Literary Insights

BOOK LINK:

The book is an introduction and guide to the 1999 Chinese military strategy book “Unrestricted Warfare” written by colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui.
Unrestricted Warfare outlined China’s long-term strategy to dominate the West through a comprehensive approach including economic, political, technological, military and other means rather than direct armed conflict.
It advocated using all tools including non-military means like cyber attacks, corporate espionage, manipulating financial systems, public opinion campaigns, etc.
The author argues Unrestricted Warfare has accurately predicted and aligned with China’s actions over the past 20 years, like coercing other countries through COVID, using climate change as a bargaining chip, rampant cyber attacks and corporate espionage.
However, the original text is dense and difficult for Western readers to understand. This book aims to provide context and explain the chapters of Unrestricted Warfare with examples to show how it maps to China’s strategy.
The goal is to raise awareness of China’s deliberate long-term strategy of undermining the West through many domains and persuade the need to rethink engagement and develop new strategies to counter China.
The author argues China’s actions justify comparisons to Nazi Germany and pose life-and-death decisions for how the US deals with the CCP going forward.
The passage compares China’s takeover of Hong Kong to Germany’s annexation of Austria in 1938, suggesting it foreshadowed greater aggression.
It attributes the increasingly hostile rhetoric and military posturing toward Taiwan to China’s ambition to bring Taiwan under its control, by force if necessary.
Militarily, China has been rapidly modernizing and expanding its forces, conducted large-scale exercises near Taiwan, and declared its intent to pursue reunification, even by non-peaceful means if Taiwan declares independence.
Economically, China has been flexing its growing economic muscle by restricting imports from Taiwan or countries that support its independence. It also uses trade as a geopolitical weapon.
Diplomatically, China seeks to isolate Taiwan and curb its international participation and recognition as an independent nation. It threatens consequences for countries that have relations with Taiwan.

So in summary, the passage argues China has been ramping up political, economic and military coercion against Taiwan in pursuit of its goal of eventual control over the island, which it views as a rogue province. International tensions over Taiwan and China’s behavior have been rising accordingly.

When the author arrived at the Pentagon in 2014, the Obama administration instructed them not to publicly antagonize China due to the importance of the US-China economic relationship.
The author came to realize that the top goal of the Chinese Communist Party is ensuring its own survival, and the greatest threat to that is American democracy.
In 2013, an internal CCP document called “Document No. 9” made it clear that China would suppress Western ideals like constitutional democracy, free press, and economic privatization. This dashed hopes that China was pursuing political reform.
The author learned from US corporate contacts that China has been conducting an “everywhere war” through tactics like stealing intellectual property, controlling global shipping, taking over companies, and infiltrating labs and social media to manipulate information.
China uses its economic power and investment to influence other countries and silence criticism. It exploits open societies while restricting its own.
China continues to be a major source of the fentanyl fueling the US opioid crisis, despite pledges to crack down on production. Its climate change promises also lack substance and aim to appease Western critics while maintaining economic and political control at home.

In summary, the author came to see China as pursuing long-term strategic domination through diverse unconventional and economic means, rather than outright military aggression, with suppression of dissent andWestern ideals as a key goal.

Unrestricted Warfare was written in 1999 by two Chinese colonels to chart a new path for China’s rise after witnessing America’s overwhelming victory in the Gulf War.
They saw that America could achieve rapid victory through innovative use of precision weapons, technology, and non-lethal means like destroying communications. Direct military confrontation with the West was too risky.
The book proposed a doctrine of “unrestricted war” - that modern wars can be fought beyond traditional military means through information, economies, technology, environment, and using civilians as warriors too.
It argued for a permanent kind of war without rules to pursue power and dominance, while avoiding direct conflict that could provoke the powerful US military.
The book provided a coherent vision for how China could achieve influence through unconventional means while distracting the West with other global threats. It justified expanding warfare into non-military spheres and helped chart China’s stealthy rise over the coming decades.
In 1998, Chinese colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiansui published the book “Unrestricted Warfare”, which proposed new strategies beyond traditional military warfare. It advocated using any means necessary, including economic, political and technological, to compel an enemy.
The book reflected ideas that were already circulating in Chinese military and political circles. It outlined strategies like psychological warfare, media manipulation, cyber attacks, disruptions to infrastructure and markets.
The authors saw no need to adhere to international laws and norms established by Western nations. Their view of war was more holistic and long-term focused on restoring Chinese power, rather than limited military objectives.
Their perspective was influenced by traditional Chinese strategists like Sun Tzu, who saw war and politics as intertwined in a continual process. This differed from Western thinkers like Clausewitz who saw war and politics as more distinct.
The book inspired the Chinese military including the People’s Liberation Army to employ new types of “digital warriors” across many fields beyond traditional combat roles. It provided a comprehensive vision that China seems to be enacting today across many domains.
Sun Tzu’s book The Art of War emphasizes non-violent strategies like deception, alliances, and avoiding direct confrontation over the use of force. This aligns with China’s historical experience of fending off invaders.
Mao Zedong also adopted this approach, framing China’s rise as a “hundred-year marathon” to defeat the West without direct military conflict. He avoided wars with the US/West and portrayed China as weak to gain their support.
Mao courted Nixon to reinforce China’s image as a non-threatening partner against the USSR. This opened China up to US investment and technology while achieving strategic gains with minimal resources spent on war.
Both Sun Tzu and Mao viewed warfare as one part of pursuing national interests through non-military means like political maneuvering, shaping perceptions, and exploiting adversaries’ weaknesses without direct combat when possible. This tradition influences modern Chinese strategic thinking.

Here is a summary of the key points about ordinary Chinese citizens from the passage:

For three weeks starting in May 1989, ordinary Chinese citizens, including students, workers, and civil rights leaders, gathered in Tiananmen Square in Beijing to hold protests in support of democracy and civil rights.
The protests were initially sparked by the death of pro-reform Communist leader Hu Yaobang in April 1989. Many Chinese citizens were feeling anxious about economic reforms that did not seem to be benefiting the general population.
By late May, the ranks of protesters in Tiananmen Square had grown to around 1 million people, the largest protests China had seen since the Communist revolution in 1949.
The protesters erected a 33-foot statue modeled after the Statue of Liberty, which they called the Goddess of Democracy, drawing global attention to the pro-democracy movement.
On June 4th, the Chinese military violently cracked down on the protesters in Tiananmen Square, killing hundreds or possibly thousands of civilians. Ten thousand protesters were also arrested.
The Tiananmen Square protests and crackdown showed the Chinese Communist Party’s total rejection of civil liberties and human rights for ordinary Chinese citizens, even as the economy was growing.

Here is a summary of the key points from the passages:

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is not truly a military force, but rather a political tool of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to maintain its hold on power in China. The needs of the Chinese people are secondary.
Colonels Qiao and Wang see warfare as entirely political. The PLA’s mission is to help the CCP impose its will on China’s civilians and other countries.
They argue the US military’s decisive victory in the Gulf War made America complacent and overconfident in its status as the sole superpower. This created an opportunity for China to rise through non-military means.
New forms of warfare like financial, cyber, and terrorism attacks can be just as destructive as traditional wars. Warfare is evolving and becoming more complex, extensive, concealed and subtle.
The authors predict the concept of the US as “world policeman” intervening militarily will become increasingly irrelevant. Nation building will not be appealing indefinitely after costly wars in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.
They envision a new type of “unrestricted warfare” utilizing all means including armed and non-armed, military and non-military to compel enemies to accept one’s interests and dominate other countries. Technology and controlling information will be important tools.
The passage discusses the book “Unrestricted Warfare” by Chinese colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, published in 1999. It analyzes their views on technological changes and future of warfare.
They argue that rapid technological advancement, especially information technology and the internet, is blurring boundaries between war and non-war. Future wars may involve non-traditional means like cyber attacks, economic warfare, and media manipulation.
They see information flow as an existential threat to authoritarian regimes like China. The internet could enable free exchange of ideas and escape from controlled narratives.
The authors believe warfare is moving beyond just weapons and battles, and will involve civilians more directly. Actions like manipulating media coverage or using civilians as human shields could give asymmetric advantages.
Their analysis was ahead of its time. Western militaries were still focused on efficiency of force, not realizing information itself could become the key battleground. Unrestricted warfare could achieve goals without direct violence.
Controlling information flow remains important for authoritarian states. The book warned that uncontrolled technology could undermine political control, leading China to create firewalls and tight media control.

Here is a summary of the key points about the CCP and weapons revolution from the passage:

The CCP launched the Great Firewall to block Western media like Google and Facebook as well as news sources like NYT and WaPo. This was meant to control the information environment and narratives inside China.
The CCP has created a “literal army” of Chinese citizens engaged in cyberwar, spreading propaganda online, and stealing technology.
In their book Unrestricted Warfare, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui proposed that everything could potentially be weaponized, including people, hackers, viruses, commercial flights, etc. They argued militaries should consider non-traditional means of warfare.
They asserted that no single weapon has the right to define future warfare. It will require many integrated systems rather than reliance on one or two technologies.
They criticized the US focus on constantly improving precision weapons and views of warfare like Rumsfeld’s Revolution in Military Affairs. They argued this was a misallocation of resources given emerging threats.
Events like 9/11 supported their view that non-traditional, asymmetric means could seriously damage conventional military powers like the US, despite technological advantages. This was seen as good news for China’s asymmetric approach.

Here are the key points:

The authors argue that modern warfare has moved beyond relying solely on advanced fighter jets and conventional weapons. Unconventional warfare involving tactics like insurgency and information operations can be more effective.
China is well-positioned to excel at unconventional warfare compared to older authoritarian regimes like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. It could wage “stealth war” through non-kinetic means to dominate the world.
The authors saw how the US military struggled against unconventional forces in Somalia in the 1990s despite superior technology. High-tech forces may be ineffective against guerrilla tactics.
They warned that continuing to pour vast resources into developing the most advanced weapons without considering changing threats could lead the US into a similar predicament as the Soviet Union. Overspending on arms while neglecting other national needs could undermine national security.
The authors argue for developing new concepts of weapons not dependent on the latest technology. Things like economic or information operations could become powerful new weapons impacting daily life. China may excel at this type of non-traditional, asymmetric warfare.

In summary, the passages warn that relying only on advanced weapons systems is short-sighted, and that unconventional, asymmetric tactics may surpass traditional military strength in modern conflicts if a nation like China chooses to focus on those types of “weapons”.

The Chinese colonels argue that weaponizing aspects of daily life like financial markets and social media is more effective than direct attacks that would provoke a military response. This allows China to cause harm and chaos stealthily and below the radar.
They acknowledge international laws against weapons of mass destruction but argue other means of destroying a society are legitimate once nuclear options are removed.
The development of more precise and non-lethal weapons reflects a shift toward more humane warfare. This allows achieving victory through control rather than slaughter. Nuclear weapons are now only useful for deterrence.
The US military is overly focused on developing ever more lethal capabilities for future wars. It has missed trends toward precision strikes and kinder weapons that avoid escalation. Ideas like information or laser weapons projected against the sky are now realistic options.
While new technologies may create new types of warfare, actual military capabilities still depend on a country’s overall strength, not just technological fantasies. The colonels argue conceptualization of warfare must be grounded in realities.
The chapter discusses how the traditional concepts of warfare - including who fighters are, what weapons are used, and where battles take place - have become blurred. Technology has expanded these definitions beyond recognition.
Any civilian could now potentially be a warrior or target, and any aspect of modern life could potentially be used as a weapon on any battlefield. This breaks down the traditional laws of war.
The authors argue that war is no longer limited to direct military conflicts between states. It can now involve things like interfering in another country’s economy or computer systems in subtle ways.
They note that historical wars were fought over more straightforward goals like religious orthodoxy or land disputes. But modern warfare could be waged over much more abstract issues using diverse new methods.
This expansion of what constitutes “war” is a major departure from Clausewitz’s notion of war as an extension of politics between states. The authors see unrestricted warfare as a new reality that breaks old limits and definitions.

So in summary, the chapter examines how emerging technologies have fundamentally changed traditional understandings of warfare in terms of actors, tools and locations of conflict.

Historically, battlefields were small and confined spaces like plains, mountain passes or cities. But modern warfare has become much larger scale.
In WWI, battles were limited by the range of artillery guns. But by WWII, long-range bombers and missiles expanded conflict beyond traditional battlefields.
Now, technology has virtually eliminated boundaries between battlefield and non-battlefield. Satellites, submarines, missiles and cyber/electromagnetic warfare can strike anywhere globally. Psychological warfare even attacks the human mind.
Innovative soldiers are developing new “battlespaces” like network/cyber warfare with little bloodshed but major strategic impact. Future wars may be won or lost based on these technological battlespaces.
Conventional and technological battlespaces will overlap and complement each other. Blurring lines between military/civilian tech and soldiers/non-combatants will make it hard to distinguish battlefield from non-battlefield.
If a computer network or stock market attack could doom an enemy, then no space could be considered non-battlefield. The future battlefield is everywhere due to all-encompassing military technologies that disregard old boundaries. Close cooperation across all domains will be needed to fight wars in this new paradigm.
The essay discusses the changing nature of warfare, with traditional boundaries between military, government and private sectors becoming blurred. Technological changes are happening faster than strategic thinking can adapt.
Modern weapons allow soldiers to be physically removed from battlefields. A “pastier-faced scholar” with technical skills may now be better suited to modern warfare than a physically strong soldier.
Hackers in the 1990s showed how individuals could cause significant damage without formal military affiliation. It’s difficult to distinguish between hacking for fun versus cyberwarfare.
Non-state organizations pursuing extreme causes, like jihadist or militia groups, pose a large threat and may be harder for states to defeat given their unconventional tactics. Terrorism is a byproduct of globalization enabling such groups.
Financiers, media moguls or influential commentators with strong beliefs could also wage unconventional “wars” without military means, through economic or information tactics.
States now have to contend with numerous non-state actors engaging in asymmetric and unlimited warfare beyond traditional military rules and capabilities. The authors saw this emerging threat early on.

Here are the key points about non-military means and methods of warfare according to the passage:

Trade war - Using domestic trade laws, tariffs, sanctions, embargoes, etc. to inflict economic damage on other countries similar to military operations. The US embargo against Iraq is given as an example.
Financial war - Coordinated attacks on foreign financial systems and currencies by private global capital, as allegedly happened in Southeast Asia in the late 1990s. This can destabilize economies and pin countries down quickly.
The authors argue these non-military means like trade wars and financial manipulation can become favored “minions” or tools of what they call “non-military war operations” - a new concept of war that extends beyond traditional military boundaries.
They see the US as particularly skilled at wielding trade wars but note China gained an early advantage in non-military forms of warfare like information warfare through their concept of “unrestricted warfare.”

So in summary, the key non-military means and methods discussed are economic warfare using trade and financial policies/manipulation to damage other countries outside of direct military confrontation.

This passage discusses different forms of non-military warfare according to Chinese military strategists, including financial warfare, new terror warfare using advanced technology, and ecological warfare. Some key points:

Financial warfare can be as destructive as traditional warfare but leaves no blood spilled. It manipulates markets, currencies, and causes economic crises. George Soros and private companies like Morgan Stanley are seen as indirect actors in financial warfare.
New terror warfare combines terrorism with newer technologies like bioweapons, cyberattacks, and information warfare. This raises the level of threat and scales of potential destruction.
Ecological warfare would manipulate natural systems like weather, oceans, earthquakes etc. through advanced technologies to damage environments or create new local ecologies as weapons. This could be done through man-made events like modified El Ninos.
Non-state actors are seen as more likely initiators of new forms of warfare like ecological terrorism given their lack of responsibility and rule-breaking nature. Advanced technologies bring new dangers if global ecosystems are stressed and small changes could trigger large impacts.
The authors were prescient in predicting the merging of terrorism and new technologies to elevate threats, years before many events involving groups like Al Qaeda utilizing weapons and cyber capabilities.

The passage discusses various forms of non-military warfare described in the Chinese military strategy of “Unrestricted Warfare”. These include psychological, economic, media, cyber, environmental/ecological, and legal warfare.

It argues that China has used many of these non-military tactics outlined in the book against the West. For example, China engages in smuggling warfare through transshipments to evade trade regulations. It conducts media warfare by influencing Hollywood portrayals of China. China has also engaged in drug and cyber warfare by smuggling fentanyl into the US and conducting cyberattacks against companies.

The passage claims China is aiming to dominate technologies, standards, and resources through tactics like controlling rare earth metals and lithium battery production. Its Belt and Road initiative is a form of economic aid warfare to increase foreign influence. Finally, China uses legal warfare through international law and organizations to shape regulations in its favor.

In summary, the passage analyzes how China has put into practice many forms of non-military warfare against Western nations, as envisioned in the Chinese military strategy of Unrestricted Warfare. It argues China is engaged in a wide-ranging campaign across multiple domains beyond traditional military confrontation.

Here is a summary of the key points about on/media warfare from the passage:

On/media warfare refers to influencing public opinion and military/civilian authorities through spreading doubts about an adversary’s actions. It aims to diminish political will and support for the adversary and potentially retard their military activity.
It provides material for public opinion/media warfare campaigns. China has gotten skilled at combining on/media warfare with other tactics like disinformation for maximum impact.
The goal is to slowly erode the vitality of an opponent nation by failing to prepare for these unconventional attacks, which are as serious as conventional warfare.
It raises questions about the legality and morality of an adversary’s actions in order to turn domestic and international opinion against them. This can weaken political support and make military action more difficult or less likely.

So in summary, on/media warfare involves spreading propaganda, disinformation, and doubts in order to turn public opinion and diminish political will for an adversary’s policies or military activities through non-kinetic means of political and informational coercion. China has become adept at wielding these tactics.

The colonels highlight how the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act reorganized the US military command structure, addressing long-standing issues around unified command during joint operations.
Previously, different US forces in Vietnam and Lebanon had to take commands from multiple headquarters, creating confusion and risk.
The Act centralized command authority under the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and theater commanders like Schwarzkopf, reducing layers of bureaucracy.
This streamlined structure was successfully implemented for the first time in the 1991 Gulf War, allowing Schwarzkopf to coordinate all services effectively against Iraq.
The colonels argue the Act was a timely response to modern warfare demands, recombining dispersed service authority into a concentrated temporary authority for objectives.
They say any country hoping to win future wars will need to undergo similar “reorganization” to overcome outdated command relations and structures.

So in summary, the passage analyzes how the Goldwater-Nichols Act addressed longstanding US command issues and enabled the successful Gulf War coordination under Schwarzkopf’s new centralized authority model.

This passage discusses the evolution of air power and helicopters in modern warfare based on lessons from various conflicts, including the 1991 Gulf War. Some key points:

The Gulf War showed the increasing dominance of air power over land warfare, in line with Douhet’s earlier predictions. Air power achieved victory more quickly than expected through an “integrated air campaign.”
This caught the U.S. military by surprise and they initially failed to appreciate the new role of air power across domains like space and cyber.
Helicopters in particular demonstrated their effectiveness in the Gulf War, destroying Iraqi armor and infantry. However, the U.S. Army downplayed helicopters and continued prioritizing tanks afterward.
Helicopters showed they could carry out operations independently at a pace that tanks could not match. They destroyed over 100 tanks without any losses, showcasing their ability to take on the “tank killer” role.
The passage argues helicopters, not tanks, should now be seen as the dominant weapon in modern land warfare based on what was revealed through conflicts like the Gulf War.

So in summary, it examines how experiences in wars like the Gulf War highlighted changes in modern warfare especially the growing influence of air power and new capabilities of helicopters over traditional land weapons like tanks.

The passage discusses the role of the media in the Gulf War and how it influenced the outcome. It notes that over 1,300 journalists were embedded with US forces and provided immediate, live coverage of the war.
The coverage was overwhelmingly positive and supportive of US military objectives. It depicted precision strikes on Iraqi targets and helped reinforce the narrative that Iraq would lose and the US would win.
This positive media coverage not only boosted support for the war at home, but also affected real-time decisions by US allies and Iraq. It made American military success seem inevitable.
The Chinese colonels analyzed this and saw that modern media, especially live cable news, had become a powerful force in war. Friendly media coverage could influence the perception of conflict more than direct propaganda.
They recognized the CCP should work to control domestic media coverage but also influence how conflicts are portrayed in the supposedly objective Western media through providing compelling narratives and images for these outlets to share.

So in summary, the passage discusses how the Gulf War demonstrated the growing influence of modern media on warfare and outcomes, a lesson carefully studied by the Chinese colonels.

The passage discusses how the United States’ large ownership stakes in major media outlets allows China to potentially exert influence over what is reported. It notes that corporate consolidation in the media has made it easy for foreign governments like China to build up sizable ownership positions. This gives them influence at outlets and could allow them to shape or control the producers of news content. The passage suggests foreign ownership of media companies is a risk as it may enable governments like China to influence the messages that are communicated to the public.

This passage discusses the development of concepts in U.S. military thinking, specifically “joint campaigns” and “total dimensional warfare”. Some key points:

“Joint campaigns” originated from a 1991 publication outlining centralized command, equality between armed forces, complete unification, and total depth of battle. It established the authority of theater commanders and allowed any military branch to take the lead based on situations.
However, “joint campaigns” was still limited in scope to the armed forces level and did not expand to other realms where confrontation can occur.
A 1993 Army publication coined the new concept of “total dimensional warfare”. This recognized the potential for “non-combat military operations” and brought the possibility of waging war across all dimensions/realms, not just armed forces.
“Total dimensional warfare” was seen as an innovative yet lofty new theory for U.S. war thinking. It was introduced by General Franks who was later criticized for conservative operations, yet displayed a fiercely innovative spirit with this concept.
In summary, it traces the development of U.S. military thinking from “joint campaigns” to the broader concept of “total dimensional warfare” that encompasses confrontation across all realms, not just between armed forces.
The passage criticizes the US military for discontinuing its conception of “total dimensional warfare” and “non-combat military operations” too early. This represented an opportunity for a major ideological revolution that was not fully realized.
It argues the US focus remained too narrowly on conventional military operations and battlespaces. Broader concepts like “non-military combat operations” were not fully developed.
Future wars will involve more dimensions beyond just land, sea, air, including things like information operations and influence campaigns.
The US missed an opportunity after the Gulf War to lead on the concept of “unrestricted warfare” and take the strategic initiative from China.
It cites China’s aggressive moves in the South China Sea as an example where more levers of national power could have been used beyond just the military, like sanctioning companies involved in island construction.
International organizations and terrorism are creating “supra-national powers” beyond states, necessitating that China infiltrate and influence these organizations to reshape international norms to its benefit.
In sum, it criticizes the US for not pursuing a more comprehensive and strategic approach beyond just the military domain to stay ahead of adversaries like China in future warfare concepts. The focus remained too narrow.
The authors argue that international organizations have become an important arena for countries to pursue their interests and resolve conflicts, beyond traditional nation-state relations. Many factors like globalization have made it difficult to achieve security through purely national means.
Both major powers like the US and smaller countries now use collaboration through international bodies as a way to advance their strategic objectives in a less directly confrontational manner. The US in particular is very skilled at leveraging international organizations.
When China was excluded from bodies like the IMF and World Bank in the late 1990s, it viewed them with contempt as tools of US influence. But it desperately wanted access to participate in globalization.
Over the past 20 years, China has effectively infiltrated and influenced key international organizations through tactics like investment under the Belt and Road Initiative. This has allowed bodies like the WHO to make more pro-China decisions.
The authors contend the international order built by the US and allies has in effect been turned into a promoter of authoritarianism by China’s actions. They argue the distinction between good and bad actors has become blurred in today’s complex global landscape.

The passage discusses the rise of new forms of terrorism that operate outside the rules of nations and boundaries. It analyzes how large nations selectively follow international rules when it benefits them, while small nations rely on rules for protection.

Non-state actors like computer hackers and Osama bin Laden conduct asymmetric warfare through indiscriminate attacks. They are not constrained by rules, boundaries, or codes of conduct. Bin Laden used religious extremism and economic means like drug trafficking to fund powerful terrorist networks.

The passage also discusses financial speculators like George Soros who use massive capital to deliberately destabilize economies and international systems. While not traditionally seen as terrorists, their destructive actions have similar transnational, concealed impacts.

These new forms of terrorism undermine the international order through borderless, rule-breaking activities. Nations struggle to respond as traditional military approaches are ineffective. The passage suggests both updating rules and flexible responses may be needed to deal with enemies who respect no boundaries or norms of behavior.

The authors argue that international agreements restricting certain types of warfare like nuclear, chemical, and civilian bombings benefit nations lagging in precision military technology, making unrestricted warfare more attractive to them.
They group traditional terrorists, financial manipulators, and computer hackers under the umbrella of unrestricted warfare as ways to damage countries through unconventional means rather than direct military confrontation.
Osama bin Laden pioneered financial and communications strategies in addition to bombings and assassinations. His real goal was to bankrupt the US through prolonged wars in the Middle East, which he succeeded in doing.
The authors say only “suckers and losers” follow international rules, advising nations to ignore rules to dominate. China publicly accepts rules but privately flouts them.
The US underfunds anti-terrorism relative to its defense budget and lacks coordination among agencies on unconventional threats. New threats require new national security views and flexible soldiers prepared for diverse risks beyond the military domain.
International agreements limiting direct warfare paradoxically increase incentives for unconventional, asymmetric means of conflict that circumvent those restrictions through economic, cyber and information operations.
The authors argue that “combination war” involving multiple fronts is a powerful strategy, as advocated by Sun Tzu. Combining military and non-military means overwhelms the enemy with confusion.
Weaker nations need to leverage unconventional assets against stronger foes. The authors update military theory by advocating mixing any hostile acts directed at the enemy.
“Combination war” is first a way of thinking, not just a method. They want Chinese leaders to envision leverage despite facing the US.
They criticize the US for not anticipating evolution in warfare, citing the 1993 WTC bombing and prediction of bin Laden as examples the US missed.
Historical victories often involved skillful combination of factors. The authors argue for deepening combination through unconventional means beyond what past generals envisioned. Their goal is to alter Chinese strategic thinking.
The passage discusses the concept of “combination” or integrating different tactics in warfare, beyond just military means on the battlefield. Only the most innovative military thinkers broke conventions by consciously combining all available means.
It argues future success in warfare will depend on skillfully mixing different tactics like combining new and established weapons. The same applies to “unrestricted warfare” but on a much broader scale across multiple domains.
The tactics discussed are not just military but also things like public relations, social media, finance, trade, economics which can work together in today’s connected world to destabilize enemies. Events like financial collapse can destroy a nation’s defenses as quickly as a nuclear strike.
It cites China’s use of these combination tactics during COVID to destabilize the West through financial, trade and media strategies. This included influencing academic reports to induce panic in places like the UK.
It introduces the additional concept of “addition,” saying one plus one is greater than one. Prior theorists like Sun Tzu were limited but addition involves combining military and non-military means, like pairing stealth aircraft with network attacks or deterrence with financial wars.
Successful combination requires thorough thought beyond political/ethical constraints. Militaries overly focused on specific enemies can be defeated by unknown threats outside their view, as happened to the US post-9/11. The future depends on broadly combining new factors through integrated technology.
The passage discusses the concept of combining different methods of warfare beyond traditional boundaries, as outlined in the Chinese military strategy book Unrestricted Warfare.
It argues the possibilities for new combinations are infinite and terrifying. Examples like China using trade warfare and disinformation simultaneously in 2020 are given.
Price gouging and “mask diplomacy” were used by China during the early Covid pandemic while restricting domestic travel but allowing international flights.
The combinations can be subtle unless one knows what to look for. Unrestricted Warfare argues any type of operation can be combined with another to form new methods.
Examples of past combinations of different warfare methods by various nations are provided, like the US using different forms against bin Laden.
The ability to freely combine all factors is now possible due to technology, according to Unrestricted Warfare. Maintaining coordination of different forms of warfare is key.
A 2021 ransomware attack on a US fuel pipeline is discussed as an example of the vulnerabilities outlined in Unrestricted Warfare, combining cyber threats with infrastructure weaknesses.
The possibilities for damage from coordinated multi-pronged attacks are tremendous, as predicted by the Chinese strategy book over 20 years ago.
The passage advocates for going beyond traditional battlefield constraints and rules of war in order to achieve victory. It calls for combining all resources across military and non-military domains like politics, economics, culture, diplomacy, etc.
Traditional military thought kept these domains separate and confined warfare to the battlefield. But technologies and other factors are blurring these boundaries, enabling new forms of “unrestricted” or “supra-means” warfare.
This includes influencing soldiers’ families, assassinations, covert “surgical” strikes without declarations of war, covert lobbying/influence campaigns, manipulating stocks/media to exert control.
Examples given include China’s obfuscation around COVID-19, which exploited gaps in how intelligence traditionally detects threats. Also events like the 1987 stock market crash triggered by US military action.
The passage argues the US military no longer comprehends these new threats and must integrate all government powers without constraint to win an “unrestricted war” against competitors like China engaging in these tactics.

So in summary, it advocates abandoning traditional war constraints and rules to employ any means across domains to achieve victory, including methods that directly influence civilians, economies, politics and media. It argues this is necessary to counter competitors already engaging in such “unrestricted warfare.”

Colonels Qiao and Wang published Unrestricted Warfare in 1999, advocating for a new type of “beyond-limits” warfare without traditional restrictions.
They argued that with globalization, conflicts can be waged across military, political, economic, and social/cultural dimensions simultaneously using any means available. Violence is not required.
They pointed to examples like Bin Laden threatening US national security with two truckloads of explosives as a tactical action with strategic impact.
They consolidated their theories into an 8-point military doctrine of “beyond-limits combined war” including omnidirectionality (360-degree observation), synchrony, and asymmetry.
While some principles resemble traditional military manuals, their revolutionary idea was total warfare across all domains with no restrictions. This became influential among Chinese leadership.
In the conclusion, they rallied Chinese leaders to embrace this new type of warfare, arguing traditional rules of conflict no longer apply and China is well-positioned to succeed through this approach.
Their book advocated for pursuing China’s interests aggressively and ruthlessly across military, economic, political and other means to achieve global influence and counter the United States.

So in summary, it laid out a blueprint for China to pursue comprehensive national power and undermine US dominance through unconventional, coordinated efforts across all dimensions of conflict and society.

The passage discusses concepts from the book “Unrestricted Warfare” by two Chinese colonels regarding emerging forms of warfare that integrate military and non-military means.
Key concepts include “synchrony” - coordinating actions across different domains simultaneously for maximum impact. Limited objectives but unlimited measures to achieve those objectives. Seeking asymmetry by attacking where the enemy doesn’t expect.
Multidimensional coordination is seen as coordinating both military and non-military forces across objectives. Victory requires adhering to principles but not guaranteed by them alone.
The conclusion argues the modern world presents challenges to nation states that require a new conceptual “key” - that of unrestricted warfare. This integrates strategies, tactics and individual actions across all levels and domains of conflict, both military and non-military. It is presented as an appropriate strategy for China to achieve victory in the changing global landscape.

So in summary, it discusses concepts from the book that envision an evolution in warfare integrating more diverse forces and means beyond just traditional military, requiring new coordinated strategies and principles of engagement.

The author now sees China’s actions towards the US and other countries as part of a grand strategy and long-term war, rather than isolated incidents, after studying the Chinese military strategy book “Unrestricted Warfare”.
Events like Hong Kong takeover and manipulating the COVID pandemic fit with strategies in the book like information control, swift coordinated movements, co-opting international organizations, and disregard for laws.
China has transformed rapidly economically but still has weaknesses like an aging population, debt, and declining manufacturing competitiveness. Their power narrative creates support for Xi but also ambition that could lead to war over Taiwan.
The CCP sees the world opposite to Western democracies and wants to spread authoritarian control. Their top goals are party survival and countering the US as their main enemy.
While China’s economy will surpass the US, per capita income remains far below. 600 million people live on $150/month. Strict one-child policy caused workforce and social issues.
The author believes Washington needs to recognize this is a long-term war with China, not isolated incidents, and change policies accordingly to deal with this reality. Many experts and officials still do not grasp what the CCP is truly doing.
The head of state’s signature from an emerging superpower like China may be worthless due to their lack of interest in honesty, integrity, law or justice, and focus on expanding power by any means.
China has a massive advantage in data collection due to its ability to freely spy on citizens, which allows it to improve AI. Other countries need to aggressively develop AI to compete.
Authors of the book “Unrestricted Warfare” predicted that globalization and the internet would allow China to exploit open societies and ideologies like Marxism. This has occurred through universities, social media, and “cancel culture.”
China uses tactics like whataboutism and accusing critics of racism to deflect from its own human rights abuses like the Uyghur genocide. It also pressures celebrities to self-censor.
While the U.S. has taken some steps to counter China, more is needed. China views relations as a “war” while the U.S. sees it as a “challenge.” A confrontational mindset is required to treat it as the hostile threat that it is.
Individual actions like consumer choices and voting can counter China along with governmental policy changes. Exploiting China’s economic and political weaknesses is important to reform or stop its aggressive actions. The principles of unrestricted warfare must be turned back on China.
The Biden administration has largely continued the assertive anti-China policies of the Trump era through measures like tariffs and FIRRMA. However, more coordination across government is needed.
A new strategy with three pillars is proposed: Protect, Rebuild, and Inspire.
Protect involves continuing tariffs, export controls, limiting investment in China, shifting defense priorities, and reshaping global supply chains.
Rebuild shifts $100B from defense to R&D, infrastructure, STEM education to rebuild U.S. economic and technological leadership.
Inspire leverages development programs and allies to spur democratic-led growth, especially in developing nations, mirroring the post-WWII Marshall Plan.
A new interagency body would coordinate U.S. economic statecraft toward like-minded partners and help private sector investment in democratic infrastructure and trade networks.
The strategy aims to counter China’s influence and drive positive change globally by strengthening an alliance of democratic-led economies focused on prosperity through open markets and multilateral cooperation.
Successful implementation could spur over 5% economic growth by tapping opportunities only available within the democratic coalition. But political will and policy changes may be needed to realign economic incentives.

Here is a balanced summary of the key points made:

The US has lost significant manufacturing to other countries like China. Reviving incentives for industries like semiconductors could boost national security and the economy.
China uses debt traps through initiatives like BRI to gain political leverage over developing nations. Multilateral institutions could provide alternative financing options.
Alliances like the Quad and AUKUS play an important deterrent and strategic role in the Indo-Pacific region against potential Chinese aggression. Bringing more partners into these groupings could strengthen their impact.
While military expansion is a concern, China’s real strategy may be “unrestricted warfare” to provoke overspending by rivals. Intentions behind assets like aircraft carriers are unclear.
On issues like climate change and international bodies, China’s actions and influence should be openly debated rather than ignored.
Countering Chinese information campaigns requires promoting factual, independent media while encouraging technology firms to limit spread of propaganda.
Tightening visa policies could balance benefits of Chinese students with security risks of intellectual property theft and undue foreign influence.
Individual actions like investing locally and avoiding consumerism can complement government policies by pressuring China to reform its conduct and become a responsible stakeholder.
Democratic processes and civic participation are important for driving a coherent strategy that balances relationship management with firm deterrence of concerning behavior.
The passage argues that confronting China poses risks but is necessary to force China to behave responsibly and refrain from imposing its authoritarian model globally.
It discusses Samuel Huntington’s theory of a “Clash of Civilizations” between Western liberal values and China’s authoritarian “Sinic civilization”. The CCP aims to establish Chinese hegemony following a Confucian hierarchical model.
The CCP’s totalitarianism based on Marxism-Leninism aims to impose a dystopian world like 1984, restricting freedom and making people subservient to the state. Western nations must ensure this future does not come to pass.
While learning tactics from China’s “Unrestricted Warfare” doctrine, the West cannot fully reciprocate China’s comprehensive approach as it would damage democratic systems. The focus must be transparent defense and exposing China’s vulnerabilities.
The challenge is understanding China’s intentions and having the will to counter its aggression. Coordinated efforts across governments are needed to confront the threat China poses to Western interests and values.

In summary, the passage argues that China under the CCP aims to dominate the Asia-Pacific region and impose its authoritarian model globally, posing an ideological clash that Western nations must stand up to through defensive yet coordinated multinational efforts.

Here is a summary of the key points from the provided articles on China:

China is experiencing a significant shale gas fracking boom, but it also faces environmental and social problems from fracking similar to those seen in the US.
If the US banned fracking, it would decrease domestic oil and gas production significantly and increase energy imports and prices. It would also impact many jobs and businesses.
Transshipment (routing goods through third countries to disguise origin) allows Chinese exporters to potentially evade Trump’s tariffs on Chinese goods.
China is increasing its influence over Hollywood by gaining ownership stakes in film studios and blocking films that portrayed China negatively. This affects the type of content and messages that reach global audiences.
China is a major source of illegally imported fentanyl that is fueling the US opioid crisis and killing tens of thousands of Americans annually.
The US has charged Chinese hackers with conducting cyberattacks on over 100 companies worldwide to steal intellectual property and commerce data for China’s economic benefit.
Experts say the US risks losing dominance in the development of 5G wireless technology standards to China without a coordinated national strategy.
China controls the global supply of many rare earth minerals that are crucial for technologies like electric vehicles, so the US relies on China for these key resources.
China’s Belt and Road infrastructure initiative aims to extend its economic and political influence worldwide through investments in ports, railways, and other projects across multiple regions.
China employs “legal warfare” strategies like lawsuits to deter international companies or claims against its actions and advance its geopolitical goals without direct military confrontation.
The Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack highlighted US vulnerabilities, and the CIA is reorganizing to prioritize defending against the strategic threat posed by China.

#book-summary

War Without Rules China's Playbook for Global Domination - Robert Spalding