Other reason a US blockade of China has long been a non starter is that the US is so utterly dependent on imports from China and Taiwan too. The lesson of the current Iran war is that near offshore is not defensible whatsoever. USN would be unable to even approach Taiwan in the event of a showdown, and US economy would rapidly implode from lack of all basic goods and parts. Not least, Trump already tried a trade showdown with the moronic "liberation day" and couldn't even sustain a tariff campaign, so it should be clear a deeper trade cutoff has no viability.
It has long been understood that the bulk of the USN -- and certainly its capital ships -- would spend much of any war with China way out past the second island chain, because anywhere inside would be lethal. Only subs and perhaps some fast littoral ships would operate anywhere near the FIRST island chain. The crucial new understanding from the Iran war is the indefensibility of US bases on the First and Second island chains, and America's inability to defend any targets from any force with a significant missile arsenal.
Sorry but I`m not convinced by these arguments. It`s all about China.
This hemisphere of the middle east and south Asia is today what Europe was during the cold war, the centre of the hegemonic struggle of the two super powers, the Sowjetunion back then and China today. Iran sits at the centre of this hemisphere. Bringing Iran back under its influence (if not by regime change by some other kind of dependency) would be a huge geostrategic win for the US.
And on the ecomomic argument. All those points may be true and there is no question that China prepared for many years for these kinds of scenarios. But when it comes to who suffers more pain overall the US as an exporter of oil and gas is in a far better position than China as an importer. No matter how well you prepare, owning the product gives you superior power.
Why is it all about China? What does it achieve if China isn't particularly vulnerable (to the extent that Chinese policy elites think it might **improve** China's competitiveness relative to its rivals)?
It is true that the US is a net exporter and China is a net importers, but the key word here is 'net'. The US imports millions of barrels a day because shale oil is unsuitable for US refineries, which are set up for heavy, sour crude, not the light sweet WTI grades. Furthermore, the US has a higher energy intensity of GDP.
“Why is it all about China?” Surprised to hear this from you of all people. China is challenging the US for the new world order. All recent interventions from Venezuela over Greenland and now Iran were about China. In all these places China is building a foothold and the US is trying to push them out. Would the US really risk all this huge global collateral damage for anything else? I don’t think so.
Whether the US will succeed is a completely different story.
Big fan of your podcast though, looking forward to it every week.
Other reason a US blockade of China has long been a non starter is that the US is so utterly dependent on imports from China and Taiwan too. The lesson of the current Iran war is that near offshore is not defensible whatsoever. USN would be unable to even approach Taiwan in the event of a showdown, and US economy would rapidly implode from lack of all basic goods and parts. Not least, Trump already tried a trade showdown with the moronic "liberation day" and couldn't even sustain a tariff campaign, so it should be clear a deeper trade cutoff has no viability.
It has long been understood that the bulk of the USN -- and certainly its capital ships -- would spend much of any war with China way out past the second island chain, because anywhere inside would be lethal. Only subs and perhaps some fast littoral ships would operate anywhere near the FIRST island chain. The crucial new understanding from the Iran war is the indefensibility of US bases on the First and Second island chains, and America's inability to defend any targets from any force with a significant missile arsenal.
Sorry but I`m not convinced by these arguments. It`s all about China.
This hemisphere of the middle east and south Asia is today what Europe was during the cold war, the centre of the hegemonic struggle of the two super powers, the Sowjetunion back then and China today. Iran sits at the centre of this hemisphere. Bringing Iran back under its influence (if not by regime change by some other kind of dependency) would be a huge geostrategic win for the US.
And on the ecomomic argument. All those points may be true and there is no question that China prepared for many years for these kinds of scenarios. But when it comes to who suffers more pain overall the US as an exporter of oil and gas is in a far better position than China as an importer. No matter how well you prepare, owning the product gives you superior power.
Why is it all about China? What does it achieve if China isn't particularly vulnerable (to the extent that Chinese policy elites think it might **improve** China's competitiveness relative to its rivals)?
It is true that the US is a net exporter and China is a net importers, but the key word here is 'net'. The US imports millions of barrels a day because shale oil is unsuitable for US refineries, which are set up for heavy, sour crude, not the light sweet WTI grades. Furthermore, the US has a higher energy intensity of GDP.
“Why is it all about China?” Surprised to hear this from you of all people. China is challenging the US for the new world order. All recent interventions from Venezuela over Greenland and now Iran were about China. In all these places China is building a foothold and the US is trying to push them out. Would the US really risk all this huge global collateral damage for anything else? I don’t think so.
Whether the US will succeed is a completely different story.
Big fan of your podcast though, looking forward to it every week.