2012-05-08 (China Military News cited from atimes.com and by Jens Kastner)
Much is being said about the Chinese military dramatically improving its combat capability to keep United States forces at arm's length. Anti-access/area
denial (A2/AD) is the magic slogan, meaning that the People's Liberation Army's (PLA's) new shore-based artillery, aircraft and naval assets could deny a
rapid deployment by United States forces into the Pacific in the event of a conflict, since the US would face heavy losses. But exactly how concerned is
the US?
A US military exercise that took place in April known as Operation Chimichanga provides some of the answers, but if it wasn't for the journalists David Axe
and Noah Shachtman, nobody would have likely taken note of it outside the US army. "Officially, Operation Chimichanga was meant to validate the long-range
strike capability of the B-1s as well as the F-22s' and F-16s' ability to escort them into an anti-access target area," Axe and Shachtman wrote. "Unofficially,
Operation Chimichanga was a proof-of-concept for the air force's evolving tactics for battling China over the vast western Pacific ... the air force would never
say that."
Steve Tsang, director of the University of Nottingham's China Policy Institute, thinks Beijing is misguided in its assessment on the PLA's A2/AD capability.
"Having an operational anti-ship ballistic missile [DF-21D] will not in fact be as critical as many in Beijing think. The US Navy and Air Force will expect to suffer
significant losses if the US became involved in a military confrontation with a near peer competitor," Tsang said. He said that the prospect of major combatant ships,
such as aircraft carriers, being badly damaged or even lost would not be sufficient to deter US forces from fulfilling the orders of their political leadership."A 'game changer'
is not the same as something that will put an end to the game," Tsang said.
"This applies to when the PLA can demonstrate that its anti-ship ballistic missiles are accurate, effective and operational. The US will just respond in ways that will
minimize the risk to its assets and adopt different tactics and weapon systems."
<a href="http://s1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj559/365Wildfire/?action=view&current=china-sea.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj559/365Wildfire/china-sea.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
Much is being said about the Chinese military dramatically improving its combat capability to keep United States forces at arm's length. Anti-access/area
denial (A2/AD) is the magic slogan, meaning that the People's Liberation Army's (PLA's) new shore-based artillery, aircraft and naval assets could deny a
rapid deployment by United States forces into the Pacific in the event of a conflict, since the US would face heavy losses. But exactly how concerned is
the US?
A US military exercise that took place in April known as Operation Chimichanga provides some of the answers, but if it wasn't for the journalists David Axe
and Noah Shachtman, nobody would have likely taken note of it outside the US army. "Officially, Operation Chimichanga was meant to validate the long-range
strike capability of the B-1s as well as the F-22s' and F-16s' ability to escort them into an anti-access target area," Axe and Shachtman wrote. "Unofficially,
Operation Chimichanga was a proof-of-concept for the air force's evolving tactics for battling China over the vast western Pacific ... the air force would never
say that."
Steve Tsang, director of the University of Nottingham's China Policy Institute, thinks Beijing is misguided in its assessment on the PLA's A2/AD capability.
"Having an operational anti-ship ballistic missile [DF-21D] will not in fact be as critical as many in Beijing think. The US Navy and Air Force will expect to suffer
significant losses if the US became involved in a military confrontation with a near peer competitor," Tsang said. He said that the prospect of major combatant ships,
such as aircraft carriers, being badly damaged or even lost would not be sufficient to deter US forces from fulfilling the orders of their political leadership."A 'game changer'
is not the same as something that will put an end to the game," Tsang said.
"This applies to when the PLA can demonstrate that its anti-ship ballistic missiles are accurate, effective and operational. The US will just respond in ways that will
minimize the risk to its assets and adopt different tactics and weapon systems."
<a href="http://s1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj559/365Wildfire/?action=view&current=china-sea.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj559/365Wildfire/china-sea.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
