Discussion about this post

User's avatar
ebear's avatar

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words.

To get a big picture understanding of global conflict you only have to look at some maps of major oil and gas deposits and their transit routes. Wherever you find conflict, you inevitably find either a major gas or oil field, or a significant transit route. The basic idea, going all the way back to WWI (which can be characterized by the emergence of oil to replace coal as a transportation fuel) is to control the world's energy resources, either via direct ownership at the wellhead, or the ability to interdict shipping routes or pipelines.

I include a few maps as examples, but do some searches on your own for different regions and see what you find. Wherever there's war or civil strife, there's almost always a pipeline or major energy resource involved.

In the current context, future Russian energy supplies to China are a game changer in the sense that it will be useless to interdict the energy sea route from the Middle East to China. China is expanding its naval presence to protect that route for now, which is also vital for commercial shipping, but energy and later commercial goods will soon be travelling by land across the New Silk Road currently being built, thus negating or at least reducing the risk to China's economy.

Read up on Mackinder's Heartland Theory to get an idea of the stakes.

The West tipped its hand by destroying Nordstream2. That was an act of desperation meant to prevent the emergence of a German-Russian energy/technology nexus - same motive as WWII. However, Russia has a new partner to replace Germany, and that's why the focus on China.

Ironically much of the technology and manufacturing output of China (which they trade for energy) was provided by the USA over the last few decades. China followed the example of Japan in capturing western markets, first with cheap consumer goods, then moving up the value chain to displace technology and engineering products that were formerly major exports of the USA and EU. Japan also figures in this equation with much of their manufacturing now being done in China. The good thus produced are not the shoddy products you find in Walmart. They are made to Japanese standards which costs more, but Japanese consumers prefer quality to price. Clothing is one example. First rate threads made in China can be bought in Japan, so if you visit Japan, travel light and buy lots of clothes when you get there!

OK, here are a few maps.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d6/1e/bc/d61ebc19f39134862b5f8c91e39b2559.jpg

https://www.eia.gov/international/content/analysis/special_topics/World_Oil_Transit_Chokepoints/images/figure1.png

https://mondediplo.com/local/cache-vignettes/L890xH851/lmd_0521_13_gazoducs_rgb-a710b-39eca.jpg?1619690877

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/plattscontent/_assets/_images/latest-news/20200113_pipelinemap.jpg

https://www.eurotrib.com/files/3/060322_Russia_China_gas_routes.gif

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sBBSWMcO5IU/VRjZtqftZbI/AAAAAAAAcZE/6a2WGVrb6LE/s1600/Uranium_Reserves.png

As a footnote, also pay attention to the electrical distribution networks from an economic and military standpoint. Right now the Baltic states are agitating for a new Maginot Line to prevent a Russian invasion, which is absurd on its face. Why would Russia invade those sad-ass countries when they can just knock out their energy grid, as is being done in Ukraine? Pipelines are one thing, but if you can't move the electricity around you'll be eating cold Spam by candlelight.

Nakayama's avatar

Once again this is the maintenance of the empire-past. Philippine was a US colony. And I have to say to some extent, USA had managed the colony well (minus the initial batch of massacres of Philippine people). Japanese occupation itself was not particularly brutal (say, compared to Japanese occupation of China's mainland) Japan did not try to station civilians controls either (very different from Japanese occupation of Kora and Taiwan). US simply does not have enough capacity to handle China alone in western Pacific. The under water listening line from Japan to Okinawa to Taiwan to Luzon is most likely fully operational now. I suspect there is another line from Japan to Iwo Jima to Guam, among others. Simply a matter to make up for the missing effort in the past. However, China's strategy against USA has always been to attack the fortress from within. A defense line in western pacific really does not matter that much. In the short term, US and Japan naval forces are more than a match against PLAN, but PLAN focus is not central Pacific or Australia, but the strategic passages through South China Sea and Malacca Strait. China's sub-borne ICBM are too few to penetrate US air defense anyway.

8 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?