The sentence is final: when Pentagon simulations at the start of 2019, based on a major conflict between the West and the Chinese and Russian coalition forces, the Western forces would be systematically swept away and only the use of strategic fire would be able to avoid the debacle; which, as we know, is far from an acceptable solution. These simulations also evaluated other scenarios, and showed for example that US forces would be unable to prevent the capture of Taiwan by Chinese forces, and that any engagement in "proximity" to Chinese waters (understand less than 1000 miles), would turn to Pekin's advantage.
The reasons for this sudden and major turnaround are to be found among Westerners as well as Russian and Chinese leaders. On the western side, the authorities were slow to become aware of the geostrategic upheavals underway, obsessed as they were by questions of domestic policy, and wanting to be convinced that the conflicts to come would not exceed the intensity of the interventions in Afghanistan or Iraq. . As a result, the European and American armed forces lost both in volume and in the capacity to face intense engagements. For example, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands, which constituted the core of the European force in 1980 and 70% of NATO forces in Europe, are not able today to line up more than 1000 battle tanks in the park, and could only deploy 200 in a period of 3 weeks, where Russia has shown that it can, during exercises , mobilize more than 1000 battle tanks.
In the Pacific, China has developed its navy and its aviation with the objective of prohibiting the US Navy from its proximity to its coasts. To do this, it built up a constantly growing fleet of destroyers, frigates, aircraft carriers and nuclear attack submarines, as well as a very large number of corvettes, missile patrol boats, and submarines. attack with conventional propulsion, capable of carrying out saturating attacks that the US Navy would be unable to counter, while creating a mesh so dense that it becomes opaque to US forces, including for its nuclear attack submarines .
The personality of the Chinese and Russian leaders, like their ambitions, also play a determining role in this new geostrategic landscape. Neither Vladimir Putin nor Xi Jinping was in fact prepared to accept Washington's economic and political supervision, and both have never made a secret of the ambitions they had for their country on the international scene. In addition, they are determined to keep power in their country, and for this, use international tensions to keep the population in a form of voluntary submission to state control, with a certain taste for the cult of personality. .
We can talk endlessly about the probabilities surrounding these hypotheses, and the reliability of the simulations, but the current situation is no less worrying, whether in Asia, as in Europe. In addition, it should not be obstructed that the Russian and Chinese forces are in the midst of a transformation, and that they will not achieve their full planned operational effectiveness until 2030-2035. However, apart from the United States, and to a lesser extent, Great Britain and the countries of the Pacific zone (Australia, South Korea, Japan, New Zealand), the majority of Western countries remain in a legacy Defense plan. of the previous period, which considered humanitarian and anti-insurgency action as the main missions of their armed forces. To be convinced, it suffices to observe the equipment of the new German F125 frigates, and even French FDI who, with only vertical 16 silos, are singularly lacking in firepower.
The fact remains that with the rise of China, US military power now seems incapable of simultaneously protecting the Pacific and Europe. The latter must therefore find within itself the resources to carry out this mission. All the European countries, which today fall under the protective wing of the United States to guarantee their security, are therefore making a very bad calculation ...