Final Paper for Conflict Class by Damian Niolet

The statements of the author contained in this report do not reflect the views of the USAF.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

1 THREE CRUCIAL ASPECTS OF U.S. CONFLICT WITH CHINA Three crucial aspects that require consideration when discussing conflict between the U.S. and China are: 1) Leadership intentions, 2) Economic codependence, and 3) Military power. Within each of these areas it is important to examine both parties involved, not merely one or the other. For instance, Chinas leaders intentions may not appear to be significant on the surface if the U.S.s leaders intentions are wholly unknown. In regards to leadership intentions, what is most important is the U.S.s guarantee to support democracies the world over with military power if need be. Likewise, the most important factor in Chinas leadership, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), intentions is the likelihood that they are bent on reuniting its territories of old that means Taiwan, a democratic state. No matter what commonalities the U.S. and China has between them, they will remain at odds until such a time as either the U.S. withdraws its guarantee (which is not likely) or China makes a move toward its objective and proves victorious (which is very likely). How China would go about making such a move may have already been enacted. The strategy is so methodical as to make it almost imperceptible, that is until the effects are of such an astronomical level as to be impossible to ignore. The U.S.s budget deficit and trade debt are of such astronomical figures. The fact that these vulnerabilities exist for the U.S. is one thing, the fact that China is enabling them and the U.S. is only now wising up to the fact is another. Lastly, it is important to consider the military powers of the two nations; however, it is not enough to compare them side by side and determine that the U.S. has the advantage in terms of strength in numbers. What must be taken into account is the type of battle that is likely should China make a move against Taiwan. It would largely be sea based. The U.S. may have an advantage over China militarily, but Chinas navy has closed the gap more than the other forces.

2 EXTREMIST ISLAM vs. WESTERN NON-ISLAM The conflict that exists between the Islamic extremist world and the Non-Islamic, western world extends from three important factors. The conflict, when it is boiled down and refined, is due to or the result of: 1) A deep ceded grudge and desire to retaliate against the western world, 2) Islamic extremists desire to restore the High Caliphates former glory, and 3) Western (especially U.S.) associations with longtime enemies of Islamic extremists. These three factors blur into each other a great deal, but this essay will seek to examine each individually. Primarily, the conflict between Islamic extremists and the western world is in connection with a deep ceded grudge held by Islamic extremists. The grudge is concerned with western interference in Islamic affairs and rule. Western interference with the Islamic world can be cited on numerous occasions throughout history, but climaxed with the end of WWI when the Ottoman Empire (or the High Caliphate) was fragmented and Islamic rule was no longer centralized. The desire to retaliate for the injustice is a natural off-shoot of the grudge and just as naturally causes conflict with those who would be retaliated against. Retaliation against the western world alone would not dissipate the grudge held by Islamic extremists, even if the western world was annihilated. The injustice would not be truly rectified until the former glory of the High Caliphate was restored; the Islamic state of affairs and rule would need to be the way they were previously, as if nothing had changed. Naturally, many of the western nations residing in the lands once held by the Ottomans would oppose this. Lastly, even if the High Caliphate was reestablished, the true enemies of Islamic extremists, Israelis, would remain. In the eyes of Islamic extremists, the restoration of the High Caliphate would mean the continuance of the High Caliphates intentions to rid the world of Israel. The western world, a staunch ally of Israel, would naturally pose a threat to such.

3 FROM THE RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE The aspects of Russian society and culture that greatly affect their perception of U.S. national security strategy are: 1) A sense of insecurity that borderlines on paranoia, 2) An arrogance born of a much longer history by comparison with the U.S., and 3) the relative effectiveness of the current state of affairs in Russia. These three aspects of Russian society and culture, in and of themselves, are at odds with each other. This internal conflict exudes during Russia and U.S. dealings, causing what appears to be conflict between the nations. The insecurity of Russia exists on various levels. Primarily, Russia as a whole realizes that they lost the cold war and ever since has been uncertain about Russias strength. Russias leaders are insecure because they fear nations (especially E.U. and U.S.), taking advantage of Russia during moments of weakness. They also fear their own political survival being aware of the speed at which regime changes have occurred in Russia. The populace is insecure because, while they understand the importance of leaders to stand up against enemies, real or imagined, they do not want to create another dictator. Acting simultaneously with Russian insecurity is Russian arrogance towards the U.S. by comparison. Russia, with centuries more history than the U.S., believes that its society (nationalist pride) is far stronger and its culture far richer than the U.S. Russia believes that their society will continue to thrive for centuries to come, no matter the form of government, regime, or threat. Russia believes the U.S. has not had time in the fire and our dealings, amateurish. Since 1991, but more so since the election of Vladimir Putin, Russia has been experiencing a new era in its glory. Its government is relatively stable. Its economy is relatively thriving. Its people are relatively happy. The fact that a democratic government and a capitalist economy has brought this era about is something of a slap in the face for Russia. Ultimately,

Russians must look passed their internal misgivings and see the common interests between themselves and the U.S. Likewise, the U.S. must not rub Russias noses in defeat. 4 THREE VARIABLES FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN AFRICA Conflict resolution in Africa requires that three critical aspects surrounding the conflict be addressed. Those aspects are: 1) Who mediates the conflict, 2) The level at which the conflict exits tribal, national, or international, and 3) Are basic needs being met? For conflict to successfully be resolved, not just in Africa, but anywhere in the world, it is important that those involved in the mediation be parties disinterested in gaining from the mediation. In such an undeveloped, but resource rich continent as Africa, involvement in internal affairs by any outside nation can easily be construed as attempts to use and abuse Africa. International bodies, such as the U.N. should be the primary mediators. The mediator should then take measures to understand the dynamics of the struggle in terms of whether it is localized in a tribe, between nations within Africa, or spanning international borders. Depending on where the conflict is arising, the leaders that will need to be represented in mediation will vary. Tribal leaders, for instance, may not recognize a particular nations government and elected leaders. Finally, Africa being the poorest continent in the world, it is important that a determination be made regarding whether the basic needs of the people involved are being fulfilled before any mediation even begins. Parties are much more willing to come to the negotiations table with a clear head if they know that they will not have to worry about their basic needs. Where there is clear neglect of basic needs, or worse - mass genocide, the mediation may need to move right into direct military intervention. 5 THREE U.S. VULNERABILITIES THAT AL QAEDA IS EXPLOITING

Three U.S. vulnerabilities that Al Qaeda is attempting to exploit or is exploiting are: 1) American hubris, ignorance, and dividedness, 2) The U.S.s conventional war mindset and stance, and 3) A sensation driven media engine. Despite the U.S. becoming wise to these vulnerabilities, they are still very prevalent and will continue to be exploited. American hubris is astounding. Americans can hardly utter a word when speaking on global affairs without emphasizing the U.S.s status as the worlds superpower. This mentality translates into the U.S. often overstepping bounds, disregarding others, and being careless. Despite numerous warnings leading up to 9/11, Americans continued to believe that they were untouchable by any serious threats. American ignorance keeps them from learning lessons or acting differently; instead, they do things like lump Iran in with the axis of evil, even at a time when Iran was reaching out peacefully. The fact that Americans are so divided and have far less of a sense of collectiveness than other countries, more often treating each other as competition, makes effectively exploiting these vulnerabilities easier for Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda saw that the U.S. was poised for conventional warfare and no other type of warfare. Al Qaeda became the enemy that could not be pinpointed, that spread out, hid, and attacked at moments of opportunity. More importantly, Al Qaeda became the enemy that did not abide by the western just war theory. They were and are willing to kill anyone. The further they break the just war rules, the more sensational the results. The U.S. does not know how to fight such an enemy. The U.S. media cannot help but assist Al Qaeda by sensationalizing Al Qaedas acts. Al Qaeda understands this and makes certain that their acts are in well-populated locations where there is guaranteed to be a lot of media coverage. You wont hear about attacks in rural areas. 1 ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS vs. U.S. AND SOLUTIONS

The animosity that exists between the western world and Islamic extremists primarily extends from western involvement and meddling in Islamic states. The pinnacle of his meddling came after WWI with the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire. Ever since this time, Islamic extremists have held a grudge and sought to retaliate against those who stole Islamic lands and overthrew the Islamic leaders. Continued western involvement in Islamic lands, which is for the most part being carried out by the U.S., further intensifies Islamic extremists desires to retaliate, focusing on the U.S. The western world, particularly the U.S., needs to take measures to 1) Reduce Islamic extremists desire to retaliate, and 2) Directly attacking Islamic extremism through a global effort. This will not eliminate Islamic extremism, it may never be eliminated, but the burden can be lessened and shared. Throughout history, Islamic lands have been meddled with or claimed outright by western powers. Typically, this has been done with little regard for the religion itself, which the people hold to ardently. The most notable instance of this came after WWI, when the Ottoman Empire, having been defeated in the war, was dismantled and its leader bereft of power. In the Islamic world, a defeat of the state is a defeat for the Islamic religion, since church and state are one and the same. In the western world, where there is mandated separation between church and state, a defeat of the state does not guarantee a blow to the religion. This fact was rarely considered by the western nations involved. Islamic extremists, interpreting the Quran in a manner that undermines the religion and more moderate Muslims, feel justified in their desire to return lands and power lost from western meddling to the Islamic world. They believe: that which was once gained under the authority of the Imam (Islamic leader), is rightfully theirs to obtained once again. Islamic extremists wish to restore Islam to its former glory. Naturally, this desire places Islamic extremists in direct

opposition with the western world, which has exerted a degree of influence on the area ever since. The constant meddling by the western world has established a grudge in the hearts of Islamic extremists. Even if an empire consistent with that of the Ottoman Empire was reestablished, Islamic extremists would seek to end westerners because of the likelihood of future meddling. With the presence of westerners in Islamic lands, not just influence from afar, Islamic extremists pursue their goals with greater intensity and urgency. The western nation they see most often is the U.S., which entails that the U.S. receives the brunt of the Islamic extremist offensive. This does not have to be the case, however. The U.S. should have sought to, and must in the future seek to, act in junction with coalition nations, not as a lone cowboy. The U.S. must learn to blend in with the crowd. Involvement in Islamic lands, primarily by one western nation, gives Islamic extremists fuel for the fire. Involvement by an international body, in which many nationalities are represented, to include some Islamic nations, makes Islamic extremist actions less justifiable. The U.S. needs to learn to take a back seat to international organizations like the U.N. and even learn not to act unless there is complete international support. The U.S. also needs to learn that it cannot push its system of statehood on others. Democracy does not work for everyone. There needs to continue to be an effort to attack Islamic extremism; however, the battle should be far less kinetic. The battle should be in the information realm. There should be numerous U.N. led conferences around the world clarifying the peaceful undertones of Islam. There should be less sensationalism in the media regarding how poorly Islamic extremism is being combatted and more reporting on how poorly it is being carried out. The ideology of Islamic extremism should be weakened in the eyes of Muslims by placing emphasis on attacks

on civilians, to include Muslims, such as the bombing of an Islamic wedding. There should be more soft power approaches. The U.N. should have the power to dismiss any Islamic leader who promotes aggression of any sort, more power to cut off nations who harbor Islamic extremists. This may even be at the risk of absolving the relationship between the U.S. and Israel, who has carried out a few extremist acts of their own. In all things international the U.S. should defer to the U.N. These actions will not eliminate Islamic extremism; however, it will greatly reduce the frequency and intensity of the extremist attacks as felt by the U.S. This is due impart to the fact that Islamic extremists will have less cause to direct their actions against the U.S. and partly because their justifiability will be debilitated. The U.S. would be far less vulnerable if it were to share the burden of combating Islamic extremism by not spreading their forces thin, as we are now, and putting them to better use protecting the homeland. 2 U.S.VULNERABILITIES WORLDWIDE The U.S.s political system, society, economy, and national defense strategy are vulnerable to total collapse through the efforts of China more than any other country. China is in a position to surpass the U.S. as the worlds leading superpower and make the U.S. look like a fool in the process. China may have begun a war with the U.S. years ago, a war that is subtle and unrestricted. The U.S. only barely realizes their situation. This is precisely intended the war effort is aimed at beating and battering the U.S. before they even declare war in return. Chinas strategy is to not focus on military power, but on other plains, in other realms. Those realms are political, societal, economical, and least of all military. China is in a position to exploit the U.S.s weaknesses in these areas with greater effectiveness than any other country for several reasons. This essay will seek to examine the U.S.s vulnerabilities in these

realms and show how China can easily exploit these vulnerabilities in imperceptible ways, winning small battles that in the end amount to a war victory for China over the U.S. It will also explain why other countries are not in as opportunistic a position as China. The most important factor regardless of the realm in which a battle is being waged is that the U.S. has clear enemies that do not include China. That way, China can maneuver in the battle space with little detection in terms of enemy threat, all the while creating advantages for itself by enlarging U.S. vulnerabilities. The war on terror greatly contributes to this factor. The U.S. is focused on fighting terrorists, not whole nations, and certainly not China. Conversely, China must appear to be cooperative towards the U.S., for the most part. China does not always stand down and defer to the U.S., but there is a general air of respect in U.S. and China dealings. The realm that has seen combat the longest and with the most adroitness on the part of China is in the economic realm. Since 1985, China has been creating and exploiting U.S. vulnerabilities in the form of both a trade deficit and a budget deficit. The U.S.s debt belongs to China more than any other country. These obligations to China, which are astronomical at this point, could go a long way in China pressuring the U.S. into adjusting policy to better suit Chinas wishes. Another important realm, wherein China can create and exploit a vulnerability in the U.S., is in the political realm. China has a political objective, to reunite its lost territories under One-China. The U.S. has yet to lose any of its territory. If China were able to subvert the U.S.s government and encourage groups such as the Texas Nationalist Movement to secede from the Union, China would create a similarity in political objectives between the U.S. and China; the U.S. would be just as determined as China to reunite its territory. Thereafter, the U.S. would have a difficult time justifying their support of Taiwans independence, or at the least, separation.

Within the societal realm, China has a decided advantage in terms of population size and relative cohesion. We have seen throughout history how a countrys cohesion is strengthened in times of adversity, such as war, unless that war has been a protracted war, at which point the cohesion begins to break down. The U.S. has been at war since 2001. China has not. If the U.S. was to get into another war, the cohesion would only further break down; whereas, if China were to get into a war, they would experience greater cohesion. Considering the possibility that China has been waging a subversive war for years, allowing them to largely win the war before it is even fought, this entails that the war would not last long and the cohesion would remain strong for some time. The last realm in which China really wishes to wage a battle is in the military realm. They understand that an upright military confrontation with the U.S. would not prove effective for China. Instead, China is taking small bites out of the U.S. in the other realms, weakening the U.S. support infrastructure that makes the military what it is. Without money, policies, and/or public support, the military of a country would be rather weak. It also helps if the countrys military is already engaged in several wars, such as the U.S. is. China could and probably is seeking ways to create further conflict between nations around the world. North and South Korea, for instance, have just begun firing at each other in the demilitarized zone. China very likely had something to do with this, perhaps by funding North Koreas military. The U.S. will undoubtedly get involved should an all-out war begin between North and South Korea. The more involved the U.S. gets with the skirmishes of other countries, the easier it will be for China to take Taiwan, since the U.S. will be spread too thin to act on Taiwans behave. Other nations are not in as good a position as China to make use of the U.S.s vulnerabilities. The next possible contender is Russia, but Russia does not have the population

10

size to produce products at such a cheap price as China, which contributes to the U.S. trade deficit with China. Russia does not have the rising economic strength to buy vast amounts of U.S. debt. Russia does not really have a leg to stand on in terms of regaining lost territories. The territories it lost after the Soviet collapse rightfully reclaimed their independence; Russia really does not have a right to regain them. Russia would not be able to create a mirrored political environment between them and the U.S. Russias people, having lost the cold war to the U.S. are not interested in intensifying hostilities with the U.S. They are looking to be partners more than enemies. Lastly, Russias only viable military asset, which will not be mentioned here in order to avoid classification issues, is ~30 years passed its service life. For these reasons, Russia, the only other possible contender to the U.S., besides China, is far below China in terms of potential.

11