China Has Practiced Bombing Runs On Guam

Just as President Donald Trump is preparing to embark on a nearly two-week tour of Asia – his first since taking office – where he is expected to discuss, among other topics, the regional threat posed by North Korea, Defense News is reporting that China has reportedly been conducting bombing drills targeting the US territory of Guam.

Reports of China’s aggressive expansion of its air force – an attempt to exert its dominance over contested territories in the South China and East China seas – were relayed by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford during a briefing with reporters.

China “is very much the long-term challenge in the region,” Dunford said. “When we look at the capabilities China is developing, we’ve got to make sure we maintain the ability to meet our alliance commitments in the Pacific.”

The notion that both North Korea and China have threatened Guam, either explicitly or tacitly, speaks to the fact that China is the biggest threat to US security in the Pacific, nuclear standoff with North Korea notwithstanding, Dunford said.

To wit, a conflict with North Korea is still viewed as “a fight we can win,” military officials said during the briefing. With China, they said they “worry about the way things are going.”

Followers of US activities in the Pacific may have noticed the increase in confrontations between US and Chinese forces, both in the water and in the sky. While it hasn’t been nearly as widely publicized as the Chinese military’s buildup in the South China Sea, China has also been building its fleet of fighter jets, operating daily, aggressive campaigns to contest airspace over the East China Sea, South China Sea and further out into the Pacific, Defense News reported.

The officials described the escalatory behaviors by China in a briefing they provided to reporters traveling with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford.

China’s willingness to test boundaries has caused the number of confrontations between Japanese and Chinese fighter jets to escalate dramatically…

Over the last year Japan has scrambled 900 sorties to intercept Chinese fighters challenging Japan’s air defense identification zone, or ADIZ. In 2013 China announced borders for its own ADIZ, borders which overlapped Japan’s zone and included the disputed Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea. Since then, increased interactions between Japanese and Chinese aircraft ultimately resulted in Japan relocating two fighter squadrons to Naha Air Base on Okinawa to more easily meet the incursions, the officials said.

 

“We now have, on a daily basis, armed Chinese Flankers and Japanese aircraft” coming in close proximity of each other, the officials said, adding that intercepts between the U.S. and China are also increasing.

…While US military officials have accused the Chinese air force of provoking the US by staging intercepts of US aircraft.

“It’s very common for PRC aircraft to intercept U.S. aircraft” these days, the officials said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

 

Chinese aircraft are also testing U.S. air defense identification zones, the officials said. Chinese H-6K “Badger” bombers upgraded with 1,000 mile range air launched cruise missiles are testing U.S. defense zones around Guam.

 

The Badgers run “not infrequent” flights to get within range of the U.S. territory, they said.

 

“The PRC is practicing attacks on Guam,” the officials said.

 

The vast majority of the flights occur without an incident, such as a report of unsafe flying, for example. The officials said they follow U.S. Pacific Command guidance on how to respond in those events, so they do not further escalate.

DefenseNews noted that the military relationship between the US and China remains open, if guarded. US officials meet twice a year at the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement conference, where the incursions are discussed along with other security topics.

However, officials described China’s repeated confrontations as part of a strategy of normalization, whereby Chinese officials repeatedly test boundaries until regional gradually come to accept their expanded presence. Ultimately, the strategy is aimed at forcing the international community to accept “the nine-dash line” – the contest maritime border surrounding islands in the South China Sea that China has claimed and developed, but have been the subject of an international dispute with several of China’s regional neighbors. Last year, an international court ruled in favor of the Philippines’ claim of ownership, but the ruling was promptly ignored by the Chinese.

The expanded Chinese fighter and bomber runs are just one part of the country’s effort to “win without fighting” to gradually normalize the gains China has made in the South China Sea, the officials said.

 

There are other pressures. For example, the officials said they estimate the People’s Liberation Army Navy has placed as many as 150,000 Chinese commercial fishing vessels under its direction, even though they are not official Chinese navy. The Chinese fishing vessels make coordinated attacks on Vietnamese fishermen, the officials said, ramming and sometimes sinking boats near the Paracel Islands. China took the territory from Vietnam in the 1970s and has militarized some of the islands. The area remains a traditional fishing area for the Vietnamese.

 

Taken together, China’s activities suggest it is preparing to defend expanded boundaries, the U.S. officials worry.

 

“I think they will be ready to enforce it when they decide to declare the Nine-Dash line as theirs,” one of the officials said, referring to the territorial line China has identified that would notionally put the entire South China Sea under Chinese control if enforced.

Ultimately, the US fears that Chinese systemic provocations will erode the so-called “rules-based order” – the system of international codes and treaties that governs military relationships between sovereign states.

If unchallenged, the U.S. officials worry that China could slowly force countries away from what they describe as the “rules based order” — essentially the standing international treaties and norms — in the region and make them shift their security alliances to Beijing for their own economic survival.

 

Dunford said the U.S. would not allow that to happen.

 

“We view ourselves as a Pacific power,” Dunford said.

 

“There are some who try to create a narrative that we are not in the Pacific to stay,” he said. “Our message is that we are a Pacific power. We intend to stay in the Pacific. Our future economic prosperity is inextricably linked to our security and political relationships in the region.”

 

While all of the officials stressed that there is no imminent danger of a conflict with China, U.S. forces in the region are rethinking what a Pacific fight would look like.

 

“If we find ourselves in conflict out there we will be under air attack,” the official said.

While North Korea will likely be the main topic of discussion during Trump’s Asia tour, Dunford said he expects Trump will convey the US’s displeasure with China’s increasingly aggressive posture in the Pacific.

Of course, while China has cooperated with the US in passing sanctions against North Korea, while partly acquiescing to US demands that Beijing curtail economic support for the Kim regime, Dunford seems to suggest that China’s cooperation on these issues is nothing more than a ploy to create a buffer of goodwill as it gradually expands its reach in the Pacific. The question now is: Will the US seek to more boldly counter China’s advance? Or, like the famous analogy of the frog in the pot of boiling water, will US reticence allow China to keep pushing until it is the dominant military power in the Pacific?

What do you think?
 

China Warns Japan: "Get Used To Our Warplanes", Sends Spy Ship Near Alaska

In an unexpectedly brazen rattling of sabers, just days after China deployed troops to its first foreign base in Djibouti, a move which the Global Times clarified is "about protecting its own security, not about seeking to control the world, Beijing made a less than subtle reversal, when it told Japan on Friday to "get used to it" after it flew six warplanes over the Miyako Strait between two southern Japanese islands in a military exercise.

It all started late on Thursday night, when Japan"s defense ministry issued a token statement describing the flyover by the formation of Xian H-6 bombers, also known as China"s B-52, earlier that day as "unusual", while noting that there had been no violation of Japanese airspace.

The flyover was hardly surprising: the Chinese navy and air force have been carrying out a series of exercises in the Western Pacific in recent month, both as they hone their ability to operate far from their home shores, as well as a trial balloon to gauge the reactions of their increasingly more nervous neighbors.

What made this flyover different, is that usually following a formal protest by the "offended" country, Beijing would take note and issue a token statement of its own, "neither admitting nor denying" guilt, but certainly without assurances of further transgressions. But not this time. On Friday the Chinese defense ministry said it was "legal and proper" for its military aircraft to operate in the airspace and that it would continue to organize regular training exercises according to "mission requirements."

In other words, Beijing pushed back against Japan"s complaint suggesting that China had not only done nothing wrong, but that this behaviour would escalate:

"The relevant side should not make a fuss about nothing or over-interpret, it will be fine once they get used to it," the ministry said in a statement.

Furthermore, the Miyako Strait is between Japan"s islands of Miyako and Okinawa, to the northeast of self-ruled Taiwan, which China claims as its own.

It wasn"t just Japan: also on Thursday, Taiwan"s Ministry of National Defense said the Chinese bombers flew just outside its air defense identification zone and that it had "closely followed" the movements.

It is probably safe to assume that several more such close encounters, coupled an escalation in the harsh language - don"t expect Japan to back off diplomatically, especially not under Abe who militant ambitions are hardly secret - and a repeat of the tensions that erupted in 2013/2014 over territorial claims in the East China Sea, and which ended with diplomatic relations between China and Japan collapsing as well as nationalist sentiment in both China and Japan erupting, appears likely.

In a separate close encounter, at the same time that the US was conducting a succeeful THAAD-based intercept of a ballistic missile on Tuesday, a Chinese spy ship was lurking just 100 miles from Alaska"s coast to witness the said test for itself, Fox News reported. Furthermore, it was the first time the North American Aerospace Defense Command had seen this class of Chinese spy ship before near Alaska, an official told Fox News. The ship was spotted off the coast of Kodiak, on Alaska"s southern tip.

The THAAD test came after North Korea successfully test launched an alleged ICBM missile (this has subsequently been challenged with many claiming the missile was only intermediate range) that flew longer than any test conducted by Kim"s regime to date. Officials have said that Kim may now have the capability to strike Alaska. Prior to the test, both China and Russia have repeatedly demanded that the US remove its THAAD installations from South Korea over concerns that the balance of power in the Pacific Rim could shift, and destabilize the region.

China has sent warships to Alaska before, most famously in 2015 when former Barack Obama visited Alaska, China "greeted" him by sending five ships, while more recently a Chinese warship trailed a U.S. warship when it sailed earlier this month near a contested island in the South China Sea.

China also recently launched a new class of destroyer in Shanghai, which military experts say is on par with modern U.S. Burke class guided-missile destroyers. Furthermore, China now has roughly the same number of destroyers, cruisers and submarines as the U.S. Navy, according to new study from CNAS a Washington think tank.

In a separate naval adventure, China"s first fully functional aircraft carrier recently sailed near Taiwan after making a port call in Hong Kong that marked 20 years since the British handed the city over. The carrier was declared combat ready following initial tests in November. It does not, however, have advanced steam catapults to launch jets like a modern U.S. Navy aircraft carrier.

It was not clear where the Chinese spy ship had moved to after its brief trip to the Alaska coast.

China Completes Construction Of New Missile Shelters On Disputed South China Sea Islands

Trump"s "up and down" relationship with China may be on the precipice of taking a sharp dive into the proverbial abyss.  After frequently threatening to label China a "currency manipulator" on the campaign trail last year, Trump"s relationship with China"s President Xi Jinping took a decided turn for the better after a meeting at Mar-a-Lago in which China vowed to help address the "menace of North Korea" .

I explained to the President of China that a trade deal with the U.S. will be far better for them if they solve the North Korean problem!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 11, 2017

Had a very good call last night with the President of China concerning the menace of North Korea.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 12, 2017

Why would I call China a currency manipulator when they are working with us on the North Korean problem? We will see what happens!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 16, 2017

But apparently those efforts have officially failed:

While I greatly appreciate the efforts of President Xi & China to help with North Korea, it has not worked out. At least I know China tried!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 20, 2017

And, shortly after those efforts were declared dead, the Trump administration signed a $1.3 billion arms deal with Taiwan, a deal which China has "demanded" be cancelled immediately.

Meanwhile, as the Financial Times points out today, in the midst of all the international crises, China has made great strides building out and further militarizing their disputed islands in the South China Sea.

Over the past three months, China has built four new missile shelters on Fiery Cross, boosting the number of installations on the reef to 12, according to satellite images provided to the Financial Times by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

China has also expanded radar facilities on Fiery Cross and two other disputed reefs — Subi and Mischief — in the Spratly Island chain, and started building underground structures that Greg Poling, director of CSIS’s Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, assesses will be used to store munitions.

“We haven’t seen any slowdown in construction, including since the Mar-a-Lago summit,” said Mr Poling. “The islands are built and they are clearly militarised, which means they already got over the hard part. Now every time they put in a new radar or new missile shelter, it is harder for the world to get angry. They are building a gun, they are just not putting the bullets in yet.”

The advances underscore how much progress China has made towards militarizing the man-made islands in ways that significantly enhance its ability to both monitor activity in the South China Sea and to project power in the western Pacific where the US has been the dominant power in the seven decades since the second world war.

Euan Graham, an Asia expert at the Lowy Institute in Sydney, said it was “not quite game over in the South China Sea” but that China had fundamentally altered the status quo over the islands that would be hard to change barring war or natural disasters.

“They already exert a strategic effect by projecting China’s presence much further out,” said Mr Graham. “They will not prevent the US Navy from operating in their vicinity, but they will complicate the threat environment for US ships and aircraft — by extending the [Chinese navy’s] surveillance and targeting net, as well as the envelope of power projection.”

Of course, these latest provocations come despite a promise made to Obama in 2015 that "China would not militarize the man-made islands"...a promise which the Obama administration apparently took at face value and proceeded to bury their heads in the sand.

During a visit to Washington, Mr Xi told Barack Obama in 2015 that China would not militarise the man-made islands, but in the intervening 20 months Beijing has stepped up construction, and now has runways that can accommodate Chinese fighter jets.

China’s legal claim to the seas around the maritime features is legally controversial since many were dredged out of coral and sand and thus not entitled to status as islands. But Vasily Kashin, an expert on the Chinese military at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow, said the goal was never legal sovereignty but to give China forward bases from which it could patrol and exercise control in their vicinity.

“If you have this infrastructure in the Spratlys, it allows China to constantly monitor aircraft and ships in the South China Sea. The point is that no one will be able to do anything in the area without them seeing.”

Ely Ratner, an Asia expert who served in the Obama administration, said Washington had failed to craft a strategy to convince China to halt militarisation of the man-made islands. “Until China believes that there will be significant costs . . . I don’t think they have any reason to slow down,” said Mr Ratner. “They have been pushing on an open door and have been surprised at how little resistance they have faced.”

Critics say the Obama administration took too cautious an approach to avoid creating tensions that would hurt the ability for co-operation on other issues. Meanwhile, some experts say the Trump team has given China a relatively free pass to maximise the chances it will boost pressure on North Korea to give up its nuclear programme.

Somehow we suspect the Trump administration will end up being slightly less "accommodating" over the long term...

April 25 Is "Highest Probability" Day For North Korean Nuclear Test China Warns

According to a report by Korea JoongAng Daily, China appears to be preparing measures in case North Korea tests a nuclear device or performs another provocation, including possibly suspending oil to the regime, and adds that relations between Beijing and Pyongyang appear frostier than ever before.

Additionally, the Korea publication references the Chinese-language Boxun News, which cites a Beijing source, according to whom Chinese President Xi Jinping attempted to send Wu Dawei, China’s special representative for Korean Peninsula affairs, to Pyongyang after his summit with U.S. President Donald Trump, but North Korean leader Kim Jong-un allegedly rejected Wu’s visit.

Boxun adds that it was unclear if North Korea did not conduct a sixth nuclear test last Saturday because of Beijing’s warning not to do so, however it adds that according to "analysts" there’s a high likelihood of a provocation on the 85th anniversary of the founding of the North Korean People’s Army next Tuesday and the days leading up to the South Korean presidential election on May 9.

Citing its Chinese source, Boxun said that "China believes there is the “highest possibility” of a nuclear test on April 25, but “does not leave out the possibility it might take action in early May."

One assumes the Carl Vinson, wherever it may be in the world currently, will eventually make it to North Korea by then.

Meanwhile, South Korean officials cited by JoongAng Daily confirmed that Wu, China’s top nuclear envoy, during a visit to Seoul last week said he proposed to visit Pyongyang in person to persuade the North to refrain from further provocations but he was spurned.

Lu Chao, a Chinese expert on Korean studies at the Liaoning Academy of Social Sciences, was among multiple analysts that told the state-affiliated tabloid Global Times Tuesday that if North Korea did not refrain from conducting its sixth nuclear test, it would “definitely trigger” more intense United Nations sanctions, and that China will implement them. 

Victor Cha, the Korea Chair at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said the “provocation window” between South Korean elections and North Korean provocations has become narrower over time, referring to database collected over the past 60 years. That window refers to the proximity in time between a South Korean election and a provocative act by North Korea, meaning a nuclear or missile test.

Cha said such a pattern “suggests a provocation as early as two weeks” before the South Korean presidential elections on May 9.  That two-week window overlaps with North Korea’s military foundation day on April 25.

* * *

Meanwhile, amid escalating military tensions in the region, the Chinese navy tested its new guided-missile destroyer, the Xining, in its first live-fire exercise conducted in the Yellow Sea, near the Korean Peninsula, broadcast on China’s state-run CCTV on Tuesday.  The Xining, China’s Type 052D-class missile destroyer with was put into service by the People’s Liberation Army Navy in January.

The exercise, possibly warning against a North Korean military provocation, was reported to have lasted several days and comes as Beijing has called for North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions under renewed pressure from the Trump administration. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence warned Monday in Seoul the “era for strategic patience is over.”

Trump has been lauding Beijing for helping with the Pyongyang situation, especially over sending back North Korean vessels bringing coal to a Chinese port. Trump told Fox News Tuesday in reference to Chinese President Xi Jinping, “He’s working so nicely that many coal ships have been sent back. Fuel is being sent back. They’re not dealing the same way. Nobody’s ever seen it like that.” As reported previously, in February, China announced it would suspend all coal imports from North Korea to the end of the year in accordance with a UN Security Council resolution.

Meanwhile, the Chinese Foreign Ministry Wednesday warned Pyongyang to exercise restraint on any actions that could heighten tension on the Korean Peninsula in response to Pyongyang’s recent bellicose rhetoric.

Lu Kang, a spokesman of the ministry, said at a briefing, “China objects to any words that could heighten tensions since the current situation on the Korean Peninsula is highly complicated and sensitive.” Within China, there is talk about playing a key card to pressure North Korea - cutting off oil supplies to the Kim Jong-un regime.

In an editorial last week, the state-run tabloid Global Times said that if Pyongyang engaged in further provocations, Chinese society would approve of “severe restrictive measures that have never been seen before, such as restricting oil imports to the North.” On Monday, the paper again called for China to cut off most oil supplies to North Korea if there was another nuclear test.

In an editorial Tuesday, it pointed out that China and U.S. cooperation is increasing over the North Korean problem, and that the possibility of dragging out the North Korea issue indefinitely has “decreased drastically.”

“North Korea and China are a blood alliance, interdependent like no other,” said a South Korean government official Tuesday.  “But the atmosphere in China, which has left a back door open to North Korea regardless of the international community’s sanctions, is changing little by little.”

North Korea depends on China for some 90 percent of its crude oil supply.

Lee Gee-dong, head of the Strategic Team on North Korea at the Seoul-based Institute for National Security Strategy, said, “Though it may not be immediate, if North Korea conducts a strategic provocation such as a sixth nuclear test or launches an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), Beijing will have to use the halting of oil exports card.” However, some analysts think the threat of cutting oil supplies to the North is mere rhetoric.

“In the 1990s, when the North Korea nuclear issue first escalated, China could have blocked oil then,” one former South Korean official said. “The oil supply card could be a performance by China to impress President Trump, but bears more watching.”

5 Maps That Show China's Biggest Limitations

Authored by George Friedman via MauldinEconomics.com,

As we wrote about in “China’s Strategy,” East Asia is split into four parts: The Pacific archipelago, the Chinese mainland, the Korean Peninsula, and Indochina. East Asia holds the second and third largest world economies: China and Japan. The relationship between them and the US define modern East Asian geopolitics.

China’s Power Can Be Seen from Outer Space

The above map shows the countries of East Asia lit up at night. It reveals much about the power dynamics in this region. The centers of Chinese wealth and power—including Beijing, Shanghai, and Hong Kong—all hug China’s long coastline. Geographic features in the interior divide the country. The rest of the country is in darkness.

Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are major industrial powers that border these waters along China’s coast. Much of the rest of East Asia is in darkness. North Korea’s darkness is particularly striking.

But relative to the bright lights of China’s coast and Japan, much of Indochina and inner China are also undeveloped.

Western China Is Nearly Uninhabitable

The below map shows population density in China with the 15-inch isohyet overlaid on top.

The area of China from this line to the coast gets enough rain to support a large population. North and west of the 15-inch isohyet, China is less populated and undeveloped.

Geography Limits China’s Expansion

The distance from Beijing to Kazakhstan is almost 2,500 miles through desert and mountains. The Himalayas box China in on the southwest. They also stop conflict between India and China.

Jungles on the border with Myanmar, Vietnam, and Thailand have always limited Chinese growth south.

It is hard for China to grow westward. When China’s power is ascendant, it can grow north, south, or east toward the Pacific. This is easier said than done. Japan continues to be the major regional power. China would still face certain defeat against Japan, especially with US support of the Japanese.

So, China is mainly focused on two things. Controlling its chaotic domestic political and economic situation as growth rates have slowed. And building its military. First for resistance and then for offensive action in the region.

The Chinese Navy Is in No Position to Take Action

The Chinese navy is still a decade away from exerting power over the islands, rocks, and shoals that limit China’s freedom to navigate along its coast.

Many countries around China have claims over these islands. The region’s other major players—Japan and South Korea—are both key US allies. They host large and permanent US military deployments. And like we recently mentioned, the Philippines recently welcomed back US forces to their bases.

This situation has created a stalemate. The US has no desire for a bad relationship with China. But it also doesn’t want any power to control the region. And China still cannot challenge US hegemony in the seas.

As we’ve discussed before, it talks of nationalism in the South China Sea mostly for domestic consumption. Japan and the other East Asian countries view China with increasing concern. They remain staunch US allies as a result.

North Korea Is China’s Bargaining Chip

When we wrote about the North Korean strategy, we said that North Korea appears dangerous with its nuclear weapons tests and its sly, bigoted strongman regime built around a top leader. Kim Jong Un is that leader and he has been consolidating his power.

North Korea happens to also be one of the few areas China is weak. The Chinese intervened in the Korean War when US forces neared the Yalu River on the border between North Korea and China.

North Korea’s unpredictable behavior gives China a big bargaining chip in its relations with the US and the region. So, China favors keeping the status quo.

China’s Limitations Determine the Future of East Asia

East Asia is the world’s most dynamic economic region. Strong countries surround bodies of water over which there is competition. These are some of the world’s most important sea lanes. Japan and China (in that order) are the region’s two most significant powers.

But as we wrote about last year, the most powerful country in the Pacific, the US, is far away. Its Navy patrols and keeps freedom of movement across the Pacific. At the center of this power struggle is China. China’s struggle against its domestic and geographic constraints is the key to understanding the future of this region.

*  *  *

Grab George Friedman"s Exclusive eBook, The World Explained in Maps reveals the panorama of geopolitical landscapes influencing today"s governments and global financial systems. Don"t miss this chance to prepare for the year ahead with the straight facts about every major country’s and region"s current geopolitical climate. You won"t find political rhetoric or media hype here. The World Explained in Maps is an essential guide for every investor as 2017 takes shape. Get your copy now—free!

The Geopolitics Of 2017 In 4 Maps

Submitted by George Friedman and Jacob Shapiro via MauldinEconomics.com,

International relations and geopolitics are not synonymous... at least, not the way we understand them at Geopolitical Futures. “International relations” is a descriptive phrase that encompasses all the ways countries behave toward one another. “Geopolitics” is the supposition that all international relationships are based on the interaction between geography and power.

Our brand of geopolitics takes this a step further and asserts that a deep understanding of geography and power enables you to do two things. First, it helps you comprehend the forces that will shape international politics and how they will do so. Second, it allows you to identify what is important and what isn’t.

This makes maps an extremely important part of our work. Writing can be an ideal medium for explaining power, but even the best writer is limited by language when it comes to describing geography. So this week, we have decided to showcase some of the best maps our graphics team (TJ Lensing and Jay Dowd) made in 2016… not just because these four maps are cool (though they are), but because we think they go a long way in explaining the foundations of what will be the most important geopolitical developments of 2017.

Map 1: Russia’s Economic Weakness

Click to enlarge

This map illustrates three key aspects of Russia that are crucial to understanding the country in 2017. First is the oft-overlooked fact that Russia is a federation. Russia has a strong national culture, but it is also an incredibly diverse political entity that requires a strong central government. Unlike most maps of Russia, this one divides the country by its constitutive regions. There are 85 of these regions… 87 if you count Crimea and Sevastopol. Not all have the same status—some are regions, while others are autonomous regions, cities, and republics.

The second aspect is that there is a great deal of economic diversity in this vast Russian Federation. The map shows this by identifying regional budget surpluses and deficits throughout the country. Two regions have such large surpluses that they break the scale: the City of Moscow and Sakhalin. Fifty-two regions (or 60% of Russia’s regional budgets) are in the red. The Central District, which includes Moscow, makes up more than 20% of Russia’s GDP, while Sakhalin and a few other regions that are blessed with surpluses produce Russia’s oil.

The third aspect follows from combining the logical conclusions of the first two observations. Russia is vast, and much of the country is in a difficult economic situation. Even if oil stays around $55 a barrel for all of 2017, that won’t be high enough to solve the problems of the many struggling parts of the country. Russian President Vladimir Putin rules as an authoritarian. This is, in part, because he governs an unwieldy country. He needs all the power he can get to redistribute wealth so that the countryside isn’t driven to revolt.

Russia is making headlines right now because of Ukraine, Syria, and alleged hacking. But the geopolitical position of Russia is better described by studying the map above.

Map 2: China’s Cage

Click to enlarge

Maps that shift perspective can be disorienting, but they are meant to be. Our minds get so used to seeing the world in one way that a different view can feel alien. But that is even more reason to push through the discomfort. The map above attempts to do that by looking at the Pacific from Beijing’s perspective.

China"s moves in the South China Sea have received a great deal of attention. In a Jan. 12 confirmation hearing with Congress, nominee for US Secretary of Defense James Mattish identified Chinese aggressiveness as one of the major reasons he believes the world order is under its biggest assault since World War II. But we believe the Chinese threat is overstated. This map helps explain why.

China’s access to the Pacific is limited by two obstacles. The first is the small island chains in the South and East China Seas. When we look at this map, China’s motive in asserting control over these large rocks and molehills becomes clear. If China cannot control these islands and shoals, they can be used against China in a military conflict. (If there were small island chains off the US coast in the Pacific or the Atlantic, US strategy might look like China’s.)

The second obstacle is that China is surrounded by American allies. Some such as Japan (and to a lesser extent South Korea and Taiwan) have significant military forces to defend themselves from Chinese encroachment. Taiwan sticks out as a major spur aimed squarely at China’s southeast coast. Those that don’t have sufficient military defenses, like the Philippines, have firm US security guarantees. China is currently at a serious geographic disadvantage in the waters off its coast.

This map, though, does not reveal a critical third piece of this puzzle—the US Navy outclasses the Chinese navy in almost every regard, despite impressive and continuing Chinese efforts to increase capabilities. But looking at this map, you can see why China wants to make noise in its coastal waters and how China is limited by an arc of American allies. You can also see why one of China’s major goals will be to attempt to entice any American allies to switch sides. Consequently, China’s moves regarding the Philippines require close observation in 2017.

Map 3: Redrawing the Middle East

Click to enlarge

It has become cliché to point out that the Middle East’s current political borders were drawn after World War I by colonial powers like the United Kingdom and France, and that the region’s wars and insurrections in recent years are making these artificial boundaries obsolete. What isn’t cliché is doubling down on that analysis. We’ve drawn a new map of the Middle East based on who controls what territory, as opposed to the official boundaries recognized by international organizations like the United Nations.

The map above reveals what the Middle East really looks like right now. Many will object to some of the boundaries for political purposes, but this map is explicitly not trying to make a political statement. Rather, it is an attempt to show who holds power over what geography in the Middle East.

From this point of view, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Libya don’t exist anymore. In their places are smaller warring statelets based on ethnic, national, and sectarian identities. Other borders (like those of Lebanon and Israel) are also redrawn to reflect actual power dynamics. Here, a politically incorrect but accurate map is more useful than an inaccurate but politically correct one.

Just as important as redrawing the borders of countries that no longer function as unified entities is noting which countries’ borders do not require redrawing. These countries include three of the region’s four major powers: Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. The borders of the other major power, Israel, are only slightly modified. (Egypt is an economic basket case and does not qualify as a major power, even though it has arguably the most cohesive national culture in the Arab world.)

The Middle East is defined by two key dynamics: the wars raging in the heart of the Arab world and the balance of power between the countries that surround this conflict.

Map 4: Imagining 2017’s Brexit

Click to enlarge

Analyzing this map must begin with a disclaimer: This is, first and foremost, an analytical tool and a means of thinking about Europe’s future. It is explicitly not a prediction of what Europe’s borders will look like in the future.

The map identifies areas in Europe with strong nationalist tendencies. Those regions with active separatist movements are not italicized. The italicized regions are those demanding increased autonomy but not independence. In many of these regions, secessionist movements may be favored by a minority of the population. The point here is not their size, but rather that in all these regions, there is some degree of national consciousness that is dissonant with the current boundaries of Europe’s nation-states.

The European Union is a flawed institution because its members could never decide what they wanted it to be. The EU is not quite a sovereign entity, but it claims more authority than a free trade agreement. European nation-states gave up some of their sovereignty to Brussels… but not all of it. So when serious issues arose (such as the 2008 financial crisis or the influx of Syrian and other refugees), EU member states went back to solving problems the way they did before the EU. Instead of “one for all and all for one,” it was “to each their own, but you still have to buy German products.”

Brexit shook the foundations of the EU in 2016. Elections in France and Germany and domestic instability in Italy will shake those foundations in 2017. But Brexit also opened the doors to a deeper question: How will national self-determination be defined in the 21st century? Not all of Europe’s nation-states are on stable ground. The most important consequences of Brexit may end up being its impact on the political future of the United Kingdom. And in Spain, Catalonia already claims it will hold an independence referendum this year.

Brussels, meanwhile, keeps trying to speak with one voice. This map communicates just how hard that is… not just for the EU, but also for some of Europe’s nation-states.

Conclusion

The saying goes that a picture is worth a thousand words. Maps are worth many more. Our perspective on the world is rooted in an objective and unbiased approach to examining geography and power. Maps like these are foundational components for building that perspective. These four maps are especially helpful in thinking about the geopolitical forces that will shape the world in the year ahead.

*  *  *

Over the last couple of weeks, we’ve shared some sneak peeks of our 24-page forecast, The World in 2017. If you’ve enjoyed these snapshots, you can now download your free copy of a special report that further illuminates the year ahead. The report, Top 3 Economic Surprises for 2017, contains information on what the future holds for three geopolitically important countries. Simply click here to get your free copy.

BREAKING: China Sends Aircraft Carrier to Pacific That Could Soon Be in “Offshore Areas of the US”

After more than a year of provocation and saber rattling, the very real threat of an armed conflict with China is coming to fruition. While Americans opened presents during the holidays, the Chinese government began flexing its military might in the Eastern Pacific — up to, and including, talk of putting its carrier fleet off the coast of the United States.

It is important to note that US foreign policy over the last year and a half has enabled this unprecedented show of force by the Chinese.

In October 2015, in an apparent move meant to project U.S. military power to the Chinese government, American officials announced that U.S. Navy warships will sail directly through a Chinese claimed 12-nautical mile zone in the disputed region of the South China Sea.

The contested waters around the Spratly Islands, which China claims as its own sovereign territory, have been the cause of intense controversy. The U.S. has refused to recognize China’s territorial claims and believes the disputed area resides in international waters.

Then, in March, the US Navy dispatched a small armada to the South China Sea. Consisting of the John C. Stennis aircraft carrier, two cruisers, two destroyers, and the 7th Fleet flagship, the US made its mission clear — we are not scared of kicking off World War III.

Confirmed by the Navy Times, the stand-off has been heating up on both sides. After news in February that the Chinese deployed an advanced surface-to-air missile battery to the Paracel Islands, U.S. Pacific Command head Adm. Harry Harris told lawmakers that China was militarizing the South China Sea.

The constant US military presence in the area undoubtedly forced the hand of the Chinese as enough firepower to level a small nation sitting in your backyard cannot be seen as a simple peacekeeping mission.

On Christmas Day, the Chinese government made clear to the world that they are now a force to be reckoned with. The state-run Global Times media agency published an editorial calling on the nation to show its capabilities.

“When China’s aircraft carrier fleet appears in offshore areas of the US one day, it will trigger intense thinking about maritime rules.

“If the fleet is able to enter areas where the US has core interests, the situation when the US unilaterally imposes pressure on China will change,” the Global Times said.

Last week, after practicing air confrontations and refueling, the Chinese Liaoning carrier began heading east into the open Pacific beyond Taiwan and Okinawa — toward the US border.

In an ominous statement, the editorial called on China to boost construction of their homemade aircraft carriers “so as to activate their combat.”

For months, analysts have been noting the obvious provocation by the US military and its potential for a global conflict — and now, it appears closer than ever.

In August, the Chinese defense minister urged citizens to begin “substantial preparation for a people’s war at sea.”

Chinese Defense Minister Chang Wanquan also warned of “offshore security threats” and the need to acknowledge the gravity of risk to China’s national security; and advised the military, police, and populace to ready for mobilization to defend national sovereignty and territorial integrity, according to state news agency, Xinhua.

The Free Thought Project has been documenting this escalation since the beginning and has predicted this very scenario. However, the US has been ignoring the potential repercussions of its actions as well as the warnings from the Chinese if the provocations continued.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter has played a large role in making sure there is plenty of conflict with China through ignoring the fact that the Chinese are simply reacting to the US presence in the area.

In March, Carter, in an evident failure of logic, warned China to halt their militarization of the region, or the US will further militarize the region.

“China must not pursue militarization in the South China Sea,” Carter said in a speech in San Francisco. “Specific actions will have specific consequences.”

In other words, Carter demanded that China allows the US military to continue to amass forces in their backyard and sit idly by. Any attempt to react to the presence of US destroyers, aircraft carriers, and missile systems will be seen as ‘militarization’ and will have ‘consequences.’

In the in the Global Times China summed up their situation, noting, “Chinese people love peace, but the Chinese military must be resolute. China will not be easily irritated, but once it is, it will take firm countermeasures. The Liaoning and its fleet is expected to experience the cruel geopolitical competition and become a standard bearer of the Chinese navy.”

As the global economy teeters on the edge of collapse, the U.S. has ramped up its saber rattling, not only with China but with the Russians as well. While America spends more on war than anyone else in the world, the idea that they can take on China and Russia simultaneously is deadly insane.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter and now on Steemit

China Responds: Will Return Stolen Drone, "Regrets US Hype"

Shortly after president-elect Trump"s "unprecedented action" tweet, Chinese authorities responded via their mouthpiece The China People"s Daily:

#Update: China will return equipment identified as US underwater drone, and regrets the US publicly hyping the incident: Ministry of Defense pic.twitter.com/zj86I1rn0l

— People"s Daily,China (@PDChina) December 17, 2016

As AP reports, China said Saturday that its military seized a U.S. Navy unmanned underwater glider in the South China Sea to ensure the "safe navigation of passing ships," in one of the most serious incidents between the two militaries in years.

Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun issued a statement late Saturday saying that a Chinese navy lifeboat discovered an unknown device in the South China Sea on Thursday. "In order to prevent this device from posing a danger to the safe navigation of passing ships and personnel, the Chinese lifeboat adopted a professional and responsible attitude in investigating and verifying the device," Yang said.

The statement said that after verifying that the device was an American unmanned submerged device, "China decided to transfer it to the U.S. through appropriate means."

The statement also accused the U.S. of long deploying ships "in China"s presence" to conduct "military surveying."

"China is resolutely opposed to this and requests the U.S. stop such activities," it said. "China will continue to maintain vigilance against the relevant U.S. activities and will take necessary measures to deal with them."

Earlier Saturday, China"s foreign ministry said the country"s military was in contact with its American counterparts on "appropriately handling" the incident, though it offered no details on what discussions were underway.

In a separate report, the paper quoted retired Chinese admiral Yang Yi as saying China considered itself well within its rights to seize the drone.

"If China needs to take it, we"ll take it. (America) can"t block us," Yang was quoted as saying.

Yang said he was unsure of the purpose of seizing the drone, but didn"t think the matter qualified as a "military conflict."

However, he added that the chances of a confrontation had risen following Trump"s recent comments, which were seen as testing China"s bottom line on Taiwan and other sensitive issues.

"It"s natural for us to take possession of and research for a bit these types of things that America sends to our doorstep," Yang said. "The louder they shout, the more their protests ring hollow."

As we concluded earlier, the drone seizure coincided with sabre-rattling from Chinese state media and some in its military establishment after U.S. President-elect Donald Trump cast doubt on whether Washington would stick to its nearly four-decades-old policy of recognizing that Taiwan is part of "one China," and as China devalues its currency to the weakest against the dollar since May 2008, Trump"s comments also drew reaction from China"s finance minister...

China hopes there won"t be a trade war with the United States, but it will take "appropriate steps" to cope with that possibility, a Chinese vice finance minister said on Saturday.

Zhu Guangyao, addressing an economic forum at a time of rising tensions with Washington, said both countries should abandon a "zero sum" mentality and seek to improve to improve economic and trade cooperation.

On Friday, Obama said it was appropriate for Trump to take a fresh look at U.S. policy toward Taiwan, but he cautioned that a shift could lead to significant consequences in the U.S. relationship with Beijing, as the notion that Taiwan is part of "one China" is central to China"s view of itself as a nation. For now, Trump is ignoring Obama"s advice and instead is more focused on venting about one-off "precedents" using Twitter without an autocorrect function.