Cold War Redux?

[c1ue]

Re: Cold War Redux?

Russia's demographics and conventional military capabilities are going the wrong way(down), while China's desire to feed the economic machine and it's conventional military capability are on the increase.

I don't for a second envisage a conflict between Russia/China......but I could see Russia's Far East at very long term risk of Chinese assimilation.

An old professor of mine has spent a good amount of time on and off through the Russian Far East......and has commented about what he perceives to be a drop in ethnic Russian population and a very noticeable increase in ethnic Chinese.

The Russian people that I know (very well) are quite aware of this and are very sensitive. Russians in general tend toward xenophobia to start with; the Yellow Horde is almost as bad a 'blacks' (ethnic Caucasians) in that regard.

However, Russia nukes work just as well in defending the Far East as it does in offsetting the US' present large, if not overwhelming conventional capability.

It is also notable that the Russian government is not doing anything to inflame said Far East sentiment.

As for what your professor observed - it is very real. Russia in the Cold War era had a large number of 'secret cities' in Siberia for the purposes of protection against attack as well as security concerns. With the change in regime, the formerly very cushy lifetimes of these secret city residents is gone.

To a significant, if lesser extent, this applied equally to those who emigrated into the Far East.

However, to say that Chinese are going to flood the region is equally problematic. There's a reason that no one likes to live there: while the 'wild nature' aspect is very nice, it doesn't really compensate for the overall really crappy weather as well as the difficulty of making a living there.

You'll note Chinese don't exactly flood to Tibet or Xinjiang without massive subsidies; why would they flood to Siberia which isn't any better?

At the end of the day, if the choice is between allowing a back-door colonization of Siberia or easy access to Russian energy and minerals, I'm pretty sure China is going to choose the latter.

In the meantime there is a bigger game afoot.

As for ways by which Iran could project force: besides speedboats there are also the mobile land-based anti-ship launchers. A guy in a wet suit with a big honking explosive limpet. Hell even artillery.

I don't see Iran doing this unless attacked, but frankly I have less faith on the part of Israel as well as to a lesser extent, the US due to the House of Saud.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Cold War Redux?

The Russian people that I know (very well) are quite aware of this and are very sensitive. Russians in general tend toward xenophobia to start with; the Yellow Horde is almost as bad a 'blacks' (ethnic Caucasians) in that regard.

However, Russia nukes work just as well in defending the Far East as it does in offsetting the US' present large, if not overwhelming conventional capability.

It is also notable that the Russian government is not doing anything to inflame said Far East sentiment.

As for what your professor observed - it is very real. Russia in the Cold War era had a large number of 'secret cities' in Siberia for the purposes of protection against attack as well as security concerns. With the change in regime, the formerly very cushy lifetimes of these secret city residents is gone.

To a significant, if lesser extent, this applied equally to those who emigrated into the Far East.

However, to say that Chinese are going to flood the region is equally problematic. There's a reason that no one likes to live there: while the 'wild nature' aspect is very nice, it doesn't really compensate for the overall really crappy weather as well as the difficulty of making a living there.

You'll note Chinese don't exactly flood to Tibet or Xinjiang without massive subsidies; why would they flood to Siberia which isn't any better?

At the end of the day, if the choice is between allowing a back-door colonization of Siberia or easy access to Russian energy and minerals, I'm pretty sure China is going to choose the latter.

In the meantime there is a bigger game afoot.

As for ways by which Iran could project force: besides speedboats there are also the mobile land-based anti-ship launchers. A guy in a wet suit with a big honking explosive limpet. Hell even artillery.

I don't see Iran doing this unless attacked, but frankly I have less faith on the part of Israel as well as to a lesser extent, the US due to the House of Saud.

I wonder if Siberia will be a colder and even more hostile version of the Aussie Outback.

Large numbers of folks are living rough in fly in/fly out camps as well as permanently in remote and inhospitable communities throughout the Aussie Outback....making big money on the back of the Aussie resource boom.....maybe if Siberian resources are exploited en masse we might see something similar way up there.

But back on topic......

I would bet my last dollar US Naval Special Warfare and relevant Mine Counter Measure assets are keeping busy to prevent potential "maritime IED", as well as other, threats.

I would also bet that the Iranian coastline is under persistant surveillance. FAR more capable surveillance than that which was available for the Scud hunts of 91.

Mobile anti ship missiles and mobile coastal artillery DO represent a threat to the gulf(Israel nearly lost a frigate to an Iranian anti ship missile a few years back, but they were complacent)....how much of a threat is debateable.........attack swimmers, probably a good bit less.

Swimmer delivered limpet mines would be like a gnat bite on an elephant to a modern double hulled supertanker....and unless VERY well equipped/transported, an attack swimmer trying to hit a moving supertanker would be risking suicide.

I think even if somewhat openly attacked(I say somewhat because Iran already IS under attack via intelligence/unconventional warfare/economic warfare) Iran would be reluctant to push back too hard via conventional means.

I would much more expect Iran to revert to what its done before....past performance is indicative of future performance......so proxy or direct asymmetric attacks that are deniable-ISH...that's Iran's game.

Maybe a hit on the Saudi royal family, a replay of the Grand Mosque Seizure of 1979, an attack on regional energy infrastructure, or supporting an attempted coup or insurrection on the West side of the Gulf.

The Iranians seem to be pretty good players at the game of geopolitical chess.....when so many can't even play a decent game of checkers.

It's a question of choosing/forcing/accepting the time and place of the battle.

Iran would be incredibly foolish to show up to a battlefield at a time and place of the US's choosing.

Iran is better off, and more likely, declining and playing it's own game.

Just my clinical-ish perspective.

[charliebrown]

Re: Cold War Redux?

thank LD this harmonizes some of my conflicting thoughts.

[c1ue]

Re: Cold War Redux?

Large numbers of folks are living rough in fly in/fly out camps as well as permanently in remote and inhospitable communities throughout the Aussie Outback....making big money on the back of the Aussie resource boom.....maybe if Siberian resources are exploited en masse we might see something similar way up there.

I guess it all depends on what your definition of 'large numbers' constitutes.

The Aussie outback has at best a population of perhaps a couple million. It is mostly hot and arid.

Siberia - depending on the regional or historical designation (i.e. as opposed to Irkutsk, Yakutsk, etc) has a population of some 30 or 40 million.

The Aussie outback is hardly a comparable analogy to Siberia.

As for exploitation - many of the above mentioned 'secret cities' were placed specifically due to resources, either to harvest them or to take advantage of access to them. Certainly more exploration/exploitation is possible, but again it is quite difficult to say that this would support a massive increase of the existing population base whether ethnic Chinese or ethnic Russian, or the many 'native' ethnic groups that are already there.

I would bet my last dollar US Naval Special Warfare and relevant Mine Counter Measure assets are keeping busy to prevent potential "maritime IED", as well as other, threats.

I would also bet that the Iranian coastline is under persistant surveillance. FAR more capable surveillance than that which was available for the Scud hunts of 91.

I'm sure that's true as well. But simply because they're paying attention doesn't mean the attention will succeed. For one thing, there are a myriad of fairly well financed, well motivated, and locally familiar people in Iran working on specific counters. Just a few examples: fishing boats. Unless the US interdicts all boat activity in the Persian Gulf - which would be an act of war - it is ridiculous to think that surveillance can be anywhere close to 100% effective.

Certainly the failure to address speedboat pirates in the Red Sea doesn't speak well to surveillance capabilities being a panacea. Wouldn't the same satellites be involved?

Mobile anti ship missiles and mobile coastal artillery DO represent a threat to the gulf(Israel nearly lost a frigate to an Iranian anti ship missile a few years back, but they were complacent)....how much of a threat is debateable.........attack swimmers, probably a good bit less.

Swimmer delivered limpet mines would be like a gnat bite on an elephant to a modern double hulled supertanker....and unless VERY well equipped/transported, an attack swimmer trying to hit a moving supertanker would be risking suicide.

Whether a human is attached/enclosed or not, there are already underwater vehicles with 12 knot speeds. This is quite comparable to oil tanker speeds, especially in the Persian Gulf.

I think even if somewhat openly attacked(I say somewhat because Iran already IS under attack via intelligence/unconventional warfare/economic warfare) Iran would be reluctant to push back too hard via conventional means.

I would much more expect Iran to revert to what its done before....past performance is indicative of future performance......so proxy or direct asymmetric attacks that are deniable-ISH...that's Iran's game.

Maybe a hit on the Saudi royal family, a replay of the Grand Mosque Seizure of 1979, an attack on regional energy infrastructure, or supporting an attempted coup or insurrection on the West side of the Gulf.

The Iranians seem to be pretty good players at the game of geopolitical chess.....when so many can't even play a decent game of checkers.

It's a question of choosing/forcing/accepting the time and place of the battle.

Iran would be incredibly foolish to show up to a battlefield at a time and place of the US's choosing.

Iran is better off, and more likely, declining and playing it's own game.

Just my clinical-ish perspective.

I quite agree - I've never said Iran would kick off the shindig.

It is Israel and the US who are the clear aggressors here, if not necessarily historically.

The tankers also aren't the only targets - the loading ports are equally vulnerable. Diesel submarines in the Indian Ocean. Damaging the Suez Canal. Putting antiship missiles in Indonesia. The list goes on and on.

I'd also note that the US hasn't yet tested its fancy kit against even export quality modern Russian antiair systems. What's the likelihood there are a few dozen S300 systems in warehouses somewhere near the Caspian sea?

[don]

Re: Cold War Redux?

from Paul Craig Roberts . . .

According to a January 13, 2012 Reuters news report, Dmitry Rogozin, the Russian ambassador to NATO who has been appointed deputy prime minister in charge of Russia’s defense sector, told news reporters at a Brussels press conference that Russia would regard any military attack on Iran as a “direct threat to our security.”


Will the crazed neocon warmongers and the Washington morons listen?

What will “direct threat to our security” mean today - a return to a modified Cold War environment?

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Cold War Redux?

Some interesting stuxnet stuff:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...control-of-it/

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Cold War Redux?

And some more....

malware targets firm that secures industrial systems

http://arstechnica.com/security/2012...stems-experts/