all ground forces are expected to fight in any condition, regardless of what their intended role is. The US deployed marines to Afghanistan despite it being a completely landlocked nation, and they certainly didn't conduct any amphibious assaults in 2003 when we invaded Iraq, yet they were deployed and fought just the same.

Another example of ground forces expected to be more generalist than specialist would be the US Army's frequent use of non-infantry personnel to conduct infantry operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Due to the nature of those operations, it didn't matter of you were cavalry, artillery, or even intelligence; at some point you were going to be used as infantry and expected to kick in doors.

So my point is that rather than assuming the Chinese are planning to start projecting their military might far beyond their borders, I think it is safer to assume they merely recognize the changing nature of modern warfare and are adjusting their military accordingly. Sure, their marines can be the amphibious assault specialists, but the current realities of war demand that they be able to do more than just their specialized role.
 
So my point is that rather than assuming the Chinese are planning to start projecting their military might far beyond their borders, I think it is safer to assume they merely recognize the changing nature of modern warfare and are adjusting their military accordingly. Sure, their marines can be the amphibious assault specialists, but the current realities of war demand that they be able to do more than just their specialized role.
Given China has been stepping up their international involvement -there are currency Chinese peacekeepers in a combat role in Africa- I presume the Chinese military is operating under a "two birds with one stone" policy.
 
Did these analysts ever think maybe China realizes all of its forces must be properly prepared for homeland defense? Large sections of China are desert territory so it would only make sense to train all of your ground forces, including your marines, for desert warfare. Also, a lot of desert nations are right in China's backyard, so it would make sense to have all your forces prepared to fight in those environments as well. And if the GWOT is any indication, all ground forces are expected to fight in any condition, regardless of what their intended role is. The US deployed marines to Afghanistan despite it being a completely landlocked nation, and they certainly didn't conduct any amphibious assaults in 2003 when we invaded Iraq, yet they were deployed and fought just the same.

Another example of ground forces expected to be more generalist than specialist would be the US Army's frequent use of non-infantry personnel to conduct infantry operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Due to the nature of those operations, it didn't matter of you were cavalry, artillery, or even intelligence; at some point you were going to be used as infantry and expected to kick in doors.

So my point is that rather than assuming the Chinese are planning to start projecting their military might far beyond their borders, I think it is safer to assume they merely recognize the changing nature of modern warfare and are adjusting their military accordingly. Sure, their marines can be the amphibious assault specialists, but the current realities of war demand that they be able to do more than just their specialized role.

From a training point of view, it's much better to have (say) an armoured unit that has spent a combat deployment on foot, than it is to have the same unit that has only ever fired its weapons in training. Much of the benefit of operational experience isn't actually about being able to do your specialised job, but the more general and 'softer' skills like being able to hold your nerve under fire, being able to keep together as a team despite discomfort and isolation over a long period of time, (especially today) having some experience dealing with difficult civilian interactions, and so on.
 
So my point is that rather than assuming the Chinese are planning to start projecting their military might far beyond their borders, I think it is safer to assume they merely recognize the changing nature of modern warfare and are adjusting their military accordingly. Sure, their marines can be the amphibious assault specialists, but the current realities of war demand that they be able to do more than just their specialized role.
The article gets into that, further down:

Along with President Xi Jinping's vows to build a more modern military, the global profile of China's armed forces is on the rise.

Already, the South Sea fleet, which is based on the mainland coast near the island of Hainan, has been used on operations far from the South China Sea.

The fleet's vessels have ventured to the Middle East and Mediterranean after deployments on international anti-piracy patrols around the Horn of Africa.

Chinese officials announced in November they were in talks with Djibouti to build permanent "support facilities" to further boost Chinese naval operations, in what would be China's first such off-shore military base.

In addition,

China's Xi to visit Saudi [Arabia], Iran in new diplomacy push [I think he's also visiting Egypt], Reuters, 15 Jan 2016
Spotlight: Chinese president's Middle East tour goes far beyond oil, Xinhua, 15 Jan 2016
Xi’s new model army, The Economist, 16 Jan 2016

And, straight from the horse's mouth, Full text of China's Arab Policy Paper, Xinhua, 13 Jan 2016

The entire paper is all about China's increased emphasis on its economic ties to Middle Eastern and African countries, but I'll pluck out section 5 "Cooperation in the Field of Peace and Security":

Spoiler :
5.1 Regional Security

China calls for a concept of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security in the Middle East, and supports Arab and regional countries in their efforts to build an inclusive and shared regional collective cooperation security mechanism, so as to realize long-term peace, prosperity and development in the Middle East.

5.2 Military Cooperation

We will deepen China-Arab military cooperation and exchange. We will strengthen exchange of visits of military officials, expand military personnel exchange, deepen cooperation on weapons, equipment and various specialized technologies, and carry out joint military exercises. We will continue to support the development of national defence and military forces of Arab States to maintain peace and security of the region.

5.3 Anti-terrorism Cooperation

We resolutely oppose and condemn all forms of terrorism, and oppose coupling terrorism with any specific ethnic group or religion as well as double standards. We support the efforts of Arab States in countering terrorism and support their counter-terrorism capacity building. The Chinese side believes that counter-terrorism needs comprehensive measures to address both the symptoms and root causes, and counter-terrorism operations should comply with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international norms, and respect sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries.

China is ready to strengthen anti-terrorism exchanges and cooperation with Arab countries to establish a long-term security cooperation mechanism, strengthen policy dialogue and intelligence information exchange, and carry out technical cooperation and personnel training to jointly address the threat of international and regional terrorism.

5.4 Consular, Immigration, Judicial and Police Cooperation

We will earnestly safeguard the safety and legitimate interests of enterprises and citizens of China and Arab states in each other's countries, and actively make institutional arrangements for bilateral personnel exchanges. We will consolidate the results of bilateral cooperation in mutual legal assistance, extradition and repatriation, fugitive repatriation and asset recovery, and set up cooperation on the signing of treaties on legal assistance, as well as fighting transnational organized crimes and corruption.

5.5 Non-Traditional Security

We will jointly enhance the capability to cope with non-traditional security threats, support the international community's efforts to combat piracy, continue to send warships to the Gulf of Aden and waters off Somalia to maintain international maritime security, and conduct cyber security cooperation.
 
Another Amazon e-book on sale,

Enemy at the Gates: The Battle for Stalingrad, by William Craig. Published in 1973, republished in 2003, e-book published September 2015. I haven't read it, so I can't vouch for it.

$1.99

26208932.jpg
 
Another Amazon e-book on sale, Enemy at the Gates: The Battle for Stalingrad, by William Craig.

Read it back in college - A worthwhile book to read if you're interested in the subject. The 2001 movie is loosely based on a couple of pages about the snipers. The book is quite comprehensive.
 
If we're noting book recommendations, I just finished "Six Frigates" by Ian W. Toll. Excellent book specifically covering the first US Navy frigates (Constitution, Constellation, et al), and more broadly the Barbary Wars and War of 1812, and the domestic and international politics surrounding them.
 
Read it back in college - A worthwhile book to read if you're interested in the subject. The 2001 movie is loosely based on a couple of pages about the snipers. The book is quite comprehensive.

The movie wasn't bad though as far as historical dramas go.
 
I dunno. Having all the Russians speak with British accents and all the Germans speak with American accents wasn't the best possible choice. :p
 
Didn't read the book yet, but there are good responses about its historical accuracy and neutrality.
The movie was crappy - the only decent movie about Stalingrad battle I've ever seen, was the German "Stalingrad", 1993.

Edit:
https://vimeo.com/86063225
 
I think you have to admit, in the end, the snipers coming out into the open and shooting it out like spaghetti western gunslingers was a hoot!:lol:
 
I thought the movie was fun, had a good cast, but I wouldn't recommend it on its historicity. :crazyeye:
 
Bad news for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

"If Russia Started a War in the Baltics, NATO Would Lose — Quickly", Foreign Policy, 3 Feb 2016

"Report: Russia defeats NATO in Baltic war game", Stars & Stripes, 3 Feb 2016

So this would seem to justify the Defense Department's plan to preposition equipment in Eastern Europe.

Foreign Policy said:
The report was released Tuesday, the same day Defense Secretary Ash Carter unveiled plans to add more heavy weapons and armored vehicles to prepositioned stocks in Eastern Europe to give the Pentagon two brigade sets worth of heavy equipment on NATO’s eastern frontier. As it stands now, there are two U.S. Army infantry brigades stationed in Europe — one in Italy and the other in Germany — but they have been stretched thin by the constant demands of training rotations with allies across the continent.

I think the Navy is generally turning its attentions to the Pacific, and I presume taking the Marines with them. Anyway, an Inchon-style landing after a Russian attack on Riga or Talinn is probably not the smart plan. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania all joined NATO in 2004, which is probably their best defense right now. So far Putin hasn't forced anyone's hand where Article 5 is concerned (Ukraine isn't part of NATO), and I'm not going to say that he's quite that crazy.
 
I thought the movie was fun, had a good cast, but I wouldn't recommend it on its historicity. :crazyeye:
It's been a while since I've seen the movie Enemy at the Gates, but just from the little she's featured in the book, I think the movie didn't give Tania Chernova her due. It sounds like she was a bad mama, and was before she met Vasili. According to the book, she snuck into the city after the fighting had started by going through a sewer. She and her comrade then simply walked into a German chow line with the Wehrmacht troopers and got some lunch. Later, she got into a hand-to-hand fight with a German soldier in a stairwell and won. I think that was all before she met Vasili and racked up a bunch of kills with the sniper rifle.
 
there is this discussion going on in Turkey with providing a legal shield to Military personnel . So that for crimes committed during security operations , they can be tried in courts only if trials are permitted by the political authority . Everybody knows it's entirely and humanly possible to kill the enemies of the country with Honour , while Party War always require some encouragement . Nothing to comment and stuff that would have required me ... But the Army of Petrol seems to have some internal rust , some flickers of resistance so that some journalist in today's Hürriyet says it's something like Human Rights to provide same legal rights to those all those naval commandos and tank crew and even those who fly the Turkish jets . This , as you might not have heard , comes after allegations that civilian human shields were wantonly killed in some basement in the Southeast . A reminder to the journo in question ... Nothing is eternal , not even your power over the country , so it will be much better for the country to spend this summer , too . Extant and intact . Without horseshoes pointed up . If you insist on proving every single person is for sale , the younger generation which is the dumbest ever , might decide to give support to the Civil War in the country . Ambiguity is always the best defence .
 
Another Amazon e-book on sale,

Enemy at the Gates: The Battle for Stalingrad, by William Craig. Published in 1973, republished in 2003, e-book published September 2015. I haven't read it, so I can't vouch for it.

$1.99

26208932.jpg

I have, although it was decades ago. A Military Book of the Month Club selection. It deserved their recommendation. It was less of a grind than 'The 900 Days, Siege of Leningrad'. After reading that you felt like you were there every one of those days. Grim. Loaves of bread made with slowly increasing amounts of sawdust... I guess a human can digest a certain amount of such stuff.

The Stalingrad book takes one right into the Soviet prison camps after the battle. Not many soldiers survived that to come home almost a decade later. That's history, the book recounts the experiences of actual survivors. Must have been incredibly tough guys. I think if I was there at Stalingrad I'd have gotten with others and tried my own sneak out of the pocket or died trying. Before the food ran out and there was nothing left to run on.
 
If training becomes "a portent of long range ambitions" then every nation with a military can be accused of actively pursuing world domination.
 
Back
Top Bottom