China was the primary actor that gave the green light to Iran to greenlight Hamas and Hezbollah. We know that Iran and China are politically close by the speed Wuhan Corona virus spread in Quom in Jan/Feb 2020. Anyway, the Chinese thinking was - by September 2023 Ukraine was a lost cause, and Republicans were ready to give up on funding Ukraine. And they had (still have) the majority in the House. So by attacking Israel, China made sure that funding for Ukraine will continue, as it was tied to the post-Oct7 funding to Israel. And this is the situation we are currently in.
OK... If you say so. (Duh!) Beyond me, I'm afraid; I'll have to take your word for it.
"...by the speed Wuhan Corona virus spread..."
Yeah... I can't help feeling someone, like the Chinese or the Iranians, might start shouting, 'Conspiracy nutjob...!' around about this point. But if you say so...
This is a great article. I also am looking at the Chinese security situation in Pakistan. Clearly, they are facing fundamental issues there from several different actors. There has been a surge in attacks on Chinese nationals and projects in Pakistan, particularly associated with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) initiatives. These attacks are often carried out by separatist groups like the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and other militant outfits such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Islamic State-Khorasan Province (ISKP). All we have to do is look at March 26, 2024 attack for what the future may look like. A suicide car bombing targeted a convoy of Chinese engineers working on the Dasu hydropower project. The attack resulted in the deaths of five Chinese engineers and their Pakistani driver. The bomber rammed an explosives-laden vehicle into the bus carrying the engineers, highlighting the ongoing risks to Chinese personnel in Pakistan. That is targeted and about as extreme as you can get, right?
We can see on various channels that there are mentions of companies like Dewey Security, China Overseas Security, and Huaxin Zhongshan Security potentially involved in providing security for Chinese workers, especially in sensitive areas like Gwadar Port. Given how important that Gwadar Port is for them. I just dont see them walking away, do you?
It would be very difficult for China to walk away from CPEC, which was conceptualized as BRI's flagship from the get-go. At the same time, dispatching PMCs there would be even riskier than dispatching them to Myanmar due to the much more acute security threats.
I'm therefore unsure of what China will do there. It's truly trapped in a dilemma since CPEC is "too big to fail", even though it's already failing in my opinion and nothing is really being done to change its fate despite China's high hopes.
Well.... I guess the concept of hazard pay or just plain old bad luck applies to contractors and workers sent there.
Yup, they simply cannot walk away from that port in particular not just from a sunk-cost point of view of economics, but from its geostrategic importance being near the Straight of Hormuz and the broader Indian Ocean. It is essential for any possible thoughts of force projection into the Gulf area to try to protect the essential maritime path for its Arabian/Iranian oil as well as to try to stave off any possible blockade of the Malacca Strait. This way they are not hemmed into their littoral waters. What cannot be forgetten is that for China, the port serves as a counterweight to India's influence in that region as well, particularly with India's development of Chabahar Port in Iran, which is just 72 kilometers from Gwadar.
I know that Pakistan established the Special Security Division in 2016, specifically aimed at protecting Chinese workers and CPEC projects, but it really is not overall effective.
I agree that the issue is so much more pronounced in Pakistan than Myanmar due to the very visible ethic and religious differences between the Pakistanis and the Chinese. Allowing China to deploy ethnically Han PMCs into Pakistan feeds right into the narrative that TTP and ISKP are weaving.
China's mistake, IMHO, is that China tries to play a heavy hand, yet does not know how to play it, and ignored its own fundamental welfare. This has been a trait consistent throughout Xi's rule, while not obvious during his two predecessors. China does not want to own northern Myanmar, yet it wants northern Myanmar as a whole to behave according to China's wishes. Even without the jungle and history of this area, it is a difficult task. Had China played more like the Putin/Lavrov pair and focused more on negotiation and free candies, less on heavy-handed mob-like behavior, China would now have the room to come out to force everybody stop and let BRI projects through. Otherwise China will punish the parties that damage the BRI projects. Instead, China wanted to play king-maker when it does not know how.
My knowledge about Myanmar is mostly from WW2 Chinese experience in fighting for Sea access. Then 1949-1953 hot border war occurred when the Republic of China forces withdrew into northern Myanmar and then counter-attacked into Yunnan province. After the West forced armistice there after the Korean War armistice, the RoC force was split in two, the bulk was airlifted to Taiwan by USAF, a small part stayed. Many of them were border minorities. Many married Myanmar women and had children. Some claimed to be under direct order from Taipei to stay. To survive, they fought as mercenaries for the Myanmar and Thailand governments against communist rebels. But eventually were worn down and de-militarized. Their second and third generations show the same typical morphing as all immigrants to another country. Some of them fought against drug lords, but eventually the drug lords won.
Therefore, due to natural geography, northern Myanmar is highly fragmented: many different tribes, variations in dialects, roots to China, or thousand-year traditions as mountain tribes suppressed by both China and Myanmar. In terms of modern nation-building, it is an impossible task, and much more difficult than dealing with Galicia between Poland, Ukraine, and Russia (and to a lesser extent Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Moldova.) The only viable way is multiple fragmented small regions under high autonomy. Yet they will not stay within respective autonomy, but rather will soon interact and interfere with neighbors. The reasons are simple, it is hard to make a living in jungles, although somewhat easier than in the deserts. There will be no long-term solution unless a ruler like Tito shows up. I don't see democracy can resolve local problems without a thirty-year peace to prepare the foundation.
Valuable insight, ably expressed, as all Korybko’s readers soon come to expect.
I am surprised, however, that the dragging out of the Kursk invasion is not seen as a net positive for Russia.
At the cost of a minor and transient PR hit, Ukraine’s best brigades, with AD and fires support, are kept occupying a nothing burger strip of borderland while the Donbas falls. Why would Russia want to remove Ukraine from Kursk?
The Kursk imbroglio was supposed to distract Russian politicos from the LoC in eastern Ukraine, and make them move assets away from the real fight. Instead, it’s training their reserves.
It’s only what Kyiv deserves for letting the Brits design an offensive: fantasy planning, blood and mud returns.
Elon Musk recently tweeted that future wars will be fought with hypersonic missiles and drones, fields where China has advanced technology, especially with drones...
In September 26th, in Zhenzhen, China demonstrated a spectacular air show of 10,000 drones displaying 3D images with colors, a feat made possible only with advanced AI control and coordination.
I could not believe the PLA did not have far more advanced swarms of drones of all kinds, of course also handled by the Artificial Intelligence.
Bear in mind China is the World's leader in industrial patents for AI.
Burma. I met a guy who drove a truck on the Burma Road during World War II. I don't want my country to have ANYTHING to do with messing around in Burma. It's literally on the other side of the world, and getting involved over there is not in the American national interest, IMO.
The Chinese would be well-advised to stay out as well. And the Indians you didn't mention. The Burmese must be allowed to find their own destiny.
Not quite. There was/is a more unified anti-Russian front in Ukraine that US is riding on than likely is to be found in Myanmar. In Myanmar the target is the Burmese militarism, which has a long history, kind of like the military rule in Egypt (the Mamelukes). Also, economically, China can really help, whereas in US cannot help anyone economically, only wants to extract and profit... See Nord Stream for instance.
Which begs the question, " Why dont other nations set these traps for the US ?" Why don't they instigate color revoutiuons to the Americans' detriment ?
If you don't want to rely on sea lanes where you can be stopped by the Anglo-American navy, you need belt and roads. No way around it. Luckily for China, Central Asia, Russia and Thailand are stable. Same for S Korea and Japan. To prefer going East (Burma) and West (Pakistan) of India is perhaps a bit naive, when going THROUGH India would be so much easier...
Not sure if chinas risk is the same especially in the light of likely economic “war” with trumps administration.(the conflict is coming, regardless of their actions).
Plus, china is so unbelievably huge in Human Resources that should they decide they could do whatever they want. It would be a new direction for sure and in those terms yes something completely new for china, but I don’t think USA can do anything close to what it’s currently doing to Russia via Ukraine. Had Russia had 6 times more people the war in Ukraine would have been over by now; china has around 10x more people and unparalleled industrial might.
"...aiding a genocidal military dictatorship..."
What, Israel? But they don't need any help from the Chinese, apparently, they've got it all sewn up with the Americans.
China was the primary actor that gave the green light to Iran to greenlight Hamas and Hezbollah. We know that Iran and China are politically close by the speed Wuhan Corona virus spread in Quom in Jan/Feb 2020. Anyway, the Chinese thinking was - by September 2023 Ukraine was a lost cause, and Republicans were ready to give up on funding Ukraine. And they had (still have) the majority in the House. So by attacking Israel, China made sure that funding for Ukraine will continue, as it was tied to the post-Oct7 funding to Israel. And this is the situation we are currently in.
OK... If you say so. (Duh!) Beyond me, I'm afraid; I'll have to take your word for it.
"...by the speed Wuhan Corona virus spread..."
Yeah... I can't help feeling someone, like the Chinese or the Iranians, might start shouting, 'Conspiracy nutjob...!' around about this point. But if you say so...
This is a great article. I also am looking at the Chinese security situation in Pakistan. Clearly, they are facing fundamental issues there from several different actors. There has been a surge in attacks on Chinese nationals and projects in Pakistan, particularly associated with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) initiatives. These attacks are often carried out by separatist groups like the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and other militant outfits such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Islamic State-Khorasan Province (ISKP). All we have to do is look at March 26, 2024 attack for what the future may look like. A suicide car bombing targeted a convoy of Chinese engineers working on the Dasu hydropower project. The attack resulted in the deaths of five Chinese engineers and their Pakistani driver. The bomber rammed an explosives-laden vehicle into the bus carrying the engineers, highlighting the ongoing risks to Chinese personnel in Pakistan. That is targeted and about as extreme as you can get, right?
We can see on various channels that there are mentions of companies like Dewey Security, China Overseas Security, and Huaxin Zhongshan Security potentially involved in providing security for Chinese workers, especially in sensitive areas like Gwadar Port. Given how important that Gwadar Port is for them. I just dont see them walking away, do you?
It would be very difficult for China to walk away from CPEC, which was conceptualized as BRI's flagship from the get-go. At the same time, dispatching PMCs there would be even riskier than dispatching them to Myanmar due to the much more acute security threats.
I'm therefore unsure of what China will do there. It's truly trapped in a dilemma since CPEC is "too big to fail", even though it's already failing in my opinion and nothing is really being done to change its fate despite China's high hopes.
If only BRICS had ditched dollar ,US offensive potential for spying and generating conditions for bad things would be several times lower
China doesn't want to as I proved in these pieces:
Alt-Media Is In Shock After The BRICS Bank Confirmed That It Complies With Western Sanctions
https://korybko.substack.com/p/alt-media-is-in-shock-after-the-brics
Russia & China’s US-Provoked Payment Problems Caught Most BRICS Enthusiasts By Surprise
https://korybko.substack.com/p/russia-and-chinas-us-provoked-payment
China’s Voluntary Compliance With US Sanctions Prevents Russia From Paying Its SCO Dues
https://korybko.substack.com/p/chinas-voluntary-compliance-with
Well.... I guess the concept of hazard pay or just plain old bad luck applies to contractors and workers sent there.
Yup, they simply cannot walk away from that port in particular not just from a sunk-cost point of view of economics, but from its geostrategic importance being near the Straight of Hormuz and the broader Indian Ocean. It is essential for any possible thoughts of force projection into the Gulf area to try to protect the essential maritime path for its Arabian/Iranian oil as well as to try to stave off any possible blockade of the Malacca Strait. This way they are not hemmed into their littoral waters. What cannot be forgetten is that for China, the port serves as a counterweight to India's influence in that region as well, particularly with India's development of Chabahar Port in Iran, which is just 72 kilometers from Gwadar.
I know that Pakistan established the Special Security Division in 2016, specifically aimed at protecting Chinese workers and CPEC projects, but it really is not overall effective.
I agree that the issue is so much more pronounced in Pakistan than Myanmar due to the very visible ethic and religious differences between the Pakistanis and the Chinese. Allowing China to deploy ethnically Han PMCs into Pakistan feeds right into the narrative that TTP and ISKP are weaving.
Am I wrong?
China's mistake, IMHO, is that China tries to play a heavy hand, yet does not know how to play it, and ignored its own fundamental welfare. This has been a trait consistent throughout Xi's rule, while not obvious during his two predecessors. China does not want to own northern Myanmar, yet it wants northern Myanmar as a whole to behave according to China's wishes. Even without the jungle and history of this area, it is a difficult task. Had China played more like the Putin/Lavrov pair and focused more on negotiation and free candies, less on heavy-handed mob-like behavior, China would now have the room to come out to force everybody stop and let BRI projects through. Otherwise China will punish the parties that damage the BRI projects. Instead, China wanted to play king-maker when it does not know how.
My knowledge about Myanmar is mostly from WW2 Chinese experience in fighting for Sea access. Then 1949-1953 hot border war occurred when the Republic of China forces withdrew into northern Myanmar and then counter-attacked into Yunnan province. After the West forced armistice there after the Korean War armistice, the RoC force was split in two, the bulk was airlifted to Taiwan by USAF, a small part stayed. Many of them were border minorities. Many married Myanmar women and had children. Some claimed to be under direct order from Taipei to stay. To survive, they fought as mercenaries for the Myanmar and Thailand governments against communist rebels. But eventually were worn down and de-militarized. Their second and third generations show the same typical morphing as all immigrants to another country. Some of them fought against drug lords, but eventually the drug lords won.
Therefore, due to natural geography, northern Myanmar is highly fragmented: many different tribes, variations in dialects, roots to China, or thousand-year traditions as mountain tribes suppressed by both China and Myanmar. In terms of modern nation-building, it is an impossible task, and much more difficult than dealing with Galicia between Poland, Ukraine, and Russia (and to a lesser extent Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Moldova.) The only viable way is multiple fragmented small regions under high autonomy. Yet they will not stay within respective autonomy, but rather will soon interact and interfere with neighbors. The reasons are simple, it is hard to make a living in jungles, although somewhat easier than in the deserts. There will be no long-term solution unless a ruler like Tito shows up. I don't see democracy can resolve local problems without a thirty-year peace to prepare the foundation.
https://themillenniumreport.com/2017/05/beijing-hires-erik-prince-as-guardian-of-the-new-silk-road/
It would be interesting to see if Eric Prince goes against the State Department.
Valuable insight, ably expressed, as all Korybko’s readers soon come to expect.
I am surprised, however, that the dragging out of the Kursk invasion is not seen as a net positive for Russia.
At the cost of a minor and transient PR hit, Ukraine’s best brigades, with AD and fires support, are kept occupying a nothing burger strip of borderland while the Donbas falls. Why would Russia want to remove Ukraine from Kursk?
The Kursk imbroglio was supposed to distract Russian politicos from the LoC in eastern Ukraine, and make them move assets away from the real fight. Instead, it’s training their reserves.
It’s only what Kyiv deserves for letting the Brits design an offensive: fantasy planning, blood and mud returns.
Then China cuts off the US supply of rare earth metals like dysprosium. Boom! No more F35.
It's not really much of a dilemma. It's either take action sooner or later. Just like Russia this is a non negotiable issue.
Elon Musk recently tweeted that future wars will be fought with hypersonic missiles and drones, fields where China has advanced technology, especially with drones...
In September 26th, in Zhenzhen, China demonstrated a spectacular air show of 10,000 drones displaying 3D images with colors, a feat made possible only with advanced AI control and coordination.
I could not believe the PLA did not have far more advanced swarms of drones of all kinds, of course also handled by the Artificial Intelligence.
Bear in mind China is the World's leader in industrial patents for AI.
Burma. I met a guy who drove a truck on the Burma Road during World War II. I don't want my country to have ANYTHING to do with messing around in Burma. It's literally on the other side of the world, and getting involved over there is not in the American national interest, IMO.
The Chinese would be well-advised to stay out as well. And the Indians you didn't mention. The Burmese must be allowed to find their own destiny.
Not quite. There was/is a more unified anti-Russian front in Ukraine that US is riding on than likely is to be found in Myanmar. In Myanmar the target is the Burmese militarism, which has a long history, kind of like the military rule in Egypt (the Mamelukes). Also, economically, China can really help, whereas in US cannot help anyone economically, only wants to extract and profit... See Nord Stream for instance.
Which begs the question, " Why dont other nations set these traps for the US ?" Why don't they instigate color revoutiuons to the Americans' detriment ?
If you don't want to rely on sea lanes where you can be stopped by the Anglo-American navy, you need belt and roads. No way around it. Luckily for China, Central Asia, Russia and Thailand are stable. Same for S Korea and Japan. To prefer going East (Burma) and West (Pakistan) of India is perhaps a bit naive, when going THROUGH India would be so much easier...
Not sure if chinas risk is the same especially in the light of likely economic “war” with trumps administration.(the conflict is coming, regardless of their actions).
Plus, china is so unbelievably huge in Human Resources that should they decide they could do whatever they want. It would be a new direction for sure and in those terms yes something completely new for china, but I don’t think USA can do anything close to what it’s currently doing to Russia via Ukraine. Had Russia had 6 times more people the war in Ukraine would have been over by now; china has around 10x more people and unparalleled industrial might.